This is a modern-English version of Studies in the Psychology of Sex, Volume 6: Sex in Relation to Society, originally written by Ellis, Havelock.
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.
STUDIES
IN THE
PSYCHOLOGY OF SEX
VOLUME VI
SEX IN RELATION TO SOCIETY
BY
HAVELOCK ELLIS
1927
PREFACE.
In the previous five volumes of these Studies, I have dealt mainly with the sexual impulse in relation to its object, leaving out of account the external persons and the environmental influences which yet may powerfully affect that impulse and its gratification. We cannot afford, however, to pass unnoticed this relationship of the sexual impulse to third persons and to the community at large with all its anciently established traditions. We have to consider sex in relation to society.
In the previous five volumes of these Studies, I have focused primarily on the sexual drive in relation to its target, without considering external people and the environmental factors that can strongly influence that drive and its satisfaction. However, we cannot ignore the connection between the sexual drive and other individuals, as well as the broader community with its long-standing traditions. We need to examine sex in relation to society.
In so doing, it will be possible to discuss more summarily than in preceding volumes the manifold and important problems that are presented to us. In considering the more special questions of sexual psychology we entered a neglected field and it was necessary to expend an analytic care and precision which at many points had never been expended before on these questions. But when we reach the relationships of sex to society we have for the most part no such neglect to encounter. The subject of every chapter in the present volume could easily form, and often has formed, the topic of a volume, and the literature of many of these subjects is already extremely voluminous. It must therefore be our main object here not to accumulate details but to place each subject by turn, as clearly and succinctly as may be, in relation to those fundamental principles of sexual psychology which—so far as the data at present admit—have been set forth in the preceding volumes.
In doing so, we can summarize more effectively than in previous volumes the various important issues we face. When we looked into the specific questions of sexual psychology, we explored a largely overlooked area and had to apply an analytical care and precision that had often never been used on these questions before. However, when we examine the relationship between sex and society, we typically don't encounter such neglect. Each chapter in this volume could easily stand alone as a book, and the literature on many of these topics is already quite extensive. Therefore, our main goal here isn't to pile on details but to present each topic clearly and concisely in relation to the fundamental principles of sexual psychology that have been outlined in the earlier volumes, based on the data available.
It may seem to some, indeed, that in this exposition I should have confined myself to the present, and not included so wide a sweep of the course of human history and the traditions of the race. It may especially seem that I have laid too great a stress on the influence of Christianity in moulding sexual ideals and establishing sexual institutions. That, I am convinced, is an error. It is because it is so frequently made that the movements of progress among us—movements that can never at any period of social history cease—are by many so seriously misunderstood. We cannot escape from our traditions. There never has been, and never can be, any "age of reason." The most ardent co-called "free-thinker," who casts aside as he imagines the authority of the Christian past, is still held by that past. If its traditions are not absolutely in his blood, they are ingrained in the texture of all the social institutions into which he was born and they affect even his modes of thinking. The latest modifications of our institutions are inevitably influenced by the past form of those institutions. We cannot realize where we are, nor whither we are moving, unless we know whence we came. We cannot understand the significance of the changes around us, nor face them with cheerful confidence, unless we are acquainted with the drift of the great movements that stir all civilization in never-ending cycles.
It might seem to some that in this discussion, I should have focused only on the present rather than covering such a broad range of human history and traditions. It especially might appear that I've put too much emphasis on Christianity's role in shaping sexual ideals and establishing sexual institutions. I'm convinced that this is a misunderstanding. It’s a common mistake that leads many people to misinterpret the ongoing progress in our society—progress that will never stop at any point in social history. We can’t escape our traditions. There has never been, and there can never be, an "age of reason." Even the most passionate so-called "free thinker," who believes they’ve discarded the authority of the Christian past, is still tied to that past. If its traditions are not literally in their blood, they are woven into the fabric of all the social institutions into which they were born, influencing even their way of thinking. The latest changes to our institutions are inevitably shaped by the earlier forms of those institutions. We can’t understand where we are, or where we’re heading, unless we know where we came from. We can’t grasp the significance of the changes happening around us, or face them with optimism, unless we are familiar with the direction of the major movements that continuously influence civilization in endless cycles.
In discussing sexual questions which are very largely matters of social hygiene we shall thus still be preserving the psychological point of view. Such a point of view in relation to these matters is not only legitimate but necessary. Discussions of social hygiene that are purely medical or purely juridical or purely moral or purely theological not only lead to conclusions that are often entirely opposed to each other but they obviously fail to possess complete applicability to the complex human personality. The main task before us must be to ascertain what best expresses, and what best satisfies, the totality of the impulses and ideas of civilized men and women. So that while we must constantly bear in mind medical, legal, and moral demands—which all correspond in some respects to some individual or social need—the main thing is to satisfy the demands of the whole human person.
In discussing sexual issues that are mostly about social health, we will still maintain a psychological perspective. This viewpoint regarding these matters is not only valid but essential. Conversations about social health that are purely medical, legal, moral, or theological often lead to conflicting conclusions and clearly lack complete relevance to the complex nature of human beings. Our primary task must be to determine what best expresses and fulfills the entirety of the impulses and thoughts of civilized men and women. Therefore, while we must always consider medical, legal, and moral requirements—which all relate in some way to individual or societal needs—the main priority is to meet the needs of the whole person.
It is necessary to emphasize this point of view because it would seem that no error is more common among writers on the hygienic and moral problems of sex than the neglect of the psychological standpoint. They may take, for instance, the side of sexual restraint, or the side of sexual unrestraint, but they fail to realize that so narrow a basis is inadequate for the needs of complex human beings. From the wider psychological standpoint we recognize that we have to conciliate opposing impulses that are both alike founded on the human psychic organism.
It’s important to highlight this perspective because it seems that no mistake is more common among writers discussing the health and ethical issues of sex than ignoring the psychological angle. They might support either sexual restraint or sexual freedom, but they don’t understand that such a limited approach is not enough for the needs of complex human beings. From a broader psychological perspective, we acknowledge that we need to balance conflicting impulses that both stem from the human mind.
In the preceding volumes of these Studies I have sought to refrain from the expression of any personal opinion and to maintain, so far as possible, a strictly objective attitude. In this endeavor, I trust, I have been successful if I may judge from the fact that I have received the sympathy and approval of all kinds of people, not less of the rationalistic free-thinker than of the orthodox believer, of those who accept, as well as of those who reject, our most current standards of morality. This is as it should be, for whatever our criteria of the worth of feelings and of conduct, it must always be of use to us to know what exactly are the feelings of people and how those feelings tend to affect their conduct. In the present volume, however, where social traditions necessarily come in for consideration and where we have to discuss the growth of those traditions in the past and their probable evolution in the future, I am not sanguine that the objectivity of my attitude will be equally clear to the reader. I have here to set down not only what people actually feel and do but what I think they are tending to feel and do. That is a matter of estimation only, however widely and however cautiously it is approached; it cannot be a matter of absolute demonstration. I trust that those who have followed me in the past will bear with me still, even if it is impossible for them always to accept the conclusions I have myself reached.
In the earlier volumes of these Studies, I aimed to avoid sharing any personal opinions and to keep a strictly objective stance as much as possible. I hope I've succeeded in this, as I seem to have garnered the support and approval of a wide range of people, including both rational free-thinkers and orthodox believers, as well as those who embrace our current moral standards and those who disregard them. This is important because, regardless of our values regarding feelings and actions, it's useful to understand what people actually feel and how those feelings influence their behavior. In this volume, though, where social traditions are a key topic and we need to look at how these traditions have developed in the past and how they might evolve in the future, I’m not sure my objectivity will be as clear to the reader. Here, I will address not only what people genuinely feel and do but also what I believe they are likely to feel and do. This is purely a matter of estimation, no matter how thoroughly and carefully I analyze it; it cannot be proven absolutely. I hope that those who have followed my work previously will continue to do so, even if they can't always agree with the conclusions I've drawn.
HAVELOCK ELLIS.
Havelock Ellis.
Carbis Bay, Cornwall, England.
Carbis Bay, Cornwall, UK.
CONTENTS.
PREFACE.
CHAPTER I.—THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD.
The Child's Right to Choose Its Ancestry—How This is Effected—The Mother the Child's Supreme Parent—Motherhood and the Woman Movement—The Immense Importance of Motherhood—Infant Mortality and Its Causes—The Chief Cause in the Mother—The Need of Rest During Pregnancy—Frequency of Premature Birth—The Function of the State—Recent Advance in Puericulture—The Question of Coitus During Pregnancy—The Need of Rest During Lactation—The Mother's Duty to Suckle Her Child—The Economic Question—The Duty of the State—Recent Progress in the Protection of the Mother—The Fallacy of State Nurseries.
The Child's Right to Choose Its Ancestry—How This is Achieved—The Mother as the Child's Primary Parent—Motherhood and the Women's Movement—The Huge Importance of Motherhood—Infant Mortality and Its Causes—The Main Cause in the Mother—The Need for Rest During Pregnancy—The Frequency of Premature Births—The Role of the State—Recent Advances in Childcare—The Issue of Sexual Intercourse During Pregnancy—The Need for Rest During Breastfeeding—The Mother's Responsibility to Breastfeed Her Child—The Economic Consideration—The State's Responsibility—Recent Progress in Protecting Mothers—The Misconception of State-run Nurseries.
CHAPTER II.—SEXUAL EDUCATION.
Nurture Necessary as Well as Breed—Precocious Manifestations of the Sexual Impulse—Are they to be Regarded as Normal?—The Sexual Play of Children—The Emotion of Love in Childhood—Are Town Children More Precocious Sexually Than Country Children?—Children's Ideas Concerning the Origin of Babies—Need for Beginning the Sexual Education of Children in Early Years—The Importance of Early Training in Responsibility—Evil of the Old Doctrine of Silence in Matters of Sex—The Evil Magnified When Applied to Girls—The Mother the Natural and Best Teacher—The Morbid Influence of Artificial Mystery in Sex Matters—Books on Sexual Enlightenment of the Young—Nature of the Mother's Task—Sexual Education in the School—The Value of Botany—Zoölogy—Sexual Education After Puberty—The Necessity of Counteracting Quack Literature—Danger of Neglecting to Prepare for the First Onset of Menstruation—The Right Attitude Towards Woman's Sexual Life—The Vital Necessity of the Hygiene of Menstruation During Adolescence—Such Hygiene Compatible with the Educational and Social Equality of the Sexes—The Invalidism of Women Mainly Due to Hygienic Neglect—Good Influence of Physical Training on Women and Bad Influence of Athletics—The Evils of Emotional Suppression—Need of Teaching the Dignity of Sex—Influence of These Factors on a Woman's Fate in Marriage—Lectures and Addresses on Sexual Hygiene—The Doctor's Part in Sexual Education—Pubertal Initiation Into the Ideal World—The Place of the Religious and Ethical Teacher—The Initiation Rites of Savages Into Manhood and Womanhood—The Sexual Influence of Literature—The Sexual Influence of Art.
Nurture is just as important as genetics—Are early signs of sexual feelings considered normal?—Children's sexual play—The experience of love during childhood—Are kids in cities more sexually aware than those in the countryside?—Children's beliefs about where babies come from—The need to start sexual education early—The importance of teaching responsibility from a young age—The harm of the old "don't talk about sex" approach—This issue is worse for girls—Mothers are the natural and best educators—The negative impact of creating artificial secrecy around sex—Books aimed at educating young people about sex—The role of mothers in this education—Sex education in schools—The benefits of studying plants—Animals—Sex education after puberty—The necessity of opposing misleading literature—The risks of failing to prepare for the start of menstruation—The appropriate attitude towards women's sexuality—The crucial importance of menstrual hygiene during teenage years—This hygiene is compatible with the educational and social equality of genders—Women's health issues often stem from neglecting hygiene—The positive effects of physical training on women and the negative impact of athletics—The problems caused by suppressing emotions—The need to teach the dignity of sexuality—How these factors affect a woman's prospects in marriage—Lectures and talks on sexual health—The role of doctors in sexual education—Introducing young people to an ideal worldview—The role of religious and ethical teachers—Rituals in various cultures marking the transition to adulthood—The impact of literature on sexuality—The influence of art on sexuality.
CHAPTER III.—SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS.
The Greek Attitude Towards Nakedness—How the Romans Modified That Attitude—The Influence of Christianity—Nakedness in Mediæval Times—Evolution of the Horror of Nakedness—Concomitant Change in the Conception of Nakedness—Prudery—The Romantic Movement—Rise of a New Feeling in Regard to Nakedness—The Hygienic Aspect of Nakedness—How Children May Be Accustomed to Nakedness—Nakedness Not Inimical to Modesty—The Instinct of Physical Pride—The Value of Nakedness in Education—The Æsthetic Value of Nakedness—The Human Body as One of the Prime Tonics of Life—How Nakedness May Be Cultivated—The Moral Value of Nakedness.
The Greek View on Nakedness—How the Romans Changed That View—The Impact of Christianity—Nakedness in Medieval Times—The Development of the Dislike for Nakedness—The Concurrent Shift in the Understanding of Nakedness—Modesty—The Romantic Era—The Emergence of a New Attitude Toward Nakedness—The Health Aspects of Nakedness—How Children Can Get Used to Nakedness—Nakedness Not Opposed to Modesty—The Instinct for Physical Pride—The Educational Benefits of Nakedness—The Aesthetic Importance of Nakedness—The Human Body as One of Life's Essential Energizers—How to Embrace Nakedness—The Moral Benefits of Nakedness.
CHAPTER IV.—
The Conception of Sexual Love—The Attitude of Mediæval Asceticism—St. Bernard and St. Odo of Cluny—The Ascetic Insistence on the Proximity of the Sexual and Excretory Centres—Love as a Sacrament of Nature—The Idea of the Impurity of Sex in Primitive Religions Generally—Theories of the Origin of This Idea—The Anti-Ascetic Element in the Bible and Early Christianity—Clement of Alexandria—St. Augustine's Attitude—The Recognition of the Sacredness of the Body by Tertullian, Rufinus and Athanasius—The Reformation—The Sexual Instinct Regarded as Beastly—The Human Sexual Instinct Not Animal-like—Lust and Love—The Definition of Love—Love and Names for Love Unknown in Some Parts of the World—Romantic Love of Late Development in the White Race—The Mystery of Sexual Desire—Whether Love is a Delusion—The Spiritual as Well as the Physical Structure of the World in Part Built up on Sexual Love The Testimony of Men of Intellect to the Supremacy of Love.
The Concept of Sexual Love—The Perspective of Medieval Asceticism—St. Bernard and St. Odo of Cluny—The Ascetic Focus on the Closeness of Sexual and Excretory Functions—Love as a Natural Sacrament—The Notion of Sexual Impurity in Primitive Religions Overall—Theories on the Origin of This Notion—The Anti-Ascetic Themes in the Bible and Early Christianity—Clement of Alexandria—St. Augustine's View—The Acknowledgment of the Body's Sacredness by Tertullian, Rufinus, and Athanasius—The Reformation—The Sexual Instinct Viewed as Base—The Human Sexual Instinct Not Similar to That of Animals—Desire and Love—The Definition of Love—Love and Terms for Love Not Found in Some Areas of the World—Romantic Love Emerging Later in the White Race—The Mystery of Sexual Desire—Is Love a Deception?—The Spiritual and Physical Framework of the World Partly Constructed on Sexual Love—The Insights of Intellectuals on the Dominance of Love.
CHAPTER V.—THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY.
Chastity Essential to the Dignity of Love—The Eighteenth Century Revolt Against the Ideal of Chastity—Unnatural Forms of Chastity—The Psychological Basis of Asceticism—Asceticism and Chastity as Savage Virtues—The Significance of Tahiti—Chastity Among Barbarous Peoples—Chastity Among the Early Christians—Struggles of the Saints with the Flesh—The Romance of Christian Chastity—Its Decay in Mediæval Times—Aucassin et Nicolette and the New Romance of Chaste Love—The Unchastity of the Northern Barbarians—The Penitentials—Influence of the Renaissance and the Reformation—The Revolt Against Virginity as a Virtue—The Modern Conception of Chastity as a Virtue—The Influences That Favor the Virtue of Chastity—Chastity as a Discipline—The Value of Chastity for the Artist—Potency and Impotence in Popular Estimation—The Correct Definitions of Asceticism and Chastity.
Chastity is Essential to the Dignity of Love—The Eighteenth Century Rebellion Against the Ideal of Chastity—Unnatural Forms of Chastity—The Psychological Basis of Asceticism—Asceticism and Chastity as Primitive Virtues—The Significance of Tahiti—Chastity Among Indigenous Peoples—Chastity Among Early Christians—Saints' Struggles with the Flesh—The Romance of Christian Chastity—Its Decline in Medieval Times—Aucassin et Nicolette and the New Romance of Chaste Love—The Unchastity of the Northern Barbarians—The Penitentials—Influence of the Renaissance and the Reformation—The Rebellion Against Virginity as a Virtue—The Modern Understanding of Chastity as a Virtue—The Influences That Support the Virtue of Chastity—Chastity as a Discipline—The Value of Chastity for the Artist—Potency and Impotence in Popular Perception—The Correct Definitions of Asceticism and Chastity.
CHAPTER VI.—THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE.
The Influence of Tradition—The Theological Conception of Lust—Tendency of These Influences to Degrade Sexual Morality—Their Result in Creating the Problem of Sexual Abstinence—The Protests Against Sexual Abstinence—Sexual Abstinence and Genius—Sexual Abstinence in Women—The Advocates of Sexual Abstinence—Intermediate Attitude—Unsatisfactory Nature of the Whole Discussion—Criticism of the Conception of Sexual Abstinence—Sexual Abstinence as Compared to Abstinence from Food—No Complete Analogy—The Morality of Sexual Abstinence Entirely Negative—Is It the Physician's Duty to Advise Extra-Conjugal Sexual Intercourse?—Opinions of Those Who Affirm or Deny This Duty—The Conclusion Against Such Advice—The Physician Bound by the Social and Moral Ideas of His Age—The Physician as Reformer—Sexual Abstinence and Sexual Hygiene—Alcohol—The Influence of Physical and Mental Exercise—The Inadequacy of Sexual Hygiene in This Field—The Unreal Nature of the Conception of Sexual Abstinence—The Necessity of Replacing It by a More Positive Ideal.
The Influence of Tradition—The Theological View of Lust—How These Influences Lower Sexual Morality—Their Role in Creating the Issue of Sexual Abstinence—The Reactions Against Sexual Abstinence—Sexual Abstinence and Talent—Sexual Abstinence in Women—Supporters of Sexual Abstinence—Middle Ground—The Unproductive Nature of the Entire Discussion—Critique of the Idea of Sexual Abstinence—Comparing Sexual Abstinence to Food Abstinence—No Complete Comparison—The Morality of Sexual Abstinence is Entirely Negative—Is It the Doctor's Responsibility to Recommend Extramarital Sexual Activity?—Views of Those Who Support or Oppose This Responsibility—The Conclusion Against Such Recommendations—The Doctor is Bound by the Social and Moral Norms of Their Time—The Doctor as a Reformer—Sexual Abstinence and Sexual Health—Alcohol—The Impact of Physical and Mental Exercise—The Insufficiency of Sexual Health in This Area—The Unrealistic Nature of the Concept of Sexual Abstinence—The Need to Replace It with a More Positive Ideal.
CHAPTER VII.—PROSTITUTION.
I.
II.
The Origin and Development of Prostitution:—The Definition of Prostitution—Prostitution Among Savages—The Conditions Under Which Professional Prostitution Arises—Sacred Prostitution—The Rite of Mylitta—The Practice of Prostitution to Obtain a Marriage Portion—The Rise of Secular Prostitution in Greece—Prostitution in the East—India, China, Japan, etc.—Prostitution in Rome—The Influence of Christianity on Prostitution—The Effort to Combat Prostitution—The Mediæval Brothel—The Appearance of the Courtesan—Tullia D'Aragona—Veronica Franco—Ninon de Lenclos—Later Attempts to Eradicate Prostitution—The Regulation of Prostitution—Its Futility Becoming Recognized.
The Origin and Development of Prostitution:—The Definition of Prostitution—Prostitution Among Primitive Societies—The Conditions That Lead to Professional Prostitution—Sacred Prostitution—The Rites of Mylitta—Prostitution as a Means to Secure a Dowry—The Emergence of Secular Prostitution in Greece—Prostitution in the East—India, China, Japan, etc.—Prostitution in Rome—The Impact of Christianity on Prostitution—Efforts to Fight Prostitution—The Medieval Brothel—The Rise of the Courtesan—Tullia D'Aragona—Veronica Franco—Ninon de Lenclos—Subsequent Attempts to Eliminate Prostitution—The Regulation of Prostitution—Recognizing Its Futility.
III.
The Causes of Prostitution:—Prostitution as a Part of the Marriage System—The Complex Causation of Prostitution—The Motives Assigned by Prostitutes—(1) Economic Factor of Prostitution—Poverty Seldom the Chief Motive for Prostitution—But Economic Pressure Exerts a Real Influence—The Large Proportion of Prostitutes Recruited from Domestic Service—Significance of This Fact—(2) The Biological Factor of Prostitution—The So-called Born-Prostitute—Alleged Identity with the Born-Criminal—The Sexual Instinct in Prostitutes—The Physical and Psychic Characters of Prostitutes—(3) Moral Necessity as a Factor in the Existence of Prostitution—The Moral Advocates of Prostitution—The Moral Attitude of Christianity Towards Prostitution—The Attitude of Protestantism—Recent Advocates of the Moral Necessity of Prostitution—(4) Civilizational Value as a Factor of Prostitution—The Influence of Urban Life—The Craving for Excitement—Why Servant-girls so Often Turn to Prostitution—The Small Part Played by Seduction—Prostitutes Come Largely from the Country—The Appeal of Civilization Attracts Women to Prostitution—The Corresponding Attraction Felt by Men—The Prostitute as Artist and Leader of Fashion—The Charm of Vulgarity.
The Causes of Prostitution:—Prostitution as a Part of the Marriage System—The Complex Causes of Prostitution—The Reasons Given by Prostitutes—(1) Economic Factor of Prostitution—Poverty is Rarely the Main Reason for Prostitution—But Economic Pressure Has a Genuine Impact—A Large Number of Prostitutes Come from Domestic Work—The Importance of This Fact—(2) The Biological Factor of Prostitution—The So-called Born-Prostitute—Alleged Similarity to the Born-Criminal—The Sexual Instinct in Prostitutes—The Physical and Psychological Traits of Prostitutes—(3) Moral Necessity as a Factor in the Existence of Prostitution—The Moral Supporters of Prostitution—The Moral View of Christianity Towards Prostitution—The Stance of Protestantism—Recent Supporters of the Moral Necessity of Prostitution—(4) Civilizational Value as a Factor of Prostitution—The Impact of Urban Life—The Desire for Excitement—Why Domestic Workers Often Turn to Prostitution—The Small Role Played by Seduction—Prostitutes Mostly Come from Rural Areas—The Allure of Urban Life Draws Women to Prostitution—The Corresponding Attraction Felt by Men—The Prostitute as Artist and Trendsetter—The Appeal of Vulgarity.
IV.
The Present Social Attitude Towards Prostitution:—The Decay of the Brothel—The Tendency to the Humanization of Prostitution—The Monetary Aspects of Prostitution—The Geisha—The Hetaira—The Moral Revolt Against Prostitution—Squalid Vice Based on Luxurious Virtue—The Ordinary Attitude Towards Prostitutes—Its Cruelty Absurd—The Need of Reforming Prostitution—The Need of Reforming Marriage—These Two Needs Closely Correlated—The Dynamic Relationships Involved.
The Current Social View on Prostitution:—The Decline of the Brothel—The Shift Toward Humanizing Prostitution—The Financial Aspects of Prostitution—The Geisha—The Hetaira—The Moral Outcry Against Prostitution—Shameful Behavior Based on Lavish Values—The General Attitude Toward Prostitutes—Its Cruelty is Ridiculous—The Necessity of Reforming Prostitution—The Necessity of Reforming Marriage—These Two Necessities are Closely Linked—The Interconnected Relationships Involved.
CHAPTER VIII.—THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES.
The Significance of the Venereal Diseases—The History of Syphilis—The Problem of Its Origin—The Social Gravity of Syphilis—The Social Dangers of Gonorrhœa—The Modern Change in the Methods of Combating Venereal Diseases—Causes of the Decay of the System of Police Regulation—Necessity of Facing the Facts—The Innocent Victims of Venereal Diseases—Diseases Not Crimes—The Principle of Notification—The Scandinavian System—Gratuitous Treatment—Punishment For Transmitting Venereal Diseases—Sexual Education in Relation to Venereal Diseases—Lectures, Etc.—Discussion in Novels and on the Stage—The "Disgusting" Not the "Immoral".
The Importance of STDs—The History of Syphilis—The Issue of Its Origin—The Social Impact of Syphilis—The Social Risks of Gonorrhea—The Modern Shift in Approaches to Tackling STDs—Reasons for the Decline of Police Regulation—The Need to Confront the Facts—The Innocent Victims of STDs—Diseases Are Not Crimes—The Principle of Reporting—The Scandinavian Approach—Free Treatment—Punishment for Spreading STDs—Sex Education Related to STDs—Lectures, Etc.—Discussion in Novels and on Stage—The "Disgusting" vs. The "Immoral".
CHAPTER IX.—SEXUAL MORALITY.
Prostitution in Relation to Our Marriage System—Marriage and Morality—The Definition of the Term "Morality"—Theoretical Morality—Its Division Into Traditional Morality and Ideal Morality—Practical Morality—Practical Morality Based on Custom—The Only Subject of Scientific Ethics—The Reaction Between Theoretical and Practical Morality—Sexual Morality in the Past an Application of Economic Morality—The Combined Rigidity and Laxity of This Morality—The Growth of a Specific Sexual Morality and the Evolution of Moral Ideals—Manifestations of Sexual Morality—Disregard of the Forms of Marriage—Trial Marriage—Marriage After Conception of Child—Phenomena in Germany, Anglo-Saxon Countries, Russia, etc.—The Status of Woman—The Historical Tendency Favoring Moral Equality of Women with Men—The Theory of the Matriarchate—Mother-Descent—Women in Babylonia—Egypt—Rome—The Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries—The Historical Tendency Favoring Moral Inequality of Woman—The Ambiguous Influence of Christianity—Influence of Teutonic Custom and Feudalism—Chivalry—Woman in England—The Sale of Wives—The Vanishing Subjection of Woman—Inaptitude of the Modern Man to Domineer—The Growth of Moral Responsibility in Women—The Concomitant Development of Economic Independence—The Increase of Women Who Work—Invasion of the Modern Industrial Field by Women—In How Far This Is Socially Justifiable—The Sexual Responsibility of Women and Its Consequences—The Alleged Moral Inferiority of Women—The "Self-Sacrifice" of Women—Society Not Concerned with Sexual Relationships—Procreation the Sole Sexual Concern of the State—The Supreme Importance of Maternity.
Prostitution in Relation to Our Marriage System—Marriage and Morality—The Definition of "Morality"—Theoretical Morality—Its Division Into Traditional Morality and Ideal Morality—Practical Morality—Practical Morality Based on Custom—The Only Subject of Scientific Ethics—The Interaction Between Theoretical and Practical Morality—Historical Sexual Morality as an Application of Economic Morality—The Combined Rigidity and Laxity of This Morality—The Development of a Specific Sexual Morality and the Evolution of Moral Ideals—Manifestations of Sexual Morality—Disregard for the Forms of Marriage—Trial Marriage—Marriage After Conceiving a Child—Phenomena in Germany, Anglo-Saxon Countries, Russia, etc.—The Status of Women—The Historical Trend Favoring Moral Equality of Women and Men—The Theory of Matriarchy—Mother-Descent—Women in Babylonia—Egypt—Rome—The Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries—The Historical Trend Favoring Moral Inequality of Women—The Mixed Influence of Christianity—Influence of Teutonic Customs and Feudalism—Chivalry—Women in England—The Sale of Wives—The Erosion of Women's Subordination—The Inability of Modern Men to Dominate—The Rise of Moral Responsibility in Women—The Concurrent Development of Economic Independence—The Increase in Women Who Work—The Entrance of Women Into Modern Industries—To What Extent This Is Socially Justifiable—The Sexual Responsibility of Women and Its Consequences—The So-Called Moral Inferiority of Women—The "Self-Sacrifice" of Women—Society Not Concerned with Sexual Relationships—Procreation as the Only Sexual Concern of the State—The Supreme Importance of Motherhood.
CHAPTER X.—MARRIAGE.
The Definition of Marriage—Marriage Among Animals—The Predominance of Monogamy—The Question of Group Marriage—Monogamy a Natural Fact, Not Based on Human Law—The Tendency to Place the Form of Marriage Above the Fact of Marriage—The History of Marriage—Marriage in Ancient Rome—Germanic Influence on Marriage—Bride-Sale—The Ring—The Influence of Christianity on Marriage—The Great Extent of this Influence—The Sacrament of Matrimony—Origin and Growth of the Sacramental Conception—The Church Made Marriage a Public Act—Canon Law—Its Sound Core—Its Development—Its Confusions and Absurdities—Peculiarities of English Marriage Law—Influence of the Reformation on Marriage—The Protestant Conception of Marriage as a Secular Contract—The Puritan Reform of Marriage—Milton as the Pioneer of Marriage Reform—His Views on Divorce—The Backward Position of England in Marriage Reform—Criticism of the English Divorce Law—Traditions of the Canon Law Still Persistent—The Question of Damages for Adultery—Collusion as a Bar to Divorce—Divorce in France, Germany, Austria, Russia, etc.—The United States—Impossibility of Deciding by Statute the Causes for Divorce—Divorce by Mutual Consent—Its Origin and Development—Impeded by the Traditions of Canon Law—Wilhelm von Humboldt—Modern Pioneer Advocates of Divorce by Mutual Consent—The Arguments Against Facility of Divorce—The Interests of the Children—The Protection of Women—The Present Tendency of the Divorce Movement—Marriage Not a Contract—The Proposal of Marriage for a Term of Years—Legal Disabilities and Disadvantages in the Position of the Husband and the Wife—Marriage Not a Contract But a Fact—Only the Non-Essentials of Marriage, Not the Essentials, a Proper Matter for Contract—The Legal Recognition of Marriage as a Fact Without Any Ceremony—Contracts of the Person Opposed to Modern Tendencies—The Factor of Moral Responsibility—Marriage as an Ethical Sacrament—Personal Responsibility Involves Freedom—Freedom the Best Guarantee of Stability—False Ideas of Individualism—Modern Tendency of Marriage—With the Birth of a Child Marriage Ceases to be a Private Concern—Every Child Must Have a Legal Father and Mother—How This Can be Effected—The Firm Basis of Monogamy—The Question of Marriage Variations—Such Variations Not Inimical to Monogamy—The Most Common Variations—The Flexibility of Marriage Holds Variations in Check—Marriage Variations versus Prostitution—Marriage on a Reasonable and Humane Basis—Summary and Conclusion.
The Definition of Marriage—Marriage Among Animals—The Predominance of Monogamy—The Question of Group Marriage—Monogamy is a Natural Fact, Not Based on Human Law—The Tendency to Place the Form of Marriage Above the Fact of Marriage—The History of Marriage—Marriage in Ancient Rome—Germanic Influence on Marriage—Bride-Sale—The Ring—The Influence of Christianity on Marriage—The Great Extent of this Influence—The Sacrament of Matrimony—Origin and Growth of the Sacramental Conception—The Church Made Marriage a Public Act—Canon Law—Its Sound Core—Its Development—Its Confusions and Absurdities—Peculiarities of English Marriage Law—Influence of the Reformation on Marriage—The Protestant View of Marriage as a Secular Contract—The Puritan Reform of Marriage—Milton as the Pioneer of Marriage Reform—His Views on Divorce—The Backward Position of England in Marriage Reform—Criticism of the English Divorce Law—Traditions of the Canon Law Still Persistent—The Question of Damages for Adultery—Collusion as a Barrier to Divorce—Divorce in France, Germany, Austria, Russia, etc.—The United States—The Impossibility of Deciding by Statute the Causes for Divorce—Divorce by Mutual Consent—Its Origin and Development—Impeded by the Traditions of Canon Law—Wilhelm von Humboldt—Modern Pioneer Advocates of Divorce by Mutual Consent—The Arguments Against Easy Divorce—The Interests of the Children—The Protection of Women—The Current Trend of the Divorce Movement—Marriage is Not a Contract—The Proposal of Marriage for a Fixed Term—Legal Disabilities and Disadvantages in the Position of the Husband and the Wife—Marriage is Not a Contract But a Fact—Only the Non-Essentials of Marriage, Not the Essentials, Are Proper Matters for Contract—The Legal Recognition of Marriage as a Fact Without Any Ceremony—Contracts of the Person Opposed to Modern Tendencies—The Factor of Moral Responsibility—Marriage as an Ethical Sacrament—Personal Responsibility Involves Freedom—Freedom is the Best Guarantee of Stability—False Ideas of Individualism—Modern Tendency in Marriage—With the Birth of a Child, Marriage Ceases to be a Private Concern—Every Child Must Have a Legal Father and Mother—How This Can be Achieved—The Firm Basis of Monogamy—The Question of Variations in Marriage—Such Variations Are Not Hostile to Monogamy—The Most Common Variations—The Flexibility of Marriage Keeps Variations in Check—Marriage Variations versus Prostitution—Marriage on a Reasonable and Humane Basis—Summary and Conclusion.
CHAPTER XI.—THE ART OF LOVE.
Marriage Not Only for Procreation—Theologians on the Sacramentum Solationis—Importance of the Art of Love—The Basis of Stability in Marriage and the Condition for Right Procreation—The Art of Love the Bulwark Against Divorce—The Unity of Love and Marriage a Principle of Modern Morality—Christianity and the Art of Love—Ovid—The Art of Love Among Primitive Peoples—Sexual Initiation in Africa and Elsewhere—The Tendency to Spontaneous Development of the Art of Love in Early Life—Flirtation—Sexual Ignorance in Women—The Husband's Place in Sexual Initiation—Sexual Ignorance in Men—The Husband's Education for Marriage—The Injury Done by the Ignorance of Husbands—The Physical and Mental Results of Unskilful Coitus—Women Understand the Art of Love Better Than Men—Ancient and Modern Opinions Concerning Frequency of Coitus—Variation in Sexual Capacity—The Sexual Appetite—The Art of Love Based on the Biological Facts of Courtship—The Art of Pleasing Women—The Lover Compared to the Musician—The Proposal as a Part of Courtship—Divination in the Art of Love—The Importance of the Preliminaries in Courtship—The Unskilful Husband Frequently the Cause of the Frigid Wife—The Difficulty of Courtship—Simultaneous Orgasm—The Evils of Incomplete Gratification in Women—Coitus Interruptus—Coitus Reservatus—The Human Method of Coitus—Variations in Coitus—Posture in Coitus—The Best Time for Coitus—The Influence of Coitus in Marriage—The Advantages of Absence in Marriage—The Risks of Absence—Jealousy—The Primitive Function of Jealousy—Its Predominance Among Animals, Savages, etc, and in Pathological States—An Anti-Social Emotion—Jealousy Incompatible With the Progress of Civilization—The Possibility of Loving More Than One Person at a Time—Platonic Friendship—The Conditions Which Make It Possible—The Maternal Element in Woman's Love—The Final Development of Conjugal Love—The Problem of Love One of the Greatest Of Social Questions.
Marriage Isn't Just for Having Kids—Theologians on the Sacramentum Solationis—Importance of the Art of Love—The Foundation of Stability in Marriage and the Requirement for Healthy Procreation—The Art of Love as a Defense Against Divorce—The Unity of Love and Marriage as a Principle of Modern Morality—Christianity and the Art of Love—Ovid—The Art of Love Among Early Societies—Sexual Initiation in Africa and Beyond—The Trend Toward Natural Development of the Art of Love in Early Years—Flirting—Sexual Ignorance in Women—The Husband's Role in Sexual Education—Sexual Ignorance in Men—The Husband's Preparation for Marriage—The Harm Caused by Husbands' Ignorance—The Physical and Mental Consequences of Poor Coitus—Women Understanding the Art of Love Better Than Men—Ancient and Modern Views on the Frequency of Coitus—Variability in Sexual Capacity—The Sexual Drive—The Art of Love Rooted in Biological Courtship Facts—The Art of Pleasing Women—The Lover Compared to a Musician—The Proposal as a Part of Dating—Insight in the Art of Love—The Importance of Initial Steps in Dating—The Inexperienced Husband Often Causes a Cold Wife—The Challenges of Courtship—Mutual Orgasm—The Issues of Incomplete Satisfaction in Women—Coitus Interruptus—Coitus Reservatus—The Human Method of Coitus—Variations in Coitus—Positions in Coitus—The Best Time for Coitus—The Impact of Coitus in Marriage—The Benefits of Absence in Marriage—The Risks of Absence—Jealousy—The Basic Role of Jealousy—Its Dominance Among Animals, Primitive People, etc., and in Pathological Conditions—A Disruptive Emotion—Jealousy Incompatible With Progress in Society—The Potential for Loving More Than One Person at Once—Platonic Friendship—The Conditions That Make It Possible—The Maternal Element in a Woman's Love—The Ultimate Development of Marital Love—The Love Problem as One of the Greatest Social Issues.
CHAPTER XII.—THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION.
The Relationship of the Science of Procreation to the Art of Love—Sexual Desire and Sexual Pleasure as the Conditions of Conception—Reproduction Formerly Left to Caprice and Lust—The Question of Procreation as a Religious Question—The Creed of Eugenics—Ellen Key and Sir Francis Galton—Our Debt to Posterity—The Problem of Replacing Natural Selection—The Origin and Development of Eugenics—The General Acceptance of Eugenical Principles To-day—The Two Channels by Which Eugenical Principles are Becoming Embodied in Practice—The Sense of Sexual Responsibility in Women—The Rejection of Compulsory Motherhood—The Privilege of Voluntary Motherhood—Causes of the Degradation of Motherhood—The Control of Conception—Now Practiced by the Majority of the Population in Civilized Countries—The Fallacy of "Racial Suicide"—Are Large Families a Stigma of Degeneration?—Procreative Control the Outcome of Natural and Civilized Progress—The Growth of Neo-Malthusian Beliefs and Practices—Facultative Sterility as Distinct from Neo-Malthusianism—The Medical and Hygienic Necessity of Control of Conception—Preventive Methods—Abortion—The New Doctrine of the Duty to Practice Abortion—How Far is this Justifiable?—Castration as a Method of Controlling Procreation—Negative Eugenics and Positive Eugenics—The Question of Certificates for Marriage—The Inadequacy of Eugenics by Act of Parliament—The Quickening of the Social Conscience in Regard to Heredity—Limitations to the Endowment of Motherhood—The Conditions Favorable to Procreation—Sterility—The Question of Artificial Fecundation—The Best Age of Procreation—The Question of Early Motherhood—The Best Time for Procreation—The Completion of the Divine Cycle of Life.
The Relationship Between Reproductive Science and the Art of Love—Sexual Desire and Pleasure as Key Factors for Conception—Reproduction Previously Left to Chance and Desire—The Procreation Debate as a Religious Matter—The Beliefs of Eugenics—Ellen Key and Sir Francis Galton—Our Responsibility to Future Generations—The Challenge of Replacing Natural Selection—The Origins and Evolution of Eugenics—The Widespread Acceptance of Eugenic Principles Today—The Two Ways Eugenic Principles Are Being Implemented—The Awareness of Sexual Responsibility Among Women—The Rejection of Forced Motherhood—The Right to Choose Motherhood—Reasons for the Deterioration of Motherhood—The Control of Conception—Now Practiced by Most People in Developed Countries—The Myth of "Racial Suicide"—Are Large Families a Sign of Decline?—Reproductive Control as a Result of Natural and Social Advancement—The Rise of Neo-Malthusian Beliefs and Practices—Facultative Sterility as Different from Neo-Malthusianism—The Medical and Health Needs for Contraceptive Control—Preventive Methods—Abortion—The New Belief in the Duty to Have Abortions—How Justifiable Is This?—Castration as a Measure for Controlling Procreation—Negative and Positive Eugenics—The Issue of Marriage Certificates—The Insufficiency of Eugenics Through Legislation—The Awakening of Social Awareness Regarding Heredity—Limits on the Advantages of Motherhood—Conditions Favorable for Conception—Infertility—The Issue of Artificial Insemination—The Ideal Age for Conception—The Topic of Young Motherhood—The Best Timing for Conception—The Fulfillment of the Divine Cycle of Life.
POSTSCRIPT.
INDEX OF AUTHORS.
INDEX OF SUBJECTS.
CHAPTER I.
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD.
The Child's Right to Choose Its Ancestry—How This is Effected—The Mother the Child's Supreme Parent—Motherhood and the Woman Movement—The Immense Importance of Motherhood—Infant Mortality and Its Causes—The Chief Cause in the Mother—The Need of Rest During Pregnancy—Frequency of Premature Birth—The Function of the State—Recent Advance in Puericulture—The Question of Coitus During Pregnancy—The Need of Rest During Lactation—The Mother's Duty to Suckle Her Child—The Economic Question—The Duty of the State—Recent Progress in the Protection of the Mother—The Fallacy of State Nurseries.
The Child's Right to Choose Its Ancestry—How This is Achieved—The Mother the Child's Main Parent—Motherhood and the Women's Movement—The Huge Significance of Motherhood—Infant Mortality and Its Causes—The Main Cause in the Mother—The Need for Rest During Pregnancy—How Often Premature Birth Happens—The Role of the State—Recent Advances in Childcare—The Debate on Intercourse During Pregnancy—The Need for Rest During Breastfeeding—The Mother's Responsibility to Breastfeed Her Child—The Economic Issue—The Role of the State—Recent Improvements in Protecting Mothers—The Misconception of State Nurseries.
A man's sexual nature, like all else that is most essential in him, is rooted in a soil that was formed very long before his birth. In this, as in every other respect, he draws the elements of his life from his ancestors, however new the recombination may be and however greatly it may be modified by subsequent conditions. A man's destiny stands not in the future but in the past. That, rightly considered, is the most vital of all vital facts. Every child thus has a right to choose his own ancestors. Naturally he can only do this vicariously, through his parents. It is the most serious and sacred duty of the future father to choose one half of the ancestral and hereditary character of his future child; it is the most serious and sacred duty of the future mother to make a similar choice.[1] In choosing each other they have between them chosen the whole ancestry of their child. They have determined the stars that will rule his fate.
A man's sexual nature, like everything else that is essential to him, is rooted in a foundation that was established long before he was born. In this, as in every other aspect, he inherits the elements of his life from his ancestors, no matter how new the combination may be or how much it is shaped by later circumstances. A man's destiny lies not in the future but in the past. That, when considered properly, is the most crucial of all important facts. Every child has the right to choose their own ancestors. Naturally, they can only do this indirectly, through their parents. It is the most serious and sacred responsibility of the future father to select one half of the ancestral and hereditary traits of his future child; it is equally the most serious and sacred responsibility of the future mother to make a similar selection. [1] By choosing each other, they have collectively chosen the entire ancestry of their child. They have determined the stars that will influence his fate.
In the past that fateful determination has usually been made helplessly, ignorantly, almost unconsciously. It has either been guided by an instinct which, on the whole, has worked out fairly well, or controlled by economic interests of the results of which so much cannot be said, or left to the risks of lower than bestial chances which can produce nothing but evil. In the future we cannot but have faith—for all the hope of humanity must rest on that faith—that a new guiding impulse, reinforcing natural instinct and becoming in time an inseparable accompaniment of it, will lead civilized man on his racial course. Just as in the past the race has, on the whole, been moulded by a natural, and in part sexual, selection, that was unconscious of itself and ignorant of the ends it made towards, so in the future the race will be moulded by deliberate selection, the creative energy of Nature becoming self-conscious in the civilized brain of man. This is not a faith which has its source in a vague hope. The problems of the individual life are linked on to the fate of the racial life, and again and again we shall find as we ponder the individual questions we are here concerned with, that at all points they ultimately converge towards this same racial end.
In the past, that crucial decision has often been made helplessly, ignorantly, and almost unconsciously. It has either been driven by an instinct that has generally worked out fairly well, or influenced by economic interests of which not much can be said, or left to the unpredictable risks that can only lead to negative outcomes. In the future, we must have faith—since all hope for humanity hinges on that faith—that a new guiding force, which supports natural instinct and eventually becomes a seamless part of it, will steer civilized people on their collective path. Just as in the past the race has generally been shaped by natural, partly sexual, selection that was unaware of itself and the goals it was working towards, in the future the race will be shaped by intentional selection, with Nature's creative energy becoming self-aware in the civilized mind of humanity. This is not a belief rooted in vague hope. The challenges of individual lives are connected to the fate of the race as a whole, and time and again, as we reflect on the individual issues we are addressing, we will find that they ultimately converge towards this same collective goal.
Since we have here, therefore, to follow out the sexual relationships of the individual as they bear on society, it will be convenient at this point to put aside the questions of ancestry and to accept the individual as, with hereditary constitution already determined, he lies in his mother's womb.
Since we're focusing on the sexual relationships of individuals and their impact on society, it makes sense to put aside questions of ancestry for now and to accept the individual as they are, with their hereditary traits already established, while they are still in their mother's womb.
It is the mother who is the child's supreme parent. At various points in zoölogical evolution it has seemed possible that the functions that we now know as those of maternity would be largely and even equally shared by the male parent. Nature has tried various experiments in this direction, among the fishes, for instance, and even among birds. But reasonable and excellent as these experiments were, and though they were sufficiently sound to secure their perpetuation unto this day, it remains true that it was not along these lines that Man was destined to emerge. Among all the mammal predecessors of Man, the male is an imposing and important figure in the early days of courtship, but after conception has once been secured the mother plays the chief part in the racial life. The male must be content to forage abroad and stand on guard when at home in the ante-chamber of the family. When she has once been impregnated the female animal angrily rejects the caresses she had welcomed so coquettishly before, and even in Man the place of the father at the birth of his child is not a notably dignified or comfortable one. Nature accords the male but a secondary and comparatively humble place in the home, the breeding-place of the race; he may compensate himself if he will, by seeking adventure and renown in the world outside. The mother is the child's supreme parent, and during the period from conception to birth the hygiene of the future man can only be affected by influences which work through her.
It’s the mother who is the child's primary parent. At various points in evolution, it seemed possible that the roles we now associate with motherhood could be largely and even equally shared by the father. Nature has tried different approaches in this area, such as among fish and even birds. But while these experiments were reasonable and effective enough to survive to this day, it’s still true that it wasn’t the path that led to the emergence of humans. Among all the mammal ancestors of humans, the male plays a significant role during initial courtship, but once conception happens, the mother takes the lead in the life of the species. The father must be satisfied with foraging outside and standing guard at home in the family’s waiting room. Once she is pregnant, the female animal rejects the advances she had once playfully enjoyed, and even in humans, the father’s role during childbirth isn’t particularly dignified or comfortable. Nature gives the male a secondary and relatively humble role in the home, the breeding ground of the species; he might find fulfillment instead by seeking adventure and glory in the outside world. The mother is the child’s primary parent, and from conception to birth, the well-being of the future child depends solely on influences that come through her.
Fundamental and elementary as is the fact of the predominant position of the mother in relation to the life of the race, incontestable as it must seem to all those who have traversed the volumes of these Studies up to the present point, it must be admitted that it has sometimes been forgotten or ignored. In the great ages of humanity it has indeed been accepted as a central and sacred fact. In classic Rome at one period the house of the pregnant woman was adorned with garlands, and in Athens it was an inviolable sanctuary where even the criminal might find shelter. Even amid the mixed influences of the exuberantly vital times which preceded the outburst of the Renaissance, the ideally beautiful woman, as pictures still show, was the pregnant woman. But it has not always been so. At the present time, for instance, there can be no doubt that we are but beginning to emerge from a period during which this fact was often disputed and denied, both in theory and in practice, even by women themselves. This was notably the case both in England and America, and it is probably owing in large part to the unfortunate infatuation which led women in these lands to follow after masculine ideals that at the present moment the inspirations of progress in women's movements come mainly to-day from the women of other lands. Motherhood and the future of the race were systematically belittled. Paternity is but a mere incident, it was argued, in man's life: why should maternity be more than a mere incident in woman's life? In England, by a curiously perverted form of sexual attraction, women were so fascinated by the glamour that surrounded men that they desired to suppress or forget all the facts of organic constitution which made them unlike men, counting their glory as their shame, and sought the same education as men, the same occupations as men, even the same sports. As we know, there was at the origin an element of rightness in this impulse.[2] It was absolutely right in so far as it was a claim for freedom from artificial restriction, and a demand for economic independence. But it became mischievous and absurd when it developed into a passion for doing, in all respects, the same things as men do; how mischievous and how absurd we may realize if we imagine men developing a passion to imitate the ways and avocations of women. Freedom is only good when it is a freedom to follow the laws of one's own nature; it ceases to be freedom when it becomes a slavish attempt to imitate others, and would be disastrous if it could be successful.[3]
Fundamental and basic as it is that mothers play a key role in the survival of the human race, and undeniable as it seems to anyone who has read these Studies so far, it's important to acknowledge that this truth has sometimes been overlooked or ignored. Throughout the great eras of humanity, this reality was seen as a vital and sacred fact. In ancient Rome, for example, a pregnant woman's home would be decorated with garlands, and in Athens, it was considered a sacred space where even criminals could find refuge. Even during the dynamic times leading up to the Renaissance, the most beautiful woman, as depicted in art, was the pregnant woman. However, that hasn't always been the case. Today, for instance, we are just beginning to emerge from a time when this reality was often questioned and denied, both in theory and practice, even by women themselves. This was particularly true in England and America, where many women were unfortunately captivated by masculine ideals. That's why, right now, much of the momentum in women's movements is driven by women from other countries. Motherhood and the future of humanity were consistently downplayed. It was argued that fatherhood is just a minor part of a man's life—so why should motherhood be seen as anything more than a minor part of a woman's life? In England, through a strangely twisted form of attraction, women became so enamored by the allure surrounding men that they sought to ignore or suppress all the biological differences that set them apart, viewing those differences as a source of shame, and pursuing the same education, careers, and even sports as men. As we know, there was initially a valid element to this desire.[2] It was entirely justifiable as a push for freedom from unnecessary limitations and a call for economic independence. However, it turned harmful and ridiculous when it morphed into a strong desire to do everything men do; we can understand how damaging and absurd this would be if we imagine men becoming obsessed with mimicking women's roles and activities. Freedom is only valuable when it allows individuals to follow their own nature; it stops being true freedom when it devolves into a mindless effort to copy someone else, and would be devastating if achieved.[3]
At the present day this movement on the theoretical side has ceased to possess any representatives who exert serious influence. Yet its practical results are still prominently exhibited in England and the other countries in which it has been felt. Infantile mortality is enormous, and in England at all events is only beginning to show a tendency to diminish; motherhood is without dignity, and the vitality of mothers is speedily crushed, so that often they cannot so much as suckle their infants; ignorant girl-mothers give their infants potatoes and gin; on every hand we are told of the evidence of degeneracy in the race, or if not in the race, at all events, in the young individuals of to-day.
At present, this movement has lost its influential representatives on the theoretical side. However, its practical results are still clearly visible in England and other countries where it has had an impact. Infant mortality rates are extremely high, and in England, they are just starting to decline; motherhood lacks dignity, and the health of mothers is quickly worn down, often leaving them unable to breastfeed their babies. Uninformed young mothers are feeding their infants potatoes and gin. Everywhere we look, there are signs of decline in the population, or at least in the youth of today.
It would be out of place, and would lead us too far, to discuss here these various practical outcomes of the foolish attempt to belittle the immense racial importance of motherhood. It is enough here to touch on the one point of the excess of infantile mortality.
It would be inappropriate and would take us too far off track to discuss here the various practical results of the misguided effort to downplay the enormous significance of motherhood in terms of race. It’s sufficient to mention here the one point regarding the high rate of infant mortality.
In England—which is not from the social point of view in a very much worse condition than most countries, for in Austria and Russia the infant mortality is higher still, though in Australia and New Zealand much lower, but still excessive—more than one-fourth of the total number of deaths every year is of infants under one year of age. In the opinion of medical officers of health who are in the best position to form an opinion, about one-half of this mortality, roughly speaking, is absolutely preventable. Moreover, it is doubtful whether there is any real movement of decrease in this mortality; during the past half century it has sometimes slightly risen and sometimes slightly fallen, and though during the past few years the general movement of mortality for children under five in England and Wales has shown a tendency to decrease, in London (according to J. F. J. Sykes, although Sir Shirley Murphy has attempted to minimize the significance of these figures) the infantile mortality rate for the first three months of life actually rose from 69 per 1,000 in the period 1888-1892 to 75 per 1,000 in the period 1898-1901. (This refers, it must be remembered, to the period before the introduction of the Notification of Births Act.) In any case, although the general mortality shows a marked tendency to improvement there is certainly no adequately corresponding improvement in the infantile mortality. This is scarcely surprising, when we realize that there has been no change for the better, but rather for the worse, in the conditions under which our infants are born and reared. Thus William Hall, who has had an intimate knowledge extending over fifty-six years of the slums of Leeds, and has weighed and measured many thousands of slum children, besides examining over 120,000 boys and girls as to their fitness for factory labor, states (British Medical Journal, October 14, 1905) that "fifty years ago the slum mother was much more sober, cleanly, domestic, and motherly than she is to-day; she was herself better nourished and she almost always suckled her children, and after weaning they received more nutritious bone-making food, and she was able to prepare more wholesome food at home." The system of compulsory education has had an unfortunate influence in exerting a strain on the parents and worsening the conditions of the home. For, excellent as education is in itself, it is not the primary need of life, and has been made compulsory before the more essential things of life have been made equally compulsory. How absolutely unnecessary this great mortality is may be shown, without evoking the good example of Australia and New Zealand, by merely comparing small English towns; thus while in Guildford the infantile death rate is 65 per thousand, in Burslem it is 205 per thousand.
In England—which isn't socially in a much worse situation than many other countries, as Austria and Russia have even higher infant mortality rates, while Australia and New Zealand have much lower rates, although still excessive—over one-fourth of all yearly deaths are infants under one year old. According to health professionals who are most qualified to make such assessments, about half of these deaths are basically preventable. Furthermore, it's questionable whether there's any real progress in reducing this mortality; over the last fifty years, it has occasionally gone up and sometimes gone down, and even though in recent years the overall mortality rate for children under five in England and Wales seems to have decreased, in London (according to J. F. J. Sykes, although Sir Shirley Murphy tried to downplay the importance of these numbers) the infant mortality rate for the first three months of life actually increased from 69 per 1,000 during 1888-1892 to 75 per 1,000 during 1898-1901. (This refers to the period before the Notification of Births Act was implemented.) Regardless, while the overall mortality rate shows significant improvement, there's definitely no corresponding improvement in infant mortality. This isn't surprising when we recognize that conditions for our infants at birth and during their upbringing have not improved, but have actually worsened. William Hall, who has had firsthand knowledge of the slums in Leeds for fifty-six years and has measured and weighed thousands of slum children, in addition to examining over 120,000 boys and girls for their suitability for factory work, states (British Medical Journal, October 14, 1905) that "fifty years ago, the slum mother was much more sober, clean, home-oriented, and nurturing than she is today; she was better nourished herself and usually breastfed her children. After weaning, the children received more nutritious food that supports growth, and she was able to cook healthier meals at home." The system of compulsory education has sadly put extra pressure on parents and negatively impacted home conditions. Because, although education is excellent in itself, it isn't the most basic requirement of life and has been made mandatory before other essential needs have been equally prioritized. The sheer unnecessary nature of this high mortality can be demonstrated by simply looking at smaller English towns; for instance, while the infant mortality rate in Guildford is 65 per thousand, in Burslem it’s 205 per thousand.
It is sometimes said that infantile mortality is an economic question, and that with improvement in wages it would cease. This is only true to a limited extent and under certain conditions. In Australia there is no grinding poverty, but the deaths of infants under one year of age are still between 80 and 90 per thousand, and one-third of this mortality, according to Hooper (British Medical Journal, 1908, vol. ii, p. 289), being due to the ignorance of mothers and the dislike to suckling, is easily preventable. The employment of married women greatly diminishes the poverty of a family, but nothing can be worse for the welfare of the woman as mother, or for the welfare of her child. Reid, the medical officer of health for Staffordshire, where there are two large centres of artisan population with identical health conditions, has shown that in the northern centre, where a very large number of women are engaged in factories, still-births are three times as frequent as in the southern centre, where there are practically no trade employments for women; the frequency of abnormalities is also in the same ratio. The superiority of Jewish over Christian children, again, and their lower infantile mortality, seem to be entirely due to the fact that Jewesses are better mothers. "The Jewish children in the slums," says William Hall (British Medical Journal, October 14, 1905), speaking from wide and accurate knowledge, "were superior in weight, in teeth, and in general bodily development, and they seemed less susceptible to infectious disease. Yet these Jews were overcrowded, they took little exercise, and their unsanitary environment was obvious. The fact was, their children were much better nourished. The pregnant Jewess was more cared for, and no doubt supplied better nutriment to the fœtus. After the children were born 90 per cent. received breast-milk, and during later childhood they were abundantly fed on bone-making material; eggs and oil, fish, fresh vegetables, and fruit entered largely into their diet." G. Newman, in his important and comprehensive book on Infant Mortality, emphasizes the conclusion that "first of all we need a higher standard of physical motherhood." The problem of infantile mortality, he declares (page 259), is not one of sanitation alone, or housing, or indeed of poverty as such, "but is mainly a question of motherhood."
It is sometimes said that infant mortality is an economic issue and that improving wages would solve it. This is only partially true and depends on certain conditions. In Australia, there is no extreme poverty, yet the death rate of infants under one year old is still between 80 and 90 per thousand. According to Hooper (British Medical Journal, 1908, vol. ii, p. 289), one-third of this mortality is due to mothers' ignorance and their reluctance to breastfeed, both of which are easily preventable. The employment of married women significantly reduces a family's poverty, but it adversely affects the woman's role as a mother and the well-being of her child. Reid, the medical officer of health for Staffordshire, where there are two major centers of artisanal population with similar health conditions, demonstrated that in the northern center, where a large number of women work in factories, stillbirths occur three times more often than in the southern center, where there are practically no job opportunities for women; abnormality rates reflect the same disparity. The superiority of Jewish children compared to Christian children and their lower infant mortality seems to stem from the fact that Jewish mothers tend to be better caregivers. "The Jewish children in the slums," says William Hall (British Medical Journal, October 14, 1905), based on extensive and accurate knowledge, "were superior in weight, dental health, and overall physical development, and they appeared to be less prone to infectious diseases. Yet these Jewish families were overcrowded, they exercised little, and their unsanitary surroundings were clear. The truth was, their children were much better nourished. The pregnant Jewish woman received better care and likely provided superior nutrition to her fetus. After birth, 90 percent were breastfed, and during their later childhood, they had a diet rich in essential nutrients; eggs, oil, fish, fresh vegetables, and fruits were staples." G. Newman, in his significant and thorough book on Infant Mortality, underscores the need for "a higher standard of physical motherhood." He states (page 259) that the problem of infant mortality is not just about sanitation, housing, or even poverty in itself, "but is mainly a question of motherhood."
The fundamental need of the pregnant woman is rest. Without a large degree of maternal rest there can be no puericulture.[4] The task of creating a man needs the whole of a woman's best energies, more especially during the three months before birth. It cannot be subordinated to the tax on strength involved by manual or mental labor, or even strenuous social duties and amusements. The numerous experiments and observations which have been made during recent years in Maternity Hospitals, more especially in France, have shown conclusively that not only the present and future well-being of the mother and the ease of her confinement, but the fate of the child, are immensely influenced by rest during the last month of pregnancy. "Every working woman is entitled to rest during the last three months of her pregnancy." This formula was adopted by the International Congress of Hygiene in 1900, but it cannot be practically carried out except by the coöperation of the whole community. For it is not enough to say that a woman ought to rest during pregnancy; it is the business of the community to ensure that that rest is duly secured. The woman herself, and her employer, we may be certain, will do their best to cheat the community, but it is the community which suffers, both economically and morally, when a woman casts her inferior children into the world, and in its own interests the community is forced to control both employer and employed. We can no longer allow it to be said, in Bouchacourt's words, that "to-day the dregs of the human species—the blind, the deaf-mute, the degenerate, the nervous, the vicious, the idiotic, the imbecile, the cretins and epileptics—are better protected than pregnant women."[5]
The primary need of a pregnant woman is rest. Without sufficient maternal rest, there can be no puericulture.[4] Creating a child requires all of a woman’s best energy, especially during the last three months before birth. This essential task cannot be compromised by the demands of physical or mental labor, or even intense social obligations and entertainment. Numerous studies and observations conducted in recent years at Maternity Hospitals, particularly in France, have clearly shown that not only the current and future well-being of the mother and the ease of her delivery but also the fate of the child are greatly affected by rest in the last month of pregnancy. "Every working woman is entitled to rest during the last three months of her pregnancy." This principle was endorsed by the International Congress of Hygiene in 1900, but it can only be effectively implemented with the cooperation of the entire community. It’s not enough to simply state that a woman should rest during pregnancy; it is the community's responsibility to ensure that she gets that rest. We can be certain that both the woman and her employer will try to cut corners, but it’s the community that suffers economically and morally when a woman brings less healthy children into the world, and for its own benefit, the community must regulate both employers and employees. We can no longer allow it to be said, in Bouchacourt's words, that "today the dregs of the human species—the blind, the deaf-mute, the degenerate, the nervous, the vicious, the idiotic, the imbecile, the cretins and epileptics—are better protected than pregnant women."[5]
Pinard, who must always be honored as one of the founders of eugenics, has, together with his pupils, done much to prepare the way for the acceptance of this simple but important principle by making clear the grounds on which it is based. From prolonged observations on the pregnant women of all classes Pinard has shown conclusively that women who rest during pregnancy have finer children than women who do not rest. Apart from the more general evils of work during pregnancy, Pinard found that during the later months it had a tendency to press the uterus down into the pelvis, and so cause the premature birth of undeveloped children, while labor was rendered more difficult and dangerous (see, e.g., Pinard, Gazette des Hôpitaux, Nov. 28, 1895, Id., Annales de Gynécologie, Aug., 1898).
Pinard, who should always be recognized as one of the founders of eugenics, along with his students, has done a lot to pave the way for the acceptance of this simple yet important principle by clarifying the reasons behind it. Through extensive observations of pregnant women from various backgrounds, Pinard has conclusively shown that women who take time to rest during pregnancy have healthier children than those who do not. Besides the broader negative effects of working during pregnancy, Pinard discovered that in the later months, it can push the uterus down into the pelvis, leading to premature births of underdeveloped children, while also making labor more difficult and dangerous (see, e.g., Pinard, Gazette des Hôpitaux, Nov. 28, 1895, Id., Annales de Gynécologie, Aug., 1898).
Letourneux has studied the question whether repose during pregnancy is necessary for women whose professional work is only slightly fatiguing. He investigated 732 successive confinements at the Clinique Baudelocque in Paris. He found that 137 women engaged in fatiguing occupations (servants, cooks, etc.) and not resting during pregnancy, produced children with an average weight of 3,081 grammes; 115 women engaged in only slightly fatiguing occupations (dressmakers, milliners, etc.) and also not resting during pregnancy, had children with an average weight of 3,130 grammes, a slight but significant difference, in view of the fact that the women of the first group were large and robust, while those of the second group were of slight and elegant build. Again, comparing groups of women who rested during pregnancy, it was found that the women accustomed to fatiguing work had children with an average weight of 3,319 grammes, while those accustomed to less fatiguing work had children with an average weight of 3,318 grammes. The difference between repose and non-repose is thus considerable, while it also enables robust women exercising a fatiguing occupation to catch up, though not to surpass, the frailer women exercising a less fatiguing occupation. We see, too, that even in the comparatively unfatiguing occupations of milliners, etc., rest during pregnancy still remains important, and cannot safely be dispensed with. "Society," Letourneux concludes, "must guarantee rest to women not well off during a part of pregnancy. It will be repaid the cost of doing so by the increased vigor of the children thus produced" (Letourneux, De l'Influence de la Profession de la Mère sur le Poids de l'Enfant, Thèse de Paris, 1897).
Letourneux explored whether rest during pregnancy is necessary for women whose jobs are only mildly tiring. He studied 732 consecutive births at the Clinique Baudelocque in Paris. He found that 137 women in demanding jobs (like maids, cooks, etc.) who didn’t rest during pregnancy had children with an average weight of 3,081 grams; meanwhile, 115 women in less demanding jobs (like dressmakers, milliners, etc.) who also didn’t rest during pregnancy had children weighing an average of 3,130 grams. This shows a slight but meaningful difference, especially since the first group consisted of larger and sturdier women, while the second group featured more delicate and slender women. Additionally, when comparing women who rested during pregnancy, it was noted that those from physically demanding jobs had children averaging 3,319 grams, while those from less physically demanding jobs had kids with an average weight of 3,318 grams. The impact of rest is significant and allows stronger women in demanding roles to keep up with, but not exceed, the weights of the more delicate women in lighter jobs. We can also see that even in relatively low-stress jobs like milliners, resting during pregnancy is still crucial and should not be overlooked. "Society," Letourneux concludes, "must ensure that women who are not well off get rest during part of their pregnancy. The cost of doing so will be returned through the improved health of the children born as a result" (Letourneux, De l'Influence de la Profession de la Mère sur le Poids de l'Enfant, Thèse de Paris, 1897).
Dr. Dweira-Bernson (Revue Pratique d'Obstétrique et de Pédiatrie, 1903, p. 370), compared four groups of pregnant women (servants with light work, servants with heavy work, farm girls, dressmakers) who rested for three months before confinement with four groups similarly composed who took no rest before confinement. In every group he found that the difference in the average weight of the child was markedly in favor of the women who rested, and it was notable that the greatest difference was found in the case of the farm girls who were probably the most robust and also the hardest worked.
Dr. Dweira-Bernson (Revue Pratique d'Obstétrique et de Pédiatrie, 1903, p. 370) compared four groups of pregnant women (those with light workloads, those with heavy workloads, farm girls, and dressmakers) who took three months off before giving birth with four similar groups who did not rest before giving birth. In every group, he found that the average weight of the babies was significantly higher for the women who rested, and it was particularly noteworthy that the largest difference was observed among the farm girls, who were likely the strongest and also the hardest workers.
The usual time of gestation ranges between 274 and 280 days (or 280 to 290 days from the last menstrual period), and occasionally a few days longer, though there is dispute as to the length of the extreme limit, which some authorities would extend to 300 days, or even to 320 days (Pinard, in Richet's Dictionnaire de Physiologie, vol. vii, pp. 150-162; Taylor, Medical Jurisprudence, fifth edition, pp. 44, 98 et seq.; L. M. Allen, "Prolonged Gestation," American Journal Obstetrics, April, 1907). It is possible, as Müller suggested in 1898 in a Thèse de Nancy, that civilization tends to shorten the period of gestation, and that in earlier ages it was longer than it is now. Such a tendency to premature birth under the exciting nervous influences of civilization would thus correspond, as Bouchacourt has pointed out (La Grossesse, p. 113), to the similar effect of domestication in animals. The robust countrywoman becomes transformed into the more graceful, but also more fragile, town woman who needs a degree of care and hygiene which the countrywoman with her more resistant nervous system can to some extent dispense with, although even she, as we see, suffers in the person of her child, and probably in her own person, from the effects of work during pregnancy. The serious nature of this civilized tendency to premature birth—of which lack of rest in pregnancy is, however, only one of several important causes—is shown by the fact that Séropian (Fréquence Comparée des Causes de l'Accouchement Prémature, Thèse de Paris, 1907) found that about one-third of French births (32.28 per cent.) are to a greater or less extent premature. Pregnancy is not a morbid condition; on the contrary, a pregnant woman is at the climax of her most normal physiological life, but owing to the tension thus involved she is specially liable to suffer from any slight shock or strain.
The typical length of pregnancy is between 274 and 280 days (or 280 to 290 days from the last menstrual period), and it can occasionally last a few days longer. There is some debate about the maximum length, with some experts suggesting it could be extended to 300 days or even up to 320 days (Pinard, in Richet's Dictionnaire de Physiologie, vol. vii, pp. 150-162; Taylor, Medical Jurisprudence, fifth edition, pp. 44, 98 et seq.; L. M. Allen, "Prolonged Gestation," American Journal Obstetrics, April, 1907). Müller proposed in 1898 in a Thèse de Nancy that civilization may shorten the duration of pregnancy and that it was longer in earlier times. This tendency towards premature birth due to the stressful influences of civilization corresponds, as Bouchacourt pointed out (La Grossesse, p. 113), to a similar effect seen in domesticated animals. The strong country woman evolves into a more elegant, yet more delicate, city woman who requires a level of care and hygiene that the more resilient country woman can sometimes forgo. However, as demonstrated, even the country woman can experience challenges during pregnancy—both for herself and her child—due to the effects of work. The seriousness of this civilized tendency towards premature birth—of which lack of rest during pregnancy is just one of several significant causes—is highlighted by Séropian's findings (Fréquence Comparée des Causes de l'Accouchement Prémature, Thèse de Paris, 1907), which revealed that about one-third of births in France (32.28 percent) are somewhat premature. Pregnancy is not a pathological condition; rather, a pregnant woman reaches the peak of her normal physiological life, but due to the stress involved, she is particularly susceptible to even minor shocks or strains.
It must be remarked that the increased tendency to premature birth, while in part it may be due to general tendencies of civilization, is also in part due to very definite and preventable causes. Syphilis, alcoholism, and attempts to produce abortion are among the not uncommon causes of premature birth (see, e.g., G. F. McCleary, "The Influence of Antenatal Conditions on Infantile Mortality," British Medical Journal, Aug. 13, 1904).
It should be noted that the rising occurrence of premature births, while partly influenced by general trends in society, is also significantly driven by specific and preventable factors. Syphilis, alcoholism, and attempts to induce abortion are among the fairly common causes of premature birth (see, e.g., G. F. McCleary, "The Influence of Antenatal Conditions on Infantile Mortality," British Medical Journal, Aug. 13, 1904).
Premature birth ought to be avoided, because the child born too early is insufficiently equipped for the task before him. Astengo, dealing with nearly 19,000 cases at the Lariboisière Hospital in Paris and the Maternité, found, that reckoning from the date of the last menstruation, there is a direct relation between the weight of the infant at birth and the length of the pregnancy. The longer the pregnancy, the finer the child (Astengo, Rapport du Poids des Enfants à la Durée de la Grossesse, Thèse de Paris, 1905).
Premature birth should be avoided because a child born too early isn't fully prepared for what's ahead. Astengo, from his work with almost 19,000 cases at the Lariboisière Hospital in Paris and the Maternité, found that if you count from the date of the last menstruation, there's a direct link between a baby's birth weight and the length of the pregnancy. The longer the pregnancy, the healthier the baby (Astengo, Rapport du Poids des Enfants à la Durée de la Grossesse, Thèse de Paris, 1905).
The frequency of premature birth is probably as great in England as in France. Ballantyne states (Manual of Antenatal Pathology; The Fœtus, p. 456) that for practical purposes the frequency of premature labors in maternity hospitals may be put at 20 per cent., but that if all infants weighing less than 3,000 grammes are to be regarded as premature, it rises to 41.5 per cent. That premature birth is increasing in England seems to be indicated by the fact that during the past twenty-five years there has been a steady rise in the mortality rate from premature birth. McCleary, who discusses this point and considers the increase real, concludes that "it would appear that there has been a diminution in the quality as well as in the quantity of our output of babies" (see also a discussion, introduced by Dawson Williams, on "Physical Deterioration," British Medical Journal, Oct. 14, 1905).
The rate of premature birth is probably just as high in England as it is in France. Ballantyne mentions (Manual of Antenatal Pathology; The Fœtus, p. 456) that for practical purposes, the frequency of premature labors in maternity hospitals can be estimated at 20 percent. However, if all infants weighing less than 3,000 grams are considered premature, that number rises to 41.5 percent. It seems that premature birth is on the rise in England, as indicated by a consistent increase in the mortality rate from premature births over the past twenty-five years. McCleary, who addresses this issue and believes the increase is genuine, concludes that "it appears that there has been a decline in both the quality and quantity of our output of babies" (see also a discussion introduced by Dawson Williams on "Physical Deterioration," British Medical Journal, Oct. 14, 1905).
It need scarcely be pointed out that not only is immaturity a cause of deterioration in the infants that survive, but that it alone serves enormously to decrease the number of infants that are able to survive. Thus G. Newman states (loc. cit.) that in most large English urban districts immaturity is the chief cause of infant mortality, furnishing about 30 per cent. of the infant deaths; even in London (Islington) Alfred Harris (British Medical Journal, Dec. 14, 1907) finds that it is responsible for nearly 17 per cent. of the infantile deaths. It is estimated by Newman that about half of the mothers of infants dying of immaturity suffer from marked ill-health and poor physique; they are not, therefore, fitted to be mothers.
It hardly needs saying that not only does immaturity contribute to the decline of the infants that do survive, but it also significantly reduces the number of infants that can survive. G. Newman states (loc. cit.) that in most large urban areas in England, immaturity is the main cause of infant mortality, accounting for about 30 percent of infant deaths; even in London (Islington), Alfred Harris (British Medical Journal, Dec. 14, 1907) finds that it contributes to nearly 17 percent of infant deaths. Newman estimates that around half of the mothers of infants who die from immaturity experience significant health issues and poor physical condition; they are, therefore, not suited to be mothers.
Rest during pregnancy is a very powerful agent in preventing premature birth. Thus Dr. Sarraute-Lourié has compared 1,550 pregnant women at the Asile Michelet who rested before confinement with 1,550 women confined at the Hôpital Lariboisière who had enjoyed no such period of rest. She found that the average duration of pregnancy was at least twenty days shorter in the latter group (Mme. Sarraute-Lourié, De l'Influence du Repos sur la Durée de la Gestation, Thèse de Paris, 1899).
Rest during pregnancy is a highly effective factor in preventing premature birth. Dr. Sarraute-Lourié compared 1,550 pregnant women at the Asile Michelet who rested before delivery with 1,550 women at the Hôpital Lariboisière who did not have such a rest period. She found that the average length of pregnancy was at least twenty days shorter in the latter group (Mme. Sarraute-Lourié, De l'Influence du Repos sur la Durée de la Gestation, Thèse de Paris, 1899).
Leyboff has insisted on the absolute necessity of rest during pregnancy, as well for the sake of the woman herself as the burden she carries, and shows the evil results which follow when rest is neglected. Railway traveling, horse-riding, bicycling, and sea-voyages are also, Leyboff believes, liable to be injurious to the course of pregnancy. Leyboff recognizes the difficulties which procreating women are placed under by present industrial conditions, and concludes that "it is urgently necessary to prevent women, by law, from working during the last three months of pregnancy; that in every district there should be a maternity fund; that during this enforced rest a woman should receive the same salary as during work." He adds that the children of unmarried mothers should be cared for by the State, that there should be an eight-hours' day for all workers, and that no children under sixteen should be allowed to work (E. Leyboff, L'Hygiène de la Grossesse, Thèse de Paris, 1905).
Leyboff has emphasized the crucial need for rest during pregnancy, both for the woman herself and the child she is carrying, and demonstrates the negative outcomes that can occur when rest is overlooked. Leyboff also believes that activities like train travel, horseback riding, cycling, and sea voyages can be harmful to the course of pregnancy. He acknowledges the challenges that working women face due to current industrial conditions and concludes that "it is urgently necessary to legally prevent women from working during the last three months of pregnancy; that maternity funds should be established in every district; and that during this compulsory rest, a woman should receive the same salary as she does when working." He adds that the State should take care of children born to unmarried mothers, that there should be an eight-hour workday for all employees, and that no children under sixteen should be permitted to work (E. Leyboff, L'Hygiène de la Grossesse, Thèse de Paris, 1905).
Perruc states that at least two months' rest before confinement should be made compulsory, and that during this period the woman should receive an indemnity regulated by the State. He is of opinion that it should take the form of compulsory assurance, to which the worker, the employer, and the State alike contributed (Perruc, Assistance aux Femmes Enceintes, Thèse de Paris, 1905).
Perruc argues that a minimum of two months' rest before giving birth should be mandatory, and during this time, the woman should be provided with compensation set by the government. He believes this compensation should be through mandatory insurance, funded by contributions from the worker, the employer, and the government as well (Perruc, Assistance aux Femmes Enceintes, Thèse de Paris, 1905).
