io 



and that they could not do so any more under 

 a socialist regime when the social organisa- 

 tion will tend to diminish congenital inequal- 

 ities. There will always be people whose 

 brain or muscular system will be more fit for 

 scientific or artistic work, whilst others will 

 be more fit for manual work or for work of 

 mechanical precision, etc. 



What ought not to be, and what will not 

 be, is that there should be men who do no 

 work, and others who work too much or who 

 are too poorly remunerated. 



But we have attained the height of in- 

 justice and absurdity, and in these days it is 

 he who does not work who has the most 

 important advantages assured to him by the 

 individual monopoly of wealth, accumulated 

 by hereditary transmission. This wealth, 

 moreover, is very rarely due to the economy 

 and privations of the actual possessor or of 

 some industrious ancestor ; it is most fre- 

 quently the time-honoured fruit of spoliation 



Also, save for certain individual exceptions, the 

 woman has less physical sensibility (the current opinion 

 is the contrary, but it confuses sensibility with irrita- 

 bility), because if her sensibility were greater she could 

 not, according to the Darwinian law, survive the 

 immense and repeated sacrifices of maternity, and the 

 species would die out. The woman has less intelligence, 

 especially in synthetic power, precisely because though 

 there are no women of genius (Sergi in Atti delta societd 

 romana di antropologia, 1894), or very nearly none, they, 

 however, give birth to men of genius. 



This is so true that one meets with a greater sensrbility 

 and intelligence among women whose function and sense 

 of motherhood do not exist or are less developed (women 

 of genius have generally masculine features), and many 

 of them attain their complete intellectual development 

 just after the critical period when motherhood has passed. 



