1869
CHAPTER1TheobjectofthisEssayistoexplainasclearlyasIamablegrounds
ofanopinionwhichIhaveheldfromtheveryearliestperiodwhenIhad
formedanyopinionsatallonsocialpoliticalmatters，andwhich，instead
ofbeingweakenedormodified，hasbeenconstantlygrowingstrongerbythe
progressreflectionandtheexperienceoflife。Thattheprinciplewhich
regulatestheexistingsocialrelationsbetweenthetwosexes——thelegal
subordinationofonesextotheother——iswrongitself，andnowoneof
thechiefhindrancestohumanimprovement;andthatitoughttobereplaced
byaprincipleofperfectequality，admittingnopowerorprivilegeontheoneside，nordisabilityontheother。TheverywordsnecessarytoexpressthetaskIhaveundertaken，showhow
arduousitis。Butitwouldbeamistaketosupposethatthedifficultyof
thecasemustlieintheinsufficiencyorobscurityofthegroundsofreason
onwhichmyconvictions。Thedifficultyisthatwhichexistsinallcases
inwhichthereisamassoffeelingtobecontendedagainst。Solongasopinion
isstronglyrootedinthefeelings，itgainsratherthanlosesinstability
byhavingapreponderatingweightofargumentagainstit。Forifitwere
acceptedasaresultofargument，therefutationoftheargumentmightshake
thesolidityoftheconviction;butwhenitrestssolelyonfeeling，worse
itfaresinargumentativecontest，themorepersuadedadherentsarethat
theirfeelingmusthavesomedeeperground，whichtheargumentsdonotreach;
andwhilethefeelingremains，itisalwaysthrowingupfreshintrenchments
ofargumenttorepairanybreachmadeintheold。Andtherearesomanycauses
tendingtomakethefeelingsconnectedwiththissubjectthemostintense
andmostdeeply—rootedofthosewhichgatherroundandprotectoldinstitutions
andcustom，thatweneednotwondertofindthemasyetlessunderminedand
loosenedthananyoftherestbytheprogressthegreatmodernspiritual
andsocialtransition;norsupposethatthebarbarismstowhichmenclinglongestmustbelessbarbarismsthanthosewhichtheyearliershakeoff。Ineveryrespecttheburthenishardonthosewhoattackanalmostuniversal
opinion。Theymustbeveryfortunatewellasunusuallycapableiftheyobtain
ahearingatall。Theyhavemoredifficultyinobtainingatrial，thanany
otherlitigantshaveingettingaverdict。Iftheydoextortahearing，they
aresubjectedtoasetoflogicalrequirementstotallydifferentfromthose
exactedfromotherpeople。Inallothercases，burthenofproofissupposed
toliewiththeaffirmative。Ifapersonischargedwithamurder，itrests
withthosewhoaccusehimtogiveproofofhisguilt，notwithhimselfto
provehisinnocence。Ifthereisadifferenceofopinionaboutthereality
ofanallegedhistoricalevent，inwhichthefeelingsofmengeneralare
notmuchinterested，astheSiegeofTroyexample，thosewhomaintainthat
theeventtookplaceexpectedtoproducetheirproofs，beforethosewhotake
theothersidecanberequiredtosayanything;andatnotimetheserequired
todomorethanshowthattheevidenceproducedbytheothersisofnovalue。
Again，inpracticalmatters，theburthenofproofissupposedtobewith
thosewhoareagainstliberty;whocontendforanyrestrictionorprohibition
eitheranylimitationofthegeneralfreedomofhumanactionoranydisqualification
ordisparityofprivilegeaffectingonepersonorkindofpersons，ascompared
withothers。Theaprioripresumptionisinfavouroffreedomandimpartiality。
ItisheldthatthereshouldbenorestraintnotrequiredbyIgeneralgood，
andthatthelawshouldbenorespecterofpersonsbutshouldtreatallalike，
savewheredissimilarityoftreatmentisrequiredbypositivereasons，either
ofjusticeorofpolicy。Butofnoneoftheserulesofevidencewillthe
benefitbeallowedtothosewhomaintaintheopinionIprofess。Itisuseless
metosaythatthosewhomaintainthedoctrinethatmenhaarighttocommand
andwomenareunderanobligationobey，orthatmenarefitforgovernment
andwomenunfit，ontheaffirmativesideofthequestion，andthattheyare
boundtoshowpositiveevidencefortheassertions，orsubmittotheirrejection。
Itisequallyunavailingformetosaythatthosewhodenytowomenanyfreedom
orprivilegerightlyallowtomen，havingthedoublepresumptionagainst
themthattheyareopposingfreedomandrecommendingpartiality，mustheld
tothestrictestproofoftheircase，andunlesstheirsuccessbesuchas
toexcludealldoubt，thejudgmentoughttoagainstthem。Thesewouldbe
thoughtgoodpleasinanycommoncase;buttheywillnotbethoughtsoin
thisinstance。BeforeIcouldhopetomakeanyimpression，Ishouldbeexpected
notonlytoanswerallthathaseverbeensaidbyewhotaketheotherside
ofthequestion，buttoimaginethatcouldbesaidbythem——tofindthem
inreasons，asIasanswerallIfind：andbesidesrefutingallarguments
fortheaffirmative，Ishallbecalleduponforinvinciblepositivearguments
toproveanegative。AndevenifIcoulddoallandleavetheoppositeparty
withahostofunansweredargumentsagainstthem，andnotasingleunrefuted
oneonside，Ishouldbethoughttohavedonelittle;foracausesupported
ontheonehandbyuniversalusage，andontheotherbysogreatapreponderance
ofpopularsentiment，issupposedtohaveapresumptioninitsfavour，superior
toanyconvictionwhichanappealtoreasonhaspowertoproduceinintellectsbutthoseofahighclass。Idonotmentionthesedifficultiestocomplainofthem;first，useit
wouldbeuseless;theyareinseparablefromhavingtocontendthroughpeople’s