It is probable that during the earlier months of pregnancy, work, if not excessively heavy and exhausting, has little or no bad effect; thus Bacchimont (Documents pour servir a l'Histoire de la Puériculture Intra-utérine, Thèse de Paris, 1898) found that, while there was a great gain in the weight of children of mothers who had rested for three months, there was no corresponding gain in the children of those mothers who had rested for longer periods. It is during the last three months that freedom, repose, the cessation of the obligatory routine of employment become necessary. This is the opinion of Pinard, the chief authority on this matter. Many, however, fearing that economic and industrial conditions render so long a period of rest too difficult of practical attainment, are, with Clappier and G. Newman, content to demand two months as a minimum; Salvat only asks for one month's rest before confinement, the woman, whether married or not, receiving a pecuniary indemnity during this period, with medical care and drugs free. Ballantyne (Manual of Antenatal Pathology: The Fœtus, p. 475), as well as Niven, also asks only for one month's compulsory rest during pregnancy, with indemnity. Arthur Helme, however, taking a more comprehensive view of all the factors involved, concludes in a valuable paper on "The Unborn Child: Its Care and Its Rights" (British Medical Journal, Aug. 24, 1907), "The important thing would be to prohibit pregnant women from going to work at all, and it is as important from the standpoint of the child that this prohibition should include the early as the late months of pregnancy."
It’s likely that in the early months of pregnancy, work—if it's not too heavy or exhausting—has little or no negative impact. Bacchimont (Documents pour servir à l'Histoire de la Puériculture Intra-utérine, Thèse de Paris, 1898) found that while children of mothers who rested for three months gained significant weight, there was no similar gain in those whose mothers rested for longer periods. It's during the last three months that relaxation, rest, and the end of the obligatory work routine become essential. This is the view of Pinard, the leading expert on this issue. However, many worry that economic and industrial conditions make such a long period of rest impractical, and together with Clappier and G. Newman, propose two months as the minimum. Salvat only asks for one month of rest before childbirth, during which the woman, whether married or not, receives financial support along with free medical care and medications. Ballantyne (Manual of Antenatal Pathology: The Fœtus, p. 475) and Niven also request just one month of mandatory rest during pregnancy, with compensation. Arthur Helme, however, taking a broader view of all the factors, concludes in a valuable paper titled "The Unborn Child: Its Care and Its Rights" (British Medical Journal, Aug. 24, 1907), “The key point would be to prohibit pregnant women from working altogether, and it’s crucial for the child's well-being that this ban applies to both the early and later months of pregnancy.”
In England little progress has yet been made as regards this question of rest during pregnancy, even as regards the education of public opinion. Sir William Sinclair, Professor of Obstetrics at the Victoria University of Manchester, has published (1907) A Plea for Establishing Municipal Maternity Homes. Ballantyne, a great British authority on the embryology of the child, has published a "Plea for a Pre-Maternity Hospital" (British Medical Journal, April 6, 1901), has since given an important lecture on the subject (British Medical Journal, Jan. 11, 1908), and has further discussed the matter in his Manual of Ante-Natal Pathology: The Fœtus (Ch. XXVII); he is, however, more interested in the establishment of hospitals for the diseases of pregnancy than in the wider and more fundamental question of rest for all pregnant women. In England there are, indeed, a few institutions which receive unmarried women, with a record of good conduct, who are pregnant for the first time, for, as Bouchacourt remarks, ancient British prejudices are opposed to any mercy being shown to women who are recidivists in committing the crime of conception.
In England, not much progress has been made regarding the issue of rest during pregnancy, especially in terms of educating public opinion. Sir William Sinclair, Professor of Obstetrics at the Victoria University of Manchester, published (1907) A Plea for Establishing Municipal Maternity Homes. Ballantyne, a leading British expert on child embryology, published a "Plea for a Pre-Maternity Hospital" (British Medical Journal, April 6, 1901), later gave an important lecture on the topic (British Medical Journal, Jan. 11, 1908), and further discussed it in his Manual of Ante-Natal Pathology: The Fœtus (Ch. XXVII); however, he is more focused on establishing hospitals for pregnancy-related diseases than on the broader, more fundamental issue of providing rest for all pregnant women. In England, there are indeed a few institutions that accommodate unmarried women with a good conduct record who are pregnant for the first time, as Bouchacourt notes, ancient British prejudices continue to oppose any leniency towards women who repeatedly "commit the crime" of conception.
At present, indeed, it is only in France that the urgent need of rest during the latter months of pregnancy has been clearly realized, and any serious and official attempts made to provide for it. In an interesting Paris thesis (De la Puériculture avant le Naissance, 1907) Clappier has brought together much information bearing on the efforts now being made to deal practically with this question. There are many Asiles in Paris for pregnant women. One of the best is the Asile Michelet, founded in 1893 by the Assistance Publique de Paris. This is a sanatorium for pregnant women who have reached a period of seven and a half months. It is nominally restricted to the admission of French women who have been domiciled for a year in Paris, but, in practice, it appears that women from all parts of France are received. They are employed in light and occasional work for the institution, being paid for this work, and are also occupied in making clothes for the expected baby. Married and unmarried women are admitted alike, all women being equal from the point of view of motherhood, and indeed the majority of the women who come to the Asile Michelet are unmarried, some being girls who have even trudged on foot from Brittany and other remote parts of France, to seek concealment from their friends in the hospitable seclusion of these refuges in the great city. It is not the least advantage of these institutions that they shield unmarried mothers and their offspring from the manifold evils to which they are exposed, and thus tend to decrease crime and suffering. In addition to the maternity refuges, there are institutions in France for assisting with help and advice those pregnant women who prefer to remain at home, but are thus enabled to avoid the necessity for undue domestic labor.
Currently, it's only in France that the urgent need for rest during the later months of pregnancy has been clearly recognized, with serious official efforts being made to address it. In an interesting thesis from Paris (De la Puériculture avant le Naissance, 1907), Clappier has compiled a lot of information regarding the attempts to practically tackle this issue. There are many Asiles in Paris for pregnant women. One of the best is the Asile Michelet, established in 1893 by the Assistance Publique de Paris. This is a sanatorium for pregnant women who are around seven and a half months along. It’s nominally limited to French women who have lived in Paris for a year, but in reality, it seems that women from all over France are admitted. They are given light work for the institution, paid for their efforts, and are also busy making clothes for their expected baby. Both married and unmarried women are welcomed, with all women considered equal in terms of motherhood, and in fact, most women at the Asile Michelet are unmarried, including some young girls who have walked from Brittany and other distant regions of France to find refuge and privacy in this supportive space within the city. One of the key benefits of these institutions is that they protect unmarried mothers and their children from the various challenges they face, helping to reduce crime and suffering. Besides the maternity shelters, France also has institutions that provide support and advice to pregnant women who want to stay at home, allowing them to avoid excessive household labor.
There ought to be no manner of doubt that when, as is the case to-day in our own and some other supposedly civilized countries, motherhood outside marriage is accounted as almost a crime, there is the very greatest need for adequate provision for unmarried women who are about to become mothers, enabling them to receive shelter and care in secrecy, and to preserve their self-respect and social position. This is necessary not only in the interests of humanity and public economy, but also, as is too often forgotten, in the interests of morality, for it is certain that by the neglect to furnish adequate provision of this nature women are driven to infanticide and prostitution. In earlier, more humane days, the general provision for the secret reception and care of illegitimate infants was undoubtedly most beneficial. The suppression of the mediæval method, which in France took place gradually between 1833 and 1862, led to a great increase in infanticide and abortion, and was a direct encouragement to crime and immorality. In 1887 the Conseil Général of the Seine sought to replace the prevailing neglect of this matter by the adoption of more enlightened ideas and founded a bureau secret d'admission for pregnant women. Since then both the abandonment of infants and infanticide have greatly diminished, though they are increasing in those parts of France which possess no facilities of this kind. It is widely held that the State should unify the arrangements for assuring secret maternity, and should, in its own interests, undertake the expense. In 1904 French law ensured the protection of unmarried mothers by guaranteeing their secret, but it failed to organize the general establishment of secret maternities, and has left to doctors the pioneering part in this great and humane public work (A. Maillard-Brune, Refuges, Maternités, Bureaux d'Admission Secrets, comme Moyens Préservatives des Infanticide, Thèse de Paris, 1908). It is not among the least benefits of the falling birth rate that it has helped to stimulate this beneficent movement.
There should be no doubt that when, as is the case today in our own and some other so-called civilized countries, motherhood outside of marriage is regarded as almost a crime, there is a significant need for proper support for unmarried women who are about to become mothers. They need to have a safe place to receive care discreetly, which helps them maintain their self-respect and social standing. This is important not just for the sake of humanity and the economy, but also, as is often overlooked, for moral reasons, since failing to provide this kind of support can push women toward infanticide and prostitution. In earlier, more compassionate times, offering a safe space for the discreet care of illegitimate infants was undoubtedly very beneficial. The end of the medieval system, which in France gradually happened between 1833 and 1862, resulted in a significant increase in infanticide and abortion, directly encouraging crime and immorality. In 1887, the Conseil Général of the Seine aimed to address this issue by adopting more enlightened ideas and established a bureau secret d'admission for pregnant women. Since then, both the abandonment of infants and infanticide have greatly decreased, although these issues are rising in parts of France without such facilities. There is a widely held belief that the State should centralize arrangements to ensure discreet maternity and should take on the financial responsibility for it. In 1904, French law protected unmarried mothers by guaranteeing their confidentiality, but it failed to establish a comprehensive system of discreet maternity services and has left doctors to take the lead in this crucial and compassionate public initiative (A. Maillard-Brune, Refuges, Maternités, Bureaux d'Admission Secrets, comme Moyens Préservatives des Infanticide, Thèse de Paris, 1908). One of the benefits of the declining birth rate is that it has helped to promote this positive movement.
The development of an industrial system which subordinates the human body and the human soul to the thirst for gold, has, for a time, dismissed from social consideration the interests of the race and even of the individual, but it must be remembered that this has not been always and everywhere so. Although in some parts of the world the women of savage peoples work up to the time of confinement, it must be remarked that the conditions of work in savage life do not resemble the strenuous and continuous labor of modern factories. In many parts of the world, however, women are not allowed to work hard during pregnancy and every consideration is shown to them. This is so, for instance, among the Pueblo Indians, and among the Indians of Mexico. Similar care is taken in the Carolines and the Gilbert Islands and in many other regions all over the world. In some places, women are secluded during pregnancy, and in others are compelled to observe many more or less excellent rules. It is true that the assigned cause for these rules is frequently the fear of evil spirits, but they nevertheless often preserve a hygienic value. In many parts of the world the discovery of pregnancy is the sign for a festival of more or less ritual character, and much good advice is given to the expectant mother. The modern Musselmans are careful to guard the health of their women when pregnant, and so are the Chinese.[6] Even in Europe, in the thirteenth century, as Clappier notes, industrial corporations sometimes had regard to this matter, and would not allow women to work during pregnancy. In Iceland, where much of the primitive life of Scandinavian Europe is still preserved, great precautions are taken with pregnant women. They must lead a quiet life, avoid tight garments, be moderate in eating and drinking, take no alcohol, be safeguarded from all shocks, while their husbands and all others who surround them must treat them with consideration, save them from worry and always bear with them patiently.[7]
The creation of an industrial system that prioritizes the pursuit of wealth over the well-being of the human body and spirit has, for a time, overlooked the needs of society and individuals. However, this hasn't always been the case everywhere. While in some regions, women from primitive cultures may work up until giving birth, it's important to note that the nature of their labor is not comparable to the demanding and continuous work in modern factories. In many areas, women are not permitted to engage in strenuous work during pregnancy, and they receive considerable care and attention. For example, this is true among the Pueblo Indians and the indigenous people of Mexico. Similar practices are observed in the Caroline Islands, the Gilbert Islands, and many other parts of the world. In certain cultures, women are kept in seclusion during their pregnancies, while in others, they're expected to follow various guidelines, which, although often attributed to the fear of evil spirits, can have significant health benefits. In numerous communities, discovering a pregnancy leads to a celebration with some ritual aspects, and the expectant mother receives a lot of valuable advice. Modern Muslims and Chinese cultures also take great care to protect the health of pregnant women. Even in Europe during the thirteenth century, as noted by Clappier, some industrial corporations recognized this issue and prohibited women from working during pregnancy. In Iceland, where many aspects of early Scandinavian life remain, pregnant women are given extensive care. They are expected to live a quiet lifestyle, avoid tight clothing, practice moderation in eating and drinking, refrain from alcohol, be shielded from all shocks, and be treated with care and patience by their husbands and those around them.
It is necessary to emphasize this point because we have to realize that the modern movement for surrounding the pregnant woman with tenderness and care, so far from being the mere outcome of civilized softness and degeneracy, is, in all probability, the return on a higher plane to the sane practice of those races which laid the foundations of human greatness.
It’s important to highlight this point because we need to understand that the modern movement to surround pregnant women with care and compassion isn’t just a result of being overly soft or weak. Instead, it’s likely a return to a healthier practice found in the cultures that established the foundations of human greatness.
While rest is the cardinal virtue imposed on a woman during the later months of pregnancy, there are other points in her regimen that are far from unimportant in their bearing on the fate of the child. One of these is the question of the mother's use of alcohol. Undoubtedly alcohol has been a cause of much fanaticism. But the declamatory extravagance of anti-alcoholists must not blind us to the fact that the evils of alcohol are real. On the reproductive process especially, on the mammary glands, and on the child, alcohol has an arresting and degenerative influence without any compensatory advantages. It has been proved by experiments on animals and observations on the human subject that alcohol taken by the pregnant woman passes freely from the maternal circulation to the foœtal circulation. Féré has further shown that, by injecting alcohol and aldehydes into hen's eggs during incubation, it is possible to cause arrest of development and malformation in the chick.[8] The woman who is bearing her child in her womb or suckling it at her breast would do well to remember that the alcohol which may be harmless to herself is little better than poison to the immature being who derives nourishment from her blood. She should confine herself to the very lightest of alcoholic beverages in very moderate amounts and would do better still to abandon these entirely and drink milk instead. She is now the sole source of the child's life and she cannot be too scrupulous in creating around it an atmosphere of purity and health. No after-influence can ever compensate for mistakes made at this time.[9]
While rest is the most important thing for a woman in the later months of pregnancy, there are other aspects of her routine that are also crucial for the well-being of her child. One of these is whether the mother consumes alcohol. It's clear that alcohol has caused a lot of extreme reactions. However, the dramatic statements from those against alcohol shouldn't distract us from the fact that alcohol's negative effects are real. Particularly affecting reproduction, breast health, and the child, alcohol has harmful and degenerative effects without any compensating benefits. Studies on animals and observations of humans have shown that alcohol consumed by a pregnant woman easily travels from her bloodstream to the fetus's bloodstream. Féré has also demonstrated that injecting alcohol and aldehydes into hen's eggs during incubation can lead to developmental issues and deformities in the chick. The woman who is carrying her child or breastfeeding should keep in mind that alcohol that might be safe for her can be almost poisonous to the developing baby that relies on her blood for nourishment. She should limit herself to very light alcoholic drinks in modest amounts, and it’s even better to avoid alcohol altogether and drink milk instead. She is now the only source of life for her child, and she must be careful to create an environment of health and cleanliness around it. No amount of later intervention can make up for mistakes made during this time.
What is true of alcohol is equally true of other potent drugs and poisons, which should all be avoided so far as possible during pregnancy because of the harmful influence they may directly exert on the embryo. Hygiene is better than drugs, and care should be exercised in diet, which should by no means be excessive. It is a mistake to suppose that the pregnant woman needs considerably more food than usual, and there is much reason to believe not only that a rich meat diet tends to cause sterility but that it is also unfavorable to the development of the child in the womb.[10]
What applies to alcohol also applies to other strong drugs and poisons, which should be avoided as much as possible during pregnancy because of the harmful effects they can have on the embryo. Good hygiene is better than medication, and care should be taken with diet, which should not be excessive. It's a misconception that pregnant women need significantly more food than usual, and there's plenty of evidence to suggest that a rich meat diet can lead to sterility and may also negatively affect the development of the child in the womb.[10]
How far, if at all, it is often asked, should sexual intercourse be continued after fecundation has been clearly ascertained? This has not always been found an easy question to answer, for in the human couple many considerations combine to complicate the answer. Even the Catholic theologians have not been entirely in agreement on this point. Clement of Alexandria said that when the seed had been sown the field must be left till harvest. But it may be concluded that, as a rule, the Church was inclined to regard intercourse during pregnancy as at most a venial sin, provided there was no danger of abortion. Augustine, Gregory the Great, Aquinas, Dens, for instance, seem to be of this mind; for a few, indeed, it is no sin at all.[11] Among animals the rule is simple and uniform; as soon as the female is impregnated at the period of œstrus she absolutely rejects all advance of the male until, after birth and lactation are over, another period of œstrus occurs. Among savages the tendency is less uniform, and sexual abstinence, when it occurs during pregnancy, tends to become less a natural instinct than a ritual observance, or a custom now chiefly supported by superstitions. Among many primitive peoples abstinence during the whole of pregnancy is enjoined because it is believed that the semen would kill the fœtus.[12]
How far, if at all, should sexual intercourse continue after pregnancy has been clearly confirmed? This question is often tough to answer because many factors apply to human couples. Even Catholic theologians haven't fully agreed on this issue. Clement of Alexandria stated that once the seed is sown, the field should be left until harvest. Generally, the Church seems to view intercourse during pregnancy as at most a minor sin, as long as there's no risk of abortion. Augustine, Gregory the Great, Aquinas, and Dens, for example, appear to share this viewpoint; some even argue it's not a sin at all.[11] Among animals, the rule is straightforward and consistent; as soon as a female is impregnated during her heat cycle, she completely rejects any advances from males until after she has given birth and weaned her young, when another heat cycle occurs. Among some tribal communities, the practice is less consistent, and sexual abstinence during pregnancy tends to be more of a ritual or custom fueled by superstitions than a natural instinct. Many primitive societies enforce total abstinence throughout pregnancy because they believe that semen could harm the fetus.[12]
The Talmud is unfavorable to coitus during pregnancy, and the Koran prohibits it during the whole of the period, as well as during suckling. Among the Hindus, on the other hand, intercourse is continued up to the last fortnight of pregnancy, and it is even believed that the injected semen helps to nourish the embryo (W. D. Sutherland, "Ueber das Alltagsleben und die Volksmedizin unter den Bauern Britischostindiens," Münchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, Nos. 12 and 13, 1906). The great Indian physician Susruta, however, was opposed to coitus during pregnancy, and the Chinese are emphatically on the same side.
The Talmud discourages sex during pregnancy, and the Koran bans it for the entire duration, including breastfeeding. In contrast, Hindus continue to have intercourse up to the last two weeks of pregnancy and even believe that the semen can help nourish the embryo (W. D. Sutherland, "Ueber das Alltagsleben und die Volksmedizin unter den Bauern Britischostindiens," Münchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, Nos. 12 and 13, 1906). However, the renowned Indian physician Susruta was against sex during pregnancy, and the Chinese share the same view.
As men have emerged from barbarism in the direction of civilization, the animal instinct of refusal after impregnation has been completely lost in women, while at the same time both sexes tend to become indifferent to those ritual restraints which at an earlier period were almost as binding as instinct. Sexual intercourse thus came to be practiced after impregnation, much the same as before, as part of ordinary "marital rights," though sometimes there has remained a faint suspicion, reflected in the hesitating attitude of the Catholic Church already alluded to, that such intercourse may be a sinful indulgence. Morality is, however, called in to fortify this indulgence. If the husband is shut out from marital intercourse at this time, it is argued, he will seek extra-marital intercourse, as indeed in some parts of the world it is recognized that he legitimately may; therefore the interests of the wife, anxious to retain her husband's fidelity, and the interests of Christian morality, anxious to uphold the institution of monogamy, combine to permit the continuation of coitus during pregnancy. The custom has been furthered by the fact that, in civilized women at all events, coitus during pregnancy is usually not less agreeable than at other times and by some women is felt indeed to be even more agreeable.[13] There is also the further consideration, for those couples who have sought to prevent conception, that now intercourse may be enjoyed with impunity. From a higher point of view such intercourse may also be justified, for if, as all the finer moralists of the sexual impulse now believe, love has its value not only in so far as it induces procreation but also in so far as it aids individual development and the mutual good and harmony of the united couple, it becomes morally right during pregnancy.
As people have moved away from barbarism toward civilization, women have completely lost the instinct to refuse sexual activity after becoming pregnant. At the same time, both men and women have become less concerned with the traditional rituals that once held great significance. As a result, sexual intercourse has continued after impregnation, just as it did before, and is viewed as a normal part of "marital rights." However, there is sometimes a lingering suspicion, as hinted at by the cautious stance of the Catholic Church, that engaging in sexual activity during this time could be seen as sinful. Nevertheless, moral arguments support this behavior. It is suggested that if a husband is denied sexual relations during this period, he might look for sexual encounters outside the marriage, which is acknowledged in some cultures as acceptable. Therefore, the interests of the wife, who wants to keep her husband's loyalty, and the interests of Christian morality, which aims to maintain monogamous relationships, come together to permit sexual activity during pregnancy. This custom has been encouraged because, for civilized women at least, sexual activity during pregnancy is usually just as enjoyable as at other times, and some women even find it more pleasurable. Additionally, for couples who have tried to avoid conception, this means they can engage in sexual activity without worry. From a broader perspective, such interactions can also be justified because many modern moral thinkers believe that love is valuable not just for creating life but also for fostering individual growth and the mutual well-being and harmony of the couple, making it morally acceptable during pregnancy.
From an early period, however, great authorities have declared themselves in opposition to the custom of practicing coitus during pregnancy. At the end of the first century, Soranus, the first of great gynæcologists, stated, in his treatise on the diseases of women, that sexual intercourse is injurious throughout pregnancy, because of the movement imparted to the uterus, and especially injurious during the latter months. For more than sixteen hundred years the question, having fallen into the hands of the theologians, seems to have been neglected on the medical side until in 1721 a distinguished French obstetrician, Mauriceau, stated that no pregnant woman should have intercourse during the last two months and that no woman subject to miscarriage should have intercourse at all during pregnancy. For more than a century, however, Mauriceau remained a pioneer with few or no followers. It would be inconvenient, the opinion went, even if it were necessary, to forbid intercourse during pregnancy.[14]
From an early time, many respected experts have spoken out against the practice of having sex during pregnancy. At the end of the first century, Soranus, the first notable gynecologist, stated in his work on women's health that sexual intercourse can harm the pregnancy due to the motion it causes in the uterus, particularly in the later months. For over sixteen hundred years, this topic was largely overlooked by the medical community as it was mainly addressed by theologians, until 1721 when a prominent French obstetrician, Mauriceau, declared that no pregnant woman should engage in intercourse during the last two months, and that women at risk of miscarriage should avoid it altogether during pregnancy. However, for more than a century, Mauriceau remained a trailblazer with little support. The general sentiment was that even if it were necessary, it would be impractical to prohibit sex during pregnancy.[14]
During recent years, nevertheless, there has been an increasingly strong tendency among obstetricians to speak decisively concerning intercourse during pregnancy, either by condemning it altogether or by enjoining great prudence. It is highly probable that, in accordance with the classical experiments of Dareste on chicken embryos, shocks and disturbances to the human embryo may also produce injurious effects on growth. The disturbance due to coitus in the early stages of pregnancy may thus tend to produce malformation. When such conditions are found in the children of perfectly healthy, vigorous, and generally temperate parents who have indulged recklessly in coitus during the early stages of pregnancy it is possible that such coitus has acted on the embryo in the same way as shocks and intoxications are known to act on the embryo of lower organisms. However this may be, it is quite certain that in predisposed women, coitus during pregnancy causes premature birth; it sometimes happens that labor pains begin a few minutes after the act.[15] The natural instinct of animals refuses to allow intercourse during pregnancy; the ritual observance of primitive peoples very frequently points in the same direction; the voice of medical science, so far as it speaks at all, is beginning to utter the same warning, and before long will probably be in a position to do so on the basis of more solid and coherent evidence.
In recent years, there has been a growing tendency among obstetricians to speak firmly about sex during pregnancy, either completely condemning it or advising extreme caution. It’s highly likely that, similar to the classic experiments by Dareste on chicken embryos, shocks and disturbances to the human embryo can also negatively affect growth. The disruption caused by intercourse in the early stages of pregnancy may lead to malformations. When such issues arise in children of perfectly healthy, vigorous, and generally temperate parents who have engaged irresponsibly in sex during early pregnancy, it’s possible that this sexual activity has impacted the embryo in the same way that shocks and intoxication affect embryos of lower organisms. However it turns out, it’s clear that in women who are already predisposed, sex during pregnancy can lead to premature birth; in some cases, labor pains start just minutes after the act. The natural instinct of animals prevents them from mating during pregnancy; and the practices of primitive peoples often reflect the same idea. Medical science, as it weighs in, is starting to offer similar warnings and will likely be able to do so based on more robust and consistent evidence soon.
Pinard, the greatest of authorities on puericulture, asserts that there must be complete cessation of sexual intercourse during the whole of pregnancy, and in his consulting room at the Clinique Baudelocque he has placed a large placard with an "Important Notice" to this effect. Féré was strongly of opinion that sexual relations during pregnancy, especially when recklessly carried out, play an important part in the causation of nervous troubles in children who are of sound heredity and otherwise free from all morbid infection during gestation and development; he recorded in detail a case which he considered conclusive ("L'Influence de l'Incontinence Sexuelle pendant la Gestation sur la Descendance," Archives de Neurologie, April, 1905). Bouchacourt discusses the subject fully (La Grossesse, pp. 177-214), and thinks that sexual intercourse during pregnancy should be avoided as much as possible. Fürbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 226) recommends abstinence from the sixth or seventh month, and throughout the whole of pregnancy where there is any tendency to miscarriage, while in all cases much care and gentleness should be exercised.
Pinard, the leading expert on childcare, insists that there should be a complete stop to sexual intercourse throughout the entire pregnancy. In his office at the Clinique Baudelocque, he has put up a large sign with an "Important Notice" conveying this message. Féré strongly believed that sexual relations during pregnancy, especially when done carelessly, significantly contribute to nervous issues in children who are otherwise healthy and free from any infections during gestation and development. He documented a specific case he found conclusive ("L'Influence de l'Incontinence Sexuelle pendant la Gestation sur la Descendance," Archives de Neurologie, April 1905). Bouchacourt thoroughly covers the topic (La Grossesse, pp. 177-214) and believes that sexual intercourse during pregnancy should be avoided as much as possible. Fürbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 226) advises abstaining from the sixth or seventh month and throughout the entire pregnancy if there’s a risk of miscarriage, while in all cases, extra care and gentleness should be practiced.
The whole subject has been investigated in a Paris Thesis by H. Brénot (De L'Influence de la Copulation pendant la Grossesse, 1903); he concludes that sexual relations are dangerous throughout pregnancy, frequently provoking premature confinement or abortion, and that they are more dangerous in primiparæ than in multiparæ.
The entire topic has been explored in a Paris Thesis by H. Brénot (De L'Influence de la Copulation pendant la Grossesse, 1903); he concludes that sexual relations are risky throughout pregnancy, often leading to premature labor or miscarriage, and that they are more hazardous for first-time mothers than for those who have given birth before.
Nearly everything that has been said of the hygiene of pregnancy, and the need for rest, applies also to the period immediately following the birth of the child. Rest and hygiene on the mother's part continue to be necessary alike in her own interests and in the child's. This need has indeed been more generally and more practically recognized than the need for rest during pregnancy. The laws of several countries make compulsory a period of rest from employment after confinement, and in some countries they seek to provide for the remuneration of the mother during this enforced rest. In no country, indeed, is the principle carried out so thoroughly and for so long a period as is desirable. But it is the right principle, and embodies the germ which, in the future, will be developed. There can be little doubt that whatever are the matters, and they are certainly many, which may be safely left to the discretion of the individual, the care of the mother and her child is not among them. That is a matter which, more than any other, concerns the community as a whole, and the community cannot afford to be slack in asserting its authority over it. The State needs healthy men and women, and by any negligence in attending to this need it inflicts serious charges of all sorts upon itself, and at the same time dangerously impairs its efficiency in the world. Nations have begun to recognize the desirability of education, but they have scarcely yet begun to realize that the nationalization of health is even more important than the nationalization of education. If it were necessary to choose between the task of getting children educated and the task of getting them well-born and healthy it would be better to abandon education. There have been many great peoples who never dreamed of national systems of education; there has been no great people without the art of producing healthy and vigorous children.
Nearly everything that has been said about pregnancy hygiene and the need for rest applies to the time right after childbirth as well. Rest and hygiene continue to be essential for both the mother and the child. This necessity is actually more widely recognized and practically implemented than the need for rest during pregnancy. The laws in several countries require a period of rest from work after giving birth, and in some places, they ensure the mother receives compensation during this mandatory rest. However, no country fully adheres to this principle for as long as would be ideal. Still, it is the right approach, and it holds the potential for future development. There’s little doubt that while many issues can be left to individual discretion, the care of mothers and their children is not one of them. This concern impacts the entire community, which cannot afford to ignore its responsibility in this area. The State needs healthy individuals, and by neglecting this need, it burdens itself with serious issues and undermines its effectiveness in the world. Nations have started to understand the importance of education, but they have barely begun to recognize that the health of the nation is even more crucial than its education. If forced to choose between ensuring children are educated or ensuring they are born healthy and remain well, it would be better to forego education. Many great societies existed without national education systems, but there has never been a great society without the ability to produce healthy and strong children.
This matter becomes of peculiar importance in great industrial states like England, the United States, and Germany, because in such states a tacit conspiracy tends to grow up to subordinate national ends to individual ends, and practically to work for the deterioration of the race. In England, for instance, this tendency has become peculiarly well marked with disastrous results. The interest of the employed woman tends to become one with that of her employer; between them they combine to crush the interests of the child who represents the race, and to defeat the laws made in the interests of the race which are those of the community as a whole. The employed woman wishes to earn as much wages as she can and with as little interruption as she can; in gratifying that wish she is, at the same time, acting in the interests of the employer, who carefully avoids thwarting her.
This issue is especially important in major industrial nations like England, the United States, and Germany, because in these countries, there's an unspoken agreement that tends to prioritize personal interests over national priorities, ultimately working against the betterment of society. In England, for example, this trend has become notably clear with serious consequences. The interests of working women often align with those of their employers; together, they work to suppress the needs of children, who represent the future of the nation, and undermine the laws created for the welfare of the entire community. The working woman wants to earn as much money as she can with as few interruptions as possible; in pursuing that goal, she inadvertently supports the employer's interests, who is careful not to interfere with her ambitions.
This impulse on the employed woman's part is by no means always and entirely the result of poverty, and would not, therefore, be removed by raising her wages. Long before marriage, when little more than a child, she has usually gone out to work, and work has become a second nature. She has mastered her work, she enjoys a certain position and what to her are high wages; she is among her friends and companions; the noise and bustle and excitement of the work-room or the factory have become an agreeable stimulant which she can no longer do without. On the other hand, her home means nothing to her; she only returns there to sleep, leaving it next morning at day-break or earlier; she is ignorant even of the simplest domestic arts; she moves about in her own home like a strange and awkward child. The mere act of marriage cannot change this state of things; however willing she may be at marriage to become a domesticated wife, she is destitute alike of the inclination or the skill for domesticity. Even in spite of herself she is driven back to the work-shop, to the one place where she feels really at home.
This impulse in the employed woman isn't always and entirely due to poverty, so simply raising her wages won't solve it. Long before marriage, when she was barely more than a child, she usually started working, and it has become second nature to her. She's mastered her job, enjoys a certain status, and earns what she considers to be good wages; she is among her friends and peers. The noise, bustle, and excitement of the workplace have become an enjoyable stimulation that she can no longer live without. On the flip side, home means very little to her; she only goes back to sleep there, leaving at dawn or even earlier the next day. She doesn't even know the simplest domestic skills; she navigates her own home like a stranger or an awkward child. Just getting married won't change this situation; no matter how much she might want to be a traditional wife, she lacks both the desire and the skills for domestic life. Even against her will, she finds herself returning to the workshop, the one place where she truly feels at home.
In Germany women are not allowed to work for four weeks after confinement, nor during the following two weeks except by medical certificate. The obligatory insurance against disease which covers women at confinement assures them an indemnity at this time equivalent to a large part of their wages. Married and unmarried mothers benefit alike. The Austrian law is founded on the same model. This measure has led to a very great decrease in infantile mortality, and, therefore, a great increase in health among those who survive. It is, however, regarded as very inadequate, and there is a movement in Germany for extending the time, for applying the system to a larger number of women, and for making it still more definitely compulsory.
In Germany, women are not allowed to work for four weeks after giving birth, and during the following two weeks, they can only work if they have a medical certificate. The mandatory health insurance that covers women during childbirth provides them with compensation during this period that is equivalent to a significant portion of their wages. Both married and unmarried mothers benefit from this. Austrian law is based on the same principles. This policy has led to a considerable reduction in infant mortality rates, which, in turn, has increased the overall health of those who survive. However, it is still seen as insufficient, and there is a movement in Germany to extend the leave, apply the system to more women, and make it even more strictly mandatory.
In Switzerland it has been illegal since 1877 for any woman to be received into a factory after confinement, unless she has rested in all for eight weeks, six weeks at least of this period being after confinement. Since 1898 Swiss working women have been protected by law from exercising hard work during pregnancy, and from various other influences likely to be injurious. But this law is evaded in practice, because it provides no compensatory indemnity for the woman. An attempt, in 1899, to amend the law by providing for such indemnity was rejected by the people.
In Switzerland, it has been illegal since 1877 for any woman to return to work in a factory after giving birth unless she has taken a total of eight weeks off, with at least six of those weeks being after childbirth. Since 1898, Swiss working women have been legally protected from doing strenuous work during pregnancy and from various other harmful influences. However, this law is often ignored in practice because it does not offer any compensation for the woman. An attempt in 1899 to change the law to include such compensation was rejected by the public.
In Belgium and Holland there are laws against women working immediately after confinement, but no indemnity is provided, so that employers and employed combine to evade the law. In France there is no such law, although its necessity has often been emphatically asserted (see, e.g., Salvat, La Dépopulation de la France, Thèse de Lyon, 1903).
In Belgium and Holland, there are laws that prevent women from working right after giving birth, but there are no benefits offered, which allows both employers and employees to sidestep the law. In France, there isn’t any such law, even though its importance has often been strongly stated (see, e.g., Salvat, La Dépopulation de la France, Thèse de Lyon, 1903).
In England it is illegal to employ a woman "knowingly" in a work-shop within four weeks of the birth of her child, but no provision is made by the law for the compensation of the woman who is thus required to sacrifice herself to the interests of the State. The woman evades the law in tacit collusion with her employers, who can always avoid "knowing" that a birth has taken place, and so escape all responsibility for the mother's employment. Thus the factory inspectors are unable to take action, and the law becomes a dead letter; in 1906 only one prosecution for this offense could be brought into court. By the insertion of this "knowingly" a premium is placed on ignorance. The unwisdom of thus beforehand placing a premium on ignorance has always been more or less clearly recognized by the framers of legal codes even as far back as the days of the Ten Commandments and the laws of Hamurabi. It is the business of the Court, of those who administer the law, to make allowance for ignorance where such allowance is fairly called for; it is not for the law-maker to make smooth the path of the law-breaker. There are evidently law-makers nowadays so scrupulous, or so simple-minded, that they would be prepared to exact that no pickpocket should be prosecuted if he was able to declare on oath that he had no "knowledge" that the purse he had taken belonged to the person he extracted it from.
In England, it’s illegal to employ a woman “knowingly” in a workshop within four weeks of giving birth, but the law doesn’t provide any compensation for the woman who has to sacrifice her own needs for the interests of the State. Women manage to get around the law in silent agreement with their employers, who can always claim they are unaware that a birth has occurred, thus avoiding any responsibility for hiring the mother. As a result, factory inspectors can’t take action, and the law becomes essentially useless; in 1906, there was only one prosecution for this offense that went to court. By including “knowingly,” the law encourages ignorance. The foolishness of incentivizing ignorance has been recognized by legal framers dating back to the Ten Commandments and the Laws of Hammurabi. It’s the role of the Court and those who enforce the law to consider ignorance where it's genuinely warranted; it shouldn't be the job of lawmakers to make things easier for those breaking the law. Clearly, some lawmakers today are either overly meticulous or naïve enough to think that no pickpocket should be prosecuted if he can swear he had no “knowledge” that the purse he stole belonged to the person he took it from.
The annual reports of the English factory inspectors serve to bring ridicule on this law, which looks so wisely humane and yet means nothing, but have so far been powerless to effect any change. These reports show, moreover, that the difficulty is increasing in magnitude. Thus Miss Martindale, a factory inspector, states that in all the towns she visits, from a quiet cathedral city to a large manufacturing town, the employment of married women is rapidly increasing; they have worked in mills or factories all their lives and are quite unaccustomed to cooking, housework and the rearing of children, so that after marriage, even when not compelled by poverty, they prefer to go on working as before. Miss Vines, another factory inspector, repeats the remark of a woman worker in a factory. "I do not need to work, but I do not like staying at home," while another woman said, "I would rather be at work a hundred times than at home. I get lost at home" (Annual Report Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops for 1906, pp. 325, etc.).
The yearly reports from the English factory inspectors highlight the absurdity of this law, which seems so well-intentioned yet actually does nothing, but they have so far been unable to drive any change. These reports also indicate that the issue is growing. Miss Martindale, a factory inspector, points out that in all the towns she visits, from a peaceful cathedral city to a bustling manufacturing hub, the number of married women working is on the rise; they've been employed in mills or factories their whole lives and are not used to cooking, doing household chores, or raising children, so after getting married, even when not forced by financial strain, they prefer to keep working as they have always done. Miss Vines, another factory inspector, echoes the sentiment of a woman working in a factory: "I don’t need to work, but I don’t like staying at home," while another woman said, "I'd rather be working a hundred times than at home. I feel lost at home" (Annual Report Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops for 1906, pp. 325, etc.).
It may be added that not only is the English law enjoining four weeks' rest on the mother after childbirth practically inoperative, but the period itself is absurdly inadequate. As a rest for the mother it is indeed sufficient, but the State is still more interested in the child than in its mother, and the child needs the mother's chief care for a much longer period than four weeks. Helme advocates the State prohibition of women's work for at least six months after confinement. Where nurseries are attached to factories, enabling the mother to suckle her infant in intervals of work, the period may doubtless be shortened.
It can be said that not only is the English law requiring four weeks of rest for mothers after childbirth essentially useless, but that timeframe is also ridiculously short. While it might be enough for the mother to rest, the State is more concerned about the child than the mother, and the child requires the mother's primary care for much longer than four weeks. Helme supports a government ban on women working for at least six months after giving birth. If there are nurseries connected to factories, allowing mothers to breastfeed their infants during work breaks, that time could certainly be reduced.
It is important to remember that it is by no means only the women in factories who are induced to work as usual during the whole period of pregnancy, and to return to work immediately after the brief rest of confinement. The Research Committee of the Christian Social Union (London Branch) undertook, in 1905, an inquiry into the employment of women after childbirth. Women in factories and workshops were excluded from the inquiry which only had reference to women engaged in household duties, in home industries, and in casual work. It was found that the majority carry on their employment right up to the time of confinement and resume it from ten to fourteen days later. The infantile death rate for the children of women engaged only in household duties was greatly lower than that for the children of the other women, while, as ever, the hand-fed infants had a vastly higher death rate than the breast-fed infants (British Medical Journal, Oct. 24, 1908, p. 1297).
It’s important to recognize that it’s not just women in factories who are expected to work throughout their entire pregnancy and return to work right after a short break for childbirth. In 1905, the Research Committee of the Christian Social Union (London Branch) conducted a study on the employment of women after giving birth. Women in factories and workshops were not included in this study; it focused only on women involved in household duties, home industries, and casual jobs. The findings showed that most women continued working until the time of delivery and went back to work within ten to fourteen days. The infant mortality rate for children of women who only did household work was significantly lower than for the children of other women, while, as usual, infants who were bottle-fed had a much higher death rate than those who were breast-fed (British Medical Journal, Oct. 24, 1908, p. 1297).
In the great French gun and armour-plate works at Creuzot (Saône et Loire) the salaries of expectant mothers among the employees are raised; arrangements are made for giving them proper advice and medical attendance; they are not allowed to work after the middle of pregnancy or to return to work after confinement without a medical certificate of fitness. The results are said to be excellent, not only on the health of the mothers, but in the diminution of premature births, the decrease of infantile deaths, and the general prevalence of breast-feeding. It would probably be hopeless to expect many employers in Anglo-Saxon lands to adopt this policy. They are too "practical," they know how small is the money-value of human lives. With us it is necessary for the State to intervene.
In the large French gun and armor-plate factories in Creuzot (Saône et Loire), the salaries of expectant mothers among the employees are increased; arrangements are made to provide them with proper advice and medical care; they are not allowed to work after the middle of their pregnancy or to return to work after giving birth without a medical certificate proving they are fit. The results are reportedly excellent, not only for the health of the mothers but also in reducing premature births, decreasing infant mortality, and encouraging breastfeeding. It would likely be unrealistic to expect many employers in Anglo-Saxon countries to adopt this approach. They are too focused on being "practical," and they understand how little money-value human lives have. Here, it’s essential for the government to step in.
There can be no doubt that, on the whole, modern civilized communities are beginning to realize that under the social and economic conditions now tending more and more to prevail, they must in their own interests insure that the mother's best energy and vitality are devoted to the child, both before and after its birth. They are also realizing that they cannot carry out their duty in this respect unless they make adequate provision for the mothers who are thus compelled to renounce their employment in order to devote themselves to their children. We here reach a point at which Individualism is at one with Socialism. The individualist cannot fail to see that it is at all cost necessary to remove social conditions which crush out all individuality; the Socialist cannot fail to see that a society which neglects to introduce order at this central and vital point, the production of the individual, must speedily perish.
There’s no doubt that, overall, modern civilized communities are starting to understand that under the social and economic conditions that are increasingly becoming the norm, they must ensure that a mother’s best energy and vitality are focused on her child, both before and after birth. They are also realizing that they can’t fulfill this responsibility unless they provide adequate support for mothers who need to give up their jobs to take care of their children. We’ve reached a point where Individualism aligns with Socialism. The individualist recognizes that it’s essential to eliminate social conditions that stifle individuality; the Socialist sees that a society that fails to establish order at this central and crucial point—the development of the individual—will quickly decline.
It is involved in the proper fulfilment of a mother's relationship to her infant child that, provided she is healthy, she should suckle it. Of recent years this question has become a matter of serious gravity. In the middle of the eighteenth century, when the upper-class women of France had grown disinclined to suckle their own children, Rousseau raised so loud and eloquent a protest that it became once more the fashion for a woman to fulfil her natural duties. At the present time, when the same evil is found once more, and in a far more serious form, for now it is not the small upper-class but the great lower-class that is concerned, the eloquence of a Rousseau would be powerless, for it is not fashion so much as convenience, and especially an intractable economic factor, that is chiefly concerned. Not the least urgent reason for putting women, and especially mothers, upon a sounder economic basis, is the necessity of enabling them to suckle their children.
It’s essential for a mother to breastfeed her infant, provided she is healthy. Recently, this issue has become very serious. In the mid-eighteenth century, when upper-class women in France stopped breastfeeding their own children, Rousseau loudly protested, and it became fashionable for women to embrace their natural responsibilities again. Today, we're facing a similar problem, but it’s even more serious because it now affects not just the small upper class but the larger lower class. The persuasive words of a Rousseau wouldn’t have much impact now since the issue isn’t just about trends but more about convenience and a tough economic situation. One of the most urgent reasons for helping women, especially mothers, achieve a more stable economic situation is to enable them to breastfeed their children.
No woman is sound, healthy, and complete unless she possesses breasts that are beautiful enough to hold the promise of being functional when the time for their exercise arrives, and nipples that can give suck. The gravity of this question to-day is shown by the frequency with which women are lacking in this essential element of womanhood, and the young man of to-day, it has been said, often in taking a wife, "actually marries but part of a woman, the other part being exhibited in the chemist's shop window, in the shape of a glass feeding-bottle." Blacker found among a thousand patients from the maternity department of University College Hospital that thirty-nine had never suckled at all, seven hundred and forty-seven had suckled all their children, and two hundred and fourteen had suckled only some. The chief reason given for not suckling was absence or insufficiency of milk; other reasons being inability or disinclination to suckle, and refusal of the child to take the breast (Blacker, Medical Chronicle, Feb., 1900). These results among the London poor are certainly very much better than could be found in many manufacturing towns where women work after marriage. In the other large countries of Europe equally unsatisfactory results are found. In Paris Madame Dluska has shown that of 209 women who came for their confinement to the Clinique Baudelocque, only 74 suckled their children; of the 135 who did not suckle, 35 were prevented by pathological causes or absence of milk, 100 by the necessities of their work. Even those who suckled could seldom continue more than seven months on account of the physiological strain of work (Dluska, Contribution à l'Etude de l'Allaitement Maternel, Thèse de Paris, 1894). Many statistics have been gathered in the German countries. Thus Wiedow (Centralblatt für Gynäkologie, No. 29, 1895) found that of 525 women at the Freiburg Maternity only half could suckle thoroughly during the first two weeks; imperfect nipples were noted in 49 cases, and it was found that the development of the nipple bore a direct relation to the value of the breast as a secretory organ. At Munich Escherich and Büller found that nearly 60 per cent. of women of the lower class were unable to suckle their children, and at Stuttgart three-quarters of the child-bearing women were in this condition.
No woman is truly healthy and complete unless she has breasts that are attractive enough to suggest they will be functional when the time comes, along with nipples that can provide milk. The importance of this issue today is highlighted by how often women lack this essential aspect of womanhood. It has been said that a young man today often "marries only part of a woman, with the other part displayed in the chemist's shop window as a glass feeding bottle." Blacker found among a thousand patients from the maternity department of University College Hospital that thirty-nine had never breastfed at all, seven hundred and forty-seven had breastfed all their children, and two hundred and fourteen had breastfed only some. The main reason given for not breastfeeding was a lack or insufficiency of milk, while other reasons included inability or unwillingness to breastfeed, and the child's refusal to take the breast (Blacker, Medical Chronicle, Feb., 1900). These figures among the poor in London are significantly better than those found in many manufacturing towns where women work after marriage. Similarly unsatisfactory results are observed in other large European countries. In Paris, Madame Dluska showed that of 209 women who came for their deliveries at the Clinique Baudelocque, only 74 breastfed their children; of the 135 who did not, 35 were prevented due to medical reasons or lack of milk, and 100 due to work obligations. Even those who breastfed rarely managed to continue for more than seven months because of the physical demands of work (Dluska, Contribution à l'Etude de l'Allaitement Maternel, Thèse de Paris, 1894). Numerous statistics have been collected in Germany. For instance, Wiedow (Centralblatt für Gynäkologie, No. 29, 1895) found that out of 525 women at the Freiburg Maternity, only half were able to breastfeed properly during the first two weeks; imperfect nipples were noted in 49 cases, and it was discovered that the development of the nipple was directly related to the effectiveness of the breast as a milk-producing organ. In Munich, Escherich and Büller found that nearly 60 percent of women from the lower class were unable to breastfeed their children, and in Stuttgart, three-quarters of childbearing women were in the same situation.
The reasons why children should be suckled at their mothers' breasts are larger than some may be inclined to believe. In the first place the psychological reason is one of no mean importance. The breast with its exquisitely sensitive nipple, vibrating in harmony with the sexual organs, furnishes the normal mechanism by which maternal love is developed. No doubt the woman who never suckles her child may love it, but such love is liable to remain defective on the fundamental and instinctive side. In some women, indeed, whom we may hesitate to call abnormal, maternal love fails to awaken at all until brought into action through this mechanism by the act of suckling.
The reasons why children should be breastfed by their mothers are more significant than some might think. First, the psychological aspect is quite important. The breast, with its highly sensitive nipple, resonates harmoniously with the sexual organs and provides the normal way for maternal love to develop. Of course, a woman who doesn’t breastfeed her child can still love it, but that love might be lacking on a fundamental and instinctive level. In some women, who we might not consider abnormal, maternal love might not emerge at all until it’s triggered by the act of breastfeeding.
A more generally recognized and certainly fundamental reason for suckling the child is that the milk of the mother, provided she is reasonably healthy, is the infant's only ideally fit food. There are some people whose confidence in science leads them to believe that it is possible to manufacture foods that are as good or better than mother's milk; they fancy that the milk which is best for the calf is equally best for so different an animal as the baby. These are delusions. The infant's best food is that elaborated in his own mother's body. All other foods are more or less possible substitutes, which require trouble to prepare properly and are, moreover, exposed to various risks from which the mother's milk is free.
A more commonly accepted and definitely essential reason for breastfeeding is that a mother’s milk, as long as she is reasonably healthy, is the only truly suitable food for her infant. Some people, who have a strong belief in science, think that it’s possible to create formula that is as good as or even better than breast milk; they believe that the milk that’s best for calves is just as suitable for babies, who are such different creatures. These are misconceptions. The best food for an infant is the milk produced in their own mother’s body. All other options are less ideal alternatives that take extra effort to prepare correctly and also come with various risks that mother’s milk does not.
A further reason, especially among the poor, against the use of any artificial foods is that it accustoms those around the child to try experiments with its feeding and to fancy that any kind of food they eat themselves may be good for the infant. It thus happens that bread and potatoes, brandy and gin, are thrust into infants' mouths. With the infant that is given the breast it is easier to make plain that, except by the doctor's orders, nothing else must be given.
A further reason, especially among the poor, against using any artificial foods is that it leads people around the child to experiment with what they feed it and to think that anything they eat might be good for the baby. As a result, bread and potatoes, brandy and gin, end up being shoved into infants' mouths. With a baby that is breastfed, it's easier to make it clear that, unless the doctor says otherwise, nothing else should be given.
An additional reason why the mother should suckle her child is the close and frequent association with the child thus involved. Not only is the child better cared for in all respects, but the mother is not deprived of the discipline of such care, and is also enabled from the outset to learn and to understand the child's nature.
Another reason why a mother should breastfeed her child is the close and frequent interaction that comes with it. Not only does this ensure better overall care for the child, but it also allows the mother to practice the responsibility of caregiving and helps her learn about and understand her child's nature from the very beginning.
The inability to suckle acquires great significance if we realize that it is associated, probably in a large measure as a direct cause, with infantile mortality. The mortality of artificially-fed infants during the first year of life is seldom less than double that of the breast-fed, sometimes it is as much as three times that of the breast-fed, or even more; thus at Derby 51.7 per cent. of hand-fed infants die under the age of twelve months, but only 8.6 per cent. of breast-fed infants. Those who survive are by no means free from suffering. At the end of the first year they are found to weigh about 25 per cent. less than the breast-fed, and to be much shorter; they are more liable to tuberculosis and rickets, with all the evil results that flow from these diseases; and there is some reason to believe that the development of their teeth is injuriously affected. The degenerate character of the artificially-fed is well indicated by the fact that of 40,000 children who were brought for treatment to the Children's Hospital in Munich, 86 per cent. had been brought up by hand, and the few who had been suckled had usually only had the breast for a short time. The evil influence persists even up to adult life. In some parts of France where the wet-nurse industry flourishes so greatly that nearly all the children are brought up by hand, it has been found that the percentage of rejected conscripts is nearly double that for France generally. Corresponding results have been found by Friedjung in a large German athletic association. Among 155 members, 65 per cent. were found on inquiry to have been breast-fed as infants (for an average of six months); but among the best athletes the percentage of breast-fed rose to 72 per cent. (for an average period of nine or ten months), while for the group of 56 who stood lowest in athletic power the percentage of breast-fed fell to 57 (for an average of only three months).
The inability to breastfeed is significant, especially since it is likely a major direct cause of infant mortality. The death rate of artificially-fed infants in their first year is usually at least double that of breast-fed infants, and sometimes it can be three times higher or more. For instance, in Derby, 51.7 percent of hand-fed infants die before their first birthday, compared to only 8.6 percent of breast-fed infants. Those who survive often suffer considerable health issues. By the end of their first year, hand-fed infants weigh about 25 percent less than those who are breast-fed and tend to be shorter; they also have higher rates of tuberculosis and rickets, leading to severe complications, and there’s some evidence suggesting their dental development may be negatively impacted. The poor health of artificially-fed infants is underscored by the fact that 86 percent of the 40,000 children treated at the Children's Hospital in Munich had been bottle-fed, and those who were breast-fed typically only had breast milk for a short time. This negative impact extends into adulthood. In some areas of France where the wet-nurse industry is so prevalent that most children are hand-fed, the rate of rejected conscripts is nearly double the national average. Similar findings were reported by Friedjung in a large German athletic association: of 155 members, 65 percent had been breast-fed as infants (for an average of six months). However, in the group of the best athletes, the percentage of those who were breast-fed rose to 72 percent (for an average of nine or ten months), while among the 56 individuals with the lowest athletic performance, the breast-fed percentage dropped to 57 percent (for an average of just three months).
The advantages for an infant of being suckled by its mother are greater than can be accounted for by the mere fact of being suckled rather than hand-fed. This has been shown by Vitrey (De la Mortalité Infantile, Thèse de Lyon, 1907), who found from the statistics of the Hôtel-Dieu at Lyons, that infants suckled by their mothers have a mortality of only 12 per cent., but if suckled by strangers, the mortality rises to 33 per cent. It may be added that, while suckling is essential to the complete well-being of the child, it is highly desirable for the sake of the mother's health also. (Some important statistics are summarized in a paper on "Infantile Mortality" in British Medical Journal, Nov. 2, 1907), while the various aspects of suckling have been thoroughly discussed by Bollinger, "Ueber Säuglings-Sterblichkeit und die Erbliche functionelle Atrophie der menschlichen Milchdrüse" (Correspondenzblatt Deutschen Gesellschaft Anthropologie, Oct., 1899).
The benefits for a baby of being breastfed by its mother are greater than just the fact that they are fed this way instead of being bottle-fed. This was demonstrated by Vitrey (De la Mortalité Infantile, Thèse de Lyon, 1907), who found from the statistics of the Hôtel-Dieu in Lyons that babies breastfed by their mothers have a mortality rate of only 12 percent, while those breastfed by others have a mortality rate of 33 percent. Additionally, while breastfeeding is essential for the child’s overall well-being, it’s also very beneficial for the mother’s health. (Some important statistics are summarized in a paper on "Infantile Mortality" in British Medical Journal, Nov. 2, 1907), and the various aspects of breastfeeding have been thoroughly discussed by Bollinger in "Ueber Säuglings-Sterblichkeit und die Erbliche functionelle Atrophie der menschlichen Milchdrüse" (Correspondenzblatt Deutschen Gesellschaft Anthropologie, Oct., 1899).
It appears that in Sweden, in the middle of the eighteenth century, it was a punishable offense for a woman to give her baby the bottle when she was able to suckle it. In recent years Prof. Anton von Menger, of Vienna, has argued (in his Burgerliche Recht und die Besitzlosen Klassen) that the future generation has the right to make this claim, and he proposes that every mother shall be legally bound to suckle her child unless her inability to do so has been certified by a physician. E. A. Schroeder (Das Recht in der Geschlechtlichen Ordnung, 1893, p. 346) also argued that a mother should be legally bound to suckle her infant for at least nine months, unless solid grounds could be shown to the contrary, and this demand, which seems reasonable and natural, since it is a mother's privilege as well as her duty to suckle her infant when able to do so, has been insistently made by others also. It has been supported from the legal side by Weinberg (Mutterschutz, Sept., 1907). In France the Loi Roussel forbids a woman to act as a wet-nurse until her child is seven months old, and this has had an excellent effect in lowering infantile mortality (A. Allée, Puériculture et la Loi Roussel, Thèse de Paris, 1908). In some parts of Germany manufacturers are compelled to set up a suckling-room in the factory, where mothers can give the breast to the child in the intervals of work. The control and upkeep of these rooms, with provision of doctors and nurses, is undertaken by the municipality (Sexual-Probleme, Sept., 1908, p. 573).
It seems that in Sweden, during the mid-eighteenth century, it was illegal for a woman to bottle-feed her baby if she was able to breastfeed. Recently, Professor Anton von Menger from Vienna has argued in his Burgerliche Recht und die Besitzlosen Klassen that future generations have the right to demand this, proposing that every mother should be legally required to breastfeed her child unless a doctor certifies her inability to do so. E. A. Schroeder in Das Recht in der Geschlechtlichen Ordnung (1893, p. 346) also argued that a mother should be legally obligated to breastfeed her infant for at least nine months unless there are solid reasons against it. This request, which seems reasonable and natural since breastfeeding is both a mother's privilege and her duty when she can, has also been strongly advocated by others. This stance has been supported legally by Weinberg (Mutterschutz, Sept. 1907). In France, the Loi Roussel prohibits a woman from acting as a wet nurse until her child reaches seven months, and this has significantly reduced infant mortality rates (A. Allée, Puériculture et la Loi Roussel, Thèse de Paris, 1908). In certain parts of Germany, manufacturers are required to establish a dedicated breastfeeding room in the factory where mothers can nurse their children during breaks. The control and maintenance of these rooms, along with the provision of doctors and nurses, is managed by the municipality (Sexual-Probleme, Sept. 1908, p. 573).
As things are to-day in modern industrial countries the righting of these wrongs cannot be left to Nature, that is, to the ignorant and untrained impulses of persons who live in a whirl of artificial life where the voice of instinct is drowned. The mother, we are accustomed to think, may be trusted to see to the welfare of her child, and it is unnecessary, or even "immoral," to come to her assistance. Yet there are few things, I think, more pathetic than the sight of a young Lancashire mother who works in the mills, when she has to stay at home to nurse her sick child. She is used to rise before day-break to go to the mill; she has scarcely seen her child by the light of the sun, she knows nothing of its necessities, the hands that are so skilful to catch the loom cannot soothe the child. The mother gazes down at it in vague, awkward, speechless misery. It is not a sight one can ever forget.
As things are today in modern industrial countries, we can't just leave the fixing of these issues to Nature, meaning the ignorant and untrained instincts of people who are caught up in a whirlwind of artificial life where instinct gets drowned out. We often think that a mother can be trusted to care for her child, and that it’s unnecessary, or even "immoral," to step in and help her. However, there are few things more heartbreaking than seeing a young mother from Lancashire who works in the mills, forced to stay home to care for her sick child. She’s used to waking before dawn to head to the mill; she has barely seen her child in daylight and knows nothing of what it needs. Her skilled hands that can work the loom cannot comfort her child. The mother looks down at her child in a state of vague, awkward, speechless despair. It’s an image you can never forget.
It is France that is taking the lead in the initiation of the scientific and practical movements for the care of the young child before and after birth, and it is in France that we may find the germs of nearly all the methods now becoming adopted for arresting infantile mortality. The village system of Villiers-le-Duc, near Dijon in the Côte d'Or, has proved a germ of this fruitful kind. Here every pregnant woman not able to secure the right conditions for her own life and that of the child she is bearing, is able to claim the assistance of the village authorities; she is entitled, without payment, to the attendance of a doctor and midwife and to one franc a day during her confinement. The measures adopted in this village have practically abolished both maternal and infantile mortality. A few years ago Dr. Samson Moore, the medical officer of health for Huddersfield, heard of this village, and Mr. Benjamin Broadbent, the Mayor of Huddersfield, visited Villiers-le-Duc. It was resolved to initiate in Huddersfield a movement for combating infant mortality. Henceforth arose what is known as the Huddersfield scheme, a scheme which has been fruitful in splendid results. The points of the Huddersfield scheme are: (1) compulsory notification of births within forty-eight hours; (2) the appointment of lady assistant medical officers of help to visit the home, inquire, advise, and assist; (3) the organized aid of voluntary lady workers in subordination to the municipal part of the scheme; (4) appeal to the medical officer of help when the baby, not being under medical care, fails to thrive. The infantile mortality of Huddersfield has been very greatly reduced by this scheme.[16]
It is France that is leading the way in developing scientific and practical initiatives for the care of young children before and after birth, and it is here that we can find the foundations of nearly all the methods being adopted to reduce infant mortality. The village system of Villiers-le-Duc, near Dijon in the Côte d'Or, has served as a catalyst for this progress. In this village, every pregnant woman who cannot secure suitable conditions for herself and her child can seek help from the village authorities; she is entitled to free assistance from a doctor and midwife and to one franc a day during her confinement. The measures implemented in this village have virtually eliminated both maternal and infant mortality. A few years ago, Dr. Samson Moore, the health officer for Huddersfield, learned about this village, and Mr. Benjamin Broadbent, the Mayor of Huddersfield, visited Villiers-le-Duc. It was decided to launch a movement in Huddersfield to combat infant mortality. This led to what is known as the Huddersfield scheme, which has produced remarkable results. The main points of the Huddersfield scheme are: (1) mandatory notification of births within forty-eight hours; (2) appointing female assistant medical officers to visit homes, inquire, advise, and assist; (3) organized support from voluntary female workers under the municipal scheme; (4) consulting the medical officer when a baby, not under medical care, is not thriving. The infant mortality rate in Huddersfield has been significantly reduced thanks to this scheme.[16]
The Huddersfield scheme may be said to be the origin of the English Notification of Births Act, which came into operation in 1908. This Act represents, in England, the national inauguration of a scheme for the betterment of the race, the ultimate results of which it is impossible to foresee. When this Act comes into universal action every baby of the land will be entitled—legally and not by individual caprice or philanthropic condescension—to medical attention from the day of birth, and every mother will have at hand the counsel of an educated woman in touch with the municipal authorities. There could be no greater triumph for medical science, for national efficiency, and the cause of humanity generally. Even on the lower financial plane, it is easy to see that an enormous saving of public and private money will thus be effected. The Act is adoptive, and not compulsory. This was a wise precaution, for an Act of this kind cannot be effectual unless it is carried out thoroughly by the community adopting it, and it will not be adopted until a community has clearly realized its advantages and the methods of attaining them.
The Huddersfield scheme can be seen as the foundation of the English Notification of Births Act, which started in 1908. This Act marks the national launch of a program aimed at improving the population in England, the ultimate outcomes of which are unpredictable. Once this Act is fully implemented, every newborn in the country will be entitled—legally, rather than through individual whims or charitable gestures—to medical care from the moment they are born, and every mother will have access to the advice of a trained woman connected with local authorities. There could be no greater victory for medical science, national efficiency, and the overall welfare of humanity. Even from a lower financial perspective, it's clear that this will lead to significant savings in both public and private funds. The Act is optional, not mandatory. This was a smart move, because legislation like this can only be effective if it is embraced wholeheartedly by the community, which will only happen once people fully understand its benefits and how to achieve them.
An important adjunct of this organization is the School for Mothers. Such schools, which are now beginning to spring up everywhere, may be said to have their origins in the Consultations de Nourrissons (with their offshoot the Goutte de Lait), established by Professor Budin in 1892, which have spread all over France and been widely influential for good. At the Consultations infants are examined and weighed weekly, and the mothers advised and encouraged to suckle their children. The Gouttes are practically milk dispensaries where infants for whom breast-feeding is impossible are fed with milk under medical supervision. Schools for Mothers represent an enlargement of the same scheme, covering a variety of subjects which it is necessary for a mother to know. Some of the first of these schools were established at Bonn, at the Bavarian town of Weissenberg, and in Ghent. At some of the Schools for Mothers, and notably at Ghent (described by Mrs. Bertrand Russell in the Nineteenth Century, 1906), the important step has been taken of giving training to young girls from fourteen to eighteen; they receive instruction in infant anatomy and physiology, in the preparation of sterilized milk, in weighing children, in taking temperatures and making charts, in managing crêches, and after two years are able to earn a salary. In various parts of England, schools for young mothers and girls on these lines are now being established, first in London, under the auspices of Dr. F. J. Sykes, Medical Officer of Health for St. Pancreas (see, e.g., A School For Mothers, 1908, describing an establishment of this kind at Somers Town, with a preface by Sir Thomas Barlow; an account of recent attempts to improve the care of infants in London will also be found in the Lancet, Sept. 26, 1908). It may be added that some English municipalities have established depôts for supplying mothers cheaply with good milk. Such depôts are, however, likely to be more mischievous than beneficial if they promote the substitution of hand-feeding for suckling. They should never be established except in connection with Schools for Mothers, where an educational influence may be exerted, and no mother should be supplied with milk unless she presents a medical certificate showing that she is unable to nourish her child (Byers, "Medical Women and Public Health Questions," British Medical Journal, Oct. 6, 1906). It is noteworthy that in England the local authorities will shortly be empowered by law to establish Schools for Mothers.
An important part of this organization is the School for Mothers. These schools, which are starting to appear everywhere, can trace their origins to the Consultations de Nourrissons (and its offshoot, the Goutte de Lait), established by Professor Budin in 1892. They have spread throughout France and have been widely beneficial. At the Consultations, infants are examined and weighed weekly, and mothers receive advice and encouragement to breastfeed their children. The Gouttes function like milk distribution centers where infants who can't be breastfed are provided milk under medical supervision. Schools for Mothers expand on this concept, covering a range of topics that mothers need to know. Some of the first of these schools were set up in Bonn, the Bavarian town of Weissenberg, and in Ghent. At some of the Schools for Mothers, especially in Ghent (as described by Mrs. Bertrand Russell in the Nineteenth Century, 1906), an important step has been taken to train young girls aged fourteen to eighteen; they learn about infant anatomy and physiology, how to prepare sterilized milk, weigh children, take temperatures, make charts, and manage daycare facilities, allowing them to earn a salary after two years. Various places in England are now establishing similar schools for young mothers and girls, starting in London, under Dr. F. J. Sykes, the Medical Officer of Health for St. Pancras (see, e.g., A School For Mothers, 1908, which describes an establishment in Somers Town, with a preface by Sir Thomas Barlow; an account of recent efforts to improve infant care in London can also be found in the Lancet, Sept. 26, 1908). Additionally, some English municipalities have set up depots to provide mothers with good milk at low cost. However, these depots could be more harmful than helpful if they encourage replacing breastfeeding with bottle-feeding. They should only be established in conjunction with Schools for Mothers, where educational support can be provided, and no mother should receive milk unless she has a medical certificate showing she cannot breastfeed her child (Byers, "Medical Women and Public Health Questions," British Medical Journal, Oct. 6, 1906). It's also notable that in England, local authorities will soon be given the power by law to establish Schools for Mothers.
The great benefits produced by these institutions in France, both in diminishing the infant mortality and in promoting the education of mothers and their pride and interest in their children, have been set forth in two Paris theses by G. Chaignon (Organisation des Consultations de Nourrissons à la Campagne, 1908), and Alcide Alexandre (Consultation de Nourrissons et Goutte de Lait d'Arques, 1908).
The significant advantages of these institutions in France, both in reducing infant mortality and in enhancing the education of mothers, as well as their pride and involvement in their children, have been outlined in two theses from Paris by G. Chaignon (Organisation des Consultations de Nourrissons à la Campagne, 1908) and Alcide Alexandre (Consultation de Nourrissons et Goutte de Lait d'Arques, 1908).
The movement is now spreading throughout Europe, and an International Union has been formed, including all the institutions specially founded for the protection of child life and the promotion of puericulture. The permanent committee is in Brussels, and a Congress of Infant Protection (Goutte de Lait) is held every two years.
The movement is now spreading across Europe, and an International Union has been established, which includes all the organizations created to protect children's lives and promote childcare. The permanent committee is based in Brussels, and a Congress of Infant Protection (Goutte de Lait) takes place every two years.
It will be seen that all the movements now being set in action for the improvement of the race through the child and the child's mother, recognize the intimacy of the relation between the mother and her child and are designed to aid her, even if necessary by the exercise of some pressure, in performing her natural functions in relation to her child. To the theoretical philanthropist, eager to reform the world on paper, nothing seems simpler than to cure the present evils of child-rearing by setting up State nurseries which are at once to relieve mothers of everything connected with the production of the men of the future beyond the pleasure—if such it happens to be—of conceiving them and the trouble of bearing them, and at the same time to rear them up independently of the home, in a wholesome, economical, and scientific manner.[17] Nothing seems simpler, but from the fundamental psychological standpoint nothing is falser. The idea of a State which is outside the community is but a survival in another form of that antiquated notion which compelled Louis XIV to declare "L'Etat c'est moi!" A State which admits that the individuals composing it are incompetent to perform their own most sacred and intimate functions, and takes upon itself to perform them instead, attempts a task which would be undesirable, even if it were possible of achievement. It must always be remembered that a State which proposes to relieve its constituent members of their natural functions and responsibilities attempts something quite different from the State which seeks to aid its members to fulfil their own biological and social functions more adequately. A State which enables its mothers to rest when they are child-bearing is engaged in a reasonable task; a State which takes over its mothers' children is reducing philanthropy to absurdity. It is easy to realize this if we consider the inevitable course of circumstances under a system of "State-nurseries." The child would be removed from its natural mother at the earliest age, but some one has to perform the mother's duties; the substitute must therefore be properly trained for such duties; and in exercising them under favorable circumstances a maternal relationship is developed between the child and the "mother," who doubtless possesses natural maternal instincts but has no natural maternal bond to the child she is mothering. Such a relationship tends to become on both sides practically and emotionally the real relationship. We very often have opportunity of seeing how unsatisfactory such a relationship becomes. The artificial mother is deprived of a child she had begun to feel her own; the child's emotional relationships are upset, split and distorted; the real mother has the bitterness of feeling that for her child she is not the real mother. Would it not have been much better for all if the State had encouraged the vast army of women it had trained for the position of mothering other women's children, to have, instead, children of their own? The women who are incapable of mothering their own children could then be trained to refrain from bearing them.
It will be clear that all the movements currently underway to improve society through the child and the child's mother acknowledge the close connection between a mother and her child. These efforts aim to support her, even if it means applying some pressure, in fulfilling her natural role regarding her child. For the idealistic reformer, eager to change the world on paper, nothing seems easier than fixing the current issues of child-rearing by establishing State nurseries that relieve mothers of all responsibilities related to raising the future generation, except for the pleasure—if any exists—of conceiving them and the burden of giving birth. At the same time, these nurseries would raise children independently from the home in a healthy, cost-effective, and scientific way.[17] It seems simple, but from a fundamental psychological perspective, it is misleading. The idea of a State that exists outside the community is just a modern version of the outdated concept that led Louis XIV to declare, "L'Etat c'est moi!" A State that takes on the responsibilities of its citizens, claiming they cannot handle their own most sacred and personal roles, is attempting something that would be undesirable, even if it were feasible. It’s crucial to remember that a State that aims to relieve its members of their natural roles and responsibilities is doing something entirely different from a State that seeks to help its members fulfill their biological and social roles more successfully. A State that allows its mothers to rest during pregnancy is engaged in a reasonable effort; a State that takes over its mothers' children turns charity into nonsense. It's easy to see this when we think about what would inevitably happen under a "State-nursery" system. The child would be taken from its biological mother at the earliest age, but someone still has to fulfill the mother's responsibilities; therefore, the substitute must be properly trained for those duties. When this caregiver takes on the role under favorable conditions, a maternal bond can develop between the child and the "mother," who likely has natural caregiving instincts but lacks a true maternal connection to the child she's caring for. This kind of relationship can become, practically and emotionally, the primary bond for both parties. We often observe how unsatisfactory such arrangements can become. The artificial mother, who has begun to feel attached to the child, is deprived of that connection; the child's emotional ties become disrupted and distorted; the real mother deals with the pain of knowing she is not the true mother to her own child. Wouldn't it have been better for everyone if the State had encouraged the many women it trained to care for other women's children to instead have children of their own? Women who are unable to care for their children could then be taught to avoid having them.
Ellen Key (in her Century of the Child, and elsewhere) has advocated for all young women a year of compulsory "service," analogous to the compulsory military service imposed in most countries on young men. During this period the girl would be trained in rational housekeeping, in the principles of hygiene, in the care of the sick, and especially in the care of infants and all that concerns the physical and psychic development of children. The principle of this proposal has since been widely accepted. Marie von Schmid (in her Mutterdienst, 1907) goes so far as to advocate a general training of young women in such duties, carried on in a kind of enlarged and improved midwifery school. The service would last a year, and the young woman would then be for three years in the reserves, and liable to be called up for duty. There is certainly much to be said for such a proposal, considerably more than is to be said for compulsory military service. For while it is very doubtful whether a man will ever be called on to fight, most women are liable to be called on to exercise household duties or to look after children, whether for themselves or for other people.
Ellen Key (in her Century of the Child, and elsewhere) has advocated for all young women to complete a year of mandatory "service," similar to the compulsory military service imposed on young men in many countries. During this time, the girl would be trained in efficient housekeeping, hygiene principles, care of the sick, and especially in caring for infants and everything related to the physical and emotional development of children. The idea behind this proposal has gained significant acceptance. Marie von Schmid (in her Mutterdienst, 1907) even suggests a comprehensive training program for young women in these responsibilities, conducted in an expanded and improved midwifery school. The service would last a year, and the young woman would then be in the reserves for three years, subject to being called up for duty. There is definitely a strong case for such a proposal, much more than for compulsory military service. While it’s uncertain whether a man will ever be asked to fight, most women are likely to be needed to handle household responsibilities or care for children, either for themselves or for others.
It is not, of course, always literally true that each parent supplies exactly half the heredity, for, as we see among animals generally, the offspring may sometimes approach more nearly to one parent, sometimes to the other, while among plants, as De Vries and others have shown, the heredity may be still more unequally divided.
It isn’t always literally true that each parent contributes exactly half of the heredity. As we observe in animals, offspring may sometimes resemble one parent more closely and at other times the other. In plants, as De Vries and others have demonstrated, heredity can be even more unevenly distributed.
It should scarcely be necessary to say that to assert that motherhood is a woman's supreme function is by no means to assert that her activities should be confined to the home. That is an opinion which may now be regarded as almost extinct even among those who most glorify the function of woman as mother. As Friedrich Naumann and others have very truly pointed out, a woman is not adequately equipped to fulfil her functions as mother and trainer of children unless she has lived in the world and exercised a vocation.
It hardly needs to be said that claiming motherhood is a woman's most important role doesn't mean her activities should be limited to the home. That viewpoint is now seen as nearly obsolete, even among those who celebrate the role of women as mothers. As Friedrich Naumann and others have rightly noted, a woman isn’t truly prepared to be an effective mother and educator for her children unless she has experienced the world and pursued a career.
"Were the capacities of the brain and the heart equal in the sexes," Lily Braun (Die Frauenfrage, page 207) well says, "the entry of women into public life would be of no value to humanity, and would even lead to a still wilder competition. Only the recognition that the entire nature of woman is different from that of man, that it signifies a new vivifying principle in human life, makes the women's movement, in spite of the misconception of its enemies and its friends, a social revolution" (see also Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, fourth edition, 1904, especially Ch. XVIII).
"Were the abilities of the brain and the heart equal between the sexes," Lily Braun (Die Frauenfrage, page 207) aptly states, "the involvement of women in public life would have no benefit for humanity and could even result in an even greater competition. It is only by acknowledging that the essence of woman is different from that of man, representing a new vital force in human existence, that the women's movement, despite the misunderstandings from both its critics and supporters, becomes a social revolution" (see also Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, fourth edition, 1904, especially Ch. XVIII).
The word "puericulture" was invented by Dr. Caron in 1866 to signify the culture of children after birth. It was Pinard, the distinguished French obstetrician, who, in 1895, gave it a larger and truer significance by applying it to include the culture of children before birth. It is now defined as "the science which has for its end the search for the knowledge relative to the reproduction, the preservation, and the amelioration of the human race" (Péchin, La Puériculture avant la Naissance, Thèse de Paris, 1908).
The term "puericulture" was created by Dr. Caron in 1866 to refer to the care of children after they are born. It was Pinard, the renowned French obstetrician, who in 1895 expanded its meaning to include the care of children before they are born. It is now defined as "the science aimed at acquiring knowledge related to reproduction, the preservation, and the improvement of the human race" (Péchin, La Puériculture avant la Naissance, Thèse de Paris, 1908).
In La Grossesse (pp. 450 et seq.) Bouchacourt has discussed the problems of puericulture at some length.
In La Grossesse (pp. 450 et seq.), Bouchacourt has discussed the issues of childcare in detail.
