Individuality and Genus 227form of the natural duties and needs of the female. The ac-
tivity of a man in life is determined by his individual ca-
pacities and inclinations; that of a woman is supposed to
be determined exclusively by the fact that she is, precisely,
a woman. Woman is supposed to be a slave of the generic,
of what is universally womanish. As long as men debate
whether women are suited to this or that profession “ac-
cording to their natural disposition,” the so-called woman
question cannot evolve beyond its most elementary stage.
What women are capable of according to their nature
should be left to women to decide. If it is true that women
are suited only to the profession that is currently allotted
to them, then they will hardly be able to attain any other
on their own. But they must be allowed to decide for them-
selves what is appropriate to their nature. Anyone who
fears a cataclysm in our social conditions if women are ac-
cepted not as generic entities but as individuals should be
told that social conditions in which one half of humanity
leads an existence unworthy of human beings are condi-
tions that stand in great need of improvement.^1
- As soon as this book appeared (1894), the objection was raised
against these comments that, within what is appropriate to their sex,
women can already live as individually as they like and much more
freely than men, who become de-individualized through school, war
and profession. I know that this objection will be raised today (1918)
perhaps even more strongly then ever. Still, I must let these sentences
stand, and hope that there are readers who understand how com-
pletely such an objection runs counter to the concept of freedom
developed in this book, and who judge the above sentences of mine
by standards other than the de-individualization of men through
school and profession. (Author’s note)