understandingsagainstthehostilitytheirfeelingsandpracticaltendencies：
andtrulytheunderstandingsofthemajorityofmankindwouldneedtobe
muchbettercultivatedthanhaseveryetbeenthecase，beforetheybeasked
toplacesuchrelianceintheirownpowerofestimatingarguments，asto
giveuppracticalprinciplesinwhichhavebeenbornandbredandwhichare
thebasisofmuchexistingorderoftheworld，atthefirstargumentative
attackwhichtheyarenotcapableoflogicallyresisting。Idonottherefore
quarrelwiththemforhavingtoolittlefaithinargument，butforhaving
toomuchfaithincustomandthegeneralfeeling。Itisoneofthecharacteristic
prejudicesoftheionofthenineteenthcenturyagainsttheeighteenth，to
accordtotheunreasoningelementsinhumannaturetheinfallibilitywhich
theeighteenthcenturyissupposedtohaveascribedtothereasoningelements。
FortheapotheosisofReasonwehavesubstitutedthatofInstinct;andwe
callthinginstinctwhichwefindinourselvesandforwhichwecannottrace
anyrationalfoundation。Thisidolatry，infinitelymoredegradingthanthe
other，andthemostperniciousofthefalseworshipsofthepresentday，
ofallofwhichitisthemainsupport，willprobablyholditsgrounduntil
itwaybeforeasoundpsychologylayingbaretherealrootofmuchthatis
boweddowntoastheintentionofNatureandordinanceofGod。Asregards
thepresentquestion，Iamgoingtoaccepttheunfavourableconditionswhich
theprejudiceassignstome。Iconsentthatestablishedcustom，andthegeneral
feelings，shouldbedeemedconclusiveagainstme，unlessthatcustomand
feelingfromagetoagecanbeshowntohaveowedtheirexistencetoother
causesthantheirsoundness，andtohavederivedtheirpowerfromtheworse
ratherthanthebetterpartsofhumannature。Iamwillingthatjudgment
shouldgoagainstme，unlessIcanshowthatmyjudgehasbeentamperedwith。
Theconcessionisnotsogreatasitmightappear;fortoprovethis，isbyfartheeasiestportionofmytask。Thegeneralityofapracticeisinsomecasesastrongpresumptionthat
itis，oratalleventsoncewas，conducivetolaudableends。Thisisthe
case，whenthepracticewasfirstadopted，orafterwardskeptup，asameans
tosuchends，andwasgroundedonexperienceofthemodeinwhichtheycould
bemosteffectuallyattained。Iftheauthorityofmenoverwomen，whenfirst
established，hadbeentheresultofaconscientiouscomparisonbetweendifferent
modesofconstitutingthegovernmentofsociety;if，aftertryingvarious
othermodesofsocialorganisation——thegovernmentofwomenovermen，equality
betweenthetwo，andsuchmixedanddividedmodesofgovernmentasmight
beinvented——ithadbeendecided，onthetestimonyofexperience，that
themodeinwhichwomenarewhollyundertheruleofmen，havingnoshare
atallinpublicconcerns，andeachinprivatebeingunderthelegalobligation
ofobediencetothemanwithwhomshehasassociatedherdestiny，wasthe
arrangementmostconducivetothehappinessandwell—beingofboth;itsgeneral
adoptionmightthenbefairlythoughttobesomeevidencethat，atthetime
whenitwasadopted，itwasthebest：thougheventhentheconsiderations
whichrecommendeditmay，likesomanyotherprimevalsocialfactsofthe
greatestimportance，havesubsequently，inthecourseofages，ceasedto
exist。Butthestateofthecaseisineveryrespectthereverseofthis。
Inthefirstplace，theopinioninfavourofthepresentsystem，whichentirely
subordinatestheweakersextothestronger，restsupontheoryonly;for
thereneverhasbeentrialmadeofanyother：sothatexperience，inthe
senseinwhichitisvulgarlyopposedtotheory，cannotbepretendedtohave
pronouncedanyverdict。Andinthesecondplace，theadoptionofthissystem
ofinequalityneverwastheresultofdeliberation，orforethought，orany
socialideas，oranynotionwhateverofwhatconducedtothebenefitofhumanity
orthegoodorderofsociety。Itarosesimplyfromthefactthatfromthe
veryearliesttwilightofhumansociety，everywomanowingtothevalueattached
toherbymen，combinedwithherinferiorityinmuscularstrength）wasfound
inastateofbondagetosomeman。Lawsandsystemsofpolityalwaysbegin
byrecognisingtherelationstheyfindalreadyexistingbetweenindividuals。
Theyconvertwhatwasamerephysicalfactintoalegalright，giveitthe
sanctionofsociety，andprincipallyaimatthesubstitutionofpublicand
organisedmeansofassertingandprotectingtheserights，insteadofthe
irregularandlawlessconflictofphysicalstrength。Thosewhohadalready
beencompelledtoobediencebecameinthismannerlegallyboundtoit。Slavery，
frombeinnamereaffairofforcebetweenthemasterandtheslave，became
regularisedandamatterofcompactamongthemasters，who，bindingthemselves
tooneanotherforcommonprotection，guaranteedbytheircollectivestrength
theprivatepossessionsofeach，includinghisslaves。Inearlytimes，the
greatmajorityofthemalesexwereslaves，aswellasthewholeofthefemale。
Andmanyageselapsed，someofthemagesofhighcultivation，beforeany
thinkerwasboldenoughtoquestiontherightfulness，andtheabsolutesocial
necessity，eitheroftheoneslaveryoroftheother。Bydegreessuchthinkers
didarise;and（thegeneralprogressofsocietyassisting）theslaveryof
themalesexhas，inallthecountriesofChristianEuropeatleast（though，
inoneofthem，onlywithinthelastfewyears）beenatlengthabolished，
