A Woman’s Voice

All the quotations found below date from before the rise of cultural Marxism and related feminist ideologies in the 1960s. This is significant because the now-orthodox narrative of the history between the sexes ("herstory") is a false one. It is fake history. The quotations given here are valuable evidence useful in demonstrating not only that the “official story” is a hoax, but also in assisting us in beginning to rewrite the history of the relations between the sexes – this time truthfully.

***

►1904 – Anonymous Gentlewoman (USA)

As society is made, it is almost impossible for a man to go the right way about his relations with woman. The system prescribes a certain attitude. It is the attitude of crawl, salaam, obsequiousness and second fiddle. If you depart from it by a hair’s breadth your woman become suspicious of you. If you advise other men to depart from it you get a bad name. Women stand up for women’s rights and are made the subject of applause, bouquets and  illuminated addresses. The man who dares come out strong for men’s rights does not breathe. Men do not want him. They are like canaries in cages, afraid to go out lest the cat get them. Peace at any price is man’s rule of life. Abroad he will swagger and bluster, and bully. “Nemo me impune lacessit!” he roars. At home his watchword is ‘‘Blessed are the meek.” Abroad he frowns and breathes fire; at home he is plain, unvarnished “him.” Abroad he struts, at home he slinks. Abroad he is very wise, at home he is a little child.— Gentlewoman.”

[“Poor, Abused Man! What Male Is There Who Will Stand Up for Man’s Rights?” Boston Globe (Ma.), May 1, 1904, p. 32; Illustration from fashion article on preceding page (31)]

►1912 – Mrs. C. H. Hughston – Suffrage leader

Many an American husband turns over every penny he makes to the woman he marries, receiving back from her a meager allowance for carfare and lunches. Perhaps she runs up extra bills; if she does, he struggles meekly to pay them, and consoles himself with the fact that Mary and the girls look ‘better’n any body in town.’ He breaks down from overwork in his early maturity, and nobody has anything but pity for his family.

[Marguerite Mooers Marshall, “Give Men Rights, Is the Doctrine of Suffragists – No Wife Should Take All of Her Husband’s Wages, Says Mrs. C. A. Hughston. - Wives Ought to Help. – They Should Not Keep Their Earnings Out of the Family Fund.” The World, Evening Edition (N.Y.), Jul. 6,1912, p. 10]

►1916 – Agnes McHugh – Chicago attorney

"A man jury will not convict a woman murderer in this county, if the prosecutor is a man. I think this leniency may be traced to the chivalry latent in every man. The jurors see two or three big strong men sitting at the prosecutors’ table, and subconsciously feel that these fierce prosecutors are attacking the frail, pretty woman in the prisoner’s chair. Their instinct is to defend her. Perhaps their pity would not be stirred so profoundly if a woman was in the prosecutor’s chair. I believe the leniency of juries with feminine slayers is responsible for the wave of ‘affinity crimes’ sweeping Chicago. The woman criminal will receive justice only when there’s a woman in court to prosecute her. We demand justice for women — not maudlin sympathy or leniency."

[“Women Say Only Woman Can Stop Women Killing Off Their Husbands - With 20 Chicago Women Acquitted of Slaying Husbands or Lovers, Feminine Lawyers Ask for “Justice Instead of Sympathy” of Men.” Sep. 26, 1916,p. 5]

►1919 – Dorothy Dix  – journalist, “the world’s most highly paid woman writer”

"Among my acquaintances is a piteous old man, who is dying of a broken heart because his wife has alienated the affections of his only child from him.

This father belongs in the ranks of those who earn their bread by the sweat of their brows. Life has been hard to him, but the one rose that has bloomed along his arid pathway has seen his little daughter, and he has found no toil too hard to keep her soft and safe, no sacrifices too great to make to give her a fine education.

While the girl was little she was a joy to him as she cuddled in his arms and pressed her rosy little cheek to his worn one, but as she has grown older her mother has weaned her away from her father and taught her to look with contempt upon him, so that now she treats him with coldness and neglect, and pays him not so much attention as she would to a faithful old workhorse.

And it has turned the father’s world to dust and ashes.