The importance of antenatal puericulture was fully recognized in China a thousand years ago. Thus Madame Cheng wrote at that time concerning the education of the child: "Even before birth his education may begin; and, therefore, the prospective mother of old, when lying down, lay straight; when sitting down, sat upright; and when standing, stood erect. She would not taste strange flavors, nor have anything to do with spiritualism; if her food were not cut straight she would not eat it, and if her mat were not set straight, she would not sit upon it. She would not look at any objectionable sight, nor listen to any objectionable sound, nor utter any rude word, nor handle any impure thing. At night she studied some canonical work, by day she occupied herself with ceremonies and music. Therefore, her sons were upright and eminent for their talents and virtues; such was the result of antenatal training" (H. A. Giles, "Woman in Chinese Literature," Nineteenth Century, Nov., 1904).
The importance of prenatal care was fully acknowledged in China a thousand years ago. Madame Cheng wrote at that time about child education: "Even before birth, a child's education can begin; and so, the expectant mother of old, when lying down, would lie straight; when sitting, she would sit upright; and when standing, she would stand tall. She would avoid unfamiliar flavors and any connection to spiritualism; if her food wasn’t cut properly, she wouldn’t eat it, and if her mat wasn’t laid out straight, she wouldn’t sit on it. She would not look at anything inappropriate, listen to any unpleasant sounds, say any rude words, or touch anything impure. At night, she would study some sacred texts; during the day, she would engage in rituals and music. As a result, her sons were upright and known for their talents and virtues; such was the outcome of prenatal training" (H. A. Giles, "Woman in Chinese Literature," Nineteenth Century, Nov., 1904).
Max Bartels, "Isländischer Brauch," etc., Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1900, p. 65. A summary of the customs of various peoples in regard to pregnancy is given by Ploss and Bartels, Das Weib, Sect. XXIX.
Max Bartels, "Icelandic Customs," etc., Journal of Ethnology, 1900, p. 65. A summary of the customs of different cultures regarding pregnancy is provided by Ploss and Bartels, The Woman, Sect. XXIX.
On the influence of alcohol during pregnancy on the embryo, see, e.g., G. Newman, Infant Mortality, pp. 72-77. W. C. Sullivan (Alcoholism, 1906, Ch. XI), summarizes the evidence showing that alcohol is a factor in human degeneration.
On how alcohol affects embryos during pregnancy, see, e.g., G. Newman, Infant Mortality, pp. 72-77. W. C. Sullivan (Alcoholism, 1906, Ch. XI), summarizes the evidence showing that alcohol contributes to human degeneration.
There is even reason to believe that the alcoholism of the mother's father may impair her ability as a mother. Bunge (Die Zunehmende Unfähigkeit der Frauen ihre Kinder zu Stillen, fifth edition, 1907), from an investigation extending over 2,000 families, finds that chronic alcoholic poisoning in the father is the chief cause of the daughter's inability to suckle, this inability not usually being recovered in subsequent generations. Bunge has, however, been opposed by Dr. Agnes Bluhm, "Die Stillungsnot," Zeitschrift für Soziale Medizin, 1908 (fully summarized by herself in Sexual-Probleme, Jan., 1909).
There’s even a reason to think that the alcoholism of the mother’s father could affect her ability to be a mother. Bunge (Die Zunehmende Unfähigkeit der Frauen ihre Kinder zu Stillen, fifth edition, 1907), based on a study involving over 2,000 families, found that chronic alcohol poisoning in the father is the main cause of the daughter’s inability to breastfeed, and this issue typically doesn’t get resolved in future generations. However, Bunge has been challenged by Dr. Agnes Bluhm, "Die Stillungsnot," Zeitschrift für Soziale Medizin, 1908 (fully summarized by herself in Sexual-Probleme, Jan., 1909).
See, e.g., T. Arthur Helme, "The Unborn Child," British Medical Journal, Aug. 24, 1907. Nutrition should, of course, be adequate. Noel Paton has shown (Lancet, July 4, 1903) that defective nutrition of the pregnant woman diminishes the weight of the offspring.
See, e.g., T. Arthur Helme, "The Unborn Child," British Medical Journal, Aug. 24, 1907. Nutrition should definitely be sufficient. Noel Paton has demonstrated (Lancet, July 4, 1903) that poor nutrition in pregnant women reduces the weight of their children.
Debreyne, Mœchialogie, p. 277. And from the Protestant side see Northcote (Christianity and Sex Problems, Ch. IX), who permits sexual intercourse during pregnancy.
Debreyne, Mœchialogie, p. 277. And from the Protestant perspective, see Northcote (Christianity and Sex Problems, Ch. IX), who allows sexual intercourse during pregnancy.
See Appendix A to the third volume of these Studies; also Ploss and Bartels, loc. cit.
See Appendix A to the third volume of these Studies; also Ploss and Bartels, loc. cit.
Thus one lady writes: "I have only had one child, but I may say that during pregnancy the desire for union was much stronger, for the whole time, than at any other period." Bouchacourt (La Grossesse, pp. 180-183) states that, as a rule, sexual desire is not diminished by pregnancy, and is occasionally increased.
Thus one lady writes: "I've only had one child, but I can say that during pregnancy, my desire for intimacy was much stronger the entire time than at any other point." Bouchacourt (La Grossesse, pp. 180-183) states that, as a rule, sexual desire is not reduced by pregnancy and can sometimes even increase.
This "inconvenience" remains to-day a stumbling-block with many excellent authorities. "Except when there is a tendency to miscarriage," says Kossmann (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 257), "we must be very guarded in ordering abstinence from intercourse during pregnancy," and Ballantyne (The Fœtus, p. 475) cautiously remarks that the question is difficult to decide. Forel also (Die Sexuelle Frage, fourth edition, p. 81), who is not prepared to advocate complete sexual abstinence during a normal pregnancy, admits that it is a rather difficult question.
This "inconvenience" continues to be a challenge for many respected experts today. "Unless there is a risk of complications," states Kossmann (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 257), "we need to be very careful about recommending abstinence from intercourse during pregnancy," and Ballantyne (The Fœtus, p. 475) cautiously notes that the issue is tough to resolve. Forel also (Die Sexuelle Frage, fourth edition, p. 81), who is not ready to support total sexual abstinence during a normal pregnancy, acknowledges that it is quite a complicated question.
This point is discussed, for instance, by Séropian in a Paris Thesis (Fréquence comparée des Causes de l'Accouchement Prémature, 1907); he concludes that coitus during pregnancy is a more frequent cause of premature confinement than is commonly supposed, especially in primiparæ, and markedly so by the ninth month.
This point is discussed, for instance, by Séropian in a Paris Thesis (Fréquence comparée des Causes de l'Accouchement Prémature, 1907); he concludes that having sex during pregnancy is a more common cause of premature birth than usually thought, particularly in first-time mothers, and significantly so by the ninth month.
"Infantile Mortality: The Huddersfield Scheme," British Medical Journal, Dec., 1907; Samson Moore, "Infant Mortality," ib., August 29, 1908.
"Infant Mortality: The Huddersfield Scheme," British Medical Journal, Dec. 1907; Samson Moore, "Infant Mortality," ib., August 29, 1908.
Ellen Key has admirably dealt with proposals of this kind (as put forth by C. P. Stetson) in her Essays "On Love and Marriage." In opposition to such proposals Ellen Key suggests that such women as have been properly trained for maternal duties and are unable entirely to support themselves while exercising them should be subsidized by the State during the child's first three years of life. It may be added that in Leipzig the plan of subsidizing mothers who (under proper medical and other supervision) suckle their infants has already been introduced.
Ellen Key has commendably addressed proposals like the ones suggested by C. P. Stetson in her Essays "On Love and Marriage." In contrast to these proposals, Ellen Key argues that women who have been properly prepared for motherhood and can't fully support themselves while fulfilling these duties should receive financial support from the State during the first three years of their child's life. Additionally, it's worth noting that in Leipzig, a program to financially support mothers who breastfeed their infants (under appropriate medical and other supervision) has already been implemented.
CHAPTER II.
SEXUAL EDUCATION.
Nurture Necessary as Well as Breed—Precocious Manifestations of the Sexual Impulse—Are They to be Regarded as Normal?—The Sexual Play of Children—The Emotion of Love in Childhood—Are Town Children More Precocious Sexually Than Country Children?—Children's Ideas Concerning the Origin of Babies—Need for Beginning the Sexual Education of Children in Early Years—The Importance of Early Training in Responsibility—Evil of the Old Doctrine of Silence in Matters of Sex—The Evil Magnified When Applied to Girls—The Mother the Natural and Best Teacher—The Morbid Influence of Artificial Mystery in Sex Matters—Books on Sexual Enlightenment of the Young—Nature of the Mother's Task—Sexual Education in the School—The Value of Botany—Zoölogy—Sexual Education After Puberty—The Necessity of Counteracting Quack Literature—Danger of Neglecting to Prepare for the First Onset of Menstruation—The Right Attitude Towards Woman's Sexual Life—The Vital Necessity of the Hygiene of Menstruation During Adolescence—Such Hygiene Compatible with the Educational and Social Equality of the Sexes—The Invalidism of Women Mainly Due to Hygienic Neglect—Good Influence of Physical Training on Women and Bad Influence of Athletics—The Evils of Emotional Suppression—Need of Teaching the Dignity of Sex—Influence of These Factors on a Woman's Fate in Marriage—Lectures and Addresses on Sexual Hygiene—The Doctor's Part in Sexual Education—Pubertal Initiation Into the Ideal World—The Place of the Religious and Ethical Teacher—The Initiation Rites of Savages Into Manhood and Womanhood—The Sexual Influence of Literature—The Sexual Influence of Art.
Nurture Is Just as Important as Nature—Early Signs of the Sexual Impulse—Should They Be Seen as Normal?—Children's Sexual Play—The Experience of Love in Childhood—Are City Kids More Sexually Advanced Than Rural Kids?—Kids' Thoughts on Where Babies Come From—The Need to Start Sexual Education Early—The Importance of Teaching Responsibility from a Young Age—The Harm of the Old Silence Around Sex—The Harm Intensified for Girls—Mothers as the Natural and Best Teachers—The Negative Impact of Artificial Mystery Surrounding Sex—Books for Youth Sexual Education—The Nature of a Mother's Role—Sexual Education in Schools—The Value of Botany—Zoology—Sexual Education After Puberty—The Importance of Countering Fake Literature—The Risk of Not Preparing for the First Menstruation—The Right Perspective on Women's Sexual Lives—The Crucial Need for Menstrual Hygiene During Adolescence—Menstrual Hygiene Being Compatible with Gender Equality—Women’s Health Issues Mainly Due to Neglect of Hygiene—The Positive Effect of Physical Training on Women and the Negative Effect of Athletics—The Harm of Emotional Suppression—The Need to Teach the Dignity of Sex—How These Factors Impact a Woman's Experience in Marriage—Lectures and Talks on Sexual Health—The Role of Doctors in Sexual Education—Coming of Age into the Ideal World—The Role of Religious and Ethical Educators—The Rites of Passage into Adulthood in Primitive Cultures—The Sexual Influence of Literature—The Sexual Influence of Art.
It may seem to some that in attaching weight to the ancestry, the parentage, the conception, the gestation, even the first infancy, of the child we are wandering away from the sphere of the psychology of sex. That is far from being the case. We are, on the contrary, going to the root of sex. All our growing knowledge tends to show that, equally with his physical nature, the child's psychic nature is based on breed and nurture, on the quality of the stocks he belongs to, and on the care taken at the early moments when care counts for most, to preserve the fine quality of those stocks.
It might seem to some that by focusing on the child's background, parentage, conception, gestation, and even early infancy, we're straying from the field of sexual psychology. That couldn't be further from the truth. In fact, we're getting to the core of sex. Our increasing understanding shows that, just like his physical traits, the child's mental traits are influenced by both genetics and environment, the quality of his lineage, and the attention given in the early stages when that attention matters the most, to maintain the high quality of those lineages.
It must, of course, be remembered that the influences of both breed and nurture are alike influential on the fate of the individual. The influence of nurture is so obvious that few are likely to under-rate it. The influence of breed, however, is less obvious, and we may still meet with persons so ill informed, and perhaps so prejudiced, as to deny it altogether. The growth of our knowledge in this matter, by showing how subtle and penetrative is the influence of heredity, cannot fail to dispel this mischievous notion. No sound civilization is possible except in a community which in the mass is not only well-nurtured but well-bred. And in no part of life so much as in the sexual relationships is the influence of good breeding more decisive. An instructive illustration may be gleaned from the minute and precise history of his early life furnished to me by a highly cultured Russian gentleman. He was brought up in childhood with his own brothers and sisters and a little girl of the same age who had been adopted from infancy, the child of a prostitute who had died soon after the infant's birth. The adopted child was treated as one of the family, and all the children supposed that she was a real sister. Yet from early years she developed instincts unlike those of the children with whom she was nurtured; she lied, she was cruel, she loved to make mischief, and she developed precociously vicious sexual impulses; though carefully educated, she adopted the occupation of her mother, and at the age of twenty-two was exiled to Siberia for robbery and attempt to murder. The child of a chance father and a prostitute mother is not fatally devoted to ruin; but such a child is ill-bred, and that fact, in some cases, may neutralize all the influences of good nurture.
It must be remembered that both genetics and environment significantly impact an individual's fate. The effect of environment is so clear that few people underestimate it. However, the impact of genetics is less apparent, and we may still encounter individuals who, either poorly informed or biased, deny it entirely. Our growing understanding of this subject reveals how subtle and pervasive the influence of heredity is, which should dispel this harmful belief. No well-functioning society can exist without a community that is both well-nurtured and well-bred. Nowhere is the influence of good breeding more critical than in sexual relationships. An enlightening example comes from the detailed history of a cultured Russian gentleman's early life. He grew up with his siblings and a little girl of the same age who had been adopted from infancy; she was the child of a prostitute who passed away shortly after giving birth. The adopted girl was treated as part of the family, and all the children believed she was a real sister. Yet, from an early age, she displayed behaviors that were different from those of the other children; she lied, was cruel, enjoyed causing trouble, and developed precocious and vicious sexual urges. Despite being carefully educated, she followed in her mother's footsteps and, by the age of twenty-two, was exiled to Siberia for robbery and attempted murder. A child with an unknown father and a prostitute mother is not necessarily doomed to failure; however, such a child is poorly bred, and that fact can sometimes outweigh the benefits of good nurturing.
When we reach the period of infancy we have already passed beyond the foundations and potentialities of the sexual life; we are in some cases witnessing its actual beginnings. It is a well-established fact that auto-erotic manifestations may sometimes be observed even in infants of less than twelve months. We are not now called upon to discuss the disputable point as to how far such manifestations at this age can be called normal.[18] A slight degree of menstrual and mammary activity sometimes occurs at birth.[19] It seems clear that nervous and psychic sexual activity has its first springs at this early period, and as the years go by an increasing number of individuals join the stream until at puberty practically all are carried along in the great current.
When we enter infancy, we have already moved beyond the basics and possibilities of sexual development; in some cases, we are even seeing its actual beginnings. It's a well-known fact that self-stimulating behaviors can be observed even in babies under twelve months old. We don't need to debate how normal these behaviors are at this age. A slight amount of menstrual and breast activity can sometimes be seen at birth. It seems clear that early nervous and psychological sexual activity starts at this stage, and as time goes on, more individuals join in until, by puberty, almost everyone is swept along in this major flow.
While, therefore, it is possibly, even probably, true that the soundest and healthiest individuals show no definite signs of nervous and psychic sexuality in childhood, such manifestations are still sufficiently frequent to make it impossible to say that sexual hygiene may be completely ignored until puberty is approaching.
While it’s likely that the healthiest individuals don't show clear signs of nervous or psychological sexuality in childhood, these signs still occur often enough that we can't claim that sexual hygiene can be completely ignored until puberty is near.
Precocious physical development occurs as a somewhat rare variation. W. Roger Williams ("Precocious Sexual Development with Abstracts of over One Hundred Cases," British Gynæcological Journal, May, 1902) has furnished an important contribution to the knowledge of this anomaly which is much commoner in girls than in boys. Roger Williams's cases include only twenty boys to eighty girls, and precocity is not only more frequent but more pronounced in girls, who have been known to conceive at eight, while thirteen is stated to be the earliest age at which boys have proved able to beget children. This, it may be remarked, is also the earliest age at which spermatozoa are found in the seminal fluid of boys; before that age the ejaculations contain no spermatozoa, and, as Fürbringer and Moll have found, they may even be absent at sixteen, or later. In female children precocious sexual development is less commonly associated with general increase of bodily development than in boys. (An individual case of early sexual development in a girl of five has been completely described and figured in the Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1896, Heft 4, p. 262.)
Precocious physical development is a fairly rare occurrence. W. Roger Williams ("Precocious Sexual Development with Abstracts of over One Hundred Cases," British Gynæcological Journal, May, 1902) has made an important contribution to understanding this anomaly, which is much more common in girls than in boys. In Roger Williams's cases, there are only twenty boys compared to eighty girls, and precocity is not only more frequent but also more noticeable in girls, who have been known to conceive as young as eight, while thirteen is reported to be the earliest age at which boys have been able to father children. It's worth noting that this is also the earliest age at which sperm can be found in the seminal fluid of boys; before that age, their ejaculations contain no sperm, and as Fürbringer and Moll have found, sperm may even be absent at sixteen or older. In female children, precocious sexual development is less often linked to a general increase in overall physical development than in boys. (An individual case of early sexual development in a five-year-old girl has been fully described and illustrated in the Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1896, Heft 4, p. 262.)
Precocious sexual impulses are generally vague, occasional, and more or less innocent. A case of rare and pronounced character, in which a child, a boy, from the age of two had been sexually attracted to girls and women, and directed all his thoughts and actions to sexual attempts on them, has been described by Herbert Rich, of Detroit (Alienist and Neurologist, Nov., 1905). General evidence from the literature of the subject as to sexual precocity, its frequency and significance, has been brought together by L. M. Terman ("A Study in Precocity," American Journal Psychology, April, 1905).
Precocious sexual urges are usually unclear, sporadic, and relatively innocent. A rare and notable case involves a boy who, starting at the age of two, was sexually drawn to girls and women, directing all his thoughts and actions toward sexual advances on them, as described by Herbert Rich from Detroit (Alienist and Neurologist, Nov., 1905). L. M. Terman has compiled general evidence from the literature regarding sexual precocity, its prevalence, and significance in his work ("A Study in Precocity," American Journal Psychology, April, 1905).
The erections that are liable to occur in male infants have usually no sexual significance, though, as Moll remarks, they may acquire it by attracting the child's attention; they are merely reflex. It is believed by some, however, and notably by Freud, that certain manifestations of infant activity, especially thumb-sucking, are of sexual causation, and that the sexual impulse constantly manifests itself at a very early age. The belief that the sexual instinct is absent in childhood, Freud regards as a serious error, so easy to correct by observation that he wonders how it can have arisen. "In reality," he remarks, "the new-born infant brings sexuality with it into the world, sexual sensations accompany it through the days of lactation and childhood, and very few children can fail to experience sexual activities and feelings before the period of puberty" (Freud, "Zur Sexuellen Aufklärung der Kinder," Soziale Medizin und Hygiene, Bd. ii, 1907; cf., for details, the same author's Drei Abhandlungen zur Sexualtheorie, 1905). Moll, on the other hand, considers that Freud's views on sexuality in infancy are exaggerations which must be decisively rejected, though he admits that it is difficult, if not impossible, to differentiate the feelings in childhood (Moll, Das Sexualleben des Kindes, p. 154). Moll believes also that psycho-sexual manifestations appearing after the age of eight are not pathological; children who are weakly or of bad heredity are not seldom sexually precocious, but, on the other hand, Moll has known children of eight or nine with strongly developed sexual impulses, who yet become finely developed men.
The erections that can occur in male infants usually have no sexual meaning, although, as Moll points out, they might catch the child's attention; they are simply reflex actions. However, some people, especially Freud, believe that certain behaviors in infants, like thumb-sucking, have sexual origins and that the sexual drive shows up very early. Freud thinks the idea that children lack a sexual instinct is a serious mistake, one that can be easily corrected through observation, and he wonders how it ever became a belief. "In reality," he states, "the newborn infant comes into the world with sexuality; sexual sensations accompany it throughout breastfeeding and childhood, and very few children don't experience sexual activities and feelings before puberty" (Freud, "Zur Sexuellen Aufklärung der Kinder," Soziale Medizin und Hygiene, Bd. ii, 1907; cf., for details, the same author's Drei Abhandlungen zur Sexualtheorie, 1905). Moll, on the other hand, thinks Freud's views about infant sexuality are exaggerations that should be firmly rejected, although he acknowledges that it is tough, if not impossible, to separate feelings in childhood (Moll, Das Sexualleben des Kindes, p. 154). Moll also believes that sexual behaviors appearing after age eight aren't pathological; children who are weak or have poor genetics can sometimes be sexually precocious, but he has also seen children around eight or nine with strong sexual impulses who grow up to be well-developed men.
Rudimentary sexual activities in childhood, accompanied by sexual feelings, must indeed—when they are not too pronounced or too premature—be regarded as coming within the normal sphere, though when they occur in children of bad heredity they are not without serious risks. But in healthy children, after the age of seven or eight, they tend to produce no evil results, and are strictly of the nature of play. Play, both in animals and men, as Groos has shown with marvelous wealth of illustration, is a beneficent process of education; the young creature is thereby preparing itself for the exercise of those functions which in later life it must carry out more completely and more seriously. In his Spiele der Menschen, Groos applies this idea to the sexual play of children, and brings forward quotations from literature in evidence. Keller, in his "Romeo und Juliet auf dem Dorfe," has given an admirably truthful picture of these childish love-relationships. Emil Schultze-Malkowsky (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. ii, p. 370) reproduces some scenes from the life of a little girl of seven clearly illustrating the exact nature of the sexual manifestation at this age.
Rudimentary sexual activities in childhood, along with sexual feelings, should indeed—when they aren't too intense or too early—be seen as part of normal development. However, when these occur in children with negative hereditary backgrounds, there are significant risks involved. In healthy children, after the age of seven or eight, these activities generally don't lead to harmful consequences and are just a type of play. Play, in both animals and humans, as Groos has illustrated with great detail, is a beneficial educational process; young beings are preparing themselves for the roles they will need to undertake more fully and seriously in adulthood. In his Spiele der Menschen, Groos applies this concept to the sexual play of children and provides examples from literature to support his argument. Keller, in his "Romeo und Juliet auf dem Dorfe," offers a remarkably accurate portrayal of these childhood relationships. Emil Schultze-Malkowsky (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. ii, p. 370) shares scenes from the life of a seven-year-old girl that clearly illustrate the nature of sexual expression at this age.
A kind of rudimentary sexual intercourse between children, as Bloch has remarked (Beiträge, etc., Bd. ii, p. 254), occurs in many parts of the world, and is recognized by their elders as play. This is, for instance, the case among the Bawenda of the Transvaal (Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1896, Heft 4, p. 364), and among the Papuans of Kaiser-Wilhelms-Land, with the approval of the parents, although much reticence is observed (id., 1889, Heft 1, p. 16). Godard (Egypte et Palestine, 1867, p. 105) noted the sexual play of the boys and girls in Cairo. In New Mexico W. A. Hammond (Sexual Impotence, p. 107) has seen boys and girls attempting a playful sexual conjunction with the encouragement of men and women, and in New York he has seen boys and girls of three and four doing the same in the presence of their parents, with only a laughing rebuke. "Playing at pa and ma" is indeed extremely common among children in genuine innocence, and with a complete absence of viciousness; and is by no means confined to children of low social class. Moll remarks on its frequency (Libido Sexualis, Bd. i, p. 277), and the committee of evangelical pastors, in their investigation of German rural morality (Die Geschlechtliche-sittliche Verhältnisse, Bd. i, p. 102) found that children who are not yet of school age make attempts at coitus. The sexual play of children is by no means confined to father and mother games; frequently there are games of school with the climax in exposure and smackings, and occasionally there are games of being doctors and making examinations. Thus a young English woman says: "Of course, when we were at school [at the age of twelve and earlier] we used to play with one another, several of us girls; we used to go into a field and pretend we were doctors and had to examine one another, and then we used to pull up one another's clothes and feel each other."
A type of basic sexual interaction among children, as Bloch mentioned (Beiträge, etc., Bd. ii, p. 254), happens in various parts of the world and is seen by adults as just play. This is, for example, the case with the Bawenda in the Transvaal (Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1896, Heft 4, p. 364) and among the Papuans in Kaiser-Wilhelms-Land, where parents approve, even though there is a degree of modesty observed (id., 1889, Heft 1, p. 16). Godard (Egypte et Palestine, 1867, p. 105) noted that boys and girls in Cairo engage in sexual play. In New Mexico, W. A. Hammond (Sexual Impotence, p. 107) observed that boys and girls playfully tried to engage sexually with encouragement from adults, and in New York, he witnessed three- and four-year-olds doing the same in front of their parents, who only gave a playful reprimand. "Playing house" is very common among children in true innocence, without any malicious intent, and it is not limited to lower social classes. Moll notes its prevalence (Libido Sexualis, Bd. i, p. 277), and a committee of evangelical pastors, while studying rural morality in Germany (Die Geschlechtliche-sittliche Verhältnisse, Bd. i, p. 102), discovered that children who are not yet in school also attempt sexual activities. The sexual play among children isn't just limited to mother and father scenarios; there are often school-themed games that end in exposure and spanking, and sometimes there are games involving doctor roles and examinations. A young English woman recalls: "Of course, when we were in school [at age twelve and younger], we would play with each other, several of us girls; we would go into a field and pretend to be doctors and have to examine each other, and then we would lift each other's clothes and touch each other."
These games do not necessarily involve the coöperation of the sexual impulse, and still less have they any element of love. But emotions of love, scarcely if at all distinguishable from adult sexual love, frequently appear at equally early ages. They are of the nature of play, in so far as play is a preparation for the activities of later life, though, unlike the games, they are not felt as play. Ramdohr, more than a century ago (Venus Urania, 1798), referred to the frequent love of little boys for women. More usually the love is felt towards individuals of the opposite or the same sex who are not widely different in age, though usually older. The most comprehensive study of the matter has been made by Sanford Bell in America on a basis of as many as 2,300 cases (S. Bell, "A Preliminary Study of the Emotion of Love Between the Sexes," American Journal Psychology, July, 1902). Bell finds that the presence of the emotion between three and eight years of age is shown by such actions as hugging, kissing, lifting each other, scuffling, sitting close to each other, confessions to each other and to others, talking about each other when apart, seeking each other and excluding the rest, grief at separation, giving gifts, showing special courtesies to each other, making sacrifices for each other, exhibiting jealousy. The girls are, on the whole, more aggressive than the boys, and less anxious to keep the matter secret. After the age of eight, the girls increase in modesty and the boys become still more secretive. The physical sensations are not usually located in the sexual organs; erection of the penis and hyperæmia of the female sexual parts Bell regards as marking undue precocity. But there is diffused vascular and nervous tumescence and a state of exaltation comparable, though not equal, to that experienced in adolescent and adult age. On the whole, as Bell soundly concludes, "love between children of opposite sex bears much the same relation to that between adults as the flower does to the fruit, and has about as little of physical sexuality in it as an apple-blossom has of the apple that develops from it." Moll also (op. cit. p. 76) considers that kissing and other similar superficial contacts, which he denominates the phenomena of contrectation, constitute most frequently the first and sole manifestation of the sexual impulse in childhood.
These games don't necessarily include the cooperation of sexual desire, and they definitely don’t involve love. However, feelings of love, which are barely distinguishable from adult sexual love, often show up at similarly early ages. These feelings are playful in nature, as play prepares us for future activities, but they are not experienced as play. Over a century ago, Ramdohr (Venus Urania, 1798) noted the common affection that little boys have for women. More often, this love is directed towards individuals of the opposite or same sex who are not significantly different in age, usually older. The most thorough study on this topic was done by Sanford Bell in America, examining around 2,300 cases (S. Bell, "A Preliminary Study of the Emotion of Love Between the Sexes," American Journal Psychology, July, 1902). Bell found that signs of this emotion between ages three and eight include actions like hugging, kissing, lifting each other, roughhousing, sitting close together, confessing feelings to each other and to others, talking about one another when apart, seeking each other out while excluding others, feeling sad at separation, giving gifts, showing special kind gestures, making sacrifices for one another, and exhibiting jealousy. Generally, girls are more assertive than boys and less likely to keep these feelings secret. After age eight, girls tend to become more modest, while boys grow increasingly secretive. Physical sensations are typically not focused on the sexual organs; Bell considers penile erection and increased blood flow to female sexual areas as signs of premature development. However, there is a general state of excitement, comparable but not identical to what is experienced in adolescence and adulthood. Overall, as Bell wisely concludes, "love between children of the opposite sex is much like the relationship between adults as a flower is to a fruit, with just as little physical sexuality as an apple blossom has of the apple that will develop from it." Moll also (op. cit. p. 76) believes that kissing and other similar light touches, which he calls the phenomena of contrectation, often represent the first and sometimes the only expression of sexual desire in childhood.
It is often stated that it is easier for children to preserve their sexual innocence in the country than in the town, and that only in cities is sexuality rampant and conspicuous. This is by no means true, and in some respects it is the reverse of the truth. Certainly, hard work, a natural and simple life, and a lack of alert intelligence often combine to keep the rural lad chaste in thought and act until the period of adolescence is completed. Ammon, for instance, states, though without giving definite evidence, that this is common among the Baden conscripts. Certainly, also, all the multiple sensory excitements of urban life tend to arouse the nervous and cerebral excitability of the young at a comparatively early age in the sexual as in other fields, and promote premature desires and curiosities. But, on the other hand, urban life offers the young no gratification for their desires and curiosities. The publicity of a city, the universal surveillance, the studied decorum of a population conscious that it is continually exposed to the gaze of strangers, combine to spread a veil over the esoteric side of life, which, even when at last it fails to conceal from the young the urban stimuli of that life, effectually conceals, for the most part, the gratifications of those stimuli. In the country, however, these restraints do not exist in any corresponding degree; animals render the elemental facts of sexual life clear to all; there is less need or regard for decorum; speech is plainer; supervision is impossible, and the amplest opportunities for sexual intimacy are at hand. If the city may perhaps be said to favor unchastity of thought in the young, the country may certainly be said to favor unchastity of act.
It’s often said that kids can keep their sexual innocence more easily in the countryside than in the city, and that sexuality is only a problem in urban areas. This isn't true, and in some ways, it's the opposite of the truth. Sure, hard work, a simple lifestyle, and a lack of awareness often help keep rural boys chaste in thought and action until they reach adolescence. For example, Ammon suggests, although without solid evidence, that this is common among the conscripts from Baden. At the same time, all the various sensory experiences of city life tend to awaken the nervous and emotional excitability of young people at a relatively early age, leading to premature desires and curiosities, both sexually and otherwise. However, urban life doesn’t provide young people with any way to satisfy those desires and curiosities. The openness of a city, the constant surveillance, and the careful behavior of people who know they are always under the watchful eyes of strangers work together to create a barrier around the private aspects of life. Even when young people become aware of the urban stimuli, most of the time, the rewards of those stimuli remain hidden. In contrast, the countryside doesn’t have those same constraints; animals make the basic facts of sexual life obvious to everyone; there’s less emphasis on decorum; communication is more straightforward; supervision is impossible, and there are plenty of chances for sexual intimacy. If we can say that the city may encourage unchaste thoughts in young people, we can definitely say that the countryside favors unchaste actions.
The elaborate investigations of the Committee of Lutheran pastors into sexual morality (Die Geschlechtich-sittliche Verhältnisse im Deutschen Reiche), published a few years ago, demonstrate amply the sexual freedom in rural Germany, and Moll, who is decidedly of opinion that the country enjoys no relative freedom from sexuality, states (op. cit., pp. 137-139, 239) that even the circulation of obscene books and pictures among school-children seems to be more frequent in small towns and the country than in large cities. In Russia, where it might be thought that urban and rural conditions offered less contrast than in many countries, the same difference has been observed. "I do not know," a Russian correspondent writes, "whether Zola in La Terre correctly describes the life of French villages. But the ways of a Russian village, where I passed part of my childhood, fairly resemble those described by Zola. In the life of the rural population into which I was plunged everything was impregnated with erotism. One was surrounded by animal lubricity in all its immodesty. Contrary to the generally received opinion, I believe that a child may preserve his sexual innocence more easily in a town than in the country. There are, no doubt, many exceptions to this rule. But the functions of the sexual life are generally more concealed in the towns than in the fields. Modesty (whether or not of the merely superficial and exterior kind) is more developed among urban populations. In speaking of sexual things in the towns people veil their thought more; even the lower class in towns employ more restraint, more euphemisms, than peasants. Thus in the towns a child may easily fail to comprehend when risky subjects are talked of in his presence. It may be said that the corruption of towns, though more concealed, is all the deeper. Maybe, but that concealment preserves children from it. The town child sees prostitutes in the street every day without distinguishing them from other people. In the country he would every day hear it stated in the crudest terms that such and such a girl has been found at night in a barn or a ditch making love with such and such a youth, or that the servant girl slips every night into the coachman's bed, the facts of sexual intercourse, pregnancy, and childbirth being spoken of in the plainest terms. In towns the child's attention is solicited by a thousand different objects; in the country, except fieldwork, which fails to interest him, he hears only of the reproduction of animals and the erotic exploits of girls and youths. When we say that the urban environment is more exciting we are thinking of adults, but the things which excite the adult have usually no erotic effect on the child, who cannot, however, long remain asexual when he sees the great peasant girls, as ardent as mares in heat, abandoning themselves to the arms of robust youths. He cannot fail to remark these frank manifestations of sexuality, though the subtle and perverse refinements of the town would escape his notice. I know that in the countries of exaggerated prudery there is much hidden corruption, more, one is sometimes inclined to think, than in less hypocritical countries. But I believe that that is a false impression, and am persuaded that precisely because of all these little concealments which excite the malicious amusement of foreigners, there are really many more young people in England who remain chaste than in the countries which treat sexual relations more frankly. At all events, if I have known Englishmen who were very debauched and very refined in vice, I have also known young men of the same nation, over twenty, who were as innocent as children, but never a young Frenchman, Italian, or Spaniard of whom this could be said." There is undoubtedly truth in this statement, though it must be remembered that, excellent as chastity is, if it is based on mere ignorance, its possessor is exposed to terrible dangers.
The detailed investigations by the Committee of Lutheran pastors into sexual morality (Die Geschlechtich-sittliche Verhältnisse im Deutschen Reiche), published a few years ago, clearly show the sexual freedom in rural Germany. Moll, who strongly believes that the countryside does not enjoy any real freedom from sexuality, states (op. cit., pp. 137-139, 239) that the circulation of obscene books and pictures among schoolchildren seems to happen more often in small towns and rural areas than in large cities. In Russia, where one might think that urban and rural conditions have less contrast than in many other countries, the same difference has been noted. "I don’t know," a Russian correspondent writes, "whether Zola in La Terre accurately portrays the life of French villages. But the life in a Russian village, where I spent part of my childhood, closely resembles what Zola describes. In the rural life I was immersed in, everything was infused with eroticism. One is surrounded by raw sexuality in all its blatant forms. Contrary to popular belief, I think a child can maintain their sexual innocence more easily in a town than in the countryside. There are certainly many exceptions to this rule. However, the expressions of sexual life are generally more hidden in the cities than in the fields. Modesty (whether it’s just superficial or not) is more developed among urban populations. When discussing sexual topics in cities, people tend to be more discreet; even the working class in cities use more restraint and euphemisms than peasants do. So, in towns, a child might easily fail to grasp when risky topics are discussed around them. One might say that the corruption in towns, though more hidden, runs deeper. Maybe so, but that concealment protects children from it. The city child sees prostitutes on the street every day without being able to tell them apart from other people. In the countryside, they would hear crudely stated gossip daily about this or that girl found at night in a barn or a ditch making love with a certain youth, or that the maid sneaks into the coachman’s bed every night, with sexual intercourse, pregnancy, and childbirth being discussed in the plainest language. In towns, a child’s attention is drawn to countless different things; in the countryside, aside from fieldwork, which doesn’t interest them, they only hear about animal reproduction and the sexual adventures of girls and boys. When we say the urban environment is more stimulating, we are thinking of adults, but the things that excite adults usually have no sexual effect on children, who cannot remain untouched when they see the large peasant girls, as eager as mares in heat, surrendering themselves to strong young men. They can't help but notice these straightforward expressions of sexuality, although the subtle and twisted nuances of city life would go over their heads. I know that in countries with extreme prudery, there is a lot of hidden corruption, perhaps even more than in less hypocritical countries. But I believe that’s a mistaken impression, and I'm convinced that it is precisely due to all these little concealments that provoke the malicious amusement of outsiders, there are really many more young people in England who remain chaste than in countries that deal with sexual relations more openly. At any rate, while I have known very debauched and very sophisticated Englishmen, I've also known young men from the same nation, over twenty, who were as innocent as children, but never a young Frenchman, Italian, or Spaniard of whom this could be said." There is undoubtedly some truth in this statement, though it must be kept in mind that, while chastity is excellent, if it’s based on mere ignorance, the person holding it is exposed to serious dangers.
The question of sexual hygiene, more especially in its special aspect of sexual enlightenment, is not, however, dependent on the fact that in some children the psychic and nervous manifestation of sex appears at an earlier age than in others. It rests upon the larger general fact that in all children the activity of intelligence begins to work at a very early age, and that this activity tends to manifest itself in an inquisitive desire to know many elementary facts of life which are really dependent on sex. The primary and most universal of these desires is the desire to know where children come from. No question could be more natural; the question of origins is necessarily a fundamental one in childish philosophies as, in more ultimate shapes, it is in adult philosophies. Most children, either guided by the statements, usually the misstatements, of their elders, or by their own intelligence working amid such indications as are open to them, are in possession of a theory of the origin of babies.
The issue of sexual hygiene, particularly regarding sexual education, doesn’t depend on the fact that some kids show signs of sexual awareness earlier than others. Instead, it relies on the broader idea that all children’s intelligence starts developing at a very young age, leading to a natural curiosity about various basic facts of life that are related to sex. One of the most fundamental questions they have is about where babies come from. This inquiry is completely natural; understanding origins is a key part of how children think, just as it is for adults. Most kids, whether influenced by the often inaccurate explanations from the adults around them or guided by their own reasoning based on available information, come up with their own theories about how babies are made.
Stanley Hall ("Contents of Children's Minds on Entering School," Pedagogical Seminary, June, 1891) has collected some of the beliefs of young children as to the origin of babies. "God makes babies in heaven, though the Holy Mother and even Santa Claus make some. He lets them down and drops them, and the women or doctors catch them, or He leaves them on the sidewalk, or brings them down a wooden ladder backwards and pulls it up again, or mamma or the doctor or the nurse go up and fetch them, sometimes in a balloon, or they fly down and lose off their wings in some place or other and forget it, and jump down to Jesus, who gives them around. They were also often said to be found in flour-barrels, and the flour sticks ever so long, you know, or they grew in cabbages, or God puts them in water, perhaps in the sewer, and the doctor gets them out and takes them to sick folks that want them, or the milkman brings them early in the morning; they are dug out of the ground, or bought at the baby store."
Stanley Hall ("Contents of Children's Minds on Entering School," Pedagogical Seminary, June, 1891) has gathered some of the beliefs of young children about where babies come from. "God creates babies in heaven, but the Holy Mother and even Santa Claus make some too. He sends them down and drops them, and the women or doctors catch them, or He leaves them on the sidewalk, or brings them down a wooden ladder backwards and pulls it up again, or Mom or the doctor or the nurse go up and get them, sometimes in a balloon, or they fly down and lose their wings somewhere and forget about it, and jump down to Jesus, who hands them out. They were also often said to be found in flour barrels, and the flour sticks for a really long time, you know, or they grow in cabbages, or God puts them in water, maybe in the sewer, and the doctor pulls them out and takes them to sick people that need them, or the milkman brings them early in the morning; they are dug out of the ground, or bought at the baby store."
In England and America the inquisitive child is often told that the baby was found in the garden, under a gooseberry bush or elsewhere; or more commonly it is said, with what is doubtless felt to be a nearer approach to the truth, that the doctor brought it. In Germany the common story told to children is that the stork brings the baby. Various theories, mostly based on folk-lore, have been put forward to explain this story, but none of them seem quite convincing (see, e.g., G. Herman, "Sexual-Mythen," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. i, Heft 5, 1906, p. 176, and P. Näcke, Neurologische Centralblatt, No. 17, 1907). Näcke thinks there is some plausibility in Professor Petermann's suggestion that a frog writhing in a stork's bill resembles a tiny human creature.
In England and America, curious kids are often told that a baby was found in the garden, under a gooseberry bush or somewhere similar; or more commonly, it's said—probably believed to be a closer version of the truth—that the doctor brought it. In Germany, the usual story for children is that the stork brings the baby. Various theories, mostly based on folklore, have been proposed to explain this story, but none seem particularly convincing (see, e.g., G. Herman, "Sexual-Mythen," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. i, Heft 5, 1906, p. 176, and P. Näcke, Neurologische Centralblatt, No. 17, 1907). Näcke finds some plausibility in Professor Petermann's suggestion that a frog squirming in a stork's beak looks like a tiny human.
In Iceland, according to Max Bartels ("Isländischer Brauch und Volksglaube," etc., Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1900, Heft 2 and 3) we find a transition between the natural and the fanciful in the stories told to children of the origin of babies (the stork is here precluded, for it only extends to the southern border of Scandinavian lands). In North Iceland it is said that God made the baby and the mother bore it, and on that account is now ill. In the northwest it is said that God made the baby and gave it to the mother. Elsewhere it is said that God sent the baby and the midwife brought it, the mother only being in bed to be near the baby (which is seldom placed in a cradle). It is also sometimes said that a lamb or a bird brought the baby. Again it is said to have entered during the night through the window. Sometimes, however, the child is told that the baby came out of the mother's breasts, or from below her breasts, and that is why she is not well.
In Iceland, according to Max Bartels ("Isländischer Brauch und Volksglaube," etc., Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1900, Heft 2 and 3), there’s a blend of the natural and the imaginative in the stories told to children about where babies come from (the stork doesn't play a role here, as it only reaches the southern edge of Scandinavian countries). In North Iceland, people say that God created the baby, and the mother gave birth, which is why she’s now unwell. In the northwest, it’s said that God made the baby and handed it to the mother. Elsewhere, it’s said that God sent the baby and the midwife delivered it, with the mother just lying in bed to be close to the baby (who is rarely placed in a cradle). Sometimes, people say that a lamb or a bird brought the baby. Other times, it’s said the baby came through the window during the night. However, there are also stories that tell the child the baby emerged from the mother’s breasts or from just below them, which is why she feels unwell.
Even when children learn that babies come out of the mother's body this knowledge often remains very vague and inaccurate. It very commonly happens, for instance, in all civilized countries that the navel is regarded as the baby's point of exit from the body. This is a natural conclusion, since the navel is seemingly a channel into the body, and a channel for which there is no obvious use, while the pudendal cleft would not suggest itself to girls (and still less to boys) as the gate of birth, since it already appears to be monopolized by the urinary excretion. This belief concerning the navel is sometimes preserved through the whole period of adolescence, especially in girls of the so-called educated class, who are too well-bred to discuss the matter with their married friends, and believe indeed that they are already sufficiently well informed. At this age the belief may not be altogether harmless, in so far as it leads to the real gate of sex being left unguarded. In Elsass where girls commonly believe, and are taught, that babies come through the navel, popular folk-tales are current (Anthropophyteia, vol. iii, p. 89) which represent the mistakes resulting from this belief as leading to the loss of virginity.
Even when kids find out that babies come out of the mother’s body, this understanding often stays pretty vague and inaccurate. It’s common in many developed countries for people to think of the navel as the baby’s exit point from the body. This makes sense, since the navel seems like a channel into the body and doesn't seem to have a clear purpose, while the vaginal opening wouldn’t naturally come to mind for girls (and even less so for boys) as the birth passage, since it already appears to be primarily used for urinary functions. This belief about the navel sometimes continues into adolescence, especially among girls from so-called educated backgrounds, who are too reserved to discuss the issue with their married friends, and genuinely think they are well-informed enough. At this age, this belief may not be entirely harmless, as it leaves them unaware of the true aspects of sexuality. In Elsass, where girls commonly believe and are taught that babies come through the navel, popular folk tales circulate (Anthropophyteia, vol. iii, p. 89) that portray the misunderstandings stemming from this belief as leading to the loss of virginity.
Freud, who believes that children give little credit to the stork fable and similar stories invented for their mystification, has made an interesting psychological investigation into the real theories which children themselves, as the result of observation and thought, reach concerning the sexual facts of life (S. Freud, "Ueber Infantile Sexualtheorien," Sexual-Probleme, Dec., 1908). Such theories, he remarks, correspond to the brilliant, but defective hypotheses which primitive peoples arrive at concerning the nature and origin of the world. There are three theories, which, as Freud quite truly concludes, are very commonly formed by children. The first, and the most widely disseminated, is that there is no real anatomical difference between boys and girls; if the boy notices that his little sister has no obvious penis he even concludes that it is because she is too young, and the little girl herself takes the same view. The fact that in early life the clitoris is relatively larger and more penis-like helps to confirm this view which Freud connects with the tendency in later life to erotic dream of women furnished with a penis. This theory, as Freud also remarks, favors the growth of homosexuality when its germs are present. The second theory is the fæcal theory of the origin of babies. The child, who perhaps thinks his mother has a penis, and is in any case ignorant of the vagina, concludes that the baby is brought into the world by an action analogous to the action of the bowels. The third theory, which is perhaps less prevalent than the others, Freud terms the sadistic theory of coitus. The child realizes that his father must have taken some sort of part in his production. The theory that sexual intercourse consists in violence has in it a trace of truth, but seems to be arrived at rather obscurely. The child's own sexual feelings are often aroused for the first time when wrestling or struggling with a companion; he may see his mother, also, resisting more or less playfully a sudden caress from his father, and if a real quarrel takes place, the impression may be fortified. As to what the state of marriage consists in, Freud finds that it is usually regarded as a state which abolishes modesty; the most prevalent theory being that marriage means that people can make water before each other, while another common childish theory is that marriage is when people can show each other their private parts.
Freud, who believes that children don't take the stork story and similar tales seriously, conducted an interesting psychological study on the actual theories that children form about the sexual facts of life based on their observations and thoughts (S. Freud, "Ueber Infantile Sexualtheorien," Sexual-Probleme, Dec., 1908). He notes that these theories are similar to the brilliant but flawed hypotheses that primitive people develop regarding the nature and origin of the world. There are three theories that children commonly develop, as Freud correctly points out. The first, and most widely shared, is that there is no real anatomical difference between boys and girls; if a boy notices that his little sister doesn’t have an obvious penis, he might conclude it’s because she’s too young, and the little girl often shares this belief. The fact that the clitoris is relatively larger and resembles a penis in early childhood supports this view, which Freud links to a later tendency toward erotic dreams of women with a penis. This theory, as Freud observes, can contribute to the development of homosexuality when the underlying tendencies are present. The second theory is the fecal theory of how babies are made. The child, who might think his mother has a penis and is unaware of the vagina, concludes that babies are born through an action similar to bowel movements. The third theory, which is possibly less common than the others, Freud calls the sadistic theory of intercourse. The child realizes that his father must have played a role in his conception. The notion that sexual intercourse involves violence contains a grain of truth but seems to be understood rather obscurely. A child's own sexual feelings often awaken for the first time while wrestling or grappling with a friend; he might also observe his mother playfully resisting a sudden hug from his father, and if a real conflict arises, that impression may be reinforced. Regarding the nature of marriage, Freud finds that children typically see it as a state that eliminates modesty; the most common belief is that marriage allows people to urinate in front of each other, while another frequent childish idea is that marriage is when people can show each other their private parts.
Thus it is that at a very early stage of the child's life we are brought face to face with the question how we may most wisely begin his initiation into the knowledge of the great central facts of sex. It is perhaps a little late in the day to regard it as a question, but so it is among us, although three thousand five hundred years ago, the Egyptian father spoke to his child: "I have given you a mother who has carried you within her, a heavy burden, for your sake, and without resting on me. When at last you were born, she indeed submitted herself to the yoke, for during three years were her nipples in your mouth. Your excrements never turned her stomach, nor made her say, 'What am I doing?' When you were sent to school she went regularly every day to carry the household bread and beer to your master. When in your turn you marry and have a child, bring up your child as your mother brought you up."[20]
At a very early stage in a child's life, we confront the question of how to best start teaching them about the important facts of sex. It might seem a bit outdated to consider this a question, but it’s still relevant today. Three thousand five hundred years ago, an Egyptian father addressed his child: "I have given you a mother who carried you inside her, a heavy burden for your sake, without resting on me. When you were finally born, she accepted the challenge, as her nipples were in your mouth for three years. Your mess never made her sick or made her question her actions. When you went to school, she went every day to bring bread and beer to your teacher. When it’s your turn to marry and have a child, raise your child the way your mother raised you."
I take it for granted, however, that—whatever doubt there may be as to the how or the when—no doubt is any longer possible as to the absolute necessity of taking deliberate and active part in this sexual initiation, instead of leaving it to the chance revelation of ignorant and perhaps vicious companions or servants. It is becoming more and more widely felt that the risks of ignorant innocence are too great.
I assume that, regardless of any uncertainty about the how or when, there's no question anymore about the absolute need to be actively involved in this sexual initiation, rather than leaving it up to the random exposure from uninformed or potentially harmful friends or companions. More and more people believe that the dangers of being naively unaware are too significant.
"All the love and solicitude parental yearning can bestow," writes Dr. G. F. Butler, of Chicago (Love and its Affinities, 1899, p. 83), "all that the most refined religious influence can offer, all that the most cultivated associations can accomplish, in one fatal moment may be obliterated. There is no room for ethical reasoning, indeed oftentimes no consciousness of wrong, but only Margaret's 'Es war so süss'." The same writer adds (as had been previously remarked by Mrs. Craik and others) that among church members it is the finer and more sensitive organizations that are the most susceptible to sexual emotions. So far as boys are concerned, we leave instruction in matters of sex, the most sacred and central fact in the world, as Canon Lyttelton remarks, to "dirty-minded school-boys, grooms, garden-boys, anyone, in short, who at an early age may be sufficiently defiled and sufficiently reckless to talk of them." And, so far as girls are concerned, as Balzac long ago remarked, "a mother may bring up her daughter severely, and cover her beneath her wings for seventeen years; but a servant-girl can destroy that long work by a word, even by a gesture."
"All the love and care that a parent's longing can give," writes Dr. G. F. Butler from Chicago (Love and its Affinities, 1899, p. 83), "everything the most sophisticated religious influence can provide, everything the most cultured social circles can achieve, can be wiped away in one tragic moment. There’s no room for ethical reasoning, often not even any awareness of wrongdoing, just Margaret's 'Es war so süss.'” The same writer notes (as also pointed out by Mrs. Craik and others) that among church members, it's the more refined and sensitive individuals who are most vulnerable to sexual emotions. As far as boys go, we leave sex education—the most sacred and central truth in the world, as Canon Lyttelton puts it—to "dirty-minded schoolboys, grooms, garden boys, or anyone, really, who at an early age might be dirty enough and reckless enough to talk about it." And regarding girls, as Balzac pointed out long ago, "a mother can raise her daughter strictly and protect her for seventeen years; but a servant-girl can ruin all that hard work with a single word, or even just a gesture."
The great part played by servant-girls of the lower class in the sexual initiation of the children of the middle class has been illustrated in dealing with "The Sexual Impulse in Women" in vol. iii, of these Studies, and need not now be further discussed. I would only here say a word, in passing, on the other side. Often as servant-girls take this part, we must not go so far as to say that it is the case with the majority. As regards Germany, Dr. Alfred Kind has lately put on record his experience: "I have never, in youth, heard a bad or improper word on sex-relationships from a servant-girl, although servant-girls followed one another in our house like sunshine and showers in April, and there was always a relation of comradeship between us children and the servants." As regards England, I can add that my own youthful experiences correspond to Dr. Kind's. This is not surprising, for one may say that in the ordinary well-conditioned girl, though her virtue may not be developed to heroic proportions, there is yet usually a natural respect for the innocence of children, a natural sexual indifference to them, and a natural expectation that the male should take the active part when a sexual situation arises.
The significant role that lower-class servant-girls play in the sexual initiation of middle-class children has been discussed in "The Sexual Impulse in Women" in vol. iii of these Studies, and doesn’t need to be revisited here. I just want to briefly mention the other side. While servant-girls often take on this role, we shouldn't claim it's true for the majority. In Germany, Dr. Alfred Kind recently shared his experience: "I have never heard a bad or inappropriate word about sex relationships from a servant-girl during my youth, even though servant-girls came and went in our house like sunshine and showers in April, and there was always a friendly relationship between us children and the servants." Regarding England, I can say my own youthful experiences match Dr. Kind's. This isn't surprising because, typically, a well-brought-up girl, even if her virtue isn't extraordinary, usually has a natural respect for children's innocence, a natural indifference towards them regarding sexuality, and a natural expectation that the male should take the lead when a sexual situation arises.
It is also beginning to be felt that, especially as regards women, ignorant innocence is not merely too fragile a possession to be worth preservation, but that it is positively mischievous, since it involves the lack of necessary knowledge. "It is little short of criminal," writes Dr. F. M. Goodchild,[21] "to send our young people into the midst of the excitements and temptations of a great city with no more preparation than if they were going to live in Paradise." In the case of women, ignorance has the further disadvantage that it deprives them of the knowledge necessary for intelligent sympathy with other women. The unsympathetic attitude of women towards women is often largely due to sheer ignorance of the facts of life. "Why," writes in a private letter a married lady who keenly realizes this, "are women brought up with such a profound ignorance of their own and especially other women's natures? They do not know half as much about other women as a man of the most average capacity learns in his day's march." We try to make up for our failure to educate women in the essential matters of sex by imposing upon the police and other guardians of public order the duty of protecting women and morals. But, as Moll insists, the real problem of chastity lies, not in the multiplication of laws and policemen, but largely in women's knowledge of the dangers of sex and in the cultivation of their sense of responsibility.[22] We are always making laws for the protection of children and setting the police on guard. But laws and the police, whether their activities are good or bad, are in either case alike ineffectual. They can for the most part only be invoked when the damage is already done. We have to learn to go to the root of the matter. We have to teach children to be a law to themselves. We have to give them that knowledge which will enable them to guard their own personalities.[23] There is an authentic story of a lady who had learned to swim, much to the horror of her clergyman, who thought that swimming was unfeminine. "But," she said, "suppose I was drowning." "In that case," he replied, "you ought to wait until a man comes along and saves you." There we have the two methods of salvation which have been preached to women, the old method and the new. In no sea have women been more often in danger of drowning than that of sex. There ought to be no question as to which is the better method of salvation.
It's becoming clear that, especially when it comes to women, naive innocence is not just too delicate to be worth keeping, but it can actually be harmful because it reflects a lack of essential knowledge. "It's almost criminal," writes Dr. F. M. Goodchild,[21] "to send our young people into the excitement and temptations of a big city with no more preparation than if they were headed to Paradise." For women, ignorance has the added drawback of preventing them from understanding and empathizing with other women. The unhelpful attitudes among women towards each other often stem from pure ignorance about the realities of life. "Why," writes a married woman who deeply understands this in a private letter, "are women raised with such a deep ignorance of their own and especially other women's nature? They don’t know nearly as much about other women as an average man picks up in his daily life." We attempt to make up for our failure to educate women on the crucial matters of sex by relying on the police and other authorities to safeguard women and morality. However, as Moll argues, the real issue with chastity lies not in having more laws and policemen, but primarily in women's awareness of the risks of sex and in fostering a sense of responsibility.[22] We constantly create laws to protect children and put police on alert. But laws and police, regardless of whether their involvement is good or bad, are equally ineffective. They can usually only intervene after harm has already occurred. We need to address the root problem. We need to teach children to be their own guardians. We must provide them with the knowledge that enables them to protect their own identities.[23] There's a true story about a woman who learned to swim, much to the dismay of her clergyman, who believed swimming was unladylike. "But," she asked, "what if I were drowning?" "In that case," he replied, "you should wait for a man to come and save you." This illustrates the two approaches to salvation that have been offered to women: the old way and the new one. No situation has posed more risks of drowning for women than that of sex. There should be no doubt about which method of salvation is better.
It is difficult nowadays to find any serious arguments against the desirability of early sexual enlightenment, and it is almost with amusement that we read how the novelist Alphonse Daudet, when asked his opinion of such enlightenment, protested—in a spirit certainly common among the men of his time—that it was unnecessary, because boys could learn everything from the streets and the newspapers, while "as to young girls—no! I would teach them none of the truths of physiology. I can only see disadvantages in such a proceeding. These truths are ugly, disillusioning, sure to shock, to frighten, to disgust the mind, the nature, of a girl." It is as much as to say that there is no need to supply sources of pure water when there are puddles in the street that anyone can drink of. A contemporary of Daudet's, who possessed a far finer spiritual insight, Coventry Patmore, the poet, in the essay on "Ancient and Modern Ideas of Purity" in his beautiful book, Religio Poetæ, had already finely protested against that "disease of impurity" which comes of "our modern undivine silences" for which Daudet pleaded. And Metchnikoff, more recently, from the scientific side, speaking especially as regards women, declares that knowledge is so indispensable for moral conduct that "ignorance must be counted the most immoral of acts" (Essais Optimistes, p. 420).
It’s hard today to find any serious arguments against the value of early sexual education, and it’s almost amusing to read how the novelist Alphonse Daudet, when asked about such education, insisted—in a mindset typical of men of his era—that it was unnecessary because boys could learn everything from the streets and the newspapers. As for young girls—no! He believed he should teach them none of the truths of physiology. He could only see downsides to such an approach. These truths are ugly, disillusioning, and sure to shock, frighten, and disgust a girl's mind and nature. It’s like saying there’s no need to provide clean water when there are puddles in the street that anyone can drink from. A contemporary of Daudet’s, Coventry Patmore, the poet, who had a much finer spiritual insight, had already eloquently protested against that "disease of impurity" resulting from "our modern undivine silences," which Daudet defended. And Metchnikoff, more recently, from a scientific perspective, especially regarding women, states that knowledge is so essential for moral behavior that "ignorance must be counted the most immoral of acts" (Essais Optimistes, p. 420).
The distinguished Belgian novelist, Camille Lemonnier, in his L'Homme en Amour, deals with the question of the sexual education of the young by presenting the history of a young man, brought up under the influence of the conventional and hypocritical views which teach that nudity and sex are shameful and disgusting things. In this way he passes by the opportunities of innocent and natural love, to become hopelessly enslaved at last to a sensual woman who treats him merely as the instrument of her pleasure, the last of a long succession of lovers. The book is a powerful plea for a sane, wholesome, and natural education in matters of sex. It was, however, prosecuted at Bruges, in 1901, though the trial finally ended in acquittal. Such a verdict is in harmony with the general tendency of feeling at the present time.
The renowned Belgian author, Camille Lemonnier, in his L'Homme en Amour, addresses the issue of sexual education for young people by telling the story of a young man raised with conventional and hypocritical beliefs that teach nudity and sex are shameful and gross. This mindset leads him to miss out on experiences of innocent and natural love, ultimately becoming hopelessly bound to a sensual woman who sees him only as a means for her pleasure, the latest in a long line of lovers. The book is a strong argument for healthy, positive, and natural sex education. However, it faced prosecution in Bruges in 1901, although the trial ended in acquittal. This verdict aligns with the current general sentiment.
The old ideas, expressed by Daudet, that the facts of sex are ugly and disillusioning, and that they shock the mind of the young, are both alike entirely false. As Canon Lyttelton remarks, in urging that the laws of the transmission of life should be taught to children by the mother: "The way they receive it with native reverence, truthfulness of understanding and guileless delicacy, is nothing short of a revelation of the never-ceasing beauty of nature. People sometimes speak of the indescribable beauty of children's innocence. But I venture to say that no one quite knows what it is who has foregone the privilege of being the first to set before them the true meaning of life and birth and the mystery of their own being. Not only do we fail to build up sound knowledge in them, but we put away from ourselves the chance of learning something that must be divine." In the same way, Edward Carpenter, stating that it is easy and natural for the child to learn from the first its physical relation to its mother, remarks (Love's Coming of Age, p. 9): "A child at the age of puberty, with the unfolding of its far-down emotional and sexual nature, is eminently capable of the most sensitive, affectional and serene appreciation of what sex means (generally more so as things are to-day, than its worldling parent or guardian); and can absorb the teaching, if sympathetically given, without any shock or disturbance to its sense of shame—that sense which is so natural and valuable a safeguard of early youth."
The old ideas, expressed by Daudet, that the facts of sex are ugly and disillusioning, and that they shock the minds of young people, are completely false. As Canon Lyttelton points out, in arguing that the laws of life transmission should be taught to children by their mothers: "The way they receive it with natural reverence, understanding, and innocent delicacy is nothing short of a revelation of the ever-present beauty of nature. People often talk about the indescribable beauty of children's innocence. But I dare say that no one truly understands it if they miss the chance to introduce them to the true meaning of life, birth, and the mystery of their own existence. Not only do we fail to provide them with solid knowledge, but we also miss the opportunity to learn something divine ourselves." Similarly, Edward Carpenter notes that it is easy and natural for a child to learn about its physical connection to its mother. He observes (Love's Coming of Age, p. 9): "A child at puberty, as its deep emotional and sexual nature unfolds, is very capable of a sensitive, affectionate, and calm understanding of what sex means (often more so than its worldly parent or guardian today); and can absorb this teaching, if presented with empathy, without any shock or disturbance to its sense of shame—something that is a natural and valuable protection of early youth."
How widespread, even some years ago, had become the conviction that the sexual facts of life should be taught to girls as well as boys, was shown when the opinions of a very miscellaneous assortment of more or less prominent persons were sought on the question ("The Tree of Knowledge," New Review, June, 1894). A small minority of two only (Rabbi Adler and Mrs. Lynn Lynton) were against such knowledge, while among the majority in favor of it were Mme. Adam, Thomas Hardy, Sir Walter Besant, Björnson, Hall Caine, Sarah Grand, Nordau, Lady Henry Somerset, Baroness von Suttner, and Miss Willard. The leaders of the woman's movement are, of course, in favor of such knowledge. Thus a meeting of the Bund für Mutterschutz at Berlin, in 1905, almost unanimously passed a resolution declaring that the early sexual enlightenment of children in the facts of the sexual life is urgently necessary (Mutterschutz, 1905, Heft 2, p. 91). It may be added that medical opinion has long approved of this enlightenment. Thus in England it was editorially stated in the British Medical Journal some years ago (June 9, 1894): "Most medical men of an age to beget confidence in such affairs will be able to recall instances in which an ignorance, which would have been ludicrous if it had not been so sad, has been displayed on matters regarding which every woman entering on married life ought to have been accurately informed. There can, we think, be little doubt that much unhappiness and a great deal of illness would be prevented if young people of both sexes possessed a little accurate knowledge regarding the sexual relations, and were well impressed with the profound importance of selecting healthy mates. Knowledge need not necessarily be nasty, but even if it were, it certainly is not comparable in that respect with the imaginings of ignorance." In America, also, where at an annual meeting of the American Medical Association, Dr. Denslow Lewis, of Chicago, eloquently urged the need of teaching sexual hygiene to youths and girls, all the subsequent nine speakers, some of them physicians of worldwide fame, expressed their essential agreement (Medico-Legal Journal, June-Sept., 1903). Howard, again, at the end of his elaborate History of Matrimonial Institutions (vol. iii, p. 257) asserts the necessity for education in matters of sex, as going to the root of the marriage problem. "In the future educational programme," he remarks, "sex questions must hold an honorable place."
How widespread, even a few years ago, was the belief that the facts of sexual life should be taught to girls as well as boys is evident from the diverse opinions of various prominent individuals on the topic ("The Tree of Knowledge," New Review, June, 1894). Only a small minority of two—Rabbi Adler and Mrs. Lynn Lynton—were against such knowledge, while the majority supporting it included Mme. Adam, Thomas Hardy, Sir Walter Besant, Björnson, Hall Caine, Sarah Grand, Nordau, Lady Henry Somerset, Baroness von Suttner, and Miss Willard. The leaders of the women's movement naturally advocate for this knowledge. For example, a meeting of the Bund für Mutterschutz in Berlin in 1905 almost unanimously adopted a resolution stating that early sexual education for children is urgently needed (Mutterschutz, 1905, Heft 2, p. 91). It is worth noting that the medical community has long endorsed this education. In England, the British Medical Journal editorially stated years ago (June 9, 1894): "Most medical professionals with enough experience to inspire confidence can recall instances where ignorance—though it might have been laughable if it weren't so tragic—was displayed on matters that every woman entering marriage should be accurately informed about. We believe there’s little doubt that much unhappiness and many illnesses could be prevented if young people of both genders had a bit of accurate knowledge regarding sexual relationships and understood the profound importance of choosing healthy partners. Knowledge doesn’t have to be distasteful, but even if it were, it certainly pales in comparison to the fantasies stemming from ignorance." In the United States, during an annual meeting of the American Medical Association, Dr. Denslow Lewis from Chicago passionately emphasized the need to teach sexual hygiene to young people. All nine of the following speakers, including some world-renowned physicians, expressed their strong agreement (Medico-Legal Journal, June-Sept., 1903). Howard, at the conclusion of his comprehensive History of Matrimonial Institutions (vol. iii, p. 257), insists on the necessity for education in sexual matters as fundamental to the marriage issue. "In the future educational program," he notes, "sex questions must hold a respected place."
While, however, it is now widely recognized that children are entitled to sexual enlightenment, it cannot be said that this belief is widely put into practice. Many persons, who are fully persuaded that children should sooner or later be enlightened concerning the sexual sources of life, are somewhat nervously anxious as to the precise age at which this enlightenment should begin. Their latent feeling seems to be that sex is an evil, and enlightenment concerning sex also an evil, however necessary, and that the chief point is to ascertain the latest moment to which we can safely postpone this necessary evil. Such an attitude is, however, altogether wrong-headed. The child's desire for knowledge concerning the origin of himself is a perfectly natural, honest, and harmless desire, so long as it is not perverted by being thwarted. A child of four may ask questions on this matter, simply and spontaneously. As soon as the questions are put, certainly as soon as they become at all insistent, they should be answered, in the same simple and spontaneous spirit, truthfully, though according to the measure of the child's intelligence and his capacity and desire for knowledge. This period should not, and, if these indications are followed, naturally would not, in any case, be delayed beyond the sixth year. After that age even the most carefully guarded child is liable to contaminating communications from outside. Moll points out that the sexual enlightenment of girls in its various stages ought to be always a little ahead of that of boys, and as the development of girls up to the pubertal age is more precocious than that of boys, this demand is reasonable.
While it’s now widely accepted that children should have sexual education, this belief isn't always put into action. Many people who firmly believe that children should eventually learn about the sexual aspects of life are somewhat anxious about the right age to start. Their underlying feeling seems to be that sex is a bad thing, and so is talking about it, even if it’s necessary. They think the main issue is figuring out how long we can delay this necessary discussion. However, this attitude is completely misguided. A child's curiosity about their origin is a completely natural, honest, and harmless desire, as long as it isn't hindered. A four-year-old might ask questions about this topic in a simple and spontaneous way. Once these questions are asked, especially if they become persistent, they should be answered truthfully and simply, according to the child’s understanding and their desire to know. This conversation should start before the age of six. After that age, even the most protected child can be exposed to inappropriate outside influences. Moll notes that the sexual education of girls should always be slightly ahead of that of boys, and since girls typically develop faster than boys before puberty, this request makes sense.
If the elements of sexual education are to be imparted in early childhood, it is quite clear who ought to be the teacher. There should be no question that this privilege belongs by every right to the mother. Except where a child is artificially separated from his chief parent it is indeed only the mother who has any natural opportunity of receiving and responding to these questions. It is unnecessary for her to take any initiative in the matter. The inevitable awakening of the child's intelligence and the evolution of his boundless curiosity furnish her love and skill with all opportunities for guiding her child's thoughts and knowledge. Nor is it necessary for her to possess the slightest technical information at this stage. It is only essential that she should have the most absolute faith in the purity and dignity of her physical relationship to her child, and be able to speak of it with frankness and tenderness. When that essential condition is fulfilled every mother has all the knowledge that her young child needs.
If we’re going to teach kids about sex education early on, it's clear who should be the teacher. There shouldn’t be any doubts that this role rightly belongs to the mother. Unless a child is separated from her, it’s really only the mother who has the natural chance to hear and answer these questions. She doesn’t even need to take any initiative. The natural development of the child’s intelligence and curiosity gives her all the opportunities to guide her child's understanding and knowledge. Plus, she doesn’t need any technical information at this point. What’s crucial is that she has complete faith in the purity and dignity of her physical relationship with her child and can talk about it openly and lovingly. Once this key condition is met, every mother has all the knowledge her young child needs.
Among the best authorities, both men and women, in all the countries where this matter is attracting attention, there seems now to be unanimity of opinion in favor of the elementary facts of the baby's relationship to its mother being explained to the child by the mother as soon as the child begins to ask questions. Thus in Germany Moll has repeatedly argued in this sense; he insists that sexual enlightenment should be mainly a private and individual matter; that in schools there should be no general and personal warnings about masturbation, etc. (though at a later age he approves of instruction in regard to venereal diseases), but that the mother is the proper person to impart intimate knowledge to the child, and that any age is suitable for the commencement of such enlightenment, provided it is put into a form fitted for the age (Moll, op. cit., p. 264).
Among top experts, both men and women, in all the countries where this issue is gaining attention, there seems to be a consensus in favor of explaining the basic facts about the baby's relationship to its mother as soon as the child starts asking questions. In Germany, Moll has consistently argued this point; he believes that sexual education should primarily be a private and personal matter. He argues that schools shouldn't give general and personal warnings about masturbation, etc. (although he later supports teaching about sexually transmitted diseases), but that the mother is the right person to share intimate information with the child, and that any age is appropriate to start this education, as long as it's presented in a way that's suitable for the child's age (Moll, op. cit., p. 264).
At the Mannheim meeting of the Congress of the German Society for Combating Venereal Disease, when the question of sexual enlightenment formed the sole subject of discussion, the opinion in favor of early teaching by the mother prevailed. "It is the mother who must, in the first place, be made responsible for the child's clear understanding of sexual things, so often lacking," said Frau Krukenberg ("Die Aufgabe der Mutter," Sexualpädagogik, p. 13), while Max Enderlin, a teacher, said on the same occasion ("Die Sexuelle Frage in die Volksschule," id., p. 35): "It is the mother who has to give the child his first explanations, for it is to his mother that he first naturally comes with his questions." In England, Canon Lyttelton, who is distinguished among the heads of public schools not least by his clear and admirable statements on these questions, states (Mothers and Sons, p. 99) that the mother's part in the sexual enlightenment and sexual guardianship of her son is of paramount importance, and should begin at the earliest years. J. H. Badley, another schoolmaster ("The Sex Difficulty," Broad Views, June, 1904), also states that the mother's part comes first. Northcote (Christianity and Sex Problems, p. 25) believes that the duty of the parents is primary in this matter, the family doctor and the schoolmaster coming in at a later stage. In America, Dr. Mary Wood Allen, who occupies a prominent and influential position in women's social movements, urges (in Child-Confidence Rewarded, and other pamphlets) that a mother should begin to tell her child these things as soon as he begins to ask questions, the age of four not being too young, and explains how this may be done, giving examples of its happy results in promoting a sweet confidence between the child and his mother.
At the Mannheim meeting of the Congress of the German Society for Combating Venereal Disease, where the topic of sexual education was the only focus of discussion, the consensus was in favor of early teaching by the mother. "It's the mother who must be held primarily responsible for helping the child understand sexual matters, which is often lacking," said Frau Krukenberg ("Die Aufgabe der Mutter," Sexualpädagogik, p. 13). Max Enderlin, a teacher, echoed this sentiment on the same occasion ("Die Sexuelle Frage in die Volksschule," id., p. 35): "The mother is the one who needs to provide the child's first explanations because it's to her that he naturally turns with his questions." In England, Canon Lyttelton, known among public school leaders for his clear and insightful views on these issues, states (Mothers and Sons, p. 99) that the mother's role in her son's sexual education and protection is crucial and should start at the earliest age. J. H. Badley, another educator ("The Sex Difficulty," Broad Views, June 1904), also asserts that the mother's role comes first. Northcote (Christianity and Sex Problems, p. 25) believes that the parents have the primary responsibility in this area, with the family doctor and teacher stepping in later. In America, Dr. Mary Wood Allen, a prominent and influential figure in women's social movements, insists (in Child-Confidence Rewarded and other pamphlets) that a mother should start discussing these topics with her child as soon as he begins to ask questions, stating that age four is not too young, and she explains how this can be done, providing examples of the positive outcomes in fostering a trusting relationship between the child and his mother.
If, as a few believe should be the case, the first initiation is delayed to the tenth year or even later, there is the difficulty that it is no longer so easy to talk simply and naturally about such things; the mother is beginning to feel too shy to speak for the first time about these difficult subjects to a son or a daughter who is nearly as big as herself. She feels that she can only do it awkwardly and ineffectively, and she probably decides not to do it at all. Thus an atmosphere of mystery is created with all the embarrassing and perverting influences which mystery encourages.
If, as some believe, the first conversation is pushed back to the tenth year or even later, it becomes harder to talk about these things simply and naturally; the mother starts to feel too shy to discuss these tough topics with a child who is almost her height. She thinks she can only approach it awkwardly and ineffectively, and likely decides not to address it at all. This results in an atmosphere of mystery that brings all the awkward and harmful influences that come with mystery.
There can be no doubt that, more especially in highly intelligent children with vague and unspecialized yet insistent sexual impulses, the artificial mystery with which sex is too often clothed not only accentuates the natural curiosity but also tends to favor the morbid intensity and even prurience of the sexual impulse. This has long been recognized. Dr. Beddoes wrote at the beginning of the nineteenth century: "It is in vain that we dissemble to ourselves the eagerness with which children of either sex seek to satisfy themselves concerning the conformation of the other. No degree of reserve in the heads of families, no contrivances, no care to put books of one description out of sight and to garble others, has perhaps, with any one set of children, succeeded in preventing or stifling this kind of curiosity. No part of the history of human thought would perhaps be more singular than the stratagems devised by young people in different situations to make themselves masters or witnesses of the secret. And every discovery, due to their own inquiries, can but be so much oil poured upon an imagination in flames" (T. Beddoes, Hygeia, 1802, vol. iii, p. 59). Kaan, again, in one of the earliest books on morbid sexuality, sets down mystery as one of the causes of psychopathia sexualis. Marro (La Pubertà, p. 299) points out how the veil of mystery thrown over sexual matters merely serves to concentrate attention on them. The distinguished Dutch writer Multatuli, in one of his letters (quoted with approval by Freud), remarks on the dangers of hiding things from boys and girls in a veil of mystery, pointing out that this must only heighten the curiosity of children, and so far from keeping them pure, which mere ignorance can never do, heats and perverts their imaginations. Mrs. Mary Wood Allen, also, warns the mother (op. cit., p. 5) against the danger of allowing any air of embarrassing mystery to creep over these things. "If the instructor feels any embarrassment in answering the queries of the child, he is not fitted to be the teacher, for the feeling of embarrassment will, in some subtle way, communicate itself to the child, and he will experience an indefinable sense of offended delicacy which is both unnecessary and undesirable. Purification of one's own thought is, then, the first step towards teaching the truth purely. Why," she adds, "is death, the gateway out of life, any more dignified or pathetic than birth, the gateway into life? Or why is the taking of earthly life a more awful fact than the giving of life?" Mrs. Ennis Richmond, in a book of advice to mothers which contains many wise and true things, says: "I want to insist, more strongly than upon anything else, that it is the secrecy that surrounds certain parts of the body and their functions that gives them their danger in the child's thought. Little children, from earliest years, are taught to think of these parts of their body as mysterious, and not only so, but that they are mysterious because they are unclean. Children have not even a name for them. If you have to speak to your child, you allude to them mysteriously and in a half-whisper as 'that little part of you that you don't speak of,' or words to that effect. Before everything it is important that your child should have a good working name for these parts of his body, and for their functions, and that he should be taught to use and to hear the names, and that as naturally and openly as though he or you were speaking of his head or his foot. Convention has, for various reasons, made it impossible to speak in this way in public. But you can, at any rate, break through this in the nursery. There this rule of convention has no advantage, and many a serious disadvantage. It is easy to say to a child, the first time he makes an 'awkward' remark in public: 'Look here, laddie, you may say what you like to me or to daddy, but, for some reason or other, one does not talk about these' (only say what things) 'in public.' Only let your child make the remark in public before you speak (never mind the shock to your caller's feelings), don't warn him against doing so" (Ennis Richmond, Boyhood, p. 60). Sex must always be a mystery, but, as Mrs. Richmond rightly says, "the real and true mysteries of generation and birth are very different from the vulgar secretiveness with which custom surrounds them."
