the great plague of his life was the hysterical female. She would put in
an appearance obtrusively at critical moments, and the anticipation of a
scene always shadowed his arrangements. We rarely see this type now.
Games have driven her away. The woman of the present generation is calm,
collected, and free from emotional outbursts, and I believe that
invigorating outdoor exercise is the chief cause. As to the second
objection, the injury to the womanliness of woman, the answer depends on
what is meant by the essential feature of "womanliness." I am afraid
most people, including most men, say with Hamlet, "Frailty, thy name is
woman." Womanliness to most men implies just frailty. They may perhaps
call it "delicacy," and refer to the "weaker sex," but they mean that
just as a man's glory is his strength, so a woman's glory is her
weakness. They argue that you must impair this "weakness" by strenuous
games. Is this true? Is the essential feature of a woman her weakness,
just as the essential feature of a man is his strength, not merely
physical, but mental and moral strength? I do not think so. Woman is a
second edition of man, if you will; therefore, like most second
editions, an improvement on the first! As Lessing puts it, "Nature
meant to make woman its masterpiece." I well remember reading in a
stirring narrative of the Indian Mutiny how a small party of English men
and women were besieged in their quarters by a body of rebels, and while
the men fought at the windows and doors the women were busy preparing
ammunition, loading guns, bandaging wounds, and zealously cheering their
war-worn defenders. When victory was at length achieved, the men asked
themselves what would have happened but for the women. That, to my mind,
was a picture of true "womanliness." Inferior in neither moral strength
nor brain-power, the true woman is a helpmeet, or man's complement,
giving him just the special form of strength in body and soul that he
needs for the special experience.