One would think that a woman who turns her children against their father and robs him of their love must be a fiend incarnate. She would be if she committed the crime deliberately, but she does it without realizing what a terrible thing she is doing, or how far-reaching and disastrous are its consequences.
For many other women are guilty of this same offense. Occasionally a mother weans her children away from their father through a morbid jealousy. She wants to be all in all to them. She cannot bear for them to love anyone else, not even their father, as well as they love her. She is filled with torturing fear that they may even prefer their father to her, as children often do if left to follow unhampered their own impulses."

[Dorothy Dix, “Teaching Children to Despise Father.” syndicated (Wheeler Syndicate, Inc.), Sep. 14, 1919, part III, p. 28]

►1919 – Hattie Barnett – Atlanta, Georgia’s first female detective

“Women must be barred from criminal trials in Fulton county. … The courtroom of the average murder trial is merely the training school where wives learn the tricks used by other women in killing their husbands, and then go home, talk them over with their neighbors and then use said tricks in ridding themselves of their husbands. … Women of this class brought heir launches and spent the day, often bringing their lunches and spent the day, often bringing their children of various ages with them. If I have to go to the legislature, I shall get morbid women barred from such trials,” she completed.”

[“Murder Case Trials Called Schools For Women Slayers – Mrs. Hattie Barnett,Female Detective, Asks the Judge to Bar Members of Her Sex From the Courtroom.”The Atlanta Constitution (Ga.), Mar. 8, 1919, p. 1]

►1921 – Judge Rhea M Whitehead – Presiding member of the Superior Court of Seattle

“A husband is going to get a square deal in my court. Too many men are convicted on sobby tales of wives!”

[“The Woman Judge Who Gives Husbands A Square Deal – She Is Introducing a Novel Procedure In Seattle Where Tears and Sentiment Carry No Weight and Women Are Not Regarded Today as ‘Helpless and Dependent Children,’”syndicated, Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette (In.), Jun. 26, 1921, sec. 4, p. 1]

►1921 – Alice Robertson – U. S. House of Representatives (Oklahoma)

“Women who murder get off too easy. They’re not judged according to the same standards as men who murder, but you don’t hear the suffragists demanding equal rights for the men, do you? No the suffragists want equal rights for women with special privileges.”

[Mildred Morris, (International News Service Staff Correspondent), “Oklahoma Congress Woman Declares Move As Necessary As For Nations Comments On Murders - She Declares Women Who Commit CrimesAre Let Off Too Easy.” Syndicated (INS), Logansport Pharos-Tribune (In.), Aug.10, 1921, p. 1]

►1922 – Judge Florence E. Allen – First Criminal Court Judge, in 1922 Elected to Ohio Supreme Court

“Men have always sit on juries and men instinctively shrink from holding women strictly accountable for their misdeeds. Now that women sit on juries I expect the percentage of convictions in cases of women to be greater. Women are more clever than men in arousing sympathy. I had on a woman, a hardened criminal, stage a terrific fainting spell in my courtroom after the jury found her guilty. It took four men to carry her to jail. She continued having these spells, so long that I had to defer pronouncing sentence. Finally I sent her word that the longer she acted so, the longer she would be in jail. Within a few moments she sent up word that, she would be good and received her sentence meekly, with no trace of feeling”

[NEA, “Why Do Juries Acquit Women – Judge, Prosecutor and Defender Tell Reason,” syndicated (NEA), Freeport Journal-Standard (Il.), Nov.25, 1922, p. 7]

►1927 – Helen Rowland – journalist

“All that the modern girl asks of man is that he treat her with tenderness and chivalry – and the same time permit her to drive the car, run the house, swim the Channel and beat him at golf and tennis.

That he acknowledge her as his economic equal – and then marry her and pay all her bills for the rest of his life.

That he join her in petting parties and take her to night-club orgies – and, at the same time, respect her, love her truly, and regard her kisses as a romantic adventure or a 'sacred' privilege.

… That he permit her to go around almost as barely clothed as a savage and as gaudily decked out as a Hottentot – and at the same time reverently keep on his coat and take off his hat in her presence, as though she were a civilized woman.

That he allow her to make his social rules, choose his friends and censor his clothes – and at the same time think of her as a cute, lovable, little thing to be 'taken care of' – God’s greatest Gift to Man!

