by the state; and while they are incessantly denouncing "paternalism," by which they mean the claim of the defenseless laborer and artisan to a share in this lavish state protection, they are all the while besieging legislatures for relief from their own incompetency, and "pleading the baby act" through a trained body of lawyers and lobbyists. The dispensing of national pap to this class should rather be called "maternalism," to which a square, open, and dignified paternalism would be infinitely preferable. Female equality Ward was a strong advocate for equal rights for women and even theorized, in a typical witty and acerbic pre-Cold War rhetorical style that can be difficult for undergraduates and antifeminists to appreciate, that women are naturally superior to men ("Our Better Halves," 1922). Ward contributed to the sociological feminist revival pioneered by Mary Wollstonecraft and Charles Fourier beginning in the 17th century. Deploying his biological expertise, Ward's take-down of patriarchal inegalitarianism and its crippling effect on both women and men's human development is consanguine with Virginia Woolf's feminist argument in Three Guineas (1938), though it can be anachronistically associated with the difference feminism of writers such as Harvard's Carol Gilligan, who have developed claims of female superiority. Ward is considered a feminist writer by contemporary historians such as Ann Taylor Allen, and a feminist Sociologist by contemporary Sociologists such as Michael Kimmel. This is a sample of the sort of confident and withering narrative style that in its deployment against patriarchal inequality can offend antifeminists: "And now from the point of view of intellectual development itself we find her side by side, and shoulder to shoulder with him furnishing, from the very outset, far back in prehistoric, presocial, and even prehuman times, the necessary complement to his otherwise one-sided, headlong, and wayward career, without which he would soon have warped and distorted the race and rendered it incapable of the very progress which he claims exclusively to inspire," Ward wrote in 1922. "And herefore again, even in the realm of intellect, where he would fain reign supreme, she has proved herself fully his equal and is entitled to her share of whatever credit attaches to human progress hereby achieved." Clifford H. Scott claims that "practically all the suffragists ignored" Ward, but Scott is focused on the Progressivist upper-class suffragists who were taken by the inegalitarian Social Darwinist and eugenicist ideologies of the day. Their ambition for