THE WOMEN AND THE uNrvERsrms.
THE Convocation of the University of London decided on Tuesday, by a majority of 83 to 65, to .do all in its power for the admission of women to its degrees. Without the concurrence of the Senate, which is the governing body of the University, this resolution will take no effect, and it is even possible that the present Government, in spite of its hankerings after female suffrage, might decline to accede to a request of the Senate, should the Senate make the request, for the supplementary charter necessary to carry out the object of Convocation. But undoubtedly the great step has been taken in the conversion of the popular body of the University to the proposed change. We call it the popular body, though on most points it has undoubtedly been far more Conservative than the Senate ; indeed, it is now many years since the Senate -were equally divided on the proposal to apply for the power to give degrees to women, and the proposition was lost only by the casting-vote of the Chancellor, who, as usual with the owner of a casting-vote, gave it with the object of securing delay and reconsideration. It certainly does not follow that the Senate will be equally favourable to the .proposition now. That body has since been reinforced by a considerable number of graduates, and amongst them not a few of the most conservative members of the University, the London Doctors. It may, therefore, happen that for the pre- sent the vote of Convocation will remain for a time a dead-letter.- But whether this be so or not, it will have its effect. When a body as Conservative as the Convocation of the University of London changes its mind, a like change of opinion in the middle-class of English society is not far off.
We heartily rejoice in the result. We said a fortnight ago that, under certain careful limitations as to age and the conditions of the examination, there appeared to us to be no plausible reason for excluding women from the same advantages of education, and the same testimonies to a good education, as men. What is to be desired is, that women may never be masculinised,—that they may never become as much exposed to the battle of life, and as much hardened by the battle of life, as men. Where a stronger and a weaker sex have to share between - them the duties of life, it is very natural and very desirable that the more onerous and more rasping of human duties, those which involve most external toil and fag, should be taken by the stronger, while the weaker should
accept those involving the most patience, tact, tenderness, and forbearance. Any change which led to an inversion of this relative position of the two sexes would be a very mischievous and dangerous change. But the question which the University of London had to discuss was whether the proposed admission of women to its degrees did endanger this result or not. It decided, rightly we think, that it did not, and should the Senate concur, we confidently believe that it will be possible to &Ty out the new policy without either bringing women into the full tide of individual competition, or encouraging them to over- work at an age when overwork may seriously injure their physical organisation. If the age at which women are first admissible to degrees be made two or three years later than that for young men ; if the women be ranged in class-lists by themselves, though subjected to the same absolute testa of proficiency ; and if the Oxford class system, as distinguished from the Cambridge individualising system, be always adopted in the examinations for honours, we do not see that any un- feminine stimulus whatever will be applied even to the educa- tion of the few who resolve on qualifying themselves for the London degrees ; and of course, considering the age at which women marry and undertake absorbing household duties, we cannot doubt that the number of them will always continue to-be indefinitely fewer than the number of men who enter for similar degrees. On the contrary, we believe that, in many directions, women who avail themselves of their new oppor- tunities will gain not merely as human beings, but as women.
Take the most critical department of all,—surgery and medicine. It is because the medical profession believes that women will attempt to intervene in departments of that pro- fession which are not fit for them, that they oppose their admission to medical degrees so strenuously. We cordially admit that there are many departments of surgery and medicine which are not well fitted for them, but women's delicacy will teach them as clearly what those departments are as it does already in hospitals, where the most refined ladies act as nurses. For how can their gain in knowledge and in the evidence of their knowledge,—for, after all, this is the most that the London University can directly give,—involve any loss in feminine qualities, or even be inconsistent with some accession to them It might have been fairly maintained that some of the duties of nurses were duties which it was impos- sible for women to accept without some loss of delicacy, but that is just what the experience of generations has disproved. Women have always given these services, and have always gained new value in the eyes of men by the manner in which they have done so. Can it reasonably be maintained that when they have more accurate and scientific knowledge of the subject they are dealing with, their delicacy is likely to suffer even so much as it does when they are familiarised with the least pleasant of the hospital duties without attaching to them the same scientific meaning ? Is it not matter of notoriety that what is coarse, or even vulgarising work to one who attaches no physiological meaning or interest to it, carries to the trained surgeon or physician a meaning which diverts the attention from the vulgarising accidents, and fixes it upon the
causes and the results And can anyone doubt, then, that if a lady can take the distressing details upon herself without loss of delicacy, in spite of complete ignorance of what, in a medical sense, they imply, she can do so much more if she has the trained understanding of the physician, as well as the tender instincts of the nurse? If her delicacy does not suffer by her duties as nurse, it can certainly not suffer by her duties as physician. No doubt this takes for granted that women will no more force themselves into painful and unfeminine positions in medical than in any other department of life. It is quite possible for a woman to be unfeminine in a drawing-room or at a ball, and of course it will be equally possible at a hospital or in a consultation. What we insist on is, that while the feminine qualities are of the first possible value, there is not even so much danger of physiological knowledge driving them away, as there is of the special services which women already take to themselves, not only in relation to general hospital work, but in relation to special classes of medical cases, driving them away. If the almost menial services of nursing, with- out scientific knowledge, do not spot the delicacy of women, we are very certain that the addition of scientific knowledge will decrease rather than increase the danger.