There’s no doubt that, especially in highly intelligent kids with vague yet strong sexual impulses, the artificial mystery around sex often just makes their natural curiosity stronger and can even fuel unhealthy intensity and prurience in their sexual feelings. This has been recognized for a long time. Dr. Beddoes wrote at the start of the nineteenth century: "It’s pointless to deny how eager children of both sexes are to learn about the bodies of the other. No amount of family reserve, tricks, or efforts to hide certain books has really stopped or stifled this kind of curiosity among any group of children. There might be nothing stranger in the history of human thought than the tactics kids use in different situations to discover the secrets. And every discovery, made through their own inquiries, only adds fuel to an imagination already on fire" (T. Beddoes, Hygeia, 1802, vol. iii, p. 59). Kaan, in one of the earliest books on unhealthy sexuality, identifies mystery as one of the causes of psychopathia sexualis. Marro (La Pubertà, p. 299) points out that the veil of mystery thrown over sexual matters just serves to draw more attention to them. The notable Dutch writer Multatuli, in one of his letters (quoted approvingly by Freud), warns about the dangers of hiding things from boys and girls under a veil of mystery, noting that this only increases their curiosity and that mere ignorance can never keep them pure; it instead inflames and distorts their imaginations. Mrs. Mary Wood Allen also advises mothers (op. cit., p. 5) against allowing any sense of embarrassing mystery to surround these topics. "If the teacher feels awkward answering a child's questions, they aren’t suited to be a teacher because that embarrassment will subtly communicate itself to the child, leading them to feel an unnecessary and undesirable sense of offended delicacy. Purifying one’s own thoughts is the first step toward teaching the truth clearly. Why," she adds, "is death, the exit from life, any more dignified or sad than birth, the entrance into life? Or why is taking a life any more awful than giving one?" Mrs. Ennis Richmond, in a book of advice for mothers filled with many wise and accurate insights, emphasizes: "I want to strongly insist that it’s the secrecy that surrounds certain body parts and their functions that makes them dangerous in a child's mind. Young children are taught from a very early age to think of these parts of their bodies as mysterious and, moreover, that they are mysterious because they are impure. Children don’t even have names for them. When you need to talk to your child, you refer to them in a mysterious half-whisper as 'that little part of you that you don't talk about,' or something similar. It’s crucial that your child has a good, practical name for these body parts and knows how to use and hear the names just as naturally and openly as when talking about their head or foot. For various reasons, custom has made it hard to speak openly about this in public. But you can, at least, break through this in the nursery. There, the rule of convention has no benefit and many serious drawbacks. It’s easy to tell a child the first time they make an 'awkward' comment in public: 'Listen, buddy, you can say whatever you like to me or Dad, but for some reason, people don’t talk about these' (just say what things) 'in public.' Just let your child make the comment in public before you say anything (don’t worry about your caller's feelings), and don’t warn them against doing so" (Ennis Richmond, Boyhood, p. 60). Sex should always retain some mystery, but as Mrs. Richmond rightly points out, "the real mysteries of generation and birth are very different from the ordinary secrecy that custom wraps them in."
The question as to the precise names to be given to the more private bodily parts and functions is sometimes a little difficult to solve. Every mother will naturally follow her own instincts, and probably her own traditions, in this matter. I have elsewhere pointed out (in the study of "The Evolution of Modesty") how widespread and instinctive is the tendency to adopt constantly new euphemisms in this field. The ancient and simple words, which in England a great poet like Chaucer could still use rightly and naturally, are so often dropped in the mud by the vulgar that there is an instinctive hesitation nowadays in applying them to beautiful uses. They are, however, unquestionably the best, and, in their origin, the most dignified and expressive words. Many persons are of opinion that on this account they should be rescued from the mud, and their sacredness taught to children. A medical friend writes that he always taught his son that the vulgar sex names are really beautiful words of ancient origin, and that when we understand them aright we cannot possibly see in them any motive for low jesting. They are simple, serious and solemn words, connoting the most central facts of life, and only to ignorant and plebeian vulgarity can they cause obscene mirth. An American man of science, who has privately and anonymously printed some pamphlets on sex questions, also takes this view, and consistently and methodically uses the ancient and simple words. I am of opinion that this is the ideal to be sought, but that there are obvious difficulties at present in the way of attaining it. In any case, however, the mother should be in possession of a very precise vocabulary for all the bodily parts and acts which it concerns her children to know.
The question of what to call private body parts and functions can be a bit tricky. Every mother will naturally go with her instincts and probably her own traditions on this topic. I've pointed out elsewhere (in the study of "The Evolution of Modesty") how common and instinctive it is to keep coming up with new euphemisms in this area. The simple, ancient words that a great poet like Chaucer could still use in England are often tossed aside by the crude, which creates a natural hesitation today in using them in a positive way. However, these words are definitely the best, and originally, the most dignified and expressive terms. Many people believe that because of this, we should reclaim them from being debased and teach their significance to children. A medical friend of mine mentioned that he always explained to his son that the crude terms for sex are actually beautiful words with ancient roots, and that when we understand them properly, we cannot associate them with low humor. They are straightforward, serious, and solemn words that refer to the most fundamental aspects of life, and only the ignorant and crude could make them the subject of obscene jokes. An American scientist, who has privately and anonymously published some pamphlets on sexual topics, shares this viewpoint and consistently and deliberately uses the ancient and simple terms. I think this is the ideal to aim for, but there are clearly challenges that make it hard to achieve. In any case, the mother should have a very precise vocabulary for all the body parts and actions that her children need to understand.
It is sometimes said that at this early age children should not be told, even in a simple and elementary form, the real facts of their origin but should, instead, hear a fairy-tale having in it perhaps some kind of symbolic truth. This contention may be absolutely rejected, without thereby, in any degree, denying the important place which fairy-tales hold in the imagination of young children. Fairy-tales have a real value to the child; they are a mental food he needs, if he is not to be spiritually starved; to deprive him of fairy-tales at this age is to do him a wrong which can never be made up at any subsequent age. But not only are sex matters too vital even in childhood to be safely made matter for a fairy-tale, but the real facts are themselves as wonderful as any fairy-tale, and appeal to the child's imagination with as much force as a fairy-tale.
It’s often said that at a young age, children shouldn’t be told the real facts about their origin, even in a simple way, but should instead hear a fairy tale that may hold some kind of symbolic truth. This idea can be completely dismissed without denying the important role fairy tales play in the imaginations of young children. Fairy tales have genuine value for kids; they are the mental nourishment they need to avoid spiritual starvation. Denying them fairy tales at this age is a disservice that can never be compensated for later. Furthermore, topics related to sexuality are too crucial even in childhood to be safely turned into fairy tales. The real facts are just as amazing as any fairy tale and capture a child's imagination with as much power as a fairy tale does.
Even, however, if there were no other reasons against telling children fairy-tales of sex instead of the real facts, there is one reason which ought to be decisive with every mother who values her influence over her child. He will very quickly discover, either by information from others or by his own natural intelligence, that the fairy-tale, that was told him in reply to a question about a simple matter of fact, was a lie. With that discovery his mother's influence over him in all such matters vanishes for ever, for not only has a child a horror of being duped, but he is extremely sensitive about any rebuff of this kind, and never repeats what he has been made to feel was a mistake to be ashamed of. He will not trouble his mother with any more questions on this matter; he will not confide in her; he will himself learn the art of telling "fairy-tales" about sex matters. He had turned to his mother in trust; she had not responded with equal trust, and she must suffer the punishment, as Henriette Fürth puts it, of seeing "the love and trust of her son stolen from her by the first boy he makes friends with in the street." When, as sometimes happens (Moll mentions a case), a mother goes on repeating these silly stories to a girl or boy of seven who is secretly well-informed, she only degrades herself in her child's eyes. It is this fatal mistake, so often made by mothers, which at first leads them to imagine that their children are so innocent, and in later years causes them many hours of bitterness because they realize they do not possess their children's trust. In the matter of trust it is for the mother to take the first step; the children who do not trust their mothers are, for the most part, merely remembering the lesson they learned at their mother's knee.
Even if there are no other reasons against telling kids fairy tales about sex instead of the truth, there’s one reason that should be a deal-breaker for any mom who cares about her influence over her child. He will quickly find out, either from others or by his own common sense, that the fairy tale he was told in response to a simple question was a lie. Once he realizes this, his mother’s influence on him regarding such matters disappears forever. Not only does a child hate being tricked, but he is also very sensitive to any kind of embarrassment like this and won’t bring up what he has learned he should be ashamed of. He won't ask his mother any more questions about it; he won’t share his thoughts with her; he will learn to tell his own “fairy tales” about sex matters. He came to his mother in trust; she didn’t respond with the same trust, and now she must face the consequence, as Henriette Fürth puts it, of seeing “the love and trust of her son stolen from her by the first boy he befriends on the street.” When, as sometimes happens (Moll mentions a case), a mother continues to tell these silly stories to a seven-year-old who secretly knows better, she only humiliates herself in her child’s eyes. This critical mistake, often made by mothers, initially leads them to believe their children are innocent, and later causes many hours of regret when they realize they’ve lost their children’s trust. When it comes to trust, it’s up to the mother to make the first move; children who don’t trust their mothers are mostly just recalling the lesson they learned at their mother’s knee.
The number of little books and pamphlets dealing with the question of the sexual enlightenment of the young—whether intended to be read by the young or offering guidance to mothers and teachers in the task of imparting knowledge—has become very large indeed during recent years in America, England, and especially Germany, where there has been of late an enormous production of such literature. The late Ben Elmy, writing under the pseudonym of "Ellis Ethelmer," published two booklets, Baby Buds, and The Human Flower (issued by Mrs. Wolstenholme Elmy, Buxton House, Congleton), which state the facts in a simple and delicate manner, though the author was not a notably reliable guide on the scientific aspects of these questions. A charming conversation between a mother and child, from a French source, is reprinted by Edward Carpenter at the end of his Love's Coming of Age. How We Are Born, by Mrs. N. J. (apparently a Russian lady writing in English), prefaced by J. H. Badley, is satisfactory. Mention may also be made of The Wonder of Life, by Mary Tudor Pole. Margaret Morley's Song of Life, an American book, which I have not seen, has been highly praised. Most of these books are intended for quite young children, and while they explain more or less clearly the origin of babies, nearly always starting with the facts of plant life, they touch very slightly, if at all, on the relations of the sexes.
The number of little books and pamphlets about educating young people on sexual topics—whether aimed at young readers or meant to help mothers and teachers convey information—has grown significantly in recent years in America, England, and especially Germany, where there's been a massive increase in such literature. The late Ben Elmy, writing under the name "Ellis Ethelmer," published two booklets, Baby Buds and The Human Flower (published by Mrs. Wolstenholme Elmy, Buxton House, Congleton), which present the facts in a straightforward and sensitive way, even though the author wasn't the most reliable source for the scientific aspects of these subjects. A delightful dialogue between a mother and child, sourced from France, is included by Edward Carpenter at the end of his Love's Coming of Age. How We Are Born, by Mrs. N. J. (likely a Russian woman writing in English), prefaced by J. H. Badley, is satisfactory. Also worth mentioning is The Wonder of Life by Mary Tudor Pole. Margaret Morley's Song of Life, an American book that I haven't seen, has received high praise. Most of these books are meant for very young children, and while they explain the origin of babies to some extent—usually starting with plant life—they generally touch very lightly, if at all, on relationships between the sexes.
Mrs. Ennis Richmond's books, largely addressed to mothers, deal with these questions in a very sane, direct, and admirable manner, and Canon Lyttelton's books, discussing such questions generally, are also excellent. Most of the books now to be mentioned are intended to be read by boys and girls who have reached the age of puberty. They refer more or less precisely to sexual relationships, and they usually touch on masturbation. The Story of Life, written by a very accomplished woman, the late Ellice Hopkins, is somewhat vague, and introduces too many exalted religious ideas. Arthur Trewby's Healthy Boyhood is a little book of wholesome tendency; it deals specially with masturbation. A Talk with Boys About Themselves and A Talk with Girls About Themselves, both by Edward Bruce Kirk (the latter book written in conjunction with a lady) deal with general as well as sexual hygiene. There could be no better book to put into the hands of a boy or girl at puberty than M. A. Warren's Almost Fourteen, written by an American school teacher in 1892. It was a most charming and delicately written book, which could not have offended the innocence of the most sensitive maiden. Nothing, however, is sacred to prurience, and it was easy for the prurient to capture the law and obtain (in 1897) legal condemnation of this book as "obscene." Anything which sexually excites a prurient mind is, it is true, "obscene" for that mind, for, as Mr. Theodore Schroeder remarks, obscenity is "the contribution of the reading mind," but we need such books as this in order to diminish the number of prurient minds, and the condemnation of so entirely admirable a book makes, not for morality, but for immorality. I am told that the book was subsequently issued anew with most of its best portions omitted, and it is stated by Schroeder (Liberty of Speech and Press Essential to Purity Propaganda, p. 34) that the author was compelled to resign his position as a public school principal. Maria Lischnewska's Geschlechtliche Belehrung der Kinder (reprinted from Mutterschutz, 1905, Heft 4 and 5) is a most admirable and thorough discussion of the whole question of sexual education, though the writer is more interested in the teacher's share in this question than in the mother's. Suggestions to mothers are contained in Hugo Salus, Wo kommen die Kinder her?, E. Stiehl, Eine Mutterpflicht, and many other books. Dr. Alfred Kind strongly recommends Ludwig Gurlitt's Der Verkehr mit meinem Kindern, more especially in its combination of sexual education with artistic education. Many similar books are referred to by Bloch, in his Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. xxvi.
Mrs. Ennis Richmond's books, primarily aimed at mothers, tackle these issues in a very sensible, straightforward, and commendable way. Canon Lyttelton's books, which discuss these topics in general, are also great. Most of the books I'll mention next are meant for boys and girls who have reached puberty. They specifically address sexual relationships and often touch on masturbation. The Story of Life, written by the late Ellice Hopkins, who was a talented woman, is somewhat unclear and incorporates too many elevated religious ideas. Arthur Trewby's Healthy Boyhood is a small book with a positive message that focuses on masturbation. A Talk with Boys About Themselves and A Talk with Girls About Themselves, both by Edward Bruce Kirk (the latter co-written with a woman), cover general and sexual hygiene. There's no better book for a boy or girl at puberty than M. A. Warren's Almost Fourteen, penned by an American school teacher in 1892. It is a charming and delicately written book that wouldn't offend the innocence of even the most sensitive young lady. However, nothing is off-limits to prurience, and it was easy for those with such tendencies to manipulate the law and get this book condemned as "obscene" in 1897. Anything that sexually excites a prurient mind is indeed “obscene” to that mind, as Mr. Theodore Schroeder notes, "obscenity is the contribution of the reading mind." Yet, we need books like this to reduce the number of prurient minds, and condemning such a fundamentally admirable book does not support morality but rather encourages immorality. I've heard that the book was later republished with many of its best parts removed, and Schroeder states in Liberty of Speech and Press Essential to Purity Propaganda (p. 34) that the author had to resign as a public school principal. Maria Lischnewska's Geschlechtliche Belehrung der Kinder (reprinted from Mutterschutz, 1905, issues 4 and 5) is an excellent and comprehensive discussion of sexual education, although the writer focuses more on the teacher's role than the mother's. Suggestions for mothers can be found in Hugo Salus's Wo kommen die Kinder her?, E. Stiehl's Eine Mutterpflicht, and many other books. Dr. Alfred Kind strongly recommends Ludwig Gurlitt's Der Verkehr mit meinen Kindern, especially for its blend of sexual education with artistic education. Numerous similar books are mentioned by Bloch in his Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. xxvi.
I have enumerated the names of these little books because they are frequently issued in a semi-private manner, and are seldom easy to procure or to hear of. The propagation of such books seems to be felt to be almost a disgraceful action, only to be performed by stealth. And such a feeling seems not unnatural when we see, as in the case of the author of Almost Fourteen, that a nominally civilized country, instead of loading with honors a man who has worked for its moral and physical welfare, seeks so far as it can to ruin him.
I’ve listed the titles of these little books because they’re often released in a semi-private way, making them hard to find or even hear about. It seems like there’s a perception that spreading such books is almost shameful, something to be done in secret. This feeling isn’t surprising when we see, as with the author of Almost Fourteen, that a supposedly civilized country, instead of celebrating a person who has contributed to its moral and physical well-being, tries to undermine him as much as possible.
I may add that while it would usually be very helpful to a mother to be acquainted with a few of the booklets I have named, she would do well, in actually talking to her children, to rely mainly on her own knowledge and inspiration.
I should mention that while it’s often really useful for a mother to know about a few of the booklets I mentioned, when she talks to her kids, she should mainly trust her own knowledge and inspiration.
The sexual education which it is the mother's duty and privilege to initiate during her child's early years cannot and ought not to be technical. It is not of the nature of formal instruction but is a private and intimate initiation. No doubt the mother must herself be taught.[24] But the education she needs is mainly an education in love and insight. The actual facts which she requires to use at this early stage are very simple. Her main task is to make clear the child's own intimate relations to herself and to show that all young things have a similar intimate relation to their mothers; in generalizing on this point the egg is the simplest and most fundamental type to explain the origin of the individual life, for the idea of the egg—in its widest sense as the seed—not only has its truth for the human creature but may be applied throughout the animal and vegetable world. In this explanation the child's physical relationship to his father is not necessarily at first involved; it may be left to a further stage or until the child's questions lead up to it.
The sexual education that it's the mother’s responsibility and privilege to start during her child’s early years shouldn’t be technical. It’s not formal instruction but a personal and intimate introduction. For sure, the mother needs to be educated herself. But what she really needs is an education in love and understanding. The key facts she needs to convey at this early stage are very simple. Her main job is to clarify the child’s own intimate connection to her and to show that all young beings have a similar close relationship with their mothers. In generalizing this point, the egg serves as the simplest and most basic example to explain the beginning of individual life, as the concept of the egg—in its broadest sense as the seed—not only holds true for humans but can be applied across the animal and plant kingdoms. When explaining this, the child's physical relationship with his father doesn’t necessarily need to be addressed right away; it can be saved for a later stage or until the child’s questions bring it up.
Apart from his interest in his origin, the child is also interested in his sexual, or as they seem to him exclusively, his excretory organs, and in those of other people, his sisters and parents. On these points, at this age, his mother may simply and naturally satisfy his simple and natural curiosity, calling things by precise names, whether the names used are common or uncommon being a matter in regard to which she may exercise her judgment and taste. In this manner the mother will, indirectly, be able to safeguard her child at the outset against the prudish and prurient notions alike which he will encounter later. She will also without unnatural stress be able to lead the child into a reverential attitude towards his own organs and so exert an influence against any undesirable tampering with them. In talking with him about the origin of life and about his own body and functions, in however elementary a fashion, she will have initiated him both in sexual knowledge and in sexual hygiene.
Aside from his curiosity about where he came from, the child is also curious about his sexual organs, or what he sees as mainly his excretory organs, as well as those of other people, like his sisters and parents. At this age, his mother can easily and naturally satisfy his simple curiosity by naming things accurately, choosing whether to use common or less common terms based on her judgment and preference. This way, she can help protect her child early on from both overly conservative and inappropriate ideas he might come across later. She can also help him develop a respectful attitude towards his own body without any awkwardness, which will discourage any unwanted touching. By discussing the origins of life and his own body and functions, even in a basic way, she will introduce him to sexual knowledge and hygiene.
The mother who establishes a relationship of confidence with her child during these first years will probably, if she possesses any measure of wisdom and tact, be able to preserve it even after the epoch of puberty into the difficult years of adolescence. But as an educator in the narrower sense her functions will, in most cases, end at or before puberty. A somewhat more technical and completely impersonal acquaintance with the essential facts of sex then becomes desirable, and this would usually be supplied by the school.
The mother who builds a trusting relationship with her child during these early years will likely be able to maintain that bond even after puberty, provided she has some wisdom and sensitivity. However, her role as an educator in a more specific sense usually finishes at or before puberty. At that point, a more factual and neutral understanding of sex becomes necessary, which is typically provided by the school.
The great though capricious educator, Basedow, to some extent a pupil of Rousseau, was an early pioneer in both the theory and the practice of giving school children instruction in the facts of the sexual life, from the age of ten onwards. He insists much on this subject in his great treatise, the Elementarwerk (1770-1774). The questions of children are to be answered truthfully, he states, and they must be taught never to jest at anything so sacred and serious as the sexual relations. They are to be shown pictures of childbirth, and the dangers of sexual irregularities are to be clearly expounded to them at the outset. Boys are to be taken to hospitals to see the results of venereal disease. Basedow is aware that many parents and teachers will be shocked at his insistence on these things in his books and in his practical pedagogic work, but such people, he declares, ought to be shocked at the Bible (see, e.g., Pinloche, La Rèforme de l'Education en Allemagne au dixhuitième siècle: Basedow et le Philanthropinisme, pp. 125, 256, 260, 272). Basedow was too far ahead of his own time, and even of ours, to exert much influence in this matter, and he had few immediate imitators.
The influential yet unpredictable educator, Basedow, who was somewhat a student of Rousseau, was an early pioneer in both the theory and practice of teaching schoolchildren about the facts of sexuality starting from the age of ten. He emphasizes this topic in his significant work, the Elementarwerk (1770-1774). He states that children’s questions should be answered honestly, and they must be taught to never make jokes about something as sacred and serious as sexual relationships. They should be shown images of childbirth, and the dangers of sexual irregularities must be clearly explained to them from the beginning. Boys are to be taken to hospitals to see the consequences of sexually transmitted diseases. Basedow recognizes that many parents and teachers will be shocked by his insistence on these topics in his writings and practical teaching work, but he insists that those people should be shocked by the Bible (see, e.g., Pinloche, La Rèforme de l'Education en Allemagne au dixhuitième siècle: Basedow et le Philanthropinisme, pp. 125, 256, 260, 272). Basedow was ahead of his time, and even ahead of ours, which limited his influence in this area, and he had few immediate followers.
Somewhat later than Basedow, a distinguished English physician, Thomas Beddoes, worked on somewhat the same lines, seeking to promote sexual knowledge by lectures and demonstrations. In his remarkable book, Hygeia, published in 1802 (vol. i, Essay IV) he sets forth the absurdity of the conventional requirement that "discretion and ignorance should lodge in the same bosom," and deals at length with the question of masturbation and the need of sexual education. He insists on the great importance of lectures on natural history which, he had found, could be given with perfect propriety to a mixed audience. His experiences had shown that botany, the amphibia, the hen and her eggs, human anatomy, even disease and sometimes the sight of it, are salutary from this point of view. He thinks it is a happy thing for a child to gain his first knowledge of sexual difference from anatomical subjects, the dignity of death being a noble prelude to the knowledge of sex and depriving it forever of morbid prurience. It is scarcely necessary to remark that this method of teaching children the elements of sexual anatomy in the post-mortem room has not found many advocates or followers; it is undesirable, for it fails to take into account the sensitiveness of children to such impressions, and it is unnecessary, for it is just as easy to teach the dignity of life as the dignity of death.
A little later than Basedow, a notable English doctor, Thomas Beddoes, explored similar ideas, aiming to promote sexual knowledge through lectures and demonstrations. In his notable book, Hygeia, published in 1802 (vol. i, Essay IV), he points out the absurdity of the traditional expectation that "discretion and ignorance should live together," and he extensively discusses masturbation and the necessity of sexual education. He emphasizes the crucial role of lectures on natural history, which he found could be properly given to a mixed audience. His experiences indicated that topics like botany, amphibians, hens and their eggs, human anatomy, and even diseases, sometimes including observing them, can be beneficial from this perspective. He believes it’s valuable for a child to learn about sexual differences from anatomical topics, with the dignity of death serving as a noble introduction to understanding sex and eliminating any unhealthy curiosity. It's hardly worth mentioning that this approach to teaching children the basics of sexual anatomy in the post-mortem room hasn't gained much support; it's inappropriate because it overlooks children's sensitivity to such topics, and it’s unnecessary because teaching the dignity of life can be just as easy as teaching the dignity of death.
The duty of the school to impart education in matters of sex to children has in recent years been vigorously and ably advocated by Maria Lischnewska (op. cit.), who speaks with thirty years' experience as a teacher and an intimate acquaintance with children and their home life. She argues that among the mass of the population to-day, while in the home-life there is every opportunity for coarse familiarity with sexual matters, there is no opportunity for a pure and enlightened introduction to them, parents being for the most part both morally and intellectually incapable of aiding their children here. That the school should assume the leading part in this task is, she believes, in accordance with the whole tendency of modern civilized life. She would have the instruction graduated in such a manner that during the fifth or sixth year of school life the pupil would receive instruction, with the aid of diagrams, concerning the sexual organs and functions of the higher mammals, the bull and cow being selected by preference. The facts of gestation would of course be included. When this stage was reached it would be easy to pass on to the human species with the statement: "Just in the same way as the calf develops in the cow so the child develops in the mother's body."
The school’s responsibility to educate children about sex has recently been strongly and effectively advocated by Maria Lischnewska (op. cit.), who has thirty years of experience as a teacher and a close understanding of children and their home lives. She argues that, in today’s society, while there is plenty of exposure to inappropriate discussions about sexual matters at home, there is no opportunity for a healthy and informed introduction to them, as most parents are both morally and intellectually unable to help their children in this area. She believes that the school should take the lead in this responsibility, which aligns with the overall direction of modern civilized life. She suggests that the instruction should be organized so that in the fifth or sixth year of school, students would learn about the sexual organs and functions of higher mammals, preferably using bulls and cows as examples, with diagrams to aid understanding. The facts of gestation would also be included. Once this stage is reached, it would be easy to transition to the human species by stating, "Just as the calf develops in the cow, so the child develops in the mother's body."
It is difficult not to recognize the force of Maria Lischnewska's argument, and it seems highly probable that, as she asserts, the instruction proposed lies in the course of our present path of progress. Such instruction would be formal, unemotional, and impersonal; it would be given not as specific instruction in matters of sex, but simply as a part of natural history. It would supplement, so far as mere knowledge is concerned, the information the child had already received from its mother. But it would by no means supplant or replace the personal and intimate relationship of confidence between mother and child. That is always to be aimed at, and though it may not be possible among the ill-educated masses of to-day, nothing else will adequately take its place.
It’s hard not to see the strength of Maria Lischnewska’s argument, and it seems very likely that, as she claims, the proposed instruction fits well with our current path of progress. This instruction would be formal, unemotional, and impersonal; it wouldn’t be specific lessons about sex, but rather a part of natural history. It would enhance, at least in terms of knowledge, what the child has already learned from their mother. However, it definitely wouldn’t replace the personal and intimate bond of trust between mother and child. That connection is always important, and while it might not be achievable among today's uneducated masses, nothing else can adequately take its place.
There can be no doubt, however, that while in the future the school will most probably be regarded as the proper place in which to teach the elements of physiology—and not as at present a merely emasculated and effeminated physiology—the introduction of such reformed teaching is as yet impracticable in many communities. A coarse and ill-bred community moves in a vicious circle. Its members are brought up to believe that sex matters are filthy, and when they become adults they protest violently against their children being taught this filthy knowledge. The teacher's task is thus rendered at the best difficult, and under democratic conditions impossible. We cannot, therefore, hope for any immediate introduction of sexual physiology into schools, even in the unobtrusive form in which alone it could properly be introduced, that is to say as a natural and inevitable part of general physiology.
There’s no doubt that, in the future, school will likely be seen as the right place to teach the basics of physiology—not just the watered-down version we have now. However, bringing in this updated teaching isn't practical in many communities just yet. A rough, unrefined community operates in a vicious cycle. People grow up thinking that topics about sex are disgusting, and by the time they become adults, they strongly oppose their kids learning about this so-called filthy knowledge. This makes the teacher’s job incredibly tough, and under democratic conditions, nearly impossible. Therefore, we can’t expect any immediate incorporation of sexual physiology into schools, even in the subtle way it should be introduced, that is, as a natural and essential part of general physiology.
This objection to animal physiology by no means applies, however, to botany. There can be little doubt that botany is of all the natural sciences that which best admits of this incidental instruction in the fundamental facts of sex, when we are concerned with children below the age of puberty. There are at least two reasons why this should be so. In the first place botany really presents the beginnings of sex, in their most naked and essential forms; it makes clear the nature, origin, and significance of sex. In the second place, in dealing with plants the facts of sex can be stated to children of either sex or any age quite plainly and nakedly without any reserve, for no one nowadays regards the botanical facts of sex as in any way offensive. The expounder of sex in plants also has on his side the advantage of being able to assert, without question, the entire beauty of the sexual process. He is not confronted by the ignorance, bad education, and false associations which have made it so difficult either to see or to show the beauty of sex in animals. From the sex-life of plants to the sex-life of the lower animals there is, however, but a step which the teacher, according to his discretion, may take.
This objection to animal physiology definitely doesn’t apply to botany. There’s little doubt that botany is the natural science that best allows for a simple introduction to the basic facts of sex, especially when addressing children before puberty. There are at least two reasons for this. First, botany clearly shows the beginnings of sex in its most basic and essential forms; it clarifies the nature, origin, and significance of sex. Second, when discussing plants, the facts of sex can be explained to children of any age or gender in a straightforward and open way since no one today finds botanical facts about sex offensive. The person explaining sex in plants also has the advantage of being able to highlight the beauty of the sexual process without hesitation. They don’t face the ignorance, poor education, and misconceptions that make it challenging to appreciate or convey the beauty of sex in animals. However, there is just a short step from the sex-life of plants to the sex-life of lower animals that the teacher may take at their discretion.
An early educational authority, Salzmann, in 1785 advocated the sexual enlightenment of children by first teaching them botany, to be followed by zoölogy. In modern times the method of imparting sex knowledge to children by means, in the first place, of botany, has been generally advocated, and from the most various quarters. Thus Marro (La Pubertà, p. 300) recommends this plan. J. Hudrey-Menos ("La Question du Sexe dans l'Education," Revue Socialiste, June, 1895), gives the same advice. Rudolf Sommer, in a paper entitled "Mädchenerziehung oder Menschenbildung?" (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang I, Heft 3) recommends that the first introduction of sex knowledge to children should be made by talking to them on simple natural history subjects; "there are endless opportunities," he remarks, "over a fairy-tale, or a walk, or a fruit, or an egg, the sowing of seed or the nest-building of birds." Canon Lyttelton (Training of the Young in Laws of Sex, pp. 74 et seq.) advises a somewhat similar method, though laying chief stress on personal confidence between the child and his mother; "reference is made to the animal world just so far as the child's knowledge extends, so as to prevent the new facts from being viewed in isolation, but the main emphasis is laid on his feeling for his mother and the instinct which exists in nearly all children of reverence due to the maternal relation;" he adds that, however difficult the subject may seem, the essential facts of paternity must also be explained to boys and girls alike. Keyes, again (New York Medical Journal, Feb. 10, 1906), advocates teaching children from an early age the sexual facts of plant life and also concerning insects and other lower animals, and so gradually leading up to human beings, the matter being thus robbed of its unwholesome mystery. Mrs. Ennis Richmond (Boyhood, p. 62) recommends that children should be sent to spend some of their time upon a farm, so that they may not only become acquainted with the general facts of the natural world, but also with the sexual lives of animals, learning things which it is difficult to teach verbally. Karina Karin ("Wie erzieht man ein Kind zür wissenden Keuschheit?" Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang I, Heft 4), reproducing some of her talks with her nine-year old son, from the time that he first asked her where children came from, shows how she began with telling him about flowers, to pass on to fish and birds, and finally to the facts of human pregnancy, showing him pictures from an obstetrical manual of the child in its mother's body. It may be added that the advisability of beginning the sex teaching of children with the facts of botany was repeatedly emphasized by various speakers at the special meeting of the German Congress for Combating Venereal Disease devoted to the subject of sexual instruction (Sexualpädagogik, especially pp. 36, 47, 76).
An early educational authority, Salzmann, in 1785 encouraged sexually educating children by starting with botany, followed by zoology. Nowadays, teaching kids about sex through botany first has been widely recommended from various perspectives. For instance, Marro (La Pubertà, p. 300) supports this approach. J. Hudrey-Menos ("La Question du Sexe dans l'Education," Revue Socialiste, June, 1895), gives the same advice. Rudolf Sommer, in a paper titled "Mädchenerziehung oder Menschenbildung?" (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang I, Heft 3), suggests that the first discussions about sex with children should involve simple topics from natural history; "there are endless opportunities," he notes, "through fairy tales, a walk, a fruit, or an egg, the planting of seeds, or the nest-building of birds." Canon Lyttelton (Training of the Young in Laws of Sex, pp. 74 et seq.) recommends a similar approach but emphasizes the importance of a trusting relationship between the child and their mother; "reference is made to the animal world as far as the child's understanding allows to avoid isolating the new facts, while the focus is on the child's feelings towards their mother and the instinctive reverence nearly all children have for this relationship;" he adds that, no matter how tricky the topic may appear, essential facts about parenthood should also be explained to both boys and girls. Keyes (New York Medical Journal, Feb. 10, 1906) urges teaching children from an early age about the sexual aspects of plant life, as well as insects and other lower animals, progressively leading up to human beings, thus removing any unhealthy mystery around it. Mrs. Ennis Richmond (Boyhood, p. 62) recommends that children should spend some time on a farm, so they can familiarize themselves not only with general facts about the natural world but also with the sexual lives of animals, learning concepts that are hard to convey verbally. Karina Karin ("Wie erzieht man ein Kind zür wissenden Keuschheit?" Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang I, Heft 4), recounting conversations with her nine-year-old son—starting from when he first asked where children come from—explains how she began with flowers, then moved on to fish and birds, and eventually to human pregnancy, even showing him images from an obstetrical manual of a child in its mother’s body. It should also be noted that various speakers at the German Congress for Combating Venereal Disease highlighted the importance of starting sex education with botany (Sexualpädagogik, particularly pp. 36, 47, 76).
The transition from botany to the elementary zoölogy of the lower animals, to human anatomy and physiology, and to the science of anthropology based on these, is simple and natural. It is not likely to be taken in detail until the age of puberty. Sex enters into all these subjects and should not be artificially excluded from them in the education of either boys or girls. The text-books from which the sexual system is entirely omitted ought no longer to be tolerated. The nature and secretion of the testicles, the meaning of the ovaries and of menstruation, as well as the significance of metabolism and the urinary excretion, should be clear in their main lines to all boys and girls who have reached the age of puberty.
The shift from studying plants to the basic biology of lower animals, then to human anatomy and physiology, and finally to the study of anthropology that builds on these subjects is straightforward and natural. It’s unlikely to be covered in detail until puberty. Gender is relevant to all these topics and shouldn't be artificially excluded from the education of either boys or girls. Textbooks that completely ignore the sexual system should no longer be acceptable. The nature and function of the testicles, the role of the ovaries and menstruation, as well as the importance of metabolism and urine output, should be clearly understood by all boys and girls who have reached puberty.
At puberty there arises a new and powerful reason why boys and girls should receive definite instruction in matters of sex. Before that age it is possible for the foolish parent to imagine that a child may be preserved in ignorant innocence.[25] At puberty that belief is obviously no longer possible. The efflorescence of puberty with the development of the sexual organs, the appearance of hair in unfamiliar places, the general related organic changes, the spontaneous and perhaps alarming occurrence in boys of seminal emissions, and in girls of menstruation, the unaccustomed and sometimes acute recognition of sexual desire accompanied by new sensations in the sexual organs and leading perhaps to masturbation; all these arouse, as we cannot fail to realize, a new anxiety in the boy's or girl's mind, and a new curiosity, all the more acute in many cases because it is carefully concealed as too private, and even too shameful, to speak of to anyone. In boys, especially if of sensitive temperament, the suffering thus caused may be keen and prolonged.
At puberty, there's a strong new reason for boys and girls to receive clear education about sex. Before this age, some parents might foolishly think they can keep their child in innocent ignorance.[25] But once puberty hits, that belief is obviously no longer valid. The changes of puberty, including the development of sexual organs, the growth of hair in new places, various related physical changes, the sometimes surprising occurrence of ejaculation in boys and menstruation in girls, and the sudden emergence of sexual desire along with new sensations in the sexual organs—possibly leading to masturbation—create a new anxiety and curiosity in both boys and girls. This curiosity can be even more intense because it feels too private and shameful to discuss with anyone. For boys, especially those who are sensitive, the distress caused by these changes can be intense and lasting.
A doctor of philosophy, prominent in his profession, wrote to Stanley Hall (Adolescence, vol. i, p. 452): "My entire youth, from six to eighteen, was made miserable from lack of knowledge that any one who knew anything of the nature of puberty might have given; this long sense of defect, dread of operation, shame and worry, has left an indelible mark." There are certainly many men who could say the same. Lancaster ("Psychology and Pedagogy of Adolescence," Pedagogical Seminary, July, 1897, pp. 123-5) speaks strongly regarding the evils of ignorance of sexual hygiene, and the terrible fact that millions of youths are always in the hands of quacks who dupe them into the belief that they are on the road to an awful destiny merely because they have occasional emissions during sleep. "This is not a light matter," Lancaster declares. "It strikes at the very foundation of our inmost life. It deals with the reproductory part of our natures, and must have a deep hereditary influence. It is a natural result of the foolish false modesty shown regarding all sex instruction. Every boy should be taught the simple physiological facts before his life is forever blighted by this cause." Lancaster has had in his hands one thousand letters, mostly written by young people, who were usually normal, and addressed to quacks who were duping them. From time to time the suicides of youths from this cause are reported, and in many mysterious suicides this has undoubtedly been the real cause. "Week after week," writes the British Medical Journal in an editorial ("Dangerous Quack Literature: The Moral of a Recent Suicide," Oct. 1, 1892), "we receive despairing letters from those victims of foul birds of prey who have obtained their first hold on those they rob, torture and often ruin, by advertisements inserted by newspapers of a respectable, nay, even of a valuable and respected, character." It is added that the wealthy proprietors of such newspapers, often enjoying a reputation for benevolence, even when the matter is brought before them, refuse to interfere as they would thereby lose a source of income, and a censorship of advertisements is proposed. This, however, is difficult, and would be quite unnecessary if youths received proper enlightenment from their natural guardians.
A well-respected PhD in philosophy wrote to Stanley Hall (Adolescence, vol. i, p. 452): "My whole youth, from ages six to eighteen, was made miserable because I didn't have any information about puberty that someone knowledgeable could have given me; this long feeling of inadequacy, fear of medical procedures, shame, and worry has left a lasting impact." Many men could definitely share similar experiences. Lancaster ("Psychology and Pedagogy of Adolescence," Pedagogical Seminary, July, 1897, pp. 123-5) strongly addresses the dangers of ignorance surrounding sexual health and the awful reality that millions of young people are often manipulated by frauds who convince them they’re doomed simply because they occasionally experience wet dreams. "This isn't a trivial issue," Lancaster asserts. "It strikes at the very core of our deepest lives. It involves the reproductive aspect of our being and must have a profound hereditary effect. It is a natural result of the foolish false modesty shown towards all sexual education. Every boy should learn the basic physiological facts before his life is permanently harmed by this issue." Lancaster has collected one thousand letters, mostly from young individuals who were typically normal, seeking help from frauds who were misguiding them. Occasionally, reports emerge about young people taking their own lives due to this issue, and in many mysterious suicides, this has undoubtedly been the underlying cause. "Week after week," writes the British Medical Journal in an editorial ("Dangerous Quack Literature: The Moral of a Recent Suicide," Oct. 1, 1892), "we receive desperate letters from those victimized by shameless predators who gained their initial control over those they exploit, torment, and often destroy through advertisements placed in newspapers that are respectable and even esteemed." It’s noted that the wealthy owners of such newspapers, often seen as benevolent, typically refuse to take action even when the issue is raised, as doing so would threaten their profit, leading to suggestions for censoring advertisements. However, this is challenging and would be unnecessary if young people were properly educated by their natural guardians.
Masturbation, and the fear that by an occasional and perhaps outgrown practice of masturbation they have sometimes done themselves irreparable injury, is a common source of anxiety to boys. It has long been a question whether a boy should be warned against masturbation. At a meeting of the Section of Psychology of the British Medical Association some years ago, four speakers, including the President (Dr. Blandford), were decidedly in favor of parents warning their children against masturbation, while three speakers were decidedly against that course, mainly on the ground that it was possible to pass through even a public school life without hearing of masturbation, and also that the warning against masturbation might encourage the practice. It is, however, becoming more and more clearly realized that ignorance, even if it can be maintained, is a perilous possession, while the teaching that consists, as it should, in a loving mother's counsel to the child from his earliest years to treat his sexual parts with care and respect, can only lead to masturbation in the child who is already irresistibly impelled to it. Most of the sex manuals for boys touch on masturbation, sometimes exaggerating its dangers; such exaggeration should be avoided, for it leads to far worse evils than those it attempts to prevent. It seems undesirable that any warnings about masturbation should form part of school instruction, unless under very special circumstances. The sexual instruction imparted in the school on sexual as on other subjects should be absolutely impersonal and objective.
Masturbation, and the worry that by occasionally engaging in this practice, which they may have outgrown, they may have caused themselves serious harm, is a common source of anxiety for boys. There has been ongoing debate about whether boys should be warned about masturbation. At a meeting of the Psychology Section of the British Medical Association a few years ago, four speakers, including the President (Dr. Blandford), strongly supported the idea of parents warning their children about masturbation. In contrast, three speakers were firmly against this approach, mainly arguing that it’s possible to go through even a public school experience without hearing about masturbation and that warnings might actually encourage the behavior. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that ignorance, even if it can be maintained, is a risky thing to hold onto. Teaching, which should involve a loving mother guiding her child from the earliest years to treat his sexual parts with care and respect, will only lead to masturbation in a child who is already strongly driven to it. Most sex education manuals for boys mention masturbation, sometimes overstating its risks; this kind of exaggeration should be avoided, as it can lead to much worse issues than those it tries to prevent. It seems unwise for any warnings about masturbation to be part of school teaching unless under very special circumstances. The sexual education provided in schools, like all subjects, should be completely impersonal and objective.
At this point we approach one of the difficulties in the way of sexual enlightenment: the ignorance or unwisdom of the would-be teachers. This difficulty at present exists both in the home and the school, while it destroys the value of many manuals written for the sexual instruction of the young. The mother, who ought to be the child's confidant and guide in matters of sexual education, and could naturally be so if left to her own healthy instincts, has usually been brought up in false traditions which it requires a high degree of intelligence and character to escape from; the school-teacher, even if only called upon to give instruction in natural history, is oppressed by the same traditions, and by false shame concerning the whole subject of sex; the writer of manuals on sex has often only freed himself from these bonds in order to advocate dogmatic, unscientific, and sometimes mischievous opinions which have been evolved in entire ignorance of the real facts. As Moll says (Das Sexualleben des Kindes, p. 276), necessary as sexual enlightenment is, we cannot help feeling a little skeptical as to its results so long as those who ought to enlighten are themselves often in need of enlightenment. He refers also to the fact that even among competent authorities there is difference of opinion concerning important matters, as, for instance, whether masturbation is physiological at the first development of the sexual impulse and how far sexual abstinence is beneficial. But it is evident that the difficulties due to false tradition and ignorance will diminish as sound traditions and better knowledge become more widely diffused.
At this point, we encounter one of the challenges to sexual education: the ignorance or lack of wisdom among those who would teach it. This issue currently exists both at home and in the school, undermining the value of many guides written for educating young people about sex. The mother, who should be the child's confidant and guide in sexual matters—and could naturally fulfill this role if left to her instincts—has usually been raised in misleading traditions that require a high degree of intelligence and character to break free from. The teacher, even when only tasked with teaching natural history, is burdened by the same outdated traditions and a false sense of shame surrounding the topic of sex. Authors of sexual education manuals often only escape these constraints to promote rigid, unscientific, and sometimes harmful views born from a lack of understanding of the real facts. As Moll states (Das Sexualleben des Kindes, p. 276), while sexual education is essential, we can't help but feel somewhat skeptical about its outcomes as long as those who are supposed to provide this education often need it themselves. He also points out that even among knowledgeable authorities, there's disagreement on significant issues, such as whether masturbation is natural during the early development of sexual urges and how beneficial sexual abstinence actually is. However, it is clear that the difficulties arising from outdated traditions and ignorance will lessen as sound traditions and better knowledge become more widely accepted.
The girl at puberty is usually less keenly and definitely conscious of her sexual nature than the boy. But the risks she runs from sexual ignorance, though for the most part different, are more subtle and less easy to repair. She is often extremely inquisitive concerning these matters; the thoughts of adolescent girls, and often their conversation among themselves, revolve much around sexual and allied mysteries. Even in the matter of conscious sexual impulse the girl is often not so widely different from her brother, nor so much less likely to escape the contamination of evil communications, so that the scruples of foolish and ignorant persons who dread to "sully her purity" by proper instruction are exceedingly misplaced.
The girl going through puberty is usually less aware and specific about her sexual nature compared to the boy. However, the risks she faces due to sexual ignorance, while different, are more subtle and harder to fix. She is often very curious about these topics; the thoughts of adolescent girls, and frequently their conversations, focus a lot on sexual and related mysteries. Even when it comes to conscious sexual feelings, the girl is often not that different from her brother, nor is she any less likely to be affected by harmful influences. So, the concerns of naive and ignorant people who fear "tainting her purity" by giving proper education are completely misplaced.
Conversations dealing with the important mysteries of human nature, Obici and Marchesini were told by ladies who had formerly been pupils in Italian Normal Schools, are the order of the day in schools and colleges, and specially circle around procreation, the most difficult mystery of all. In England, even in the best and most modern colleges, in which games and physical exercise are much cultivated, I am told that "the majority of the girls are entirely ignorant of all sexual matters, and understand nothing whatever about them. But they do wonder about them, and talk about them constantly" (see Appendix D, "The School Friendships of Girls," in the second volume of these Studies). "The restricted life and fettered mind of girls," wrote a well-known physician some years ago (J. Milner Fothergill, Adolescence, 1880, pp. 20, 22) "leave them with less to actively occupy their thoughts than is the case with boys. They are studiously taught concealment, and a girl may be a perfect model of outward decorum and yet have a very filthy mind. The prudishness with which she is brought up leaves her no alternative but to view her passions from the nasty side of human nature. All healthy thought on the subject is vigorously repressed. Everything is done to darken her mind and foul her imagination by throwing her back on her own thoughts and a literature with which she is ashamed to own acquaintance. It is opposed to a girl's best interests to prevent her from having fair and just conceptions about herself and her nature. Many a fair young girl is irredeemably ruined on the very threshold of life, herself and her family disgraced, from ignorance as much as from vice. When the moment of temptation comes she falls without any palpable resistance; she has no trained educated power of resistance within herself; her whole future hangs, not upon herself, but upon the perfection of the social safeguards by which she is hedged and surrounded." Under the free social order of America to-day much the same results are found. In an instructive article ("Why Girls Go Wrong," Ladies' Home Journal, Jan., 1907) B. B. Lindsey, who, as Judge of the Juvenile Court of Denver, is able to speak with authority, brings forward ample evidence on this head. Both girls and boys, he has found, sometimes possess manuscript books in which they had written down the crudest sexual things. These children were often sweet-faced, pleasant, refined and intelligent, and they had respectable parents; but no one had ever spoken to them of sex matters, except the worst of their school-fellows or some coarse-minded and reckless adult. By careful inquiry Lindsey found that only in one in twenty cases had the parents ever spoken to the children of sexual subjects. In nearly every case the children acknowledged that it was not from their parents, but in the street or from older companions, that they learnt the facts of sex. The parents usually imagined that their children were absolutely ignorant of these matters, and were astonished to realize their mistake; "parents do not know their children, nor have they the least idea of what their children know, or what their children talk about and do when away from them." The parents guilty of this neglect to instruct their children, are, Lindsey declares, traitors to their children. From his own experience he judges that nine-tenths of the girls who "go wrong," whether or not they sink in the world, do so owing to the inattention of their parents, and that in the case of most prostitutes the mischief is really done before the age of twelve; "every wayward girl I have talked to has assured me of this truth." He considers that nine-tenths of school-boys and school-girls, in town or country, are very inquisitive regarding matters of sex, and, to his own amazement, he has found that in the girls this is as marked as in the boys.
Conversations about the significant mysteries of human nature, Obici and Marchesini were told by women who had previously attended Italian Normal Schools, are common in schools and colleges, particularly focusing on procreation, which is the most challenging mystery of all. In England, even in the best and most modern colleges, where games and physical activity are emphasized, I hear that "the majority of the girls are completely unaware of all sexual matters and understand nothing at all about them. But they are curious about these topics and constantly discuss them" (see Appendix D, "The School Friendships of Girls," in the second volume of these Studies). "The restricted lives and limited thinking of girls," wrote a well-known physician years ago (J. Milner Fothergill, Adolescence, 1880, pp. 20, 22), "leave them with less to engage their thoughts than boys. They are carefully taught to hide things, and a girl can appear perfectly proper on the outside while having a very dirty mind. The prudish upbringing gives her no choice but to see her desires from the negative side of human nature. Healthy thoughts on the subject are strongly suppressed. Everything is done to cloud her mind and corrupt her imagination by forcing her back into her own thoughts and a literature she is ashamed to be associated with. It's against a girl's best interests to keep her from having a fair and accurate understanding of herself and her nature. Many a young woman is hopelessly damaged right at the beginning of her life, bringing disgrace to herself and her family, due to ignorance as much as vice. When temptation arises, she falls without any real resistance; she lacks the trained, educated ability to resist. Her entire future depends not on her own strength but on the effectiveness of the societal protections around her." In today's free social order in America, similar results are observed. In an insightful article ("Why Girls Go Wrong," Ladies' Home Journal, Jan., 1907), B. B. Lindsey, who, as a Judge of the Juvenile Court of Denver, speaks with authority, presents substantial evidence on this topic. He found that both girls and boys sometimes have notebooks where they wrote down the most crude sexual information. These children were often sweet-faced, pleasant, refined, and intelligent, with respectable parents; yet, no one had ever discussed sex with them, except the worst of their classmates or some coarse-minded and reckless adult. Through careful investigation, Lindsey discovered that only one in twenty times did parents talk to their children about sexual topics. In nearly every instance, the children admitted that they didn't learn about sex from their parents but rather from the streets or older peers. Parents typically believed their children were completely unaware of these issues and were shocked to realize their mistake; "parents do not know their children, nor do they have any idea of what their children know, or what they talk about and do when they are away." Parents who neglect to educate their children, Lindsey asserts, are traitors to them. From his experience, he estimates that nine out of ten girls who "go wrong," regardless of whether they end up in a bad situation, do so due to their parents' neglect, and for most prostitutes, the damage occurs before the age of twelve; "every wayward girl I have spoken to has confirmed this truth." He believes that nine out of ten schoolboys and schoolgirls, whether in the city or the countryside, are very curious about sexual matters, and to his surprise, he found that this curiosity in girls is just as strong as in boys.
It is the business of the girl's mother, at least as much as of the boy's, to watch over her child from the earliest years and to win her confidence in all the intimate and personal matters of sex. With these aspects the school cannot properly meddle. But in matters of physical sexual hygiene, notably menstruation, in regard to which all girls stand on the same level, it is certainly the duty of the teacher to take an actively watchful part, and, moreover, to direct the general work of education accordingly, and to ensure that the pupil shall rest whenever that may seem to be desirable. This is part of the very elements of the education of girls. To disregard it should disqualify a teacher from taking further share in educational work. Yet it is constantly and persistently neglected. A large number of girls have not even been prepared by their mothers or teachers for the first onset of the menstrual flow, sometimes with disastrous results both to their bodily and mental health.[26]
It's the responsibility of the girl's mother, just as much as the boy's, to watch over her child from a young age and build trust in all personal and intimate matters regarding sex. Schools should not interfere in these areas. However, when it comes to physical sexual hygiene, particularly menstruation, which affects all girls equally, it is definitely the teacher's duty to be actively involved and to guide the overall educational approach accordingly. Teachers should ensure that students have the opportunity to rest whenever it's necessary. This is a fundamental part of educating girls. Ignoring this responsibility should disqualify a teacher from continuing in educational roles. Yet, this issue is often overlooked. A significant number of girls are not adequately prepared by their mothers or teachers for their first menstrual experience, which can lead to serious consequences for both their physical and mental health.[26]
"I know of no large girl's school," wrote a distinguished gynæcologist, Sir W. S. Playfair ("Education and Training of Girls at Puberty," British Medical Journal, Dec. 7, 1895), "in which the absolute distinction which exists between boys and girls as regards the dominant menstrual function is systematically cared for and attended to. Indeed, the feeling of all schoolmistresses is distinctly antagonistic to such an admission. The contention is that there is no real difference between an adolescent male and female, that what is good for one is good for the other, and that such as there is is due to the evil customs of the past which have denied to women the ambitions and advantages open to men, and that this will disappear when a happier era is inaugurated. If this be so, how comes it that while every practical physician of experience has seen many cases of anæmia and chlorosis in girls, accompanied by amenorrhæa or menorrhagia, headaches, palpitations, emaciation, and all the familiar accompaniments of breakdown, an analogous condition in a school-boy is so rare that it may well be doubted if it is ever seen at all?"
"I don’t know of any large girls' school," wrote a prominent gynecologist, Sir W. S. Playfair ("Education and Training of Girls at Puberty," British Medical Journal, Dec. 7, 1895), "where the clear difference that exists between boys and girls regarding the dominant menstrual function is systematically recognized and addressed. In fact, all schoolmistresses seem to be pretty opposed to acknowledging this. The argument they make is that there is no real difference between adolescent males and females, that what benefits one also benefits the other, and any differences stem from outdated customs that have denied women the same ambitions and opportunities available to men, which will vanish when a better era begins. If that’s true, then why is it that while every experienced physician has seen many cases of anemia and chlorosis in girls, along with amenorrhea or menorrhagia, headaches, palpitations, weight loss, and all the usual signs of a breakdown, a similar condition in a schoolboy is so rare that it’s almost hard to believe it happens at all?"
It is, however, only the excuses for this almost criminal negligence, as it ought to be considered, which are new; the negligence itself is ancient. Half a century earlier, before the new era of feminine education, another distinguished gynæcologist, Tilt (Elements of Health and Principles of Female Hygiene, 1852, p. 18) stated that from a statistical inquiry regarding the onset of menstruation in nearly one thousand women he found that "25 per cent. were totally unprepared for its appearance; that thirteen out of the twenty-five were much frightened, screamed, or went into hysterical fits; and that six out of the thirteen thought themselves wounded and washed with cold water. Of those frightened ... the general health was seriously impaired."
It is, however, only the excuses for this nearly criminal negligence, as it should be seen, that are new; the negligence itself is not. Fifty years earlier, before the new era of women's education, another respected gynecologist, Tilt (Elements of Health and Principles of Female Hygiene, 1852, p. 18), noted from a statistical study on the onset of menstruation in nearly a thousand women that "25 percent were completely unprepared for its arrival; thirteen out of the twenty-five were very scared, screamed, or had hysterical episodes; and six out of the thirteen thought they were injured and washed with cold water. Among those who were frightened... their general health was seriously affected."
Engelmann, after stating that his experience in America was similar to Tilt's in England, continues ("The Health of the American Girl," Transactions of the Southern Surgical and Gynæcological Society, 1890): "To innumerable women has fright, nervous and emotional excitement, exposure to cold, brought injury at puberty. What more natural than that the anxious girl, surprised by the sudden and unexpected loss of the precious life-fluid, should seek to check the bleeding wound—as she supposes? For this purpose the use of cold washes and applications is common, some even seek to stop the flow by a cold bath, as was done by a now careful mother, who long lay at the point of death from the result of such indiscretion, and but slowly, by years of care, regained her health. The terrible warning has not been lost, and mindful of her own experience she has taught her children a lesson which but few are fortunate enough to learn—the individual care during periods of functional activity which is needful for the preservation of woman's health."
Engelmann, after saying that his experience in America was similar to Tilt's in England, continues ("The Health of the American Girl," Transactions of the Southern Surgical and Gynæcological Society, 1890): "Many women have suffered injuries at puberty due to fear, nervous and emotional stress, and exposure to cold. What could be more natural than for the anxious girl, caught off guard by the sudden and unexpected loss of her precious life-fluid, to try to stop the bleeding? To do this, it's common to use cold washes and applications. Some even attempt to stop the flow with a cold bath, like a now-cautious mother who nearly died from such a rash decision and took years to recover her health. This terrible lesson hasn’t been ignored, and remembering her own experience, she has taught her children a lesson that very few are lucky enough to learn—the personal care needed during times of bodily changes to maintain a woman's health."
In a study of one hundred and twenty-five American high school girls Dr. Helen Kennedy refers to the "modesty" which makes it impossible even for mothers and daughters to speak to each other concerning the menstrual functions. "Thirty-six girls in this high school passed into womanhood with no knowledge whatever, from a proper source, of all that makes them women. Thirty-nine were probably not much wiser, for they stated that they had received some instruction, but had not talked freely on the matter. From the fact that the curious girl did not talk freely on what naturally interested her, it is possible she was put off with a few words as to personal care, and a reprimand for her curiosity. Less than half of the girls felt free to talk with their mothers of this most important matter!" (Helen Kennedy, "Effects of High School Work upon Girls During Adolescence," Pedagogical Seminary, June, 1896.)
In a study of one hundred and twenty-five American high school girls, Dr. Helen Kennedy mentions the "modesty" that prevents even mothers and daughters from discussing menstruation. "Thirty-six girls in this high school entered womanhood with no knowledge at all, from a proper source, about what it means to be female. Thirty-nine were probably not much better off, as they indicated they had received some instruction but hadn't talked openly about it. Because the curious girl didn't feel comfortable discussing something that naturally interested her, she may have been given just a few words about personal care, along with a scolding for her curiosity. Less than half of the girls felt they could talk to their mothers about this very important topic!" (Helen Kennedy, "Effects of High School Work upon Girls During Adolescence," Pedagogical Seminary, June, 1896.)
The same state of things probably also prevails in other countries. Thus, as regards France, Edmond de Goncourt in Chérie (pp. 137-139) described the terror of his young heroine at the appearance of the first menstrual period for which she had never been prepared. He adds: "It is very seldom, indeed, that women speak of this eventuality. Mothers fear to warn their daughters, elder sisters dislike confidences with their younger sisters, governesses are generally mute with girls who have no mothers or sisters."
The same situation probably exists in other countries as well. For example, in France, Edmond de Goncourt in Chérie (pp. 137-139) describes the fear of his young heroine when she experiences her first menstrual period, for which she had never been prepared. He adds: "It's very rare for women to talk about this situation. Mothers are afraid to warn their daughters, older sisters don’t share secrets with their younger sisters, and governesses usually remain silent with girls who don’t have mothers or sisters."
Sometimes this leads to suicide or to attempts at suicide. Thus a few years ago the case was reported in the French newspapers of a young girl of fifteen, who threw herself into the Seine at Saint-Ouen. She was rescued, and on being brought before the police commissioner said that she had been attacked by an "unknown disease" which had driven her to despair. Discreet inquiry revealed that the mysterious malady was one common to all women, and the girl was restored to her insufficiently punished parents.
Sometimes this leads to suicide or attempts at suicide. A few years ago, French newspapers reported on a 15-year-old girl who jumped into the Seine at Saint-Ouen. She was rescued, and when brought before the police commissioner, she stated that she had been suffering from an "unknown disease" that had driven her to despair. A discreet investigation revealed that the mysterious illness was one that many women experience, and the girl was returned to her parents, who were not adequately punished.
Half a century ago the sexual life of girls was ignored by their parents and teachers from reasons of prudishness; at the present time, when quite different ideas prevail regarding feminine education, it is ignored on the ground that girls should be as independent of their physiological sexual life as boys are. The fact that this mischievous neglect has prevailed equally under such different conditions indicates clearly that the varying reasons assigned for it are merely the cloaks of ignorance. With the growth of knowledge we may reasonably hope that one of the chief evils which at present undermine in early life not only healthy motherhood but healthy womanhood generally, may be gradually eliminated. The data now being accumulated show not only the extreme prevalence of painful, disordered, and absent menstruation in adolescent girls and young women, but also the great and sometimes permanent evils inflicted upon even healthy girls when at the beginning of sexual life they are subjected to severe strain of any kind. Medical authorities, whichever sex they belong to, may now be said to be almost or quite unanimous on this point. Some years ago, indeed, Dr. Mary Putnam Jacobi, in a very able book, The Question of Rest for Women, concluded that "ordinarily healthy" women may disregard the menstrual period, but she admitted that forty-six per cent, of women are not "ordinarily healthy," and a minority which comes so near to being a majority can by no means be dismissed as a negligible quantity. Girls themselves, indeed, carried away by the ardor of their pursuit of work or amusement, are usually recklessly and ignorantly indifferent to the serious risks they run. But the opinions of teachers are now tending to agree with medical opinion in recognizing the importance of care and rest during the years of adolescence, and teachers are even prepared to admit that a year's rest from hard work during the period that a girl's sexual life is becoming established, while it may ensure her health and vigor, is not even a disadvantage from the educational point of view. With the growth of knowledge and the decay of ancient prejudices, we may reasonably hope that women will be emancipated from the traditions of a false civilization, which have forced her to regard her glory as her shame,—though it has never been so among robust primitive peoples,—and it is encouraging to find that so distinguished an educator as Principal Stanley Hall looks forward with confidence to such a time. In his exhaustive work on Adolescence he writes: "Instead of shame of this function girls should be taught the greatest reverence for it, and should help it to normality by regularly stepping aside at stated times for a few years till it is well established and normal. To higher beings that looked down upon human life as we do upon flowers, these would be the most interesting and beautiful hours of blossoming. With more self-knowledge women will have more self-respect at this time. Savagery reveres this state and it gives to women a mystic awe. The time may come when we must even change the divisions of the year for women, leaving to man his week and giving to her the same number of Sabbaths per year, but in groups of four successive days per month. When woman asserts her true physiological rights she will begin here, and will glory in what, in an age of ignorance, man made her think to be her shame. The pathos about the leaders of woman's so-called emancipation, is that they, even more than those they would persuade, accept man's estimate of this state."[27]
Half a century ago, parents and teachers overlooked the sexual lives of girls due to their prudish attitudes. Nowadays, in a time when perspectives on female education have shifted, this aspect is ignored because it’s believed that girls should be just as independent from their physiological sexual lives as boys are. The consistent disregard for this issue, despite changing attitudes, shows that the reasons given are simply excuses for ignorance. As our understanding grows, we can reasonably hope that one of the main issues harming not only healthy motherhood but also healthy womanhood in early life can gradually be addressed. Current data highlights not only the widespread issues of painful, disordered, and absent menstruation among adolescent girls and young women but also the significant and sometimes lasting harms inflicted on even healthy girls when they face serious strain at the onset of sexual maturity. Medical experts, regardless of gender, now largely agree on this matter. A few years ago, Dr. Mary Putnam Jacobi, in her insightful book, The Question of Rest for Women, concluded that "ordinarily healthy" women might ignore their menstrual periods, but she acknowledged that forty-six percent of women are not "ordinarily healthy," and a minority so close to being a majority cannot be dismissed as insignificant. Girls themselves, often caught up in their pursuits of work or fun, tend to recklessly and ignorantly overlook the serious risks they face. However, teachers are increasingly aligning with medical opinions on the importance of care and rest during adolescence, and many are even willing to admit that taking a year off from intense work during the time a girl's sexual life is establishing can be beneficial for her health and vitality, without being a disadvantage from an educational perspective. With the increase in knowledge and the decline of outdated prejudices, we can hope that women will break free from the harmful traditions of a flawed civilization, which have conditioned them to see their natural attributes as shameful—unlike in vibrant, primitive cultures. It’s promising to hear that a prominent educator like Principal Stanley Hall envisions a future where this changes. In his comprehensive work on Adolescence, he writes: "Instead of feeling ashamed of this function, girls should be taught to hold it in the highest regard and support its normality by taking breaks at set times for a few years until it is well-established and normal. To higher beings observing human life as we do with flowers, these moments of blossoming would be the most fascinating and beautiful. With greater self-awareness, women will gain more self-respect during this time. Primitive societies cherish this state and imbue it with a sense of mystery. There may come a time when we need to revise the calendar for women, allowing men their week while giving women the same number of days off each year, structured in four consecutive days per month. When women claim their true physiological rights, they will begin here and take pride in what, during an era of ignorance, men made them believe was shameful. It’s tragic that the leaders of women's so-called liberation accept men's views of this state even more than those they seek to influence."
These wise words cannot be too deeply pondered. The pathos of the situation has indeed been—at all events in the past for to-day a more enlightened generation is growing up—that the very leaders of the woman's movement have often betrayed the cause of women. They have adopted the ideals of men, they have urged women to become second-rate men, they have declared that the healthy natural woman disregards the presence of her menstrual functions. This is the very reverse of the truth. "They claim," remarks Engelmann, "that woman in her natural state is the physical equal of man, and constantly point to the primitive woman, the female of savage peoples, as an example of this supposed axiom. Do they know how well this same savage is aware of the weakness of woman and her susceptibility at certain periods of her life? And with what care he protects her from harm at these periods? I believe not. The importance of surrounding women with certain precautions during the height of these great functional waves of her existence was appreciated by all peoples living in an approximately natural state, by all races at all times; and among their comparatively few religious customs this one, affording rest to women, was most persistently adhered to." It is among the white races alone that the sexual invalidism of women prevails, and it is the white races alone, which, outgrowing the religious ideas with which the menstrual seclusion of women was associated, have flung away that beneficent seclusion itself, throwing away the baby with the bath in an almost literal sense.[28]
These wise words deserve deep reflection. The emotional weight of the situation has indeed been significant—in the past at least, because today a more informed generation is emerging—yet even the leaders of the women's movement have often let down the cause of women. They have embraced male ideals, encouraged women to be second-rate versions of men, and claimed that a healthy, natural woman ignores her menstrual functions. This is the exact opposite of reality. "They argue," notes Engelmann, "that a woman in her natural state is physically equal to a man, and constantly point to primitive women, the females of savage peoples, as proof of this supposed truth. Do they understand how aware that same savage is of a woman's vulnerabilities and her sensitivity at certain times in her life? And how carefully he protects her from harm during those periods? I doubt it. The importance of ensuring certain protections for women during the peak of these significant phases in her life was recognized by all cultures living in a relatively natural state, by all races throughout history; and among their comparatively few religious customs, this one, which allowed women to rest, was most consistently followed." It is only among white races that the notion of women's sexual invalidism exists, and it is these same races that, having outgrown the religious beliefs associated with women's menstrual seclusion, have discarded that beneficial seclusion itself, throwing out the baby with the bathwater in an almost literal sense.[28]
In Germany Tobler has investigated the menstrual histories of over one thousand women (Monatsschrift für Geburtshülfe und Gynäkologie, July, 1905). He finds that in the great majority of women at the present day menstruation is associated with distinct deterioration of the general health, and diminution of functional energy. In 26 per cent. local pain, general malaise, and mental and nervous anomalies coexisted; in larger proportion come the cases in which local pain, general weak health or psychic abnormality was experienced alone at this period. In 16 per cent. only none of these symptoms were experienced. In a very small separate group the physical and mental functions were stronger during this period, but in half of these cases there was distinct disturbance during the intermenstrual period. Tobler concludes that, while menstruation itself is physiological, all these disturbances are pathological.
In Germany, Tobler investigated the menstrual histories of over a thousand women (Monatsschrift für Geburtshülfe und Gynäkologie, July, 1905). He found that in the vast majority of women today, menstruation is linked to a noticeable decline in overall health and a decrease in energy levels. In 26 percent of cases, local pain, general discomfort, and mental or nervous issues occurred together; a larger percentage experienced either local pain, poor health, or psychological abnormalities alone during this time. In 16 percent, none of these symptoms were reported. In a very small separate group, physical and mental functions were stronger during this period, but in half of these cases, there were clear disturbances during the time between menstrual cycles. Tobler concludes that while menstruation itself is normal, all these disturbances are abnormal.
As far as England is concerned, at a discussion of normal and painful menstruation at a meeting of the British Association of Registered Medical Women on the 7th of July, 1908, it was stated by Miss Bentham that 50 per cent. of girls in good position suffered from painful menstruation. Mrs. Dunnett said it usually occurred between the ages of twenty-four and thirty, being frequently due to neglect to rest during menstruation in the earlier years, and Mrs. Grainger Evans had found that this condition was very common among elementary school teachers who had worked hard for examinations during early girlhood.
As for England, during a discussion about normal and painful menstruation at a meeting of the British Association of Registered Medical Women on July 7, 1908, Miss Bentham mentioned that 50 percent of girls from good backgrounds experienced painful menstruation. Mrs. Dunnett noted that it typically occurred between the ages of twenty-four and thirty, often resulting from not resting during menstruation in their younger years. Mrs. Grainger Evans found that this issue was very common among elementary school teachers who had worked hard for exams during their early teenage years.
In America various investigations have been carried out, showing the prevalence of disturbance in the sexual health of school girls and young women. Thus Dr. Helen P. Kennedy obtained elaborate data concerning the menstrual life of one hundred and twenty-five high school girls of the average age of eighteen ("Effect of High School Work upon Girls During Adolescence," Pedagogical Seminary, June, 1896). Only twenty-eight felt no pain during the period; half the total number experienced disagreeable symptoms before the period (such as headache, malaise, irritability of temper), while forty-four complained of other symptoms besides pain during the period (especially headache and great weakness). Jane Kelley Sabine (quoted in Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, Sept. 15, 1904) found in New England schools among two thousand girls that 75 per cent. had menstrual troubles, 90 per cent. had leucorrhœa and ovarian neuralgia, and 60 per cent. had to give up work for two days during each month. These results seem more than usually unfavorable, but are significant, as they cover a large number of cases. The conditions in the Pacific States are not much better. Dr. Mary Ritter (in a paper read before the California State Medical Society in 1903) stated that of 660 Freshmen girls at the University of California, 67 per cent. were subject to menstrual disorders, 27 per cent. to headaches, 30 per cent. to backaches, 29 per cent. were habitually constipated, 16 per cent. had abnormal heart sounds; only 23 per cent. were free from functional disturbances. Dr. Helen MacMurchey, in an interesting paper on "Physiological Phenomena Preceding or Accompanying Menstruation" (Lancet, Oct. 5, 1901), by inquiries among one hundred medical women, nurses, and women teachers in Toronto concerning the presence or absence of twenty-one different abnormal menstrual phenomena, found that between 50 and 60 per cent. admitted that they were liable at this time to disturbed sleep, to headache, to mental depression, to digestive disturbance, or to disturbance of the special senses, while about 25 to 50 per cent. were liable to neuralgia, to vertigo, to excessive nervous energy, to defective nervous and muscular power, to cutaneous hyperæsthesia, to vasomotor disturbances, to constipation, to diarrhœa, to increased urination, to cutaneous eruption, to increased liability to take cold, or to irritating watery discharges before or after the menstrual discharge. This inquiry is of much interest, because it clearly brings out the marked prevalence at menstruation of conditions which, though not necessarily of any gravity, yet definitely indicate decreased power of resistance to morbid influences and diminished efficiency for work.
In America, various studies have been conducted that reveal the widespread issues affecting the sexual health of school girls and young women. Dr. Helen P. Kennedy gathered detailed information about the menstrual experiences of 125 high school girls, averaging eighteen years old ("Effect of High School Work upon Girls During Adolescence," Pedagogical Seminary, June 1896). Only twenty-eight reported no pain during their periods; half of the participants experienced unpleasant symptoms leading up to their periods, such as headaches, fatigue, and irritability, while forty-four reported additional symptoms beyond pain during menstruation, particularly headaches and extreme weakness. Jane Kelley Sabine (as cited in Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, Sept. 15, 1904) found that among two thousand girls in New England schools, 75% had menstrual issues, 90% experienced leucorrhea and ovarian pain, and 60% had to miss work for two days each month. These findings appear particularly concerning, given the large sample size. Conditions in the Pacific States are similarly troubling. Dr. Mary Ritter (in a presentation to the California State Medical Society in 1903) noted that of 660 freshman girls at the University of California, 67% suffered from menstrual disorders, 27% had headaches, 30% experienced backaches, 29% were consistently constipated, and 16% exhibited abnormal heart sounds; only 23% were free from functional disturbances. Dr. Helen MacMurchey, in an intriguing paper titled "Physiological Phenomena Preceding or Accompanying Menstruation" (Lancet, Oct. 5, 1901), surveyed one hundred medical women, nurses, and women teachers in Toronto regarding the presence or absence of twenty-one different abnormal menstrual symptoms. She found that between 50% and 60% acknowledged being prone to disrupted sleep, headaches, mental depression, digestive issues, or disturbances of the senses during this time, while about 25% to 50% reported experiencing nerve pain, dizziness, excessive nervous energy, weakened nerve and muscle strength, skin sensitivity, circulation issues, constipation, diarrhea, increased urination, skin rashes, heightened susceptibility to colds, or irritating watery discharges before or after menstruation. This research is noteworthy as it highlights the significant prevalence of conditions during menstruation that, while not necessarily serious, clearly indicate a reduced ability to cope with negative influences and a decrease in work efficiency.
How serious an impediment menstrual troubles are to a woman is indicated by the fact that the women who achieve success and fame seem seldom to be greatly affected by them. To that we may, in part, attribute the frequency with which leaders of the women's movement have treated menstruation as a thing of no importance in a woman's life. Adele Gerhard, and Helene Simon, also, in their valuable and impartial work, Mutterschaft und Geistige Arbeit (p. 312), failed to find, in their inquiries among women of distinguished ability, that menstruation was regarded as seriously disturbing to work.
How much menstrual issues can hold a woman back is shown by the fact that those who find success and fame often don’t seem to be heavily impacted by them. This may partly explain why leaders of the women's movement frequently view menstruation as insignificant in a woman's life. Adele Gerhard and Helene Simon, in their important and unbiased work, Mutterschaft und Geistige Arbeit (p. 312), also found in their studies among accomplished women that menstruation was not seen as a major disruption to their work.
Of late the suggestion that adolescent girls shall not only rest from work during two days of the menstrual period, but have an entire holiday from school during the first year of sexual life, has frequently been put forward, both from the medical and the educational side. At the meeting of the Association of Registered Medical Women, already referred to, Miss Sturge spoke of the good results obtained in a school where, during the first two years after puberty, the girls were kept in bed for the first two days of each menstrual period. Some years ago Dr. G. W. Cook ("Some Disorders of Menstruation," American Journal of Obstetrics, April, 1896), after giving cases in point, wrote: "It is my deliberate conviction that no girl should be confined at study during the year of her puberty, but she should live an outdoor life." In an article on "Alumna's Children," by "An Alumna" (Popular Science Monthly, May, 1904), dealing with the sexual invalidism of American women and the severe strain of motherhood upon them, the author, though she is by no means hostile to education, which is not, she declares, at fault, pleads for rest for the pubertal girl. "If the brain claims her whole vitality, how can there be any proper development? Just as very young children should give all their strength for some years solely to physical growth before the brain is allowed to make any considerable demands, so at this critical period in the life of the woman nothing should obstruct the right of way of this important system. A year at the least should be made especially easy for her, with neither mental nor nervous strain; and throughout the rest of her school days she should have her periodical day of rest, free from any study or overexertion." In another article on the same subject in the same journal ("The Health of American Girls," Sept., 1907), Nellie Comins Whitaker advocates a similar course. "I am coming to be convinced, somewhat against my wish, that there are many cases when the girl ought to be taken out of school entirely for some months or for a year at the period of puberty." She adds that the chief obstacle in the way is the girl's own likes and dislikes, and the ignorance of her mother who has been accustomed to think that pain is a woman's natural lot.