That’s positively ALL! And yet, men are becoming so woman-shy, that it is getting harder to lure a man into marriage than it is to get a golfer into church!”

[Helen Rowland, “Why Men Don’t Marry” (“Meditations of A Married Woman,” (column), syndicated, Miami Daily News (Fl.), Jan. 25, 1927, p. 4]

►1927 – Fannie Hurst – writer

Married women “have become parasites and consumers instead of producers, taking no share in their husbands’ burdens, and are worse chattels than their grandmothers,” Miss Hurst said. “The vast army of women seeking divorce are mainly after easy alimony from men they have ceased to love – surely one of the most despicable forms of barter that can exchange human hands.”

[“Two Prominent Women Differ Over Present-Day Wives -  Fannie Hurst and Mrs. J.Borden Harriman Take Opposite Views in Magazine War.” syndicated (UP), Dunkirk Evening Observer (N.Y.), Jul. 12, 1927, p. 7]

►1927 – Elsie Marlowe – journalist

Sally thinks she’s a dear, sweet home girl. She’s not. She’s the meanest kind of a slacker and cheat. She let a man build his faith on her. She went with him into a Going Business. She tied up all he had to give of youth and ambition and love. And then, because she was too stingy of soul to do her share, she took her children and left him bankrupt of faith or hope. Some day Sally is going to hear how Ed is “carrying on” and she’s going to be perfectly furious and divorce him and feel frightfully abused if he won’t give her alimony. Would you give an absconding cashier heavy alimony? For that’s what Sally is!

[Elsie Marlowe, “Wives Who Bankrupt Husbands Of Hope - NoOne Ever Thinks of Paying Alimony to Absconding Cashier, So Why Pay a Defaulting Woman,” Premier Syndicate, Inc.), Jan. 11, 1927, p. 11]

►1927 – Bessie Cooley – anti-alimony activist, Chicago (Alimony Club of Illinois)

“Down with alimony gold-digging. Millions for defense, but not one cent for alimony.”

[Gibbons,Roy J., “Militant Wife Launches War Against Alimony in Chicago,” syndicated (NEA), Freeport Journal-Standard (Il.), Jul. 8, 1927, p. 13]

►1928 – Faith Baldwin – novelist

“The rising tide of divorce has brought us a new industry, the ultimate refinement of golddigging, the perfection of blackmail within the law—marriage for alimony,” said Faith Baldwin, the well-known writer. “Women who do not want husbands or children have found a joker in our marriage laws by which they can establish themselves comfortably for life; free, respectable, rich, safe—without personal cost or sacrifice.

There are thousands and thousands of women who are being supported by men to whom they are no longer wives. There is no doubt that this business of alimony is getting to be a serious menace, it may be ail right when a man has plenty of money. To pay a former wife a few thousand dollars in alimony may mean nothing to him. But, on the other hand, just consider how many men are forced to pay alimony who cannot afford it. You will find in the majority of cases that there is no good reason why they should pay it, either. The women are well able to take care of themselves. If they did not lack pride and self-respect, they would not accept money from men who no longer mean anything to them.”

[Genn, Lillian G, “Marriage for Alimony Only a Public Menace Says Faith Baldwin,” syndicated (Public Register), Modesto Bee (Ca.), Sep. 25, 1928]

►1929 – Dorothy Dix – journalist, “the world’s most highly paid woman writer”

I often wonder that the modern woman does not perceive that she is killing the goose that lays the golden egg by her attitude toward men. By which I mean to say that it is women themselves who are destroying the things that they value most in life. It is women’s hands that are tearing to tatters the chiffons of romance and sentiment and idealism in which men have always clothed them. It is women who are stifling tenderness and slaying chivalry in the hearts of men. It is women who are doing away with all the graces and sweetnesses that made charm in the relationship between men and women and that incidentally lured men into matrimony.

For women are making men afraid of them and what they will do to them and that makes men cold and cautious in dealing with the fair sex. Even Romeo watches his step and counts the calories in his sweet talk when he keeps a date with Juliet nowadays.

Women don’t like this. They complain bitterly that there are no impassioned lovers. They say that young men are so afraid they may compromise themselves by their attentions to a girl that ten minutes alter meeting her they serve notice on her that they have no intention of marrying and that even one’s fiance’s letters read like a communication about the state of the stock market instead of being an outpouring of burning affection. …

Worse still, women are keeping men from marrying by demanding so much alimony that it makes matrimony not only a gamble in happiness but the most risky financial speculation they can engage in.

Under the present laws a man can marry a girl who makes no effort in any way to be a good wife. She can refuse to keep house, refuse to bear children She can be lazy, extravagant, high-tempered, nagging and make his life a torment to him, yet she can force him to support her as long as he lives. And, such being the case, it is not strange that prudent men are shying of more and more from the altar.

[Dorothy Dix, “Why Can’t The Modern Woman See That She Is Killing the Goose That Laysthe Golden Eggs When She Places a Commercial Value on Every Endearment a Man Utters, Cries Dorothy Dix,” syndicated, The Bee (Danville, W. Va.), Dec. 6,1929, p. 12]

►1931 – Dorothy Dix  - journalist, “the world’s most highly paid woman writer”

Still another reason why men do not marry is because of their fear of alimony. Certainly the gold-digging ladles, who make a man pay and pay and pay as long as he lives for the mistake he made in marrying one of them, are doing a lot to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. For they have made marriage a hazardous adventure that causes men to get cold feet even to think about and that causes the prudent to avoid the altar.

[Dorothy Dix, “High Cost of Keeping a Family and Fear of Alimony Keep Men from Altar – Bachelor Life looks Easier – Boys Too Poor, MenToo Wise To Take A Chance,” syndicated, Spokane Daily Chronicle (Wa.), Jul. 10,1931, p. 5]

►1931 – Ruth Brown Reed – writer

“The alimony racket has become the great woman’s industry. A sobbing pretty woman before the court — and what chance has the husband? In many cases the amount of alimony is so large in proportion to the man’s earnings that it completely nullifies any chance of happiness or of another marriage. And why – one cannot help but ask – should a divorced man be denied the right to a normal family life?”

[“Men’s Rights.” The Titusville Herald (Pa.), Jun. 4, 1931, p. 4]

►1933 – Dorothy Dix –  journalist, “the world’s most highly paid woman writer”

There is nothing in our alleged modern civilization that is so disgraceful as the fact that divorce has become just as much a racket among unprincipled women as bootlegging has among men. A large class of women as bootlegging has among them. A large class of women as bootlegging has among them. A large class of women have made a gift wrecking homes and breaking up men’s lives. They enter into the most binding of all human contracts with no intention whatever of fulfilling it. They perjure their souls without even a qualm of conscience by taking upon their lips the most solemn of all oaths that they do not even mean to keep.

[Dix, Dorothy, “Kill the Graft in Alimony and You Will See a Decline in Divorce – Matrimonial Graftersand Fair-Weather Wives Would Then Hold On to Hubby With Both Hands,” The Hartford Courant (Ct.), Mar. 31, 1933, p. 12]

►1934 – Mrs. Rose Fox – activist, New York Alimony Club

I joined this club primarily because I wanted to see justice done, and I feel that that very often a woman can attack her own sex with more effect than can a man. I am intensely against the ‘woman chiseler’ who marries not for a home and a husband, but for alimony and a good time at some decent man’s expense.

[Church, Douglas, "Open New War on the Alimony Racket:Woman Joins Club and Will Lead Fight for Change in Laws Which Now Send Men to Jail Because They Cannot Pay Allowances to Separated Wives,”

►1936 – Dorothy Dix – journalist, “the world’s most highly paid woman writer”

One of the most monstrously unfair thing in the world is the way women treat their husbands about their children. They demand that their husbands shall slave to support their children and deny themselves ease and luxury in order that their children may go to high-priced colleges, and have expensive cars and clothes, but that ends their conception of a father’s relationship to his children. He is just a biological and financial necessity and, having served his purpose, he goes into the scrapheap like any other useless piece of junk. They don’t even think of his having any right to a part of the children, or any feeling about them.

How women ever got the idea that mothers alone love their children and that fathers have no more affection for their offspring than an alley cat has for his, no one knows, but that they do hold to this theory is amply proven by the ruthlessness with which they separate their children from their fathers when they happen to want to divorce their husbands.

