As a society full of women, Herland is also a society full of mothers. As Gilman explains in her novel Herland, Herlandian women reproduce through a process called parthenogenesis in which an ovum develops into a baby without being fertilized by a man’s sperm. Motherhood is considered sacred and giving birth is the most important part of any Herlandian woman’s life, although they are only allowed to reproduce once unless they receive special permission. When three men—Americans named Terry, Van, and Jeff—discover Herland, they struggle to understand the importance the Herlandians place on motherhood. The men ultimately learn that motherhood is the reason for Herland’s success—the maternal love that Herlandians feel for their own children extends to all children, and thus they selflessly work to improve their world for their daughters and their daughters’ daughters. Motherhood in Herland is starkly contrasted with motherhood in America in the 20th century, as Gilman explores the importance of women having control over their reproductive lives on both the personal and national levels.
American motherhood as described by Terry, Van, and Jeff is fraught with stress and frequently comes at a great personal cost. The primary reason for this is that American mothers have very limited control over their reproductive lives. Van describes American motherhood as “involuntary fecundity” in which mothers are “forced to fill and overfill the land.” Without any socially acceptable and safe forms of birth control, American women—particularly married ones—have virtually no control over how often they have babies. Unfortunately, it is the lower-class women who are most burdened by an overabundance of children, as shown by Jeff’s observation that “the poorer [women are], the more children they ha[ve].” This only perpetuates poverty from one generation to the next as impoverished mothers are unable to give their children adequate education, ample food, or opportunities for advancement. For women of the middle or upper classes, motherhood “[keeps] them in the home.” This means that once a woman—even a more affluent one—becomes a mother, she has to give up all other personal ambition or an active life in the public or professional sphere.
In Herland, however, women have complete control over their reproductive lives and limit the number of children they each have to one (or two in special cases). This not only makes motherhood more precious and desirable, but also encourages the whole community to take an active role in raising the children. Early in their history, Herlandians realized that overpopulation could create a burden on their country that would lead to poverty, hunger, illness, and even war. For them, limiting reproduction was key in preventing these things from happening and thus creating a happier and more sustainable community. Furthermore, reproductive control helps Herlandians become “Conscious Makers of People.” Thanks to reproductive control, motherhood is planned for—a conscious decision that one does not feel compelled to make, and therefore is a positive thing instead of a burden.
What’s more, the culture of Herland is portrayed as overwhelmingly positive because motherhood is a conscious decision instead of something women are forced into by a lack of reproductive control. In fact, reproductive control and limiting population growth is the primary reason for the happiness of Herlandians. Even though many women want to have more children, the choice not to benefits everyone, especially the children. This is shown in Somel’s statement that “the reason our children are […] so fully loved, by all of us, is that we never […] have enough of our own,” meaning that the collective love and devotion of the entire community is funneled into the care of all the children, instead of just a select few at the top tiers of society. Van notes that in Ameica “children […] constitute about three-fifths of the population; with [Herlandians], only about one-third.” The overwhelming number of children prevents American society from being able to properly care for them, but a lack of reproductive control also prevents Americans from limiting population growth the way Herlandians do. Because Herlandians were able to check population growth relatively early in their history, their present community is able to thrive: there is enough food for everyone, nobody struggles with poverty, education is universally accessible, and no child is considered a burden. This sends a powerful message to readers about the profound benefits access to contraception can have for individual women, their families, and entire communities.
Related Themes from Other Texts
Motherhood and Reproductive Control ThemeTracker
Motherhood and Reproductive Control Quotes in Herland
These women, whose essential distinction of motherhood was the dominant note of their whole culture, were strikingly deficient in what we call “femininity.” This led me very promptly to the conviction that those “feminine charms” we are so fond of are not feminine at all, but mere reflected masculinity—developed to please us because they had to please us, and in no way essential to the real fulfillment of their great process.
“The children in this country are the one center and focus of all our thoughts. Every step of our advance is always considered in its effect on them—on the race. You see, we are Mothers,” she repeated, as if in that she had said it all.
There you have it. You see, they were Mothers, not in our sense of helpless involuntary fecundity, forced to fill and overfill the land, every land, and then see their children suffer, sin, and die, fighting horribly with one another; but in the sense of Conscious Makers of People. Mother-love with them was not a brute passion, a mere “instinct,” a wholly personal feeling; it was—A Religion.
“But does not each mother want her own child to bear her name?” I asked.
“No—why should she? The child has its own.”
“Why for—for identification—so people will know whose child she is.”
“We keep the most careful records,” said Somel. Each one of us has our exact line of descent all the way back to our dear First Mother. There are many reasons for doing that. But as to everyone knowing which child belongs to which mother—why should she?”
Here, as in so many other instances, we were led to feel the difference between the purely maternal and the paternal attitude of mind. The element of personal pride seemed strangely lacking.
All the surrendering devotion our women have put into their private families, these women put into their country and race. All the loyalty and service men expect of their wives, they gave, not singly to men, but collectively to one another.
We have two life cycles: the man’s and the woman’s. To the man there is growth, struggle, conquest, the establishment of his family, and as much further success in gain or ambition as he can achieve.
To the woman, growth, the securing of a husband, the subordinate activities of family life, and afterward such “social” or charitable interests as her position allows.
