对妇女的偏见 Prejudice Against Women

妇女运动的全部目的就是要推翻妇女有必要服服贴贴的观念ˇ就是要教会妇女获得自尊ˇ使她们不听命于人ˇ教会男人充分理解平等ˇ使他们不强求妇女服服贴贴。

    卡丽ˇ查普曼ˇ卡特(1859ˇ1947)出生于威斯康星州里彭ˇ当过教师ˇ中学校长ˇ爱阿华州梅森城学校督学。卡特筹建有爱阿华妇女参政协会ˇ创立了国际妇女参政联盟ˇ并改组了全美妇女参政协会ˇ从而加强了其政治作用。第十九号修正案通过后ˇ卡特将妇女参政协会改组为妇女选民联盟。以下节选自卡特于1902年2月在华盛顿当选为全美妇女参政协会主席时的就职演说词。

    ……妇女参政是个简单明了的问题。这一要求带着尊严、有礼有节、顺理成章。战胜保守派ˇ获得男子普选权虽然是一大胜利ˇ但将来获得女子普选权的胜利则是不可估量的。攻克了许许多多被认为不可攻破的传统思ˇ的堡垒后ˇ男子才争取到选举权。然而ˇ与妇女选举权面前一排排强大的反对势力ˇ比ˇ那些保垒充其量不过是唐吉诃德的风车。

    妇女选举权面临的正是男子选举权曾面对的所有反对势力。可除此之外ˇ妇女选举权还得与性偏见作斗争。这种性偏见是人类最古老、最无理、最顽固的偏执症。何谓偏见? 那就是一种毫无理由的观点ˇ一种听不到论证ˇ就作出的判断ˇ一种不知来处的莫名其妙的情绪。性偏见是剥夺妇女权益、剥夺妇女自由、剥夺妇女机会的一种先验判断ˇ毫无根据地认为妇女没有能力从事她们从未做过的事。女权运动迅速发展到今天ˇ其道路上的最大障碍就是性偏见。这种偏见至今仍然是个巨大的障碍。

    至少在美国ˇ我们不需再为妇女与有识之士一道投票时有关智力、道德及身体方面的合格性作辩解。我们当中最佳公民的道理早巳得到证实ˇ我们论点的正确性也已得到公认ˇ但我们还远远没有战胜性偏见。

    当一个大教堂主持暴躁地宣布说ˇ妇女的要求不再那么有节制时ˇ男人可能重操旧业ˇ溺死女婴。当一个名声赫赫的参议员宣布说ˇ没有人能为妇女的选举权找到理由时ˇ当他以个人的地位和影ˇ来反对时ˇ当一个著名女作家将女权运动的代言人说成“尖声呼叫的女性”时ˇ当一个政治头面人物说ˇ“反对妇女选举权就是否定独立宣言”ˇ而他自己却希望妇女得不到选举权时ˇ问题已经完全超越理智范围ˇ而回到性偏见的领域ˇ逻辑与常识都无法打开的领域……

    有四大原因导致妇女处于受支配的地位。按照男人是一个种族的唯一组成单位的理论ˇ每个原因都是合乎逻辑的推断。这四大原因是ˇ服从ˇ愚昧ˇ否定个人自由ˇ否定财产和报酬的ˇ有权。这四种因素共起作用ˇ使男人养成自私、霸道的习性ˇ使妇女养成逆来顺受的习惯……为了使这些不利条件牢牢地套住妇女ˇ世人的推理是男人代表整个种族ˇ女人只是男人的附属品ˇ这样他们的行为便合乎逻辑了。将妇女永远作为附属品来监护等于剥夺了妇女思ˇ与行动的全部自由ˇ剥夺了妇女的发展动力ˇ使妇女顺理成章地成为世人所希望看到的空虚的弱者。妇女的地位又进一步强化了有关妇女低能的流行观点。这世界不让妇女学会任何技巧ˇ却说她们干的活一文不值ˇ这世界不许妇女持有个人见解ˇ却说妇女不善于思考ˇ这世界不许妇女对公众演讲ˇ却说女性中没有演说家ˇ这世界不让妇女上学校ˇ却说女性中没有天才ˇ这世界剥夺了妇女的一切责任ˇ却说女性软弱无能ˇ这世界要让妇女明白她们的点滴快乐全是靠男人施舍的。当妇女按照人们所教的ˇ涂脂抹粉ˇ戴上精巧的羽饰ˇ去寻求快活时ˇ人们又说她们图虚荣。

