The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, September 23, 1900, Page 9

rain: The come own elub he more eloped wo- y developed AANISS st of men and rse. If it ever our vision seems otherw is faulty. Me c nt must be particiy ted in by b a women. Our sex may be more closely 1de d with e particular work th: the of but both will pproximately equally affected by the resuits, Mrs. Hanaford—I belleve that women have that very work given into thelr pands. Women have been earnest in their beliefs, even to bigotry, and if they grow in knowledge rnd are broadened by club fellowship they will grow less bigoted, but ever remain earnest for what seems to GAIL LALIGHLIN -~ m tne truth. And they will still belom hat devoted class of followers of Jesus who were “last at the cross and earliest at the grave.” Mrs. Gaffney—I am glad you insist upon Ir ence of men and women, Miss s frequently asserted, you women in the professions want men out of all consideration and 1 society ale Miss L That 11 position seems to be very illogical. The entrance of to 1 trial and professional that women are doing more of k of the world; that they are be- coming more interested in the things in which men are interested. The result ist be closer relations rather than fur- er separation. It is those who belleve in scparate spheres for men and women who would m & chasm between men 1 women. t is not that just the position that wen have taken? Laughlin—I belleve that is pos vhich has been attributed- to them by those opposed to the advance- me of women, in order to discredit the vement, rather than that assumed by are working for wider opportuni- ties for women, the But is woman's entry into the profes- sions not & bad thing for the men? Mrs. Gaffney—In what way? hat they are away from the family all day and therefore cannot give the me attention to their homes that the old women” for generations have en? Mrs. Gaffney—It i said that there never yet was an occasion that there was not a person born to f and women will now e to the needs of the hour. The world s got to arrive at the noint where women must look upon housekeeping as a business and not ne arily devolving upon the wife or mother. Why should a wife keep house as a profession or busi- ness when she might render more valua- ble service to the world and could hire some one for $20 & month to do the house- keeping? Miss Laughl! It is iInteresting to sece the different values piaced on the house- hold work of men according as different questions are discussed. Wh a woman does the work of her house she Is not constdercd to be entitled to any payment. t even the law recognizes her services as belng of money value, but gives her household labor to her husband without ma and witbout price. But when a woman leaves her house to dd other work, then her service In the house Is consid- ered of o much value that her fallure to perform that service Is said to be a men- ace to civilization. Do you belleve that a woman 18 jus- tifled in« neglecting husband and chil- dren and houschold cares for a profes- elon? Miss Laughlin—Not at all. I think the trouble is this: That when a woman does work outside of the house she is expected to look after her house, too. In other words, she is expected to do the work of two and inevitably she must fall some- where. What is needed is that the care of children and of the house should be recognized as a profession in itself. If a woman chooses to have children, then I think the care of her children while they are young should be her profession, but it by no means follows that it is the des- tiny of évery woman to enter the profes- sfon of houseke®ping. And it is to be re- membered, too, that a man has some du- ties as a father and some responsibility in common with the mother for the mak- ing of a home. AARST FANANIE HUMPHREYS GAFFANEY - Don't you think this matter of chil- dren s a part of the same subject—at least stands In the same relation In that it was one of the few points of activity permitted to women, the oth- ers being the sewing soclety, the do- nation party and similar functions at- tendant on church life? Mies Laughlin—Yes; in the past the only fleld for women's activities was the rear- ing of children and pariicipation in church They had to have some fleld for nergies, and the church was the annel for the outlet of their ener- gies. Now “there are others,’ as they say. I fancy that when women used to meet every week to sew for the heathen it was not because they cared so much for the heathen or for sewing, but be- cause they wanted to meet with other women, to have a little life outside of the four walls of thelr own houses. Mrs. Gaffney—A woman thought that to belong to a certain church was an essen- tial to respectability. When as a young woman I came to New York I was tola to join a certain church—advice given not with a view to my eternal salvation, but as a social step. You would then consider the churches that our mothers and grand- mothers attended with such devotion more in the light of social centers than religious shrines? Mrs. Gaffney—Yes; you met soclally the peopls who went to your church. You met some people outside, of course, but you depended mainly for soclety upon the people who went to your particular church. Mrs, Hanaford—Not the sole soclal cen- ter, because family tles and nelghborhood facilities have their influence to form cen- ters, In village and country soclety the church still constitutes the chief so- clal center, does it not? Mrs, Gatney—No; there is a universal reaching out of women to other sources of social life and in.crcourse. 1 find that in Iowa, In an o ng country dls a band of women have formed w call a Chauncey Depew C far removed from any of cilities for feminin: they are going Are there : the a ; as there wer, tional chu . tobe. Wer got beyond t religion nt t It seems to me that the as failed in not being the leader in philanthropy. I f being fore- most work it ind. Mrs h t given woma rk or e 1 the b 1y er at was ing to be done and what he would allow ughi the women were to collect the mc spend it ¢f the church d from taking an part in nies even in the Catholic not permit ard a church say that the Masons and Od llows in their work were doing more beneficent wor shurches. He thought th: zht to do th rk or fault, with rch members ed lodges whi uch philan ork was done. The churches are : to-day and the women, if they . t the institutional idea, are greatly helping to carry it out. I thor i lieve in the united efforts of w of a case where built at her own éxpense, and when it was finished she was not allowed to go behind the altar r: A few days ago the trustees of Wesh an College decided to limit the number of women students to 2) pér cent of the They also made other discrimin- At the end of the h reported ment -that a $28,000 to the col- whole. ations against wo newspaper paragrapn thelr action was the woman _ had just give Yege. The trouble is that women are too unselfish. work for those org izations which are unjust toward the 1 was talking with a woman, a_member of the Methodist church, who thoroug ly believes in equality of men and wo- men, and I asKed her how she could r main a member of a church which so discriminated against women, and she said she could not get over the old spirit of loyalty to the church, even though it did things she did not like. She pre- ferred to work .from within rather than from without, and there is something in to concelve it. The frog i about dol ter of Fir ground. blinded ipon th rests upon t preted by t lighteth eve with men and with wo ss and practical go. Lord req do justice, to love mer bumbly with thy God.™ to >d wi years, ® ars come onfy en, but to bring then,