WOMWN'S INTERESTS

Hokitika Guardian, 15 June 1933, Page 8

WOMWN'S INTERESTS

WOMA? vHOOD AND MUSSOLINIA benevolent despotism. /Ii English -woman-traveller, writing in the Morning Post, describes how, on the occasion of a former visit to •Italy, she expressed her disl'ke of M>'6solinj’s despotic methods to an Italian University Professor, List was startie'l to receive from him, the significant response, “Italy needs a. despot; we 'ialia,ns ig.re too individualistic, we have to be made to thmk of our country.” The remark surprised her into taking stock for lierself of'the effect of 'Musto’ini’s regime on Italian life in general, iJ»nd on domestic life in/particular, and the results of her observations are i«~ teiTtsling and illuminating.

“For the moment I confine mrseD to recording seine of the ways in which 'the Dime's government h's affected women—the women of Italy, ana less important) the women visitors to Italy,’’ she wnipn.

“Capable, intelligent and quickly responsive, the Italian women, though ip 4 •ctrat'ng. more frequency than iormerly into the struggling outer worM, pro devoted to their homes and their children. It is natural that every Mwsolini which has directly effected their homes lias been subjected to their criticism. ,

.“They are growing keener on education for their children. The educational needs of the country, from the univers'tiea with whose rectors he find? time to discuss their projects, down to the ham. let where educat em till recently was non-existent, receive vigorous site c Don from, the Premier.

“The village mother view s with hopeful pride the new school where her offspring are to have a, start in iife, am the mother of . the High School b°y i f loud j, n her praise of the Mnssobni wlm has insisted on physical education being given a. place in advanced curricula.“Beneficent works for sick and poor children are herng- rapidly extendedThey are hi the. charge of devoted women of Icdsiive. and are we'l organised and happy in their atmosphere. It gave one ia, pleasurable shock to hear childish shouts ringjiig across the walls of a fortress in *. jbiii l . city,, and to be told that this had been transformed'' into. a. sunbathing establishment fop poor children. “Tho workman’s wife believes' fine may reasonably" trust .the despot-ruler to deal fairly with hpr. -She remembers the occasion when, a crisis having'demanded an all-roAid reduction iti wages, a simultaneous order required 'a, reduction in shop prices. .- v . - “Iji the country, the farmer’s wife in healthier and happier (once *ffie has. got over the innovation) for having the dunghill removed from the house-door, and she is not ... slow' t 0... welcome 'the agricultural laws which bind landlords to at least some of their duties, “Instruction in’scieiit'fic methods ot farming and, a surer market for' prochanges of recent date—add to the com fort able .prospects of the' fanner’e family. 1 " ... ■ .. v . ‘HVomen' visiting Italy have naturally . been .quick to. appreciate the astpmsi«i-g improvement in travel fa hi,lit e§- the .clean,' punctu-1 trains and the . courtesy of railway officials, the munificent system of'moj,Or '.coaches which...covers the- whole country, -and the rapid progress in building and impfoVing.j^ads.’' INTERFERING PARENTS.

ORGANISING CHILDREN’S LIVES It used to be “tfie child' Ci.” N°' v it is “the chi<!d”; and beneath thj« sinister change lies the secret of much nri warrantable interference, that is in: <le with, children's • freedom, says an ( overseas mother. The children of pre- war days Were i dressed a;n,d put to bed, taught «and f«d j -.and doctored when necessary. But in 1 between were stretches of glorious free- : Jpm, when grown-ups went their way | and hit children to their own devices. | Im some sunny, red-walled kitchen | garden, far from parental eye, many an i explorer has first put up his tent. In ■ h home-made “shop,” where rabbithutches, ships, barometers, and lelewere constructed, many &n eingineer has first discovered himself, and so fitted his square person in after life into the. necessary square hole. Not. so with “the child” to.day. It •it, e o much as begins to amuse itself some clean and clever toy is thrust into its bands or some welL-meaniug grown■up takes it out in the car. It s very films arc' snatched from the camera 'by a kindly parent and taken to the chemist to be developed and printed. It eaves *ll that mess that we children used to make Vi the bath-room. It is not the school organisation of work and play—inevitable with large namhets —that I 'lament, but the perfect passjon of modern parents for organising their children’s ho'.id -ys. Hardly ,r :n hour is left free for individ- „.<] hobbles. It is simply not worth ~while to begin to make or draw or write or invent anything. It is small wonder that so .many c-hildr pi to-dav eic r.o nervy, irritable, resting and discontented, or that so many have no 'resources whatever to am.uso themselves.

