But, even allowing for this, it is difficult to question that men as
individuals do differ, for good and for evil, more than women as
individuals. Such a malady as haemophilia, for instance, sharply
distinguishes a certain number of men from the rest of their sex,
whereas women, not subject to the disease, are not thus distinguished,
as individuals.
But the very case here cited serves to illustrate the fallacy of
studying the individual as an individual only, and teaches that there is
a second reason why the selection of women for motherhood is more
important than is so commonly supposed. In the matter of, for instance,
haemophilia, men appear sharply contrasted among themselves and women all
similar. Yet the truth is that men and women differ equally in this very
respect. Women do not suffer from haemophilia, but they convey it. Just
as definitely as one man is haemophilic and another is not, so one woman
will convey haemophilia and another will not. The abnormality is present
in her, but it is latent; or, as we shall see the Mendelians would say,
"recessive" instead of "dominant."
Now I am well assured that if we could study not only the patencies but
also the latencies of individuals of both sexes, we should find that
they vary equally. Women, as individuals, appear more similar than men,
but as individuals conveying latent or "recessive" characters which will
appear in their children, especially their male children, they are just
as various as men are.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25