andthatofthefemalesexhasbeengraduallychangedintoamilderform
ofdependence。Butthisdependence，asitexistsatpresent，isnotanoriginal
institution，takingafreshstartfromconsiderationsofjusticeandsocial
expediency——itistheprimitivestateofslaverylastingon，throughsuccessive
mitigationsandmodificationsoccasionedbythesamecauseswhichhavesoftened
thegeneralmanners，andbroughtallhumanrelationsmoreunderthecontrol
ofjusticeandtheinfluenceofhumanity。Ithasnotlostthetaintofits
brutalorigin。Nopresumptioninitsfavour，therefore，canbedrawnfrom
thefactofitsexistence。Theonlysuchpresumptionwhichitcouldbesupposed
tohave，mustbegroundedonitshavinglastedtillnow，whensomanyother
thingswhichcamedownfromthesameodioussourcehavebeendoneawaywith。
Andthis，indeed，iswhatmakesitstrangetoordinaryears，tohearitasserted
thattheinequalityofrightsbetweenmenandwomenhasnoothersourcethanthelawofthestrongest。Thatthisstatementshouldhavetheeffectofaparadox，isinsomerespects
creditabletotheprogressofcivilisation，andtheimprovementofthemoral
sentimentsofmankind。Wenowlive——thatistosay，oneortwoofthemost
advancednationsoftheworldnowlive——inastateinwhichthelawof
thestrongestseemstobeentirelyabandonedastheregulatingprinciple
oftheworld’saffairs：nobodyprofessesit，and，asregardsmostofthe
relationsbetweenhumanbeings，nobodyispermittedtopractiseit。When
anyonesucceedsindoingso，itisundercoverofsomepretextwhichgives
himthesemblanceofhavingsomegeneralsocialinterestonhisside。This
beingtheostensiblestateofthings，peopleflatterthemselvesthatthe
ruleofmereforceisended;thatthelawofthestrongestcannotbethe
reasonofexistenceofanythingwhichhasremainedinfulloperationdown
tothepresenttime。Howeveranyofourpresentinstitutionsmayhavebegun，
itcanonly，theythink，havebeenpreservedtothisperiodofadvancedcivilisation
byawell—groundedfeelingofitsadaptationtohumannature，andconduciveness
tothegeneralgood。Theydonotunderstandthegreatvitalityanddurability
ofinstitutionswhichplacerightonthesideofmight;howintenselythey
areclungto;howthegoodaswellasthebadpropensitiesandsentiments
ofthosewhohavepowerintheirhands，becomeidentifiedwithretaining
it;howslowlythesebadinstitutionsgiveway，oneatatime，theweakest
first，beginningwiththosewhichareleastinterwovenwiththedailyhabits
oflife;andhowveryrarelythosewhohaveobtainedlegalpowerbecause
theyfirsthadphysical，haveeverlosttheirholdofituntilthephysical
powerhadpassedovertotheotherside。Suchshiftingofthephysicalforce
nothavingtakenplaceinthecaseofwomen;thisfact，combinedwithall
thepeculiarandcharacteristicfeaturesoftheparticularcase，madeit
certainfromthefirstthatthisbranchofthesystemofrightfoundedon
might，thoughsoftenedinitsmostatrociousfeaturesatanearlierperiod
thanseveraloftheothers，wouldbetheverylasttodisappear。Itwasinevitable
thatthisonecaseofasocialrelationgroundedonforce，wouldsurvive
throughgenerationsofinstitutionsgroundedonequaljustice，analmost
solitaryexceptiontothegeneralcharacteroftheirlawsandcustoms;but
which，solongasitdoesnotproclaimitsownorigin，andasdiscussion
hasnotbroughtoutitstruecharacter，isnotfelttojarwithmoderncivilisation，
anymorethandomesticslaveryamongtheGreeksjarredwiththeirnotionofthemselvesasafreepeople。Thetruthis，thatpeopleofthepresentandthelasttwoorthreegenerations
havelostallpracticalsenseoftheprimitiveconditionofhumanity;and
onlythefewwhohavestudiedhistoryaccurately，orhavemuchfrequented
thepartsoftheworldoccupiedbythelivingrepresentativesofageslong
past，areabletoformanymentalpictureofwhatsocietythenwas。People
arenotawarehowentirely，informerages，thelawofsuperiorstrengthwas
theruleoflife;howpubliclyandopenlyitwasavowed，Idonotsaycynically
orshamelessly——forthesewordsimplyafeelingthattherewassomething
inittobeashamedof，andnosuchnotioncouldfindaplaceinthefaculties
ofanypersoninthoseages，exceptaphilosopherorasaint。Historygives
acruelexperienceofhumannature，inshowinghowexactlytheregarddue
tothelife，possessions，andentireearthlyhappinessofanyclassofpersons，
wasmeasuredbywhattheyhadthepowerofenforcing;howallwhomadeany
resistancetoauthoritiesthathadarmsintheirhands，howeverdreadful
mightbetheprovocation，hadnotonlythelawofforcebutallotherlaws，
andallthenotionsofsocialobligationagainstthem;andintheeyesof
thosewhomtheyresisted，werenotonlyguiltyofcrime，butoftheworst
ofallcrimes，deservingthemostcruelchastisementwhichhumanbeingscould
inflict。Thefirstsmallvestigeofafeelingofobligationinasuperior
toacknowledgeanyrightininferiors，beganwhenhehadbeeninduced，for
convenience，tomakesomepromisetothem。Thoughthesepromises，evenwhen
sanctionedbythemostsolemnoaths，wereformanyagesrevokedorviolated
onthemosttriflingprovocationortemptation，itisprobablythatthis，
exceptbypersonsofstillworsethantheaveragemorality，wasseldomdone
withoutsometwingesofconscience。Theancientrepublics，beingmostlygrounded
fromthefirstuponsomekindofmutualcompact，oratanyrateformedby
anunionofpersonsnotveryunequalinstrength，afforded，inconsequence，