Recently, there has been a proposal that adolescent girls should not only take a break from work during the first two days of their menstrual period but also have a complete school holiday during their first year of sexual development. This idea has been frequently suggested from both medical and educational perspectives. At a meeting of the Association of Registered Medical Women, previously mentioned, Miss Sturge talked about the positive outcomes observed in a school where, during the initial two years after puberty, girls were kept in bed for the first two days of each menstrual period. A few years back, Dr. G. W. Cook wrote in "Some Disorders of Menstruation" (American Journal of Obstetrics, April 1896) that "I firmly believe no girl should have to study during her year of puberty; instead, she should lead an outdoor life." In an article titled "Alumna's Children" by "An Alumna" (Popular Science Monthly, May 1904), which discusses the sexual health issues of American women and the heavy toll of motherhood on them, the author—who is not against education—argues for the necessity of rest for pubescent girls. "If the brain demands all her energy, how can proper development occur? Just as very young children should focus all their strength on physical growth for several years before their brains begin to make significant demands, so at this critical stage in a woman's life, nothing should hinder the development of this crucial system. At least a year should be dedicated to making this period as easy as possible for her, without mental or emotional stress; and throughout her remaining school years, she should have a regular day of rest free from study or exertion." In another article on the same topic in the same journal ("The Health of American Girls," Sept. 1907), Nellie Comins Whitaker supports this idea as well. "I am becoming convinced, somewhat reluctantly, that there are many instances where a girl should be taken out of school entirely for several months or a year during puberty." She points out that the primary barrier to this is the girl's own preferences and the ignorance of her mother, who has been conditioned to believe that pain is a natural part of being a woman.
Such a period of rest from mental strain, while it would fortify the organism in its resistance to any reasonable strain later, need by no means be lost for education in the wider sense of the word, for the education required in classrooms is but a small part of the education required for life. Nor should it by any means be reserved merely for the sickly and delicate girl. The tragic part of the present neglect to give girls a really sound and fitting education is that the best and finest girls are thereby so often ruined. Even the English policeman, who admittedly belongs in physical vigor and nervous balance to the flower of the population, is unable to bear the strain of his life, and is said to be worn out in twenty-five years. It is equally foolish to submit the finest flowers of girlhood to a strain which is admittedly too severe.
Taking a break from mental stress can strengthen the body’s ability to handle reasonable challenges later on. This time shouldn’t be seen as lost for education in the broader sense, since the learning that happens in classrooms is only a small part of what’s needed for life. It shouldn't only be reserved for sickly or fragile girls either. The unfortunate reality of the current neglect in providing girls with a solid and appropriate education is that it often ends up harming the best and brightest among them. Even the English policeman, who is recognized for his physical strength and mental stability, finds it hard to cope with the demands of his job and is said to be worn out within twenty-five years. It's just as foolish to subject the most hopeful young girls to a level of stress that is clearly too much for them.
It seems to be clear that the main factor in the common sexual and general invalidism of girls and young women is bad hygiene, in the first place consisting in neglect of the menstrual functions and in the second place in faulty habits generally. In all the more essential matters that concern the hygiene of the body the traditions of girls—and this seems to be more especially the case in the Anglo-Saxon countries—are inferior to those of youths. Women are much more inclined than men to subordinate these things to what seems to them some more urgent interest or fancy of the moment; they are trained to wear awkward and constricting garments, they are indifferent to regular and substantial meals, preferring innutritious and indigestible foods and drinks; they are apt to disregard the demands of the bowels and the bladder out of laziness or modesty; they are even indifferent to physical cleanliness.[29] In a great number of minor ways, which separately may seem to be of little importance, they play into the hands of an environment which, not always having been adequately adjusted to their special needs, would exert a considerable stress and strain even if they carefully sought to guard themselves against it. It has been found in an American Women's College in which about half the scholars wore corsets and half not, that nearly all the honors and prizes went to the non-corset-wearers. McBride, in bringing forward this fact, pertinently remarks, "If the wearing of a single style of dress will make this difference in the lives of young women, and that, too, in their most vigorous and resistive period, how much difference will a score of unhealthy habits make, if persisted in for a life-time?"[30]
It’s clear that the main reason for the common health issues among girls and young women is poor hygiene, primarily due to neglect of menstrual health and secondly due to general bad habits. In crucial aspects of bodily hygiene, the traditions for girls—especially in Anglo-Saxon countries—are not as good as those for boys. Women tend to prioritize what seems like a more urgent interest or momentary desire over these important issues; they are often trained to wear uncomfortable and tight clothing, neglect regular and nutritious meals in favor of unhealthy and hard-to-digest foods and drinks. They frequently ignore the needs of their bowel and bladder out of laziness or modesty and are even indifferent to personal cleanliness. In many small ways, which might seem trivial on their own, they contribute to an environment that hasn't always been tailored to their specific needs, creating significant stress and strain even if they try to protect themselves against it. Research at an American Women's College showed that among students, those who didn’t wear corsets were the ones who received nearly all the honors and prizes. McBride notes, "If wearing one type of clothing can make such a difference in young women's lives during their most vigorous and resilient years, imagine how much impact a multitude of unhealthy habits could have if maintained over a lifetime?"
"It seems evident," A. E. Giles concludes ("Some Points of Preventive Treatment in the Diseases of Women," The Hospital, April 10, 1897) "that dysmenorrhœa might be to a large extent prevented by attention to general health and education. Short hours of work, especially of standing; plenty of outdoor exercise—tennis, boating, cycling, gymnastics, and walking for those who cannot afford these; regularity of meals and food of the proper quality—not the incessant tea and bread and butter with variation of pastry; the avoidance of overexertion and prolonged fatigue; these are some of the principal things which require attention. Let girls pursue their study, but more leisurely; they will arrive at the same goal, but a little later." The benefit of allowing free movement and exercise to the whole body is undoubtedly very great, both as regards the sexual and general physical health and the mental balance; in order to insure this it is necessary to avoid heavy and constricting garments, more especially around the chest, for it is in respiratory power and chest expansion more than in any other respect that girls fall behind boys (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, Ch. IX). In old days the great obstacle to the free exercise of girls lay in an ideal of feminine behavior which involved a prim restraint on every natural movement of the body. At the present day that ideal is not so fervently preached as of old, but its traditional influence still to some extent persists, while there is the further difficulty that adequate time and opportunity and encouragement are by no means generally afforded to girls for the cultivation and training of the romping instincts which are really a serious part of education, for it is by such free exercise of the whole body that the neuro-muscular system, the basis of all vital activity, is built up. The neglect of such education is to-day clearly visible in the structure of our women. Dr. F. May Dickinson Berry, Medical Examiner to the Technical Education Board of the London County Council, found (British Medical Journal, May 28, 1904) among over 1,500 girls, who represent the flower of the schools, since they had obtained scholarships enabling them to proceed to higher grade schools, that 22 per cent, presented some degree, not always pronounced, of lateral curvature of the spine, though such cases were very rare among the boys. In the same way among a very similar class of select girls at the Chicago Normal School, Miss Lura Sanborn (Doctors' Magazine, Dec., 1900) found 17 per cent, with spinal curvature, in some cases of a very pronounced degree. There is no reason why a girl should not have as straight a back as a boy, and the cause can only lie in the defective muscular development which was found in most of the cases, sometimes accompanied by anæmia. Here and there nowadays, among the better social classes, there is ample provision for the development of muscular power in girls, but in any generalized way there is no adequate opportunity for such exercise, and among the working class, above all, in the section of it which touches the lower middle class, although their lives are destined to be filled with a constant strain on the neuro-muscular system from work at home or in shops, etc., there is usually a minimum of healthy exercise and physical development. Dr. W. A. B. Sellman, of Baltimore ("Causes of Painful Menstruation in Unmarried Women," American Journal Obstetrics, Nov., 1907), emphasizes the admirable results obtained by moderate physical exercise for young women, and in training them to care for their bodies and to rest their nervous systems, while Dr. Charlotte Brown, of San Francisco, rightly insists on the establishment in all towns and villages alike of outdoor gymnastic fields for women and girls, and of a building, in connection with every large school, for training in physical, manual, and domestic science. The provision of special playgrounds is necessary where the exercising of girls is so unfamiliar as to cause an embarrassing amount of attention from the opposite sex, though when it is an immemorial custom it can be carried out on the village green without attracting the slightest attention, as I have seen in Spain, where one cannot fail to connect it with the physical vigor of the women. In boys' schools games are not only encouraged, but made compulsory; but this is by no means a universal rule in girls' schools. It is not necessary, and is indeed highly undesirable, that the games adopted should be those of boys. In England especially, where the movements of women are so often marked by awkwardness, angularity and lack of grace, it is essential that nothing should be done to emphasize these characteristics, for where vigor involves violence we are in the presence of a lack of due neuro-muscular coördination. Swimming, when possible, and especially some forms of dancing, are admirably adapted to develop the bodily movements of women both vigorously and harmoniously (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, Ch. VII). At the International Congress of School Hygiene in 1907 (see, e.g., British Medical Journal, Aug. 24, 1907) Dr. L. H. Gulick, formerly Director of Physical Training in the Public Schools of New York City, stated that after many experiments it had been found in the New York elementary and high schools that folk-dancing constituted the very best exercise for girls. "The dances selected involved many contractions of the large muscular masses of the body and had therefore a great effect on respiration, circulation and nutrition. Such movements, moreover, when done as dances, could be carried on three or four times as long without producing fatigue as formal gymnastics. Many folk-dances were imitative, sowing and reaping dance, dances expressing trade movements (the shoemaker's dance), others illustrating attack and defense, or the pursuit of game. Such neuro-muscular movements were racially old and fitted in with man's expressive life, and if it were accepted that the folk-dances really expressed an epitome of man's neuro-muscular history, as distinguished from mere permutation of movements, the folk-dance combinations should be preferred on these biological grounds to the unselected, or even the physiologically selected. From the æsthetic point of view the sense of beauty as shown in dancing was far commoner than the power to sing, paint or model."
"It seems obvious," A. E. Giles concludes ("Some Points of Preventive Treatment in the Diseases of Women," The Hospital, April 10, 1897) "that dysmenorrhea could be largely prevented by focusing on overall health and education. Shorter working hours, especially of standing; plenty of outdoor exercise—like tennis, boating, cycling, gymnastics, and walking for those who can’t afford other options; regular meal times and quality food—not the constant tea with bread and butter and occasional pastries; avoiding overexertion and prolonged fatigue; these are some of the main issues that need attention. Let girls study, but more leisurely; they will still reach the same goal, just a bit later." The benefits of allowing the whole body to move and exercise are undeniably significant for both sexual and general physical health, as well as mental balance; to ensure this, it’s necessary to avoid heavy and constricting clothing, especially around the chest, as girls generally lag behind boys in respiratory power and chest expansion (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, Ch. IX). In the past, a major barrier to girls exercising freely stemmed from an ideal of feminine behavior that imposed a rigid restraint on every natural movement of the body. Today, that ideal isn’t as strongly promoted as it once was, but its traditional influence still lingers to some extent. Additionally, there’s the ongoing challenge that girls aren’t universally given enough time, opportunity, or encouragement to develop and train the playful instincts that are actually an essential part of education; it is through this kind of full-body exercise that the neuro-muscular system, the foundation of all vital activity, is established. The neglect of such education is now clearly visible in the physical development of our women. Dr. F. May Dickinson Berry, Medical Examiner for the Technical Education Board of the London County Council, found (British Medical Journal, May 28, 1904) that among over 1,500 girls, who represent the best of the schools as they had received scholarships to attend higher grade schools, 22 percent showed some degree, not always severe, of lateral curvature of the spine, whereas such cases were very rare among boys. Similarly, among a comparable group of select girls at the Chicago Normal School, Miss Lura Sanborn (Doctors' Magazine, Dec., 1900) found 17 percent exhibited spinal curvature, with some cases being quite pronounced. There’s no reason why a girl can’t have as straight a back as a boy, and the problem can only result from inadequate muscular development found in most cases, sometimes combined with anemia. Nowadays, among the upper social classes, there are some good opportunities for girls to develop muscular strength, but generally, there’s a lack of proper exercise opportunities, and especially among the working class, particularly in the lower middle class. Even though their lives involve constant physical strain from work at home or in shops, they usually get minimal healthy exercise and physical growth. Dr. W. A. B. Sellman of Baltimore ("Causes of Painful Menstruation in Unmarried Women," American Journal of Obstetrics, Nov., 1907) stresses the excellent benefits of moderate physical exercise for young women, teaching them to take care of their bodies and rest their nervous systems. Dr. Charlotte Brown of San Francisco rightly advocates for outdoor gymnastic fields for women and girls in all towns and villages, as well as a building for training in physical, manual, and domestic sciences at every major school. Establishing special playgrounds is essential where girl’s exercise is so uncommon that it attracts unwanted attention from boys, though in places where it’s a long-standing tradition, it can take place in the village green without anyone batting an eye, as I’ve observed in Spain, where the link between activity and the physical robustness of women is clear. In boys' schools, games are not only encouraged but made mandatory; however, this is far from a universal practice in girls' schools. It's not necessary and is indeed quite undesirable for the games adopted to mirror those of boys. Especially in England, where women’s movements often seem awkward and lacking in grace, it’s vital to avoid emphasizing these traits. When vigor comes off as violence, it highlights a lack of proper neuro-muscular coordination. Swimming, when possible, and particularly certain kinds of dancing, are superb for developing women's physical movements both vigorously and gracefully (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, Ch. VII). At the International Congress of School Hygiene in 1907 (see, e.g., British Medical Journal, Aug. 24, 1907), Dr. L. H. Gulick, former Director of Physical Training in New York City’s Public Schools, declared that after many trials, it was determined in New York’s elementary and high schools that folk-dancing provided the best exercise for girls. "The selected dances involved extensive muscle engagement and significantly affected respiration, circulation, and nutrition. Moreover, these dance movements could be sustained three or four times longer without fatigue compared to formal gymnastics. Many folk-dances were imitative—like the sowing and reaping dance or the shoemaker's dance—others depicting attack and defense or the chase of game. Such neuro-muscular movements were racially ancient and aligned with the expressive nature of human life, and if it’s accepted that folk-dances express a summary of human neuro-muscular history, as opposed to merely a variation of movements, then these folk-dance combinations should be preferred for these biological reasons over unselected or even physiologically selected activities. Aesthetically speaking, the sense of beauty expressed in dance is far more common than the ability to sing, paint, or sculpt."
It must always be remembered that in realizing the especial demands of woman's nature, we do not commit ourselves to the belief that higher education is unfitted for a woman. That question may now be regarded as settled. There is therefore no longer any need for the feverish anxiety of the early leaders of feminine education to prove that girls can be educated exactly as if they were boys, and yield at least as good educational results. At the present time, indeed, that anxiety is not only unnecessary but mischievous. It is now more necessary to show that women have special needs just as men have special needs, and that it is as bad for women, and therefore, for the world, to force them to accept the special laws and limitations of men as it would be bad for men, and therefore, for the world, to force men to accept the special laws and limitations of women. Each sex must seek to reach the goal by following the laws of its own nature, even although it remains desirable that, both in the school and in the world, they should work so far as possible side by side. The great fact to be remembered always is that, not only are women, in physical size and physical texture, slighter and finer than men, but that to an extent altogether unknown among men, their centre of gravity is apt to be deflected by the series of rhythmic sexual curves on which they are always living. They are thus more delicately poised and any kind of stress or strain—cerebral, nervous, or muscular—is more likely to produce serious disturbance and requires an accurate adjustment to their special needs.
It’s important to remember that acknowledging the unique needs of women doesn’t mean we believe higher education isn’t suitable for them. That debate can be considered settled now. So, there’s no longer a reason for the intense worry that early advocates for women’s education had in proving that girls can be educated just like boys and achieve at least the same educational outcomes. Nowadays, that worry is not only unnecessary but also harmful. It’s more important to demonstrate that women have specific needs just like men do, and it’s equally detrimental for women—and therefore, for society—to be forced to conform to the specific laws and limitations of men, just as it would be harmful for men to adhere to the specific laws and limitations of women. Each gender should aim to achieve their goals by following the principles of their own nature, although it’s still desirable for both to work together as much as possible in school and society. The key fact to always keep in mind is that women are not only physically smaller and finer than men, but also, to a degree that is not found in men, their center of gravity can be influenced by the series of rhythmic sexual cycles they experience. This makes them more delicately balanced, so any kind of stress or strain—be it cerebral, nervous, or muscular—is more likely to lead to serious issues and requires careful adjustments to meet their specific needs.
The fact that it is stress and strain in general, and not necessarily educational studies, that are injurious to adolescent women, is sufficiently proved, if proof is necessary, by the fact that sexual arrest, and physical or nervous breakdown, occur with extreme frequency in girls who work in shops or mills, even in girls who have never been to school at all. Even excesses in athletics—which now not infrequently occur as a reaction against woman's indifference to physical exercise—are bad. Cycling is beneficial for women who can ride without pain or discomfort, and, according to Watkins, it is even beneficial in many diseased and disordered pelvic conditions, but excessive cycling is evil in its results on women, more especially by inducing rigidity of the perineum to an extent which may even prevent childbirth and necessitate operation. I may add that the same objection applies to much horse-riding. In the same way everything which causes shocks to the body is apt to be dangerous to women, since in the womb they possess a delicately poised organ which varies in weight at different times, and it would, for instance, be impossible to commend football as a game for girls. "I do not believe," wrote Miss H. Ballantine, Director of Vassar College Gymnasium, to Prof. W. Thomas (Sex and Society, p. 22) "women can ever, no matter what the training, approach men in their physical achievements; and," she wisely adds, "I see no reason why they should." There seem, indeed, as has already been indicated, to be reasons why they should not, especially if they look forward to becoming mothers. I have noticed that women who have lived a very robust and athletic outdoor life, so far from always having the easy confinements which we might anticipate, sometimes have very seriously difficult times, imperilling the life of the child. On making this observation to a distinguished obstetrician, the late Dr. Engelmann, who was an ardent advocate of physical exercise for women (in e.g. his presidential address, "The Health of the American Girl," Transactions Southern Surgical and Gynæcological Association, 1890), he replied that he had himself made the same observation, and that instructors in physical training, both in America and England, had also told him of such cases among their pupils. "I hold," he wrote, "precisely the opinion you express [as to the unfavorable influence of muscular development in women]. Athletics, i.e., overdone physical training, causes the girl's system to approximate to the masculine; this is so whether due to sport or necessity. The woman who indulges in it approximates to the male in her attributes; this is marked in diminished sexual intensity, and in increased difficulty of childbirth, with, in time, lessened fecundity. Healthy habits improve, but masculine muscular development diminishes, womanly qualities, although it is true that the peasant and the laboring woman have easy labor. I have never advocated muscular development for girls, only physical training, but have perhaps said too much for it and praised it too unguardedly. In schools and colleges, so far, however, it is insufficient rather than too much; only the wealthy have too much golf and athletic sports. I am collecting new material, but from what I already have seen I am impressed with the truth of what you say. I am studying the point, and shall elaborate the explanation." Any publication on this subject was, however, prevented by Engelmann's death a few years later.
The idea that stress and pressure in general, rather than just academic studies, can harm young women is well-supported, if proof is needed, by the fact that issues like sexual dysfunction and physical or nervous breakdowns happen frequently in girls working in shops or factories, even in those who have never attended school. Even extreme involvement in sports—which often arises as a reaction to women’s previous lack of interest in physical activity—can be harmful. Cycling is good for women who can do it without pain or discomfort, and according to Watkins, it can even help with certain pelvic health issues. However, excessive cycling can be harmful to women, especially by causing stiffness in the perineum to the degree that it might complicate childbirth and require surgical intervention. The same concern applies to extensive horse-riding. Everything that shocks the body can be dangerous for women because their womb contains a delicately balanced organ that changes weight at different times. For instance, football is not suitable for girls. "I do not believe," wrote Miss H. Ballantine, Director of Vassar College Gymnasium, to Prof. W. Thomas (Sex and Society, p. 22), "that women can ever, no matter the training, match men in their physical achievements; and," she sensibly adds, "I see no reason why they should." Indeed, there seem to be valid reasons against it, especially for those who plan to become mothers. I’ve noticed that women who lead very active, athletic lives do not always have the easy deliveries one might expect; sometimes they face very serious challenges that can threaten the child’s life. When I shared this observation with the late Dr. Engelmann, a well-respected obstetrician who passionately supported physical exercise for women (as seen in his presidential address, "The Health of the American Girl," Transactions Southern Surgical and Gynæcological Association, 1890), he confirmed he had noted the same issue and that trainers in both America and England had reported similar experiences with their students. "I hold," he wrote, "the same opinion you express regarding the negative impact of muscular development in women. Athletics, or excessive physical training, brings a girl's system closer to that of a male; this is true whether through sport or necessity. A woman who participates in it tends to adopt more masculine traits, which is evident in reduced sexual drive and increased challenges during childbirth, leading over time to decreased fertility. While healthy habits are beneficial, masculine muscular development can diminish feminine qualities, although it is true that peasant and working-class women tend to have easier deliveries. I have never promoted muscular development for girls; only physical training, but perhaps I’ve advocated it too much and praised it too indiscriminately. In schools and colleges, the situation is lacking rather than excessive; only affluent individuals indulge in too much golf and sports. I am gathering more information, but based on what I've seen, I agree with your observations. I’m researching this issue and will provide a more detailed explanation." However, Engelmann's death a few years later stopped any publication on the topic.
A proper recognition of the special nature of woman, of her peculiar needs and her dignity, has a significance beyond its importance in education and hygiene. The traditions and training to which she is subjected in this matter have a subtle and far-reaching significance, according as they are good or evil. If she is taught, implicitly or explicitly, contempt for the characteristics of her own sex, she naturally develops masculine ideals which may permanently discolor her vision of life and distort her practical activities; it has been found that as many as fifty per cent. of American school girls have masculine ideals, while fifteen per cent. American and no fewer than thirty-four per cent. English school girls wished to be men, though scarcely any boys wished to be women.[31] With the same tendency may be connected that neglect to cultivate the emotions, which, by a mischievously extravagant but inevitable reaction from the opposite extreme, has sometimes marked the modern training of women. In the finely developed woman, intelligence is interpenetrated with emotion. If there is an exaggerated and isolated culture of intelligence a tendency shows itself to disharmony which breaks up the character or impairs its completeness. In this connection Reibmayr has remarked that the American woman may serve as a warning.[32] Within the emotional sphere itself, it may be added, there is a tendency to disharmony in women owing to the contradictory nature of the feelings which are traditionally impressed upon her, a contradiction which dates back indeed to the identification of sacredness and impurity at the dawn of civilization. "Every girl and woman," wrote Hellmann, in a pioneering book which pushed a sound principle to eccentric extremes, "is taught to regard her sexual parts as a precious and sacred spot, only to be approached by a husband or in special circumstances a doctor. She is, at the same time, taught to regard this spot as a kind of water-closet which she ought to be extremely ashamed to possess, and the mere mention of which should cause a painful blush."[33] The average unthinking woman accepts the incongruity of this opposition without question, and grows accustomed to adapt herself to each of the incompatibles according to circumstances. The more thoughtful woman works out a private theory of her own. But in very many cases this mischievous opposition exerts a subtly perverting influence on the whole outlook towards Nature and life. In a few cases, also, in women of sensitive temperament, it even undermines and ruins the psychic personality.
A proper acknowledgment of the unique nature of women, along with their specific needs and inherent dignity, holds significance that goes beyond just education and hygiene. The traditions and training they undergo have a subtle and far-reaching impact, depending on whether they are positive or negative. If a woman is taught, either directly or indirectly, to look down on her own gender's characteristics, she tends to adopt masculine ideals that can permanently skew her perspective on life and influence her actions negatively. Research shows that up to fifty percent of American schoolgirls hold masculine ideals, while fifteen percent of American girls and thirty-four percent of English girls want to be boys, whereas hardly any boys wish to be girls. This same tendency may be connected to a disregard for emotional development, which can result from an excessive reaction to the opposite extreme in modern women's education. In well-rounded women, intellect and emotion should coexist. However, a singular focus on intelligence often leads to disharmony, disrupting the overall character or wholeness of a person. Reibmayr has noted that American women can serve as a cautionary example in this regard. Within the realm of emotions, women also face disharmony due to the conflicting feelings traditionally imposed upon them, a conflict that dates back to the early days of civilization when sacredness and impurity were intertwined. "Every girl and woman," wrote Hellmann in a groundbreaking book that took a valid principle to extreme lengths, "is taught to view her sexual parts as a precious and sacred area, only to be approached by a husband or, in certain situations, a doctor. At the same time, she is instructed to see this area as something shameful, akin to a toilet, which she should be extremely embarrassed to have, and even the mention of it should cause a painful blush." The average unthinking woman accepts the inconsistency of this contradiction without question and learns to adjust to each opposing view based on the situation. More reflective women develop their own personal understanding of the issue. However, in many cases, this destructive opposition subtly skews their entire perspective on nature and life. In some instances, particularly in women with sensitive temperaments, it can even undermine and ruin their mental well-being.
Thus Boris Sidis has recorded a case illustrating the disastrous results of inculcating on a morbidly sensitive girl the doctrine of the impurity of women. She was educated in a convent. "While there she was impressed with the belief that woman is a vessel of vice and impurity. This seemed to have been imbued in her by one of the nuns who was very holy and practiced self-mortification. With the onset of her periods, and with the observation of the same in the other girls, this doctrine of female impurity was all the stronger impressed on her sensitive mind." It lapsed, however, from conscious memory and only came to the foreground in subsequent years with the exhaustion and fatigue of prolonged office work. Then she married. Now "she has an extreme abhorrence of women. Woman, to the patient, is impurity, filth, the very incarnation of degradation and vice. The house wash must not be given to a laundry where women work. Nothing must be picked up in the street, not even the most valuable object, perchance it might have been dropped by a woman" (Boris Sidis, "Studies in Psychopathology," Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, April 4, 1907). That is the logical outcome of much of the traditional teaching which is given to girls. Fortunately, the healthy mind offers a natural resistance to its complete acceptation, yet it usually, in some degree, persists and exerts a mischievous influence.
Thus, Boris Sidis documented a case showing the harmful effects of teaching a highly sensitive girl the idea that women are impure. She was educated in a convent. "While there, she absorbed the belief that a woman is a vessel of vice and impurity. This seemed to be instilled in her by one of the nuns who was very devout and practiced self-denial. With the onset of her periods, and seeing the same in the other girls, this idea of female impurity was even more strongly ingrained in her sensitive mind." However, it faded from her conscious memory and only resurfaced in later years with the exhaustion and fatigue from long hours of office work. Then she got married. Now "she has a deep disdain for women. To her, women represent impurity, dirt, the very embodiment of degradation and vice. Laundry must not be given to a place where women work. Nothing should be picked up from the street, not even the most valuable object, in case it might have been dropped by a woman" (Boris Sidis, "Studies in Psychopathology," Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, April 4, 1907). This is the logical result of much of the traditional education that girls receive. Fortunately, a healthy mind naturally resists fully accepting it, but it often lingers and has a negative influence.
It is, however, not only in her relations to herself and to her sex that a girl's thoughts and feelings tend to be distorted by the ignorance or the false traditions by which she is so often carefully surrounded. Her happiness in marriage, her whole future career, is put in peril. The innocent young woman must always risk much in entering the door of indissoluble marriage; she knows nothing truly of her husband, she knows nothing of the great laws of love, she knows nothing of her own possibilities, and, worse still, she is even ignorant of her ignorance. She runs the risk of losing the game while she is still only beginning to learn it. To some extent that is quite inevitable if we are to insist that a woman should bind herself to marry a man before she has experienced the nature of the forces that marriage may unloose in her. A young girl believes she possesses a certain character; she arranges her future in accordance with that character; she marries. Then, in a considerable proportion of cases (five out of six, according to the novelist Bourget), within a year or even a week, she finds she was completely mistaken in herself and in the man she has married; she discovers within her another self, and that self detests the man to whom she is bound. That is a possible fate against which only the woman who has already been aroused to love is entitled to regard herself as fairly protected.
It is not just in her relationships with herself and other women that a girl's thoughts and feelings can be distorted by the ignorance or false traditions surrounding her. Her happiness in marriage and her entire future are at risk. The innocent young woman must always take a big chance when she steps into a permanent marriage; she knows very little about her husband, nothing about the deep laws of love, nothing about her own potential, and, even worse, she is unaware of her own ignorance. She risks losing everything while she is still just starting to learn about it. To some extent, this is unavoidable if we insist that a woman should commit to marry a man before she has experienced the forces that marriage can unleash in her. A young girl believes she has a certain character; she plans her future based on that belief; she gets married. Then, in a significant number of cases (five out of six, according to the novelist Bourget), within a year or even a week, she realizes she was completely wrong about herself and the man she married; she uncovers another version of herself, and that version dislikes the man she is bound to. That is a possible fate that only a woman who has already been awakened to love can feel somewhat protected against.
There is, however, a certain kind of protection which it is possible to afford the bride, even without departing from our most conventional conceptions of marriage. We can at least insist that she shall be accurately informed as to the exact nature of her physical relations to her future husband and be safeguarded from the shocks or the disillusions which marriage might otherwise bring. Notwithstanding the decay of prejudices, it is probable that even to-day the majority of women of the so-called educated class marry with only the vaguest and most inaccurate notions, picked up more or less clandestinely, concerning the nature of the sexual relationships. So highly intelligent a woman as Madame Adam has stated that she believed herself bound to marry a man who had kissed her on the mouth, imagining that to be the supreme act of sexual union,[34] and it has frequently happened that women have married sexually inverted persons of their own sex, not always knowingly, but believing them to be men, and never discovering their mistake; it is not long indeed since in America three women were thus successively married to the same woman, none of them apparently ever finding out the real sex of the "husband." "The civilized girl," as Edward Carpenter remarks, "is led to the 'altar' often in uttermost ignorance and misunderstanding of the sacrificial rites about to be consummated." Certainly more rapes have been effected in marriage than outside it.[35] The girl is full of vague and romantic faith in the promises of love, often heightened by the ecstasies depicted in sentimental novels from which every touch of wholesome reality has been carefully omitted. "All the candor of faith is there," as Sénancour puts it in his book De l'Amour, "the desires of inexperience, the needs of a new life, the hopes of an upright heart. She has all the faculties of love, she must love; she has all the means of pleasure, she must be loved. Everything expresses love and demands love: this hand formed for sweet caresses, an eye whose resources are unknown if it must not say that it consents to be loved, a bosom which is motionless and useless without love, and will fade without having been worshipped; these feelings that are so vast, so tender, so voluptuous, the ambition of the heart, the heroism of passion! She needs must follow the delicious rule which the law of the world has dictated. That intoxicating part, which she knows so well, which everything recalls, which the day inspires and the night commands, what young, sensitive, loving woman can imagine that she shall not play it?" But when the actual drama of love begins to unroll before her, and she realizes the true nature of the "intoxicating part" she has to play, then, it has often happened, the case is altered; she finds herself altogether unprepared, and is overcome with terror and alarm. All the felicity of her married life may then hang on a few chances, her husband's skill and consideration, her own presence of mind. Hirschfeld records the case of an innocent young girl of seventeen—in this case, it eventually proved, an invert—who was persuaded to marry but on discovering what marriage meant energetically resisted her husband's sexual approaches. He appealed to her mother to explain to her daughter the nature of "wifely duties." But the young wife replied to her mother's expostulations, "If that is my wifely duty then it was your parental duty to have told me beforehand, for, if I had known, I should never have married." The husband in this case, much in love with his wife, sought for eight years to over-persuade her, but in vain, and a separation finally took place.[36] That, no doubt, is an extreme case, but how many innocent young inverted girls never realize their true nature until after marriage, and how many perfectly normal girls are so shocked by the too sudden initiation of marriage that their beautiful early dreams of love never develop slowly and wholesomely into the acceptance of its still more beautiful realities?
There is, however, a certain kind of protection that can be provided to the bride without straying from our conventional ideas of marriage. At the very least, we can ensure that she is fully informed about the nature of her physical relationship with her future husband and shielded from the shocks or disappointments that marriage might otherwise bring. Despite the decline of old prejudices, it's likely that even today, most women from the so-called educated class enter marriage with only the vaguest and most misleading ideas, often learned secretly, about sexual relationships. A highly intelligent woman like Madame Adam stated that she believed she was bound to marry a man who had kissed her, thinking that was the ultimate act of sexual union,[34] and it has often been the case that women have married individuals of their own sex, not always realizing it, but believing them to be men, and never discovering their error; just not long ago in America, three women were married in succession to the same woman, none of them ever apparently discovering the true sex of the "husband." "The civilized girl," as Edward Carpenter observes, "is often led to the 'altar' in complete ignorance and misunderstanding of the sacrificial rites about to be completed." Certainly, more violations have occurred within marriage than outside of it.[35] The girl is filled with vague and romantic hopes in the promises of love, often intensified by the ecstatic portrayals in sentimental novels that leave out any genuine reality. "All the honesty of belief is there," as Sénancour expresses in his book De l'Amour, "the desires of inexperience, the needs of a new life, the hopes of an upright heart. She possesses all the faculties of love; she must love. She has all the means of pleasure; she must be loved. Everything conveys love and demands love: this hand made for tender caresses, an eye whose potential remains unknown if it doesn't express consent to be loved, a chest that is still and useless without love, which will wither without having been adored; these feelings that are vast, tender, and passionate, the ambition of the heart, the heroism of desire! She must follow the delightful path dictated by worldly expectations. That intoxicating role, which she is so familiar with, which everything recalls, inspired by the day and commanded by the night, what young, sensitive, loving woman can imagine she won’t play it?" But when the real drama of love unfolds in front of her, and she recognizes the true nature of the "intoxicating role" she has to play, it often happens that the situation changes; she finds herself completely unprepared and is overwhelmed with fear and anxiety. All the happiness of her married life may then come down to a few chances, her husband’s skill and sensitivity, and her own ability to stay calm. Hirschfeld describes the case of an innocent seventeen-year-old girl—who ultimately turned out to be an invert—who was convinced to marry but, upon discovering what marriage meant, strongly resisted her husband’s sexual advances. He asked her mother to explain "wifely duties" to her. But the young wife replied to her mother's protests, "If that's my wifely duty, then it was your responsibility as a parent to tell me beforehand because if I had known, I never would have married." The husband, deeply in love with his wife, tried for eight years to persuade her otherwise, but to no avail, and they eventually separated.[36] That may be an extreme case, but how many innocent young inverted girls never realize their true nature until after marriage, and how many perfectly normal girls are so shocked by the abrupt onset of marriage that their beautiful early dreams of love never develop slowly and healthily into accepting its even more beautiful realities?
Before the age of puberty it would seem that the sexual initiation of the child—apart from such scientific information as would form part of school courses in botany and zoölogy—should be the exclusive privilege of the mother, or whomever it may be to whom the mother's duties are delegated. At puberty more authoritative and precise advice is desirable than the mother may be able or willing to give. It is at this age that she should put into her son's or daughter's hands some one or other of the very numerous manuals to which reference has already been made (page 53), expounding the physical and moral aspects of the sexual life and the principles of sexual hygiene. The boy or girl is already, we may take it, acquainted with the facts of motherhood, and the origin of babies, as well as, more or less precisely, with the father's part in their procreation. Whatever manual is now placed in his or her hands should at least deal summarily, but definitely, with the sexual relationship, and should also comment, warningly but in no alarmist spirit, with the chief auto-erotic phenomena, and by no means exclusively with masturbation. Nothing but good can come of the use of such a manual, if it has been wisely selected; it will supplant what the mother has already done, what the teacher may still be doing, and what later may be done by private interview with a doctor. It has indeed been argued that the boy or girl to whom such literature is presented will merely make it an opportunity for morbid revelry and sensual enjoyment. It can well be believed that this may sometimes happen with boys or girls from whom all sexual facts have always been mysteriously veiled, and that when at last they find the opportunity of gratifying their long-repressed and perfectly natural curiosity they are overcome by the excitement of the event. It could not happen to children who have been naturally and wholesomely brought up. At a later age, during adolescence, there is doubtless great advantage in the plan, now frequently adopted, especially in Germany, of giving lectures, addresses, or quiet talks to young people of each sex separately. The speaker is usually a specially selected teacher, a doctor or other qualified person who may be brought in for this special purpose.
Before puberty, it seems that sexual education for children—aside from basic scientific knowledge that might be included in school subjects like botany and zoology—should primarily come from the mother or whoever takes on her responsibilities. Once they hit puberty, more authoritative and precise guidance is needed than what the mother may be able or willing to provide. At this stage, she should give her son or daughter one of the many manuals previously mentioned (see page 53), which explain the physical and moral aspects of sexual life and the basics of sexual hygiene. By this point, it can be assumed that they already know about motherhood, how babies come into being, and somewhat about the father's role in conception. Any manual provided should at least summarize, but clearly, address sexual relationships, and also discuss, in a cautionary yet calm way, the main autoerotic phenomena, not just masturbation. Using such a manual, if chosen wisely, will only be beneficial; it will build on what the mother has taught, what the teacher may currently be addressing, and what could later be discussed privately with a doctor. Some argue that a boy or girl given access to this kind of literature might simply indulge in unhealthy fantasies and pleasures. It's understandable that this could happen with children who have been kept in the dark about sexual matters, and when they finally get the chance to explore their long-suppressed curiosity, they might become overwhelmed. However, this shouldn't occur with children raised in a natural and healthy way. At a later age, during adolescence, there is certainly a significant benefit to the approach now commonly used, especially in Germany, of holding lectures, discussions, or private talks for young people of each sex separately. The speaker is typically a specially chosen teacher, doctor, or another qualified individual brought in for this specific purpose.
Stanley Hall, after remarking that sexual education should be chiefly from fathers to sons and from mothers to daughters, adds: "It may be that in the future this kind of initiation will again become an art, and experts will tell us with more confidence how to do our duty to the manifold exigencies, types and stages of youth, and instead of feeling baffled and defeated, we shall see that this age and theme is the supreme opening for the highest pedagogy to do its best and most transforming work, as well as being the greatest of all opportunities for the teacher of religion" (Stanley Hall, Adolescence, vol. i, p. 469). "At Williams College, Harvard, Johns Hopkins and Clark," the same distinguished teacher observes (ib., p. 465), "I have made it a duty in my departmental teaching to speak very briefly, but plainly to young men under my instruction, personally if I deemed it wise, and often, though here only in general terms, before student bodies, and I believe I have nowhere done more good, but it is a painful duty. It requires tact and some degree of hard and strenuous common sense rather than technical knowledge."
Stanley Hall, after noting that sexual education should primarily come from fathers to sons and mothers to daughters, says: "It’s possible that in the future this kind of initiation will become an art again, and experts will confidently guide us on how to fulfill our responsibilities to the various demands, types, and stages of youth. Instead of feeling confused and defeated, we'll recognize that this period and topic present the greatest opportunity for the best and most transformative educational efforts, as well as being the greatest chance for the teacher of religion" (Stanley Hall, Adolescence, vol. i, p. 469). "At Williams College, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and Clark," the same respected educator notes (ib., p. 465), "I have made it a point in my departmental teaching to speak very briefly, but clearly to the young men I teach, personally when I think it’s wise, and often, though only in general terms, before larger groups of students. I believe I’ve accomplished the most good here, but it’s a difficult task. It calls for tact and a fair amount of practical common sense rather than just technical knowledge."
It is scarcely necessary to say that the ordinary teacher of either sex is quite incompetent to speak of sexual hygiene. It is a task to which all, or some, teachers must be trained. A beginning in this direction has been made in Germany by the delivery to teachers of courses of lectures on sexual hygiene in education. In Prussia the first attempt was made in Breslau when the central school authorities requested Dr. Martin Chotzen to deliver such a course to one hundred and fifty teachers who took the greatest interest in the lectures, which covered the anatomy of the sexual organs, the development of the sexual instinct, its chief perversions, venereal diseases, and the importance of the cultivation of self-control. In Geschlecht und Gesellschaft (Bd. i, Heft 7) Dr. Fritz Reuther gives the substance of lectures which he has delivered to a class of young teachers; they cover much the same ground as Chotzen's.
It’s hardly necessary to point out that the average teacher, regardless of gender, isn’t really equipped to discuss sexual health. This is a topic that requires specialized training for all, or at least some, teachers. Progress has started in Germany with teachers receiving lectures on sexual health in education. In Prussia, the first initiative took place in Breslau, where the central school authorities asked Dr. Martin Chotzen to give a course to one hundred and fifty teachers who were very interested in the topics covered. These lectures addressed the anatomy of the sexual organs, the development of sexual instincts, their main perversions, sexually transmitted diseases, and the importance of developing self-control. In Geschlecht und Gesellschaft (Bd. i, Heft 7), Dr. Fritz Reuther summarizes the lectures he has delivered to a group of young teachers; these topics are quite similar to those discussed by Chotzen.
There is no evidence that in England the Minister of Education has yet taken any steps to insure the delivery of lectures on sexual hygiene to the pupils who are about to leave school. In Prussia, however, the Ministry of Education has taken an active interest in this matter, and such lectures are beginning to be commonly delivered, though attendance at them is not usually obligatory. Some years ago (in 1900), when it was proposed to deliver a series of lectures on sexual hygiene to the advanced pupils in Berlin schools, under the auspices of a society for the improvement of morals, the municipal authorities withdrew their permission to use the classrooms, on the ground that "such lectures would be extremely dangerous to the moral sense of an audience of the young." The same objection has been made by municipal officials in France. In Germany, at all events, however, opinion is rapidly growing more enlightened. In England little or no progress has yet been made, but in America steps are being taken in this direction, as by the Chicago Society for Social Hygiene. It must, indeed, be said that those who oppose the sexual enlightenment of youth in large cities are directly allying themselves, whether or not they know it, with the influences that make for vice and immorality.
There is no evidence that the Minister of Education in England has taken any steps to ensure that lectures on sexual hygiene are delivered to students who are about to graduate from school. In Prussia, however, the Ministry of Education is actively involved in this issue, and such lectures are starting to be commonly given, although attendance is usually not mandatory. A few years ago (in 1900), when there was a proposal to conduct a series of lectures on sexual hygiene for advanced students in Berlin schools, supported by a society focused on moral improvement, the local authorities revoked their permission to use the classrooms, claiming that "such lectures would be extremely dangerous to the moral sense of young audiences." The same concerns have been raised by local officials in France. In Germany, however, attitudes are quickly becoming more progressive. In England, little to no progress has been made yet, but in America, initiatives are underway in this area, such as those by the Chicago Society for Social Hygiene. It must be noted that those who oppose the sexual education of youth in large cities are, whether they realize it or not, aligning themselves with influences that promote vice and immorality.
Such lectures are also given to girls on leaving school, not only girls of the well-to-do, but also those of the poor class, who need them fully as much, and in some respects more. Thus Dr. A. Heidenhain has published a lecture (Sexuelle Belehrung der aus den Volksschule entlassenen Mädchen, 1907), accompanied by anatomical tables, which he has delivered to girls about to leave school, and which is intended to be put into their hands at this time. Salvat, in a Lyons thesis (La Dépopulation de la France, 1903), insists that the hygiene of pregnancy and the care of infants should form part of the subject of such lectures. These subjects might well be left, however, to a somewhat later period.
Such lectures are also given to girls after they finish school, not just for girls from wealthy families, but also for those from poorer backgrounds, who need them just as much, and in some ways even more. Dr. A. Heidenhain has published a lecture (Sexuelle Belehrung der aus den Volksschule entlassenen Mädchen, 1907), with anatomical charts, which he has presented to girls about to graduate, and which is meant to be given to them at this time. Salvat, in a thesis from Lyons (La Dépopulation de la France, 1903), argues that topics like pregnancy hygiene and infant care should be included in these lectures. However, these topics could be addressed later on.
Something is clearly needed beyond lectures on these matters. It should be the business of the parents or other guardians of every adolescent youth and girl to arrange that, once at least at this period of life, there should be a private, personal interview with a medical man to afford an opportunity for a friendly and confidential talk concerning the main points of sexual hygiene. The family doctor would be the best for this duty because he would be familiar with the personal temperament of the youth and the family tendencies.[37] In the case of girls a woman doctor would often be preferred. Sex is properly a mystery; and to the unspoilt youth, it is instinctively so; except in an abstract and technical form it cannot properly form the subject of lectures. In a private and individualized conversation between the novice in life and the expert, it is possible to say many necessary things that could not be said in public, and it is possible, moreover, for the youth to ask questions which shyness and reserve make it impossible to put to parents, while the convenient opportunity of putting them naturally to the expert otherwise seldom or never occurs. Most youths have their own special ignorances, their own special difficulties, difficulties and ignorances that could sometimes be resolved by a word. Yet it by no means infrequently happens that they carry them far on into adult life because they have lacked the opportunity, or the skill and assurance to create the opportunity, of obtaining enlightenment.
Something clearly needs to be done beyond just lectures on these topics. It's the responsibility of parents or guardians of every teenager to arrange at least one private meeting with a doctor during this stage of life to provide a chance for a friendly and confidential discussion about key aspects of sexual health. The family doctor would be the best choice for this task since they are familiar with the personality of the youth and the family's background. In the case of girls, a female doctor is often preferred. Sex is rightly a mystery, and for the innocent youth, it feels instinctively so; aside from abstract and technical discussions, it can't really be the focus of lectures. In a private and personalized conversation between an inexperienced individual and an expert, important matters can be addressed that wouldn't be appropriate for public discussion. Additionally, the youth can ask questions that shyness and caution prevent them from asking their parents, while opportunities to ask these questions of an expert are rarely available. Most young people have their own specific gaps in knowledge and unique challenges, which could sometimes be clarified with just a few words. Unfortunately, it's common for these issues to persist into adulthood because they've missed the chance, or the confidence and skill to create that chance, to gain understanding.
It must be clearly understood that these talks are of medical, hygienic, and physiological character; they are not to be used for retailing moral platitudes. To make them that would be a fatal mistake. The young are often very hostile to merely conventional moral maxims, and suspect their hollowness, not always without reason. The end to be aimed at here is enlightenment. Certainly knowledge can never be immoral, but nothing is gained by jumbling up knowledge and morality together.
It should be clear that these discussions are about medical, hygiene, and physiological topics; they shouldn’t be used to share moral clichés. Doing so would be a serious mistake. Young people often have a strong dislike for conventional moral sayings and tend to see their emptiness, not without some justification. The goal here is to promote understanding. Certainly, knowledge itself can never be immoral, but there’s no benefit in mixing knowledge with morality.
In emphasizing the nature of the physician's task in this matter as purely and simply that of wise practical enlightenment, nothing is implied against the advantages, and indeed the immense value in sexual hygiene, of the moral, religious, ideal elements of life. It is not the primary business of the physician to inspire these, but they have a very intimate relation with the sexual life, and every boy and girl at puberty, and never before puberty, should be granted the privilege—and not the duty or the task—of initiation into those elements of the world's life which are, at the same time, natural functions of the adolescent soul. Here, however, is the sphere of the religious or ethical teacher. At puberty he has his great opportunity, the greatest he can ever obtain. The flower of sex that blossoms in the body at puberty has its spiritual counterpart which at the same moment blossoms in the soul. The churches from of old have recognized the religious significance of this moment, for it is this period of life that they have appointed as the time of confirmation and similar rites. With the progress of the ages, it is true, such rites become merely formal and apparently meaningless fossils. But they have a meaning nevertheless, and are capable of being again vitalized. Nor in their spirit and essence should they be confined to those who accept supernaturally revealed religion. They concern all ethical teachers, who must realize that it is at puberty that they are called upon to inspire or to fortify the great ideal aspirations which at this period tend spontaneously to arise in the youth's or maiden's soul.[38]
In emphasizing the nature of a physician's role in this matter as simply providing wise practical guidance, there’s nothing to suggest that the moral, religious, and ideal aspects of life aren’t valuable for sexual health. It’s not primarily the physician's role to inspire these elements, but they are closely related to sexual life, and every boy and girl at puberty—never before—should have the privilege, not the duty or task, of being introduced to those aspects of life that are natural functions of the adolescent spirit. This is where the religious or ethical teacher comes in. At puberty, they have a significant opportunity, the greatest they’ll ever have. The blossoming of sexuality in the body at this stage has a spiritual counterpart that simultaneously thrives in the soul. Historically, churches have acknowledged the religious significance of this moment, as this is the period they designated for confirmation and similar rites. Over time, it’s true that such rites have become little more than formalities and seemingly meaningless remnants. However, they still hold meaning and can be revitalized. Moreover, in their spirit and essence, these rites shouldn't be limited to those who adhere to a religion based on supernatural revelation. They concern all ethical teachers, who need to understand that it’s at puberty that they’re called to inspire or strengthen the significant ideal aspirations that naturally begin to surface in the souls of young men and women.[38]
The age of puberty, I have said, marks the period at which this new kind of sexual initiation is called for. Before puberty, although the psychic emotion of love frequently develops, as well as sometimes physical sexual emotions that are mostly vague and diffused, definite and localized sexual sensations are rare. For the normal boy or girl love is usually an unspecialized emotion; it is in Guyau's words "a state in which the body has but the smallest place." At the first rising of the sun of sex the boy or girl sees, as Blake said he saw at sunrise, not a round yellow body emerging above the horizon, or any other physical manifestation, but a great company of singing angels. With the definite eruption of physical sexual manifestation and desire, whether at puberty or later in adolescence, a new turbulent disturbing influence appears. Against the force of this influence, mere intellectual enlightenment, or even loving maternal counsel—the agencies we have so far been concerned with—may be powerless. In gaining control of it we must find our auxiliary in the fact that puberty is the efflorescence not only of a new physical but a new psychic force. The ideal world naturally unfolds itself to the boy or girl at puberty. The magic of beauty, the instinct of modesty, the naturalness of self-restraint, the idea of unselfish love, the meaning of duty, the feeling for art and poetry, the craving for religious conceptions and emotions—all these things awake spontaneously in the unspoiled boy or girl at puberty. I say "unspoiled," for if these things have been thrust on the child before puberty when they have yet no meaning for him—as is unfortunately far too often done, more especially as regards religious notions—then it is but too likely that he will fail to react properly at that moment of his development when he would otherwise naturally respond to them. Under natural conditions this is the period for spiritual initiation. Now, and not before, is the time for the religious or ethical teacher as the case may be—for all religions and ethical systems may equally adapt themselves to this task—to take the boy or girl in hand, not with any special and obtrusive reference to the sexual impulses but for the purpose of assisting the development and manifestation of this psychic puberty, of indirectly aiding the young soul to escape from sexual dangers by harnessing his chariot to a star that may help to save it from sticking fast in any miry ruts of the flesh.
The age of puberty, as I’ve mentioned, marks the time when a new type of sexual initiation is needed. Before puberty, while the emotional experience of love often develops, along with vague and diffuse physical sensations, clear and focused sexual feelings are uncommon. For a typical boy or girl, love is usually a general emotion; in Guyau's words, it’s “a state in which the body has but the smallest place.” When the sun of sexuality rises, the boy or girl sees, as Blake described, not a round yellow sun coming up over the horizon or any other physical form, but a great choir of singing angels. With the clear emergence of physical sexual feelings and desires, whether at puberty or later in adolescence, a new, turbulent influence comes into play. In the face of this influence, mere intellectual understanding or even loving maternal advice—the things we’ve addressed so far—might be ineffective. To gain control over it, we must recognize that puberty brings forth not just a new physical force but a new psychological one as well. The ideal world naturally reveals itself to the boy or girl at puberty. The magic of beauty, the instinct for modesty, the natural impulse for self-restraint, the concept of selfless love, the sense of duty, the appreciation for art and poetry, the yearning for spiritual ideas and feelings—all of these awaken spontaneously in the untouched boy or girl at puberty. I say “untouched” because if these concepts are forced on the child before puberty when they hold no meaning for them—something that unfortunately happens far too often, especially regarding religious ideas—then it’s likely they won’t react properly when they would normally be ready to respond. Under natural circumstances, this is the period for spiritual initiation. Now, not before, is the time for religious or ethical teachers, as appropriate—since all religions and ethical systems can adapt themselves to this role—to guide the boy or girl. This should not be done with any direct focus on sexual impulses but rather aimed at supporting the growth and expression of this psychological puberty, helping the young soul navigate sexual dangers by steering their journey toward a higher purpose that can prevent them from getting stuck in the muddy ruts of physical desires.
Such an initiation, it is important to remark, is more than an introduction to the sphere of religious sentiment. It is an initiation into manhood, it must involve a recognition of the masculine even more than of the feminine virtues. This has been well understood by the finest primitive races. They constantly give their boys and girls an initiation at puberty; it is an initiation that involves not merely education in the ordinary sense, but a stern discipline of the character, feats of endurance, the trial of character, the testing of the muscles of the soul as much as of the body.
Such an initiation, it's important to note, is more than just an introduction to the realm of religious feelings. It's an initiation into manhood, and it involves recognizing masculine virtues even more than feminine ones. This has been well understood by the best primitive cultures. They routinely initiate their boys and girls at puberty; this initiation goes beyond regular education; it requires a tough discipline of character, endurance challenges, trials of character, and testing the strength of the soul just as much as the body.
Ceremonies of initiation into manhood at puberty—involving physical and mental discipline, as well as instruction, lasting for weeks or months, and never identical for both sexes—are common among savages in all parts of the world. They nearly always involve the endurance of a certain amount of pain and hardship, a wise measure of training which the softness of civilization has too foolishly allowed to drop, for the ability to endure hardness is an essential condition of all real manhood. It is as a corrective to this tendency to flabbiness in modern education that the teaching of Nietzsche is so invaluable.
Ceremonies that mark the transition to manhood during puberty—featuring mental and physical training, as well as instruction, lasting for weeks or months, and differing between the sexes—are widespread among various cultures around the globe. They almost always require enduring a certain level of pain and hardship, which serves as a crucial form of training that modern civilization has carelessly neglected. The ability to withstand difficulty is a vital aspect of true manhood. Nietzsche's teachings are incredibly valuable as a remedy for this tendency toward weakness in contemporary education.
The initiation of boys among the natives of Torres Straits has been elaborately described by A. C. Haddon (Reports Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits, vol. v, Chs. VII and XII). It lasts a month, involves much severe training and power of endurance, and includes admirable moral instruction. Haddon remarks that it formed "a very good discipline," and adds, "it is not easy to conceive of a more effectual means for a rapid training."
The initiation of boys among the natives of Torres Straits has been thoroughly detailed by A. C. Haddon (Reports Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits, vol. v, Chs. VII and XII). It lasts a month, involves intense training and endurance, and includes excellent moral instruction. Haddon notes that it provides "very good discipline," and adds, "it’s hard to imagine a more effective way for quick training."
Among the aborigines of Victoria, Australia, the initiatory ceremonies, as described by R. H. Mathews ("Some Initiation Ceremonies," Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1905, Heft 6), last for seven months, and constitute an admirable discipline. The boys are taken away by the elders of the tribe, subjected to many trials of patience and endurance of pain and discomfort, sometimes involving even the swallowing of urine and excrement, brought into contact with strange tribes, taught the laws and folk-lore, and at the end meetings are held at which betrothals are arranged.
Among the Indigenous people of Victoria, Australia, the initiation ceremonies, as described by R. H. Mathews ("Some Initiation Ceremonies," Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1905, Heft 6), last for seven months and serve as an excellent form of discipline. The boys are taken away by the tribe's elders and put through various tests of patience and endurance of pain and discomfort, which sometimes even include drinking urine and waste. They are exposed to unfamiliar tribes, taught the laws and folklore, and at the end, meetings are held where betrothals are arranged.
Among the northern tribes of Central Australia the initiation ceremonies involve circumcision and urethral subincision, as well as hard manual labor and hardships. The initiation of girls into womanhood is accompanied by cutting open of the vagina. These ceremonies have been described by Spencer and Gillen (Northern Tribes of Central Australia, Ch. XI). Among various peoples in British East Africa (including the Masai) pubertal initiation is a great ceremonial event extending over a period of many months, and it includes circumcision in boys, and in girls clitoridectomy, as well as, among some tribes, removal of the nymphæ. A girl who winces or cries out during the operation is disgraced among the women and expelled from the settlement. When the ceremony has been satisfactorily completed the boy or girl is marriageable (C. Marsh Beadnell, "Circumcision and Clitoridectomy as Practiced by the Natives of British East Africa," British Medical Journal, April 29, 1905).
Among the northern tribes of Central Australia, initiation ceremonies include circumcision and urethral subincision, along with difficult physical labor and challenges. The initiation of girls into womanhood involves cutting open the vagina. Spencer and Gillen describe these ceremonies in Northern Tribes of Central Australia, Ch. XI. Among various groups in British East Africa (including the Masai), pubertal initiation is a significant ceremonial event that lasts several months. It includes circumcision for boys and clitoridectomy for girls, and in some tribes, removal of the nymphæ. A girl who flinches or cries out during the procedure is shamed among the women and banished from the community. When the ceremony is successfully completed, the boy or girl is considered ready for marriage (C. Marsh Beadnell, "Circumcision and Clitoridectomy as Practiced by the Natives of British East Africa," British Medical Journal, April 29, 1905).
Initiation among the African Bawenda, as described by a missionary, is in three stages: (1) A stage of instruction and discipline during which the traditions and sacred things of the tribe are revealed, the art of warfare taught, self-restraint and endurance borne; then the youths are counted as full-grown. (2) In the next stage the art of dancing is practiced, by each sex separately, during the day. (3) In the final stage, which is that of complete sexual initiation, the two sexes dance together by night; the scene, in the opinion of the good missionary, "does not bear description;" the initiated are now complete adults, with all the privileges and responsibilities of adults (Rev. E. Gottschling, "The Bawenda," Journal Anthropological Institution, July to Dec., 1905, p. 372. Cf., an interesting account of the Bawenda Tondo schools by another missionary, Wessmann, The Bawenda, pp. 60 et seq.).
Initiation among the African Bawenda, as described by a missionary, happens in three stages: (1) The first stage involves instruction and discipline where the tribe’s traditions and sacred practices are revealed, the skills of warfare are taught, and self-control and endurance are developed; after this, the young people are considered fully grown. (2) The next stage includes practicing the art of dancing, with each gender dancing separately during the day. (3) The final stage is the complete sexual initiation, where both genders dance together at night; the missionary believes this scene is "indescribable;" those initiated are now fully recognized as adults, with all the rights and responsibilities that come with adulthood (Rev. E. Gottschling, "The Bawenda," Journal Anthropological Institution, July to Dec., 1905, p. 372. Cf., an interesting account of the Bawenda Tondo schools by another missionary, Wessmann, The Bawenda, pp. 60 et seq.).
The initiation of girls in Azimba Land, Central Africa, has been fully and interestingly described by H. Crawford Angus ("The Chensamwali' or Initiation Ceremony of Girls," Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1898, Heft 6). At the first sign of menstruation the girl is taken by her mother out of the village to a grass hut prepared for her where only the women are allowed to visit her. At the end of menstruation she is taken to a secluded spot and the women dance round her, no men being present. It was only with much difficulty that Angus was enabled to witness the ceremony. The girl is then informed in regard to the hygiene of menstruation. "Many songs about the relations between men and women are sung, and the girl is instructed as to all her duties when she becomes a wife.... The girl is taught to be faithful to her husband, and to try and bear children. The whole matter is looked upon as a matter of course, and not as a thing to be ashamed of or to hide, and being thus openly treated of and no secrecy made about it, you find in this tribe that the women are very virtuous, because the subject of married life has no glamour for them. When a woman is pregnant she is again danced; this time all the dancers are naked, and she is taught how to behave and what to do when the time of her delivery arrives."
The initiation of girls in Azimba Land, Central Africa, is described in detail and with great interest by H. Crawford Angus ("The Chensamwali or Initiation Ceremony of Girls," Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1898, Heft 6). When a girl first gets her period, her mother takes her out of the village to a grass hut prepared just for her, where only women are allowed to visit. Once her menstruation ends, she is taken to a private area where women dance around her, with no men present. Angus had a hard time getting to see this ceremony. The girl is then educated about menstrual hygiene. "Many songs about the relationships between men and women are sung, and the girl is taught all her responsibilities as a future wife.... She learns to be loyal to her husband and to try to have children. This whole process is seen as normal, not something to be ashamed of or kept secret, which is why women in this tribe are very virtuous; the subject of married life doesn't hold any allure for them. When a woman is pregnant, she is danced around again; this time, all the dancers are naked, and she is taught how to conduct herself and what to do when it's time for her to give birth."
Among the Yuman Indians of California, as described by Horatio Rust ("A Puberty Ceremony of the Mission Indians," American Anthropologist, Jan. to March, 1906, p. 28) the girls are at puberty prepared for marriage by a ceremony. They are wrapped in blankets and placed in a warm pit, where they lie looking very happy as they peer out through their covers. For four days and nights they lie here (occasionally going away for food), while the old women of the tribe dance and sing round the pit constantly. At times the old women throw silver coins among the crowd to teach the girls to be generous. They also give away cloth and wheat, to teach them to be kind to the old and needy; and they sow wild seeds broadcast over the girls to cause them to be prolific. Finally, all strangers are ordered away, garlands are placed on the girls' heads, and they are led to a hillside and shown the large and sacred stone, symbolical of the female organs of generation and resembling them, which is said to protect women. Then grain is thrown over all present, and the ceremony is over.
Among the Yuman Indians of California, as described by Horatio Rust ("A Puberty Ceremony of the Mission Indians," American Anthropologist, Jan. to March, 1906, p. 28), girls undergo a ceremony to prepare for marriage when they reach puberty. They are wrapped in blankets and placed in a warm pit, where they look very happy as they peek out from their covers. They stay here for four days and nights (stepping out occasionally for food), while the older women of the tribe dance and sing around the pit continuously. At times, the older women toss silver coins into the crowd to teach the girls about generosity. They also distribute cloth and wheat to encourage kindness toward the elderly and those in need; and they scatter wild seeds over the girls to promote fertility. Finally, all outsiders are asked to leave, garlands are placed on the girls' heads, and they are taken to a hillside to see a large, sacred stone that symbolizes female reproductive organs and is believed to protect women. After that, grain is scattered over everyone present, marking the end of the ceremony.
The Thlinkeet Eskimo women were long noted for their fine qualities. At puberty they were secluded, sometimes for a whole year, being kept in darkness, suffering, and filth. Yet defective and unsatisfactory as this initiation was, "Langsdorf suggests," says Bancroft (Native Races of Pacific, vol. i, p. 110), referring to the virtues of the Thlinkeet woman, "that it may be during this period of confinement that the foundation of her influence is laid; that in modest reserve and meditation her character is strengthened, and she comes forth cleansed in mind as well as body."
The Thlinkeet Eskimo women were long recognized for their admirable qualities. At puberty, they were isolated, sometimes for an entire year, kept in darkness, enduring suffering and neglect. However imperfect and inadequate this initiation was, "Langsdorf suggests," as Bancroft notes (Native Races of Pacific, vol. i, p. 110), referring to the qualities of the Thlinkeet woman, "that it may be during this period of confinement that the foundation of her influence is laid; that in modest reserve and reflection her character is strengthened, and she emerges cleansed in both mind and body."
We have lost these ancient and invaluable rites of initiation into manhood and womanhood, with their inestimable moral benefits; at the most we have merely preserved the shells of initiation in which the core has decayed. In time, we cannot doubt, they will be revived in modern forms. At present the spiritual initiation of youths and maidens is left to the chances of some happy accident, and usually it is of a purely cerebral character which cannot be perfectly wholesome, and is at the best absurdly incomplete.
We have lost these ancient and priceless rites of passage into adulthood, along with their immense moral benefits; at most, we only retain the remnants of initiation while the essence has faded. Eventually, we can’t doubt that they will be revived in modern forms. Right now, the spiritual initiation of young men and women is left to the randomness of fortunate coincidences, and it typically leans toward purely intellectual experiences that aren’t fully beneficial and, at best, are ridiculously incomplete.
This cerebral initiation commonly occurs to the youth through the medium of literature. The influence of literature in sexual education thus extends, in an incalculable degree, beyond the narrow sphere of manuals on sexual hygiene, however admirable and desirable these may be. The greater part of literature is more or less distinctly penetrated by erotic and auto-erotic conceptions and impulses; nearly all imaginative literature proceeds from the root of sex to flower in visions of beauty and ecstasy. The Divine Comedy of Dante is herein the immortal type of the poet's evolution. The youth becomes acquainted with the imaginative representations of love before he becomes acquainted with the reality of love, so that, as Leo Berg puts it, "the way to love among civilized peoples passes through imagination." All literature is thus, to the adolescent soul, a part of sexual education.[39] It depends, to some extent, though fortunately not entirely, on the judgment of those in authority over the young soul whether the literature to which the youth or girl is admitted is or is not of the large and humanizing order.
This mental initiation often happens to young people through literature. The impact of literature on sexual education reaches far beyond the limited scope of manuals about sexual health, no matter how valuable and necessary those might be. Most literature is influenced by erotic and self-erotic ideas and urges; nearly all creative literature stems from the essence of sex and blossoms into visions of beauty and ecstasy. Dante's Divine Comedy is a timeless example of the poet's growth in this regard. Young people encounter imaginative depictions of love before experiencing real love, so, as Leo Berg puts it, "the path to love among civilized societies goes through imagination." Therefore, all literature is a part of sexual education for the adolescent soul. It somewhat relies, though not completely, on the judgment of those in authority over young individuals whether the literature accessible to boys or girls is of a broad and uplifting nature.
All great literature touches nakedly and sanely on the central facts of sex. It is always consoling to remember this in an age of petty pruderies. And it is a satisfaction to know that it would not be possible to emasculate the literature of the great ages, however desirable it might seem to the men of more degenerate ages, or to close the avenues to that literature against the young. All our religious and literary traditions serve to fortify the position of the Bible and of Shakespeare. "So many men and women," writes a correspondent, a literary man, "gain sexual ideas in childhood from reading the Old Testament, that the Bible may be called an erotic text-book. Most persons of either sex with whom I have conversed on the subject, say that the Books of Moses, and the stories of Amnon and Tamar, Lot and his daughters, Potiphar's wife and Joseph, etc., caused speculation and curiosity, and gave them information of the sexual relationship. A boy and girl of fifteen, both friends of the writer, and now over thirty years of age, used to find out erotic passages in the Bible on Sunday mornings, while in a Dissenting chapel, and pass their Bibles to one another, with their fingers on the portions that interested them." In the same way many a young woman has borrowed Shakespeare in order to read the glowing erotic poetry of Venus and Adonis, which her friends have told her about.
All great literature honestly and sensibly addresses the fundamental aspects of sex. It's always reassuring to remember this in a time of trivial moral strictness. It's also satisfying to know that it would be impossible to strip the literature of past great eras of its essence, no matter how appealing that might seem to those of more repressive times, or to block access to that literature for the young. All our religious and literary traditions support the importance of the Bible and Shakespeare. "Many men and women," writes a correspondent, a literary individual, "develop sexual ideas in childhood from reading the Old Testament, so the Bible could be considered an erotic textbook. Most people, regardless of gender, whom I've discussed this with, say that the Books of Moses, along with the stories of Amnon and Tamar, Lot and his daughters, Potiphar's wife and Joseph, etc., sparked curiosity and speculation, providing them with insights into sexual relationships. A boy and girl, both fifteen and friends of mine, now in their thirties, used to discover erotic passages in the Bible on Sunday mornings while at a Dissenting chapel, passing their Bibles to each other with their fingers marking the sections that intrigued them." Similarly, many young women have borrowed Shakespeare just to read the passionate erotic poetry of Venus and Adonis, which their friends have told them about.
The Bible, it may be remarked, is not in every respect, a model introduction for the young mind to the questions of sex. But even its frank acceptance, as of divine origin, of sexual rules so unlike those that are nominally our own, such as polygamy and concubinage, helps to enlarge the vision of the youthful mind by showing that the rules surrounding the child are not those everywhere and always valid, while the nakedness and realism of the Bible cannot but be a wholesome and tonic corrective to conventional pruderies.
The Bible, it can be said, isn't exactly the best introduction for young people regarding the topic of sex. However, its open acknowledgment of sexual rules that are very different from what we generally accept today, like polygamy and concubinage, broadens a young person's perspective by highlighting that the rules governing their lives aren't universally applicable. Additionally, the Bible's straightforwardness and realism can serve as a healthy and refreshing counter to conventional modesty.
We must, indeed, always protest against the absurd confusion whereby nakedness of speech is regarded as equivalent to immorality, and not the less because it is often adopted even in what are regarded as intellectual quarters. When in the House of Lords, in the last century, the question of the exclusion of Byron's statue from Westminster Abbey was under discussion, Lord Brougham "denied that Shakespeare was more moral than Byron. He could, on the contrary, point out in a single page of Shakespeare more grossness than was to be found in all Lord Byron's works." The conclusion Brougham thus reached, that Byron is an incomparably more moral writer than Shakespeare, ought to have been a sufficient reductio ad absurdum of his argument, but it does not appear that anyone pointed out the vulgar confusion into which he had fallen.
We must always stand against the ridiculous confusion where straightforward speech is seen as the same as immorality, especially since this mindset is often found in what are considered intellectual circles. Back in the House of Lords, in the last century, when they discussed the exclusion of Byron's statue from Westminster Abbey, Lord Brougham argued that Shakespeare was not more moral than Byron. He claimed he could, in just one page of Shakespeare, find more explicit content than in all of Byron's works. Brougham's conclusion—that Byron is a vastly more moral writer than Shakespeare—should have clearly shown the flaws in his argument, but it seems no one pointed out the crass misunderstanding he had fallen into.
It may be said that the special attractiveness which the nakedness of great literature sometimes possesses for young minds is unwholesome. But it must be remembered that the peculiar interest of this element is merely due to the fact that elsewhere there is an inveterate and abnormal concealment. It must also be said that the statements of the great writers about natural things are never degrading, nor even erotically exciting to the young, and what Emilia Pardo Bazan tells of herself and her delight when a child in the historical books of the Old Testament, that the crude passages in them failed to send the faintest cloud of trouble across her young imagination, is equally true of most children. It is necessary, indeed, that these naked and serious things should be left standing, even if only to counterbalance the lewdly comic efforts to besmirch love and sex, which are visible to all in every low-class bookseller's shop window.
It can be said that the unique appeal of the rawness found in great literature sometimes draws young minds in ways that aren't healthy. However, it’s important to recognize that this particular interest exists mainly because there’s a persistent and abnormal tendency to hide things elsewhere. Additionally, it should be noted that what great writers express about natural subjects is never degrading or even sexually provocative to the young. Emilia Pardo Bazan reflects on her own experience, sharing how, as a child, she was captivated by the historical books of the Old Testament, and the explicit passages never troubled her young imagination in the slightest. This is true for most children as well. It’s essential, in fact, that these frank and serious topics remain present, if only to balance out the crass, humorous attempts to tarnish love and sex that are evident in every low-end bookstore window.
This point of view was vigorously championed by the speakers on sexual education at the Third Congress of the German Gesellschaft zur Bekämpfung der Geschlechtskrankheiten in 1907. Thus Enderlin, speaking as a headmaster, protested against the custom of bowdlerizing poems and folk-songs for the use of children, and thus robbing them of the finest introduction to purified sexual impulses and the highest sphere of emotion, while at the same time they are recklessly exposed to the "psychic infection" of the vulgar comic papers everywhere exposed for sale. "So long as children are too young to respond to erotic poetry it cannot hurt them; when they are old enough to respond it can only benefit them by opening to them the highest and purest channels of human emotion" (Sexualpädagogik, p. 60). Professor Schäfenacker (id., p. 98) expresses himself in the same sense, and remarks that "the method of removing from school-books all those passages which, in the opinion of short-sighted and narrow-hearted schoolmasters, are unsuited for youth, must be decisively condemned." Every healthy boy and girl who has reached the age of puberty may be safely allowed to ramble in any good library, however varied its contents. So far from needing guidance they will usually show a much more refined taste than their elders. At this age, when the emotions are still virginal and sensitive, the things that are realistic, ugly, or morbid, jar on the young spirit and are cast aside, though in adult life, with the coarsening of mental texture which comes of years and experience, this repugnance, doubtless by an equally sound and natural instinct, may become much less acute.
This perspective was strongly supported by the speakers on sexual education at the Third Congress of the German Society for Combating Venereal Diseases in 1907. Enderlin, speaking as a headmaster, objected to the practice of sanitizing poems and folk songs for children, stripping them of a valuable introduction to healthy sexual impulses and the deepest emotions, while simultaneously exposing them to the "psychic infection" of vulgar comic papers readily available for purchase. "As long as children are too young to understand erotic poetry, it can't harm them; when they become old enough to appreciate it, it can only help them by introducing them to the highest and purest forms of human emotion" (Sexualpädagogik, p. 60). Professor Schäfenacker (id., p. 98) shares this view and notes that "the practice of removing passages from school books that, in the opinion of shortsighted and narrow-minded educators, are inappropriate for youth, must be strongly rejected." Every healthy boy and girl who has reached puberty can safely explore any good library, regardless of its diverse contents. Rather than needing guidance, they will typically demonstrate a much more refined taste than their elders. At this age, when emotions are still pure and sensitive, anything realistic, ugly, or morbid can disturb the young spirit and is often disregarded; however, in adulthood, as the mind becomes coarser through years and experience, this natural aversion may diminish considerably.
Ellen Key in Ch. VI of her Century of the Child well summarizes the reasons against the practice of selecting for children books that are "suitable" for them, a practice which she considers one of the follies of modern education. The child should be free to read all great literature, and will himself instinctively put aside the things he is not yet ripe for. His cooler senses are undisturbed by scenes that his elders find too exciting, while even at a later stage it is not the nakedness of great literature, but much more the method of the modern novel, which is likely to stain the imagination, falsify reality and injure taste. It is concealment which misleads and coarsens, producing a state of mind in which even the Bible becomes a stimulus to the senses. The writings of the great masters yield the imaginative food which the child craves, and the erotic moment in them is too brief to be overheating. It is the more necessary, Ellen Key remarks, for children to be introduced to great literature, since they often have little opportunity to occupy themselves with it in later life. Many years earlier Ruskin, in Sesame and Lilies, had eloquently urged that even young girls should be allowed to range freely in libraries.
Ellen Key in Ch. VI of her Century of the Child clearly outlines the reasons against choosing books for children that are deemed "suitable." She views this practice as one of the mistakes of modern education. Children should be free to explore all great literature and will instinctively set aside what they aren't ready for. Their calmer senses are not disturbed by scenes that adults find too intense, and even later on, it's not the explicit nature of great literature, but much more the style of the modern novel, that is likely to taint the imagination, distort reality, and hurt taste. It's the things that are hidden that mislead and dull the senses, leading to a mindset where even the Bible becomes a trigger for the senses. The works of great masters provide the imaginative nourishment that children desire, and any erotic elements in them are too brief to be overwhelming. Ellen Key emphasizes the importance of introducing children to great literature since they often have little chance to engage with it later in life. Many years earlier, Ruskin, in Sesame and Lilies, powerfully advocated that even young girls should be allowed to explore libraries freely.
What has been said about literature applies equally to art. Art, as well as literature, and in the same indirect way, can be made a valuable aid in the task of sexual enlightenment and sexual hygiene. Modern art may, indeed, for the most part, be ignored from this point of view, but children cannot be too early familiarized with the representations of the nude in ancient sculpture and in the paintings of the old masters of the Italian school. In this way they may be immunized, as Enderlin expresses it, against those representations of the nude which make an appeal to the baser instincts. Early familiarity with nudity in art is at the same time an aid to the attainment of a proper attitude towards purity in nature. "He who has once learnt," as Höller remarks, "to enjoy peacefully nakedness in art, will be able to look on nakedness in nature as on a work of art."
What has been said about literature also applies to art. Art, just like literature, can serve as a valuable resource for sexual education and hygiene. Modern art might, for the most part, be overlooked in this context, but children should be introduced early to representations of the nude in ancient sculptures and the works of the old masters from the Italian school. This helps them, as Enderlin puts it, to become immune to those depictions of nudity that appeal to more primitive instincts. Being familiar with nudity in art at an early age also contributes to developing a healthy attitude toward natural purity. "Once someone has learned," as Höller notes, "to appreciate nakedness in art peacefully, they will be able to view nakedness in nature as a work of art."
Casts of classic nude statues and reproductions of the pictures of the old Venetian and other Italian masters may fittingly be used to adorn schoolrooms, not so much as objects of instruction as things of beauty with which the child cannot too early become familiarized. In Italy it is said to be usual for school classes to be taken by their teachers to the art museums with good results; such visits form part of the official scheme of education.
Casts of classic nude statues and reproductions of paintings by old Venetian and other Italian masters can be appropriately used to decorate classrooms, not just as teaching tools but as beautiful objects that children should get to know early on. In Italy, it’s common for teachers to take their students on trips to art museums, and these visits are part of the official education plan, yielding good results.
