Sex and Society | Page 5

is true, it is a remarkable confirmation of the conservative
tendency of woman. "I have thought for several years that woman was,
in a general way, less dolichocephalic in dolichocephalic races, and less

brachycephalic in brachycephalic races, and that she had a tendency to
approach the typical median form of humanity."[36] The skin of
woman is without exception of a lighter shade than that of man, even
among the dark races. This cannot be due to less exposure, since the
women and men are equally exposed among the uncivilized races, but
is due to the same causes as the more brilliant plumage of male birds.
The form of woman is rounder and less variable than that of man, and
art has been able to produce a more nearly ideal figure of woman than
of man; at the same time, the bones of woman weigh less with
reference to body weight than the bones of man, and both these facts
indicate less variation and more constitutional passivity in woman. The
trunk of woman is slightly longer than that of man,[37] and her
abdomen is relatively more prominent, and is so represented in art. In
these respects she resembles the child and the lower races, i.e., the less
developed forms.[38] Ranke states that the typical adult male form is
characterized by a relatively shorter trunk, relatively longer arms, legs,
hands, and feet, and relatively to the long upper arms and thighs by still
longer forearms and lower legs, and relatively to the whole upper
extremity by a still longer lower extremity; while the typical female
form approaches the infantile condition in having a relatively longer
trunk, shorter arms, legs, hands, and feet; relatively to short upper arms
still shorter forearms, and relatively to short thighs still shorter lower
legs, and relatively to the whole short upper extremity[39] a still shorter
lower extremity--a very striking evidence of the ineptitude of woman
for the expenditure of physiological energy through motor action.[40]
The strength of woman, on the other hand, her capacity for motion, and
her muscular mechanical aptitude are far inferior to that of man. Tests
of strength made on 2,300 students of Yale University[41] and on
1,600 women of Oberlin College[42] show the mean relation of the
strength of the sexes, expressed in kilograms:
Back Legs Right Forearm Men 153.0 186.0 56.0 Women 54.0 76.5
21.4
The average weight of the men was 63.1 kilograms, and of the women
51 kilograms; and, making deduction for this, the strength of the men is
still not less than twice as great as that of the women. The
anthropometric committee reported to the British Association in 1883
that women are little more than half as strong as men.

The first field day of the Vassar College Athletic Association was held
November 9, 1895, and a comparison of the records of some of the
events with those of similar events at Yale University in the
corresponding year gives us a basis of comparison:[43]
Yale Vassar 100-yard dash 10-2/5 sec. 15¼ sec. Running broad jump
23 ft. 11 ft. 5 in. Running high jump 5 ft. 9 in. 4 ft. 220-yard dash
22-3/5 sec. 36¼ sec.
Miss Thompson, whose results were obtained in a psychological
laboratory, concludes that in reactions where strength is involved men
are clearly superior to women, and this is the only respect in which she
finds a marked difference:
Motor ability in most of its forms is better in men than in women. In
strength, rapidity of movement, and rate of fatigue they have a very
decided advantage. These three forms of superiority are probably all
expressions of one and the same fact--the greater muscular strength of
men. Men are very slightly superior to women in precision of
movement. This fact is probably also connected with their superior
muscular force. In the formation of a new co-ordination women are
superior. The superiority of men in muscular strength is so well known
that it is a universally accepted fact. There has been more or less
dispute as to which sex displayed greater manual dexterity. According
to the present results, that depends on what is meant by manual
dexterity. If it means the ability to make very delicate and minutely
controlled movements, then it is slightly better in men. If it means
ability to co-ordinate movements rapidly to unforeseen stimuli it is
clearly better in women.[44]
We have no other than a utilitarian basis for judging some variations
advantageous and others disadvantageous. We can estimate them only
with reference to activity and the service or disservice to the individual
and society implied in them, and a given variation must receive very
different valuations at different historical periods in the development of
the race. Departures from the normal are simply nature's way of "trying
conclusions." The variations which have