thefirstinstanceofaportionofhumanrelationsfencedround，andplaced
underthedominionofanotherlawthanthatofforce。Andthoughtheoriginal
lawofforceremainedinfulloperationbetweenthemandtheirslaves，and
also（exceptsofaraslimitedbyexpresscompact）betweenacommonwealth
anditssubjects，orotherindependentcommonwealths;thebanishmentofthat
primitivelawevenfromsonarrowafield，commencedtheregenerationof
humannature，bygivingbirthtosentimentsofwhichexperiencesoondemonstrated
theimmensevalueevenformaterialinterests，andwhichthenceforwardonly
requiredtobeenlarged，notcreated。Thoughslaveswerenopartofthecommonwealth，
itwasinthefreestatesthatslaveswerefirstfelttohaverightsashuman
beings。TheStoicswere，Ibelieve，thefirst（exceptsofarastheJewish
lawconstitutesanexception）whotaughtasapartofmoralitythatmenwere
boundbymoralobligationstotheirslaves。Noone，afterChristianitybecame
ascendant，couldeveragainhavebeenastrangertothisbelief，intheory;
nor，aftertheriseoftheCatholicChurch，wasiteverwithoutpersonsto
standupforit。YettoenforceitwasthemostarduoustaskwhichChristianity
everhadtoperform。FormorethanathousandyearstheChurchkeptupthe
contest，withhardlyanyperceptiblesuccess。Itwasnotforwantofpower
overmen’sminds。Itspowerwasprodigious。Itcouldmakekingsandnobles
resigntheirmostvaluedpossessionstoenrichtheChurch。Itcouldmake
thousandsintheprimeoflifeandtheheightofworldlyadvantages，shut
themselvesupinconventstoworkouttheirsalvationbypoverty，fasting，
andprayer。Itcouldsendhundredsofthousandsacrosslandandsea，Europe
andAsia，togivetheirlivesforthedeliveranceoftheHolySepulchre。
Itcouldmakekingsrelinquishwiveswhoweretheobjectoftheirpassionate
attachment，becausetheChurchdeclaredthattheywerewithintheseventh
（byourcalculationthefourteenth）degreeofrelationship。Allthisitdid;
butitcouldnotmakemenfightlesswithoneanother，nortyranniseless
cruellyovertheserfs，andwhentheywereable，overburgesses。Itcould
notmakethemrenounceeitheroftheapplicationsofforce;forcemilitant，
orforcetriumphant。Thistheycouldneverbeinducedtodountiltheywere
themselvesintheirturncompelledbysuperiorforce。Onlybythegrowing
powerofkingswasanendputtofightingexceptbetweenkings，orcompetitors
forkingship;onlybythegrowthofawealthyandwarlikebourgeoisiein
thefortifiedtowns，andofaplebeianinfantrywhichprovedmorepowerful
inthefieldthantheundisciplinedchivalry，wastheinsolenttyrannyof
thenoblesoverthebourgeoisieandpeasantrybroughtwithinsomebounds。
Itwaspersistedinnotonlyuntil，butlongafter，theoppressedhadobtained
apowerenablingthemoftentotakeconspicuousvengeance;andontheContinent
muchofitcontinuedtothetimeoftheFrenchRevolution，thoughinEngland
theearlierandbetterorganisationofthedemocraticclassesputanendtoitsooner，byestablishingequallawsandfreenationalinstitutions。Ifpeoplearemostlysolittleawarehowcompletely，duringthegreater
partofthedurationofourspecies，thelawofforcewastheavowedrule
ofgeneralconduct，anyotherbeingonlyaspecialandexceptionalconsequence
ofpeculiarties——andfromhowveryrecentadateitisthattheaffairs
ofsocietyingeneralhavebeenevenpretendedtoberegulatedaccording
toanymorallaw;aslittledopeoplerememberorconsider，howinstitutions
andcustomswhichneverhadanygroundbutthelawofforce，lastoninto
agesandstatesofgeneralopinionwhichneverwouldhavepermittedtheir
firstestablishment。Lessthanfortyyearsago，Englishmenmightstillby
lawholdhumanbeingsinbondageassaleableproperty：withinthepresent
centurytheymightkidnapthemandcarrythemoff，andworkthemliterally
todeath。Thisabsolutelyextremecaseofthelawofforce，condemnedby
thosewhocantoleratealmosteveryotherformofarbitrarypower，andwhich，
ofallotherspresentsfeaturesthemostrevoltingtothefeelingsofall
wholookatitfromanimpartialposition，wasthelawofcivilisedandChristian
Englandwithinthememoryofpersonsnowliving：andinonehalfofAnglo—Saxon
Americathreeorfouryearsago，notonlydidslaveryexist，buttheslave—trade，
andthebreedingofslavesexpresslyforit，wasageneralpracticebetween
slavestates。Yetnotonlywasthereagreaterstrengthofsentimentagainst
it，but，inEnglandatleast，alessamounteitheroffeelingorofinterest
infavourofit，thanofanyotherofthecustomaryabusesofforce：for
itsmotivewastheloveofgain，unmixedandundisguised;andthosewhoprofited
byitwereaverysmallnumericalfractionofthecountry，whilethenatural
feelingofallwhowerenotpersonallyinterestedinit，wasunmitigated
abhorrence。Soextremeaninstancemakesitalmostsuperfluoustoreferto
anyother：butconsiderthelongdurationofabsolutemonarchy。InEngland
atpresentitisthealmostuniversalconvictionthatmilitarydespotism
isacaseofthelawofforce，havingnootheroriginorjustification。Yet
inallthegreatnationsofEuropeexceptEnglanditeitherstillexists，
orhasonlyjustceasedtoexist，andhasevennowastrongpartyfavourable
toitinallranksofthepeople，especiallyamongpersonsofstationand
consequence。Suchisthepowerofanestablishedsystem，evenwhenfarfrom
universal;whennotonlyinalmosteveryperiodofhistorytherehavebeen