There can be no doubt that such early familiarity with the beauty of nudity in classic art is widely needed among all social classes and in many countries. It is to this defect of our education that we must attribute the occasional, and indeed in America and England frequent, occurrence of such incidents as petitions and protests against the exhibition of nude statuary in art museums, the display of pictures so inoffensive as Leighton's "Bath of Psyche" in shop windows, and the demand for the draping of the naked personifications of abstract virtues in architectural street decoration. So imperfect is still the education of the multitude that in these matters the ill-bred fanatic of pruriency usually gains his will. Such a state of things cannot but have an unwholesome reaction on the moral atmosphere of the community in which it is possible. Even from the religious point of view, prurient prudery is not justifiable. Northcote has very temperately and sensibly discussed the question of the nude in art from the standpoint of Christian morality. He points out that not only is the nude in art not to be condemned without qualification, and that the nude is by no means necessarily the erotic, but he also adds that even erotic art, in its best and purest manifestations, only arouses emotions that are the legitimate object of man's aspirations. It would be impossible even to represent Biblical stories adequately on canvas or in marble if erotic art were to be tabooed (Rev. H. Northcote, Christianity and Sex Problems, Ch. XIV).
There’s no doubt that early exposure to the beauty of nudity in classical art is very much needed across all social classes and in many countries. We can attribute the occasional—and particularly in America and England, frequent—occurrence of things like petitions and protests against the display of nude statues in art museums, the showcasing of harmless images like Leighton’s "Bath of Psyche" in shop windows, and the calls to cover up the naked representations of abstract virtues in street decorations to this flaw in our education. The general population's understanding is still so lacking that in these cases, the ill-mannered zealot of modesty often gets their way. This situation inevitably has a negative impact on the moral environment of the community where it happens. Even from a religious perspective, excessive prudishness is not justifiable. Northcote has discussed the issue of nudity in art from the Christian morality viewpoint in a very reasonable and sensible manner. He points out that nudity in art shouldn’t be condemned outright, and that nudity isn’t necessarily erotic. He also adds that even erotic art, in its best and purest forms, only evokes feelings that align with man's aspirations. It would be impossible to depict Biblical stories properly in paintings or sculptures if erotic art were to be banned (Rev. H. Northcote, Christianity and Sex Problems, Ch. XIV).
Early familiarity with the nude in classic and early Italian art should be combined at puberty with an equal familiarity with photographs of beautiful and naturally developed nude models. In former years books containing such pictures in a suitable and attractive manner to place before the young were difficult to procure. Now this difficulty no longer exists. Dr. C. H. Stratz, of The Hague, has been the pioneer in this matter, and in a series of beautiful books (notably in Der Körper des Kindes, Die Schönheit des Weiblichen Körpers and Die Rassenschönheit des Weibes, all published by Enke in Stuttgart), he has brought together a large number of admirably selected photographs of nude but entirely chaste figures. More recently Dr. Shufeldt, of Washington (who dedicates his work to Stratz), has published his Studies of the Human Form in which, in the same spirit, he has brought together the results of his own studies of the naked human form during many years. It is necessary to correct the impressions received from classic sources by good photographic illustrations on account of the false conventions prevailing in classic works, though those conventions were not necessarily false for the artists who originated them. The omission of the pudendal hair, in representations of the nude was, for instance, quite natural for the people of countries still under Oriental influence are accustomed to remove the hair from the body. If, however, under quite different conditions, we perpetuate that artistic convention to-day, we put ourselves into a perverse relation to nature. There is ample evidence of this. "There is one convention so ancient, so necessary, so universal," writes Mr. Frederic Harrison (Nineteenth Century and After, Aug., 1907), "that its deliberate defiance to-day may arouse the bile of the least squeamish of men and should make women withdraw at once." If boys and girls were brought up at their mother's knees in familiarity with pictures of beautiful and natural nakedness, it would be impossible for anyone to write such silly and shameful words as these.
Early exposure to the nude in classic and early Italian art should be paired at puberty with a similar familiarity with photographs of beautiful, naturally developed nude models. In the past, it was hard to find books containing such images presented in an appropriate and appealing way for young people. That challenge no longer exists. Dr. C. H. Stratz from The Hague has been a pioneer in this area, and in a series of beautiful books (notably in Der Körper des Kindes, Die Schönheit des Weiblichen Körpers and Die Rassenschönheit des Weibes, all published by Enke in Stuttgart), he has compiled a large number of well-selected photographs of nude but completely modest figures. More recently, Dr. Shufeldt from Washington (who dedicates his work to Stratz) has published his Studies of the Human Form, in which, with the same intent, he has gathered the results of his own explorations of the naked human form over many years. It’s crucial to correct the impressions from classic sources with accurate photographic illustrations due to the misleading conventions that exist in classic works, although those conventions weren’t necessarily wrong for the artists who created them. For example, the lack of pubic hair in nude depictions was quite normal for people from regions still influenced by Oriental customs who are used to removing body hair. However, by perpetuating that artistic convention today under very different circumstances, we create a distorted relationship with nature. There’s plenty of evidence for this. "There is one convention so ancient, so necessary, so universal," writes Mr. Frederic Harrison (Nineteenth Century and After, Aug., 1907), "that its deliberate defiance today may irritate even the least squeamish of men and should cause women to withdraw immediately." If boys and girls were raised by their mothers with a familiarity of images depicting beautiful and natural nudity, no one would be able to write such foolish and shameful words as these.
There can be no doubt that among ourselves the simple and direct attitude of the child towards nakedness is so early crushed out of him that intelligent education is necessary in order that he may be enabled to discern what is and what is not obscene. To the plough-boy and the country servant-girl all nakedness, including that of Greek statuary, is alike shameful or lustful. "I have a picture of women like that," said a countryman with a grin, as he pointed to a photograph of one of Tintoret's most beautiful groups, "smoking cigarettes." And the mass of people in most northern countries have still passed little beyond this stage of discernment; in ability to distinguish between the beautiful and the obscene they are still on the level of the plough-boy and the servant-girl.
There’s no doubt that among us, a child’s simple and straightforward view of nudity is quickly suppressed, making it essential to provide proper education so they can understand what is and isn’t obscene. For the farm boy and the country maid, all forms of nudity, including Greek statues, are equally shameful or erotic. "I have a picture of women like that," a countryman grinned, pointing to a photo of one of Tintoretto's most stunning works, "smoking cigarettes." Most people in many northern countries have barely moved past this level of understanding; when it comes to distinguishing between beauty and obscenity, they’re still at the level of the farm boy and the maid.
These manifestations have been dealt with in the study of Autoerotism in vol. i of the present Studies. It may be added that the sexual life of the child has been exhaustively investigated by Moll, Das Sexualleben des Kindes, 1909.
These expressions have been discussed in the study of Autoerotism in volume 1 of the current Studies. It's worth mentioning that the sexual life of children has been thoroughly examined by Moll in Das Sexualleben des Kindes, 1909.
This genital efflorescence in the sexual glands and breasts at birth or in early infancy has been discussed in a Paris thesis, by Camille Renouf (La Crise Génital et les Manifestations Connexes chez le Fœtus et le Nouveau-né, 1905); he is unable to offer a satisfactory explanation of these phenomena.
This genital rash in the sexual glands and breasts at birth or in early infancy has been discussed in a Paris thesis by Camille Renouf (La Crise Génital et les Manifestations Connexes chez le Fœtus et le Nouveau-né, 1905); he is unable to provide a satisfactory explanation for these phenomena.
Amélineau, La Morale des Egyptiens, p. 64.
Amélineau, La Morale des Egyptiens, p. 64.
"The Social Evil in Philadelphia," Arena, March, 1896.
"The Social Evil in Philadelphia," Arena, March 1896.
Moll, Konträre Sexualempfindung, third edition, p. 592.
Moll, Contrary Sexual Feelings, third edition, p. 592.
This powerlessness of the law and the police is well recognized by lawyers familiar with the matter. Thus F. Werthauer (Sittlichkeitsdelikte der Grosstadt, 1907) insists throughout on the importance of parents and teachers imparting to children from their early years a progressively increasing knowledge of sexual matters.
This helplessness of the law and the police is well recognized by lawyers who know the subject. Thus, F. Werthauer (Sittlichkeitsdelikte der Grosstadt, 1907) emphasizes the importance of parents and teachers teaching children about sexual matters from a young age, in a way that becomes more in-depth over time.
"Parents must be taught how to impart information," remarks E. L. Keyes ("Education upon Sexual Matters," New York Medical Journal, Feb. 10, 1906), "and this teaching of the parent should begin when he is himself a child."
"Parents need to learn how to share information," says E. L. Keyes ("Education upon Sexual Matters," New York Medical Journal, Feb. 10, 1906), "and this education for parents should start when they're still children themselves."
Moll (op. cit., p. 224) argues well how impossible it is to preserve children from sights and influence connected with the sexual life.
Moll (op. cit., p. 224) makes a strong case for how impossible it is to shield children from the sights and influences associated with sexual life.
Girls are not even prepared, in many cases, for the appearance of the pubic hair. This unexpected growth of hair frequently causes young girls much secret worry, and often they carefully cut it off.
Girls often aren’t ready for the appearance of pubic hair. This sudden hair growth frequently causes young girls a lot of secret anxiety, and many of them choose to cut it off carefully.
G. S. Hall, Adolescence, vol. i, p. 511. Many years ago, in 1875, the late Dr. Clarke, in his Sex in Education, advised menstrual rest for girls, and thereby aroused a violent opposition which would certainly not be found nowadays, when the special risks of womanhood are becoming more clearly understood.
G. S. Hall, Adolescence, vol. i, p. 511. Many years ago, in 1875, the late Dr. Clarke, in his Sex in Education, recommended menstrual rest for girls, sparking strong opposition that wouldn’t happen today, as the specific risks of womanhood are becoming better understood.
For a summary of the physical and mental phenomena of the menstrual period, see Havelock Ellis: Man and Woman, Ch. XI. The primitive conception of menstruation is briefly discussed in Appendix A to the first volume of these Studies, and more elaborately by J. G. Frazer in The Golden Bough. A large collection of facts with regard to the menstrual seclusion of women throughout the world will be found in Ploss and Bartels, Das Weib. The pubertal seclusion of girls at Torres Straits has been especially studied by Seligmann, Reports Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits, vol. v, Ch. VI.
For a summary of the physical and mental aspects of the menstrual period, check out Havelock Ellis: Man and Woman, Ch. XI. The basic ideas about menstruation are briefly addressed in Appendix A of the first volume of these Studies, and discussed in more detail by J. G. Frazer in The Golden Bough. You can find a extensive collection of information about women's menstrual seclusion around the world in Ploss and Bartels, Das Weib. The pubertal seclusion of girls at Torres Straits has been specifically studied by Seligmann, Reports Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits, vol. v, Ch. VI.
Thus Miss Lura Sanborn, Director of Physical Training at the Chicago Normal School, found that a bath once a fortnight was not unusual. At the menstrual period especially there is still a superstitious dread of water. Girls should always be taught that at this period, above all, cleanliness is imperatively necessary. There should be a tepid hip bath night and morning, and a vaginal douche (which should never be cold) is always advantageous, both for comfort as well as cleanliness. There is not the slightest reason to dread water during menstruation. This point was discussed a few years ago in the British Medical Journal with complete unanimity of opinion. A distinguished American obstetrician, also, Dr. J. Clifton Edgar, after a careful study of opinion and practice in this matter ("Bathing During the Menstrual Period," American Journal Obstetrics, Sept., 1900), concludes that it is possible and beneficial to take cold baths (though not sea-baths) during the period, provided due precautions are observed, and that there are no sudden changes of habits. Such a course should not be indiscriminately adopted, but there can be no doubt that in sturdy peasant women who are inured to it early in life even prolonged immersion in the sea in fishing has no evil results, and is even beneficial. Houzel (Annales de Gynécologie, Dec., 1894) has published statistics of the menstrual life of 123 fisherwomen on the French coast. They were accustomed to shrimp for hours at a time in the sea, often to above the waist, and then walk about in their wet clothes selling the shrimps. They all insisted that their menstruation was easier when they were actively at work. Their periods are notably regular, and their fertility is high.
Thus, Miss Lura Sanborn, Director of Physical Training at the Chicago Normal School, found that taking a bath every two weeks was not uncommon. During menstruation, there is still a superstitious fear of water. Girls should always be taught that at this time, cleanliness is extremely important. There should be a warm hip bath every morning and night, and a vaginal douche (which should never be cold) is always helpful for both comfort and hygiene. There is absolutely no reason to fear water during menstruation. This topic was discussed a few years ago in the British Medical Journal with a complete consensus. A distinguished American obstetrician, Dr. J. Clifton Edgar, after carefully studying opinions and practices on this issue ("Bathing During the Menstrual Period," American Journal of Obstetrics, Sept., 1900), concluded that it is possible and beneficial to take cold baths (though not sea baths) during menstruation, as long as proper precautions are taken and there are no sudden changes in habits. This approach should not be taken indiscriminately, but there is no doubt that strong peasant women who are used to it from an early age can even handle prolonged immersion in the sea while fishing without negative effects, and it can even be beneficial. Houzel (Annales de Gynécologie, Dec., 1894) published statistics on the menstrual experiences of 123 fisherwomen on the French coast. They were accustomed to being in the sea for hours at a time, often up to their waists, and then walking around in their wet clothes selling shrimp. They all claimed that their menstrual experience was better when they were actively working. Their cycles are notably regular, and their fertility rates are high.
J. H. McBride, "The Life and Health of Our Girls in Relation to Their Future," Alienist and Neurologist, Feb., 1904.
J. H. McBride, "The Life and Health of Our Girls in Relation to Their Future," Alienist and Neurologist, Feb. 1904.
W. G. Chambers, "The Evolution of Ideals," Pedagogical Seminary, March, 1903; Catherine Dodd, "School Children's Ideals," National Review, Feb. and Dec., 1900, and June, 1901. No German girls acknowledged a wish to be men; they said it would be wicked. Among Flemish girls, however, Varendonck found at Ghent (Archives de Psychologie, July, 1908) that 26 per cent. had men as their ideals.
W. G. Chambers, "The Evolution of Ideals," Pedagogical Seminary, March 1903; Catherine Dodd, "School Children's Ideals," National Review, February and December 1900, and June 1901. No German girls expressed a desire to be men; they said it would be wrong. However, among Flemish girls, Varendonck discovered in Ghent (Archives de Psychologie, July 1908) that 26 percent looked up to men as their ideals.
A. Reibmayr, Die Entwicklungsgeschichte des Talentes und Genies, 1908, Bd. i, p. 70.
A. Reibmayr, The Development History of Talent and Genius, 1908, Vol. 1, p. 70.
R. Hellmann, Ueber Geschlechtsfreiheit, p. 14.
R. Hellmann, On Sexual Freedom, p. 14.
This belief seems frequent among young girls in Continental Europe. It forms the subject of one of Marcel Prevost's Lettres de Femmes. In Austria, according to Freud, it is not uncommon, exclusively among girls.
This belief appears to be common among young girls in Continental Europe. It is the topic of one of Marcel Prevost's Lettres de Femmes. In Austria, according to Freud, it's not unusual, specifically among girls.
Yet, according to English law, rape is a crime which it is impossible for a husband to commit on his wife (see, e.g., Nevill Geary, The Law of Marriage, Ch. XV, Sect. V). The performance of the marriage ceremony, however, even if it necessarily involved a clear explanation of marital privileges, cannot be regarded as adequate justification for an act of sexual intercourse performed with violence or without the wife's consent.
Yet, under English law, a husband cannot be charged with raping his wife (see, e.g., Nevill Geary, The Law of Marriage, Ch. XV, Sect. V). However, just because a marriage ceremony took place, even if it included a clear explanation of marital rights, does not justify any act of sexual intercourse that is done violently or without the wife’s consent.
Hirschfeld, Jahrbuch für Sexuelle Zwischenstufen, 1903, p. 88. It may be added that a horror of coitus is not necessarily due to bad education, and may also occur in hereditarily degenerate women, whose ancestors have shown similar or allied mental peculiarities. A case of such "functional impotence" has been reported in a young Italian wife of twenty-one, who was otherwise healthy, and strongly attached to her husband. The marriage was annulled on the ground that "rudimentary sexual or emotional paranoia, which renders a wife invincibly refractory to sexual union, notwithstanding the integrity of the sexual organs, constitutes psychic functional impotence" (Archivio di Psichiatria, 1906, fasc. vi, p. 806).
Hirschfeld, Yearbook for Sexual Intermediate Stages, 1903, p. 88. It should be noted that a fear of sex isn't always a result of poor education; it can also occur in women with hereditary issues, whose ancestors exhibited similar or related mental traits. One case of this "functional impotence" was reported in a healthy twenty-one-year-old Italian wife who was very attached to her husband. The marriage was annulled on the grounds that "rudimentary sexual or emotional paranoia, which makes a wife unyieldingly resistant to sexual union, despite the health of the sexual organs, constitutes psychic functional impotence" (Archive of Psychiatry, 1906, fasc. vi, p. 806).
The reasonableness of this step is so obvious that it should scarcely need insistence. "The instruction of school-boys and school-girls is most adequately effected by an elderly doctor," Näcke remarks, "sometimes perhaps the school-doctor." "I strongly advocate," says Clouston (The Hygiene of Mind, p. 249), "that the family doctor, guided by the parent and the teacher, is by far the best instructor and monitor." Moll is of the same opinion.
The reasonableness of this step is so clear that it shouldn't really need emphasis. "Teaching boys and girls is most effectively done by an older doctor," Näcke notes, "sometimes even the school doctor." "I strongly recommend," says Clouston (The Hygiene of Mind, p. 249), "that the family doctor, with guidance from the parent and teacher, is by far the best instructor and monitor." Moll shares the same view.
I have further developed this argument in "Religion and the Child," Nineteenth Century and After, 1907.
I expanded on this argument in "Religion and the Child," Nineteenth Century and After, 1907.
The intimate relation of art and poetry to the sexual impulse has been realized in a fragmentary way by many who have not attained to any wide vision of auto-erotic activity in life. "Poetry is necessarily related to the sexual function," says Metchnikoff (Essais Optimistes, p. 352), who also quotes with approval the statement of Möbius (previously made by Ferrero and many others) that "artistic aptitudes must probably be considered as secondary sexual characters."
The close connection between art and poetry and the sexual impulse has been partly understood by many who haven't fully grasped the broader concept of self-pleasure in life. "Poetry is inherently linked to the sexual function," says Metchnikoff (Essais Optimistes, p. 352), who also agrees with Möbius's statement (originally made by Ferrero and many others) that "artistic skills should likely be seen as secondary sexual traits."
CHAPTER III.
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS.
The Greek Attitude Towards Nakedness—How the Romans Modified That Attitude—The Influence of Christianity—Nakedness in Mediæval Times—Evolution of the Horror of Nakedness—Concomitant Change in the Conception of Nakedness—Prudery—The Romantic Movement—Rise of a New Feeling in Regard to Nakedness—The Hygienic Aspect of Nakedness—How Children May Be Accustomed to Nakedness—Nakedness Not Inimical to Modesty—The Instinct of Physical Pride—The Value of Nakedness in Education—The Æsthetic Value of Nakedness—The Human Body as One of the Prime Tonics of Life—How Nakedness May Be Cultivated—The Moral Value of Nakedness.
The Greek View on Nudity—How the Romans Changed That View—The Impact of Christianity—Nudity in Medieval Times—The Shift in Attitudes Toward Nudity—The Changing Ideas About Nudity—Modesty—The Romantic Era—The Development of a New Perspective on Nudity—The Health Benefits of Nudity—How to Help Children Feel Comfortable with Nudity—Nudity Isn't Against Modesty—The Natural Pride in Our Bodies—The Importance of Nudity in Education—The Aesthetic Appeal of Nudity—The Human Body as One of Life's Great Sources of Vitality—How to Embrace Nudity—The Ethical Significance of Nudity.
The discussion of the value of nakedness in art leads us on to the allied question of nakedness in nature. What is the psychological influence of familiarity with nakedness? How far should children be made familiar with the naked body? This is a question in regard to which different opinions have been held in different ages, and during recent years a remarkable change has begun to come over the minds of practical educationalists in regard to it.
The discussion about the value of nudity in art brings us to the related topic of nudity in nature. What is the psychological impact of being familiar with nudity? How much should children be exposed to the naked body? This is a question that has had varying opinions throughout different times, and in recent years, there has been a significant shift in how practical educators think about it.
In Sparta, in Chios, and elsewhere in Greece, women at one time practiced gymnastic feats and dances in nakedness, together with the men, or in their presence.[40] Plato in his Republic approved of such customs and said that the ridicule of those who laughed at them was but "unripe fruit plucked from the tree of knowledge." On many questions Plato's opinions changed, but not on this. In the Laws, which are the last outcome of his philosophic reflection in old age, he still advocates (Bk. viii) a similar co-education of the sexes and their coöperation in all the works of life, in part with a view to blunt the over-keen edge of sexual appetite; with the same object he advocated the association together of youths and girls without constraint in costumes which offered no concealment to the form.
In Sparta, Chios, and other places in Greece, women used to perform gymnastic routines and dances in the nude, either alongside men or in their presence.[40] Plato in his Republic supported these customs, claiming that the mockery from those who laughed at them was just "unripe fruit plucked from the tree of knowledge." Plato’s views changed on many topics, but not this one. In the Laws, which represent the culmination of his philosophical thinking in old age, he still promotes (Bk. viii) a similar education and collaboration of the sexes in all aspects of life, partly to tone down excessive sexual desire; with this aim, he also encouraged the mingling of boys and girls without restrictions in outfits that revealed their figures.
It is noteworthy that the Romans, a coarser-grained people than the Greeks and in our narrow modern sense more "moral," showed no perception of the moralizing and refining influence of nakedness. Nudity to them was merely a licentious indulgence, to be treated with contempt even when it was enjoyed. It was confined to the stage, and clamored for by the populace. In the Floralia, especially, the crowd seem to have claimed it as their right that the actors should play naked, probably, it has been thought, as a survival of a folk-ritual. But the Romans, though they were eager to run to the theatre, felt nothing but disdain for the performers. "Flagitii principium est, nudare inter cives corpora." So thought old Ennius, as reported by Cicero, and that remained the genuine Roman feeling to the last. "Quanta perversitas!" as Tertullian exclaimed. "Artem magnificant, artificem notant."[41] In this matter the Romans, although they aroused the horror of the Christians, were yet in reality laying the foundation of Christian morality.
It’s important to note that the Romans, a rougher group than the Greeks and, in our limited modern view, more "moral," didn’t recognize the moral and uplifting influence of nudity. To them, nudity was simply a reckless pleasure to be scorned, even if it was enjoyed. It was limited to the theater and demanded by the public. During the Floralia, in particular, the crowd seemed to insist that actors perform naked, likely as a remnant of a folk ritual. However, while the Romans were eager to attend the theater, they held nothing but contempt for the performers. "The beginning of disgrace is to expose bodies among citizens." This view was shared by the old poet Ennius, as reported by Cicero, and it remained a genuine Roman sentiment until the end. "What a perversion!" as Tertullian remarked. "They glorify the art, but criticize the artist." In this regard, the Romans, despite shocking the Christians, were indeed laying the groundwork for Christian morality.
Christianity, which found so many of Plato's opinions congenial, would have nothing to do with his view of nakedness and failed to recognize its psychological correctness. The reason was simple, and indeed simple-minded. The Church was passionately eager to fight against what it called "the flesh," and thus fell into the error of confusing the subjective question of sexual desire with the objective spectacle of the naked form. "The flesh" is evil; therefore, "the flesh" must be hidden. And they hid it, without understanding that in so doing they had not suppressed the craving for the human form, but, on the contrary, had heightened it by imparting to it the additional fascination of a forbidden mystery.
Christianity, which found many of Plato's ideas appealing, completely rejected his views on nudity and failed to recognize their psychological accuracy. The reason was straightforward and somewhat simplistic. The Church was intensely focused on opposing what it referred to as "the flesh," leading to the mistake of confusing the subjective issue of sexual desire with the objective reality of the naked body. "The flesh" is evil; therefore, "the flesh" must be concealed. And they concealed it, not realizing that by doing so, they didn't eliminate the desire for the human form; instead, they made it even more compelling by adding an element of forbidden mystery.
Burton, in his Anatomy of Melancholy (Part III, Sect II, Mem. II, Subs. IV), referring to the recommendations of Plato, adds: "But Eusebius and Theodoret worthily lash him for it; and well they might: for as one saith, the very sight of naked parts, causeth enormous, exceeding concupiscences, and stirs up both men and women to burning lust." Yet, as Burton himself adds further on in the same section of his work (Mem. V, Subs. III), without protest, "some are of opinion, that to see a woman naked, is able of itself to alter his affection; and it is worthy of consideration, saith Montaigne, the Frenchman, in his Essays, that the skilfullest masters of amorous dalliance appoint for a remedy of venereous passions, a full survey of the body."
Burton, in his Anatomy of Melancholy (Part III, Sect II, Mem. II, Subs. IV), referring to the recommendations of Plato, adds: "But Eusebius and Theodoret rightly criticize him for it; and they have good reason: for as one says, the very sight of naked parts, causes enormous, excessive desires, and arouses both men and women to intense lust." Yet, as Burton himself notes later in the same section of his work (Mem. V, Subs. III), without objection, "some believe that seeing a woman naked can change a man's feelings; and it’s worth considering, says Montaigne, the Frenchman, in his Essays, that the most skilled masters of love advise a full view of the body as a remedy for sexual passions."
There ought to be no question regarding the fact that it is the adorned, the partially concealed body, and not the absolutely naked body, which acts as a sexual excitant. I have brought together some evidence on this point in the study of "The Evolution of Modesty." "In Madagascar, West Africa, and the Cape," says G. F. Scott Elliot (A Naturalist in Mid-Africa, p. 36), "I have always found the same rule. Chastity varies inversely as the amount of clothing." It is now indeed generally held that one of the chief primary objects of ornament and clothing was the stimulation of sexual desire, and artists' models are well aware that when they are completely unclothed, they are most safe from undesired masculine advances. "A favorite model of mine told me," remarks Dr. Shufeldt (Medical Brief, Oct., 1904), the distinguished author of Studies of the Human Form, "that it was her practice to disrobe as soon after entering the artist's studio as possible, for, as men are not always responsible for their emotions, she felt that she was far less likely to arouse or excite them when entirely nude than when only semi-draped." This fact is, indeed, quite familiar to artists' models. If the conquest of sexual desire were the first and last consideration of life it would be more reasonable to prohibit clothing than to prohibit nakedness.
There should be no doubt that it's the adorned, partially covered body, and not the completely naked body, that acts as a sexual attractor. I've gathered some evidence on this point in my study "The Evolution of Modesty." "In Madagascar, West Africa, and the Cape," says G. F. Scott Elliot (A Naturalist in Mid-Africa, p. 36), "I've always found the same rule. Chastity decreases as the amount of clothing increases." It's now widely accepted that one of the main purposes of decoration and clothing was to stimulate sexual desire, and models are well aware that when they're fully unclothed, they are less likely to face unwanted male attention. "A favorite model of mine told me," notes Dr. Shufeldt (Medical Brief, Oct., 1904), the renowned author of Studies of the Human Form, "that she made it a point to take her clothes off as soon as she entered the artist's studio because she felt that men are not always in control of their feelings, and she was much less likely to provoke or excite them when completely nude than when only partially draped." This fact is well known to models. If conquering sexual desire were the most important aspect of life, it would make more sense to ban clothing rather than to ban nakedness.
When Christianity absorbed the whole of the European world this strict avoidance of even the sight of "the flesh," although nominally accepted by all as the desirable ideal, could only be carried out, thoroughly and completely, in the cloister. In the practice of the world outside, although the original Christian ideals remained influential, various pagan and primitive traditions in favor of nakedness still persisted, and were, to some extent, allowed to manifest themselves, alike in ordinary custom and on special occasions.
When Christianity took over the entire European world, this strict avoidance of even seeing "the flesh," while officially accepted by everyone as the ideal, could only truly be achieved in monasteries. In everyday life beyond that, although the original Christian ideals still had an influence, various pagan and primitive traditions that favored nudity continued to exist and were, to some extent, allowed to show themselves, both in everyday customs and on special occasions.
How widespread is the occasional or habitual practice of nakedness in the world generally, and how entirely concordant it is with even a most sensitive modesty, has been set forth in "The Evolution of Modesty," in vol. i of these Studies.
How common is the occasional or regular practice of being naked in the world today, and how completely it aligns with even the most delicate sense of modesty has been discussed in "The Evolution of Modesty," in vol. i of these Studies.
Even during the Christian era the impulse to adopt nudity, often with the feeling that it was an especially sacred practice, has persisted. The Adamites of the second century, who read and prayed naked, and celebrated the sacrament naked, according to the statement quoted by St. Augustine, seem to have caused little scandal so long as they only practiced nudity in their sacred ceremonies. The German Brethren of the Free Spirit, in the thirteenth century, combined so much chastity with promiscuous nakedness that orthodox Catholics believed they were assisted by the Devil. The French Picards, at a much later date, insisted on public nakedness, believing that God had sent their leader into the world as a new Adam to reestablish the law of Nature; they were persecuted and were finally exterminated by the Hussites.
Even during the Christian era, the urge to embrace nudity, often seen as a deeply sacred practice, has continued. The Adamites of the second century, who read and prayed while naked, and celebrated the sacrament in the nude, according to St. Augustine, seemed to create little scandal as long as they practiced nudity only during their sacred ceremonies. The German Brethren of the Free Spirit in the thirteenth century mixed a strong sense of chastity with casual nudity, leading orthodox Catholics to believe they were being influenced by the Devil. The French Picards, much later, insisted on public nudity, thinking that God had sent their leader into the world as a new Adam to restore the law of Nature; they faced persecution and were ultimately wiped out by the Hussites.
In daily life, however, a considerable degree of nakedness was tolerated during mediæval times. This was notably so in the public baths, frequented by men and women together. Thus Alwin Schultz remarks (in his Höfische Leben zur Zeit der Minnesänger), that the women of the aristocratic classes, though not the men, were often naked in these baths except for a hat and a necklace.
In everyday life, a significant amount of nudity was accepted during medieval times. This was especially true in public baths, where men and women shared the space. Alwin Schultz points out (in his Höfische Leben zur Zeit der Minnesänger) that women from aristocratic families, unlike men, were often completely naked in these baths, except for a hat and a necklace.
It is sometimes stated that in the mediæval religious plays Adam and Eve were absolutely naked. Chambers doubts this, and thinks they wore flesh-colored tights, or were, as in a later play of this kind, "apparelled in white leather" (E. K. Chambers, The Mediæval Stage, vol. i, p. 5). It may be so, but the public exposure even of the sexual organs was permitted, and that in aristocratic houses, for John of Salisbury (in a passage quoted by Buckle, Commonplace Book, 541) protests against this custom.
It’s sometimes said that in medieval religious plays, Adam and Eve were completely naked. Chambers questions this idea and suggests they wore flesh-colored tights, or were, as in a later play of this type, "dressed in white leather" (E. K. Chambers, The Mediæval Stage, vol. i, p. 5). This could be true, but the public display of even sexual organs was allowed, even in upper-class homes, as John of Salisbury (in a passage quoted by Buckle, Commonplace Book, 541) argues against this custom.
The women of the feminist sixteenth century in France, as R. de Maulde la Clavière remarks (Revue de l'Art, Jan., 1898), had no scruple in recompensing their adorers by admitting them to their toilette, or even their bath. Late in the century they became still less prudish, and many well-known ladies allowed themselves to be painted naked down to the waist, as we see in the portrait of "Gabrielle d'Estrées au Bain" at Chantilly. Many of these pictures, however, are certainly not real portraits.
The women of the feminist sixteenth century in France, as R. de Maulde la Clavière notes (Revue de l'Art, Jan., 1898), had no qualms about rewarding their admirers by letting them into their dressing rooms or even their baths. By the end of the century, they became even less reserved, and many famous women allowed themselves to be painted nude from the waist up, as seen in the portrait of "Gabrielle d'Estrées au Bain" in Chantilly. However, many of these images are definitely not true portraits.
Even in the middle of the seventeenth century in England nakedness was not prohibited in public, for Pepys tells us that on July 29, 1667, a Quaker came into Westminster Hall, crying, "Repent! Repent!" being in a state of nakedness, except that he was "very civilly tied about the privities to avoid scandal." (This was doubtless Solomon Eccles, who was accustomed to go about in this costume, both before and after the Restoration. He had been a distinguished musician, and, though eccentric, was apparently not insane.)
Even in the middle of the 17th century in England, public nudity wasn’t banned. Pepys tells us that on July 29, 1667, a Quaker walked into Westminster Hall shouting, "Repent! Repent!" while almost completely naked, except for being "very civilly tied around his private parts to avoid scandal." (This was probably Solomon Eccles, who often dressed this way both before and after the Restoration. He had been a well-known musician and, although eccentric, seemed to be mentally sound.)
In a chapter, "De la Nudité," and in the appendices of his book, De l'Amour (vol. i, p. 221), Sénancour gives instances of the occasional practice of nudity in Europe, and adds some interesting remarks of his own; so, also, Dulaure (Des Divinités Génératrices, Ch. XV). It would appear, as a rule, that though complete nudity was allowed in other respects, it was usual to cover the sexual parts.
In a chapter called "De la Nudité," and in the appendices of his book, De l'Amour (vol. i, p. 221), Sénancour provides examples of the occasional practice of nudity in Europe and shares some of his own interesting thoughts. Similarly, Dulaure does so in Des Divinités Génératrices, Ch. XV. Generally, it seems that while full nudity was permitted in many contexts, it was common to cover the sexual parts.
The movement of revolt against nakedness never became completely victorious until the nineteenth century. That century represented the triumph of all the forces that banned public nakedness everywhere and altogether. If, as Pudor insists, nakedness is aristocratic and the slavery of clothes a plebeian characteristic imposed on the lower classes by an upper class who reserved to themselves the privilege of physical culture, we may perhaps connect this with the outburst of democratic plebeianism which, as Nietzsche pointed out, reached its climax in the nineteenth century. It is in any case certainly interesting to observe that by this time the movement had entirely changed its character. It had become general, but at the same time its foundation had been undermined. It had largely lost its religious and moral character, and instead was regarded as a matter of convention. The nineteenth century man who encountered the spectacle of white limbs flashing in the sunlight no longer felt like the mediæval ascetic that he was risking the salvation of his immortal soul or even courting the depravation of his morals; he merely felt that it was "indecent" or, in extreme cases, "disgusting." That is to say he regarded the matter as simply a question of conventional etiquette, at the worst, of taste, of æsthetics. In thus bringing down his repugnance to nakedness to so low a plane he had indeed rendered it generally acceptable, but at the same time he had deprived it of high sanction. His profound horror of nakedness was out of relation to the frivolous grounds on which he based it.
The revolt against nudity didn’t fully succeed until the nineteenth century. That century marked the victory of various forces that prohibited public nudity everywhere. If, as Pudor claims, nudity is seen as aristocratic, while the need for clothes is a plebeian trait forced upon the lower classes by the upper class, who kept the privilege of physical culture for themselves, we might connect this to the rise of democratic plebeianism that Nietzsche noted peaked in the nineteenth century. It's certainly interesting to see that by this time, the movement had completely changed its nature. It became widespread, but its foundation had been eroded. It had mostly lost its religious and moral aspects and was now viewed as simply a matter of social convention. A man in the nineteenth century who saw bare limbs shining in the sunlight no longer felt like a medieval ascetic worried about the salvation of his soul or even the corruption of his morals; he just thought it was “indecent” or, in more extreme cases, “disgusting.” This means he viewed it as mainly a question of social etiquette or, at worst, a matter of taste or aesthetics. By reducing his aversion to nudity to such trivial reasons, he had made it generally acceptable, but at the same time, he stripped it of any significant justification. His deep fear of nudity was out of proportion to the trivial reasons he cited for it.
We must not, however, under-rate the tenacity with which this horror of nakedness was held. Nothing illustrates more vividly the deeply ingrained hatred which the nineteenth century felt of nakedness than the ferocity—there is no other word for it—with which Christian missionaries to savages all over the world, even in the tropics, insisted on their converts adopting the conventional clothing of Northern Europe. Travellers' narratives abound in references to the emphasis placed by missionaries on this change of custom, which was both injurious to the health of the people and degrading to their dignity. It is sufficient to quote one authoritative witness, Lord Stanmore, formerly Governor of Fiji, who read a long paper to the Anglican Missionary Conference in 1894 on the subject of "Undue Introduction of Western Ways." "In the centre of the village," he remarked in quoting a typical case (and referring not to Fiji but to Tonga), "is the church, a wooden barn-like building. If the day be Sunday, we shall find the native minister arrayed in a greenish-black swallow-tail coat, a neckcloth, once white, and a pair of spectacles, which he probably does not need, preaching to a congregation, the male portion of which is dressed in much the same manner as himself, while the women are dizened out in old battered hats or bonnets, and shapeless gowns like bathing dresses, or it may be in crinolines of an early type. Chiefs of influence and women of high birth, who in their native dress would look, and do look, the ladies and gentlemen they are, are, by their Sunday finery, given the appearance of attendants upon Jack-in-the-Green. If a visit be paid to the houses of the town, after the morning's work of the people is over, the family will be found sitting on chairs, listless and uncomfortable, in a room full of litter. In the houses of the superior native clergy there will be a yet greater aping of the manners of the West. There will be chairs covered with hideous antimacassars, tasteless round worsted-work mats for absent flower jars, and a lot of ugly cheap and vulgar china chimney ornaments, which, there being no fireplace, and consequently no chimney-piece, are set out in order on a rickety deal table. The whole life of these village folk is one piece of unreal acting. They are continually asking themselves whether they are incurring any of the penalties entailed by infraction of the long table of prohibitions, and whether they are living up to the foreign garments they wear. Their faces have, for the most part, an expression of sullen discontent, they move about silently and joylessly, rebels in heart to the restrictive code on them, but which they fear to cast off, partly from a vague apprehension of possible secular results, and partly because they suppose they will cease to be good Christians if they do so. They have good ground for their dissatisfaction. At the time when I visited the villages I have specially in my eye, it was punishable by fine and imprisonment to wear native clothing, punishable by fine and imprisonment to wear long hair or a garland of flowers; punishable by fine or imprisonment to wrestle or to play at ball; punishable by fine and imprisonment to build a native-fashioned house; punishable not to wear shirt and trousers, and in certain localities coat and shoes also; and, in addition to laws enforcing a strictly puritanical observation of the Sabbath, it was punishable by fine and imprisonment to bathe on Sundays. In some other places bathing on Sunday was punishable by flogging; and to my knowledge women have been flogged for no other offense. Men in such circumstances are ripe for revolt, and sometimes the revolt comes."
We shouldn’t underestimate how deeply this horror of nakedness was held. Nothing illustrates the intense hatred the nineteenth century had towards nakedness more than the fierce—in no other way can it be described—pressure Christian missionaries put on indigenous people all over the world, even in tropical regions, to adopt the typical clothing of Northern Europe. Travelers’ stories are full of references to how much importance missionaries placed on this change in customs, which was detrimental to the health of the people and degrading to their dignity. One authoritative source is Lord Stanmore, a former Governor of Fiji, who presented a detailed paper to the Anglican Missionary Conference in 1894 titled "Undue Introduction of Western Ways." "In the center of the village," he noted while giving a typical example (referring not to Fiji but to Tonga), "is the church, a wooden barn-like structure. If it’s Sunday, we find the local minister dressed in a greenish-black tailcoat, a necktie that was once white, and a pair of glasses he probably doesn’t need, preaching to a congregation where the men are dressed similarly, while the women wear old, battered hats or bonnets and shapeless gowns like bathing suits, or perhaps early-style crinolines. Influential chiefs and noblewomen, who would look like the ladies and gentlemen they are in their traditional attire, appear as if they are simply attendants to a Jack-in-the-Green when dressed in their Sunday best. If you visit the homes in the town after the morning work is done, you’ll find the families sitting stiffly on chairs in a cluttered room. In the homes of the higher-ranking local clergy, there’s an even greater imitation of Western manners. You’ll find chairs covered in hideous antimacassars, tacky round mats for missing flower vases, and a lot of cheap, ugly china ornaments on a rickety table, as there are no fireplaces or chimney-pieces. The entire life of these village people feels like a false performance. They are constantly worrying about whether they are breaking any of the many rules imposed on them and whether they are living up to the foreign clothes they wear. Most of their expressions show discontent; they move around silently and without joy, internally rebelling against the restrictive rules but afraid to let go, partly due to a vague fear of possible worldly consequences, and partly because they think they will stop being good Christians if they do. Their dissatisfaction is well-founded. When I visited the villages I have in mind, it was punishable by fines and imprisonment to wear native clothing, have long hair, or wear flower garlands; it was punishable to wrestle or play ball; to build a native-style house; and, in some areas, not to wear a shirt and trousers, and sometimes a coat and shoes as well. In addition to laws enforcing a strictly puritanical observation of the Sabbath, it was also punishable by fines and imprisonment to bathe on Sundays. In some other regions, bathing on Sunday could lead to flogging; to my knowledge, women have been flogged for no other offense. In such situations, men are ready to revolt, and sometimes that rebellion happens.
An obvious result of reducing the feeling about nakedness to an unreasoning but imperative convention is the tendency to prudishness. This, as we know, is a form of pseudo-modesty which, being a convention, and not a natural feeling, is capable of unlimited extension. It is by no means confined to modern times or to Christian Europe. The ancient Hebrews were not entirely free from prudishness, and we find in the Old Testament that by a curious euphemism the sexual organs are sometimes referred to as "the feet." The Turks are capable of prudishness. So, indeed, were even the ancient Greeks. "Dion the philosopher tells us," remarks Clement of Alexandria (Stromates, Bk. IV, Ch. XIX) "that a certain woman, Lysidica, through excess of modesty, bathed in her clothes, and that Philotera, when she was to enter the bath, gradually drew back her tunic as the water covered her naked parts; and then rising by degrees, put it on." Mincing prudes were found among the early Christians, and their ways are graphically described by St. Jerome in one of his letters to Eustochium: "These women," he says, "speak between their teeth or with the edge of the lips, and with a lisping tongue, only half pronouncing their words, because they regard as gross whatever is natural. Such as these," declares Jerome, the scholar in him overcoming the ascetic, "corrupt even language." Whenever a new and artificial "modesty" is imposed upon savages prudery tends to arise. Haddon describes this among the natives of Torres Straits, where even the children now suffer from exaggerated prudishness, though formerly absolutely naked and unashamed (Cambridge Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits, vol. v, p. 271).
An obvious result of reducing the feelings about nudity to an irrational yet strict convention is the tendency towards prudishness. This, as we know, is a form of fake modesty that, being a convention rather than a natural feeling, can expand infinitely. It isn't limited to modern times or to Christian Europe. The ancient Hebrews weren't completely free from prudishness either; in the Old Testament, they used a curious euphemism where sexual organs were sometimes referred to as "the feet." The Turks can be prudish as well, and even the ancient Greeks were no exception. "Dion the philosopher tells us," notes Clement of Alexandria (Stromates, Bk. IV, Ch. XIX), "that a certain woman, Lysidica, out of excessive modesty, bathed in her clothes, and that Philotera, while preparing to enter the bath, gradually pulled back her tunic as the water covered her naked parts; and then, as she rose, she put it on." Fussy prudes existed among the early Christians too, and their behaviors are vividly described by St. Jerome in one of his letters to Eustochium: "These women," he says, "speak between their teeth or with pursed lips, and with a lisp, only partially pronouncing their words, because they consider anything natural to be crude. Such people," Jerome declares, with his scholarly side dominating his ascetic side, "even corrupt language." Whenever a new and artificial "modesty" is forced on those who are unaccustomed, prudishness tends to develop. Haddon describes this phenomenon among the natives of Torres Straits, where even children now experience exaggerated prudishness, despite having been completely naked and unashamed in the past (Cambridge Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits, vol. v, p. 271).
The nineteenth century, which witnessed the triumph of timidity and prudery in this matter, also produced the first fruitful germ of new conceptions of nakedness. To some extent these were embodied in the great Romantic movement. Rousseau, indeed, had placed no special insistence on nakedness as an element of the return to Nature which he preached so influentially. A new feeling in this matter emerged, however, with characteristic extravagance, in some of the episodes of the Revolution, while in Germany in the pioneering Lucinde of Friedrich Schlegel, a characteristic figure in the Romantic movement, a still unfamiliar conception of the body was set forth in a serious and earnest spirit.
The nineteenth century, which saw a victory for shyness and conservatism on this topic, also planted the seeds for new ideas about nudity. In some ways, these ideas were reflected in the great Romantic movement. Rousseau didn't emphasize nudity as part of the return to Nature that he famously advocated. However, a new attitude toward this issue arose, with a distinctive boldness, during certain events of the Revolution. Meanwhile, in Germany, Friedrich Schlegel's pioneering Lucinde, a key figure in the Romantic movement, introduced a still unfamiliar view of the body in a serious and sincere manner.
In England, Blake with his strange and flaming genius, proclaimed a mystical gospel which involved the spiritual glorification of the body and contempt for the civilized worship of clothes ("As to a modern man," he wrote, "stripped from his load of clothing he is like a dead corpse"); while, later, in America, Thoreau and Whitman and Burroughs asserted, still more definitely, a not dissimilar message concerning the need of returning to Nature.
In England, Blake, with his unique and passionate genius, declared a mystical message that emphasized the spiritual glory of the body and a disdain for the modern obsession with clothing ("As for a modern man," he wrote, "when stripped of his load of clothing, he is like a dead corpse"); while later, in America, Thoreau, Whitman, and Burroughs expressed a similar idea about the need to reconnect with Nature.
We find the importance of the sight of the body—though very narrowly, for the avoidance of fraud in the preliminaries of marriage—set forth as early as the sixteenth century by Sir Thomas More in his Utopia, which is so rich in new and fruitful ideas. In Utopia, according to Sir Thomas More, before marriage, a staid and honest matron "showeth the woman, be she maid or widow, naked to the wooer. And likewise a sage and discreet man exhibiteth the wooer naked to the woman. At this custom we laughed and disallowed it as foolish. But they, on their part, do greatly wonder at the folly of all other nations which, in buying a colt where a little money is in hazard, be so chary and circumspect that though he be almost all bare, yet they will not buy him unless the saddle and all the harness be taken off, lest under these coverings be hid some gall or sore. And yet, in choosing a wife, which shall be either pleasure or displeasure to them all their life after, they be so reckless that all the residue of the woman's body being covered with clothes, they estimate her scarcely by one handsbreadth (for they can see no more but her face) and so join her to them, not without great jeopardy of evil agreeing together, if anything in her body afterward should chance to offend or mislike them. Verily, so foul deformity may be hid under these coverings that it may quite alienate and take away the man's mind from his wife, when it shall not be lawful for their bodies to be separate again. If such deformity happen by any chance after the marriage is consummate and finished, well, there is no remedy but patience. But it were well done that a law were made whereby all such deceits were eschewed and avoided beforehand."
We see the significance of seeing the body—though quite restricted, to prevent fraud during marriage preparations—highlighted as early as the sixteenth century by Sir Thomas More in his Utopia, which is full of innovative and valuable ideas. In Utopia, according to Sir Thomas More, before marriage, a respectable and honest matron "shows the woman, whether she's a maiden or a widow, naked to the suitor. Likewise, a wise and discreet man presents the suitor naked to the woman. We laughed at this custom and dismissed it as foolish. But they, in turn, are quite astonished at the foolishness of other nations that, when buying a colt with a small amount of money at stake, are so cautious and careful that even if the colt is nearly naked, they won't buy it unless the saddle and all its gear are removed, fearing that some fault or sore might be hidden under those coverings. Yet, when choosing a wife, who will bring them either joy or sorrow for the rest of their lives, they are so reckless that, with most of the woman's body covered in clothes, they judge her hardly by a hand's breadth (since they can only see her face) and marry her, not without the significant risk of an unhappy match, should anything about her body later offend or displease them. Indeed, such a hideous deformity could be concealed under those coverings that it could completely turn a man's affections away from his wife when it becomes inappropriate for them to separate again. If such a deformity emerges after the marriage has been fully consummated, well, there’s nothing to do but be patient. But it would be wise to establish a law that prevents all such deceit from happening in the first place."
The clear conception of what may be called the spiritual value of nakedness—by no means from More's point of view, but as a part of natural hygiene in the widest sense, and as a high and special aspect of the purifying and ennobling function of beauty—is of much later date. It is not clearly expressed until the time of the Romantic movement at the beginning of the nineteenth century. We have it admirably set forth in Sénancour's De l'Amour (first edition, 1806; fourth and enlarged edition, 1834), which still remains one of the best books on the morality of love. After remarking that nakedness by no means abolishes modesty, he proceeds to advocate occasional partial or complete nudity. "Let us suppose," he remarks, somewhat in the spirit of Plato, "a country in which at certain general festivals the women should be absolutely free to be nearly or even quite naked. Swimming, waltzing, walking, those who thought good to do so might remain unclothed in the presence of men. No doubt the illusions of love would be little known, and passion would see a diminution of its transports. But is it passion that in general ennobles human affairs? We need honest attachments and delicate delights, and all these we may obtain while still preserving our common-sense.... Such nakedness would demand corresponding institutions, strong and simple, and a great respect for those conventions which belong to all times" (Sénancour, De l'Amour, vol. i, p. 314).
The clear understanding of what could be called the spiritual value of nakedness—definitely not from More's perspective, but as part of natural hygiene in the broadest sense, and as a significant and special aspect of the purifying and uplifting role of beauty—comes much later. It isn’t expressed clearly until the Romantic movement at the beginning of the nineteenth century. Sénancour's De l'Amour (first edition, 1806; fourth and enlarged edition, 1834) presents this beautifully and remains one of the best books on the ethics of love. After stating that nakedness does not eliminate modesty, he goes on to support occasional partial or complete nudity. "Let us imagine," he states, somewhat in the spirit of Plato, "a country where, during certain general festivals, women would be completely free to be almost or even entirely naked. During swimming, dancing, walking, those who wished could remain unclothed in the presence of men. Certainly, the illusions of love might be less common, and passion could experience a decrease in its intensity. But is it passion that usually elevates human affairs? We need honest connections and subtle pleasures, and we can achieve all of these while still maintaining our common sense.... Such nakedness would require corresponding institutions that are strong and straightforward, along with great respect for the conventions that apply to all times" (Sénancour, De l'Amour, vol. i, p. 314).
From that time onwards references to the value and desirability of nakedness become more and more frequent in all civilized countries, sometimes mingled with sarcastic allusions to the false conventions we have inherited in this matter. Thus Thoreau writes in his journal on June 12, 1852, as he looks at boys bathing in the river: "The color of their bodies in the sun at a distance is pleasing. I hear the sound of their sport borne over the water. As yet we have not man in Nature. What a singular fact for an angel visitant to this earth to carry back in his note-book, that men were forbidden to expose their bodies under the severest penalties."
From that time on, references to the value and appeal of being naked became more common in all civilized countries, sometimes mixed with sarcastic comments about the false conventions we've inherited regarding this issue. Thoreau writes in his journal on June 12, 1852, as he watches boys swimming in the river: "The color of their bodies in the sun from a distance is pleasing. I can hear the sound of their play carried over the water. So far, we don’t have man in Nature. What a strange fact for an angel visiting this earth to note down, that men were prohibited from showing their bodies under the strictest penalties."
Iwan Bloch, in Chapter VII of his Sexual Life of Our Time, discusses this question of nakedness from the modern point of view, and concludes: "A natural conception of nakedness: that is the watchword of the future. All the hygienic, æsthetic, and moral efforts of our time are pointing in that direction."
Iwan Bloch, in Chapter VII of his Sexual Life of Our Time, discusses the issue of nudity from a modern perspective and concludes: "A natural understanding of nudity: that is the guiding principle of the future. All the health, aesthetic, and ethical efforts of our time are heading in that direction."
Stratz, as befits one who has worked so strenuously in the cause of human health and beauty, admirably sets forth the stage which we have now attained in this matter. After pointing out (Die Frauenkleidung, third edition, 1904, p. 30) that, in opposition to the pagan world which worshipped naked gods, Christianity developed the idea that nakedness was merely sexual, and therefore immoral, he proceeds: "But over all glimmered on the heavenly heights of the Cross, the naked body of the Saviour. Under that protection there has gradually disengaged itself from the confusion of ideas a new transfigured form of nakedness made free after long struggle. I would call this artistic nakedness, for as it was immortalized by the old Greeks through art, so also among us it has been awakened to new life by art. Artistic nakedness is, in its nature, much higher than either the natural or the sensual conception of nakedness. The simple child of Nature sees in nakedness nothing at all; the clothed man sees in the uncovered body only a sensual irritation. But at the highest standpoint man consciously returns to Nature, and recognizes that under the manifold coverings of human fabrication there is hidden the most splendid creature that God has created. One may stand in silent, worshipping wonder before the sight; another may be impelled to imitate and show to his fellow-man what in that holy moment he has seen. But both enjoy the spectacle of human beauty with full consciousness and enlightened purity of thought."
Stratz, as someone who has worked tirelessly for human health and beauty, effectively outlines the progress we’ve made in this area. He notes (Die Frauenkleidung, third edition, 1904, p. 30) that, unlike the pagan world that worshipped naked gods, Christianity introduced the idea that nakedness was solely sexual and thus immoral. He continues: "But shining down from the heavenly heights of the Cross was the naked body of the Saviour. Under that protection, a new, transformed concept of nakedness has gradually emerged from the confusion of ideas, one that has been liberated after a long struggle. I would call this artistic nakedness, for just as it was immortalized by the ancient Greeks through art, it has also been revived among us through art. Artistic nakedness is, in essence, far superior to both the natural and sensual views of nakedness. The simple child of Nature sees nothing in nakedness; the clothed individual views the uncovered body merely as a source of sensual temptation. However, from the highest perspective, a person consciously returns to Nature and understands that beneath the numerous layers of human creation lies the most magnificent being that God has made. Some may stand in silent, reverent awe before this sight; others may feel compelled to imitate and share with their fellow man what they have witnessed in that sacred moment. Yet both appreciate the beauty of the human form with complete awareness and enlightened clarity of thought."
It was not, however, so much on these more spiritual sides, but on the side of hygiene, that the nineteenth century furnished its chief practical contribution to the new attitude towards nakedness.
It wasn't really about the more spiritual aspects, but rather about hygiene, that the nineteenth century made its main practical contribution to the new perspective on nudity.
Lord Monboddo, the Scotch judge, who was a pioneer in regard to many modern ideas, had already in the eighteenth century realized the hygienic value of "air-baths," and he invented that now familiar name. "Lord Monboddo," says Boswell, in 1777 (Life of Johnson, edited by Hill, vol. iii, p. 168) "told me that he awaked every morning at four, and then for his health got up and walked in his room naked, with the window open, which he called taking an air-bath." It is said also, I know not on what authority, that he made his beautiful daughters take an air-bath naked on the terrace every morning. Another distinguished man of the same century, Benjamin Franklin, used sometimes to work naked in his study on hygienic grounds, and, it is recorded, once affrighted a servant-girl by opening the door in an absent-minded moment, thus unattired.
Lord Monboddo, the Scottish judge who was a pioneer of many modern ideas, had already recognized the health benefits of "air-baths" in the eighteenth century and coined that now well-known term. "Lord Monboddo," says Boswell in 1777 (Life of Johnson, edited by Hill, vol. iii, p. 168), "told me that he woke up every morning at four, and then for his health got up and walked around his room naked, with the window open, which he called taking an air-bath." It is also said, though I’m not sure on what authority, that he made his lovely daughters take an air-bath naked on the terrace every morning. Another notable figure from the same century, Benjamin Franklin, would sometimes work naked in his study for health reasons, and it’s reported that he once startled a servant girl by absent-mindedly opening the door in that state.
Rikli seems to have been the apostle of air-baths and sun-baths regarded as a systematic method. He established light-and air-baths over half a century ago at Trieste and elsewhere in Austria. His motto was: "Light, Truth, and Freedom are the motive forces towards the highest development of physical and moral health." Man is not a fish, he declared; light and air are the first conditions of a highly organized life. Solaria for the treatment of a number of different disordered conditions are now commonly established, and most systems of natural therapeutics attach prime importance to light and air, while in medicine generally it is beginning to be recognized that such influences can by no means be neglected. Dr. Fernand Sandoz, in his Introduction à la Thérapeutique Naturiste par les agents Physiques et Dietétiques (1907) sets forth such methods comprehensively. In Germany sun-baths have become widely common; thus Lenkei (in a paper summarized in British Medical Journal, Oct. 31, 1908) prescribes them with much benefit in tuberculosis, rheumatic conditions, obesity, anæmia, neurasthenia, etc. He considers that their peculiar value lies in the action of light. Professor J. N. Hyde, of Chicago, even believes ("Light-Hunger in the Production of Psoriasis," British Medical Journal, Oct. 6, 1906), that psoriasis is caused by deficiency of sunlight, and is best cured by the application of light. This belief, which has not, however, been generally accepted in its unqualified form, he ingeniously supports by the fact that psoriasis tends to appear on the most exposed parts of the body, which may be held to naturally receive and require the maximum of light, and by the absence of the disease in hot countries and among negroes.
Rikli appears to have been a pioneer of air and sun baths seen as an organized practice. He set up light and air baths over fifty years ago in Trieste and other places in Austria. His motto was: "Light, Truth, and Freedom are the driving forces behind the highest development of physical and moral health." He argued that humans aren't fish; light and air are essential for a well-functioning life. Today, solaria for treating various health issues are commonly found, and most natural therapy systems emphasize the importance of light and air. In general medicine, there's a growing recognition that these factors can't be overlooked. Dr. Fernand Sandoz, in his Introduction à la Thérapeutique Naturiste par les agents Physiques et Dietétiques (1907), outlines these methods in detail. Sun baths have gained popularity in Germany; for example, Lenkei (in a paper summarized in British Medical Journal, Oct. 31, 1908) recommends them with considerable success for conditions like tuberculosis, rheumatism, obesity, anemia, and neurasthenia. He believes their unique benefit stems from the effects of light. Professor J. N. Hyde from Chicago even suggests ("Light-Hunger in the Production of Psoriasis," British Medical Journal, Oct. 6, 1906) that psoriasis may be caused by a lack of sunlight and that it is best treated with light exposure. Although this idea hasn't been widely accepted in an absolute sense, he cleverly supports it by noting that psoriasis often appears in the most exposed areas of the body, which are meant to receive and need the most light, and that the disease is absent in hotter regions and among Black populations.
The hygienic value of nakedness is indicated by the robust health of the savages throughout the world who go naked. The vigor of the Irish, also, has been connected with the fact that (as Fynes Moryson's Itinerary shows) both sexes, even among persons of high social class, were accustomed to go naked except for a mantle, especially in more remote parts of the country, as late as the seventeenth century. Where-ever primitive races abandon nakedness for clothing, at once the tendency to disease, mortality, and degeneracy notably increases, though it must be remembered that the use of clothing is commonly accompanied by the introduction of other bad habits. "Nakedness is the only condition universal among vigorous and healthy savages; at every other point perhaps they differ," remarks Frederick Boyle in a paper ("Savages and Clothes," Monthly Review, Sept., 1905) in which he brings together much evidence concerning the hygienic advantages of the natural human state in which man is "all face."
The health benefits of going naked are shown by the strong health of indigenous people around the world who live without clothes. The vitality of the Irish has also been linked to the fact that, as noted in Fynes Moryson's Itinerary, both men and women, even from high social classes, typically went unclothed except for a cloak, particularly in more isolated areas of the country, up until the seventeenth century. Whenever primitive societies move away from nakedness to wearing clothes, there is a noticeable increase in disease, death, and decline. However, it's important to note that wearing clothing often comes with other unhealthy habits. "Nakedness is the only state common among strong and healthy indigenous people; in every other respect, they may differ," states Frederick Boyle in a paper ("Savages and Clothes," Monthly Review, Sept., 1905) where he presents extensive evidence on the health benefits of the natural human state where people are "all face."
It is in Germany that a return towards nakedness has been most ably and thoroughly advocated, notably by Dr. H. Pudor in his Nackt-Cultur, and by R. Ungewitter in Die Nacktheit (first published in 1905), a book which has had a very large circulation in many editions. These writers enthusiastically advocate nakedness, not only on hygienic, but on moral and artistic grounds. Pudor insists more especially that "nakedness, both in gymnastics and in sport, is a method of cure and a method of regeneration;" he advocates co-education in this culture of nakedness. Although he makes large claims for nakedness—believing that all the nations which have disregarded these claims have rapidly become decadent—Pudor is less hopeful than Ungewitter of any speedy victory over the prejudices opposed to the culture of nakedness. He considers that the immediate task is education, and that a practical commencement may best be made with the foot which is specially in need of hygiene and exercise; a large part of the first volume of his book is devoted to the foot.
In Germany, the push for embracing nudity has been effectively and thoroughly championed, especially by Dr. H. Pudor in his Nackt-Cultur, and by R. Ungewitter in Die Nacktheit (first published in 1905), a book that has enjoyed widespread popularity through numerous editions. These authors passionately promote nudity, not just for hygienic reasons, but also for moral and artistic ones. Pudor particularly emphasizes that "nudity, both in gymnastics and in sports, is a method of healing and rejuvenation;" he supports co-education in this practice of nudity. While Pudor makes bold assertions about the benefits of nudity—arguing that all nations that have ignored these benefits have quickly become decadent—he is less optimistic than Ungewitter about a rapid change in attitudes towards the practice of nudity. He believes that the immediate focus should be on education, and that a practical starting point should be the foot, which notably requires better hygiene and exercise; a significant portion of the first volume of his book is dedicated to the foot.
As the matter is to-day viewed by those educationalists who are equally alive to sanitary and sexual considerations, the claims of nakedness, so far as concerns the young, are regarded as part alike of physical and moral hygiene. The free contact of the naked body with air and water and light makes for the health of the body; familiarity with the sight of the body abolishes petty pruriencies, trains the sense of beauty, and makes for the health of the soul. This double aspect of the matter has undoubtedly weighed greatly with those teachers who now approve of customs which, a few years ago, would have been hastily dismissed as "indecent." There is still a wide difference of opinion as to the limits to which the practice of nakedness may be carried, and also as to the age when it should begin to be restricted. The fact that the adult generation of to-day grew up under the influence of the old horror of nakedness is an inevitable check on any revolutionary changes in these matters.
As today's educators, who are aware of both health and sexual issues, view the topic, the benefits of nudity for young people are seen as important for both physical and moral well-being. The natural exposure of the naked body to air, water, and light contributes to physical health; being accustomed to seeing the body reduces unnecessary shame, fosters an appreciation for beauty, and supports the well-being of the soul. This dual perspective has certainly influenced teachers who now endorse practices that would have previously been quickly labeled as "indecent." There is still considerable disagreement about how far nudity practices can go and when they should start to be limited. The fact that today's adults were raised with a strong aversion to nudity inevitably slows down any significant changes in these views.
Maria Lischnewska, one of the ablest advocates of the methodical enlightenment of children in matters of sex (op. cit.), clearly realizes that a sane attitude towards the body lies at the root of a sound education for life. She finds that the chief objection encountered in such education, as applied in the higher classes of schools, is "the horror of the civilized man at his own body." She shows that there can be no doubt that those who are engaged in the difficult task of working towards the abolition of that superstitious horror have taken up a moral task of the first importance.
Maria Lischnewska, one of the most effective advocates for the systematic education of children about sex (op. cit.), clearly understands that a healthy attitude towards the body is fundamental to proper life education. She notes that the main challenge faced in this education, especially in higher school classes, is "the civilized person's dread of their own body." She demonstrates that there is no question that those working to eliminate this superstitious fear have taken on a morally crucial task.
Walter Gerhard, in a thoughtful and sensible paper on the educational question ("Ein Kapitel zur Erziehungsfrage," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. i, Heft 2), points out that it is the adult who needs education in this matter—as in so many other matters of sexual enlightenment—considerably more than the child. Parents educate their children from the earliest years in prudery, and vainly flatter themselves that they have thereby promoted their modesty and morality. He records his own early life in a tropical land and accustomed to nakedness from the first. "It was not till I came to Germany when nearly twenty that I learnt that the human body is indecent, and that it must not be shown because that 'would arouse bad impulses.' It was not till the human body was entirely withdrawn from my sight and after I was constantly told that there was something improper behind clothes, that I was able to understand this.... Until then I had not known that a naked body, by the mere fact of being naked, could arouse erotic feelings. I had known erotic feelings, but they had not arisen from the sight of the naked body, but gradually blossomed from the union of our souls." And he draws the final moral that, if only for the sake of our children, we must learn to educate ourselves.
Walter Gerhard, in a thoughtful and sensible paper on the educational issue ("Ein Kapitel zur Erziehungsfrage," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. i, Heft 2), points out that it’s the adults who really need education on this topic—like so many other issues of sexual awareness—much more than the children do. Parents raise their kids from a young age with a sense of prudishness, mistakenly believing that this promotes their modesty and morality. He reflects on his own early life in a tropical country where nudity was common from the start. "It wasn’t until I came to Germany at nearly twenty that I learned that the human body is considered indecent and shouldn’t be shown because it 'might provoke bad impulses.' It was only after the human body was completely kept from my view and I was continually told that there was something inappropriate about being clothed, that I could comprehend this... Until then, I didn’t realize that a naked body could, simply by being naked, evoke erotic feelings. I had experienced erotic feelings, but they didn’t come from seeing a naked body; they developed gradually from the connection of our souls." He concludes with the important lesson that, for the sake of our children, we must learn to educate ourselves.
Forel (Die Sexuelle Frage, p. 140), speaking in entirely the same sense as Gerhard, remarks that prudery may be either caused or cured in children. It may be caused by undue anxiety in covering their bodies and hiding from them the bodies of others. It may be cured by making them realize that there is nothing in the body that is unnatural and that we need be ashamed of, and by encouraging bathing of the sexes in common. He points out (p. 512) the advantages of allowing children to be acquainted with the adult forms which they will themselves some day assume, and condemns the conduct of those foolish persons who assume that children already possess the adult's erotic feelings about the body. That is so far from being the case that children are frequently unable to distinguish the sex of other children apart from their clothes.
Forel (Die Sexuelle Frage, p. 140) shares the same view as Gerhard, noting that prudery can be either generated or resolved in children. It can arise from excessive worry about covering their bodies and from hiding other people's bodies from them. It can be resolved by helping them understand that there’s nothing unnatural about the body that we should feel ashamed of, and by encouraging mixed-gender bathing. He highlights (p. 512) the benefits of letting children see the adult bodies they will eventually have and criticizes those misguided individuals who think that children already have the adult sexual feelings regarding the body. In reality, children often struggle to tell the sex of other kids apart from their clothing.
At the Mannheim Congress of the German Society for Combating Venereal Diseases, specially devoted to sexual hygiene, the speakers constantly referred to the necessity of promoting familiarity with the naked body. Thus Eulenburg and Julian Marcuse (Sexualpädagogik, p. 264) emphasize the importance of air-baths, not only for the sake of the physical health of the young, but in the interests of rational sexual training. Höller, a teacher, speaking at the same congress (op. cit., p. 85), after insisting on familiarity with the nude in art and literature, and protesting against the bowdlerising of poems for the young, continues: "By bathing-drawers ordinances no soul was ever yet saved from moral ruin. One who has learnt to enjoy peacefully the naked in art is only stirred by the naked in nature as by a work of art." Enderlin, another teacher, speaking in the same sense (p. 58), points out that nakedness cannot act sexually or immorally on the child, since the sexual impulse has not yet become pronounced, and the earlier he is introduced to the naked in nature and in art, as a matter of course, the less likely are the sexual feelings to be developed precociously. The child thus, indeed, becomes immune to impure influences, so that later, when representations of the nude are brought before him for the object of provoking his wantonness, they are powerless to injure him. It is important, Enderlin adds, for familiarity with the nude in art to be learnt at school, for most of us, as Siebert remarks, have to learn purity through art.
At the Mannheim Congress of the German Society for Combating Venereal Diseases, which focused on sexual hygiene, the speakers consistently emphasized the need to become comfortable with the naked body. Both Eulenburg and Julian Marcuse (Sexualpädagogik, p. 264) highlighted the significance of air baths, not just for the physical health of young people but also for effective sexual education. Höller, a teacher speaking at the same congress (op. cit., p. 85), stressed the importance of being familiar with nudity in art and literature and criticized the censorship of poetry for youth. He said, "No one has ever been saved from moral downfall by laws about bathing suits. Someone who has learned to appreciate nudity in art will only respond to nudity in nature as they would to a piece of art." Enderlin, another teacher, echoed this sentiment (p. 58), noting that nakedness cannot have sexual or immoral effects on a child since the sexual impulse hasn’t fully developed yet. The earlier a child is introduced to nakedness in nature and art as a normal part of life, the less likely they are to develop sexual feelings too early. Thus, the child becomes resilient to inappropriate influences, so that later, when they encounter depictions of nudity meant to provoke desire, these have little effect on them. Enderlin also stressed the importance of learning about nudity in art at school since, as Siebert points out, most of us have to learn about purity through art.
Nakedness in bathing, remarks Bölsche in his Liebesleben in der Natur (vol. iii, pp. 139 et seq.), we already in some measure possess; we need it in physical exercises, at first for the sexes separately; then, when we have grown accustomed to the idea, occasionally for both sexes together. We need to acquire the capacity to see the bodies of individuals of the other sex with such self-control and such natural instinct that they become non-erotic to us and can be gazed at without erotic feeling. Art, he says, shows that this is possible in civilization. Science, he adds, comes to the aid of the same view.
Nakedness while bathing, notes Bölsche in his Liebesleben in der Natur (vol. iii, pp. 139 et seq.), is something we already have to some extent; we need it for physical activities, first for each sex separately and then, as we get used to the idea, sometimes for both sexes together. We need to develop the ability to see bodies of the opposite sex with enough self-control and natural instinct that they become non-erotic to us and can be looked at without any sexual feelings. Art, he states, demonstrates that this is achievable in a civilized society. Science, he adds, supports this view.
Ungewitter (Die Nacktheit, p. 57) also advocates boys and girls engaging in play and gymnastics together, entirely naked in air-baths. "In this way," he believes, "the gymnasium would become a school of morality, in which young growing things would be able to retain their purity as long as possible through becoming naturally accustomed to each other. At the same time their bodies would be hardened and developed, and the perception of beautiful and natural forms awakened." To those who have any "moral" doubts on the matter, he mentions the custom in remote country districts of boys and girls bathing together quite naked and without any sexual consciousness. Rudolf Sommer, similarly, in an excellent article entitled "Mädchenerziehung oder Menschenbildung?" (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. i, Heft 3) advises that children should be made accustomed to each other's nakedness from an early age in the family life of the house or the garden, in games, and especially in bathing; he remarks that parents having children of only one sex should cultivate for their children's sake intimate relations with a family having children of like age of the opposite sex, so that they may grow up together.
Ungewitter (Die Nacktheit, p. 57) also suggests that boys and girls should play and do gymnastics together, completely naked during air-baths. "This way," he believes, "the gym would turn into a school of morality, where young individuals can maintain their purity for as long as possible by naturally getting used to each other. At the same time, their bodies would become stronger and more developed, and their appreciation for beautiful and natural forms would be awakened." To those who have any "moral" concerns about this, he points out the tradition in remote rural areas where boys and girls bathe together completely naked without any sexual awareness. Similarly, Rudolf Sommer, in a great article titled "Mädchenerziehung oder Menschenbildung?" (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. i, Heft 3), recommends that children should get used to each other's nakedness from an early age in the home or garden, through games, and especially during bathing; he notes that parents with children of only one gender should encourage close relationships with a family that has children of a similar age of the opposite gender so that they can grow up together.
It is scarcely necessary to add that the cultivation of nakedness must always be conciliated with respect for the natural instincts of modesty. If the practice of nakedness led the young to experience a diminished reverence for their own or others' personalities the advantages of it would be too dearly bought. This is, in part, a matter of wholesome instinct, in part of wise training. We now know that the absence of clothes has little relation with the absence of modesty, such relation as there is being of the inverse order, for the savage races which go naked are usually more modest than those which wear clothes. The saying quoted by Herodotus in the early Greek world that "A woman takes off her modesty with her shift" was a favorite text of the Christian Fathers. But Plutarch, who was also a moralist, had already protested against it at the close of the Greek world: "By no means," he declared, "she who is modest clothes herself with modesty when she lays aside her tunic." "A woman may be naked," as Mrs. Bishop, the traveller, remarked to Dr. Baelz, in Japan, "and yet behave like a lady."[42]
It’s hardly necessary to say that embracing nudity must always respect our natural instincts for modesty. If being naked causes young people to lose respect for themselves or others, then the benefits just wouldn’t be worth it. This is partly about healthy instincts and partly about good training. We now understand that not wearing clothes doesn’t necessarily mean a lack of modesty; in fact, the opposite often holds true, as many nude cultures tend to be more modest than those who dress. The saying reported by Herodotus in ancient Greece that "A woman takes off her modesty with her shift" was a favorite of the Christian Fathers. However, Plutarch, also a moral thinker, disagreed with this idea towards the end of the Greek era, stating, "By no means," and insisted, "she who is modest dresses in modesty when she takes off her tunic." “A woman may be naked,” as Mrs. Bishop, the traveler, told Dr. Baelz in Japan, “and still act like a lady.”[42]
The question is complicated among ourselves because established traditions of rigid concealment have fostered a pruriency which is an offensive insult to naked modesty. In many lands the women who are accustomed to be almost or quite naked in the presence of their own people cover themselves as soon as they become conscious of the lustful inquisitive eyes of Europeans. Stratz refers to the prevalence of this impulse of offended modesty in Japan, and mentions that he himself failed to arouse it simply because he was a physician, and, moreover, had long lived in another land (Java) where also the custom of nakedness prevails.[43] So long as this unnatural prurience exists a free unqualified nakedness is rendered difficult.
The issue is tricky for us because established traditions of strict concealment have created an inappropriate curiosity that's a direct insult to natural modesty. In many cultures, women who are used to being nearly or completely naked around their own people cover up as soon as they notice the lustful, curious gazes of Europeans. Stratz points out how common this sense of offended modesty is in Japan, noting that he couldn't evoke it himself simply because he was a doctor and had lived for a long time in another place (Java) where nudity is common. So long as this unnatural curiosity exists, true and free nudity becomes challenging.
Modesty is not, however, the only natural impulse which has to be considered in relation to the custom of nakedness. It seems probable that in cultivating the practice of nakedness we are not merely carrying out a moral and hygienic prescription but allowing legitimate scope to an instinct which at some periods of life, especially in adolescence, is spontaneous and natural, even, it may be, wholesomely based in the traditions of the race in sexual selection. Our rigid conventions make it impossible for us to discover the laws of nature in this matter by stifling them at the outset. It may well be that there is a rhythmic harmony and concordance between impulses of modesty and impulses of ostentation, though we have done our best to disguise the natural law by our stupid and perverse by-laws.
Modesty isn't the only natural instinct we need to think about when it comes to being naked. It's likely that when we embrace nakedness, we're not just following a moral or health guideline, but also giving room to an instinct that, at certain times in life—especially during adolescence—is natural and spontaneous, and perhaps even rooted in our sexual selection traditions. Our strict social norms prevent us from understanding nature's laws in this area by suppressing them right from the start. It’s possible that there’s a natural balance and connection between modesty and the desire to show off, even though we've done our best to hide this natural law with our foolish and twisted rules.
Stanley Hall, who emphasizes the importance of nakedness, remarks that at puberty we have much reason to assume that in a state of nature there is a certain instinctive pride and ostentation that accompanies the new local development, and quotes the observation of Dr. Seerley that the impulse to conceal the sexual organs is especially marked in young men who are underdeveloped, but not evident in those who are developed beyond the average. Stanley Hall (Adolescence, vol. ii, p. 97), also refers to the frequency with which not only "virtuous young men, but even women, rather glory in occasions when they can display the beauty of their forms without reserve, not only to themselves and to loved ones, but even to others with proper pretexts."
Stanley Hall, who highlights the significance of being naked, notes that during puberty, there’s plenty of reason to believe that in a natural state, there's an instinctive pride and showiness that comes with this new physical development. He cites Dr. Seerley's observation that the urge to cover up sexual organs is particularly noticeable in young men who are underdeveloped, but not in those who are more developed than average. Stanley Hall (Adolescence, vol. ii, p. 97) also mentions how often not just "virtuous young men, but even women, take pride in chances to show off their bodies without shame, not only to themselves and loved ones but even to others when appropriate."
