Essays on the Woman Question

Caird's essay, "Marriage," was published in 1888 and describes the abuses women suffered under marriage during the Victorian era. In response to her essay, The Daily Telegraph began a series called 'Is Marriage a Failure?" and its readers sent in over 27,000 letters. A digital version of "Marriage" can be found here. A plain text version can be found on this site here.

Immediately before the essay begins, the periodical, The Westminster Review, features a message that informs the reader that the following pieces do not reflect the views of the magazine but of that the editors aim to "facilitate the expression of opinion by men of high mental power and culture, who, …, differ widely, on special points of great practical concern." The debate over the Woman Question caused great controversy and many individuals possessed strong beliefs on the issue. Caird addresses these strong emotions in the first line of her essay,

"It is not difficult to find people mild and easy-going about religion, and even politics may be regarded with wide-minded tolerance; but broach social subjects, and English men and women at once become alarmed and talk about the foundations of society and the sacredness of the home!"

She then begins her argument against the idea that marriage must remain the same by rejecting the idea of "women's nature." She argues that human nature is limitless and adaptable to its conditions, so that the state of women is not a result of their nature but of their condition. That condition is the tradition of marriage that began with Martin Luther in the Reformation and is dependent on the idea of Respectability.

In the next paragraph, Caird criticizes the way critical thinking and logic fall to the side when thinkers focus on situations that involve women. She appeals to Victorians' value of science and obsession with evolution by referencing Darwin's natural selection and Lamarck's use and disuse theories. Caird points out the inconsistency and pushes the reader to apply the same reason and science to women and marriage as they do to all other subjects.

Then Caird uses the vivid and memorable analogy of comparing women tied by marriage to dogs on a lease. She uses the analogy to argue that the state of women is a result of marriage, just as the dog's behavior is a result of being chained their whole life. She then moves into criticizing the common argument against the emancipation of women that states that because something has always been done a certain way it ought to continue being done that way. She points out that although it seems that marriage has always been ruled by the man, that is only in the recent past and that before then there was a time in which German society was matriarchal and women were the heads of homes and had the right to their children.

Caird later adresses Eliza Lynn Linton's anti-feminist views by criticizing her pity for married men.

Caird concludes her fifteen page long essay criticizing the current state of marriage and women not calling for violent revolution, but for a "gradual alteration of opinion which will rebuild [established institutions] from the very foundation." She looks forward to a future in which "men and women shall be comrades and fellow-workers as well as lovers and husbands and wives, when the rich and many-sided happiness which they have the power to bestow on one another shall no longer be enjoyed in tantalizing snatches, but shall gladden and give life to all humanity."

"The Wild Women as Politicians" was Lynn Linton's first essay on the Wild Women and was published in July of 1891. A digital facsimile can be found here. A plain text version can be found here.

In this essay, Linton attacks the wild women for attempting to become involved in politics. She believes the wild women are receiving a large amount of attention, but to not deserve it. She states that they have the characteristics of men and have morals that are detrimental to the society in which the new women live. The new women also try to throw away their obligations as women and want independence in society only so that they do not have to live by any laws or enact any self-restraint. Lynn Linton claims that the ultimate responsibility of women is to reproduce to increase the population and raise children. The new women are the minority in a society full of "respectable" Englishwomen and they are corrupting the youth with their false principles. Lynn Linton also points out in her essay that the new women are very good at manipulating others through their word choice and claims that deceive the readers or listeners. Lynn Linton then goes onto discuss the fact that these new women want to become involved in politics. She states that politics would be too much for women and would do more harm than good, explaining, "The cradle lies across the door of the polling-booth and bars the way to the senate. We can conceive of nothing more disastrous to a woman in any stage of maternity, expectant or accomplished, than the heated passions and turmoil of a political contest" (Lynn Linton, 79-88). Lynn Linton continues on at the end of her essay that if women were to be included in politics that they would also ruin it with their emotional and irrational thinking. She states that the only thing to do now is to educate the youth and show them that women have no part in politics and getting involved would only be "self-destructive and socially hurtful; the sure precursor to the loss of men's personal consideration and to the letting loose the waters of strife; and-what egotism will not regard-the sure precursor to a future regime of redoubled coercion and suppression" (Lynn Linton, 79-88).

A digitized version of the text can be found here.

Lynn Linton wrote her second Wild Women essay, "The Wild Women as Social Insurgents" in October of 1891. Her essay condemns the New Woman and women that seek anything outside of their sphere. The idea of separate spheres was popular during the Victorian era and was the belief that men and women had separate roles and responsibilities, for example much of women's sphere concerned the home whereas the men's sphere would include higher education and financial responsibilities. Lynn Linton argues against the emancipation of women by describing the New Woman as manly. She writes that the New Woman "exemplifies how beauty can degenerate into ugliness, and shows how the once fragrant flower, run to seed, is good for neither food nor ornament." She continues to criticize the New Woman's questioning of the separate spheres and for trying to join traditionally male activities, such as sports like golf and cricket and hunting.

Lynn Linton concludes her essay hoping that some disaster or time of stress would revert men and women back to their traditional masculine and feminine roles. She also implies that the New Woman is acting against her nature and that the men that support her are rejecting theirs as well. She wonders, "Perhaps, if called upon, even our Wild Women would cast off their ugly travesty and become what modesty and virtue designed them to be; and perhaps their male adorers would go back to the ranks of masculine self-respect and leave off this base subservience to folly which now disfigures and unmans them."

The third of Lynn Linton's Wild Women essays, "The Partisans of the Wild Women" was published in Nineteenth Century in March 1892. A digital facsimile can be found here. A plain text version can be found here.

Lynn Linton begins her essay by distinguishing between the two kinds of partisans of the Wild Women or New Women. She writes that there are those who truly and foolishly believe in the cause and that there are those that believe they can personally benefit from being a part of it. Of the sincere partisans Lynn Linton writes, "how much soever [sic] we may respect them as individuals, we cannot shit our eyes to the fact that they are doing their best to bring about one of the greatest social and national disasters that could befall us." She then splits the first group, the sincere partisans, into men and women. Lynn Linton describes the men as noble for embracing ideas of chivalry, but mistaken in their reasoning for holding "that the law of abstract justice should override the wisdom of experience." Whereas she describes the women as "sheltered and innocent, they know nothing of life as it is." She describes the female partisans as victims to the lies of the Wild Woman. After criticizing the sincere partisans, Lynn Linton says that she wishes not to disrespect or attack them, but to "open their eyes." She then transitions into criticizing the partisan that supports the Wild Women because it benefits them.

When the insincere partisans are men, they pretend to support the emancipation of women in order to appeal to women and gain favor with them or even to prey upon them.

Lynn Linton concludes her essay against the New Woman, whom she calls the Wild Woman, by describing the women's movement as "an epidemic of vanity and restlessness- a disease as marked as measles or small-pox." She continues to say, "Hereafter this outbreak will stand in history as an instance of national sickness, of moral decadence, of social disorder." Lynn Linton imagines that because history cycles the fight for the emancipation of women will eventually fade and the superiority of men will be restored. She encourages those that somewhat support the Wild Women to reject them because once one is a dedicated supporter "repentance and restoration will be impossible."

Mona Caird wrote "A Defence of the So-Called 'Wild Women'" in 1892 as a response to Eliza Lynn Linton's Wild Women essays. A digital facsimile of this article can be found here. A plain text version of the essay can be found here.

Caird begins her response to Lynn Linton's Wild Women essays by writing that "her adversaries must bring considerable force and patience, and for this singular reason, that she gives them nothing to answer." Caird argues that all that Lynn Linton has done is throw "accusations against the personal qualities of women" and that it is difficult to constructively respond to her argument or lack thereof. She also criticizes Lynn Linton's arguments because they are full of contradictions. Another specific criticism Caird gives is that Lynn Linton is too extremist, she leaves no room for a middle ground or varying degrees of support for the New Woman.

Caird then transitions into arguing for the emancipation of women. She argues that for a society to call themselves a free state that all members must have equal standing. Caird also writes that granting women the right to vote and freeing them from the constrains of marriage will not result in a flooding of the labor market and a destabilizing of society, but the betterment of society because it will allow women to do that which suits them best. Freed from having to be married and run a household or be a governess will lead to women unsuited for those roles to pursue other professions, but many women will still choose to marry and raise children. So in having only good mothers and good governesses by letting other women into the workforce all of society will benefit.

Caird also addresses Lynn Linton's arguments that women themselves are at fault for any wrongs they find with society because they raised the people who made the decisions and legislation that created the problems and that women do not need the vote because they have such influence over their children and therefore indirectly are able to affect politics. Caird responds to these arguments by asking, "If the woman is to be asked to surrender so much because she has to produce the succeeding generations, why is the father left altogether out of count? Does his life leave no mark upon his offspring?" Caird argues that equal standing between a married man and woman fosters friendship and that a loving husband would want freedom for his wife.

Caird concludes her essay by saying that in raising the position of women to be equal to men will benefit both sexes. In the last line she quotes the German philosopher Hegel, "The master does not become really free till he has liberated his slave."

Sarah Grand published "The New Aspect of the Woman Question" in The North American Review in March of 1894. A digital copy of the essay can be found here. A plain text version can be found on this site here.

Her feminist essay criticizes men and their role in the subjugation of women. She is also credited for being the first to use the phrase "New Woman." She first describes men as infants and children that have been allowed to misbehave and still need to grow into proper men. Grand writes, "The men of the future will be better, while the women will be stronger and wiser. To bring this about is the whole aim and object of the current struggle, and with the discovery of the means lies the solution of the Woman Question." Grand then transitions to a more severe and direct criticism of men, describing how they prey upon women and attack the women who call out their actions.

"When we hear the "Help! help! help!" of the desolate and the oppressed, and still more when we see the awful dumb despair of those who have lost even the hope of help, we must respond. This is often inconvenient to man, especially when he has seized upon a defenceless victim whom he would have destroyed had we not come to the rescue; and so, because it is inconvenient to be exposed and thwarted, he snarls about the end of all true womanliness, cants on the subject of the Sphere..."

Grand continues her criticism by saying that women have not become more manly, but that men have lost their manliness. She wrote, "Man in his manners becomes more and more wanting until we seem to be near the time when there will be nothing left of him but the old Adam, who said, 'It wasn't me.'" Grand not only criticizes men's lack of manners, but also their denial of their role in the oppressive system that preys upon women. Grand concludes her essay with a metaphor about how improving English society is like cleaning and that it will stir up dust and be unpleasant at first, but that only those living in the dirt will truly be exposed and everyone else will benefit from the cleaning.

A digitized facsimile can be found here. A plain text version can be found on this site here.

Ouida wrote "The New Woman" in May of 1894 in response to Sarah Grand's "The New Aspect of the Woman Question." Her anti-feminist essay attacks Grand's piece and the New Woman. Ouida criticizes Grand for not clearly explaining a solution to the Woman Question. She then disparages the New Woman for focusing her time on the wrong social issues and wanting control over things outside of her sphere. For example, Ouida writes that women ought to try to change the future by how she raises her children and that focusing any time on school boards, governesses, and tutors or her personal freedoms is fruitless and foolish. Her analogy for this situation is a farmer that refuses to till his own land and demands to farm his neighbor's land instead.

Ouida concludes her essay by saying that as long as women do anything outside of their sphere or that modern women do, such as riding a bicycle, participating in literature or art, or wearing new fashions, "she has no possible title or capacity to demand the place or the privilege of men."

In her essay, "Foibles of the Woman Question," published in April 1896, Ella W. Winston expresses her anti-New Woman beliefs and argues against suffrage for women. A digitized version can be found here. A plain text version on this site can be found here.

Ella W. Winston argues that the New Woman's attempt to abandon her social place in the home and, instead, overtake the role of men in society has been a failure. She states that the New Women claim to be new versions of women that are somehow superior to everyone else. She claims that the New Women are tearing down women who choose to live the traditional way and are only focused on what they deem to be the most important question in life: "Shall women vote or not?" (Winston, 186-192). Winston further argues that the New Woman cannot be argued with because they use no logic and are always contradicting themselves. She says that New Woman are selfish children that take what men give them and are only hungry for me. She sees no reason why women can't be happy with the equal status they have already been given. She says that the New Woman equates the right to vote with power and that she is mistaken. She points out that these women think that they are protecting their homes through gaining the ballet, but they should be more focused on protecting their homes in other ways. If they just spent more time actually teaching their children instead of worrying about their right to vote, they would not need to protect their homes in the first place. She then pokes at the New Woman, stating, "But the faculty of logically reasoning from cause to effect has never been characteristic of the New Woman" (Winston, 186-193). Winston also sees no point in women being directly involved in the voting process because every person in society already comes from women or was influenced by them. She points out that the claim that Women will "purify purify politics" is false because there have been incidences in which women were not reprimanded for bribing hired males in their family to vote a specific way.

Her argument come to an end by reiterating that the New Women have their priorities all wrong and they should spend more time focusing on the things they can change than those they can't. Winston states:

"Woman cannot shirk her responsibility for the sins of the earth. It is easy for her to say that men are bad; that as a class, they are worse than women. But who trained these bad men? Were it not woman? Herin lies the inconsistency of women - striving to for a chance to do good when the opportunity is inherently theirs" (Winston, 186-193).

Winston concludes her argument by claiming that the New Woman's biggest foible is the fact that they believe they are superior to men and should be treated as such.

To the best of our knowledge, no digitized versions of "Why Women are Ceasing to Marry" exist online.

In Hepworth Dixon's essay, she responds to the arguments made in other essays that the new women are too selfish to take on the righteous duties of a wife and mother and are only focused on their individual success and establishment in male-dominated fields. She starts out by taking the blame off of the new woman and placing it on the failures of men. Hepworth Dixon explains that women are not against marriage and the idea of doing house work and caring for children, but they are opposed to marrying the men that are available to them and would rather spend their time working towards a carreer than being with a man that has qualities that make him less than desirable. She says that women are becoming less likely to ignore the flaws of a man. Wives are no longer staying beneath thier husbans, looking up with awe at their perfection. They are no longer meek and are beginning to stand up for themselves. Heptworth Dixon also points out that some men are even apt to "step down from their pedestools" and treat women in their lives as equals. She then goes on to discuss that the ideal for marriage have changed and that now women also view marriage as a scary commitment. She mentions other female authors who were having a tough time taking such a large step in their lives.

Hepworth Dixon goes on to say that marriage used to be a way for girls to gain social freedom, but with the feminist movement and the social norms of women changing, girls can gain their social freedom without having to marry someone. A woman gains even more social freedom through creating a career for herself and making her own money. Hepworth Dixon address the fact that a small portion of the reason a woman would not want to marry is because becoming a wife and mother would make it difficult to maintain a career that is heavy in work. However, she goes on to stay that this would not deter a woman if she loved the man she were to marry very much.

Hepworth Dixon summarizes her argument by stating that women are not as likely to marry because of their skepticism of marriage and their higher standards for both their partner and for the marriage partnership itself. She hopes that in the future, when marriage is more an equal partnership than a submissive one, more women will be happy to get married and further the race.