20.
Selections on gender from [Victorian Prose] (ed. Leighon and Surridge) and [Victorian Prose] (ed. Mundhenk and Fletcher).
Leighton, Mary Elizabeth and Lisa Surridge. The Broadview Anthology of Victorian Prose: 1832-1901. Ontario: Broadview Press, 2012. Print.
Mundhenk, Rosemary J. and LuAnn McCracken Fletcher. Victorian Prose: An Anthology. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999. Print.
Bodichon, Barabara Leigh Smith. "from A Brief Summary, in Plain Language, of the Most important Laws Concerning Women; Together with a Few Observations Thereon. Leighton and Surridge. 292-8.
A general understanding of the laws which governed the rights of women in nineteenth-century England does not stand to an actual explanation of their place in the legal system. Married women are, very literally, non-persons in the eyes of the Victorian government, instead existing as extensions of their husbands who have full legal rights over their persons, offspring, property, and production. "A man and wife are one person in law; the wife loses all her rights as a single woman, and her existence is entirely absorbed in that of her husband" writes Bodichon, a suffragette and activist. She goes on to detail in her summary the legal justification for marital rape, how no man is obliged to "support his wife" (despite her inability to autonomously support herself 0 294), how she owns not even her own clothing (293), and how she maintains no custody over her children (294). Bodichon further laments that divorce is a luxury for the wealthy patriarch, and in her "Remarks," uses strong language which describes even the most capable of women as "infants" under the care of their husbands (296), the legal robbery at their hands, and the general abuse supported by the system. These are the tumultuous politics which inspired the political movements discussed in The Politics of Gender in Victorian Britain.
Ellis, Sarah Stickney. "The Women of England, Their Social Duties, and Domestic Habits. Victorian Prose. Mundhenk and Fletcher. 53-7. AND Leighton and Surridge 288-92.
According to the editors of the volume, Ellis is one of the central figures responsible for the formulation of the gendered "spheres" for which Victorians are so well known. Author of The Daughters of England, The Mothers of England, The Wives of England, and others, Ellis' writing seeks to direct readers in the proper formulation and execution of gender in support of a culturally-forwarded system of morality and propriety. In this selection Ellis is directly equating the morality of women with the morality of English, which she posits is superior to that of other countries. In the Broadview edition, there is an emphasis on the actual influence of women, as Ellis chastises women who claim they have none. She asserts, "Have they not bound themselves by a sacred and enduring bond, to be to one fellow-traveller along the path of life, a ... guide and a help...? ... Above all, have they not, many of them, had the feeble steps of infancy committed to their care - the pure unsullied page of childhood presented to them for its fist and most durable inscription? - and what have they written there? ... It is therefore not only false in reasoning, but wrong in principle, for women to assert ... that they have no influence"" (290). It is for this influence, then, that Ellis argues in the Mundhenk excerpts, for the exercising of female morality in the improvement of England.
Greg, William Rathbone. “Why Are Women Redundant?” Mundhenk and Fletcher. 157-63.
According to editors, Greg’s “Why Are Women Redundant?” is published in The National Review in 1862 in response to the 1851 census which identifies a large population of women between twenty and forty who are not married. As it is considered the duty of a moral middle class to marry and produce children, the number of unmarried women is identified as a threat to middle class values and expectations, and thus a problem to be solved. Greg’s solution, then, is exportation – the emigration of single women to the colonies which has drawn away large numbers of single men. “Hundreds of women remain single in our distorted civilization because they have never been asked at all,” Greg asserts, and thus wishes to place them in a positon where they may be asked. Evident in his analysis is the material status of women in Victorian culture – he wishes to export a surplus like so many goods, in order to balance the moral and social economy of his country.
Mill, John Stuart. "The Subjection of Women." Mundhenk and Fletcher. 121-31.
Mill’s seminal essay begins succinctly with the assertion of “an opinion which [he has] held from the very earliest period when [he] had formed any opinions at all on social or political matters … That the principle which regulates the existing social relations between the two sexes – the legal subordination of one sex to another – is wrong in itself, and now one of the chief hindrances to human improvement; and that it out to be replaced by a principle of perfect equality, admitting no power or privilege on the one side, nor disability on the other” (122). His support is a reading of culture and history which demonstrates that the way things “have always been” is not necessarily the right way to do things – that “the adoption of this system of inequality never was the result of deliberation, or forethought, or any social ideas, or any notion whatever of what conduced to the benefit of humanity or the good order of society” (123) – essentially, that the subordination of women is literally senseless. He attacks the reasoning of a powerful majority by alluding to slavery, and that this abhorrent system is maintained as “a matter of compact among the masters” for their own good, and not the good of the whole. He associates the place of nineteenth century women with this form of bondage by further stating that “it is the primitive state of slavery lasting on” (123), and moves forward to demonstrate that the state of women is not natural, as some politicians claim, but the result of male sentimentality and fear. He argues that in a culture seeking to move forward and evolve as exemplary the state of one women is backwards, and that their legal status is (negatively) unique “in modern legislation” (128). Of the calls for maintenance Mill says that one cannot truly know women because they do not yet have the rights and education to express themselves as thoughtfully and completely as men – that they’ve been denied the powers of full representation, and thus a reading of the female character is an imperfect analysis of an external, limited reader. There is a great deal here useful for the understanding of Victorian culture as a whole, and gender politics specifically.
