Is man the calculating tyrant the modern uneasy woman charges?
Are her fetters due only to his unfair domination?
Or is she suffering from the generally bungling way things go in the world?
And is not man a victim as well as she--caught in the same trap?
Moreover, is woman never a tyrant?
One of the first answers to her original revolt came from the most eminent woman of the day, Harriet Beecher Stowe, and it was called "_Pink and White_ Tyranny!" "I have seen a collection of medieval English poems," says Chesterton, "in which the section headed 'Poems of Domestic Life' consisted entirely (literally entirely) of the complaints of husbands bullied by their wives." Again, will doing the same things a man does work as well in stifling her unrest as she fancies it has in man's case?
If a woman's temperamental and intellectual operations were identical with a man's, there would be hope of success,--but they are not.

She is a different being.

Whether she is better or worse, stronger or weaker, primary or secondary, is not the question.

She is different.
And she tries to ease a world-old human curse by imitating the occupations, points of views, and methods of a radically different being.

Can she realize her quest in this way?
Generally speaking, nothing is more wasteful in human operations than following a course which is not native and spontaneous, not according to the law of the being.
If she demonstrates her points, successfully copies man's activities, can she impress her program on any great body of women?
The mass of women believe in their task.