greatandwell—knownexamplesofthecontrarysystem，butthesehavealmost
invariablybeenaffordedbythemostillustriousandmostprosperouscommunities。
Inthiscase，too，thepossessoroftheunduepower，thepersondirectly
interestedinit，isonlyoneperson，whilethosewhoaresubjecttoitand
sufferfromitareliterallyalltherest。Theyokeisnaturallyandnecessarily
humiliatingtoallpersons，excepttheonewhoisonthethrone，together
with，atmost，theonewhoexpectstosucceedtoit。Howdifferentarethese
casesfromthatofthepowerofmenoverwomen！*Iamnotnowprejudging
thequestion—ofitsjustifiableness。Iamshowinghowvastlymorepermanent
itcouldnotbutbe，evenifnotjustifiable，thantheseotherdominations
whichhaveneverthelesslasteddowntoourowntime。Whatevergratification
ofpridethereisinthepossessionofpower，andwhateverpersonalinterest
initsexercise，isinthiscasenotconfinedtoalimitedclass，butcommon
tothewholemalesex。Insteadofbeing，tomostofitssupporters）athing
desirablechieflyintheabstract，or，likethepoliticalendsusuallycontended
forbyfactions，oflittleprivateimportancetoanybuttheleaders;it
comeshometothepersonandhearthofeverymaleheadofafamily，andof
everyonewholooksforwardtobeingso。Theclodhopperexercises，oristo
exercise，hisshareofthepowerequallywiththehighestnobleman。Andthe
caseisthatinwhichthedesireofpoweristhestrongest：foreveryone
whodesirespower，desiresitmostoverthosewhoarenearesttohim，with
whomhislifeispassed，withwhomhehasmostconcernsincommonandin
whomanyindependenceofhisauthorityisoftenestlikelytointerferewith
hisindividualpreferences。If，intheothercasesspecified，powersmanifestly
groundedonlyonforce，andhavingsomuchlesstosupportthem，aresoslowly
andwithsomuchdifficultygotridof，muchmoremustitbesowiththis，
evenifitrestsonnobetterfoundationthanthose。Wemustconsider，too，
thatthepossessorsofthepowerhavefacilitiesinthiscase，greaterthan
inanyother，topreventanyuprisingagainstit。Everyoneofthesubjects
livesundertheveryeye，andalmost，itmaybesaid，inthehands，ofone
ofthemastersincloserintimacywithhimthanwithanyofherfellow—subjects;
withnomeansofcombiningagainsthim，nopowerofevenlocallyovermastering
him，and，ontheotherhand，withthestrongestmotivesforseekinghisfavour
andavoidingtogivehimoffence。Instrugglesforpoliticalemancipation，
everybodyknowshowoftenitschampionsareboughtoffbybribes，ordaunted
byterrors。Inthecaseofwomen，eachindividualofthesubject—classis
inachronicstateofbriberyandintimidationcombined。Insettingupthe
standardofresistance，alargenumberoftheleaders，andstillmoreof
thefollowers，mustmakeanalmostcompletesacrificeofthepleasuresor
thealleviationsoftheirownindividuallot。Ifeveranysystemofprivilege
andenforcedsubjectionhaditsyoketightlyrivetedonthethosewhoare
keptdownbyit，thishas。Ihavenotyetshownthatitisawrongsystem：
buteveryonewhoiscapableofthinkingonthesubjectmustseethateven
ifitis，itwascertaintooutlastallotherformsofunjustauthority。
Andwhensomeofthegrossestoftheotherformsstillexistinmanycivilised
countries，andhaveonlyrecentlybeengotridofinothers，itwouldbe
strangeifthatwhichissomuchthedeepestrootedhadyetbeenperceptibly
shakenanywhere。Thereismorereasontowonderthattheprotestsandtestimoniesagainstitshouldhavebeensonumerousandsoweightyastheyare。Somewillobject，thatacomparisoncannotfairlybemadebetweenthe
governmentofthemalesexandtheformsofunjustpowerwhichIhaveadduced
inillustrationofit，sincethesearearbitrary，andtheeffectofmere
usurpation，whileitonthecontraryisnatural。Butwasthereeveranydomination
whichdidnotappearnaturaltothosewhopossessedit？Therewasatime
whenthedivisionofmankindintotwoclasses，asmalloneofmastersand
anumerousoneofslaves，appeared，eventothemostcultivatedminds，to
benatural，andtheonlynatural，conditionofthehumanrace。Nolessan
intellect，andonewhichcontributednolesstotheprogressofhumanthought，
thanAristotle，heldthisopinionwithoutdoubtormisgiving;andrested
itonthesamepremisesonwhichthesameassertioninregardtothedominion
ofmenoverwomenisusuallybased，namelythattherearedifferentnatures
amongmankind，freenatures，andslavenatures;thattheGreekswereofa
freenature，thebarbarianracesofThraciansandAsiaticsofaslavenature。
ButwhyneedIgobacktoAristotle？Didnottheslave—ownersoftheSouthern
UnitedStatesmaintainthesamedoctrine，withallthefanaticismwithwhich
mendingtothetheoriesthatjustifytheirpassionsandlegitimatetheir
personalinterests？Didtheynotcallheavenandearthtowitnessthatthe
dominionofthewhitemanovertheblackisnatural，thattheblackrace
isbynatureincapableoffreedom，andmarkedoutforslavery？someeven
goingsofarastosaythatthefreedomofmanuallabourersisanunnatural
orderofthingsanywhere。Again，thetheoristsofabsolutemonarchyhave
alwaysaffirmedittobetheonlynaturalformofgovernment;issuingfrom
thepatriarchal，whichwastheprimitiveandspontaneousformofsociety，
framedonthemodelofthepaternal，whichisanteriortosocietyitself，
and，astheycontend，themostnaturalauthorityofall。Nay，forthatmatter，
thelawofforceitself，tothosewhocouldnotpleadanyotherhasalways
