University of Virginia Library

8. THE INFLUENCE OF EQUALITY OF RIGHTS FOR MEN AND WOMEN UPON SEXUAL DIFFERENTIATION IN RESPECT OF BODILY FORM AND CLOTHING

IN respect of the development of bodily form and in respect of the clothing typical for the two sexes, equality of rights initiates a trend exactly opposite to that characteristic of monosexual dominance. Whereas monosexual dominance is established upon an artificial creation of contrasts and differences between men and women, equality of rights is established upon the maintenance of the natural resemblances between the sexes. The result is that in the era of equality we find that the sexes are equal in average stature, that they tend to resemble one another in bodily form, and that they wear the same sort of clothing. Typical in these matters were our own ancestors, the ancient Teutons. We have abundant indications that among them in the days of Tacitus the sexes had equal rights. Tacitus expressly reports that among the Teutons men and women were of the same height and were equally strong. He also tells us that they were similarly dressed. There seems to have been very little difference in the way they did their hair, for both men and women wore the hair long. Diodorus[1] reports of the Gauls (and we may presume that he is referring to the period when the sexes had equal rights among these people) that the

[1] V, 32.

women were as tall and as strong as the men. O. Schultze[2] enumerates the secondary sexual characters of women, mentioning among others a smaller skeleton, weaker muscles, rounded forms, and a stronger growth of hair on the head. All these characters, which are to-day so universally assumed to be secondary sexual characters of women, are merely the characters of the subordinate sex under monosexual dominance, and disappear slowly but surely when equality of rights is established.

Ploss and Bartels write of the Kamchadales: "The women show a complete lack of feminine charm, and are distinguished from the men only by the difference in the genital organs. The women are so like the men that at the first glance we can hardly tell the sexes apart." This report is peculiarly instructive. It seems at first to conflict with the account of the matter given by Meiners. That authority declared that the Kamchadale women were remarkably good-looking, and that they preserved their youth exceptionally long. But in reality there is no contradiction, for Meiners' report dates from a much earlier period than that of Ploss and Bartels. Meiners was referring to the era when the dominance of women was unchallenged among the Kamchadales. Since, according to the latest investigations, male dominance is now being definitely established among this people, they must have passed through a phase when the sexes had equal rights, and it is to this period indubitably that Ploss and Bartels' account relates. The instance shows with remarkable clearness how strong an influence sexual dominance exerts on the development of typical bodily forms. More especially we see that the development

[2] Das Weib in anthropologische Betrachtung.

of equal rights tends to do away with the artificial differentiation produced by monosexual dominance and to restore the primitive similarity. Two or three centuries are more than enough to bring about such transformations in an entire race. This is proved by the instance of the Kamchadales. Moreover, we have direct proof that changes in the average stature of a nation can take place far more rapidly than this. Bolk[3] has shown that during the last fifty years there has been an increase of four inches in the average height of the Dutch.

Liepmann[4] writes: "A stressing of the secondary sexual characters is felt to be beautiful." We, however, are now able to realise that this is merely a Men's-State view, and that it has no application to conditions where equality of rights prevails.

In the case of many other peoples we have data showing the existence of a close likeness between the sexes in physical form. The most perfect instance of this would seem to be that of the Cingalese. Albert Friedenthal states that a newcomer to Ceylon is quite unable to distinguish between the sexes. Men and women dress alike, the only difference being that the men wear a curved mother-of-pearl comb. Friedenthal gives additional details which show clearly that the Cingalese are in the phase of equal rights for the sexes. Of the Lepkas, the same writer tells us that the sexes are so much alike that it is necessary to count their hair plaits in order to distinguish men from women—for the women wear two plaits and the men only one. According to Ellis, among the Pueblos the men and the women closely resemble one another in

[3] "Zeitschrift für Morphologie und Anthropologic," 1914.

