Nov. 4, 1881.] 



K N C W LEDGE 



point to be established by one who would prove his nation 

 in advance of others, should be the inferiority of the women 

 of his race. If this were really so, we imagine that there 

 are some races of men, not supposed to be far from the 

 very forefront of human progi-ess, who would not care, at 

 such a cost, to establish their claims to a high position. 



M. Delaunay is caref\d to show why he thinks the 

 female inferior to the male in the higher races. First, we 

 find that among birds and mammals, including man (who 

 shares with the pig, the monkey, the dog, itc, the privilege 

 of breast nourishment), the nutritive phenomena are more 

 intense than in the female. Man eats more than woman ; 

 and he is, therefore, incontestably her superior. " Yet, 

 although she eats less, the woman is more of a (jonrmande, 

 and eats more frequently." (This may be proved by com- 

 paring aldermanic feasts and club dijmers with the favourite 

 forms of feminine gourmandism.) " Xe.xt we observe that 

 the breathing of men is more intense than that of women. 

 For an equal height he has a greater capacity of chest, and 

 a larger thoracic index than the woman" (a greater breathing 

 capacity). " He also absorbs more oxygen, though his 

 breathing is slower." (Why should not this be regarded 

 as a proof of inferiority 1 Suppose a woman were writing, 

 and should put it this way, Woman requires less oxygen 

 than man, and is therefore superior to him ; how then f) 

 " The temperature is higher in man than in woman,' and 

 the pressure of the blood greater, though the pulse is less 

 frequent." This, again, might be quoted the other way by 

 women. It would be almost as logical to say, Man is 

 superior to woman because he wears a beard, and the hair 

 on his head is shorter than hers. 



It appears that the frame of man, as compared with that 

 of woman, proves incontestably his superiority. He has 

 a heavier skeleton, absolutely as well as relatively. " The 

 woman in all the physical characteristics of her skeleton is 

 intermediate betweenjthe child and the man, according to 

 Topinaud." Must we then rank the elephant as man's 

 superior ? his skeleton is certainly heavier than man's, not 

 only absolutely Init relatively. " The woman is not so 

 right-handed as the man ; the pre-eminence of the right 

 side over the left is not so marked with her as with the 

 male." Charles Reade would probably regard this as 

 e%'idence of superiority rather than inferiority ; and many 

 men who have not been thought inferior to their fellows, 

 but the reverse, have been at no small pains to train the 

 left side to equality, or as near equality as they could attain, 

 with the right side. 



Worse remains, however, to be told. " The male ex- 

 ternally is always larger than the female. The woman is 

 not so heavy as the man, although she would often appear 

 larger on account of the development of the adipose 

 system, which in her is greater than the man." 



The next point, if established satisfactorily, would bo 

 rather more to tlie purpose. " In all our Hindo-European 

 races," says Topinaud, "the woman is more prognathous 

 than the man," that is, her jaws are relatively more pro- 

 jecting than those of man. This would be a strong point, 

 because there really appears to be a correlation between 

 the position of the jaws in animals and the capacity 

 (relative, of course,) of their brains. But it would be 

 desirable to have all the particulars liy which the pecu- 

 liarity referred to has been established. It would be easy 

 to select classes either of men or of women who would be 

 very unfair representatives of their sex taken as a whole ; 

 and though I would be far from saying that anything of 

 this sort has been done, I would note that it is a much 

 more difficult matter than many would suppose (who have 

 not tried) to obtain a large number of either sex who 

 could be regarded as absolutely free from class influences. 



The task would be easier if men and women pursued 

 similar avocations. As they do not, the statistics collected 

 by Toi-pinaud may, for aught that appears, have tended, if 

 rightly interpreted, to show that such and such a\ ocations 

 either affected intellectual develojunent, or were selected 

 by persons of inferior intellect, rather than anything speci- 

 fically distinguishing men from women." 



A similar objection applies, but yet more strongly, to 

 M. Delaunay's next point. He says that, " according to 

 his o\^^l researches, woman is more flat-footed than man, 

 and has a foot less ai-clied — a sign of inferiority — hence 

 tlie preference of women for high-heeled boots." It is a 

 rather bold assumption that the form of the feet thus 

 indicates intellectual development. But assuming that it 

 were so, I apprehend that the statistics of feet-forms would 

 show very diflerent results according to the classes that 

 might be selected. Supposing, for instance, M. Delaunay 

 had measured the feet of a few hundred waiters, and com 

 pared them with those of a few hundred opera-dancers, 

 he might, perhaps, have inferred either that opera-dancing 

 conduced far more than waiting at table to intellectual 

 development, or else that women were far superior to men. 

 1 do not say that a selection so unlikely to lead to a correct 

 result as this has actually been made: but we require 

 to know much more than we do about M. Delaunay's 

 statistics before we can accept his conclusion, even if we 

 admit that the mental and moral qualities can be deduced 

 from the shape of the feet. The fancy for wearing high- 

 heeled boots may reasonably be regarded as showing that 

 women regard a high instep as a natural feminir.e beauty, 

 to be enhanced where present or imitated where wanting ; 

 that, in fact, women are more particular in this respect 

 than men. So viewed, it would no more prove that women 

 are commonly flat-footed than their weai-ing chignons or 

 switches would show that they commonly have shorter 

 hair than men. In fact, M. Delaunay's argument here 

 is decidedly unfavourable to his theory, if a high instep 

 really is a proof of intellectual superiority ; for women try 

 more to enliance those qualities which they regard as 

 feminine, and therefore attractive, than those which they 

 share with men. 



"The female voice is sharper than that of the male. 

 Both in wild and domesticated animals the male has the 

 muscular system more developed than the female." All 

 this may be granted ; but it proves nothing to tlie purpose. 

 The bull has a deeper voice than man, and the gorilla has 

 the muscular system far more developed ; but we do not 

 infer that the bull or the gorilla stands higher iji develop- 

 ment on either account than man. 



" The movements are more precise in man than in 

 woman." (What movements 1) "Among pianists of the 

 two sexes the mechanism reaches a much higher degree of 

 perfection in men." As musicians, whether we consider 

 composition or execution, women certainly are surpassed 

 by men ; and I may note among the absurdities of our 

 system of education that almost every girl in the middle 

 and upper classes " learns the piano" (save the mark !) 

 though not one in a hundred has any natural aptitude for 

 music, while among boys music is comparatively neglected. 

 There is little, however, in feminine execution to justify 

 the statement that their movements are less precise. On 

 the contrary, numbers of girls acquire wonderful pre- 

 cision in playing ; only, unfortunately, most of them want 

 that aptitude for music which can alone make mere per- 

 fection of digital mechanism of any account. It is not 

 easy, however, to see why musical skill should be regarded 

 as a test of mental or moral qualities. I am disposed, on 

 the contrary, to consider that women in our day are 

 handicapped by their musical education ; and that pro- 