seemedthemostnaturalofallgroundsfortheexerciseofauthority。Conquering
racesholdittobeNature’sowndictatethattheconqueredshouldobeythe
conquerors，orastheyeuphoniouslyparaphraseit，thatthefeeblerandmore
unwarlikeracesshouldsubmittothebraverandmanlier。Thesmallestacquaintance
withhumanlifeinthemiddleages，showshowsupremelynaturalthedominion
ofthefeudalnobilityovermenoflowconditionappearedtothenobility
themselves，andhowunnaturaltheconceptionseemed，ofapersonoftheinferior
classclaimingequalitywiththem，orexercisingauthorityoverthem。It
hardlyseemedlesssototheclassheldinsubjection。Theemancipatedserfs
andburgesses，evenintheirmostvigorousstruggles，nevermadeanypretension
toashareofauthority;theyonlydemandedmoreorlessoflimitationto
thepoweroftyrannisingoverthem。Sotrueisitthatunnaturalgenerally
meansonlyuncustomary，andthateverythingwhichisusualappearsnatural。
Thesubjectionofwomentomenbeingauniversalcustom，anydeparturefrom
itquitenaturallyappearsunnatural。Buthowentirely，eveninthiscase，
thefeelingisdependentoncustom，appearsbyampleexperience。Nothing
somuchastonishesthepeopleofdistantpartsoftheworld，whentheyfirst
learnanythingaboutEngland，astobetoldthatitisunderaqueen;the
thingseemstothemsounnaturalastobealmostincredible。ToEnglishmen
thisdoesnotseemintheleastdegreeunnatural，becausetheyareusedto
it;buttheydofeelitunnaturalthatwomenshouldbesoldiersorMembers
ofParliament。Inthefeudalages，onthecontrary，warandpoliticswere
notthoughtunnaturaltowomen，becausenotunusual;itseemednaturalthat
womenoftheprivilegedclassesshouldbeofmanlycharacter，inferiorin
nothingbutbodilystrengthtotheirhusbandsandfathers。Theindependence
ofwomenseemedratherlessunnaturaltotheGreeksthantootherancients，
onaccountofthefabulousAmazons（whomtheybelievedtobehistorical），
andthepartialexampleaffordedbytheSpartanwomen;who，thoughnoless
subordinatebylawthaninotherGreekstates，weremorefreeinfact，and
beingtrainedtobodilyexercisesinthesamemannerwithmen，gaveample
proofthattheywerenotnaturallydisqualifiedforthem。Therecanbelittle
doubtthatSpartanexperiencesuggestedtoPlato，amongmanyotherofhisdoctrines，thatofthesocialandpoliticalequalityofthetwosexes。But，itwillbesaid，theruleofmenoverwomendiffersfromallthese
othersinnotbeingarulearuleofforce：itisacceptedvoluntarily;women
makenocomplaint，andareconsentingpartiestoit。Inthefirstplace，
agreatnumberofwomendonotacceptit。Eversincetherehavebeenwomen
abletomaketheirsentimentsknownbytheirwritings（theonlymodeofpublicity
whichsocietypermitstothem），anincreasingnumberofthemhaverecorded
protestsagainsttheirpresentsocialcondition：andrecentlymanythousands
ofthem，headedbythemosteminentwomenknowntothepublic，havepetitioned
ParliamentfortheiradmissiontotheParliamentarySuffrageTheclaimof
womentobeeducatedassolidly，andinthesamebranchesofknowledge，as
men，isurgedwithgrowingintensity，andwithagreatprospectofsuccess;
whilethedemandfortheiradmissionintoprofessionsandoccupationshitherto
closedagainstthem，becomeseveryyearmoreurgent。Thoughtherearenot
inthiscountry，asthereareintheUnitedStates，periodicalconventions
andanorganisedpartytoagitatefortheRightsofWomen，thereisanumerous
andactivesocietyorganisedandmanagedbywomen，forthemorelimitedobject
ofobtainingthepoliticalfranchise。Norisitonlyinourowncountryand
inAmericathatwomenarebeginningtoprotest，moreorlesscollectively，
againstthedisabilitiesunderwhichtheylabour。France，andItaly，and
Switzerland，andRussianowaffordexamplesofthesamething。Howmanymore
womentherearewhosilentlycherishsimilaraspirations，noonecanpossibly
know;butthereareabundanttokenshowmanywouldcherishthem，werethey
notsostrenuouslytaughttorepressthemascontrarytotheproprieties
oftheirsex。Itmustberemembered，also，thatnoenslavedclasseverasked
forcompletelibertyatonce。WhenSimondeMontfortcalledthedeputies
ofthecommonstositforthefirsttimeinParliament，didanyofthemdream
ofdemandingthatanassembly，electedbytheirconstituents，shouldmake
anddestroyministries，anddictatetothekinginaffairsofState？Nosuch
thoughtenteredintotheimaginationofthemostambitiousofthem。Thenobility
hadalreadythesepretensions;thecommonspretendedtonothingbuttobe
exemptfromarbitrarytaxation，andfromthegrossindividualoppression
oftheking’sofficers。Itisapoliticallawofnaturethatthosewhoare
underanypowerofancientorigin，neverbeginbycomplainingofthepower
itself，butonlyofitsoppressiveexercise。Thereisneveranywantofwomen
whocomplainofill—usagebytheirhusbands。Therewouldbeinfinitelymore，
ifcomplaintwerenotthegreatestofallprovocativestoarepetitionand
increaseoftheill—usage。Itisthiswhichfrustratesallattemptstomaintain
thepowerbutprotectthewomanagainstitsabuses。Innoothercase（except
thatofachild）isthepersonwhohasbeenprovedjudiciallytohavesuffered
aninjury，replacedunderthephysicalpoweroftheculpritwhoinflicted
it。Accordinglywives，eveninthemostextremeandprotractedcasesofbodily
ill—usage，hardlyeverdareavailthemselvesofthelawsmadefortheirprotection：
