Sketcher.

Alexandra Herald and Central Otago Gazette, Issue 422, 26 May 1904, Page 7

Sketcher.

. A SLANDEBED SEX. women improving, or are they f>JM|Q) becoming blind to their faults ? jjggjjg PoliteHess demands, in this connection, that we also ask, Had ever women faults? —to which candour demands an 7 affirmative answer; and so little disparagement of the sex is involved therein that probably none of our lady readers will object. * , Bat the first question raises some im- 1 portant and interesting points. In the first place, there ia no longer among us assy lady writer of the first rank who is a bitter hater of her own sex. A great change has, unobserved, just taken place. Only a few years since Mcs Lynn Linton was at the height of her fame. Beginning with her essay on the Girl of the Period in the 'Saturday Review,' which created:! guch an extraordinary sensation, she poured out essay after essay and book after bock directed against the follies and frailties of womankind. Her subjects isrerai chiefly feminine types and characteristics, Buch as Modern Mothers, Mature Sirens, Feminine Affectations, Shunted Dowagers, Feline Amenities,'and the like.

NeTHiNG New. The most remarkable thing about these papers, with their obvious sarcasms, their lack of humour, and their well-woin words and phrases, is that they Bhould have' been considered worthy of the • Saturday Beview.' The majority of;-the types dealt with have been common in every period. But Mrs Lynn Linton apparently believed that she-had discovered the faßt girl, the emancipated woman, and the frisky matron, and that these were tjpes peculiar to her own generation. In the latter period of her life Mrs Linton became more bitter, and, of course, she had many contemporaneous imitators I in her crusade.

As for ' Oaida,' who may be cited as another leading misogynist, it must be remembered that the author of' Moths' is frankly cynical in dealing with both sexes, and that it is difficult to find any rabid utterances against her own sex as a sex, although some of her male characters are cast in such heroic mould that by contrast the woman appears mean. It would; seem, then, that the recent manifestation of woman-hatred among women was based on delusions. (Needless to say, no man writer takes up such an unnatural attitude.) Yet that the question is still a burning one, for one reason or another,- is shown by the letters on newspaper pages. It is indeed evident that if there be n living prophetess with a mission to lash

with scorn and condemnation the ill-doing of womankind, there are plenty of lesser people of both sexes anxious to impute all manner of evil to the ladies, ' WOKEW IN THB ' COJCI« ' PAMBBB

t 'Of course, there was & woman in the j caee'4B; ia cdmmon eri&ogh expression which amply illustrates a Jrame of mtßd willing to holdtbatwome* are veritabljr, the authors of all mischief. In the nip-' pant' humour' of certain periodicals and the careless talk of individuals the sex is con aietently and unceasingly slandered. From among themselves no defender appears. There is no woman dhampion of women. The woman writer has her heroes, but seldom a heroine. Manly virtues, not womanly, occupy them. At the same time, however, as has been said, with Mrs Lynn LifttoV the 'reign "of the prophetess.,of women-hatred died out.

Now this is:an appeal for fair play. Chivalry, or at any -rate the abuse- of chivalry which would be blind to faults, is not necessary. No true woman asks for it. But is ..rt.nofe time to drop all this nonsense about the mischief-making qualities of women P

How About tbe Men?

Are not men also talkative, quarrelsome, deceitful, conceited, and unscrupulous P Tbe errors and exaggerations of the Mrs Lynn Linton type have been fully exposed. She dealt solely with the ' disorderly fringe of the sex, and by dint of exaggerating their faults and follies a thousandfold, and adding to their own battle cries other far more terrific b&ttlecries of her own invention, she produced a species of moral and intellectual monster, whom she put forward as a serious and truthfui presentment of the -. modem woman.

Her appallingly repulsiYe females ' repudiate for women the moral fetters that they still demand for men,' and claim political supremacy for their own sex together with political annihilation for the other. While maintaining that what is lawful for a man should be lawful for a womaur they insist that women shall be allowed to keep their present immunities,' their little dishonesties and dishonours, their little

lies, subterfuges, and co wardly meannesses' and so on.

Bat that's all over, thank goodness. The question with which this article starts can readily be answered- There are. faults on both sides, Womankind is* alternately worshipped and remorselessly condemned. Probably we are all improving slowly. That the. Mrs Lysm" Linton type no longer exists by no means" proves tbat women are blind as to their faults. •'

Let as, at aßy rate, refuse to participate in the spiteful slanders of the habitual woman-hater.—A Man.