    这就是文学作品所记奉的妇女形ˇˇ歌谣与传说使之不朽ˇ骑士为之说尽发疯般的甜言蜜语。正如狄德罗说的ˇ“当女性是主题时ˇ笔头需浸满彩虹ˇ而纸张需用蝴蝶翅膀来擦干。”人们让妇女罩上这种神秘的光环ˇ让她们ˇ信自己是受宠爱的。世人眼中理ˇ的妇女形ˇ是ˇ漂亮ˇ风流ˇ多情ˇ顺从ˇ谨卑ˇ时而柔弱ˇ时而激动得暴跳ˇ但从来是愚昧无知ˇ软弱无能的。

    当新的女性终于出ˇˇ高举真理的火炬ˇ有理有节ˇ带着尊严ˇ要求分ˇ这世上的教育、机会与责任时ˇ难怪那些缺乏训练ˇ软弱无能的妇女害怕地往后退ˇ也难怪男人竟站出来为传统妇女说话ˇ因为他们已习惯于自己所钟爱的女性。他们欣赏的正是妇女的软弱与依赖性。他们喜欢把妇女ˇˇ成柔软的攀援藤ˇ而把自己看作粗壮的ˇ树。男人打从骑士时代起ˇ就崇拜女性的理ˇˇ似乎她们是女神ˇ但却一直控制她们ˇ似乎女人又是白痴。男人根本没有意识到ˇ自己的这两重地位是如何不协调ˇ而错以为这种关系正符合上帝的旨意…。ˇ

    妇女运动的全部目的就是要推翻妇女有必要服服 贴贴的观念ˇ就是要教会妇女获得自尊ˇ使她们不听命于人ˇ教会男人充分理解平等ˇ使他们不强求妇女服服贴贴。正如约翰ˇ斯图亚特ˇ穆勒谈到男子获得选举权之前的情况所说的ˇ“高贵者在社会阶梯上一步步往下走ˇ普通人一步步往上攀ˇ每过五十年ˇ他们就彼此更加靠近。”因此我们也可以说ˇ在过去一百年里ˇ男性作为世界的主导力量一直往下降ˇ女性一直往上攀ˇ每过十年ˇ他们都彼此更加靠近。反对妇女争取选举权是旧理论的最后一道防ˇ。这种理论认为ˇ只有男性才是种族的创造者ˇ因此女性必须服服 贴贴……

    过去ˇ妇女运动的全部努力在于推翻女性在家庭中的隶属地位。这一目的已基本达到。一般受过教育的女子ˇ在父亲家中、在丈夫家中、在儿子家中ˇ都ˇ有个人自由的权利。一个女子不必再顺从一个男子。在家里以及在社会中ˇ女子都ˇ有自主权ˇˇ在的问题是ˇ作为整体的女性是否应顺从作为整体的男性? 能否允许在生活的各个部门ˇ有自治权的女子ˇ在国家政治生活中也ˇ有自治权? 一个男子支配一个女子是不对的ˇ整个男性支配整个女性也同样不对。一个男子支配其它男子是不对的ˇ男性支配女性也同样是不对的….

...The question of woman suffrage is a very simple one. The plea is dignified, calm and logical. Yet, great as is the victory over conservatism which is represented in the accomplishment of man suffrage, infinitely greater will be the attainment of woman suffrage. Man suffrage exists through the surrender of many a stronghold of ancient thought, deemed impregnable, yet these obstacles were the veriest Don Quixote windmills compared with the opposition which has stood arrayed against woman suffrage.

      Woman suffrage must meet precisely the same objections which have been urged against man suffrage, but in addition, it must combat sex-prejudice, the oldest, the most unreasoning, the most stubborn of all human idiosyncracies. What is prejudice? An opinion, which is not based upon reason; a judgment, without having heard the argument; a feeling, without being able to trace from whence it came. And sex-prejudice is a pre-judgment against the rights, liberties and opportunities of women. A belief, without proof, in the incapacity of women to do that which they have never done. Sex-prejudice has been the chief hindrance in the rapid advance of the woman's rights movement to its present status, and it is still a stupendous obstacle to be overcome.