andif，inamomentofirrepressibleindignation，orbytheinterference
ofneighbours，theyareinducedtodoso，theirwholeeffortafterwardsis
todiscloseaslittleastheycan，andtobegofftheirtyrantfromhismeritedchastisement。Allcauses，socialandnatural，combinetomakeitunlikelythatwomen
shouldbecollectivelyrebellioustothepowerofmen。Theyaresofarin
apositiondifferentfromallothersubjectclasses，thattheirmastersrequire
somethingmorefromthemthanactualservice。Mendonotwantsolelythe
obedienceofwomen，theywanttheirsentiments。Allmen，exceptthemost
brutish，desiretohave，inthewomanmostnearlyconnectedwiththem，not
aforcedslavebutawillingone，notaslavemerely，butafavourite。They
havethereforeputeverythinginpracticetoenslavetheirminds。Themasters
ofallotherslavesrely，formaintainingobedience，onfear;eitherfear
ofthemselves，orreligiousfears。Themastersofwomenwantedmorethan
simpleobedience，andtheyturnedthewholeforceofeducationtoeffect
theirpurpose。Allwomenarebroughtupfromtheveryearliestyearsinthe
beliefthattheiridealofcharacteristheveryoppositetothatofmen;
notselfwill，andgovernmentbyself—control，butsubmission，andyielding
tothecontrolofother。Allthemoralitiestellthemthatitistheduty
ofwomen，andallthecurrentsentimentalitiesthatitistheirnature，to
liveforothers;tomakecompleteabnegationofthemselves，andtohaveno
lifebutintheiraffections。Andbytheiraffectionsaremeanttheonly
onestheyareallowedtohave——thosetothemenwithwhomtheyareconnected，
ortothechildrenwhoconstituteanadditionalandindefeasibletiebetween
themandaman。Whenweputtogetherthreethings——first，thenaturalattraction
betweenoppositesexes;secondly，thewife’sentiredependenceonthehusband，
everyprivilegeorpleasureshehasbeingeitherhisgift，ordependingentirely
onhiswill;andlastly，thattheprincipalobjectofhumanpursuit，consideration，
andallobjectsofsocialambition，caningeneralbesoughtorobtained
byheronlythroughhim，itwouldbeamiracleiftheobjectofbeingattractive
tomenhadnotbecomethepolarstaroffeminineeducationandformation
ofcharacter。And，thisgreatmeansofinfluenceoverthemindsofwomen
havingbeenacquired，aninstinctofselfishnessmademenavailthemselves
ofittotheutmostasameansofholdingwomeninsubjection，byrepresenting
tothemmeekness，submissiveness，andresignationofallindividualwill
intothehandsofaman，asanessentialpartofsexualattractiveness。Can
itbedoubtedthatanyoftheotheryokeswhichmankindhavesucceededin
breaking，wouldhavesubsistedtillnowifthesamemeanshadexisted，and
hadbeensosedulouslyused，tobowdowntheirmindstoit？Ifithadbeen
madetheobjectofthelifeofeveryyoungplebeiantofindpersonalfavour
intheeyesofsomepatrician，ofeveryyoungserfwithsomeseigneur;if
domesticationwithhim，andashareofhispersonalaffections，hadbeen
heldoutastheprizewhichtheyallshouldlookoutfor，themostgifted
andaspiringbeingabletoreckononthemostdesirableprizes;andif，when
thisprizehadbeenobtained，theyhadbeenshutoutbyawallofbrassfrom
allinterestsnotcentringinhim，allfeelingsanddesiresbutthosewhich
hesharedorinculcated;wouldnotserfsandseigneurs，plebeiansandpatricians，
havebeenasbroadlydistinguishedatthisdayasmenandwomenare？and
wouldnotallbutathinkerhereandthere，havebelievedthedistinctiontobeafundamentalandunalterablefactinhumannature？Theprecedingconsiderationsareamplysufficienttoshowthatcustom，
howeveruniversalitmaybe，affordsinthiscasenopresumption，andought
nottocreateanyprejudice，infavourofthearrangementswhichplacewomen
insocialandpoliticalsubjectiontomen。ButImaygofarther，andmaintain
thatthecourseofhistory，andthetendenciesofprogressivehumansociety，
affordnotonlynopresumptioninfavourofthissystemofinequalityof
rights，butastrongoneagainstit;andthat，sofarasthewholecourse
ofhumanimprovementuptothetime，thewholestreamofmoderntendencies，
warrantsanyinferenceonthesubject，itis，thatthisrelicofthepastisdiscordantwiththefuture，andmustnecessarilydisappear。For，whatisthepeculiarcharacterofthemodernworld——thedifference
whichchieflydistinguishesmoderninstitutions，modernsocialideas，modern
lifeitself，fromthoseoftimeslongpast？Itis，thathumanbeingsare
nolongerborntotheirplaceinlife，andchaineddownbyaninexorable
bondtothewouldbeinfinitelymore，ifcomplaintwerenotthegreatest
ofallprovocativestoarepetitionandincreaseoftheill—usage。Itis
thiswhichfrustratesallattemptstomaintainthepowerbutprotectthe
womanagainstitsabuses。Innoothercase（exceptthatofachild）isthe
personwhohasbeenprovedjudiciallytohavesufferedaninjury，replaced
underthephysicalpoweroftheculpritwhoinflictedit。Accordinglywives，
eveninthemostextremeandprotractedcasesofbodilyill—usage，hardly
everdareavailthemselvesofthelawsmadefortheirprotection：andif，
inamomentofirrepressibleindignation，orbytheinterferenceofneighbours，
theyareinducedtodoso，theirwholeeffortafterwardsistodiscloseas
littleastheycan，andtobegofftheirtyrantfromhismeritedchastisement。
Allcauses，socialandnatural，combinetomakeitunlikelythatwomenshould
becollectivelyrebellioustothepowerofmen。Theyaresofarinaposition
