There are some amusing moments in Dairnvaell’s account, not the least of which is his claim that Proudhon’s ideas were derived in part from 18th century sex manuals. I’m hoping to get a little time to write up an analysis of his arguments in the near future. But, regardless of the accuracy of the response, I think this pair of pamphlets gives us an interesting window in on the reception of Proudhon’s work, both among those who claimed to be sympathetic to the general goals of socialism, but rejected Proudhon’s work on property, and among the women with whom he would quarrel about issues related to gender and the family.
I’ve posted working translations of a pair of pamphlets published in 1848/9: “The History of Mr. Proudhon and His Principles,” by “Satan,” and “Response to Satan on the Subject of Mr. Proudhon,” by “The Archangel Saint Michael.” The author of the first was Georges Dairnvaell, and the second was published by the “Society for the Mutual Education of Women,” the organization, founded by Jeanne Deroin and Désirée Gay, which published Politique des femmes. The author of the second pamphlet does not appear in any of the sources I have been able to find, but the sentiments are certainly in line with those expressed by Gay in l’Opinion des Femmes, the later paper published by the Society.