he
virtue or purity of woman imperilled by her taking an interest in
public questions affecting the welfare of the families, considering
that whatever her status may be in life, woman always occupies some
position in the family? Why should we fear that woman will leave the
flower of her charms on the brambles of politics if she listens to
a political speaker, after having listened to sermons all her life,
or if she herself makes a speech giving her opinions on some subject
of interest to the family, on the necessity of remedying some social
evil or of providing a home for abandoned and indigent children?
Let us take the case of one of the most vital questions of the
present time, the subject of gambling. Do you not believe that this
question has a direct bearing upon the welfare of the families,
especially of the feminine part of them? Who suffers the most if the
father or husband spends the money of the family in order to satisfy
his craving for gambling? The women, of course, the daughters who
are often condemned to undergo unnecessary privations and suffering
because of the conduct of the head of the family. And you try to deny
to woman the right to take a part in political affairs, to enlighten
the electorate with regard to the fatal results of gambling or cast
her vote for the candidate who promises to secure the passage of
measures against it? And why should the opinion of woman on issues
like this not have as much weight as that of man? Should it not be
given greater weight, it being she who suffers the consequences and
results of the evil? There are many questions like this which vitally
affect the welfare and happiness of woman.
I fail to see anything pernicious in the activity of woman in the
field of politics: I even believe that her activity in this respect
will be highly salutary and beneficent not only for womankind, but
for society in general. It will serve to instruct woman and give her
a more extensive knowledge of the world and of life. She will not be
considered as an outsider where society and government are concerned
and will therefore not remain indifferent to their short-comings and
progress. Nothing could possibly be more harmful to society than the
presence in it of foreign bodies absolutely indifferent to its weal
or woe, of useless parts in the machinery of progress.
We are terrified by the idea that the impulsiveness of woman and her
fanaticism and narrow-mindedness, according to some,
|