differentfromallothersubjectclasses，thattheirmastersrequiresomething
morefromthemthanactualserviceMendonotwantsolelytheobedienceof
women，theywanttheirsentiments。Allmen，exceptthemostbrutish，desire
tohave，inthewomanmostnearlyconnectedwiththem，notaforcedslave
butawillingone，notaslavemerely，butafavourite。Theyhavetherefore
puteverythinginpracticetoenslavetheirminds。Themastersofallother
slavesrely，formaintainingobedience，onfear;eitherfearofthemselves，
orreligiousfears。Themastersofwomenwantedmorethansimpleobedience，
andtheyturnedthewholeforceofeducationtoeffecttheirpurpose。All
womenarebroughtupfromtheveryearliestyearsinthebeliefthattheir
idealofcharacteristheveryoppositetothatofmen;notself—will，and
governmentbyself—control，butsubmission，andyieldingtothecontrolof
others。Allthemoralitiestellthemthatitisthedutyofwomen，andall
thecurrentsentimentalitiesthatitistheirnature，toliveforothers;
tomakecompleteabnegationofthemselves，andtohavenolifebutintheir
affections。Andbytheiraffectionsaremeanttheonlyonestheyareallowed
tohave——thosetothemenwithwhomtheyareconnected，ortothechildren
whoconstituteanadditionalandindefeasibletiebetweenthemandaman。
Whenweputtogetherthreethings——first，thenaturalattractionbetween
oppositesexes;secondly，thewife’sentiredependenceonthehusband，every
privilegeorpleasureshehasbeingeitherhisgift，ordependingentirely
onhiswill;andlastly，thattheprincipalobjectofhumanpursuit，consideration，
andallobjectsofsocialambition，caningeneralbesoughtorobtained
byheronlythroughhim，itwouldbeamiracleiftheobjectofbeingattractive
tomenhadnotbecomethepolarstaroffeminineeducationandformation
ofcharacter。And，thisgreatmeansofinfluenceoverthemindsofwomen
havingbeenacquired，aninstinctofselfishnessmademenavailthemselves
ofittotheutmostasameansofholdingwomeninsubjection，byrepresenting
tothemmeekness，submissiveness，andresignationofallindividualwill
intothehandsofaman，asanessentialpartofsexualattractiveness。Can
itbedoubtedthatanyoftheotheryokeswhichmankindhavesucceededin
breaking，wouldhavesubsistedtillnowifthesamemeanshadexisted，and
hadbeensosedulouslyused，tobowdowntheirmindstoit？Ifithadbeen
madetheobjectofthelifeofeveryyoungplebeiantofindpersonalfavour
intheeyesofsomepatrician，ofeveryyoungserfwithsomeseigneur;if
domesticationwithhim，andashareofhispersonalaffections，hadbeen
heldoutastheprizewhichtheyallshouldlookoutfor，themostgifted
andaspiringbeingabletoreckononthemostdesirableprizes;andif，when
thisprizehadbeenobtained，theyhadbeenshutoutbyawallofbrassfrom
allinterestsnotcentringinhim，allfeelingsanddesiresbutthosewhich
hesharedorinculcated;wouldnotserfsandseigneurs，plebeiansandpatricians，
havebeenasbroadlydistinguishedatthisdayasmenandwomenare？and
wouldnotallbutathinkerhereandthere，havebelievedthedistinction
tobeafundamentalandunalterablefactinhumannature？Theprecedingconsiderations
areamplysufficienttoshowthatcustom，howeveruniversalitmaybe，affords
inthiscasenopresumption，andoughtnottocreateanyprejudice，infavour
ofthearrangementswhichplacewomeninsocialandpoliticalsubjection
tomen。ButImaygofarther，andmaintainthatthecourseofhistory，and
thetendenciesofprogressivehumansociety，affordnotonlynopresumption
infavourofthissystemofinequalityofrights，butastrongoneagainst
it;andthat，sofarasthewholecourseofhumanimprovementuptothetime，
thewholestreamofmoderntendencies，warrantsanyinferenceonthesubject，
itis，thatthisrelicofthepastisdiscordantwiththefuture，andmust
necessarilydisappear。For，whatisthepeculiarcharacterofthemodern
world——thedifferencewhichchieflydistinguishesmoderninstitutions，
modernsocialideas，modernlifeitself，fromthoseoftimeslongpast？It
is，thathumanbeingsarenolongerborntotheirplaceinlife，andchained
downbyaninexorablebondtotheplacetheyarebornto，butarefreeto
employtheirfaculties，andsuchfavourablechancesasoffer，toachieve
thelotwhichmayappeartothemmostdesirable。Humansocietyofoldwas
constitutedonaverydifferentprinciple。Allwereborntoafixedsocial
position，andweremostlykeptinitbylaw，orinterdictedfromanymeans
bywhichtheycouldemergefromit。Assomemenarebornwhiteandothers
black，sosomewerebornslavesandothersfreemenandcitizens;somewere
bornpatricians，othersplebeians;somewerebornfeudalnobles，otherscommoners
androturiers。Aslaveorserfcouldnevermakehimselffree，nor，except
bythewillofhismaster，becomeso。InmostEuropeancountriesitwasnot
tilltowardsthecloseofthemiddleages，andasaconsequenceofthegrowth
ofregalpower，thatcommonerscouldbeennobled。Evenamongnobles，the
eldestsonwasborntheexclusiveheirtothepaternalpossessions，anda
longtimeelapsedbeforeitwasfullyestablishedthatthefathercoulddisinherit
him。Amongtheindustriousclasses，onlythosewhowerebornmembersofa
guild，orwereadmittedintoitbyitsmembers，couldlawfullypractisetheir
callingwithinitslocallimits;andnobodycouldpractiseanycallingdeemed
important，inanybutthelegalmanner——byprocessesauthoritativelyprescribed。