The state controlling a woman would mean denying her full autonomy and full equality.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I said on the equality side of it, that it is essential to a woman's equality with man that she be the decision-maker, that her choice be controlling.
The sanctity of a woman's right to control her own destiny is a moral force of its own... I came to realize that the question of choice is to be answered, not by the state, but by the individual.
There is a kind of woman who is economically powerful, professionally powerful, who threatens a white male grip on power that has a long historic precedent in the country. Independent women living outside of marriage threaten all kinds of things about the way power is supposed to work.
And when a woman's will is as strong as the man's who wants to govern her, half her strength must be concealment.
To deny women directors, as I suspect is happening in the States, is to deny the feminine vision.
A married woman has the same right to control her own body as does an unmarried woman.
First, then, State Socialism, which may be described as the doctrine that all the affairs of men should be managed by the government, regardless of individual choice.
America is a land where men govern, but women rule.
The women of the country have the power in their own hands, in spite of the law and the government being altogether of the male order.
In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.
No opposing quotes found.