the account of the fall of man, were literally true, I could not believe what my reason told me was derogatory to the character of the Supreme Being.14
She discovers the only reason for women's state is their lack of education. In Chapter V she attacks several writers, especially Rousseau, who had written poor accounts of women. Wollstonecraft cites and comments on long passages from Emile. She is not unaware of Rousseau's relationships with women. In her chapter "On National Education," she states:
Who ever drew a more exalted female character than Rousseau? Though in the lump he constantly endeavoured to degrade the sex. And why was he thus anxious? Truly to justify to himself the affection which weakness and virtue had made him cherish for that fool Theresa. He could not raise her to the common level of her sex; and therefore he labored to bring woman down to hers. He found her a convenient humble companion, and pride made him determine to find some superiour virtues in the being whom he chose to live with; but did not her conduct during his life, and after his death, clearly show how grossly he was mistaken who called her a celestial innocent.15
She treats his description of Sophie with smug indignation, as when Rousseau describes Sophie's garb, "simple as it seems, was only put in its proper order to be taken to pieces by the imagination." To this she retorts, "Is this modesty? Is this a preparation for immortality?"16 She correctly accuses Rousseau of depicting not a wife and sensible mother, but a pleasing mistress.
Getting to the heart of Rousseau's error, she determines:
Men have superior strength of body, but were it not for mistaken notions of beauty, women would acquire sufficient to enable them to earn their own subsistence, the true definition of independence". Let us then, by being allowed to take the same exercise as boys, not only during infancy, but youth, arrive at perfection of boys, that we may know how far the natural superiority of man extends.17
She cautions that she has no desire to breed a generation of independent and unattached women like herself, but that she seeks to develop wiser and more virtuous mothers. She believes that children's characters are formed before the age of seven, shuddering to think of the damage done by addle-headed mothers. Without stressing independence she believes that once women gain intellectual equality, they should be given political and economic equality as well.
In Chapter XII, "On National Education," Wollstonecraft develops her proposal. She feels that private education is confined to the �lite, and that school-children need the company of other children. She has an aversion to boarding schools because of the interruptions of vacations. She suggests day schools where children may spend time with other children. These need to be national establishments, so that school-matters are not left to the "caprice of the parents."18 Like Rousseau, she emphasizes that children must be allowed to play freely.
What is so radical about Wollstonecraft's idea is that girls are not educated relative to boys, but with them. She states:
If marriage be the cement of society, mankind should all be educated after the same model, or the intercourse of the sexes will never deserve the name of fellowship, nor will women ever fulfill the peculiar duties of their sex". Nay, marriage will never be held sacred till women, by being brought up with men, are prepared to be their companions rather than their mistresses.19
After the age of nine, girls and boys intended for domestic employments or mechanical trades will be removed to other schools. The two sexes will still study together in the mornings, and in the afternoons girls will learn millinery, mantua-making, and other fitting pursuits.
Girls and boys still together? I hear some readers ask: yes. And I should not fear any other consequence than that some early attachment might take place". Besides, this would be a sure way to promote early marriages, and from early marriages the most salutary physical and moral effects naturally flow.20