[Dorothy Dix, “Fathers Have Right to Love of Children; Dorothy Dix Says That Jealousy Endangers Home Life,” syndicated, The Fresno Bee (Ca.), Feb. 20, 1936, 7-A]

►1936 – Doris Blake – journalist, advice columnist

Once in a while one meets a mother with sufficient sense of fairness to realize that because she can’t get along with her child’s father, this constitutes no reason why there should not be devotion between the father and child. Ordinarily, however, one finds the feminine parent doing everything in her power to poison the child’s mind against the other parent. The mind poisoning goes on at a vicious rate when father and mother have come to the parting of ways.

And it goes on in ratio to the mother’s own fault in the domestic upheaval. Women have a remarkable penchant for absolving themselves from every particle of blame in the event of domestic strife. Regrettably, when the man has taken all he can stand and departs, sympathy is on the woman’s side, no matter what her status as a wife and parent.

[Doris Blake, “Mother Is Unfair to Poison Child’s Mind Against Dad,” Chicago Daily Tribune (Il.), Mar. 9, 1936, p. 17]

►1937 – Kathleen Norris – novelist, journalist

The alimony racket is a definite livelihood for thousands of women. And until men do something about it it will flourish like a green bay tree.

[Norris, Kathleen (advice column), “The Alimony Racket,”syndicated (Bell Syndicate), Sunday Journal and Star (Lincoln,  Ne.), Dec. 5, 1937]

►1937 – Maxine Garrison – journalist

Women who marry that they may divorce for money are high-class chiselers who have so far got off scot-free. It’s an old con game with streamline trimmings, and even if the men are dumb enough to fall for it, the women are still responsible for it as they who put over the idealistic and romanticized picture of womanhood which still makes a man believe that the little woman really does want a vine-covered cottage when she says, “Yes.” It’s all too easy these days for a woman to reason along these lines when she is momentarily bored or angry, “Why should I go on putting up with this guy? A divorce, with alimony to take care of the money problem, and I can live my own life as I please.”

[Maxine Garrison, “Blame The Alimony Racket For Marriage Fear In Men – Too Many Girls Enter Matrimony With An Attitude Of  “Quick Divorce, Easy Money’,” The Pittsburgh Press (Pa.), Apr. 8, 1937, p. 30]

►1937 – Lois Maddox Miller – journalist

Few people realize how easy it is to have a man thrown into jail for non-payment of money owed. A person who owes as little as $5 may be put behind the bars in New York City even before being tried and found guilty of not paying a debt. …

But let me tell you there’s nothing funny ahead for the man who is escorted to a county jail to serve three months or so just because he is unable to beg, borrow or steal enough money, to satisfy (temporarily, at least) some hysterical or vindictive woman who is his former spouse. If he has a job, he’ll probably lose it; if he has a business, it will probably go to pieces in his absence. He can’t earn any money while he is in jail, so when he is released three months later he will be broke” and jobless, and that Ol’ Debbil Alimony will catch up with him so fast that it is almost a sure-thing bet that his ex-wife will have him back behind the bars in no time.

[Miller, Lois Maddox, “I’m a Slave of His First Wife – Laments This Distracted Woman in a True-Life Drama that Bares One Side of New York’s ‘Alimony Racket,’ in Which Vengeful Wife No. 1 Can, and Often Does, Jail the Man She Loved, Until He is Down and Completely Out,” Billings GazetteMagazine (Montana), Jul. 25, 1937, Magazine Section]

►1937 – Spring Byington – actress, anti-alimony activist

“Alimony has become a racket. …After all, the theory of alimony is to protect a woman who has relinquished her ability to support herself. She deserves this protection. But like many other laws that were well conceived, the alimony law is being abused. It not only is providing thousands of undeserving ex-wives with a comfortable living, but it has been twisted into a weapon by which women vent their hatred on the men they once loved.”

[“Picture Star Who Is Unmarried Proposes New Plan for Alimony,” syndicated (AP), TheEvening Independent (St. Petersburg, Fl.), Feb. 22, 1937, p. 10-A]

►1939 – Dorothy Dix – journalist, “the world’s most highly paid woman writer”

As for alimony, one of the profound mysteries of the world is why men, who make the laws, have not long ago done away with the cruel and unjust and medieval status that govern the whole subject of divorce and under which they suffer, whenever they find it impossible to live with their wives, or their wives get tired of living with them.