Nightingale, Florence. "from Suggestions for Thought to the Searchers after Truth among the Artizans of England: Volume 2, Section 5: Cassandra." Leighton and Surridge 298-300.
In excerpts from "Cassandra" in both anthologies, Nightingale uses the language of dreaming, blessings, and saviors to argue for the necessity of offering women full educations in support of their moral, intellectual, and social development. She speaks of women mourning opportunities they never have, and how dreams and thoughts are crushed by the cultural system which denies them the educational opportunities of men. She says women are "petrified into stone ... chained to the bronze pedestal" when, with education, "woman will be the Saviour of her race" (299). Restriction to the domestic sphere kills the ideal philosophical life of the woman, and that "Men are afraid that their houses will not be so comfortable, that their wives will make themselves 'remarkable'" actually makes women "recoil" from domestic expectations - that, in fact, restricting women so vehemently is a greater threat to these gender spheres than educating women may be.
Norton, Caroline. “A Letter to the Queen on Lord Chancellor Cranworth’s Marriage and Divorce Bill.” Mundhenk and Fletcher. 143-55.
Caroline Norton’s unfortunate social and legal position serves as an exemplary case of the abuses of the gendered system of law. In “A Letter to the Queen” she considers the absurdity of her own non-existence in the eyes of the law, as a citizen of a country until the rule of a queen. Many of her complaints are echoes of the other reflections on the unfortunate position of gender, with the additional ethos of a woman who has been directly harmed by this legal imbalance. She writes, for example, that “An English wife has no legal right even to her clothes or ornaments … her husband … is not bound to [maintain] her … As her husband, he has a right to all that is hers: as his wife, she has no right to anything that is his” (146-7). Like Bodichon, Norton reflects that divorce is a luxury for the wealthy, and that lower classes are still ignorant of their rights and obligations. Her rhetoric maintains much of the tone of Ellis, as she says, “The natural position of woman is inferiority to men. Amen! That is a thing of God’s appointing, not of man’s devising” (150), but begs the law to take consideration of men who are themselves tyrannical: “do not leave me to the mercy of one who has never shewn me mercy” (151). She seeks not superiority, she says, but the legal right of autonomy – to protect herself. Her sentiments are just the sort that are described in The Politics of Gender - a call to the government (patriarchy, really) to allow women protection under that patriarchy from individual deviant husbands.
Ruskin, John. "Lecture 2: Lilies: Of Queen's Gardens." Leighton and Surridge 301-9.
Ruskin's famous lecture on women's education falsely asserts that women are queens of their own domestic spheres in order to maintain that men and women are separate-but-equal in the present system. He scoffs at the idea that man "could be helped effectively by a shadow, or worthily by a slave!" and thus "We are foolish, and without excuse foolish, in speaking of the 'superiority' of one sex to the other, as if they could be compared in similar things" (302). Throughout the lecture he suggests that women's "intellect is ... for sweet ordering, arrangement, and decision," that she's naturally intellectually inclined to the ordering and maintenance of a peaceful and comforting household, and that "within his house, as ruled by her, unless she herself has sought it, need enter no danger" (302). He maintains that women should be educated similarly to men, that they can understand the woes of their husbands, communicate domestic and "sweet" ideas to others in their native tongues, and generally to know "whatever her husband is likely to know ... for daily and helpful use" (304). Thus, a woman's education should be pursued as a boon to her husband, to make her a better helpmate.
Several interesting pronouncements are made within the lecture which are worthy of their own consideration, including: "You bring up your girls as if they were meant for sideboard ornaments, and then complain of their frivolity" (304); "You do not treat the Dean of Christ Church or the Master of Trinity as your inferiors" (and so should not treat governesses in this way - 305); "There is not a war in the world, no, nor an injustice, but you women are answerable for it; not in that you have provoked, but in that you have not hindered" (307).
Ward, Mary Arnold (Mrs. Humphry). “An Appeal Against Female Suffrage.” Mundhenk and Fletcher. 417-422.
In an address signed by 104 female anti-suffragettes, Ward ardently defends the status quo and the relinquishing of rights, decisions, and power to the male sex in support of female decency and morality. Citing “natural” differences between men and women which render women less capable to make political decisions, such as their “natural eagerness and quickness of temper” (419), Ward maintains that women have all the influence they can handle, thank you very much, and their inclusion in “foreign or colonial policy, or of grave constitutional change” would be disastrous as compared to the “sound judgment” of men (419). Several points, however, signify greater cultural judgment as inspiration for the appeal. For example, point three warns that “If votes be given to unmarried women on the same terms as they are given to men, large numbers of women leading immoral lives will be enfranchised on the one hand, while married women, who, as a rule, have passed through more of the practical experiences of life than the unmarried, will be excluded.” But, she continues, giving married women the same vote will be too great of an upset to “family life … which have never been adequately considered” (420). Giving women the vote is “demoralizing” and indicates “a total misconception of woman’s true dignity and special mission” (421).
