On the Equality of the Sexes

“Another instance of our creative powers, is our talent for slander; how ingenious are we at inventive scandal? what a formidable story can we in a moment fabricate merely from the force of a prolifick imagination? how many reputations, in the fertile brain of a female, have been utterly despoiled? how industrious are we at improving a hint? suspicion how easily do we convert into conviction, and conviction, embellished by the power of eloquence, stalks abroad to the surprise and confusion of unsuspecting innocence. Perhaps it will be asked if I furnish these facts as instances of excellency in our sex. Certainly not; but as proofs of a creative faculty, of a lively imagination.”

With a sarcastic tone, Murray finds a way to put a positive spin on some of the negative characteristics often associated with women. She points to women’s “talent for slander” as evidence of creativity and imagination.

“‘But our judgment is not so strong we do not distinguish so well.’ Yet it may be questioned, from what doth this superiority, in this determining faculty of the soul, proceed. May we not trace its source in the difference of education, and continued advantages? Will it be said that the judgment of a male of two years old, is more sage than that of a female’s of the same age? I believe the reverse is generally observed to be true. But from that period what partiality! how is the one exalted and the other depressed, by the contrary modes of education which are adopted! the one is taught to aspire, and the other is early confined and limited. As their years increase, the sister must be wholly domesticated, while the brother is led by the hand through all the flowery paths of science.”

With an exasperated tone, Murray addresses the themes of education and domestic duties, arguing that any deficits in female judgment are a result of the limitations placed on women. Specifically, limiting one’s education and pushing an individual toward domestic duties are both likely to result in insufficient judgment.

“Meantime she herself is most unhappy; she feels the want of a cultivated mind. Is she single, she in vain seeks to fill up time from sexual employments or amusements. Is she united to a person whose soul nature made equal to her own, education hath set him so far above her, that in those entertainments which are productive of such rational felicity, she is not qualified to accompany him. She experiences a mortifying consciousness of inferiority, which embitters every enjoyment. Doth the person to whom her adverse fate hath consigned her, possess a mind incapable of improvement, she is equally wretched, in being so closely connected with an individual whom she cannot but despise.”

Murray moves her argument forward by applying the idea of equality of the sexes to marriage. Here, she addresses how the limitations placed on women have a direct and negative impact on marriage.

“Will it be urged that those acquirements would supersede our domestick duties. I answer that every requisite in female economy is easily attained; and, with truth I can add, that when once attained, they require no further mental attention. Nay, while we are pursuing the needle, or the superintendency of the family, I repeat, that our minds are at full liberty for reflection.”

Murray appeals to logic in order to rebut the counterclaim that an education would take women away from their domestic duties. In response, she explains that once a woman learns a domestic skill, it then requires little mental thought to fulfill it.

“Should it still be vociferated, ‘Your domestick employments are sufficient’ – I would calmly ask, is it reasonable, that a candidate for immortality, for the joys of heaven, an intelligent being, who is to spend an eternity in contemplating the works of Deity, should at present be so degraded, as to be allowed no other ideas, than those which are suggested by the mechanism of a pudding, or the sewing the seams of a garment?”

In an appeal to ethos, Murray points out that since the souls of women are equal to those of men, as they are “candidate[s] for immortality,” they should indeed receive an equal education. With a tone of sarcasm and the employment of rhetorical questions, she invites the reader to consider if preparing food and sewing should be enough to satisfy a person.

“I know there are who assert, that as the animal powers of the one sex are superiour, of course their mental faculties also must be stronger; thus attributing strength of mind to the transient organization of this earth born tenement. But if this reasoning is just, man must be content to yield the palm [to] many of the brute creation, since by not a few of his brethren of the field, he is far surpassed in bodily strength. Moreover, was this argument admitted, it would prove too much, for occular demonstration evinceth, that there are many robust masculine ladies, and effeminate gentlemen.”

With an appeal to logos, Murray asserts that intellect is not equal to one’s physical existence. For example, she states that many animals are stronger than men; however, we know that people possess more intelligence than animals.

“Besides, were we to grant that animal strength proved any thing, taking into consideration the accustomed impartiality of nature, we should be induced to imagine, that she had invested the female mind with superiour strength as an equivalent for the bodily powers of man. But waving this however palpable advantage, for equality only, we wish to contend.”

With another appeal to logos, Murray reasons that if nature has given men a physical advantage, then, were nature impartial, women would have the intellectual advantage. However, she asserts that it is only equality that she is after.

“I am aware that there are many passages in the sacred oracles which seem to give the advantage to the other sex; but I consider all these as wholly metaphorical. Thus David was a man after God’s own heart, yet see him enervated by his licentious passions! behold him following Uriah4 to the death, and shew me wherein could consist the immaculate Being’s complacency. Listen to the curses which Job bestoweth upon the day of his nativity, and tell me where is his perfection, where his patience literally it existed not. David and Job were types of him who was to come; and the superiority of man, as exhibited in scripture, being also emblematical, all arguments deduced from thence, of course fall to the ground.”

Murray utilizes ethos to appeal to her readers’ moral compass. Pulling in characters from the Bible, she states that since male figures in the Bible were flawed, they are not superior. As such, she sets herself up to invalidate any other such counterclaims.

“[F]or after an education which limits and confines, and employments and recreations which naturally tend to enervate the body, and debilitate the mind; after we have from our early youth been adorned with ribbons, and other gewgaws, dressed out like the ancient victims previous to a sacrifice, being taught by the care of our parents in collecting the most showy materials that the ornamenting our exteriour ought to be the principal object of our attention; after, I say, fifteen years thus spent, we are introduced into the world, amid the united adulation of every beholder. Praise is sweet to the soul; we are immediately intoxicated by large draughts of flattery, which being plentifully administered, is to the pride of our hearts the most acceptable incense.”

Murray utilizes mockery in this selection to criticize the outer ornamentation that is often expected of women. Word choices like “gewgaws” and descriptives including women’s likeness to “the ancient victims previous to a sacrifice” indicate her dislike for this sort of embellishment.

“We must be constantly upon our guard; prudence and discretion must be our characteristicks; and we must rise superiour to, and obtain a complete victory over those who have been long adding to the native strength of their minds, by an unremitted study of men and books, and who have, moreover, conceived from the loose characters which they have seen portrayed in the extensive variety of their reading, a most contemptible opinion of the sex. Thus unequal, we are, notwithstanding, forced to the combat, and the infamy which is consequent upon the smallest deviation in our conduct, proclaims the high idea which was formed of our native strength; and thus, indirectly at least, is the preference acknowledged to be our due. And if we are allowed an equality of acquirement, let serious studies equally employ our minds, and we will bid our souls arise to equal strength. We will meet upon every ground, the despot man; we will rush with alacrity to the combat, and, crowned by success, we shall then answer the exalted expectations which are formed.”

Word choices like “victory,” “forced to combat,” “meet upon every around,” and “rush with alacrity to combat” are all indicative of war. In this passage, war becomes a metaphor for the power struggle between wives and their husbands—one that Murray depicts women as being wholly unprepared for due to a lack of studies.

“And should it still be urged, that the studies thus insisted upon would interfere with our more peculiar department, I must further reply, that early hours, and close application, will do wonders; and to her who is from the first dawn of reason taught to fill up time rationally, both the requisites will be easy.”

Presenting a rebuttal, Murray asserts that women would still be able to manage their “peculiar department,” or their domestic duties, while pursuing an education. As a solution to this challenge, she proposes that women work on their studies early and remain focused on the task at hand.

“But in one respect, O ye arbiters of our fate! we confess that the superiority is indubitably yours; you are by nature formed for our protectors; we pretend not to vie with you in bodily strength; upon this point we will never contend for victory. Shield us then, we beseech you, from external evils, and in return we will transact your domestick affairs. Yes, your, for are you not equally interested in those matters with ourselves? Is not the elegancy of neatness as agreeable to your sight as to ours; is not the well savoured viand equally delightful to your taste; and doth not your sense of hearing suffer as much, from the discordant sounds prevalent in an ill regulated family, produced by the voices of children and many et ceteras?”

This quote begins with numerous statements of irony, wherein Murray confesses the physical superiority of men and offers her domestic duties in return for their protection. Sincerity, however, is not indicated by her tone. The implication is that male strength is not a fair trade off for the domestic duties fulfilled by women. That is why emphasis is placed on domestic duties being of importance to men as well at the end of this quote.

“It doth not appear that she was governed by any one sensual appetite; but merely by a desire of adorning her mind; a laudable ambition fired her soul, and a thirst for knowledge impelled the predilection so fatal in its consequences. Adam could not plead the same deception; assuredly he was not deceived; nor ought we to admire his superiour strength, or wonder at his sagacity, when we so often confess that example is much more influential than precept. His gentle partner stood before him, a melancholy instance of the direful effects of disobedience; he saw her not possessed of that wisdom which she had fondly hoped to obtain, but he beheld the once blooming female, disrobed of that innocence, which had heretofore rendered her so lovely. To him then deception became impossible, as he had proof positive of the fallacy of the argument, which the deceiver had suggested. What then could be his inducement to burst the barriers, and to fly directly in the face of that command, which immediately from the mouth of deity he had received, since, I say, he could not plead that fascinating stimulus, the accumulation of knowledge, as indisputable conviction was so visibly portrayed before him.”

In rebuttal to the argument that women are the lesser sex due to Eve’s consumption of the fruit in Eden, Murray asserts that Adam did not face the same type of deception that Eve faced. As such, it is unfair to say that Adam would not have made the same decision she did.