Many have doubtless noted this tendency, especially in women, and chiefly in those who are conscious of beautiful physical development. Madame Céline Renooz believes that the tendency corresponds to a really deep-rooted instinct in women, little or not at all manifested in men who have consequently sought to impose artificially on women their own masculine conceptions of modesty. "In the actual life of the young girl to-day there is a moment when, by a secret atavism, she feels the pride of her sex, the intuition of her moral superiority and cannot understand why she must hide its cause. At this moment, wavering between the laws of Nature and social conventions, she scarcely knows if nakedness should, or should not, affright her. A sort of confused atavistic memory recalls to her a period before clothing was known, and reveals to her as a paradisaical ideal the customs of that human epoch" (Céline Renooz, Psychologie Comparée de l'Homme et de la Femme, pp. 85-87). Perhaps this was obscurely felt by the German girl (mentioned in Kalbeck's Life of Brahms), who said: "One enjoys music twice as much décolletée."
Many people have likely noticed this tendency, especially in women, and mainly in those who are aware of their beautiful physical development. Madame Céline Renooz believes that this tendency reflects a deep-rooted instinct in women, which is rarely, if ever, seen in men. Men have often tried to impose their own masculine ideas of modesty onto women. "In the real life of young girls today, there comes a moment when, through a hidden instinct, she feels pride in her gender, a sense of her moral superiority, and cannot understand why she should hide the source of this pride. At this moment, caught between the laws of nature and societal expectations, she barely knows if she should find nakedness frightening or not. A sort of hazy instinctual memory brings to mind a time before clothing existed, revealing to her a paradisiacal ideal of the customs from that human era" (Céline Renooz, Psychologie Comparée de l'Homme et de la Femme, pp. 85-87). Perhaps this feeling was vaguely experienced by the German girl (mentioned in Kalbeck's Life of Brahms), who said: "One enjoys music twice as much décolletée."
From the point of view with which we are here essentially concerned there are three ways in which the cultivation of nakedness—so far as it is permitted by the slow education of public opinion—tends to exert an influence: (1) It is an important element in the sexual hygiene of the young, introducing a wholesome knowledge and incuriosity into a sphere once given up to prudery and pruriency. (2) The effect of nakedness is beneficial on those of more mature age, also, in so far as it tends to cultivate the sense of beauty and to furnish the tonic and consoling influences of natural vigor and grace. (3) The custom of nakedness, in its inception at all events, has a dynamic psychological influence also on morals, an influence exerted in the substitution of a strenuous and positive morality for the merely negative and timid morality which has ruled in this sphere.
From the perspective we’re focusing on, there are three ways in which promoting nakedness—as much as public opinion allows—can have an impact: (1) It plays a key role in the sexual health of young people, providing a healthy understanding and curiosity in a realm previously dominated by modesty and obsession. (2) Nakedness also has positive effects on older individuals, as it helps to nurture a sense of beauty and offers the refreshing and reassuring influences of natural strength and elegance. (3) The practice of nakedness, at its beginning at least, has a strong psychological impact on morals, replacing a weak and fearful morality with a more robust and assertive one in this area.
Perhaps there are not many adults who realize the intense and secret absorption of thought in the minds of many boys and some girls concerning the problem of the physical conformation of the other sex, and the time, patience, and intellectual energy which they are willing to expend on the solution of this problem. This is mostly effected in secret, but not seldom the secret impulse manifests itself with a sudden violence which in the blind eyes of the law is reckoned as crime. A German lawyer, Dr. Werthauer, has lately stated that if there were a due degree of familiarity with the natural organs and functions of the opposite sex ninety per cent. of the indecent acts of youths with girl children would disappear, for in most cases these are not assaults but merely the innocent, though uncontrollable, outcome of a repressed natural curiosity. It is quite true that not a few children boldly enlist each others' coöperation in the settlement of the question and resolve it to their mutual satisfaction. But even this is not altogether satisfactory, for the end is not attained openly and wholesomely, with a due subordination of the specifically sexual, but with a consciousness of wrong-doing and an exclusive attentiveness to the merely physical fact which tend directly to develop sexual excitement. When familiarity with the naked body of the other sex is gained openly and with no consciousness of indecorum, in the course of work and of play, in exercise or gymnastics, in running or in bathing, from a child's earliest years, no unwholesome results accompany the knowledge of the essential facts of physical conformation thus naturally acquired. The prurience and prudery which have poisoned sexual life in the past are alike rendered impossible.
Perhaps not many adults realize the intense and secretive thoughts many boys and some girls have about the physical differences of the other sex, and the time, patience, and mental energy they're willing to invest in figuring this out. This mostly happens in secret, but often the hidden urge bursts forth with a sudden force that the law mistakenly sees as a crime. A German lawyer, Dr. Werthauer, recently stated that if there were a proper understanding of the natural organs and functions of the opposite sex, ninety percent of the indecent acts by boys against girls would vanish. In most cases, these aren't assaults but merely the innocent, albeit uncontrollable, result of repressed natural curiosity. It's true that many children openly seek each other's help to resolve their questions and find mutual satisfaction. However, even this isn't completely satisfying, as the resolution isn't achieved in an open and healthy way, but rather with a sense of wrongdoing and a narrow focus on the physical aspect, which tends to spark sexual excitement. When familiarity with the naked body of the opposite sex is developed in a straightforward manner, without any sense of impropriety, through work and play, exercise or gymnastics, running or bathing, starting from early childhood, the knowledge of these basic physical differences is acquired naturally without any unhealthy consequences. The shame and excessive modesty that have tainted sexual life in the past are thereby made impossible.
Nakedness has, however, a hygienic value, as well as a spiritual significance, far beyond its influences in allaying the natural inquisitiveness of the young or acting as a preventative of morbid emotion. It is an inspiration to adults who have long outgrown any youthful curiosities. The vision of the essential and eternal human form, the nearest thing to us in all the world, with its vigor and its beauty and its grace, is one of the prime tonics of life. "The power of a woman's body," said James Hinton, "is no more bodily than the power of music is a power of atmospheric vibrations." It is more than all the beautiful and stimulating things of the world, than flowers or stars or the sea. History and legend and myth reveal to us the sacred and awful influence of nakedness, for, as Stanley Hall says, nakedness has always been "a talisman of wondrous power with gods and men." How sorely men crave for the spectacle of the human body—even to-day after generations have inculcated the notion that it is an indecorous and even disgusting spectacle—is witnessed by the eagerness with which they seek after the spectacle of even its imperfect and meretricious forms, although these certainly possess a heady and stimulating quality which can never be found in the pathetic simplicity of naked beauty. It was another spectacle when the queens of ancient Madagascar at the annual Fandroon, or feast of the bath, laid aside their royal robes and while their subjects crowded the palace courtyard, descended the marble steps to the bath in complete nakedness. When we make our conventions of clothing rigid we at once spread a feast for lust and deny ourselves one of the prime tonics of life.
Nakedness has a hygienic value, as well as a spiritual significance, that goes far beyond its role in calming the natural curiosity of young people or preventing unhealthy emotions. It inspires adults who have long moved past any youthful interests. The sight of the essential and timeless human form, the closest thing to us in the world, with its vitality, beauty, and grace, is one of life's greatest energizers. "The power of a woman's body," said James Hinton, "is no more bodily than the power of music is a power of atmospheric vibrations." It surpasses all the beautiful and invigorating things in the world, like flowers, stars, or the sea. History, legend, and myth reveal the sacred and profound influence of nakedness, for, as Stanley Hall says, nakedness has always been "a talisman of wondrous power with gods and men." How desperately men long for the sight of the human body—even today, after generations have taught that it's inappropriate and even repulsive—is evidenced by the eagerness with which they pursue even its flawed and superficial forms, although these certainly have an intoxicating and exciting quality that can never be compared to the simple beauty of the naked body. It was a different scene when the queens of ancient Madagascar, during the annual Fandroon, or feast of the bath, set aside their royal garments and, while their subjects filled the palace courtyard, descended the marble steps to the bath completely naked. When we make our clothing conventions too strict, we not only create an invitation to lust but also deny ourselves one of life's essential energizers.
"I was feeling in despair and walking despondently along a Melbourne street," writes the Australian author of a yet unpublished autobiography, "when three children came running out of a lane and crossed the road in full daylight. The beauty and texture of their legs in the open air filled me with joy, so that I forgot all my troubles whilst looking at them. It was a bright revelation, an unexpected glimpse of Paradise, and I have never ceased to thank the happy combination of shape, pure blood, and fine skin of these poverty-stricken children, for the wind seemed to quicken their golden beauty, and I retained the rosy vision of their natural young limbs, so much more divine than those always under cover. Another occasion when naked young limbs made me forget all my gloom and despondency was on my first visit to Adelaide. I came on a naked boy leaning on the railing near the Baths, and the beauty of his face, torso, fair young limbs and exquisite feet filled me with joy and renewed hope. The tears came to my eyes, and I said to myself, 'While there is beauty in the world I will continue to struggle,'"
"I was feeling hopeless and walking sadly along a Melbourne street," writes the Australian author of an unpublished autobiography, "when three kids came running out of a side street and crossed the road in broad daylight. The beauty and texture of their legs in the fresh air filled me with joy, making me forget all my troubles while watching them. It was a bright revelation, an unexpected glimpse of Paradise, and I have never stopped thanking the happy combination of shape, pure blood, and fine skin of these underprivileged children, as the wind seemed to enhance their golden beauty, and I held onto the vivid image of their natural young limbs, far more divine than those always covered up. Another time when bare young limbs made me forget all my sadness was on my first visit to Adelaide. I came across a naked boy leaning on the railing near the Baths, and the beauty of his face, torso, fair young limbs, and perfect feet filled me with joy and renewed hope. Tears came to my eyes, and I said to myself, 'As long as there is beauty in the world, I will keep fighting.'"
We must, as Bölsche declares (loc. cit.), accustom ourselves to gaze on the naked human body exactly as we gaze at a beautiful flower, not merely with the pity with which the doctor looks at the body, but with joy in its strength and health and beauty. For a flower, as Bölsche truly adds, is not merely "naked body," it is the most sacred region of the body, the sexual organs of the plant.
We should, as Bölsche states (loc. cit.), train ourselves to look at the naked human body the same way we admire a beautiful flower, not just with the pity the doctor feels, but with appreciation for its strength, health, and beauty. Because a flower, as Bölsche rightly points out, is not just a "naked body"; it’s the most sacred part of the body, the plant’s reproductive organs.
"For girls to dance naked," said Hinton, "is the only truly pure form of dancing, and in due time it must therefore come about. This is certain: girls will dance naked and men will be pure enough to gaze on them." It has already been so in Greece, he elsewhere remarks, as it is to-day in Japan (as more recently described by Stratz). It is nearly forty years since these prophetic words were written, but Hinton himself would probably have been surprised at the progress which has already been made slowly (for all true progress must be slow) towards this goal. Even on the stage new and more natural traditions are beginning to prevail in Europe. It is not many years since an English actress regarded as a calumny the statement that she appeared on the stage bare-foot, and brought an action for libel, winning substantial damages. Such a result would scarcely be possible to-day. The movement in which Isadora Duncan was a pioneer has led to a partial disuse among dancers of the offensive device of tights, and it is no longer considered indecorous to show many parts of the body which it was formerly usual to cover.
"For girls to dance naked," said Hinton, "is the only truly pure form of dancing, and eventually it will happen. It’s certain: girls will dance naked and men will be pure enough to look at them." He noted that this has happened in Greece and is still the case in Japan today (as described more recently by Stratz). Nearly forty years have passed since these prophetic words were written, but Hinton would likely be surprised by the progress that has already been made slowly (because all true progress must be slow) toward this goal. Even on stage, new and more natural traditions are starting to take hold in Europe. It wasn’t long ago that an English actress was offended by the claim that she appeared on stage barefoot and sued for libel, winning significant damages. Such a scenario would hardly be possible today. The movement that Isadora Duncan helped initiate has led to a decrease in the use of tights among dancers, and it's no longer seen as inappropriate to show many parts of the body that were once typically covered.
It should, however, be added at the same time that, while dancers, in so far as they are genuine artists, are entitled to determine the conditions most favorable to their art, nothing whatever is gained for the cause of a wholesome culture of nakedness by the "living statues" and "living pictures" which have obtained an international vogue during recent years. These may be legitimate as variety performances, but they have nothing whatever to do with either Nature or art. Dr. Pudor, writing as one of the earliest apostles of the culture of nakedness, has energetically protested against these performances (Sexual-Probleme, Dec., 1908, p. 828). He rightly points out that nakedness, to be wholesome, requires the open air, the meadows, the sunlight, and that nakedness at night, in a music hall, by artificial light, in the presence of spectators who are themselves clothed, has no element of morality about it. Attempts have here and there been quietly made to cultivate a certain amount of mutual nakedness as between the sexes on remote country excursions. It is significant to find a record of such an experiment in Ungewitter's Die Nacktheit. In this case a party of people, men and women, would regularly every Sunday seek remote spots in woods or meadows where they would settle down, picnic, and enjoy games. "They made themselves as comfortable as possible, the men laying aside their coats, waistcoats, boots and socks; the women their blouses, skirts, shoes and stockings. Gradually, as the moral conception of nakedness developed in their minds, more and more clothing fell away, until the men wore nothing but bathing-drawers and the women only their chemises. In this 'costume' games were carried out in common, and a regular camp-life led. The ladies (some of whom were unmarried) would then lie in hammocks and we men on the grass, and the intercourse was delightful. We felt as members of one family, and behaved accordingly. In an entirely natural and unembarrassed way we gave ourselves up entirely to the liberating feelings aroused by this light- and air-bath, and passed these splendid hours in joyous singing and dancing, in wantonly childish fashion, freed from the burden of a false civilization. It was, of course, necessary to seek spots as remote as possible from high-roads, for fear of being disturbed. At the same time we by no means failed in natural modesty and consideration towards one another. Children, who can be entirely naked, may be allowed to take part in such meetings of adults, and will thus be brought up free from morbid prudery" (R. Ungewitter, Die Nacktheit, p. 58).
It should be noted that while dancers, as genuine artists, have the right to decide the conditions most conducive to their art, nothing beneficial for a healthy appreciation of nakedness comes from the "living statues" and "living pictures" that have recently gained international popularity. These may be seen as legitimate variety acts, but they have nothing to do with either nature or art. Dr. Pudor, one of the earliest advocates for the appreciation of nudity, has strongly criticized these performances (Sexual-Probleme, Dec., 1908, p. 828). He rightly points out that, for nudity to be healthy, it needs to be in the open air, in meadows, under sunlight, and that being naked at night, in a music hall under artificial light, with clothed spectators, lacks any moral value. There have been some quiet attempts to foster a degree of mutual nudity between the sexes during secluded country outings. It's notable to find a record of such an experiment in Ungewitter's Die Nacktheit. In this case, a group of men and women would regularly set out on Sundays to secluded spots in woods or meadows to relax, picnic, and play games. "They made themselves as comfortable as possible, with the men removing their coats, vests, boots, and socks; the women shedding their blouses, skirts, shoes, and stockings. Gradually, as their understanding of nudity evolved, they shed more clothing until the men wore only swim trunks and the women just their chemises. In this 'outfit,' they played games together and led a typical camp life. The women (some of whom were single) would recline in hammocks while we men rested on the grass, and the atmosphere was delightful. We felt like a family and behaved like one. Naturally and without embarrassment, we immersed ourselves in the liberating feelings brought about by this exposure to light and air, spending wonderful hours in joyful singing and dancing, in a carefree, childlike manner, released from the burdens of a false civilization. Of course, it was necessary to find spots as far away from busy roads as possible to avoid disturbances. At the same time, we did not neglect our natural modesty and consideration for one another. Children, who can be completely naked, could join these adult gatherings, allowing them to grow up free from unhealthy prudishness" (R. Ungewitter, Die Nacktheit, p. 58).
No doubt it may be said that the ideal in this matter is the possibility of permitting complete nakedness. This may be admitted, and it is undoubtedly true that our rigid police regulations do much to artificially foster a concealment in this matter which is not based on any natural instinct. Dr. Shufeldt narrates in his Studies of the Human Form that once in the course of a photographic expedition in the woods he came upon two boys, naked except for bathing-drawers, engaged in getting water lilies from a pond. He found them a good subject for his camera, but they could not be induced to remove their drawers, by no means out of either modesty or mock-modesty, but simply because they feared they might possibly be caught and arrested. We have to recognize that at the present day the general popular sentiment is not yet sufficiently educated to allow of public disregard for the convention of covering the sexual centres, and all attempts to extend the bounds of nakedness must show a due regard for this requirement. As concerns women, Valentin Lehr, of Freiburg, in Breisgau, has invented a costume (figured in Ungewitter's Die Nacktheit) which is suitable for either public water-baths or air-baths, because it meets the demand of those whose minimum requirement is that the chief sexual centres of the body should be covered in public, while it is otherwise fairly unobjectionable. It consists of two pieces, made of porous material, one covering the breasts with a band over the shoulders, and the other covering the abdomen below the navel and drawn between the legs. This minimal costume, while neither ideal nor æsthetic, adequately covers the sexual regions of the body, while leaving the arms, waist, hips, and legs entirely free.
It's certainly true that the ideal in this matter is the ability to be completely naked. This is an accepted view, and it's clear that our strict regulations do a lot to create an artificial sense of concealment that isn't rooted in any natural instinct. Dr. Shufeldt shares in his Studies of the Human Form that during a photographic outing in the woods, he encountered two boys who were naked except for bathing trunks, busy picking water lilies from a pond. He thought they would make a great subject for his camera, but they were unwilling to take off their trunks, not out of modesty or false modesty, but simply because they were afraid they might get caught and arrested. We have to acknowledge that today, public sentiment hasn't evolved enough to disregard the norm of covering the sexual organs, and any efforts to broaden the acceptance of nudity must consider this requirement. Regarding women, Valentin Lehr from Freiburg in Breisgau has created a costume (depicted in Ungewitter's Die Nacktheit) that is appropriate for public water or air baths since it fulfills the needs of those who insist on covering their main sexual areas in public while still being relatively unobtrusive. It consists of two pieces made from breathable material: one piece covers the breasts with a band over the shoulders and the other covers the abdomen beneath the navel and is drawn between the legs. This minimal outfit, while not ideal or particularly aesthetic, adequately covers the sexual areas of the body while leaving the arms, waist, hips, and legs completely free.
There finally remains the moral aspect of nakedness. Although this has been emphasized by many during the past half century it is still unfamiliar to the majority. The human body can never be a little thing. The wise educator may see to it that boys and girls are brought up in a natural and wholesome familiarity with each other, but a certain terror and beauty must always attach to the spectacle of the body, a mixed attraction and repulsion. Because it has this force it naturally calls out the virtue of those who take part in the spectacle, and makes impossible any soft compliance to emotion. Even if we admit that the spectacle of nakedness is a challenge to passion it is still a challenge that calls out the ennobling qualities of self-control. It is but a poor sort of virtue that lies in fleeing into the desert from things that we fear may have in them a temptation. We have to learn that it is even worse to attempt to create a desert around us in the midst of civilization. We cannot dispense with passions if we would; reason, as Holbach said, is the art of choosing the right passions, and education the art of sowing and cultivating them in human hearts. The spectacle of nakedness has its moral value in teaching us to learn to enjoy what we do not possess, a lesson which is an essential part of the training for any kind of fine social life. The child has to learn to look at flowers and not pluck them; the man has to learn to look at a woman's beauty and not desire to possess it. The joyous conquest over that "erotic kleptomania," as Ellen Key has well said, reveals the blossoming of a fine civilization. We fancy the conquest is difficult, even impossibly difficult. But it is not so. This impulse, like other human impulses, tends under natural conditions to develop temperately and wholesomely. We artificially press a stupid and brutal hand on it, and it is driven into the two unnatural extremes of repression and license, one extreme as foul as the other.
There’s also the moral aspect of nudity. Even though many have pointed this out over the past fifty years, it’s still unfamiliar to most people. The human body is never a trivial matter. A wise educator can ensure that boys and girls grow up in a natural and healthy comfort with each other, but there will always be a certain mix of fear and beauty associated with seeing the human body. This combination creates both attraction and repulsion. Because of this energy, it naturally calls for the virtue of those involved in the experience, making it impossible to simply give in to emotions. Even if we agree that seeing nudity challenges our passions, it is still a challenge that brings out the noble qualities of self-control. It’s a shallow kind of virtue to run away to a desert because we fear temptation. We need to realize that trying to create a desert in the midst of civilization is even worse. We can’t get rid of our passions if we wanted to; reason, as Holbach said, is about choosing the right passions, and education is about cultivating them in people's hearts. The moral value of seeing nudity lies in teaching us to appreciate what we don’t have—a lesson essential for a rich social life. A child must learn to admire flowers without picking them; a man must learn to appreciate a woman’s beauty without wanting to possess it. The joyful victory over that “erotic kleptomania,” as Ellen Key aptly put it, signifies the growth of a great civilization. We imagine this victory to be tough, even impossible. But it isn’t. This urge, like other human impulses, tends to develop in a balanced and healthy way under natural conditions. We forcefully impose a cruel and ignorant pressure on it, leading it to the two unhealthy extremes of repression and excess, both equally abhorrent.
To those who have been bred under bad conditions, it may indeed seem hopeless to attempt to rise to the level of the Greeks and the other finer tempered peoples of antiquity in realizing the moral, as well as the pedagogic, hygienic, and æsthetic advantages[44] of admitting into life the spectacle of the naked human body. But unless we do we hopelessly fetter ourselves in our march along the road of civilization, we deprive ourselves at once of a source of moral strength and of joyous inspiration. Just as Wesley once asked why the devil should have all the best tunes, so to-day men are beginning to ask why the human body, the most divine melody at its finest moments that creation has yielded, should be allowed to become the perquisite of those who lust for the obscene. And some are, further, convinced that by enlisting it on the side of purity and strength they are raising the most powerful of all bulwarks against the invasion of a vicious conception of life and the consequent degradation of sex. These are considerations which we cannot longer afford to neglect, however great the opposition they arouse among the unthinking.
To those who have grown up in difficult circumstances, it may seem impossible to try to achieve the level of the Greeks and other more refined cultures of the past when it comes to understanding the moral, educational, health, and artistic benefits[44] of incorporating the sight of the naked human body into our lives. But if we don’t, we restrict ourselves in our progress toward civilization, depriving ourselves of a source of moral strength and joyful inspiration. Just as Wesley once asked why the devil should have all the best tunes, today people are starting to question why the human body—the most beautiful melody that creation has to offer—should be claimed by those who are drawn to the obscene. Additionally, some believe that by promoting it as a symbol of purity and strength, they are building a powerful defense against the harmful views of life and the resulting degradation of sexuality. These are considerations we can no longer ignore, no matter how much opposition they face from those who do not think critically.
"Folk are afraid of such things rousing the passions," Edward Carpenter remarks. "No doubt the things may act that way. But why, we may ask, should people be afraid of rousing passions which, after all, are the great driving forces of human life?" It is true, the same writer continues, our conventional moral formulæ are no longer strong enough to control passion adequately, and that we are generating steam in a boiler that is cankered with rust. "The cure is not to cut off the passions, or to be weakly afraid of them, but to find a new, sound, healthy engine of general morality and common sense within which they will work" (Edward Carpenter, Albany Review, Sept., 1907).
"People are afraid of things that stir up emotions," Edward Carpenter notes. "It’s true that these things can have that effect. But why should we be afraid of stirring up feelings that are, after all, the main driving forces of human life?" The same writer goes on to point out that our traditional moral guidelines aren’t strong enough to effectively control emotions, and we’re building up pressure in a system that’s corroded. "The solution isn’t to suppress emotions or to timidly fear them, but to create a new, solid, healthy framework of general morality and common sense where they can function" (Edward Carpenter, Albany Review, Sept., 1907).
So far as I am aware, however, it was James Hinton who chiefly sought to make clear the possibility of a positive morality on the basis of nakedness, beauty, and sexual influence, regarded as dynamic forces which, when suppressed, make for corruption and when wisely used serve to inspire and ennoble life. He worked out his thoughts on this matter in MSS., written from about 1870 to his death two years later, which, never having been prepared for publication, remain in a fragmentary state and have not been published. I quote a few brief characteristic passages: "Is not," he wrote, "the Hindu refusal to see a woman eating strangely like ours to see one naked? The real sensuality of the thought is visibly identical.... Suppose, because they are delicious to eat, pineapples were forbidden to be seen, except in pictures, and about that there was something dubious. Suppose no one might have sight of a pineapple unless he were rich enough to purchase one for his particular eating, the sight and the eating being so indissolubly joined. What lustfulness would surround them, what constant pruriency, what stealing!... Miss —— told us of her Syrian adventures, and how she went into a wood-carver's shop and he would not look at her; and how she took up a tool and worked, till at last he looked, and they both burst out laughing. Will it not be even so with our looking at women altogether? There will come a work—and at last we shall look up and both burst out laughing.... When men see truly what is amiss, and act with reason and forethought in respect to the sexual relations, will they not insist on the enjoyment of women's beauty by youths, and from the earliest age, that the first feeling may be of beauty? Will they not say, 'We must not allow the false purity, we must have the true.' The false has been tried, and it is not good enough; the power purely to enjoy beauty must be gained; attempting to do with less is fatal. Every instructor of youth shall say: 'This beauty of woman, God's chief work of beauty, it is good you see it; it is a pleasure that serves good; all beauty serves it, and above all this, for its office is to make you pure. Come to it as you come to daily bread, or pure air, or the cleansing bath: this is pure to you if you be pure, it will aid you in your effort to be so. But if any of you are impure, and make of it the feeder of impurity, then you should be ashamed and pray; it is not for you our life can be ordered; it is for men and not for beasts.' This must come when men open their eyes, and act coolly and with reason and forethought, and not in mere panic in respect to the sexual passion in its moral relations."
As far as I know, it was James Hinton who primarily aimed to clarify the possibility of a positive morality based on nakedness, beauty, and sexual influence, seen as powerful forces that, when repressed, lead to corruption, and when handled wisely, can inspire and uplift life. He developed his thoughts on this topic in manuscripts written from around 1870 until his death two years later, which, since they were never prepared for publication, remain fragmented and unpublished. Here are a few brief, telling excerpts: "Isn't the Hindu refusal to see a woman eating strangely similar to our reluctance to see someone naked? The underlying sensuality of the thought is visibly the same... Imagine if pineapples were forbidden to be seen, except in pictures, and there was something questionable about that. Suppose no one could see a pineapple unless they were wealthy enough to buy one for themselves, with sight and consumption being tightly linked. What obsession would surround them, what constant yearning, what theft!... Miss —— shared her experiences in Syria and how she walked into a woodcarver's shop where he wouldn’t look at her; she picked up a tool and worked until he finally looked, and they both burst out laughing. Will it not be the same with how we look at women in general? There will come a work—and eventually, we will look up and both laugh... When men truly recognize what's wrong and act with reason and thoughtfulness regarding sexual relations, won’t they insist that young people appreciate women’s beauty from an early age, so that their first feelings are of beauty? Won’t they say, 'We must reject false purity; we need the real thing.' The false has been tried, and it's not good enough; we must cultivate the ability to enjoy beauty; trying to settle for less is detrimental. Every educator should teach: 'This beauty of woman, God’s greatest creation of beauty, it’s good for you to see it; it’s a joy that serves good; all beauty serves this purpose, especially this, since its role is to make you pure. Approach it like you do daily bread, pure air, or a cleansing bath: it is pure for you if you are pure, and it will support your efforts to remain so. But if any of you are impure and turn it into a source of impurity, then you should be ashamed and pray; it is not for you that our life can be shaped; it is for men, not beasts.' This realization must come when men open their eyes and act calmly, logically, and thoughtfully, rather than in sheer panic regarding the moral implications of sexual passion."
Thus Athenæus (Bk. xiii, Ch. XX) says: "In the Island of Chios it is a beautiful sight to go to the gymnasia and the race-courses, and to see the young men wrestling naked with the maidens who are also naked."
Thus Athenæus (Bk. xiii, Ch. XX) says: "In the Island of Chios, it's a lovely sight to visit the gymnasiums and the racetracks, and to watch the young men wrestling naked with the maidens who are also naked."
Augustine (De civitate Dei, lib. ii, cap. XIII) refers to the same point, contrasting the Romans with the Greeks who honored their actors.
Augustine (De civitate Dei, lib. ii, cap. XIII) makes the same point, comparing the Romans with the Greeks, who respected their actors.
See "The Evolution of Modesty" in the first volume of these Studies, where this question of the relationship of nakedness to modesty is fully discussed.
See "The Evolution of Modesty" in the first volume of these Studies, where the issue of how nakedness relates to modesty is fully explored.
C. H. Stratz, Die Körperformen in Kunst und Leben der Japaner, Second edition, Ch. III; id., Frauenkleidung, Third edition, pp. 22, 30.
C. H. Stratz, Die Körperformen in Kunst und Leben der Japaner, Second edition, Ch. III; id., Frauenkleidung, Third edition, pp. 22, 30.
I have not considered it in place here to emphasize the æsthetic influence of familiarity with nakedness. The most æsthetic nations (notably the Greeks and the Japanese) have been those that preserved a certain degree of familiarity with the naked body. "In all arts," Maeterlinck remarks, "civilized peoples have approached or departed from pure beauty according as they approached or departed from the habit of nakedness." Ungewitter insists on the advantage to the artist of being able to study the naked body in movement, and it may be worth mentioning that Fidus (Hugo Höppener), the German artist of to-day who has exerted great influence by his fresh, powerful and yet reverent delineation of the naked human form in all its varying aspects, attributes his inspiration and vision to the fact that, as a pupil of Diefenbach, he was accustomed with his companions to work naked in the solitudes outside Munich which they frequented (F. Enzensberger, "Fidus," Deutsche Kultur, Aug., 1906).
I don't think it's necessary to highlight the aesthetic impact of being familiar with nudity here. The most artistic nations, particularly the Greeks and the Japanese, have maintained a level of comfort with the naked body. "In all arts," Maeterlinck notes, "civilized societies have either moved closer to or further away from pure beauty depending on their relationship with the habit of nudity." Ungewitter emphasizes how beneficial it is for artists to study the naked body in motion. It's also interesting to mention that Fidus (Hugo Höppener), a contemporary German artist known for his fresh, powerful, and respectful portrayal of the naked human form, credits his inspiration and insight to his time studying under Diefenbach. He and his classmates would often work naked in the remote areas outside Munich that they frequented (F. Enzensberger, "Fidus," Deutsche Kultur, Aug., 1906).
CHAPTER IV.
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE.
The Conception of Sexual Love—The Attitude of Mediæval Asceticism—St. Bernard and St. Odo of Cluny—The Ascetic Insistence on the Proximity of the Sexual and Excretory Centres—Love as a Sacrament of Nature—The Idea of the Impurity of Sex in Primitive Religions Generally—Theories of the Origin of This Idea—The Anti-Ascetic Element in the Bible and Early Christianity—Clement of Alexandria—St. Augustine's Attitude—The Recognition of the Sacredness of the Body by Tertullian, Rufinus and Athanasius—The Reformation—The Sexual Instinct regarded as Beastly—The Human Sexual Instinct Not Animal-like—Lust and Love—The Definition of Love—Love and Names for Love Unknown in Some Parts of the World—Romantic Love of Late Development in the White Race—The Mystery of Sexual Desire—Whether Love is a Delusion—The Spiritual as Well as the Physical Structure of the World in Part Built up on Sexual Love—The Testimony of Men of Intellect to the Supremacy of Love.
The Concept of Sexual Love—The Attitude of Medieval Asceticism—St. Bernard and St. Odo of Cluny—The Ascetic Focus on the Close Relationship Between Sexual and Excretory Functions—Love as a Natural Sacrament—The Idea of Sexual Impurity in Most Primitive Religions—Theories About the Origin of This Idea—The Anti-Ascetic Aspect in the Bible and Early Christianity—Clement of Alexandria—St. Augustine's Perspective—Recognition of the Body's Sacredness by Tertullian, Rufinus, and Athanasius—The Reformation—Viewing the Sexual Instinct as Bestial—The Human Sexual Instinct Is Not Like That of Animals—Lust and Love—Defining Love—Terms for Love and Their Absence in Certain Parts of the World—The Late Emergence of Romantic Love in the White Race—The Mystery of Sexual Desire—Is Love Just an Illusion?—The Spiritual and Physical Structures of the World Partly Built on Sexual Love—Insights from Intellectuals on the Dominance of Love.
It will be seen that the preceding discussion of nakedness has a significance beyond what it appeared to possess at the outset. The hygienic value, physically and mentally, of familiarity with nakedness during the early years of life, however considerable it may be, is not the only value which such familiarity possesses. Beyond its æsthetic value, also, there lies in it a moral value, a source of dynamic energy. And now, taking a still further step, we may say that it has a spiritual value in relation to our whole conception of the sexual impulse. Our attitude towards the naked human body is the test of our attitude towards the instinct of sex. If our own and our fellows' bodies seem to us intrinsically shameful or disgusting, nothing will ever really ennoble or purify our conceptions of sexual love. Love craves the flesh, and if the flesh is shameful the lover must be shameful. "Se la cosa amata è vile," as Leonardo da Vinci profoundly said, "l'amante se fa vile." However illogical it may have been, there really was a justification for the old Christian identification of the flesh with the sexual instinct. They stand or fall together; we cannot degrade the one and exalt the other. As our feelings towards nakedness are, so will be our feelings towards love.
It will be clear that the earlier discussion about nudity has a meaning that goes beyond what it seemed to have at first. The health benefits, both physically and mentally, of being familiar with nudity during childhood, no matter how significant they are, aren't the only benefits of this familiarity. Beyond its aesthetic value, there is also a moral value and a source of dynamic energy. Taking it a step further, we can say it has a spiritual value that connects to our entire understanding of sexual desire. Our perspective on the naked human body reflects our view of sexual instinct. If we see our own bodies and those of others as inherently shameful or disgusting, nothing will truly elevate or purify our ideas about sexual love. Love desires the body, and if the body is shameful, the lover must also be shameful. "If the thing loved is vile," as Leonardo da Vinci profoundly stated, "the lover becomes vile." Regardless of how illogical it may seem, there was indeed a reason for the old Christian belief that linked the flesh with sexual instinct. They rise and fall together; we can't degrade one and uplift the other. Our feelings about nudity will shape our feelings about love.
"Man is nothing else than fetid sperm, a sack of dung, the food of worms.... You have never seen a viler dung-hill." Such was the outcome of St. Bernard's cloistered Meditationes Piissimæ.[45] Sometimes, indeed, these mediæval monks would admit that the skin possessed a certain superficial beauty, but they only made that admission in order to emphasize the hideousness of the body when deprived of this film of loveliness, and strained all their perverse intellectual acumen, and their ferocious irony, as they eagerly pointed the finger of mockery at every detail of what seemed to them the pitiful figure of man. St. Odo of Cluny—charming saint as he was and a pioneer in his appreciation of the wild beauty of the Alps he had often traversed—was yet an adept in this art of reviling the beauty of the human body. That beauty only lies in the skin, he insists; if we could see beneath the skin women would arouse nothing but nausea. Their adornments are but blood and mucus and bile. If we refuse to touch dung and phlegm even with a fingertip, how can we desire to embrace a sack of dung?[46] The mediæval monks of the more contemplative order, indeed, often found here a delectable field of meditation, and the Christian world generally was content to accept their opinions in more or less diluted versions, or at all events never made any definite protest against them.
"Man is nothing more than rotten sperm, a bag of waste, the food of worms.... You have never seen a more disgusting pile of filth." This was the conclusion of St. Bernard's cloistered Meditationes Piissimæ.[45] Sometimes, indeed, these medieval monks would acknowledge that the skin had a certain superficial beauty, but they only did that to highlight the grotesqueness of the body when stripped of this layer of attractiveness, using their twisted intellectual skills and harsh irony as they eagerly mocked every detail of what they viewed as the pathetic human condition. St. Odo of Cluny—charming as he was and a trailblazer in his appreciation of the wild beauty of the Alps he often crossed—was nonetheless skilled in this art of denigrating the beauty of the human body. He insisted that beauty resides only in the skin; if we could see beneath the skin, women would inspire nothing but disgust. Their decorations are just blood, mucus, and bile. If we wouldn’t even touch dung and phlegm with a fingertip, how can we possibly want to embrace a bag of waste?[46] The medieval monks of the more contemplative orders often found a rich area for meditation here, and the Christian world generally accepted their views in more or less softened forms, or at least never put up any strong opposition to them.
Even men of science accepted these conceptions and are, indeed, only now beginning to emancipate themselves from such ancient superstitions. R. de Graef in the Preface to his famous treatise on the generative organs of women, De Mulierum Organis Generatione Inservientibus, dedicated to Cosmo III de Medici in 1672, considered it necessary to apologize for the subject of his work. Even a century later, Linnæus in his great work, The System of Nature, dismissed as "abominable" the exact study of the female genitals, although he admitted the scientific interest of such investigations. And if men of science have found it difficult to attain an objective vision of women we cannot be surprised that medieval and still more ancient conceptions have often been subtly mingled with the views of philosophical and semi-philosophical writers.[47]
Even scientists accepted these ideas and are just now starting to free themselves from such old superstitions. R. de Graef, in the Preface to his well-known work on women's reproductive organs, De Mulierum Organis Generatione Inservientibus, dedicated to Cosmo III de Medici in 1672, felt he had to apologize for the topic of his study. Even a hundred years later, Linnæus in his major work, The System of Nature, called the detailed study of female genitals "abominable," although he acknowledged the scientific value of such research. If scientists have struggled to maintain an objective perspective on women, we can't be surprised that medieval and even older ideas have often been subtly mixed with the views of philosophical and semi-philosophical writers.[47]
We may regard as a special variety of the ascetic view of sex,—for the ascetics, as we see, freely but not quite legitimately, based their asceticism largely on æsthetic considerations,—that insistence on the proximity of the sexual to the excretory centres which found expression in the early Church in Augustine's depreciatory assertion: "Inter fæces et urinam nascimur," and still persists among many who by no means always associate it with religious asceticism.[48] "As a result of what ridiculous economy, and of what Mephistophilian irony," asks Tarde,[49] "has Nature imagined that a function so lofty, so worthy of the poetic and philosophical hymns which have celebrated it, only deserved to have its exclusive organ shared with that of the vilest corporal functions?"
We can see a unique version of the ascetic perspective on sex—since ascetics, as we've noted, often based their asceticism on aesthetic reasons, even if it wasn't entirely valid—highlighting the closeness of sexual and excretory functions. This idea was famously expressed in the early Church by Augustine's unsettling statement: "Inter fæces et urinam nascimur," and it still exists among many people who don’t necessarily link it with religious asceticism.[48] "What ridiculous economy and what Mephistophelean irony," Tarde asks,[49] "can explain how Nature decided that such a noble function, deserving of the poetic and philosophical praises that celebrate it, should have its sole organ shared with that of the most base bodily functions?"
It may, however, be pointed out that this view of the matter, however unconsciously, is itself the outcome of the ascetic depreciation of the body. From a scientific point of view, the metabolic processes of the body from one end to the other, whether regarded chemically or psychologically, are all interwoven and all of equal dignity. We cannot separate out any particular chemical or biological process and declare: This is vile. Even what we call excrement still stores up the stuff of our lives. Eating has to some persons seemed a disgusting process. But yet it has been possible to say, with Thoreau, that "the gods have really intended that men should feed divinely, as themselves, on their own nectar and ambrosia.... I have felt that eating became a sacrament, a method of communion, an ecstatic exercise, and a sitting at the communion table of the world."
It can be noted, though perhaps unconsciously, that this perspective stems from a belief that undervalues the body. From a scientific standpoint, the metabolic processes of the body, whether looked at from a chemical or psychological lens, are all interconnected and equally important. We can't single out any specific chemical or biological process and label it as unworthy. Even what we refer to as waste still holds the essence of our lives. To some, eating might seem like a gross act. Yet, one could say, as Thoreau did, that "the gods have really intended that people should feed divinely, just like themselves, on their own nectar and ambrosia.... I have felt that eating becomes a sacrament, a way of communion, an ecstatic practice, and sitting at the communion table of the world."
The sacraments of Nature are in this way everywhere woven into the texture of men's and women's bodies. Lips good to kiss with are indeed first of all chiefly good to eat and drink with. So accumulated and overlapped have the centres of force become in the long course of development, that the mucous membranes of the natural orifices, through the sensitiveness gained in their own offices, all become agents to thrill the soul in the contact of love; it is idle to discriminate high or low, pure or impure; all alike are sanctified already by the extreme unction of Nature. The nose receives the breath of life; the vagina receives the water of life. Ultimately the worth and loveliness of life must be measured by the worth and loveliness for us of the instruments of life. The swelling breasts are such divinely gracious insignia of womanhood because of the potential child that hangs at them and sucks; the large curves of the hips are so voluptuous because of the potential child they clasp within them; there can be no division here, we cannot cut the roots from the tree. The supreme function of manhood—the handing on of the lamp of life to future races—is carried on, it is true, by the same instrument that is the daily conduit of the bladder. It has been said in scorn that we are born between urine and excrement; it may be said, in reverence, that the passage through this channel of birth is a sacrament of Nature's more sacred and significant than men could ever invent.
The natural sacraments are intricately woven into the fabric of men's and women's bodies. Lips that are great for kissing are primarily meant for eating and drinking. Over time, the centers of energy have become so intertwined that the sensitive membranes of natural openings, through their own functions, all become conduits to ignite the soul through love; it’s pointless to distinguish between high or low, pure or impure; all are already sanctified by the ultimate blessing of Nature. The nose takes in the breath of life; the vagina receives the water of life. Ultimately, the value and beauty of life should be measured by how much the instruments of life mean to us. Full breasts symbolize womanhood's divine grace due to the potential child that nourishes from them; the generous curves of the hips are alluring because of the potential child they cradle within; there can be no separation here, we cannot sever the roots from the tree. The primary purpose of manhood—passing on the light of life to future generations—is fulfilled through the same organ that also serves as the body's exit for waste. It has been said mockingly that we are born between urine and excrement; yet, it can be said reverently that the journey through this birth canal is a sacrament of Nature that is more sacred and meaningful than anything men could ever create.
These relationships have been sometimes perceived and their meaning realized by a sort of mystical intuition. We catch glimpses of such an insight now and again, first among the poets and later among the physicians of the Renaissance. In 1664 Rolfincius, in his Ordo et Methods Generationi Partium etc., at the outset of the second Part devoted to the sexual organs of women, sets forth what ancient writers have said of the Eleusinian and other mysteries and the devotion and purity demanded of those who approached these sacred rites. It is so also with us, he continues, in the rites of scientific investigation. "We also operate with sacred things. The organs of sex are to be held among sacred things. They who approach these altars must come with devout minds. Let the profane stand without, and the doors be closed." In those days, even for science, faith and intuition were alone possible. It is only of recent years that the histologist's microscope and the physiological chemist's test-tube have furnished them with a rational basis. It is no longer possible to cut Nature in two and assert that here she is pure and there impure.[50]
These relationships have sometimes been understood, and their significance realized through a kind of mystical intuition. We occasionally catch glimpses of this insight, first among poets and later among the physicians of the Renaissance. In 1664, Rolfincius, in his Ordo et Methods Generationi Partium etc., at the beginning of the second part focused on women's sexual organs, outlines what ancient writers have said about the Eleusinian and other mysteries, and the devotion and purity required of those who participate in these sacred rituals. He continues, "It’s the same for us in the rituals of scientific investigation. We also work with sacred things. The sexual organs are to be considered sacred. Those who approach these altars must do so with reverent minds. Let the uninitiated stay outside, and keep the doors closed." Back then, even in science, faith and intuition were the only options. It’s only in recent years that the histologist's microscope and the physiological chemist's test-tube have provided a rational foundation for their work. It's no longer feasible to divide Nature and claim that this part is pure while that part is impure.[50]
There thus appears to be no adequate ground for agreeing with those who consider that the proximity of the generative and excretory centres is "a stupid bungle of Nature's." An association which is so ancient and primitive in Nature can only seem repulsive to those whose feelings have become morbidly unnatural. It may further be remarked that the anus, which is the more æsthetically unattractive of the excretory centres, is comparatively remote from the sexual centre, and that, as R. Hellmann remarked many years ago in discussing this question (Ueber Geschlechtsfreiheit, p. 82): "In the first place, freshly voided urine has nothing specially unpleasant about it, and in the second place, even if it had, we might reflect that a rosy mouth by no means loses its charm merely because it fails to invite a kiss at the moment when its possessor is vomiting."
There doesn't seem to be a valid reason to agree with those who think that the closeness of the reproductive and waste systems is "a foolish mistake of Nature." An association that is so ancient and basic in Nature can only seem off-putting to those whose feelings have become excessively unnatural. Additionally, it's worth noting that the anus, which is the less appealing of the waste systems, is relatively far from the sexual system. As R. Hellmann pointed out many years ago while discussing this topic (Ueber Geschlechtsfreiheit, p. 82): "First, freshly expelled urine isn’t particularly unpleasant, and second, even if it were, we should remember that a pretty mouth doesn’t lose its charm just because it’s not inviting a kiss at the moment its owner is throwing up."
A clergyman writes suggesting that we may go further and find a positive advantage in this proximity: "I am glad that you do not agree with the man who considered that Nature had bungled by using the genitals for urinary purposes; apart from teleological or theological grounds I could not follow that line of reasoning. I think there is no need for disgust concerning the urinary organs, though I feel that the anus can never be attractive to the normal mind; but the anus is quite separate from the genitals. I would suggest that the proximity serves a good end in making the organs more or less secret except at times of sexual emotion or to those in love. The result is some degree of repulsion at ordinary times and a strong attraction at times of sexual activity. Hence, the ordinary guarding of the parts, from fear of creating disgust, greatly increases their attractiveness at other times when sexual emotion is paramount. Further, the feeling of disgust itself is merely the result of habit and sentiment, however useful it may be, and according to Scripture everything is clean and good. The ascetic feeling of repulsion, if we go back to origin, is due to other than Christian influence. Christianity came out of Judaism which had no sense of the impurity of marriage, for 'unclean' in the Old Testament simply means 'sacred.' The ascetic side of the religion of Christianity is no part of the religion of Christ as it came from the hands of its Founder, and the modern feeling on this matter is a lingering remnant of the heresy of the Manichæans." I may add, however, that, as Northcote points out (Christianity and Sex Problems, p. 14), side by side in the Old Testament with the frank recognition of sexuality, there is a circle of ideas revealing the feeling of impurity in sex and of shame in connection with it. Christianity inherited this mixed feeling. It has really been a widespread and almost universal feeling among the ancient and primitive peoples that there is something impure and sinful in the things of sex, so that those who would lead a religious life must avoid sexual relationships; even in India celibacy has commanded respect (see, e.g., Westermarck, Marriage, pp. 150 et seq.). As to the original foundation of this notion—which it is unnecessary to discuss more fully here—many theories have been put forward; St. Augustine, in his De Civitate Dei, sets forth the ingenious idea that the penis, being liable to spontaneous movements and erections that are not under the control of the will, is a shameful organ and involves the whole sphere of sex in its shame. Westermarck argues that among nearly all peoples there is a feeling against sexual relationship with members of the same family or household, and as sex was thus banished from the sphere of domestic life a notion of its general impurity arose; Northcote points out that from the first it has been necessary to seek concealment for sexual intercourse, because at that moment the couple would be a prey to hostile attacks, and that it was by an easy transition that sex came to be regarded as a thing that ought to be concealed, and, therefore, a sinful thing. (Diderot, in his Supplément au Voyage de Bougainville, had already referred to this motive for seclusion as "the only natural element in modesty.") Crawley has devoted a large part of his suggestive work, The Mystic Rose, to showing that, to savage man, sex is a perilous, dangerous, and enfeebling element in life, and, therefore, sinful.
A clergyman writes suggesting that we might find a positive benefit in this closeness: "I’m glad you don’t agree with the person who thought that Nature made a mistake by using the genitals for urination; aside from teleological or theological reasons, I can’t follow that viewpoint. I don’t think there’s any reason to be disgusted by the urinary organs, although I believe that the anus can never be appealing to a typical mind; still, the anus is quite separate from the genitals. I would argue that this closeness serves a beneficial purpose by keeping these organs mostly private except during sexual excitement or for those in love. This leads to some level of aversion at normal times and a strong attraction during sexual activity. Therefore, the usual covering of these parts, out of fear of causing disgust, significantly enhances their attractiveness at times when sexual feelings are at their peak. Moreover, the feeling of disgust itself is merely a product of habit and sentiment, however practical it may be, and according to Scripture, everything is clean and good. The ascetic feeling of repulsion, when we trace it back, stems from influences other than Christianity. Christianity emerged from Judaism, which did not see marriage as impure, since 'unclean' in the Old Testament simply means 'sacred.' The ascetic aspect of Christianity is not part of the original teachings of Christ as delivered by its Founder, and the modern sentiments regarding this issue are remnants of the heresy of the Manichæans." I should also note, as Northcote points out (Christianity and Sex Problems, p. 14), that alongside the clear acknowledgment of sexuality in the Old Testament, there exists a range of ideas that reflect feelings of impurity and shame connected to sex. Christianity inherited this mixed sentiment. It has been a widespread belief among ancient and primitive cultures that there is something impure and sinful in sexual matters, which led people aspiring for a religious life to avoid sexual relationships; even in India, celibacy has been held in high regard (see, e.g., Westermarck, Marriage, pp. 150 et seq.). Regarding the initial basis of this idea—which doesn’t need further discussion here—many theories have been proposed; St. Augustine, in his De Civitate Dei, presents the clever notion that the penis, due to its tendency to have spontaneous movements and erections beyond voluntary control, is a disgraceful organ that brings shame to the entire realm of sex. Westermarck argues that almost all cultures have a sense of prohibiting sexual relations with family members or those living in the same household, and as sex was thus pushed out of domestic life, the idea of its general impurity emerged; Northcote emphasizes that from early on, it has been necessary to conceal sexual intercourse, because at that moment the couple would be vulnerable to hostile threats, and it easily transitioned into being viewed as something that should be hidden, thus, a sinful thing. (Diderot, in his Supplément au Voyage de Bougainville, already noted this reason for seclusion as "the only natural element in modesty.") Crawley has spent significant time in his thought-provoking work, The Mystic Rose, illustrating that, for primitive man, sex is a risky, dangerous, and weakening part of life, and therefore sinful.
It would, however, be a mistake to think that such men as St. Bernard and St. Odo of Cluny, admirably as they represented the ascetic and even the general Christian views of their own time, are to be regarded as altogether typical exponents of the genuine and primitive Christian view. So far as I have been able to discover, during the first thousand years of Christianity we do not find this concentrated intellectual and emotional ferocity of attack on the body; it only developed at the moment when, with Pope Gregory VII, mediæval Christianity reached the climax of its conquest over the souls of European men, in the establishment of the celibacy of the secular clergy, and the growth of the great cloistered communities of monks in severely regulated and secluded orders.[51] Before that the teachers of asceticism were more concerned to exhort to chastity and modesty than to direct a deliberate and systematic attack on the whole body; they concentrated their attention rather on spiritual virtues than on physical imperfections. And if we go back to the Gospels we find little of the mediæval ascetic spirit in the reported sayings and doings of Jesus, which may rather indeed be said to reveal, on the whole, notwithstanding their underlying asceticism, a certain tenderness and indulgence to the body, while even Paul, though not tender towards the body, exhorts to reverence towards it as a temple of the Holy Spirit.
It would be a mistake to think that figures like St. Bernard and St. Odo of Cluny, admirable as they were in representing the ascetic and overall Christian views of their time, are fully typical examples of the true and early Christian perspective. From what I’ve found, throughout the first thousand years of Christianity, there wasn't this intense intellectual and emotional hostility toward the body; it emerged only when, with Pope Gregory VII, medieval Christianity peaked in its influence over the souls of Europeans, especially with the establishment of celibacy for the secular clergy and the rise of large, strictly regulated monastic communities. Before that, the teachers of asceticism focused more on encouraging chastity and modesty rather than launching an organized attack on the body itself; they directed their efforts more on spiritual virtues than on physical flaws. If we look back at the Gospels, we see little of the medieval ascetic spirit in the words and actions of Jesus, which, despite their underlying asceticism, reveal a certain kindness and acceptance toward the body. Even Paul, although not gentle toward the body, encourages respect for it as a temple of the Holy Spirit.[51]
We cannot expect to find the Fathers of the Church sympathetic towards the spectacle of the naked human body, for their position was based on a revolt against paganism, and paganism had cultivated the body. Nakedness had been more especially associated with the public bath, the gymnasium, and the theatre; in profoundly disapproving of these pagan institutions Christianity discouraged nakedness. The fact that familiarity with nakedness was favorable, rather than opposed, to the chastity to which it attached so much importance, the Church—though indeed at one moment it accepted nakedness in the rite of baptism—was for the most part unable to see if it was indeed a fact which the special conditions of decadent classic life had tended to disguise. But in their decided preference for the dressed over the naked human body the early Christians frequently hesitated to take the further step of asserting that the body is a focus of impurity and that the physical organs of sex are a device of the devil. On the contrary, indeed, some of the most distinguished of the Fathers, especially those of the Eastern Church who had felt the vivifying breath of Greek thought, occasionally expressed themselves on the subject of Nature, sex, and the body in a spirit which would have won the approval of Goethe or Whitman.
We can’t expect the Fathers of the Church to be sympathetic toward the sight of the naked human body, because their stance was rooted in a revolt against paganism, which celebrated the body. Nakedness was mainly linked to the public bath, the gym, and the theater; by strongly disapproving of these pagan institutions, Christianity discouraged nakedness. Although at one point it accepted nakedness in the rite of baptism, the Church mostly failed to recognize that familiarity with nakedness could actually support the chastity it valued so highly, a fact that the specific conditions of decaying classical life may have obscured. However, in their clear preference for clothed bodies over naked ones, early Christians often hesitated to go further and claim that the body is a source of impurity and that sexual organs are a tool of the devil. On the contrary, some of the most notable Fathers, particularly those from the Eastern Church who were influenced by Greek thought, sometimes expressed views on nature, sex, and the body in ways that would have resonated with Goethe or Whitman.
Clement of Alexandria, with all the eccentricities of his over-subtle intellect, was yet the most genuinely Greek of all the Fathers, and it is not surprising that the dying ray of classic light reflected from his mind shed some illumination over this question of sex. He protested, for instance, against that prudery which, as the sun of the classic world set, had begun to overshadow life. "We should not be ashamed to name," he declared, "what God has not been ashamed to create."[52] It was a memorable declaration because, while it accepted the old classic feeling of no shame in the presence of nature, it put that feeling on a new and religious basis harmonious to Christianity. Throughout, though not always quite consistently, Clement defends the body and the functions of sex against those who treated them with contempt. And as the cause of sex is the cause of women he always strongly asserts the dignity of women, and also proclaims the holiness of marriage, a state which he sometimes places above that of virginity.[53]
Clement of Alexandria, with all the quirks of his overly nuanced intellect, was the most authentically Greek of all the early Church Fathers. It's not surprising that the fading light of classical thought from his mind provided some insight into the topic of sex. He protested, for example, against the prudishness that, as the classical world declined, started to cloud people's lives. "We shouldn't be ashamed to name," he stated, "what God has not been ashamed to create." [52] This was a significant statement because, while it embraced the classical idea of having no shame regarding nature, it grounded that idea in a new, religious perspective compatible with Christianity. Throughout his work, even if not always consistently, Clement defends the body and sexual functions against their detractors. Considering that the cause of sex relates to the cause of women, he firmly upholds the dignity of women and also emphasizes the sanctity of marriage, a state he sometimes considers superior to that of virginity. [53]
Unfortunately, it must be said, St. Augustine—another North African, but of Roman Carthage and not of Greek Alexandria—thought that he had a convincing answer to the kind of argument which Clement presented, and so great was the force of his passionate and potent genius that he was able in the end to make his answer prevail. For Augustine sin was hereditary, and sin had its special seat and symbol in the sexual organs; the fact of sin has modified the original divine act of creation, and we cannot treat sex and its organs as though there had been no inherited sin. Our sexual organs, he declares, have become shameful because, through sin, they are now moved by lust. At the same time Augustine by no means takes up the mediæval ascetic position of contemptuous hatred towards the body. Nothing can be further from Odo of Cluny than Augustine's enthusiasm about the body, even about the exquisite harmony of the parts beneath the skin. "I believe it may be concluded," he even says, "that in the creation of the human body beauty was more regarded than necessity. In truth, necessity is a transitory thing, and the time is coming when we shall be able to enjoy one another's beauty without any lust."[54] Even in the sphere of sex he would be willing to admit purity and beauty, apart from the inherited influence of Adam's sin. In Paradise, he says, had Paradise continued, the act of generation would have been as simple and free from shame as the act of the hand in scattering seed on to the earth. "Sexual conjugation would have been under the control of the will without any sexual desire. The semen would be injected into the vagina in as simple a manner as the menstrual fluid is now ejected. There would not have been any words which could be called obscene, but all that might be said of these members would have been as pure as what is said of the other parts of the body."[55] That, however, for Augustine, is what might have been in Paradise where, as he believed, sexual desire had no existence. As things are, he held, we are right to be ashamed, we do well to blush. And it was natural that, as Clement of Alexandria mentions, many heretics should have gone further on this road and believed that while God made man down to the navel, the rest was made by another power; such heretics have their descendants among us even to-day.
Unfortunately, it must be said, St. Augustine—another North African, but from Roman Carthage and not Greek Alexandria—believed he had a strong response to the kind of argument Clement presented, and his passionate and powerful genius was so influential that he ultimately made his answer prevail. For Augustine, sin is hereditary, and it finds its specific seat and symbol in the sexual organs; the existence of sin has altered the original divine act of creation, and we can't view sex and its organs as if there were no inherited sin. He asserts that our sexual organs have become shameful because, due to sin, they are now driven by lust. At the same time, Augustine does not adopt the medieval ascetic stance of contempt for the body. Nothing could be further from Odo of Cluny than Augustine's appreciation for the body, including the beautiful harmony of its parts beneath the skin. "I believe it can be concluded," he even states, "that in the creation of the human body, beauty was more valued than necessity. In truth, necessity is a temporary thing, and a time will come when we can appreciate each other's beauty without any lust."[54] Even when it comes to sex, he would be willing to acknowledge purity and beauty, separate from the inherited influence of Adam's sin. He claims that if Paradise had continued, the act of reproduction would have been as simple and free from shame as the act of handily scattering seeds on the ground. "Sexual union would have been guided by the will without any sexual desire. The semen would be delivered into the vagina as simply as menstrual fluid is now expelled. There would have been no words that could be deemed obscene, and everything said about these organs would be as pure as what is said about the other parts of the body."[55] However, for Augustine, that reflects what could have been in Paradise where, as he believed, sexual desire did not exist. As it stands, he believed we are right to feel shame and do well to blush. It was natural that, as Clement of Alexandria notes, many heretics went even further down this path, believing that while God created man up to the navel, the rest was made by another power; such heretics still have their descendants among us today.
Alike in the Eastern and Western Churches, however, both before and after Augustine, though not so often after, great Fathers and teachers have uttered opinions which recall those of Clement rather than of Augustine. We cannot lay very much weight on the utterance of the extravagant and often contradictory Tertullian, but it is worth noting that, while he declared that woman is the gate of hell, he also said that we must approach Nature with reverence and not with blushes. "Natura veneranda est, non erubescenda." "No Christian author," it has indeed been said, "has so energetically spoken against the heretical contempt of the body as Tertullian. Soul and body, according to Tertullian, are in the closest association. The soul is the life-principle of the body, but there is no activity of the soul which is not manifested and conditioned by the flesh."[56] More weight attaches to Rufinus Tyrannius, the friend and fellow-student of St. Jerome, in the fourth century, who wrote a commentary on the Apostles' Creed, which was greatly esteemed by the early and mediæval Church, and is indeed still valued even to-day. Here, in answer to those who declared that there was obscenity in the fact of Christ's birth through the sexual organs of a woman, Rufinus replies that God created the sexual organs, and that "it is not Nature but merely human opinion which teaches that these parts are obscene. For the rest, all the parts of the body are made from the same clay, whatever differences there may be in their uses and functions."[57] He looks at the matter, we see, piously indeed, but naturally and simply, like Clement, and not, like Augustine, through the distorting medium of a theological system. Athanasius, in the Eastern Church, spoke in the same sense as Rufinus in the Western Church. A certain monk named Amun had been much grieved by the occurrence of seminal emissions during sleep, and he wrote to Athanasius to inquire if such emissions are a sin. In the letter he wrote in reply, Athanasius seeks to reassure Amun. "All things," he tells him, "are pure to the pure. For what, I ask, dear and pious friend, can there be sinful or naturally impure in excrement? Man is the handwork of God. There is certainly nothing in us that is impure."[58] We feel as we read these utterances that the seeds of prudery and pruriency are already alive in the popular mind, but yet we see also that some of the most distinguished thinkers of the early Christian Church, in striking contrast to the more morbid and narrow-minded mediæval ascetics, clearly stood aside from the popular movement. On the whole, they were submerged because Christianity, like Buddhism, had in it from the first a germ that lent itself to ascetic renunciation, and the sexual life is always the first impulse to be sacrificed to the passion for renunciation. But there were other germs also in Christianity, and Luther, who in his own plebeian way asserted the rights of the body, although he broke with mediæval asceticism, by no means thereby cast himself off from the traditions of the early Christian Church.
Both the Eastern and Western Churches, both before and after Augustine—though less often after—have seen great Fathers and teachers express views more reminiscent of Clement than Augustine. While we can’t give too much weight to the extreme and often contradictory statements of Tertullian, it’s interesting to note that although he said women are the gate of hell, he also emphasized that we should approach Nature with respect rather than shame. "Natura veneranda est, non erubescenda." It has even been said that "no Christian author has spoken so forcefully against the heretical disdain for the body as Tertullian." According to Tertullian, the soul and body are deeply connected. The soul is the life force of the body, but every action of the soul is expressed and shaped by the flesh.[56] More significance belongs to Rufinus Tyrannius, a friend and fellow student of St. Jerome in the fourth century, who wrote a commentary on the Apostles' Creed, highly regarded by both the early and medieval Church, and still appreciated today. In response to those who argued that Christ's birth through a woman's sexual organs was obscene, Rufinus stated that God created these organs, and that "it is not Nature but simply human opinion that labels these parts as obscene. All parts of the body are made from the same clay, regardless of their different uses and functions."[57] He approaches the topic reverently, yes, but also in a straightforward and natural way, like Clement, unlike Augustine, who views it through the lens of a theological framework. Athanasius in the Eastern Church echoed Rufinus's sentiments in the Western Church. A monk named Amun was troubled by experiencing seminal emissions during sleep and wrote to Athanasius asking whether this was a sin. In his reply, Athanasius reassures Amun: "All things are pure to the pure. What, my dear and pious friend, can possibly be sinful or naturally impure in excrement? Man is God's creation. There is nothing in us that is impure."[58] As we read these statements, we sense that the seeds of prudery and prurience are already taking root in popular thought. However, we also see that some of the prominent thinkers of the early Christian Church, in stark contrast to the more morbid and narrow-minded medieval ascetics, stood apart from popular sentiment. Overall, they were often overshadowed because Christianity, like Buddhism, contained from the start an inclination toward ascetic renunciation, and the sexual life is typically the first instinct sacrificed in pursuit of such renunciation. Yet, Christianity also had other elements, and Luther, who asserted bodily rights in his own straightforward way, while breaking away from medieval asceticism, did not completely sever ties with the traditions of the early Christian Church.
I have thought it worth while to bring forward this evidence, although I am perfectly well aware that the facts of Nature gain no additional support from the authority of the Fathers or even of the Bible. Nature and humanity existed before the Bible and would continue to exist although the Bible should be forgotten. But the attitude of Christianity on this point has so often been unreservedly condemned that it seems as well to point out that at its finest moments, when it was a young and growing power in the world, the utterances of Christianity were often at one with those of Nature and reason. There are many, it may be added, who find it a matter of consolation that in following the natural and rational path in this matter they are not thereby altogether breaking with the religious traditions of their race.
I thought it was important to present this evidence, even though I know that the facts of nature don’t need the backing of the Church Fathers or the Bible. Nature and humanity existed before the Bible and will continue to exist even if the Bible is forgotten. However, Christianity has often faced strong criticism on this issue, so it’s worth noting that at its best moments—when it was a young and growing force in the world—Christianity often aligned with the principles of nature and reason. Many people find comfort in knowing that by following a natural and rational approach in this matter, they aren’t completely breaking from the religious traditions of their heritage.
It is scarcely necessary to remark that when we turn from Christianity to the other great world-religions, we do not usually meet with so ambiguous an attitude towards sex. The Mahommedans were as emphatic in asserting the sanctity of sex as they were in asserting physical cleanliness; they were prepared to carry the functions of sex into the future life, and were never worried, as Luther and so many other Christians have been, concerning the lack of occupation in Heaven. In India, although India is the home of the most extreme forms of religious asceticism, sexual love has been sanctified and divinized to a greater extent than in any other part of the world. "It seems never to have entered into the heads of the Hindu legislators," said Sir William Jones long since (Works, vol. ii, p. 311), "that anything natural could be offensively obscene, a singularity which pervades all their writings, but is no proof of the depravity of their morals." The sexual act has often had a religious significance in India, and the minutest details of the sexual life and its variations are discussed in Indian erotic treatises in a spirit of gravity, while nowhere else have the anatomical and physiological sexual characters of women been studied with such minute and adoring reverence. "Love in India, both as regards theory and practice," remarks Richard Schmidt (Beiträge zur Indischen Erotik, p. 2) "possesses an importance which it is impossible for us even to conceive."
It’s hardly necessary to point out that when we shift our focus from Christianity to other major world religions, we typically don’t find such a mixed attitude towards sex. Muslims were just as strong in affirming the sanctity of sex as they were in promoting physical cleanliness; they were open to the idea of sexual functions continuing into the afterlife and were never troubled, as Luther and many other Christians have been, about a lack of activities in Heaven. In India, despite being the birthplace of extreme forms of religious asceticism, sexual love has been honored and revered more than in any other region of the world. “It seems never to have occurred to the Hindu lawmakers,” wrote Sir William Jones long ago (Works, vol. ii, p. 311), “that anything natural could be offensively obscene, a unique trait that runs through all their writings, but it’s not evidence of moral depravity.” The sexual act often held religious significance in India, and even the smallest details of sexual life and its variations are discussed in Indian erotic texts with seriousness, while nowhere else have the anatomical and physiological traits of women been examined with such careful and admiring reverence. “Love in India, both in theory and practice,” notes Richard Schmidt (Beiträge zur Indischen Erotik, p. 2), “holds an importance that it’s impossible for us to even grasp.”
In Protestant countries the influence of the Reformation, by rehabilitating sex as natural, indirectly tended to substitute in popular feeling towards sex the opprobrium of sinfulness by the opprobrium of animality. Henceforth the sexual impulse must be disguised or adorned to become respectably human. This may be illustrated by a passage in Pepys's Diary in the seventeenth century. On the morning after the wedding day it was customary to call up new married couples by music; the absence of this music on one occasion (in 1667) seemed to Pepys "as if they had married like dog and bitch." We no longer insist on the music, but the same feeling still exists in the craving for other disguises and adornments for the sexual impulse. We do not always realize that love brings its own sanctity with it.
In Protestant countries, the Reformation's influence, by normalizing sex as a natural part of life, indirectly shifted people's feelings about sex from seeing it as sinful to viewing it as something animalistic. From that point on, the sexual impulse had to be hidden or dressed up to be considered respectable. This can be seen in a passage from Pepys's Diary from the seventeenth century. On the morning after a wedding, it was customary to wake newly married couples with music; one time, the absence of this music in 1667 made Pepys feel "as if they had married like dog and bitch." We don’t insist on the music anymore, but the same sentiment lingers in our desire for other ways to disguise and embellish the sexual impulse. We often overlook the fact that love inherently carries its own sense of dignity.
Nowadays indeed, whenever the repugnance to the sexual side of life manifests itself, the assertion nearly always made is not so much that it is "sinful" as that it is "beastly." It is regarded as that part of man which most closely allies him to the lower animals. It should scarcely be necessary to point out that this is a mistake. On whichever side, indeed, we approach it, the implication that sex in man and animals is identical cannot be borne out. From the point of view of those who accept this identity it would be much more correct to say that men are inferior, rather than on a level with animals, for in animals under natural conditions the sexual instinct is strictly subordinated to reproduction and very little susceptible to deviation, so that from the standpoint of those who wish to minimize sex, animals are nearer to the ideal, and such persons must say with Woods Hutchinson: "Take it altogether, our animal ancestors have quite as good reason to be ashamed of us as we of them." But if we look at the matter from a wider biological standpoint of development, our conclusion must be very different.
Nowadays, whenever there's a strong dislike for the sexual aspect of life, the common claim made is not that it's "sinful," but that it's "beastly." It’s seen as the part of humans that connects us most closely to lower animals. It’s important to note that this view is misguided. No matter how we look at it, the idea that sex in humans and animals is the same doesn't hold up. If we take the perspective of those who believe in this similarity, it would actually be more accurate to say that humans are inferior rather than equal to animals. In the animal kingdom, under natural conditions, the sexual instinct is primarily focused on reproduction and is less prone to variation. Thus, from the viewpoint of those who want to downplay sex, animals are closer to an ideal, leading such individuals to agree with Woods Hutchinson: "Overall, our animal ancestors have just as much reason to be ashamed of us as we are of them." However, if we consider the issue from a broader biological perspective of development, our conclusion must be quite different.
So far from being animal-like, the human impulses of sex are among the least animal-like acquisitions of man. The human sphere of sex differs from the animal sphere of sex to a singularly great extent.[59] Breathing is an animal function and here we cannot compete with birds; locomotion is an animal function and here we cannot equal quadrupeds; we have made no notable advance in our circulatory, digestive, renal, or hepatic functions. Even as regards vision and hearing, there are many animals that are more keen-sighted than man, and many that are capable of hearing sounds that to him are inaudible. But there are no animals in whom the sexual instinct is so sensitive, so highly developed, so varied in its manifestations, so constantly alert, so capable of irradiating the highest and remotest parts of the organism. The sexual activities of man and woman belong not to that lower part of our nature which degrades us to the level of the "brute," but to the higher part which raises us towards all the finest activities and ideals we are capable of. It is true that it is chiefly in the mouths of a few ignorant and ill-bred women that we find sex referred to as "bestial" or "the animal part of our nature."[60] But since women are the mothers and teachers of the human race this is a piece of ignorance and ill-breeding which cannot be too swiftly eradicated.
Far from being animal-like, human sexual impulses are actually some of the least animal-like traits we have. The way humans experience sex is significantly different from the way animals do.[59] Breathing is a basic function, and we can't compete with birds in that regard; movement is another basic function, and we can't match quadrupeds; we haven't made any significant progress in our circulatory, digestive, renal, or liver functions. Even when it comes to sight and hearing, many animals have sharper eyesight and can hear sounds that are inaudible to us. However, no other animals have a sexual instinct that is as sensitive, highly developed, diverse in its expressions, constantly active, and capable of influencing the highest and most distant parts of our being. The sexual experiences of men and women don’t lower us to the level of "brutes," but instead elevate us toward the finest activities and ideals we can achieve. It's true that only a few ignorant and ill-bred women refer to sex as "bestial" or part of our "animal nature."[60] But since women are the mothers and educators of humanity, this ignorance and bad breeding must be eliminated as quickly as possible.
There are some who seem to think that they have held the balance evenly, and finally stated the matter, if they admit that sexual love may be either beautiful or disgusting, and that either view is equally normal and legitimate. "Listen in turn," Tarde remarks, "to two men who, one cold, the other ardent, one chaste, the other in love, both equally educated and large-minded, are estimating the same thing: one judges as disgusting, odious, revolting, and bestial what the other judges to be delicious, exquisite, ineffable, divine. What, for one, is in Christian phraseology, an unforgivable sin, is, for the other, the state of true grace. Acts that for one seem a sad and occasional necessity, stains that must be carefully effaced by long intervals of continence, are for the other the golden nails from which all the rest of conduct and existence is suspended, the things that alone give human life its value."[61] Yet we may well doubt whether both these persons are "equally well-educated and broad-minded." The savage feels that sex is perilous, and he is right. But the person who feels that the sexual impulse is bad, or even low and vulgar, is an absurdity in the universe, an anomaly. He is like those persons in our insane asylums, who feel that the instinct of nutrition is evil and so proceed to starve themselves. They are alike spiritual outcasts in the universe whose children they are. It is another matter when a man declares that, personally, in his own case, he cherishes an ascetic ideal which leads him to restrain, so far as possible, either or both impulses. The man, who is sanely ascetic seeks a discipline which aids the ideal he has personally set before himself. He may still remain theoretically in harmony with the universe to which he belongs. But to pour contempt on the sexual life, to throw the veil of "impurity" over it, is, as Nietzsche declared, the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost of Life.
Some people believe they've found a balanced view when they say that sexual love can be either beautiful or disgusting, and that both perspectives are equally valid. "Listen," Tarde says, "to two men: one is cold, the other passionate; one is chaste, the other in love; both well-educated and open-minded, yet they have completely different opinions about the same thing: one finds it disgusting, horrible, revolting, and primitive, while the other sees it as delightful, exquisite, beyond words, and divine. What one sees as, in Christian terms, an unforgivable sin, the other sees as a state of true grace. Actions that seem like a sad necessity to one, stains that must be removed by long periods of self-control, are viewed by the other as the essential elements of life, the very things that give human existence its value.[61] However, we might question whether these two are truly "equally well-educated and open-minded." The savage understands that sex can be dangerous, and he's correct. But someone who thinks the sexual impulse is bad, or even low and vulgar, is completely out of place in this world, an anomaly. They're like those in mental institutions who believe that the instinct for nourishment is evil and end up starving themselves. They are spiritual outcasts in the universe to which they belong. It’s different when someone says that, for personal reasons, they embrace an ascetic ideal that leads them to restrain both impulses as much as possible. A genuinely ascetic person seeks discipline that aligns with the personal ideal they set for themselves, and they can still remain theoretically in tune with the universe they inhabit. But to disdain the sexual life and label it as "impure" is, as Nietzsche stated, the unforgivable sin against the Spirit of Life.
There are many who seek to conciliate prejudice and reason in their valuation of sex by drawing a sharp distinction between "lust" and "love," rejecting the one and accepting the other. It is quite proper to make such a distinction, but the manner in which it is made will by no means usually bear examination. We have to define what we mean by "lust" and what we mean by "love," and this is not easy if they are regarded as mutually exclusive. It is sometimes said that "lust" must be understood as meaning a reckless indulgence of the sexual impulse without regard to other considerations. So understood, we are quite safe in rejecting it. But that is an entirely arbitrary definition of the word. "Lust" is really a very ambiguous term; it is a good word that has changed its moral values, and therefore we need to define it very carefully before we venture to use it. Properly speaking, "lust" is an entirely colorless word[62] and merely means desire in general and sexual desire in particular; it corresponds to "hunger" or "thirst"; to use it in an offensive sense is much the same as though we should always assume that the word "hungry" had the offensive meaning of "greedy." The result has been that sensitive minds indignantly reject the term "lust" in connection with love.[63] In the early use of our language, "lust," "lusty," and "lustful" conveyed the sense of wholesome and normal sexual vigor; now, with the partial exception of "lusty," they have been so completely degraded to a lower sense that although it would be very convenient to restore them to their original and proper place, which still remains vacant, the attempt at such a restoration scarcely seems a hopeful task. We have so deeply poisoned the springs of feeling in these matters with mediæval ascetic crudities that all our words of sex tend soon to become bespattered with filth; we may pick them up from the mud into which they have fallen and seek to purify them, but to many eyes they will still seem dirty. One result of this tendency is that we have no simple, precise, natural word for the love of the sexes, and are compelled to fall back on the general term, which is so extensive in its range that in English and French and most of the other leading languages of Europe, it is equally correct to "love" God or to "love" eating.
