Chicago Tribune
WIFE CRITICISES CRITIC OF
WOMEN
———
Mrs. W. I. Thomas Disagrees with Husband’s Views on "Sex and Society."
———
WRITINGS PRAISED, TOO.
———
Despite Denunciation by Heads of Clubs, Champion Is for the Author’s Arguments.
———
Chicago women took issues yesterday with Prof. William I Thomas of the University of Chicago in his sensational views on woman and her position in the world, published in his new book, "Sex and Society." Even his wife joined in the attack on his views, declaring it "would not accomplish anything revolutionary."
Mrs. Thomas did not upbraid her husband for his views, but merely took an opposite stand.
"I do not agree with my husband in all his statements, although I feel that many of them are true," she declared. "His declarations on family life not being conducive to romantic love are quite easy to misinterpret, but I hold that, whether or not, marriage should be founded on a much higher plane than romantic love.
"Mr. Thomas is quite fond in private life — I believe he has never said much about a revolution in belief. I think he has been fair and honest in what he has stated, although, as I have said, his view do not coincide with mine."
Says City Should Blush
Mrs. Thomas D. Palmer, president of the Klio association, was most vehement in her denunciation of the volume.
"I disagree most decidedly with Prof. Thomas," she said. "I have read his views and consider them shameful in the extreme. To publish them in a book was emphatically a most dastardly thing to do.
"Chicago must blush in shame at the publication of this book. It should be kept out of our libraries. No children or young folks should be allowed to read it, and some sort of action should be taken by the faculty to keep it from gaining a wide circulation.
"Prof. Thomas has done a world of harm. He is a teacher and should remain in the classroom. It is most unfortunate for him to present such views, and if he does the same in the classroom then is all the more shame. He is there to guide the thoughts of young people and to aid them in forming good ideals.
"His remarks on ‘loose woman’ are enough to make any honest person blush. I do not see how he dares make such statements — having a wife and family — as he does. It is a dreadful thing to uphold loose morals and then be allowed to teach young people in the classroom.
"He makes the statement that family life is not conducive to romantic love. He must be an exceedingly weak minded man to make such a statement. As a matter of fact most of us believe that family life is certainly conducive to romantic love. Can any one imagine anything more romantic than a couple who have gone through life and attained old age with a family and leave this earth together?"
Praises Family Life.
"I disagree with Prof. Thomas in many of his views," said Mrs. Frederick K. Bowes. "I cannot believe that family life is not conducive to romantic love. I think the professor is wrong in his statements in this respect.
"I think, however, he will find more romantic love in the families of the east than in the middle west. This is in regard to the smaller cities and in the country. There is more family life and family circle than in the west.
"His comparison of men and women intellectually hardly is fair. I do not see how any one can compare the intellectual capacity of men and women when their spheres are so totally different. From the time a woman is born she lives almost in another world. She does different things and thinks about different things, so that a comparison is not only unfair but impossible.
Calls Book "Most Able."
The book created a stir at the university. The view of Prof. Thomas were declared to be radical in the extreme, and quite likely to mare a new era of though on the "woman question." Prof. Albion W. Small, who is head of the sociology department of which Prof. Thomas is a member, declared it was a "most able book."
"I have not read it through yet, and so I cannot express much of an opinion," he said. "I cannot say that my views correspond with those of Prof. Thomas. He has made a special study of the question, and I have not, and so I am not able to judge. However, he views are far from being those of the popular sort, and on the whole I consider his work a most able book."
