That their common product is a mixed breed or a mule;
That difference of races corresponds to difference of rights.
You have to define for us an association, and also the nature of a citizen or a functionary.
You have to prove that woman is less useful than man in society;
That, at the present time, she is necessarily a housewife, when she is not a courtesan;
That she is destitute of intellect, that she knows nothing of government.
You pretend that woman has not a right to demand for herself special legislation.
Was I guilty of a paralogism in pointing out to you that it is not she, but you, who demand this, since you lay down as a principle the inequality of the sexes before human law?
All that you say relatively to the pretended inferiority of woman and the conclusions which you draw from it applying to human races inferior to our own, it would be easy for me to demonstrate that the consequence of your principles is the re-establishment of slavery. The nearest perfect has the right to take advantage of the weakest, instead of becoming his educator. An admirable doctrine, full of the spirit of progress, full of generosity! I compliment you most sincerely on it.
You say that labor specialized is the great emancipator of man; that labor, conscience, liberty, and reason, find only in themselves their right to exist and to act; that these pure forces constitute the human person, which is sacred.