Queen Victoria: “Feminists Ought to Get a Good Whipping”

by Elizabeth on April 22, 2011 · 14 comments

Queen Victoria grew up during the late 1800s and of course, she was objected to women’s rights in the sense of voting, owning property and marriage laws because that was the social norm and she was a part of a royal family that she was trying to protect. However, it is interesting to note what she says about what would happen if there was equality of the sexes.
“I am most anxious to enlist everyone who can speak or write to join in checking this mad, wicked folly of 'Women's Rights,' with all its attendant horrors, on which her poor feeble sex is bent, forgetting every sense of womanly feelings and propriety. Feminists ought to get a good whipping. Were woman to 'unsex' themselves by claiming equality with men, they would become the most hateful, heathen and disgusting of beings and would surely perish without male protection.”
Queen Victoria recognized that women were different than men. If women were to try and become the same as men in every way possible, then they wouldn’t be women anymore. Femininity would be lost and men wouldn’t like them anymore. Did Queen Victoria predict what will happen in the future? I sure hope that we don’t get to the point of becoming the most “hateful, heathen and disgusting beings” and I hope radical feminists hope we don’t either. But, I do believe that Queen Victoria was right-that if we continue on this path of trying to make men and women completely equal, and forgetting that we are different-we will be doomed to a gloomy future.

Previous post:

Next post:

{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }

Bob April 22, 2011 at 5:55 pm

I don’t know about “…would surely perish without male protection.” But about “…they would become the most hateful, heathen and disgusting of beings…”? Well, see for yourselves:


Three out of four is not too bad, especially when the prediction is 90 to 100 years into the future. I think HM Queen Victoria knew what she was talking about.


Alyssa April 24, 2011 at 3:57 pm

Elizabeth, I was SOOO excited to see this post. I am the greatest fan of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert… 🙂 I believe this quote does accurately capture the dangers of wanting to claim equality with men. Women certainly should not be denied rights, yet I believe it is important for women to embrace feminine differences.
On a side note, I always found it interesting that in the past the British would allow a female to inherit the monarchy but not the estates or wealth of her father. I know they cared more about preserving their monarchy but they should have understood that women were capable of managing property 🙂


Kara April 26, 2011 at 6:58 pm

I find it fascinating that Queen Victoria recognized that women had different roles than men. I also think it is interesting that she hints that women “would surely perish without male protection;” which also implies that they are different and also need each other.

I would be interested to hear what Queen Victoria believed those differences were. Did she believe it was a woman’s role to vote, or manage property? Being a female monarch, she surely had to fight for a certain amount of “equality with men” but she was obviously so vividly against it. What were the Women’s Rights that Queen Victoria had to fight for herself? But on the other side of that coin, what exactly did she reject? I think you are right Elizabeth, she must have been fearing some of what feminism has become today.


Renessac May 7, 2011 at 5:38 pm

you write, “this path of trying to make men and women completely equal”

WHO is trying to make men and women completely equal? that doesn’t even make any sense. What feminists want is equal RIGHTS for both men and women.

and how would having equal rights make us “doomed to a gloomy future.”

Why would you not want equal rights?


jackson hail June 19, 2013 at 3:14 am

What feminists want is all the advantages of masculinity and none of the disadvantages.

With the way radical feminists act it seems that they are fighting for supremacy instead of equal rights.


cecil August 26, 2013 at 2:32 am

That is EXACTLY that feminists want, they are nothing more than a hate movement of scum with Marxism at its core.


Ben May 11, 2011 at 10:05 pm

First off a very interesting and rationale case.

@ Renessac

I’m going to assume your a female and a feminist to boot.

There are many tenets to feminist, but one of the major ones is the idea that men and women are truly the same, and only differ socially due to what society constructs. Any intelligent person knows in order to argue effectively for the notions of “being treated the same” one has to denote any inheritable [or biological] differences between men and women that would differ such policies. So the idea put out by Feminist is that society creates “social constructs [something will no empirical data]” that limit men and women’s potential, and it is the job of Feminist to deconstruct such myths because when they’re gone everyone can live in harmony, be free, and create a more prosperous society.

You would note that the further radical you go within the Feminist sphere of thought the more of a refusal to accept inheritable differences amongst men and women. Orthodox Feminist will state that only visible “external” differences are seen and even that can be changed. Such [failed] cases as the “David Reimer case” was a test made by radical Feminist to put theory into practice.

Feminist theory rejects science, especially Darwinism and evolutionary thought, to promote the ideals mention above. It has too. If men and women are not biological equal, than it makes no sense to grant equal rights. Darwinism tries to piece together the realities of the world as is, than how it should be.

The reason why men and women have had certain, what Feminist call “gender roles,” for thousands of years, is because of survival. Men and women are biologically different and so societies, across time and cultures, reflected those differences. Men are physically bigger and stronger, for example, and therefore more successful when hunting–increasing survival and reproduction. Women are biologically designed to produce and raise children.

A society doesn’t survive without clearcut boundaries and roles as noted by years of evolution. Respecting differences can actually bring more harmony and balance.

I don’t believe that Feminism argues for “equal rights” as they claim, but the post here is assuming otherwise.

Anyways, it is an interesting subject and I stumbled here. I found the quote interesting.

Here is another case against Feminism from another person if it interest you:


Morgan November 7, 2011 at 4:53 pm

I think Queen Victoria (RIP) was absolutly wrong to abject women’s rights. But I do see the point of her views.


Balwan November 29, 2012 at 2:25 pm

I think I tend to read more women authors than men, but I wonedr if the numbers would prove me wrong if I sat down and figured it out from previous years, as you did. With all the thriller/mysteries I’ve read in the past year or so, I may have bumped the male author side up a notch or two. Hard to say.


What is MyCaa July 8, 2014 at 2:39 am

I loved as much as you’ll receive carried out right here.
The sketch is attractive, your authored subject matter stylish.
nonetheless, you command get got an shakiness over that you wish be delivering
the following. unwell unquestionably come further formerly again since exactly the same nearly very
often inside case you shield this hike.


Lacy December 28, 2016 at 11:36 pm

Hi, i think that i saw you visited my web site so i camme to go back the
want?.I am trying to in finding issuess to improve myy site!I guess
its ok to use a feww of yor concepts!!


KennethSot January 21, 2017 at 6:14 pm

вирус герпеса человека типа 6 hhv 6 http://fitzgerald-white.xyz/index.php?viewurl=7185 вобэнзим при герпесе


Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }