Women's Work, Number II [pp. 91-94]

THE LADIES' REPOSITOR2r.
scarcely to be quietly put out of the way by calling it sentimental nonsense. Besides, granting
the truth of the statement that there is, at this
present moment, occupation enough for every
woman, of one kind or another, is not this outside the question? Is not the occupying herself with whatever comes to hand, even allowing it to be of a useful character, a very different
thing from the being untrammeled in the intelligent choice of whatever work she feels she is
best fitted for? I claim for a woman in the
matter of life-work neither more nor less than
the same opportunities and privileges which a
man enjoys without question, and as a matter
of course. A woman should be able to do
whatever she can do best, exactly as, generally
speaking, a man is able.
But, it is objected, there are too many women
who must have work in order to live now.
Why increase the number, and crowd the already overfilled ranks with those to whom it is
not a necessity? I reply, that work of some
kind is an inward moral necessity to every
one-that there is not a single department in
life which, to-day, would not be infinitely improved and elevated by the preaching in it of a
practical Gospel of work by cultivated women
fitted for it. A woman's sphere is the limit of
the development of her capacities in every direction, menftal, moral, physical, and spiritual.
Thle moment it is made an easy thing for a
woman to choose her calling, educate herself
for it, and devote herself to it, there will be new
and before-undreamed-of applications and combinations of labor, by which the world will be the
richer. Women can be physicians, ministers,
architects, nurses, landscape-gardeners. The
various phases of business would receive new
vitality by the infusion into them of feminine
ability and earnestness.
Do not fancy that I undervalue marriage.
On the contrary, I set so high a value upon it,
it is to me so infinitely sacred, that I can not
see it desecrated, as I continually do, without a
protest. No true woman will ever reject marriage if it come to her in suclh form that she
may rightly accept it. There needs be no anxiety on that score. But women marry now because it is expected of them-often from sheer
inability to withstand the public sentiment which
demands that every woman past a certain age
should be married-often from weariness with
life, and the longing, almost the necessity, for a
change-sometimes for the excitement attendant upon an engagement, a trousseau, and a
wedding-from almost any and every reason
except the true one. A higher standard in this
most important matter is imperatively needed.
I would have girls educated in a radically
different manner. They should have some object in life beyond a husband and an establishment. They should be taught that, while a true
marriage is a gift from God, and to be accepted
with devout thankfulness, any thing short of
that is sin. And failing that for any reason,
they should still have a resource in some honest,
earnest work suited to their especial gifts, by
which their own natures and the world would
be benefited.
The happiest marriage I know is one where
the wife was for many years previously occupied
as a successful teacher. Marriage came to her:
she did not go out of her way to seek it; and
her work so fully satisfied her that, though she
accepted with gratitude the crowning joy of her
life, even without that joy she would hardly have
felt her work wasted or thrown away.
But I hear it said: A woman will lose social
caste if she do such things unless obliged by
outward necessity, and then it is a great pity,
and only certain modes of self-support should
be permitted. Wherefore? Are women, cultured and refined, any the less objects of admiration and affection because they, believing
that a natural gift in any direction implies use
and responsibility, endeavor to employ it in the
best manner possible for the glory of God and
the benefit of the world, their own highest
natures included? They may spend less money
upon dress, perhaps, and visit, and dance, and
gossip less, but would that be an evil? It is
time a truer and less artificial standard were
recognized. A girl may dance through the season with any and every man who asks her. No
one protests against the physical outrag e of late
hours, heated rooms and wine, or the still
greater shock such a proceeding ought to be to
feminine purity and delicacy. All this is acceptecl as a matter of course. Let that same
girl demand work outside the conventional
limits, a profession or a business, and forthwith
she is branded as "unwomanly" and "strongmninded." A social public opinion which fosters
uselessness and vanity, and worse, to the exclusion of earnestness and endeavor in right directions, is simply not worth considering at all.
The sooner such perverted notions are brot ght
to notice in order to be done away with, the
better for all parties concerned. Why is it considered a social degradation for the daughter of
a rich man to earn money in any honest, suitable way, and a permitted, almost a required,
thing for her brother?
There is a stigma of reproach cast upon the
term "old maid"-too often justly so, I admit.
But where does the fault lie? I know two
92
I