FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1067   1068   1069   1070   1071   1072   1073   1074   1075   1076   1077   1078   1079   1080   1081   1082   1083   1084   1085   1086   1087   1088   1089   1090   1091  
1092   1093   1094   1095   1096   1097   1098   1099   1100   1101   1102   1103   1104   1105   1106   1107   1108   1109   1110   1111   1112   1113   1114   1115   1116   >>   >|  
d never expect to return to a female toilette. I am fully aware, however, that my dress will probably prejudice the great body of our friends in America against me, while present impressions on that subject exist; and it was with the view of allaying this feeling that I wished to address the assembly at Worcester. By this means I think I could satisfy any liberal-minded person, of either sex, that there is no moral or political principle involved in this question, and that a woman may, if she like, dress in male habiliments without injury to herself or others.... Those who suppose that woman can be "the political, social, pecuniary, religious equal of man" without conforming to his dress, deceive themselves, and mislead others who have no minds of their own. While the superiority of the male dress for all purposes of business and recreation is conceded, it is absurd to argue that we should not avail ourselves of its advantages. There are no well-founded objections to women dressing, as we term it, _en cavalier_. The only two I ever heard are these: "To do so is contrary to law, both human and divine," and, "The male dress is _outre_ and less graceful than our own." These objections may be answered in a few words. The human statutes on this subject should be repealed, as they surely will be in due time, or be regarded as they now are in European States--as dead letters. The practice is not contrary to divine law. The alleged prohibition, as contained in the fifth book of Moses, had reference to a religious custom of the Amorites, and was limited in its application to the children of Israel, who had by Divine command dispossessed that pagan nation of their territory, and destroyed their temples of idolatrous worship. The context will show two other prohibitions on this subject. In the 11th and 12th verses of the same chapter (Deut, xxii.) it is forbidden to "wear garments of divers sorts, as of woolen and linen together," and to wear fringes on the vesture. These prohibitions are all of the same character, and had an obvious reference to the ceremonies used by the pagans in their worship of idols. If one of these prohibitions be binding upon nations of the present age, the others are not less so. To the second objection, it may be said that beauty and grace in matters of dress are determined by no rules, and if the fashion of men's clothes be awkward it can easily be improved. Women who prefer the gown should, of
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1067   1068   1069   1070   1071   1072   1073   1074   1075   1076   1077   1078   1079   1080   1081   1082   1083   1084   1085   1086   1087   1088   1089   1090   1091  
1092   1093   1094   1095   1096   1097   1098   1099   1100   1101   1102   1103   1104   1105   1106   1107   1108   1109   1110   1111   1112   1113   1114   1115   1116   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

subject

 

prohibitions

 
political
 

objections

 

reference

 

worship

 

contrary

 
present
 

divine

 

religious


command

 

Divine

 

Israel

 

limited

 
dispossessed
 

application

 

children

 

letters

 

regarded

 

European


surely

 

statutes

 
repealed
 
States
 
custom
 

contained

 
prohibition
 

practice

 
alleged
 
Amorites

objection
 

beauty

 
nations
 
pagans
 

binding

 

matters

 
improved
 
easily
 

prefer

 
awkward

clothes

 

determined

 

fashion

 

ceremonies

 

answered

 

verses

 
chapter
 

destroyed

 
territory
 

temples