Women are ſuppoſed to poſſeſs more ſenſibility, and even humanity, than men, and their ſtrong attachments and inſtantaneous emotions of compaſſion are given as proofs; but the clinging affection of ignorance has ſeldom any thing noble in it, and may moſtly be reſolved into ſelfiſhneſs, as well as the affection of children and brutes. I have known many weak women whoſe ſenſibility was entirely engroſſed by their huſbands; and as for their humanity, it was very faint indeed, or rather it was only a tranſient emotion of compaſſion. Humanity does not conſiſt 'in a ſqueamiſh ear,' ſays an eminent orator. 'It belongs to the mind as well as the nerves.'
But this kind of excluſive affection, though it degrades the individual, ſhould not be brought forward as a proof of the inferiority of the ſex, becauſe it is the natural conſequence of confined views: for even women of ſuperiour ſenſe, having their attention turned to little employments, and private plans, rarely riſe to heroiſm, unleſs when ſpurred on by love; and love, as an heroic paſſion, like genius, appears but once in an age. I therefore agree with the moraliſt who aſſerts, 'that women have ſeldom ſo much generoſity as men;' and that their narrow affections, to which juſtice and humanity are often ſacrificed, render the ſex apparently inferiour, eſpecially, as they are commonly inſpired by men; but I contend that the heart would expand as the underſtanding gained ſtrength, if women were not depreſſed from their cradles.
