“Objections having been made to the former title, as not sufficiently easy to be understood, the present has been substituted as expressive of the main purpose of the essay; though, by myself, the other is preferred, partly for the reason others do not like it, i.e., that it requires some thought to see what it means, and might thus prepare the reader to meet me on my own ground.”

Fuller expresses her reluctance to change the original title of her essay, “The Great Lawsuit: Man versus Men; Woman versus Women,” to the simpler Woman in the Nineteenth Century. She prefers the original because it demands more intellectual engagement from readers, as it challenges them to consider the philosophical distinction between the ideal “Man” and the flawed reality of “Men” and “Women” in society. By acknowledging that the original title “requires some thought,” Fuller employs irony to critique the ease with which society avoids complex ideas. This reveals her belief that genuine progress requires deeper reflection and engagement with challenging concepts rather than opting for simplicity. The title change also illustrates the tension between accessibility and intellectual rigor, a theme Fuller grapples with throughout the essay.

“Man no longer paints his proper nature in some form, and says, ‘Prometheus had it; it is God-like,’ but ‘Man must have it; it is human.’”

This sentence marks a turning point in Fuller’s argument about human potential. Fuller emphasizes that humanity’s highest ideals, once reserved for mythological or divine figures like Prometheus, are now understood as achievable by ordinary humans. This shift underscores the idea that both men and women can reach their full, divinely inspired potential. Fuller uses this remark to challenge traditional views of greatness, urging her