[4] Op. cit., p. 104.

bodily form. Avé-Lallemant[5] says of the Botocudos, that the men and the women seemed extraordinarily alike. "I was looking at a repulsive medley of women-men and men-women; there was not a real man or a real woman in the whole crowd." The wording of this passage gives a plain indication of the traveller's Men's-State prejudices. To persons belonging to the Men's State, it seems a matter of course that there should be marked physical differences between the sexes, and that is why the resemblances characteristic of equality of rights seem to them "repulsive." We are told of the Eskimos that the features of the men and of the women are extraordinarily alike, so that the sexes are often mistaken one for another. Parenthetically let us remark that in this case also we perceive how erroneous is the prevalent opinion concerning a "natural" difference between the growth of the hair in the two sexes.

We are in a position to-day to observe how during the phase of equality of rights a tendency arises to mitigate the sexual differences in bodily form and in dress that have been established during monosexual dominance. A comparison of the typical feminine figure in the Germany of thirty years back with the feminine figure which is typical to-day will show how vast has been the transformation. All the artificially accentuated feminine traits—accentuated with the aid of corsets and breast-pads—have disappeared. No longer do we see slender waists, broad hips, and luxuriant bosoms. The ideal of feminine beauty tends to approximate towards a boyish type. In the case of men we notice the same trend. Germans are now clean-shaven, or at most have a mere indication of a

[5] Reise durch Nord-Brasilien.

boyish moustache. The much bebearded man, regarded thirty years ago as the typical German citizen, seems to be dying out. In the case of other nations the characteristic luxuriance of the feminine figure has already disappeared or is on the way to disappear. In the United States, where the movement towards equal rights for the sexes is farther advanced than in Europe, the disappearance of the ultra-feminine type was already so marked by the year 1910 that voices were raised in warning. Sargent and Alexander ascribed the transformation to sport, and prophesied that within a few years women would no longer be distinguishable from men. Of late in the United States, with the further progress of the trend towards equal rights, the assimilation between the sexes in respect of dress and coiffure has become still more manifest. We learn that there is a club whose members, men and women, wear the same dress. It is true that the club was founded to fight the clothing profiteers in America, but the thought that men and women could dress alike would never have been put into practice had there not pre-existed a vigorous movement towards equal rights for the sexes. Even where this movement is already active, the obstacles imposed by the deeply-rooted prejudices of monosexual dominance may still be sufficiently formidable to check advance in the new direction for a considerable time. It is barely ten years since an attempt was made in France to introduce the fashion of the divided skirt and short hair. At that date, however, the movement could make no headway against the prejudices of the Men's State. The change in dress for women remained restricted to night attire in the form of pyjamas. We read to-day that English women are already able without being mobbed to cut their hair short and to go about their business wearing breeches and square-toed shoes, and that American women can wear trousers or breeches if they please. In the long run, such developments make their way in defiance of all opposition. Obstacles may slacken progress for a time, but in the end they are swept away, and the current seems to move all the more swiftly. It is of psychological interest to note that, speaking generally, the dominant sex raises the chief objections to such changes in dress. Thus at the present time men are most vociferous in their protests against the "masculinisation" of women's dress. For an obverse instance, we may turn to Madagascar. Here a king wished to introduce new customs, and issued an ordinance that the soldiers were to cut their hair short. The women raised a riot and prevented the enforcement of the decree.

In the period of transition from monosexual dominance to equality of rights, two trends are manifest. The greater simplicity and unadornedness of the dominant sex struggle with the marked trend of the subordinate sex towards self-adornment, each of these trends trying to extend its dominion over both sexes. The two tendencies seem to have equal chances of success. The growing influence of women increases the erotic inclinations of the males, and therewith simultaneously accentuates the impulse towards self-adornment. In the case of women, on the other hand, who are now engaging in extra-domestic avocations, there is less leisure for self-adornment, and an inclination towards simplicity and utility in dress awakens.

There are, consequently, certain reasons for hoping

that in the phase of equal rights for the sexes dress will undergo a development along a line that will be the resultant of these two forces. In that case the clothing of men and women will combine tasteful beauty with useful simplicity.