Smyrna times., 1907-07-17
THE PROGRESSIVE WOMAN OF TO-DAY.
Charlotte Gilman Tells About Her 10 July
WOman's Home Companion.

Woman's Home Companion.
'sFrom strictly economic, non-senti
mental standpoint, doing ones own
work is the most wasteful possible form
next to having man and woman do
it separately" writes Charlotte Perk-
ms Gilman in the July WOmau's Home
Communion. This sounds like non
sense. no doubt, to the conscientious
housekeeper, who knows that she can
not afford servant, much less an ex-
pert
"But Instead of looking at the ques-
from a strictly personal standpoint, |
let her look at it for moment collec' |
lively. Wealth is made by human la
Dor applied to materials. The more
expert the labor, the more wealth it
produces. The better organized and
specialized the labor, the more wealth
it produces. Society grows in wealth,
ease leisure, power and intelligence,
as it develops from self industry to
world industry. Very we'll: Iu fifty
families we have fifty men and fifty
women-a hundred units of wealth
producing labor. Now suppose just
for a contrast-that these fifty women
all worked at some trade earning dol
lar and a half day-nine dollars a
week, and that all the men were only
housekeepers to the wOmen-coOking,
sweeping, washing, caring for the
children, for no wages. The family
income would be nine dollars a week
and both parties working all the time.
We can see at a glance what a loss of
wealth is involved.
"Those men, we cry, would earn
more thau one dollar and fifty cents a
: day if they were free to specialize, to
develop their various talents, to com
bine, organize, serve one another and
their families at the same time. Let
the men earn the money and the
women do the housework.
$50 we usually have the reverse of
the picture: the men earning from one
dollar and fifty cents to four or five
dollars or more day, a much improved
service, the mems service, that is.
| Now, those fifty women represent
potential wealth as we'll as the men.
While each of them works all day iu
house for no wages, sharing the in
come of her husband, is it not possible
that she might be working at som'
special labor that she preferred? W.
continually forget that all women dc
not like home work nor all kinds o
housework equally, and that each fam
. lily is obliged to put up with inferiO
service in some particular.
''Some women have special geniu
for general management; such Nigh
:. manage in the housekeeping business
in this utopian future we are looking
at, aud be we'll paid for it. Some lik
to cook, and can cook we'll. Thes
could learn the beautiful art to it
fullest, and cook for appreciative nun
- bers. Some like to clean, and coul
Id learn the laundry business-learni it a
r and provide for each group of patron
beautiful laundry work, or to keep I'll
4 house antiseptically clean. Some hav
Il especial talent with babies and chilC
ren, and could undoubtedly develc
that talent, to the probable advantas
of our sometimes mishandled infanc,
"By such division each woma
specializing, would improve the qua
ity of her labor and add to its mark
value; she would serve more peopl
serve them better, and be paid more
but here we are pulled up sho
against blank wall. Habits as old
history are not to be over-ridden in
day. Prejudices far older than histo
cannot be blown aside like feather
We object to such a change as tn
We do not want it. We sternly disa
prove of it. honestly believe, no
ever, that social progress along th
line cannot be permanently stoppe
We can hang back and dig onr heels
like sulky child, hut Mother Natu
drags us on relentlessly."