      In the United States, at least, we need no longer argue woman's intellectual, moral and physical qualification for the ballot with the intelligent. The Reason of the best of our citizens has long been convinced. The justice of the argument has been admitted, but sex-prejudice is far from conquered.

      When a great church official exclaims petulantly, that if women are no more modest in their demands men may be obliged to take to drowning female infants again; when a renowned United States Senator declares no human being can find an answer to the arguments for woman suffrage, but with all the force of his position and influence he will oppose it; when a popular woman novelist speaks of the advocates of the movement as the "shrieking sisterhood;" when a prominent politician says "to argue against woman suffrage is to repudiate the Declaration of Independence," yet he hopes it may never come, the question flies entirely outside the domain of reason, and retreats within the realm of sex-prejudice, where neither logic nor common sense can dislodge it. . . .

      Four chief causes led to the subjection of women, each the logical deduction from the theory that men were the units of the race― obedience, ignorance, the denial of personal liberty, and the denial of right to property and wages. These forces united in cultivating a spirit of egotism and tyranny in men and weak dependence in women. . . . In fastening these disabilities upon women, the world acted logically when reasoning from the premise that man is the race and woman his dependent. The perpetual tutelage and subjection robbed women of all freedom of thought and action, and all incentive for growth, and they logically became the inane weaklings the world would have them, and their condition strengthened the universal belief in their incapacity. This world taught woman northing skillful and then said her work was valueless. It permitted her no opinions and said she did not know how to think. It forbade her to speak in public, and said the sex had no orators. It denied her the schools, and said the sex had no genius. It robbed her of every vestige of responsibility, and then called her weak. It taught her that every pleasure must come as a favor from men, and when to gain it she decked herself in paint and fine feathers, as she had been taught to do, it called her vain.

      This was the woman enshrined in literature. She was immortalized in song and story. Chivalry paid her fantastic compliments. As Diderot said: "when woman is the theme, the pen must be dipped in the rainbow, and the pages must be dried with a butterfly's wing." Surrounded by a halo of this kind of mysticism woman was encouraged to believe herself adored. This woman who was pretty, coquettish, affectionate, obedient, self effacive [sic], now gentle and meek, now furious and emotional, always ignorant, weak and silly, became the ideal woman of the world.

      When at last the New Woman came, bearing the torch of truth, and with calm dignity asked a share in the world's education, opportunities and duties, it is no wonder these untrained weaklings should have shrunk away in horror. . . . Nor was it any wonder that man should arise to defend the woman of the past, whom he had learned to love and cherish. Her very weakness and dependence were dear to him and he loved to think of her as the tender clinging vine, while he was the strong and sturdy oak. He had worshiped her ideal through the age of chivalry as though she were a goddess, but he had governed her as though she were an idiot. Without the slightest comprehension of the inconsistency of his position, he believed this relation to be in accordance with God's command. . . .

      The whole aim of the woman movement has been to destroy the idea that obedience is necessary to women; to train women to such self- respect that they would not grant obedience and to train men to such comprehension of equity they would not exact it. . . . As John Stuart Mill said in speaking of the conditions which preceded the enfranchisement of men: "The noble has been gradually going down on the social ladder and the commoner has been gradually going up. Every half century has brought them nearer to each other;" so we may say, for the past hundred years, man as the dominant power in the world has been going down the ladder and -woman has been climbing up. Every decade has brought them nearer together. The opposition to the enfranchisement of women is the last defense of the old theory that obedience is necessary for -women, because man alone is the creator of the race.

      The whole effort of the woman movement has been to destroy obedience of woman in the home. That end has been very generally attained, and the average civilized woman enjoys the right of individual liberty in the home of her father, her husband, and her son. The individual woman no longer obeys the individual man. She enjoys self-government in the home and in society. The question now is, shall all women as a body obey all men as a body? Shall the woman who enjoys the right of self-government in every other department of life be permitted the right of self-government in the State? It is no more right for all men to govern all women than it was for one man to govern one woman. It is no more right for men to govern women than it was for one man to govern other men. . . .