THE INFLUENCE OF EQUALITY OF RIGHTS FOR MEN
AND WOMEN UPON SEXUAL DIFFERENTIATION IN RESPECT OF BODILY FORM AND
CLOTHING The Dominant Sex: The Sociology of Sex Differentiation | ||
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
THE INFLUENCE OF EQUALITY OF RIGHTS FOR MEN
AND WOMEN UPON SEXUAL DIFFERENTIATION IN RESPECT OF BODILY FORM AND
CLOTHING The Dominant Sex: The Sociology of Sex Differentiation | ||