Hints from

Home and Jibrcad.

WHAT CONSTITUTES SNOBBERY The trouble is that in snobbishly judging a snob, we are all occasionally betrayed into that worst form of snobbery, judging by our own timid standards the truly unaffected, dolf-pos-sessed man 0 r woman, writes Clemence Dane. For snobbery, after all, is no more than our,old friend tile infeupiity complex,” the chi'd of fear and coiiee.it.. ‘I am not as you are. Your attainments frighten me. But I’m not going to let you think I know 1 m not as good ap you.” That is the attitude of the snob.

But is the. man who dresses every night for dinner in the wilderness in order to keep .‘‘bis self-respect” a snob? It’s customary to laugh at him, but—l’m not sure. Is he not rather a man who knows the limitations of his own character, knows how easy it is for a man or a garden to degenerate and become one again with the weeds in the wilderness.

Is exclusiveness, which after all is a preference' for being with people ioft one’s caste find creed, necessarily a snobbery—ls it, for that matter, ..snobbish to insist that a convention' of suitable dress for certain occasions should be preserved ? Where, in fact, does snobbery become convention and convention a sense of what is Suitable, or to quote St. Paul, “expedient”? Srobbery is the symbol of bad taste, and yet, .like a poor relation, it follows i,s cousin—good taste—hard on the heelsAnd here is the final problem: One cf the dictionary definitions 0 f a snob is “a workman who continues working while others are out on strike.” But is that a fair definition nowadays? Haven’t we all, mixed wiih o ur conventional horror of the blackleg, a sneaking sense that in this case snobbishness stands for independence, dislike of being dictated to, and a love of work greater than a love of gain? Perhaps it is easiest' tor"agree that we cau’t. helo being snobs, but we can see to it. that our particular pet snobbery can masquerade as a commicality or as n grace. . .

A CHALLENGE TO WOMEN THEIR ATTITUDE TO WAR “The vvprld is, not yet a rap better because women have been let loose m it. Our. effect upon its major evils war, poverty,, and what belong to them —is no, tiling, our' achievement of our independence nothing.” , This, 1 is.Ww Miss Storm Jameson sums up the petition pf women in the modern world, in b.er most recent booh) says an jßnglish, contenipory .writer. Briefly, the: famous novelist indicts a materialism which takes for granted not onl.VjoU.r slums, our unemployed, our wars arid the perpetual life-destr.oy r ing inventions of our "scientists, hut a religion-sb"-'divorced' from,the Christianity of the Sermon on the Mount that “if ursury, if poverty, if war are. ever abolished no part <>f the credit will, belong to a church, which has condoned all three.

“Women” she writes, “have only ade'd to the quantity of human activity, and little so far t.o its quality. If it. were true (that, women have no values as natural to them—as women _a s their shapes are, we shoidd have to be pleased with the spectacle of women in football shorts, women scribbling for the newspapers, women flying, preaching, quoting shares and all that. “But it. i« not true. Women Im,ve not naturally the same attitude as men to ail tlmt touches breeding, marriage and destroying life. They have a mind., an attitude, a gesture of their own. For them to pretend otherwise is a denial of life . . .. it. is treachery and desertion —since the human destine in not complete without the working to it of women thinking, feeling and acting aslo in terms of their womanhood. In discussing the recent speech of a certain eminent scientist who described war calmly aind dispassionately as nature’s pruning-hook,” she pasionately protests against the cold-blooded inhumanity of any modern, responsible thinker Who is actually able to persuade himself' that gsrdners cut dawn the healthiest trees ip order to improve the rest. ‘No one. ’ she continues. “not even this Laputan among the scientists, has yet explained in ri'e" cise language how it strengthens sue* ceeding generations for a million men to be killed and an incalculable number maimed or spoiled If this country ever gets into another Great War I shall take every means in my power to keep my son oiit of it. I shall tell him that it is move shameful to volunteer foi gas-bombing than to run from it.

'■A WOMAN’S SPHERE” Tliey talk about a woman’s sphere, As though it had a limit. There’s not a place in earth or heaven There’s net a task to mankind given, , Thero’s not a blessing or a woe, There’s not a whispered “Yes or “No,” There’s not a life, or birth, or death That is a feather’s weight of worth, Without 3 woman in it- 1