But, says the Times, these degrees, whenever they are gained, must lead women to desire to utilise them in professional life ; with men, degrees are the gates to professional distinction, —how is it to be expected that they should be otherwise regarded by women We should reply that, to a limited extent, it will be so, and ought to be so. The most effective external use made by men of degrees is to qualify them as teachers, and for this purpose we not only expect, but hope, that women also will use their degrees. Again, medical men use their degrees as guarantees of their possessing the proper knowledge of medicine, and the few women who are likely to practise medicine,—mainly, of course, in relation to the diseases of woaien and children,—will do the same. Again, science degrees may become very useful to a few exceptional women, as evi- dence of knowledge which will qualify them for appointments in certain of the scientific arts. But what we cannot under- stand is, why feminine tact cannot be trusted to discover for itself the various callings in which knowledge and the proof of knowledge may be put to good account, without any undue admixture of masculine forwardness, but must be protected by artificial hindrances put in the way of women's obtaining the proper attestation of their acquirements. We not only take no such guarantees where the danger is greatest,—in the case of the accomplishments of singing, dancing, and acting,—but we freely allow women to compete on the stage with men in all sorts of unfeminine, and often really injurious capacities ; for then our own amusements are at stake, and when men are to be amused, women may sacrifice their delicacy, and no one cares. Yet when we have such substantial guaran- tees for culture as true knowledge always gives,—and with culture, of course, partial guarantees also for capacity, judgment, and the humility which true knowledge brings,—the world cries out that women's good-feeling cannot be trusted to keep within properly feminine limits, but must
be further secured by refusing to feminine study and acquire- ments the accredited trade-marks which we freely accord to
those of men. Is a woman who knows a fair share of Latin,
French, German, Mathematics, Literature, and Science really less to be trusted with the guidance of her own powers, than an empty-minded woman with a lovely voice or graceful and
active limbs ? Has true knowledge a refining and steadying, or a vulgarising and intoxicating influence ? If, as we all
believe, the true earthly ideal of woman's character and man's character be a widely different ideal, will a good education be likely to deepen the insight into this instinctive difference in the minds of women, or to cancel it ? If to deepen it, why
object to give women the attestation of a good education ? If to cancel it, why not at once prohibit the education of women beyond the dangerous point,—if there be such a point,—in- stead of merely refusing to give them the attestation that such an education has actually been received? For our own parts, we are very confident indeed that educated women will assimilate the feminine elements in literature for their own guidance, just as educated men assimilate the masculine ele- ments, and become more true women, rather than less true women, as the result. It must not be forgotten that while men are not in the least likely to wish to have pushing and forward women for their wives, they do more and more look for a certain amount of intellectual sympathy as well as prac- tical sympathy in their homes, and that no wife fails to gain influence by her ability to appreciate the character and culture .of her husband's pursuits. But then, it is said, there is sex in mind as well as in body, and therefore women's culture should follow a different path and aim at a different end from men's. That is all very pretty as a theory. But as the two most thoughtful speakers in the recent debate in the University of London, Mr. Fitch and Mr. Oaler, both showed, it is in the theoretical rather than in the practical stage of the question that such a state- ment takes the fancy. The University of London did its best to act on the theory. It drew up an examination for women intended to be a feminine equivalent for the matriculation examination for boys, with (originally) somewhat less of mathematical requirement, with a choice of Italian in the place of Greek, with a rather higher examination in English history and literature, and questions in physical geography not put to the young men, and with an alternative of Botany in the place of Chemistry. After all the difference was very slight, but what was most remarkable was thie,—that, slight as it was, it had to be constantly attenuated. The young ladies hardly ever chose the alternatives of Italian and Botany. They complained of the smallness of the requirements in mathematics, and asked and eventually obtained leave to take up as much mathematics as the lads, with a compensating remission of the examination in one of their own feminine subjects. And the net result was, as Mr. Osler very justly said, that the difference between the girls' examination and the boys' is now a difference not in reality, but in name. Again, Mr. Fitch described very ably
'his own embarrasment as an Examiner in trying to discover what specially feminine aspect he could give to his ques- tions in English History and Literature. Try as he would, he could not manage it. Of course, girls might show greater taste for one class of subjects and boys for another, but how was he to frame questions which would distinguish the feminine familiarity with English institutions and English poets from the masculine ? After all, kno cledge is knowledge, and there is no more a specifically feminine way of describing correctly the origin of the Lollard movement, or the character of Spenser's poetry, than there is a specifically feminine way of solving a quadratic equation or proving the 47th proposition of Euclid's first book. Women and men may and will assimi- late somewhat different elements in the teaching they receive ; but knowledge, after all, is one, and neither men nor women can know the same truth adequately without knowing it in the same way.
Look at it as you will, then, the result always comes out the same. The woman's character is not, and ought never to be, the same as the man's. But you cannot distinguish between the foundations of a good education for a woman, and the foundations of the same education for a man. Moreover, once let a woman receive a good education and the proof of it, and you have more instead of less reason to expect that she will use the power it gives her with tact and delicacy, and make for herself with it a way in life different from, and yet complementary to, men's.
Previous page