That many women marry for the sole purpose of getting divorces a matter of common knowledge. The women who practice this hold-up game marry men they don’t love. They  don’t make an effort to get along with them, or do their duty as wives in any respect, and in the course of a year or two they pick a quarrel and fly to Reno.

Then their poor dupes have to pay them enough money to live on luxuriously ever after Why should this be possible? Why should a man have to spend the remainder of his life supporting a woman who has made his life a hell on earth? Why should a first husband have to go on supporting his former wife and her second husband? Why should a poor fellow who can't pay his alimony be put in jail where he can't make any money? My own idea is that no young and able-bodied woman without children should ever be given a nickel of alimony. She took her chances on marriage just as the man did, and she should be enough of a sport to be a good loser.

[Dorothy Dix, “When Alimony Is Banned There Will Be Fewer Divorces In America – Too Many Women Rush Into Marriage For The Sole Purpose of Getting Money, syndicated, The Bee (Danville, Va.), Jun. 27, 1939, p. 2]

►1944 – Dorothy Dix – journalist, “the world’s most highly paid woman writer”

And another, and a bitter and a shameful reason, why women ask for divorces oftener than men is because they have found out how profitable is the alimony racket and how easily it can be worked by any pretty woman. Thousands of women marry men for whom they have no affection, and with whom they have no intention of living, just because a marriage license delivers their husbands into their hands as the victims of the lowest holdup game ever practiced.

[“Dorothy Dix Says:” (column), syndicated (Bell Syndicate Inc.), The News (Frederick, Md.), Jul. 6, 1944, p. 4]

►1946 – Kathleen Norris – novelist, journalist

It made me consider afresh what I often have thought of alimony; that alimony is essentially unfair, and that men who make and change laws so easily, are rather stupid that they don’t regularize this one. The childless woman I quote above was about 28. It is possible that “he,” whoever he is, will be paying her $6,000 a year for more than 40 years. A quarter of a million dollars for the 24 months she spent in disillusioning him and breaking his heart. Such a woman, if I judged her rightly, will not re-marry while this golden river is rolling in. She will have her love affairs and her freedom; she will feel herself infinitely superior to the quiet girl who sticks to her bargain, keeps her man happy and secure, and raises children.

[Kathleen Norris, “The Alimony Racket,” syndicated (Bell Syndicate / WNU Features), Le Mars Semi-Weekly Sentinel (Io.), Oct. 11, 1946, p. 13]

►1951 – Mrs. Walter Ferguson – journalist

After World War I, which opened up new business horizons to multitudes of women, these laws became a legal device for picking husbands’ pockets. Something must be worked out from the present hodge-podge of laws to protect children, and at the same time prevent the hard-boiled sisterhood from using marriage as a high-jacking scheme. … Men and women must be equally responsible for the support of their children – as they have always been. Any effort on the part of either to shun that duty should be punished severely. But certainly, society can no longer tolerate the parasitic woman.

[Mrs. Walter Ferguson, “The Alimony Racket (“A Woman’s View”column), The Pittsburgh Press (Pa.), Jul. 12, 1951, p. 18]

►1953 – Doris Blake – journalist, advice columnist

From a letter to Doris Blake: “It is painful to watch what she is doing to her children in their relationship with their dad. It is obvious to everyone that he is crazy about his boy and girl. He tries to visit them on every possible occasion. But if she keeps on telling them what a heel their dad is and relaying to the young innocents what a horror he was to live with, she may succeed in alienating them from him entirely. That isn’t all.

“The little girl has been saying things about men being big brutes, etc., which never should be heard out of a child’s mouth. I call it poisoning the youngster’s mind.”

From Doris Blake’s reply: “It is a monstrous mother, indeed, who would corrupt a girl-child with horror tales in general. After all, where marriage fails, the mother has a share in the responsibility.”

[Doris Blake, “Mother Poisons Minds of Her Tots,” Los Angeles Times (Ca.), Jun. 28, 1953, part III, p. 10]

***
[4207-12/31/18]
***