SEX AND SOCIETY 231 



the wives and mothers. Those who admire 

 the bee-hive will even point to it in support 

 of their thesis, for the queen-mother's brain 

 does not develop so well as that of the workers. 



But the biological objection is just the same 

 as against nunneries. We cannot countenance 

 a theory which deliberately leaves maternity 

 to the less intellectual. In addition to the 

 clever mother's contribution to the organic 

 inheritance of the child, there is the hardly 

 less important nurtural influence in the home. 

 The idea of leaving maternity to a docile 

 and domesticated type, of cow-like placidity, 

 while the intellectuals run the world, is 

 quaintly non-biological. 



We come, in conclusion, to the third side 

 of our thesis, that the lines of evolution to 

 be followed are those which seem likely to 

 make the most of the deeply rooted organic 

 distinction between male and female, and to 

 make the most of those masculine and 

 feminine characteristics that have proved 

 themselves for ages of vital value. 



Taking a simple illustration first, we submit 

 that Man both male and female is a very 

 slowly varying organism, though he hides 

 his persistence of type under ever-changing 

 garments of acquirement and convention. 

 In spite of affectation and pose there is still 

 a wholesome abundance of that mutual 

 attractiveness of complementaries which 

 has given a spice to life from the beginning, 

 and is of enormous biological importance. 

 We venture to say that attempts to lessen the 

 old-fashioned natural differences are to be 



