East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1908-12-07
Is WOMAN INFERIOR TO
MAN.
(St. Louis Globe-Democrat,) }

Are there really any scientific-or
perhaps l should say psychological
grounds for the assertion that woman
is naturally the inferior of man?
This can not be answered by a mere
Yes or a mere NO" Physically
the answer must be Yes" If mental
ly regarded. not at all. In the early
days of human history, when brute
force was the sign of superiority. wo-
man, being inferior, exerted her femi-
nine arts of flattery and blandish-
ment to win his admiration and gain
his protection.
Returning To the charge. are there
rot instances in history of women who
became rulers of whole tribes. and by
so booming held their own menfolk
under subsection. Take Boadicea as
an example.
That occasionally did happen, but
the fact was probably in the first in
stance, due either to there being no
male survivors remaining in the tribe
or else to the opposing male faction
being eXtirpated by adherents who
were probably bribed to support the
new regime. Always. in fact. when
there were dissensions among the men
women found their opportunity, and
the supremacy of tyrant man was cur
tailed o. abolished.
Illustrations from the animal king
dom are good in only partial man.
ner. While the male animal would
fight for the female. she fought
equally fiercely for her young. To-
day. not her physical strength but her
skill in artifice. is woman's most pow
erful weapon. To every man some
member of the sex" becomes a prize
worth winning, And yet because there
are many prizes. she resorts to fic-)
titious aids to capture him-orna-
ments, face powders and beauty pre-
servatives of all sorts are her decoys
This brings one naturally to a con-
temptation of dress as factor in
feminine psychology.
As matter Of fact. at first-and
even now in some places-there was
none But, owing to two conditions,
climatic and bodily imperfection.
some kind of dress or covering be-
came a necessity and ultimately was
elaborated as affordlng an opportuni-
ty for the display of wealth or lux
ury on the part of womankind On
the other hand, where II was desired
to subordinate the sexual to the sell ,
fish or intellectual. dress was employ
ed to conceal the figure, even the face
being hidden by a veil, as in the case
Of the religieuse.
The capability Of woman to do !
what is called mems work is a mat |
ter of somewhat serious import to /
our sex, in these days of wholesale fe- |
male clerical employment This is an |
important question to urge and one
that is difficult to solve Theoreti- |
cally. there seems no reason why wo-
men should not do-and do well-a
great deal of what Is called mems
work.; that is, when they are not
Handicapped seXualy. The one great
obstacle to her universal success here
is that her nature is emotional and
obstinate rather than logical and CO.
herent.
The suffragette question-n which
the fair sex has certainly exhibited a
wonderful obstlnacy, indeed is partly
due to a sense that, theoretically there
is no good reason why they should not
vote if they want to, and partly be-
cause they believe that they are really
fighting for freedom against male re-
straint, and partly again, because the
more men seem determined not to let
them have it, so the more obstinately
must they try to get it
AS to women being jealous of our
sex: Women are not Jealous of our
sex, but jealous of each other in that
relation. But if they are obstinate
ard wilful, they are on the other
hand, far our superiors in what, for
want of definite term, may be called
sympathy"