Feminism - Women and Memory Forum

142
FEMINISM
fact, converts a woman into a mother, and so seems to satisfy her
physiological function. But it does not (nor would two) satisfy
the physiological purpose, which is to perpetuate the race. To
this the feminists show the supremest indifference. The birthrate
of one's own country, of one's own class, may fall still lower,
and they care not.^^ " Whether one has children or not is a
purely personal matter." ^^ There is no longer any duty in it,
except the duty of making no demand upon anybody to do anything
he or she does not want to do. If the reproduction of the
race, or of any valuable part of it, be dangerously reduced
through observance of this great new duty, then " it can only be
replied that such reduction would be proved thereby to be desirable."
«3
In excuse really, but brazenly in advocacy, of small families is
offered the plea that thereby, instead of quantity, the quality of
the future generations may be improved.^* This idea is in harmony
with the ease-loving tendencies of a luxurious age. From
the thoughtless it has been taken up by many well-meaning persons,
and advanced in all seriousness and sincerity. But it deserves
little respect on the latter account, and none on the former.
Physiologically there is not an atom of reason to suppose that
quality can be improved by restriction of numbers. On the contrary,
all probability is for improvement with practice, and good
combinations of hereditary qualities are more likely to be produced
— short of excess — in the later than in the earlier
concludes that " the prevailing American ideal, among rich and poor, educated and
uneducated, women and men, '—and one which even foreign immigrants soon learn
to adopt,— " is two children," preferably a boy and a girl. The Atnerican Idea, 45, cf,
12-19; examples, 26-g; so among physicians, 44; landlords do not want tenants who
have many children, or who have any at all, lo-ii.
91 Cf. Christabel Pankhurst, who seems to contemplate this possibility with a grim
satisfaction, op. cit., 104.
92 Clara G. Stillman, quoted by Robinson, The Limitation of Offspring, 193.
93 " Candida," in The New Statesmen, June 20, 1914, p. 335- Cf. an editorial in
The Nation, New York, May 21, 1891, p. 418: We are very much of the opinion
that the most likely way for any nation to be happy is for all the individuals in it
to be happy; and that the most likely way for an individual to be happy is to have
his own way in life, as far as compatible with the right of every other man to have
his way. This rule is as applicable to the matter of marrying and raising children as to
any other concern of life, and every ordinarily intelligent man will be better able
to judge of what it behooves him to do in that regard than anjr college professor or
member of a legislature or newspaper editor can do for him. Neither need any citizen
feel bound to postpone his own present happiness to any consideration of what may
become of his country a hundred or two hundred years hence. He can neither foresee
nor avert the future; and if he could it would be futile to do so. As long as a
nation is fit to exist it will continue to exist; if it is not fit, the sooner it makes
room for one that is, the better. If the French or any other people are doomed to
extinction, it must be for deep-seated organic reasons, which no legislation or rhetoric
can reach," In other words, we need make no effort to make any people more "fit
to exist," or to keep it from becoming less so.
9-1 Thus in an article on The Decline of the Birth-rate in the Westminster Review,
Sept., 1908, pp. 268-73, J. Fizelle attributes the decline to women's greater knowledge
of the sexual relations, revolt at its inequality, and consideration for the welfare of
the children, who n\ay be better if they be fewer, the perference being for quality
before quantity. This last may be found pasHm in feministic literature.