Many people try to balance prejudice and reason in their views on sex by clearly separating "lust" from "love," rejecting one while embracing the other. It makes sense to make such a distinction, but the way it’s done often doesn't hold up to scrutiny. We need to define what we mean by "lust" and what we mean by "love," and that’s not easy if we see them as completely separate. It’s often suggested that "lust" refers to indulging the sexual impulse carelessly, without consideration for other factors. If we understand it this way, we can easily reject it. However, that is just an arbitrary definition. "Lust" is actually a very vague term; it’s a useful word that has changed in moral meaning, so we need to define it carefully before we use it. Properly speaking, "lust" is a neutral term and simply refers to desire in general, particularly sexual desire; it’s like "hunger" or "thirst"; using it in a negative way is similar to always assuming that "hungry" implies "greedy." As a result, sensitive people often reject the term "lust" when discussing love. In early language use, "lust," "lusty," and "lustful" indicated healthy and normal sexual vigor; now, except for "lusty," they've become so degraded that, while it would be very useful to restore their original meaning, attempts to do so seem unlikely to succeed. We have so deeply tainted our feelings in these matters with medieval ascetic ideas that all our terms related to sex quickly become sullied; we may try to clean them off after they’ve fallen in the mud, but to many, they will still look dirty. One outcome of this trend is that we lack a simple, precise, natural word for the love between the sexes and have to rely on a general term that is so broad that in English, French, and most other major European languages, it is equally correct to "love" God or to "love" food.
Love, in the sexual sense, is, summarily considered, a synthesis of lust (in the primitive and uncolored sense of sexual emotion) and friendship. It is incorrect to apply the term "love" in the sexual sense to elementary and uncomplicated sexual desire; it is equally incorrect to apply it to any variety or combination of varieties of friendship. There can be no sexual love without lust; but, on the other hand, until the currents of lust in the organism have been so irradiated as to affect other parts of the psychic organism—at the least the affections and the social feelings—it is not yet sexual love. Lust, the specific sexual impulse, is indeed the primary and essential element in this synthesis, for it alone is adequate to the end of reproduction, not only in animals but in men. But it is not until lust is expanded and irradiated that it develops into the exquisite and enthralling flower of love. We may call to mind what happens among plants: on the one hand we have the lower organisms in which sex is carried on summarily and cryptogamically, never shedding any shower of gorgeous blossoms on the world, and on the other hand the higher plants among whom sex has become phanersgamous and expanded enormously into form and color and fragrance.
Love, in the sexual sense, can be seen as a blend of lust (in its basic, raw form) and friendship. It's inaccurate to use the term "love" in a sexual context to describe simple and straightforward sexual desire; it's similarly wrong to apply it to any type or mix of friendships. There can't be sexual love without lust, but until the waves of lust within a person also influence other emotional and social aspects—at least feelings of affection and social connections—it's not really sexual love yet. Lust, the specific sexual drive, is indeed the key and essential part of this blend, as it alone is sufficient for reproduction, not just in animals but in humans too. However, it’s only when lust grows and deepens that it transforms into the beautiful and captivating experience of love. We can think of what happens in plants: on one hand, there are simpler organisms where sex occurs in a basic and hidden manner, never producing any beautiful flowers for the world, and on the other hand, there are more advanced plants where sex has become vibrant, taking on a variety of shapes, colors, and fragrances.
While "lust" is, of course, known all over the world, and there are everywhere words to designate it, "love" is not universally known, and in many languages there are no words for "love." The failures to find love are often remarkable and unexpected. We may find it where we least expect it. Sexual desire became idealized (as Sergi has pointed out) even by some animals, especially birds, for when a bird pines to death for the loss of its mate this cannot be due to the uncomplicated instinct of sex, but must involve the interweaving of that instinct with the other elements of life to a degree which is rare even among the most civilized men. Some savage races seem to have no fundamental notion of love, and (like the American Nahuas) no primary word for it, while, on the other hand, in Quichua, the language of the ancient Peruvians, there are nearly six hundred combinations of the verb munay, to love. Among some peoples love seems to be confined to the women. Letourneau (L'Evolution Littéraire, p. 529) points out that in various parts of the world women have taken a leading part in creating erotic poetry. It may be mentioned in this connection that suicide from erotic motives among primitive peoples occurs chiefly among women (Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaft, 1899, p. 578). Not a few savages possess love-poems, as, for instance, the Suahali (Velten, in his Prosa und Poesie der Suahali, devotes a section to love-poems reproduced in the Suahali language). D. G. Brinton, in an interesting paper on "The Conception of Love in Some American Languages" (Proceedings American Philosophical Society, vol. xxiii, p. 546, 1886) states that the words for love in these languages reveal four main ways of expressing the conception: (1) inarticulate cries of emotion; (2) assertions of sameness or similarity; (3) assertions of conjunction or union; (4) assertions of a wish, desire, a longing. Brinton adds that "these same notions are those which underlie the majority of the words of love in the great Aryan family of languages." The remarkable fact emerges, however, that the peoples of Aryan tongue were slow in developing their conception of sexual love. Brinton remarks that the American Mayas must be placed above the peoples of early Aryan culture, in that they possessed a radical word for the joy of love which was in significance purely psychical, referring strictly to a mental state, and neither to similarity nor desire. Even the Greeks were late in developing any ideal of sexual love. This has been well brought out by E. F. M. Benecke in his Antimachus of Colophon and the Position of Women in Greek Poetry, a book which contains some hazardous assertions, but is highly instructive from the present point of view. The Greek lyric poets wrote practically no love poems at all to women before Anacreon, and his were only written in old age. True love for the Greeks was nearly always homosexual. The Ionian lyric poets of early Greece regarded woman as only an instrument of pleasure and the founder of the family. Theognis compares marriage to cattle-breeding; Alcman, when he wishes to be complimentary to the Spartan girls, speaks of them as his "female boy-friends." Æschylus makes even a father assume that his daughters will misbehave if left to themselves. There is no sexual love in Sophocles, and in Euripides it is only the women who fall in love. Benecke concludes (p. 67) that in Greece sexual love, down to a comparatively later period, was looked down on, and held to be unworthy of public discussion and representation. It was in Magna Græcia rather than in Greece itself that men took interest in women, and it was not until the Alexandrian period, and notably in Asclepiades, Benecke maintains, that the love of women was regarded as a matter of life and death. Thereafter the conception of sexual love, in its romantic aspects, appears in European life. With the Celtic story of Tristram, as Gaston Paris remarks, it finally appears in the Christian European world of poetry as the chief point in human life, the great motive force of conduct.
While "lust" is recognized worldwide and has names in many languages, "love" isn't as universally understood, and many languages lack a word for it. The challenges in finding love can be surprising. We might discover it where we least expect it. As Sergi pointed out, sexual desire has even been idealized by some animals, especially birds; when a bird dies of grief after losing its mate, it's not just a simple sexual instinct at play, but a blend of that instinct with other life elements, a complexity that's rare even among the most sophisticated humans. Some primitive cultures seem to have no true concept of love, like the American Nahuas who lack a key term for it. Conversely, the Quichua language of ancient Peru has nearly six hundred variations of the verb munay, which means to love. In some cultures, expressions of love appear to be primarily female. Letourneau (in L'Evolution Littéraire, p. 529) notes that women have often been at the forefront of creating erotic poetry around the world. It's worth mentioning that among primitive groups, suicides driven by erotic motives primarily occur among women (Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaft, 1899, p. 578). Many primitive societies have love poems, such as the Suahali, as explained by Velten in his Prosa und Poesie der Suahali, which includes a section on love poems in the Suahali language. D. G. Brinton, in his intriguing article "The Conception of Love in Some American Languages" (Proceedings American Philosophical Society, vol. xxiii, p. 546, 1886), states that the words for love in these languages indicate four main expressions of the concept: (1) inarticulate emotional cries; (2) declarations of similarity; (3) declarations of union; (4) declarations of wish and desire. Brinton adds that "these same ideas are the foundation for most love-related words in the large Aryan language family." Interestingly, the Aryan-speaking peoples were slow to develop their understanding of sexual love. Brinton observes that the American Mayas surpass early Aryan cultures because they had a foundational word for the joy of love that strictly referred to a mental state, not to similarity or desire. Even the Greeks took their time to formulate an ideal of sexual love. E. F. M. Benecke discusses this in his book Antimachus of Colophon and the Position of Women in Greek Poetry, which features some bold statements but is very enlightening in this context. Greek lyric poets hardly wrote any love poems for women before Anacreon, and his were penned only in his later years. For the Greeks, true love was nearly always homosexual. Early Ionian lyric poets viewed women merely as sources of pleasure and family founders. Theognis likened marriage to breeding cattle; Alcman, in complimenting Spartan girls, referred to them as his "female boyfriends." Æschylus even portrayed fathers as assuming their daughters would misbehave if left unsupervised. There’s no presence of sexual love in Sophocles, , and in Euripides, it's primarily the women who experience love. Benecke concludes (p. 67) that in Greece, sexual love was, until a relatively recent time, looked down upon and considered unworthy of public discourse and representation. Interest in women emerged more in Magna Græcia than in Greece itself, and it was during the Alexandrian period—particularly in the works of Asclepiades, according to Benecke—that the love of women was seen as a vital matter. Following this period, the concept of sexual love in its romantic forms began to appear in European life. The Celtic tale of Tristram, as noted by Gaston Paris, finally introduced it into the Christian European poetic tradition as a central theme in human experience and a major driving force of behavior.
Romantic love failed, however, to penetrate the masses in Europe. In the sixteenth century, or whenever it was that the ballad of "Glasgerion" was written, we see it is assumed that a churl's relation to his mistress is confined to the mere act of sexual intercourse; he fails to kiss her on arriving or departing; it is only the knight, the man of upper class, who would think of offering that tender civility. And at the present day in, for instance, the region between East Friesland and the Alps, Bloch states (Sexualleben unserer Zeit, p. 29), following E. H. Meyer, that the word "love" is unknown among the masses, and only its coarse counterpart recognized.
Romantic love, however, didn't really reach the masses in Europe. In the sixteenth century, or whenever the ballad of "Glasgerion" was written, it's clear that a peasant's relationship with his mistress is limited to just sexual intercourse; he doesn't bother to kiss her when he arrives or leaves; it's only the knight, the upper-class man, who thinks to offer that kind of gentle courtesy. And even today, in places like the area between East Friesland and the Alps, Bloch points out (Sexualleben unserer Zeit, p. 29), following E. H. Meyer, that the term "love" is unfamiliar to the masses, with only its crude equivalent recognized.
On the other side of the world, in Japan, sexual love seems to be in as great disrepute as it was in ancient Greece; thus Miss Tsuda, a Japanese head-mistress, and herself a Christian, remarks (as quoted by Mrs. Eraser in World's Work and Play, Dec., 1906): "That word 'love' has been hitherto a word unknown among our girls, in the foreign sense. Duty, submission, kindness—these were the sentiments which a girl was expected to bring to the husband who had been chosen for her—and many happy, harmonious marriages were the result. Now, your dear sentimental foreign women say to our girls: 'It is wicked to marry without love; the obedience to parents in such a case is an outrage against nature and Christianity. If you love a man you must sacrifice everything to marry him.'"
On the other side of the world, in Japan, sexual love seems to be just as frowned upon as it was in ancient Greece; thus Miss Tsuda, a Japanese headmistress and a Christian herself, comments (as quoted by Mrs. Eraser in World's Work and Play, Dec., 1906): "That word 'love' has previously been a term unknown among our girls, in the foreign sense. Duty, submission, kindness—these were the feelings a girl was expected to offer to the husband chosen for her—and many happy, harmonious marriages resulted. Now, your dear sentimental foreign women tell our girls: 'It is wrong to marry without love; obeying your parents in such a case is an offense against nature and Christianity. If you love a man, you must give up everything to marry him.'"
When, however, love is fully developed it becomes an enormously extended, highly complex emotion, and lust, even in the best sense of that word, becomes merely a coördinated element among many other elements. Herbert Spencer, in an interesting passage of his Principles of Psychology (Part IV, Ch. VIII), has analyzed love into as many as nine distinct and important elements: (1) the physical impulse of sex; (2) the feeling for beauty; (3) affection; (4) admiration and respect; (5) love of approbation; (6) self-esteem; (7) proprietary feeling; (8) extended liberty of action from the absence of personal barriers; (9) exaltation of the sympathies. "This passion," he concludes, "fuses into one immense aggregate most of the elementary excitations of which we are capable."
When love fully develops, it transforms into a hugely complex feeling that encompasses many aspects, and lust, even in its most positive form, becomes just one component among many. Herbert Spencer, in an intriguing section of his Principles of Psychology (Part IV, Ch. VIII), breaks down love into nine distinct and important elements: (1) the physical drive for sex; (2) the appreciation of beauty; (3) affection; (4) admiration and respect; (5) the desire for approval; (6) self-esteem; (7) possessiveness; (8) increased freedom of action due to the absence of personal obstacles; (9) an enhancement of empathy. "This passion," he concludes, "merges into one vast whole most of the basic impulses we can experience."
It is scarcely necessary to say that to define sexual love, or even to analyze its components, is by no means to explain its mystery. We seek to satisfy our intelligence by means of a coherent picture of love, but the gulf between that picture and the emotional reality must always be incommensurable and impassable. "There is no word more often pronounced than that of love," wrote Bonstetten many years ago, "yet there is no subject more mysterious. Of that which touches us most nearly we know least. We measure the march of the stars and we do not know how we love." And however expert we have become in detecting and analyzing the causes, the concomitants, and the results of love, we must still make the same confession to-day. We may, as some have done, attempt to explain love as a form of hunger and thirst, or as a force analogous to electricity, or as a kind of magnetism, or as a variety of chemical affinity, or as a vital tropism, but these explanations are nothing more than ways of expressing to ourselves the magnitude of the phenomenon we are in the presence of.
It’s hardly necessary to say that defining sexual love, or even breaking down its parts, doesn’t really explain its mystery. We try to satisfy our need to understand love by fitting it into a clear framework, but the gap between that framework and the emotional reality will always be unmeasurable and insurmountable. "There is no word more frequently spoken than love," wrote Bonstetten many years ago, "yet there is no subject more mysterious. Of what affects us most deeply, we know the least. We can measure the paths of the stars, but we don’t know how we love." And no matter how skilled we’ve become at identifying and analyzing the causes, conditions, and effects of love, we still have to make the same admission today. We might, as some have tried, explain love as a type of hunger and thirst, or as a force similar to electricity, or as a kind of magnetism, or as a variety of chemical attraction, or as a vital instinct, but these explanations are just ways of articulating the vastness of the phenomenon we are experiencing.
What has always baffled men in the contemplation of sexual love is the seeming inadequacy of its cause, the immense discrepancy between the necessarily circumscribed region of mucous membrane which is the final goal of such love and the sea of world-embracing emotions to which it seems as the door, so that, as Remy de Gourmont has said, "the mucous membranes, by an ineffable mystery, enclose in their obscure folds all the riches of the infinite." It is a mystery before which the thinker and the artist are alike overcome. Donnay, in his play L'Escalade, makes a cold and stern man of science, who regards love as a mere mental disorder which can be cured like other disorders, at last fall desperately in love himself. He forces his way into the girl's room, by a ladder, at dead of night, and breaks into a long and passionate speech: "Everything that touches you becomes to me mysterious and sacred. Ah! to think that a thing so well known as a woman's body, which sculptors have modelled, which poets have sung of, which men of science like myself have dissected, that such a thing should suddenly become an unknown mystery and an infinite joy merely because it is the body of one particular woman—what insanity! And yet that is what I feel."[64]
What has always puzzled people when thinking about sexual love is its seemingly insufficient cause—the huge gap between the small area of mucous membrane that love aims for and the vast ocean of all-encompassing emotions it seems to connect to. As Remy de Gourmont said, "the mucous membranes, by an indescribable mystery, contain within their hidden folds all the treasures of the infinite." It’s a mystery that leaves both thinkers and artists in awe. In his play L'Escalade, Donnay portrays a cold and stern scientist who views love as just a mental disorder that can be treated like any other, only to ultimately fall deeply in love himself. He climbs through the girl's window at midnight and delivers an impassioned speech: "Everything that touches you becomes mysterious and sacred to me. Ah! To think that something as familiar as a woman's body, which sculptors have shaped, poets have written about, and scientists like myself have examined, could suddenly transform into an unknown mystery and boundless joy simply because it's the body of one particular woman—what madness! And yet, that's how I feel."[64]
That love is a natural insanity, a temporary delusion which the individual is compelled to suffer for the sake of the race, is indeed an explanation that has suggested itself to many who have been baffled by this mystery. That, as we know, was the explanation offered by Schopenhauer. When a youth and a girl fall into each other's arms in the ecstacy of love they imagine that they are seeking their own happiness. But it is not so, said Schopenhauer; they are deluded by the genius of the race into the belief that they are seeking a personal end in order that they may be induced to effect a far greater impersonal end: the creation of the future race. The intensity of their passion is not the measure of the personal happiness they will secure but the measure of their aptitude for producing offspring. In accepting passion and renouncing the counsels of cautious prudence the youth and the girl are really sacrificing their chances of selfish happiness and fulfilling the larger ends of Nature. As Schopenhauer saw the matter, there was here no vulgar illusion. The lovers thought that they were reaching towards a boundlessly immense personal happiness; they were probably deceived. But they were deceived not because the reality was less than their imagination, but because it was more; instead of pursuing, as they thought, a merely personal end they were carrying on the creative work of the world, a task better left undone, as Schopenhauer viewed it, but a task whose magnitude he fully recognized.[65]
That love is a natural madness, a temporary illusion that a person has to endure for the sake of the species, is an explanation that many have considered when faced with this mystery. This was, as we know, the explanation given by Schopenhauer. When a young man and woman fall into each other's arms in the bliss of love, they believe they are pursuing their own happiness. But it’s not that simple, according to Schopenhauer; they are misled by the drive of the species into thinking they are seeking personal fulfillment so they can be driven to achieve a much larger impersonal goal: the creation of future generations. The intensity of their passion doesn’t reflect the amount of personal happiness they will attain but rather their capability of producing offspring. By embracing passion and ignoring the advice of careful prudence, the young man and woman are actually sacrificing their chances for selfish happiness while fulfilling the greater purposes of Nature. According to Schopenhauer, this situation isn’t just a simple illusion. The lovers believed they were striving for limitless personal happiness; they were likely mistaken. But they were misled not because reality was less than their imagination, but because it was more; instead of chasing a purely personal goal, they were contributing to the creative work of the world, a task Schopenhauer thought was better left undone, but one whose significance he fully recognized.[65]
It must be remembered that in the lower sense of deception, love may be, and frequently is, a delusion. A man may deceive himself, or be deceived by the object of his attraction, concerning the qualities that she possesses or fails to possess. In first love, occurring in youth, such deception is perhaps entirely normal, and in certain suggestible and inflammable types of people it is peculiarly apt to occur. This kind of deception, although far more frequent and conspicuous in matters of love—and more serious because of the tightness of the marriage bond—is liable to occur in any relation of life. For most people, however, and those not the least sane or the least wise, the memory of the exaltation of love, even when the period of that exaltation is over, still remains as, at the least, the memory of one of the most real and essential facts of life.[66]
It should be noted that in a more basic sense, love can be, and often is, an illusion. A man might fool himself or be misled by the person he's attracted to regarding the qualities she has or doesn’t have. In young love, which happens in youth, this kind of self-deception is probably pretty normal, and it’s especially likely to happen with certain suggestible and passionate types of people. While this type of deception is more common and noticeable in romantic relationships—and more serious due to the binding nature of marriage—it can happen in any area of life. For most people, including those who are neither insane nor unwise, the memory of love’s highs, even after those highs have passed, remains one of the most real and important experiences of life.[66]
Some writers seem to confuse the liability in matters of love to deception or disappointment with the larger question of a metaphysical illusion in Schopenhauer's sense. To some extent this confusion perhaps exists in the discussion of love by Renouvier and Prat in La Nouvelle Monadologie (pp. 216 et seq.). In considering whether love is or is not a delusion, they answer that it is or is not according as we are, or are not, dominated by selfishness and injustice. "It was not an essential error which presided over the creation of the idol, for the idol is only what in all things the ideal is. But to realize the ideal in love two persons are needed, and therein is the great difficulty. We are never justified," they conclude, "in casting contempt on our love, or even on its object, for if it is true that we have not gained possession of the sovereign beauty of the world it is equally true that we have not attained a degree of perfection that would have entitled us justly to claim so great a prize." And perhaps most of us, it may be added, must admit in the end, if we are honest with ourselves, that the prizes of love we have gained in the world, whatever their flaws, are far greater than we deserved.
Some writers seem to blur the line between the risks of love—like deception or disappointment—and the bigger issue of a metaphysical illusion in the way Schopenhauer describes it. This confusion might show up in how Renouvier and Prat discuss love in La Nouvelle Monadologie (pp. 216 et seq.). When they consider if love is a delusion, they say it depends on whether we are influenced by selfishness and unfairness. "The creation of the idol wasn't fundamentally mistaken, since the idol reflects what the ideal is in all things. However, to realize the ideal in love, we need two people, and that’s where the real challenge lies. We should never look down on our love or its object, because while it's true we haven't grasped the ultimate beauty of the world, it's also true that we haven't reached a level of perfection that gives us the right to claim such a significant reward." And perhaps most of us, if we're being honest, must admit in the end that the love we have experienced, despite its imperfections, is much more than we actually deserved.
We may well agree that in a certain sense not love alone but all the passions and desires of men are illusions. In that sense the Gospel of Buddha is justified, and we may recognize the inspiration of Shakespeare (in the Tempest) and of Calderon (in La Vida es Sueño), who felt that ultimately the whole world is an insubstantial dream. But short of that large and ultimate vision we cannot accept illusion; we cannot admit that love is a delusion in some special and peculiar sense that men's other cravings and aspirations escape. On the contrary, it is the most solid of realities. All the progressive forms of life are built up on the attraction of sex. If we admit the action of sexual selection—as we can scarcely fail to do if we purge it from its unessential accretions[67]—love has moulded the precise shape and color, the essential beauty, alike of animal and human life.
We can agree that, in a way, not only love but all human passions and desires are illusions. In this sense, the teachings of Buddha are valid, and we can see the influence of Shakespeare (in the Tempest) and Calderon (in La Vida es Sueño), who believed that ultimately the entire world is an insubstantial dream. However, apart from that broad and ultimate perspective, we cannot accept that illusion; we cannot claim that love is a delusion in a unique way that other human cravings and aspirations aren’t. On the contrary, love is the most tangible reality. All progressive forms of life are built upon the attraction of sex. If we acknowledge the role of sexual selection—something we can hardly ignore once we strip away unnecessary complexities[67]—love has shaped the exact form and color, the essential beauty, of both animal and human existence.
If we further reflect that, as many investigators believe, not only the physical structure of life but also its spiritual structure—our social feelings, our morality, our religion, our poetry and art—are, in some degree at least, also built up on the impulse of sex, and would have been, if not non-existent, certainly altogether different had other than sexual methods of propagation prevailed in the world, we may easily realize that we can only fall into confusion by dismissing love as a delusion. The whole edifice of life topples down, for as the idealist Schiller long since said, it is entirely built up on hunger and on love. To look upon love as in any special sense a delusion is merely to fall into the trap of a shallow cynicism. Love is only a delusion in so far as the whole of life is a delusion, and if we accept the fact of life it is unphilosophical to refuse to accept the fact of love.
If we think about it more, as many researchers suggest, not just the physical aspects of life but also its emotional components—our social connections, morality, religion, poetry, and art—are, to some extent, influenced by our sexual instincts. These aspects would be either non-existent or completely different if non-sexual ways of reproduction had dominated the world. Therefore, it's clear that dismissing love as just a fantasy leads us to confusion. The entire foundation of life collapses, because as the idealist Schiller pointed out long ago, it is fundamentally built on hunger and love. Viewing love as a special kind of delusion is simply falling into shallow cynicism. Love is only a delusion in the same way that all of life is a delusion, and if we acknowledge the reality of life, it's unreasonable to reject the reality of love.
It is unnecessary here to magnify the functions of love in the world; it is sufficient to investigate its workings in its own proper sphere. It may, however, be worth while to quote a few expressions of thinkers, belonging to various schools, who have pointed out what seemed to them the far-ranging significance of the sexual emotions for the moral life. "The passions are the heavenly fire which gives life to the moral world," wrote Helvétius long since in De l'Esprit. "The activity of the mind depends on the activity of the passions, and it is at the period of the passions, from the age of twenty-five to thirty-five or forty that men are capable of the greatest efforts of virtue or of genius." "What touches sex," wrote Zola, "touches the centre of social life." Even our regard for the praise and blame of others has a sexual origin, Professor Thomas argues (Psychological Review, Jan., 1904, pp. 61-67), and it is love which is the source of susceptibility generally and of the altruistic side of life. "The appearance of sex," Professor Woods Hutchinson attempts to show ("Love as a Factor in Evolution," Monist, 1898), "the development of maleness and femaleness, was not only the birthplace of affection, the well-spring of all morality, but an enormous economic advantage to the race and an absolute necessity of progress. In it first we find any conscious longing for or active impulse toward a fellow creature." "Were man robbed of the instinct of procreation, and of all that spiritually springs therefrom," exclaimed Maudsley in his Physiology of Mind, "that moment would all poetry, and perhaps also his whole moral sense, be obliterated from his life." "One seems to oneself transfigured, stronger, richer, more complete; one is more complete," says Nietzsche (Der Wille zur Macht, p. 389), "we find here art as an organic function: we find it inlaid in the most angelic instinct of 'love:' we find it as the greatest stimulant of life.... It is not merely that it changes the feeling of values: the lover is worth more, is stronger. In animals this condition produces new weapons, pigments, colors, and forms, above all new movements, new rhythms, a new seductive music. It is not otherwise in man.... Even in art the door is opened to him. If we subtract from lyrical work in words and sounds the suggestions of that intestinal fever, what is left over in poetry and music? L'Art pour l'art perhaps, the quacking virtuosity of cold frogs who perish in their marsh. All the rest is created by love."
It’s not necessary to emphasize the role of love in the world; it's enough to explore how it functions in its own domain. However, it might be useful to cite a few thoughts from various thinkers who have highlighted what they see as the significant impact of sexual emotions on moral life. "The passions are the heavenly fire that brings life to the moral world," wrote Helvétius long ago in De l'Esprit. "The mind’s activity relies on the passions, and it’s during the passionate years, from around twenty-five to thirty-five or forty, that people are capable of their greatest acts of virtue or genius." "What relates to sex," wrote Zola, "relates to the core of social life." Even our concern for how others judge us has a sexual origin, argues Professor Thomas (Psychological Review, Jan., 1904, pp. 61-67), and love is the source of general susceptibility and the altruistic aspects of life. "The emergence of sex," Professor Woods Hutchinson attempts to demonstrate ("Love as a Factor in Evolution," Monist, 1898), "the development of male and female, was not just the birthplace of affection and the root of all morality, but also a massive economic advantage for the human race and a crucial requirement for progress. It was here that we first find any conscious desire or active impulse toward another being." "If humanity were stripped of the instinct to procreate, and everything spiritually arising from it," exclaimed Maudsley in his Physiology of Mind, "that moment would see all poetry, and perhaps his entire moral sense, erased from existence." "One feels transformed, stronger, richer, more complete; one is more complete," says Nietzsche (Der Wille zur Macht, p. 389), "we find here art as an organic function: it is embedded in the most angelic instinct of 'love': it serves as the greatest stimulant of life... It’s not just that it changes our sense of value: the lover is more valuable, stronger. In animals, this state produces new weapons, colors, patterns, and especially new movements, new rhythms, a new enticing music. The same applies to humans... Even in art, the door is opened for him. If we take away the influence of that internal fervor from lyrical creations in words and sounds, what remains in poetry and music? L'Art pour l'art perhaps, the hollow virtuosity of cold frogs that perish in their swamp. Everything else is created by love."
It would be easy to multiply citations tending to show how many diverse thinkers have come to the conclusion that sexual love (including therewith parental and especially maternal love) is the source of the chief manifestations of life. How far they are justified in that conclusion, it is not our business now to inquire.
It would be easy to list examples showing how many different thinkers have concluded that sexual love (including parental and especially maternal love) is the source of the main expressions of life. Whether they are justified in that conclusion is not something we need to examine right now.
It is undoubtedly true that, as we have seen when discussing the erratic and imperfect distribution of the conception of love, and even of words for love, over the world, by no means all people are equally apt for experiencing, even at any time in their lives, the emotions of sexual exaltation. The difference between the knight and the churl still subsists, and both may sometimes be found in all social strata. Even the refinements of sexual enjoyment, it is unnecessary to insist, quite commonly remain on a merely physical basis, and have little effect on the intellectual and emotional nature.[68] But this is not the case with the people who have most powerfully influenced the course of the world's thought and feeling. The personal reality of love, its importance for the individual life, are facts that have been testified to by some of the greatest thinkers, after lives devoted to the attainment of intellectual labor. The experience of Renan, who toward the end of his life set down in his remarkable drama L'Abbesse de Jouarre, his conviction that, even from the point of view of chastity, love is, after all, the supreme thing in the world, is far from standing alone. "Love has always appeared as an inferior mode of human music, ambition as the superior mode," wrote Tarde, the distinguished sociologist, at the end of his life. "But will it always be thus? Are there not reasons for thinking that the future perhaps reserves for us the ineffable surprise of an inversion of that secular order?" Laplace, half an hour before his death, took up a volume of his own Mécanique Celeste, and said: "All that is only trifles, there is nothing true but love." Comte, who had spent his life in building up a Positive Philosophy which should be absolutely real, found (as indeed it may be said the great English Positivist Mill also found) the culmination of all his ideals in a woman, who was, he said, Egeria and Beatrice and Laura in one, and he wrote: "There is nothing real in the world but love. One grows tired of thinking, and even of acting; one never grows tired of loving, nor of saying so. In the worst tortures of affection I have never ceased to feel that the essential of happiness is that the heart should be worthily filled—even with pain, yes, even with pain, the bitterest pain." And Sophie Kowalewsky, after intellectual achievements which have placed her among the most distinguished of her sex, pathetically wrote: "Why can no one love me? I could give more than most women, and yet the most insignificant women are loved and I am not." Love, they all seem to say, is the one thing that is supremely worth while. The greatest and most brilliant of the world's intellectual giants, in their moments of final insight, thus reach the habitual level of the humble and almost anonymous persons, cloistered from the world, who wrote The Imitation of Christ or The Letters of a Portuguese Nun. And how many others!
It’s definitely true that, as we've seen while talking about the uneven and imperfect way love is understood and even how words for love are used across the world, not everyone is equally capable of feeling the intense emotions of sexual excitement, even at different times in their lives. The gap between the noble and the ordinary still exists, and both types of people can be found across all social classes. Even the more refined aspects of sexual pleasure often remain purely physical and have little impact on our intellectual and emotional selves. But this isn’t true for those who have had a significant influence on the direction of human thought and feeling. The personal reality of love, and its significance for an individual’s life, are truths that have been affirmed by some of the greatest thinkers who dedicated their lives to intellectual pursuits. Renan, near the end of his life, captured his belief that, from a perspective of chastity, love is ultimately the most important thing in the world in his remarkable play L'Abbesse de Jouarre. He’s not alone in this thought. Tarde, a distinguished sociologist, wrote at the end of his life, “Love has always been seen as a lesser form of human expression, while ambition is viewed as a higher one. But will it always be this way? Isn’t there a chance that the future might surprise us with a complete reversal of this long-standing view?” Half an hour before he passed away, Laplace picked up a copy of his Mécanique Celeste and said, “All of that is just trivial; nothing is true except for love.” Comte, who dedicated his life to developing a Positive Philosophy grounded in reality, found (just like the great English Positivist Mill) that the pinnacle of all his ideals was captured in a woman whom he described as Egeria, Beatrice, and Laura all in one. He wrote, “Nothing in the world is real except for love. We grow weary of thinking and even of acting; we never tire of loving or expressing that love. Even in the deepest anguish of love, I have always felt that the essence of happiness lies in the heart being filled—yes, even with pain, even with the most bitter pain.” And Sophie Kowalewsky, after achieving intellectual recognition that placed her among the most distinguished women of her time, sadly wrote, “Why can no one love me? I could give more than most women, yet even the most insignificant women are loved while I am not.” They all seem to convey that love is the one thing that truly matters. The greatest and most brilliant minds of our world, in moments of ultimate clarity, reach the same basic understanding as the humble and almost anonymous individuals who wrote The Imitation of Christ or The Letters of a Portuguese Nun. And there are so many others!
Meditationes Piissimæ de Cognitione Humanæ Conditionis, Migne's Patrologia, vol. clxxiv, p. 489, cap. III, "De Dignitate Animæ et Vilitate Corporis." It may be worth while to quote more at length the vigorous language of the original. "Si diligenter consideres quid per os et nares cæterosque corporis meatus egrediatur, vilius sterquilinum numquam vidisti.... Attende, homo, quid fuisti ante ortum, et quid es ab ortu usque ad occasum, atque quid eris post hanc vitam. Profecto fuit quand non eras: postea de vili materia factus, et vilissimo panno involutus, menstruali sanguine in utero materno fuisti nutritus, et tunica tua fuit pellis secundina. Nihil aliud est homo quam sperma fetidum, saccus stercorum, cibus vermium.... Quid superbis, pulvis et cinis, cujus conceptus cula, nasci miseria, vivere pœna, mori angustia?"
Meditationes Piissimæ de Cognitione Humanæ Conditionis, Migne's Patrologia, vol. clxxiv, p. 489, cap. III, "De Dignitate Animæ et Vilitate Corporis." It may be worth quoting more fully the striking language of the original. "If you carefully consider what comes out through the mouth and nostrils and other openings of the body, you've never seen a filthier dump.... Pay attention, human, to what you were before you were born, what you are from birth to death, and what you will be after this life. There was a time when you did not exist: then you were made from worthless material, wrapped in the most disgusting cloth, nourished by menstrual blood in your mother's womb, and your covering was the flesh of the placenta. A human being is nothing more than foul sperm, a bag of excrement, food for worms.... Why do you take pride, dust and ashes, whose conception is misery, whose birth is suffering, whose life is pain, and whose death is anguish?"
See (in Mignes' edition) S. Odonis abbatis Cluniacensis Collationes, lib. ii, cap. IX.
See (in Mignes' edition) S. Odonis abbatis Cluniacensis Collationes, book II, chapter IX.
Dühren (Neue Forshungen über die Marquis de Sade, pp. 432 et seq.) shows how the ascetic view of woman's body persisted, for instance, in Schopenhauer and De Sade.
Dühren (Neue Forschungen über die Marquis de Sade, pp. 432 et seq.) demonstrates how the ascetic perception of women's bodies continued to exist, for example, in Schopenhauer and De Sade.
In "The Evolution of Modesty," in the first volume of these Studies, and again in the fifth volume in discussing urolagnia in the study of "Erotic Symbolism," the mutual reactions of the sexual and excretory centres were fully dealt with.
In "The Evolution of Modesty," in the first volume of these Studies, and again in the fifth volume when discussing urolagnia in the study of "Erotic Symbolism," the interactions between the sexual and excretory centers were thoroughly explored.
"La Morale Sexuelle," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Jan., 1907.
"La Morale Sexuelle," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Jan., 1907.
The above passage, now slightly modified, originally formed an unpublished part of an essay on Walt Whitman in The New Spirit, first issued in 1889.
The above passage, now slightly changed, originally came from an unpublished section of an essay on Walt Whitman in The New Spirit, first released in 1889.
Even in the ninth century, however, when the monastic movement was rapidly developing, there were some who withstood the tendencies of the new ascetics. Thus, in 850, Ratramnus, the monk of Corbie, wrote a treatise (Liber de eo quod Christus ex Virgine natus est) to prove that Mary really gave birth to Jesus through her sexual organs, and not, as some high-strung persons were beginning to think could alone be possible, through the more conventionally decent breasts. The sexual organs were sanctified. "Spiritus sanctus ... et thalamum tanto dignum sponso sanctificavit et portam" (Achery, Spicilegium, vol. i, p. 55).
Even in the ninth century, though, when the monastic movement was rapidly growing, there were some who resisted the trends of the new ascetics. In 850, Ratramnus, a monk from Corbie, wrote a treatise (Liber de eo quod Christus ex Virgine natus est) to prove that Mary truly gave birth to Jesus through her sexual organs, and not, as some overly sensitive people were starting to believe, through the more traditionally acceptable breasts. The sexual organs were sacred. "Spiritus sanctus ... et thalamum tanto dignum sponso sanctificavit et portam" (Achery, Spicilegium, vol. i, p. 55).
Pædagogus, lib. ii, cap. X. Elsewhere (id., lib. ii, Ch. VI) he makes a more detailed statement to the same effect.
Pædagogus, book II, chapter X. In another place (id., book II, chapter VI) he provides a more detailed explanation on the same topic.
See, e.g., Wilhelm Capitaine, Die Moral des Clemens von Alexandrien, pp. 112 et seq.
See, e.g. Wilhelm Capitaine, Die Moral des Clemens von Alexandrien, pp. 112 et seq.
De Civitate Dei, lib. xxii, cap. XXIV. "There is no need," he says again (id., lib. xiv, cap. V) "that in our sins and vices we accuse the nature of the flesh to the injury of the Creator, for in its own kind and degree the flesh is good."
De Civitate Dei, lib. xxii, cap. XXIV. "There's no reason," he says again (id., lib. xiv, cap. V) "for us to blame the nature of the flesh for our sins and vices, which would harm the Creator, because in its own way and to its own extent, the flesh is good."
St. Augustine, De Civitate Dei, lib. xiv, cap. XXIII-XXVI. Chrysostom and Gregory, of Nyssa, thought that in Paradise human beings would have multiplied by special creation, but such is not the accepted Catholic doctrine.
St. Augustine, De Civitate Dei, lib. xiv, cap. XXIII-XXVI. Chrysostom and Gregory of Nyssa believed that in Paradise, humans would have been created through special creation, but this is not the accepted Catholic doctrine.
W. Capitaine, Die Moral des Clemens von Alexandrien, pp. 112 et seq. Without the body, Tertullian declared, there could be no virginity and no salvation. The soul itself is corporeal. He carries, indeed, his idea of the omnipresence of the body to the absurd.
W. Capitaine, Die Moral des Clemens von Alexandrien, pp. 112 et seq. Tertullian asserted that without the body, there can be no virginity and no salvation. The soul itself is physical. He even takes his idea of the body's omnipresence to an absurd level.
Rufinus, Commentarius in Symbolum Apostolorum, cap. XII.
Rufinus, Commentary on the Apostles' Creed, ch. XII.
Migne, Patrologia Græca, vol. xxvi, pp. 1170 et seq.
Migne, Patrologia Græca, vol. 26, pp. 1170 and following
Even in physical conformation the human sexual organs, when compared with those of the lower animals, show marked differences (see "The Mechanism of Detumescence," in the fifth volume of these Studies).
Even in their physical structure, human sexual organs are noticeably different from those of lower animals (see "The Mechanism of Detumescence," in the fifth volume of these Studies).
It may perhaps be as well to point out, with Forel (Die Sexuelle Frage, p. 208), that the word "bestial" is generally used quite incorrectly in this connection. Indeed, not only for the higher, but also for the lower manifestation of the sexual impulse, it would usually be more correct to use instead the qualification "human."
It might be a good idea to note, as Forel mentions (Die Sexuelle Frage, p. 208), that the term "bestial" is often used incorrectly in this context. In fact, for both the higher and lower expressions of the sexual impulse, it would typically be more accurate to use the term "human" instead.
Loc. cit., Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Jan., 1907.
Loc. cit., Archives of Criminal Anthropology, Jan., 1907.
It has, however, become colored and suspect from an early period in the history of Christianity. St. Augustine (De Civitate Dei, lib. xiv, cap. XV), while admitting that libido or lust is merely the generic name for all desire, adds that, as specially applied to the sexual appetite, it is justly and properly mixed up with ideas of shame.
It has, however, been viewed with skepticism and suspicion since the early days of Christianity. St. Augustine (De Civitate Dei, lib. xiv, cap. XV) acknowledges that libido or lust is simply a general term for all desire, but he adds that when it specifically refers to sexual appetite, it is understandably associated with feelings of shame.
Hinton well illustrates this feeling. "We call by the name of lust," he declares in his MSS., "the most simple and natural desires. We might as well term hunger and thirst 'lust' as so call sex-passion, when expressing simply Nature's prompting. We miscall it 'lust,' cruelly libelling those to whom we ascribe it, and introduce absolute disorder. For, by foolishly confounding Nature's demands with lust, we insist upon restraint upon her."
Hinton clearly expresses this idea. "We label the simplest and most natural desires as 'lust,'" he states in his manuscripts. "We could just as easily call hunger and thirst 'lust' as we call sexual passion that, when we’re simply referring to Nature's instincts. We wrongly call it 'lust,' unfairly slandering those we associate it with, and we create total chaos. By mistakenly mixing up Nature's needs with lust, we impose restrictions on her."
Several centuries earlier another French writer, the distinguished physician, A. Laurentius (Des Laurens) in his Historia Anatomica Humani Corporis (lib. viii, Quæstio vii) had likewise puzzled over "the incredible desire of coitus," and asked how it was that "that divine animal, full of reason and judgment, which we call Man, should be attracted to those obscene parts of women, soiled with filth, which are placed, like a sewer, in the lowest part of the body." It is noteworthy that, from the first, and equally among men of religion, men of science, and men of letters, the mystery of this problem has peculiarly appealed to the French mind.
Several centuries earlier, another French writer, the esteemed physician A. Laurentius (Des Laurens), in his Historia Anatomica Humani Corporis (lib. viii, Quæstio vii), also puzzled over "the incredible desire for sex" and questioned how it was that "that divine creature, filled with reason and judgment, which we call Man, could be attracted to those filthy parts of women, soiled by dirt, which are located, like a sewer, at the lowest part of the body." It’s interesting to note that, from the beginning, the mystery of this issue has uniquely captivated the French intellect, spanning across religious figures, scientists, and writers.
Schopenhauer, Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung, vol. ii, pp. 608 et seq.
Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation, vol. ii, pp. 608 and following
"Perhaps there is scarcely a man," wrote Malthus, a clergyman as well as one of the profoundest thinkers of his day (Essay on the Principle of Population, 1798, Ch. XI), "who has once experienced the genuine delight of virtuous love, however great his intellectual pleasures may have been, that does not look back to the period as the sunny spot in his whole life, where his imagination loves to bask, which he recollects and contemplates with the fondest regrets, and which he would most wish to live over again. The superiority of intellectual to sexual pleasures consists rather in their filling up more time, in their having a larger range, and in their being less liable to satiate, than in their being more real and essential."
"Maybe there’s hardly a man," wrote Malthus, a clergyman and one of the deepest thinkers of his time (Essay on the Principle of Population, 1798, Ch. XI), "who has truly experienced the joy of virtuous love, no matter how rich his intellectual pleasures have been, that doesn’t look back on that time as the bright spot of his entire life, where his imagination loves to linger, which he remembers and reflects on with the deepest nostalgia, and which he would most want to experience again. The advantage of intellectual pleasures over sexual ones lies more in how much longer they occupy our time, their wider variety, and their lesser tendency to become unfulfilling, rather than in their being more real and essential."
The whole argument of the fourth volume of these Studies, on "Sexual Selection in Man," points in this direction.
The entire argument of the fourth volume of these Studies, on "Sexual Selection in Man," leads to this conclusion.
"Perhaps most average men," Forel remarks (Die Sexuelle Frage, p. 307), "are but slightly receptive to the intoxication of love; they are at most on the level of the gourmet, which is by no means necessarily an immoral plane, but is certainly not that of poetry."
"Maybe most average guys," Forel notes (Die Sexuelle Frage, p. 307), "are only a little open to the thrill of love; they’re at best on the level of the gourmet, which isn’t necessarily an immoral place, but it definitely isn’t the realm of poetry."
CHAPTER V.
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY.
Chastity Essential to the Dignity of Love—The Eighteenth Century Revolt Against the Ideal of Chastity—Unnatural Forms of Chastity—The Psychological Basis of Asceticism—Asceticism and Chastity as Savage Virtues—The Significance of Tahiti—Chastity Among Barbarous Peoples—Chastity Among the Early Christians—Struggles of the Saints with the Flesh—The Romance of Christian Chastity—Its Decay in Mediæval Times—Aucassin et Nicolette and the new Romance of Chaste Love—The Unchastity of the Northern Barbarians—The Penitentials—Influence of the Renaissance and the Reformation—The Revolt Against Virginity as a Virtue—The Modern Conception of Chastity as a Virtue—The Influences That Favor the Virtue of Chastity—Chastity as a Discipline—The Value of Chastity for the Artist—Potency and Impotence in Popular Estimation—The Correct Definitions of Asceticism and Chastity.
Chastity Essential to the Dignity of Love—The Eighteenth Century Revolt Against the Ideal of Chastity—Unnatural Forms of Chastity—The Psychological Basis of Asceticism—Asceticism and Chastity as Savage Virtues—The Significance of Tahiti—Chastity Among Barbarous Peoples—Chastity Among the Early Christians—Struggles of the Saints with the Flesh—The Romance of Christian Chastity—Its Decay in Medieval Times—Aucassin et Nicolette and the New Romance of Chaste Love—The Unchastity of the Northern Barbarians—The Penitentials—Influence of the Renaissance and the Reformation—The Revolt Against Virginity as a Virtue—The Modern Conception of Chastity as a Virtue—The Influences That Favor the Virtue of Chastity—Chastity as a Discipline—The Value of Chastity for the Artist—Potency and Impotence in Popular Estimation—The Correct Definitions of Asceticism and Chastity.
The supreme importance of chastity, and even of asceticism, has never at any time, or in any greatly vital human society, altogether failed of recognition. Sometimes chastity has been exalted in human estimation, sometimes it has been debased; it has frequently changed the nature of its manifestations; but it has always been there. It is even a part of the beautiful vision of all Nature. "The glory of the world is seen only by a chaste mind," said Thoreau with his fine extravagance. "To whomsoever this fact is not an awful but beautiful mystery there are no flowers in Nature." Without chastity it is impossible to maintain the dignity of sexual love. The society in which its estimation sinks to a minimum is in the last stages of degeneration. Chastity has for sexual love an importance which it can never lose, least of all to-day.
The importance of chastity, and even of self-discipline, has always been recognized in every significant human society. At times, chastity has been praised, and at other times, it has been devalued; its expressions have often evolved, but it has always persisted. It is even part of the beautiful vision of all Nature. "The glory of the world is seen only by a chaste mind," Thoreau said with his characteristic flair. "For those who do not see this fact as an awe-inspiring but beautiful mystery, there are no flowers in Nature." Without chastity, it is impossible to uphold the dignity of sexual love. A society that undervalues it is in the final stages of decline. Chastity holds an importance for sexual love that it can never lose, especially today.
It is quite true that during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries many men of high moral and intellectual distinction pronounced very decidedly their condemnation of the ideal of chastity. The great Buffon refused to recognize chastity as an ideal and referred scornfully to "that kind of insanity which has turned a girl's virginity into a thing with a real existence," while William Morris, in his downright manner, once declared at a meeting of the Fellowship of the New Life, that asceticism is "the most disgusting vice that afflicted human nature." Blake, though he seems always to have been a strictly moral man in the most conventional sense, felt nothing but contempt for chastity, and sometimes confers a kind of religious solemnity on the idea of unchastity. Shelley, who may have been unwise in sexual matters but can scarcely be called unchaste, also often seems to associate religion and morality, not with chastity, but with unchastity, and much the same may be said of James Hinton.[69]
It is true that during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, many men of high moral and intellectual distinction strongly condemned the ideal of chastity. The great Buffon refused to see chastity as an ideal and scornfully referred to "that kind of insanity that has turned a girl's virginity into something with real existence." Meanwhile, William Morris, in his direct way, once stated at a meeting of the Fellowship of the New Life that asceticism is "the most disgusting vice that afflicted human nature." Blake, who always seemed to be a strictly moral man in the conventional sense, felt nothing but contempt for chastity and sometimes gave a kind of religious significance to the idea of unchastity. Shelley, who may have been imprudent in sexual matters but can hardly be called unchaste, also seemed to link religion and morality not with chastity but with unchastity, and much the same can be said of James Hinton.[69]
But all these men—with other men of high character who have pronounced similar opinions—were reacting against false, decayed, and conventional forms of chastity. They were not rebelling against an ideal; they were seeking to set up an ideal in a place where they realized that a mischievous pretense was masquerading as a moral reality.
But all these men—along with other principled individuals who shared the same views—were pushing back against outdated, false, and traditional views of chastity. They weren't fighting against an ideal; they were trying to establish an ideal in a situation where they recognized that a harmful facade was pretending to be a moral truth.
We cannot accept an ideal of chastity unless we ruthlessly cast aside all the unnatural and empty forms of chastity. If chastity is merely a fatiguing effort to emulate in the sexual sphere the exploits of professional fasting men, an effort using up all the energies of the organism and resulting in no achievement greater than the abstinence it involves, then it is surely an unworthy ideal. If it is a feeble submission to an external conventional law which there is no courage to break, then it is not an ideal at all. If it is a rule of morality imposed by one sex on the opposite sex, then it is an injustice and provocative of revolt. If it is an abstinence from the usual forms of sexuality, replaced by more abnormal or more secret forms, then it is simply an unreality based on misconception. And if it is merely an external acceptance of conventions without any further acceptance, even in act, then it is a contemptible farce. These are the forms of chastity which during the past two centuries many fine-souled men have vigorously rejected.
We can't embrace an ideal of chastity unless we brutally discard all the unnatural and hollow versions of it. If chastity is just a tiresome attempt to mirror the practices of professional abstainers, draining all the energy of the body without achieving anything more than mere abstinence, then it's certainly not a worthy ideal. If it's a weak compliance with an external societal rule that we lack the courage to break, then it's not an ideal at all. If it's a moral guideline enforced by one gender on the other, then it's unfair and likely to spark rebellion. If it's simply avoiding typical sexual expressions in favor of more bizarre or secretive ones, then it's just a fantasy built on misunderstanding. And if it's merely an outward acceptance of social norms without any genuine ____________ acceptance, even in action, then it's a pathetic joke. These are the versions of chastity that many noble-minded individuals have strongly rejected over the past two centuries.
The fact that chastity, or asceticism, is a real virtue, with fine uses, becomes evident when we realize that it has flourished at all times, in connection with all kinds of religions and the most various moral codes. We find it pronounced among savages, and the special virtues of savagery—hardness, endurance, and bravery—are intimately connected with the cultivation of chastity and asceticism.[70] It is true that savages seldom have any ideal of chastity in the degraded modern sense, as a state of permanent abstinence from sexual relationships having a merit of its own apart from any use. They esteem chastity for its values, magical or real, as a method of self-control which contributes towards the attainment of important ends. The ability to bear pain and restraint is nearly always a main element in the initiation of youths at puberty. The custom of refraining from sexual intercourse before expeditions of war and hunting, and other serious concerns involving great muscular and mental strain, whatever the motives assigned, is a sagacious method of economizing energy. The extremely widespread habit of avoiding intercourse during pregnancy and suckling, again, is an admirable precaution in sexual hygiene which it is extremely difficult to obtain the observance of in civilization. Savages, also, are perfectly well aware how valuable sexual continence is, in combination with fasting and solitude, to acquire the aptitude for abnormal spiritual powers.
Chastity, or self-discipline, is a genuine virtue with valuable applications, which becomes clear when we see how it has thrived throughout history, linked to various religions and moral codes. We observe it among primitive societies, where qualities like toughness, endurance, and courage are closely tied to the practice of chastity and self-denial. It's true that these societies rarely have an ideal of chastity in the degraded modern sense, where permanent abstinence from sexual relationships is viewed as a virtue in itself. Instead, they value chastity for its practical benefits, whether magical or real, as a form of self-control that aids in achieving important goals. The ability to endure pain and restraint is often a key part of boys' initiation rituals at puberty. The practice of avoiding sexual intercourse before going to war or on hunts, or during other serious activities that require great physical and mental effort, is a wise way to conserve energy. The common practice of refraining from intercourse during pregnancy and breastfeeding is a commendable approach to sexual health, which is hard to enforce in modern society. Additionally, these societies recognize the importance of sexual abstinence, combined with fasting and solitude, for developing extraordinary spiritual abilities.[70]
Thus C. Hill Tout (Journal Anthropological Institute, Jan.-June, 1905, pp. 143-145) gives an interesting account of the self-discipline undergone by those among the Salish Indians of British Columbia, who seek to acquire shamanistic powers. The psychic effects of such training on these men, says Hill Tout, is undoubted. "It enables them to undertake and accomplish feats of abnormal strength, agility, and endurance; and gives them at times, besides a general exaltation of the senses, undoubted clairvoyant and other supernormal mental and bodily powers." At the other end of the world, as shown by the Reports of the Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits (vol. v, p. 321), closely analogous methods of obtaining supernatural powers are also customary.
Thus C. Hill Tout (Journal Anthropological Institute, Jan.-June, 1905, pp. 143-145) provides an interesting account of the self-discipline practiced by those among the Salish Indians of British Columbia who aim to gain shamanistic abilities. The psychological effects of this training on these men, according to Hill Tout, are undeniable. "It enables them to perform and achieve feats of extraordinary strength, agility, and endurance; and it occasionally grants them not only a heightened sensitivity of the senses but also clear insights and other extraordinary mental and physical capabilities." On the other side of the world, as illustrated by the Reports of the Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits (vol. v, p. 321), similar methods to gain supernatural powers are also common.
There are fundamental psychological reasons for the wide prevalence of asceticism and for the remarkable manner in which it involves self-mortification, even acute physical suffering. Such pain is an actual psychic stimulant, more especially in slightly neurotic persons. This is well illustrated by a young woman, a patient of Janet's, who suffered from mental depression and was accustomed to find relief by slightly burning her hands and feet. She herself clearly understood the nature of her actions. "I feel," she said, "that I make an effort when I hold my hands on the stove, or when I pour boiling water on my feet; it is a violent act and it awakens me: I feel that it is really done by myself and not by another.... To make a mental effort by itself is too difficult for me; I have to supplement it by physical efforts. I have not succeeded in any other way; that is all: when I brace myself up to burn myself I make my mind freer, lighter and more active for several days. Why do you speak of my desire for mortification? My parents believe that, but it is absurd. It would be a mortification if it brought any suffering, but I enjoy this suffering, it gives me back my mind; it prevents my thoughts from stopping: what would one not do to attain such happiness?" (P. Janet, "The Pathogenesis of Some Impulsions," Journal of Abnormal Psychology, April, 1906.) If we understand this psychological process we may realize how it is that even in the higher religions, however else they may differ, the practical value of asceticism and mortification as the necessary door to the most exalted religious state is almost universally recognized, and with complete cheerfulness. "Asceticism and ecstacy are inseparable," as Probst-Biraben remarks at the outset of an interesting paper on Mahommedan mysticism ("L'Extase dans le Mysticisme Musulman," Revue Philosophique, Nov., 1906). Asceticism is the necessary ante-chamber to spiritual perfection.
There are basic psychological reasons for the widespread practice of asceticism and the surprising way it includes self-denial, even intense physical pain. Such suffering acts as a real mental stimulant, especially in slightly neurotic individuals. This is clearly shown by a young woman, a patient of Janet's, who dealt with depression and would find relief by lightly burning her hands and feet. She understood her actions well. "I feel," she said, "that I make an effort when I hold my hands on the stove or pour boiling water on my feet; it’s a forceful act and it wakes me up: I realize that it’s really me doing it and not someone else.... Making a mental effort alone is too hard for me; I have to back it up with physical efforts. I haven't succeeded any other way; that’s all: when I push myself to burn myself, I feel my mind becomes freer, lighter, and more active for several days. Why do you talk about my desire for self-denial? My parents think that, but it’s ridiculous. It would be self-denial if it caused me any pain, but I actually enjoy this pain; it clears my mind and keeps my thoughts flowing: what wouldn’t one do to achieve such happiness?" (P. Janet, "The Pathogenesis of Some Impulsions," Journal of Abnormal Psychology, April, 1906.) If we understand this psychological process, we can see why even in the major religions, despite their differences, the practical value of asceticism and self-denial as a necessary path to the highest religious state is almost universally acknowledged, and with complete acceptance. "Asceticism and ecstasy are inseparable," as Probst-Biraben notes at the beginning of an insightful paper on Islamic mysticism ("L'Extase dans le Mysticisme Musulman," Revue Philosophique, Nov., 1906). Asceticism is the essential gateway to spiritual perfection.
It thus happens that savage peoples largely base their often admirable enforcement of asceticism not on the practical grounds that would justify it, but on religious grounds that with the growth of intelligence fall into discredit.[71] Even, however, when the scrupulous observances of savages, whether in sexual or in non-sexual matters, are without any obviously sound basis it cannot be said that they are entirely useless if they tend to encourage self-control and the sense of reverence.[72] The would-be intelligent and practical peoples who cast aside primitive observances because they seem baseless or even ridiculous, need a still finer practical sense and still greater intelligence in order to realize that, though the reasons for the observances have been wrong, yet the observances themselves may have been necessary methods of attaining personal and social efficiency. It constantly happens in the course of civilization that we have to revive old observances and furnish them with new reasons.
Savage peoples often base their impressive commitment to asceticism more on religious beliefs than on practical reasons that would justify it, and as intelligence grows, these beliefs lose credibility. Even when the strict practices of these groups, whether related to sex or not, lack a solid basis, they can't be considered completely pointless if they promote self-control and a sense of reverence. Those who consider themselves intelligent and practical and dismiss primitive practices because they seem unfounded or silly actually need a sharper practical sense and greater intelligence to understand that, although the reasons behind these practices may be flawed, the practices themselves might have been necessary ways to achieve personal and social effectiveness. Throughout civilization, it often becomes necessary to bring back old practices and give them new justifications.
In considering the moral quality of chastity among savages, we must carefully separate that chastity which among semi-primitive peoples is exclusively imposed upon women. This has no moral quality whatever, for it is not exercised as a useful discipline, but merely enforced in order to heighten the economic and erotic value of the women. Many authorities believe that the regard for women as property furnishes the true reason for the widespread insistence on virginity in brides. Thus A. B. Ellis, speaking of the West Coast of Africa (Yoruba-Speaking Peoples, pp. 183 et seq.), says that girls of good class are betrothed as mere children, and are carefully guarded from men, while girls of lower class are seldom betrothed, and may lead any life they choose. "In this custom of infant or child betrothals we probably find the key to that curious regard for ante-nuptial chastity found not only among the tribes of the Gold and Slave Coasts, but also among many other uncivilized peoples in different parts of the world." In a very different part of the world, in Northern Siberia, "the Yakuts," Sieroshevski states (Journal Anthropological Institute, Jan.-June, 1901, p. 96), "see nothing immoral in illicit love, providing only that nobody suffers material loss by it. It is true that parents will scold a daughter if her conduct threatens to deprive them of their gain from the bride-price; but if once they have lost hope of marrying her off, or if the bride-price has been spent, they manifest complete indifference to her conduct. Maidens who no longer expect marriage are not restrained at all, if they observe decorum it is only out of respect to custom." Westermarck (History of Human Marriage, pp. 123 et seq.) also shows the connection between the high estimates of virginity and the conception of woman as property, and returning to the question in his later work, The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas (vol. ii, Ch. XLII), after pointing out that "marriage by purchase has thus raised the standard of female chastity," he refers (p. 437) to the significant fact that the seduction of an unmarried girl "is chiefly, if not exclusively, regarded as an offense against the parents or family of the girl," and there is no indication that it is ever held by savages that any wrong has been done to the woman herself. Westermarck recognizes at the same time that the preference given to virgins has also a biological basis in the instinctive masculine feeling of jealousy in regard to women who have had intercourse with other men, and especially in the erotic charm for men of the emotional state of shyness which accompanies virginity. (This point has been dealt with in the discussion of Modesty in vol. i of these Studies.)
In looking at the moral aspect of chastity among primitive cultures, we need to clearly distinguish between the chastity that is enforced solely on women in semi-primitive societies. This kind of chastity has no moral significance because it’s not practiced as a meaningful discipline, but instead it’s imposed to enhance the economic and sexual value of women. Many experts argue that the view of women as property is the real reason why there is such a strong emphasis on virginity in brides. For example, A. B. Ellis notes regarding the West Coast of Africa (Yoruba-Speaking Peoples, pp. 183 et seq.) that girls from respectable families are betrothed as young children and are closely protected from men, while girls from lower classes rarely get betrothed and can live however they want. "In this practice of child betrothals, we likely find the key to the peculiar emphasis on pre-marital chastity observed not just among the tribes of the Gold and Slave Coasts, but also among many other uncivilized groups across the globe." In a completely different region, in Northern Siberia, "the Yakuts," Sieroshevski mentions (Journal Anthropological Institute, Jan.-June, 1901, p. 96), "do not see anything immoral in extramarital relationships as long as no one suffers a financial loss because of it. While parents may scold a daughter if her actions risk reducing their bride-price earnings, once they lose hope of marrying her off or if the bride-price has been spent, they show complete indifference to her behavior. Young women who no longer anticipate marriage are not held back at all; if they act decently, it’s just out of respect for tradition." Westermarck (History of Human Marriage, pp. 123 et seq.) also illustrates the link between the high regard for virginity and the perception of women as property. In his later work, The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas (vol. ii, Ch. XLII), after noting that "marriage by purchase has increased the expectations for female chastity," he points out (p. 437) the important fact that the seduction of an unmarried girl "is primarily, if not exclusively, seen as an offense against her parents or family," with no suggestion that any wrong has been done to the woman herself. Westermarck also acknowledges that the preference for virgins has a biological basis in men's instinctive jealousy over women who have been with other men, particularly in the erotic appeal of the emotional state of shyness that comes with virginity. (This point has been covered in the discussion of Modesty in vol. i of these Studies.)
It is scarcely necessary to add that the insistence on the virginity of brides is by no means confined, as A. B. Ellis seems to imply, to uncivilized peoples, nor is it necessary that wife-purchase should always accompany it. The preference still persists, not only by virtue of its natural biological basis, but as a refinement and extension of the idea of woman as property, among those civilized peoples who, like ourselves, inherit a form of marriage to some extent based on wife-purchase. Under such conditions a woman's chastity has an important social function to perform, being, as Mrs. Mona Caird has put it (The Morality of Marriage, 1897, p. 88), the watch-dog of man's property. The fact that no element of ideal morality enters into the question is shown by the usual absence of any demand for ante-nuptial chastity in the husband.
It's hardly necessary to mention that the emphasis on brides’ virginity isn't limited, as A. B. Ellis suggests, to uncivilized societies, nor does it always require wife-purchase. This preference still exists, not only because of its natural biological basis but also as a refinement and expansion of the idea of women as property, among those civilized societies that, like ours, have inherited a form of marriage that is somewhat based on wife-purchase. In such situations, a woman’s chastity plays a significant social role, serving, as Mrs. Mona Caird noted (The Morality of Marriage, 1897, p. 88), as the protector of man’s property. The absence of ideal morality in this discussion is evident in the typical lack of any expectation for pre-marital chastity in men.
It must not be supposed that when, as is most usually the case, there is no complete and permanent prohibition of extra-nuptial intercourse, mere unrestrained license prevails. That has probably never happened anywhere among uncontaminated savages. The rule probably is that, as among the tribes at Torres Straits (Reports Cambridge Anthropological Expedition, vol. v, p. 275), there is no complete continence before marriage, but neither is there any unbridled license.
It shouldn't be assumed that when, as is usually the case, there's no complete and permanent ban on sexual activity outside of marriage, complete freedom exists. This has likely never occurred among untainted indigenous groups. The norm seems to be that, similar to the tribes at Torres Straits (Reports Cambridge Anthropological Expedition, vol. v, p. 275), there isn't total abstinence before marriage, but there also isn't any unrestricted freedom.
The example of Tahiti is instructive as regards the prevalence of chastity among peoples of what we generally consider low grades of civilization. Tahiti, according to all who have visited it, from the earliest explorers down to that distinguished American surgeon, the late Dr. Nicholas Senn, is an island possessing qualities of natural beauty and climatic excellence, which it is impossible to rate too highly. "I seemed to be transported into the garden of Eden," said Bougainville in 1768. But, mainly under the influence of the early English missionaries who held ideas of theoretical morality totally alien to those of the inhabitants of the islands, the Tahitians have become the stock example of a population given over to licentiousness and all its awful results. Thus, in his valuable Polynesian Researches (second edition, 1832, vol. i, Ch. IX) William Ellis says that the Tahitians practiced "the worst pollutions of which it was possible for man to be guilty," though not specifying them. When, however, we carefully examine the narratives of the early visitors to Tahiti, before the population became contaminated by contact with Europeans, it becomes clear that this view needs serious modification. "The great plenty of good and nourishing food," wrote an early explorer, J. R. Forster (Observations Made on a Voyage Round the World, 1778, pp. 231, 409, 422), "together with the fine climate, the beauty and unreserved behavior of their females, invite them powerfully to the enjoyments and pleasures of love. They begin very early to abandon themselves to the most libidinous scenes. Their songs, their dances, and dramatic performances, breathe a spirit of luxury." Yet he is over and over again impelled to set down facts which bear testimony to the virtues of these people. Though rather effeminate in build, they are athletic, he says. Moreover, in their wars they fight with great bravery and valor. They are, for the rest, hospitable. He remarks that they treat their married women with great respect, and that women generally are nearly the equals of men, both in intelligence and in social position; he gives a charming description of the women. "In short, their character," Forster concludes, "is as amiable as that of any nation that ever came unimproved out of the hands of Nature," and he remarks that, as was felt by the South Sea peoples generally, "whenever we came to this happy island we could evidently perceive the opulence and happiness of its inhabitants." It is noteworthy also, that, notwithstanding the high importance which the Tahitians attached to the erotic side of life, they were not deficient in regard for chastity. When Cook, who visited Tahiti many times, was among "this benevolent humane" people, he noted their esteem for chastity, and found that not only were betrothed girls strictly guarded before marriage, but that men also who had refrained from sexual intercourse for some time before marriage were believed to pass at death immediately into the abode of the blessed. "Their behavior, on all occasions, seems to indicate a great openness and generosity of disposition. I never saw them, in any misfortune, labor under the appearance of anxiety, after the critical moment was past. Neither does care ever seem to wrinkle their brow. On the contrary, even the approach of death does not appear to alter their usual vivacity" (Third Voyage of Discovery, 1776-1780). Turnbull visited Tahiti at a later period (A Voyage Round the World in 1800, etc., pp. 374-5), but while finding all sorts of vices among them, he is yet compelled to admit their virtues: "Their manner of addressing strangers, from the king to the meanest subject, is courteous and affable in the extreme.... They certainly live amongst each other in more harmony than is usual amongst Europeans. During the whole time I was amongst them I never saw such a thing as a battle.... I never remember to have seen an Otaheitean out of temper. They jest upon each other with greater freedom than the Europeans, but these jests are never taken in ill part.... With regard to food, it is, I believe, an invariable law in Otaheite that whatever is possessed by one is common to all." Thus we see that even among a people who are commonly referred to as the supreme example of a nation given up to uncontrolled licentiousness, the claims of chastity were admitted, and many other virtues vigorously flourished. The Tahitians were brave, hospitable, self-controlled, courteous, considerate to the needs of others, chivalrous to women, even appreciative of the advantages of sexual restraint, to an extent which has rarely, if ever, been known among those Christian nations which have looked down upon them as abandoned to unspeakable vices.
The example of Tahiti is insightful when it comes to the prevalence of chastity among people we usually consider to be of low levels of civilization. Tahiti, as noted by everyone who has visited it—from the earliest explorers to the renowned American surgeon, the late Dr. Nicholas Senn—is an island with incredible natural beauty and an amazing climate, qualities that cannot be overstated. "I felt as if I was transported to the Garden of Eden," said Bougainville in 1768. However, largely due to the influence of early English missionaries who had completely different moral views than the locals, the Tahitians have become the standard example of a population given to promiscuity and all its terrible consequences. In his valuable Polynesian Researches (second edition, 1832, vol. i, Ch. IX), William Ellis states that the Tahitians practiced "the worst pollutions imaginable," though he does not specify what they are. Yet, when we carefully examine the accounts of early visitors to Tahiti, before the population was impacted by contact with Europeans, it's clear that this perspective needs significant adjustment. "The great abundance of nourishing food," wrote early explorer J. R. Forster (Observations Made on a Voyage Round the World, 1778, pp. 231, 409, 422), "combined with the fine climate and the beauty and open nature of their women, strongly invites them to the pleasures of love. They begin very early to indulge in the most lustful scenes. Their songs, dances, and performances radiate a spirit of luxury." Nevertheless, he is repeatedly compelled to record facts that reflect the virtues of these people. Although he describes them as somewhat effeminate, he notes they are athletic. Additionally, in their conflicts, they fight with great bravery and valor. They are also very hospitable. He observes that they treat their married women with a lot of respect, and in general, women are almost equal to men in intelligence and social standing; he provides a delightful description of the women. "In summary, their character," Forster concludes, "is as admirable as that of any nation that has ever remained untouched by civilization," and he remarks that, as felt by the South Sea peoples in general, "whenever we arrived on this blessed island, we could clearly perceive the wealth and happiness of its inhabitants." It’s also noteworthy that, despite the high value the Tahitians placed on the erotic aspects of life, they were not lacking in regard for chastity. When Cook, who visited Tahiti many times, was among "this kind-hearted people," he noted their respect for chastity and found that not only were engaged girls closely guarded before marriage, but men who had abstained from sexual relations for some time were believed to immediately enter the realm of the blessed after death. "Their behavior, at all times, seems to show a great openness and generosity of spirit. I never saw them, in any misfortune, exhibit anxiety after the crucial moment was past. Nor does worry ever seem to crease their brows. On the contrary, even the approach of death does not seem to affect their usual liveliness" (Third Voyage of Discovery, 1776-1780). Turnbull visited Tahiti later (A Voyage Round the World in 1800, etc., pp. 374-5), and while he found various vices among them, he was still compelled to acknowledge their virtues: "Their manner of addressing strangers, from the king to the humblest subject, is extremely courteous and friendly... They certainly live in more harmony with each other than is typical among Europeans. During my entire time among them, I never saw anything resembling a battle... I don't recall ever seeing a Tahitian lose their temper. They joke with one another more freely than Europeans, but these jokes are never taken badly... Regarding food, I believe that in Tahiti, whatever one possesses is shared with all." Thus, we observe that even among a people often labeled as the ultimate example of a nation given to unrestrained promiscuity, the principles of chastity were recognized, and many other virtues flourished vigorously. The Tahitians were brave, hospitable, self-controlled, polite, considerate of others' needs, chivalrous toward women, and they even appreciated the benefits of sexual restraint, a level of acknowledgment that has rarely, if ever, been seen among the Christian nations that have looked down upon them as debased by unspeakable vices.
As we turn from savages towards peoples in the barbarous and civilized stages we find a general tendency for chastity, in so far as it is a common possession of the common people, to be less regarded, or to be retained only as a traditional convention no longer strictly observed. The old grounds for chastity in primitive religions and tabu have decayed and no new grounds have been generally established. "Although the progress of civilization," wrote Gibbon long ago, "has undoubtedly contributed to assuage the fiercer passions of human nature, it seems to have been less favorable to the virtue of chastity," and Westermarck concludes that "irregular connections between the sexes have, on the whole, exhibited a tendency to increase along with the progress of civilization."
As we move from savagery to more advanced societies, we notice that the value placed on chastity, particularly among common people, tends to diminish or only be upheld as an outdated custom that's no longer strictly followed. The original reasons for valuing chastity in early religions and taboos have faded away, and no new reasons have widely taken their place. "Though the advancement of civilization," Gibbon noted long ago, "has certainly helped to lessen the more intense passions of human nature, it appears to have been less beneficial for the virtue of chastity," and Westermarck concludes that "irregular relationships between the sexes have generally shown an increased tendency as civilization progresses."
The main difference in the social function of chastity as we pass from savagery to higher stages of culture seems to be that it ceases to exist as a general hygienic measure or a general ceremonial observance, and, for the most part, becomes confined to special philosophic or religious sects which cultivate it to an extreme degree in a more or less professional way. This state of things is well illustrated by the Roman Empire during the early centuries of the Christian era.[73] Christianity itself was at first one of these sects enamored of the ideal of chastity; but by its superior vitality it replaced all the others and finally imposed its ideals, though by no means its primitive practices, on European society generally.
The main difference in how chastity functions socially as we move from primitive societies to more advanced cultures is that it stops being a general health practice or a common ceremonial ritual and mostly becomes limited to specific philosophical or religious groups that practice it intensely, often in a more formalized way. This situation is clearly shown by the Roman Empire in the early centuries of the Christian era. Christianity itself started as one of these groups that valued the ideal of chastity; however, due to its greater vitality, it eventually replaced all the others and imposed its ideals, though not its original practices, on European society as a whole.
Chastity manifested itself in primitive Christianity in two different though not necessarily opposed ways. On the one hand it took a stern and practical form in vigorous men and women who, after being brought up in a society permitting a high degree of sexual indulgence, suddenly found themselves convinced of the sin of such indulgence. The battle with the society they had been born into, and with their own old impulses and habits, became so severe that they often found themselves compelled to retire from the world altogether. Thus it was that the parched solitudes of Egypt were peopled with hermits largely occupied with the problem of subduing their own flesh. Their pre-occupation, and indeed the pre-occupation of much early Christian literature, with sexual matters, may be said to be vastly greater than was the case with the pagan society they had left. Paganism accepted sexual indulgence and was then able to dismiss it, so that in classic literature we find very little insistence on sexual details except in writers like Martial, Juvenal and Petronius who introduce them mainly for satirical ends. But the Christians could not thus escape from the obsession of sex; it was ever with them. We catch interesting glimpses of their struggles, for the most part barren struggles, in the Epistles of St. Jerome, who had himself been an athlete in these ascetic contests.
Chastity showed up in early Christianity in two different but not necessarily opposing ways. On one hand, it took a tough and practical form in strong men and women who, after growing up in a society that allowed a lot of sexual freedom, suddenly found themselves convinced that such indulgence was sinful. The struggle against the society they grew up in, along with their old impulses and habits, became so intense that they often felt the need to completely withdraw from the world. This led to the isolated deserts of Egypt being filled with hermits primarily focused on mastering their own desires. Their fixation, and in fact the fixation of much early Christian writing, on sexual issues was far greater than what was seen in the pagan society they had left behind. Paganism accepted sexual indulgence and could then dismiss it, so classic literature has very little emphasis on sexual matters, except from authors like Martial, Juvenal, and Petronius, who brought them up mainly for satire. But Christians couldn't escape the obsession with sex; it was always on their minds. We catch intriguing glimpses of their struggles, mostly fruitless, in the letters of St. Jerome, who had himself participated in these ascetic battles.
"Oh, how many times," wrote St. Jerome to Eustochium, the virgin to whom he addressed one of the longest and most interesting of his letters, "when in the desert, in that vast solitude which, burnt up by the heart of the sun, offers but a horrible dwelling to monks, I imagined myself among the delights of Rome! I was alone, for my soul was full of bitterness. My limbs were covered by a wretched sack and my skin was as black as an Ethiopian's. Every day I wept and groaned, and if I was unwillingly overcome by sleep my lean body lay on the bare earth. I say nothing of my food and drink, for in the desert even invalids have no drink but cold water, and cooked food is regarded as a luxury. Well, I, who, out of fear of hell, had condemned myself to this prison, companion of scorpions and wild beasts, often seemed in imagination among bands of girls. My face was pale with fasting and my mind within my frigid body was burning with desire; the fires of lust would still flare up in a body that already seemed to be dead. Then, deprived of all help, I threw myself at the feet of Jesus, washing them with my tears and drying them with my hair, subjugating my rebellious flesh by long fasts. I remember that more than once I passed the night uttering cries and striking my breast until God sent me peace." "Our century," wrote St. Chrysostom in his Discourse to Those Who Keep Virgins in Their Houses, "has seen many men who have bound their bodies with chains, clothed themselves in sacks, retired to the summits of mountains where they have lived in constant vigil and fasting, giving the example of the most austere discipline and forbidding all women to cross the thresholds of their humble dwellings; and yet, in spite of all the severities they have exercised on themselves, it was with difficulty they could repress the fury of their passions." Hilarion, says Jerome, saw visions of naked women when he lay down on his solitary couch and delicious meats when he sat down to his frugal table. Such experiences rendered the early saints very scrupulous. "They used to say," we are told in an interesting history of the Egyptian anchorites, Palladius's Paradise of the Holy Fathers, belonging to the fourth century (A. W. Budge, The Paradise, vol. ii, p. 129), "that Abbâ Isaac went out and found the footprint of a woman on the road, and he thought about it in his mind and destroyed it saying, 'If a brother seeth it he may fall.'" Similarly, according to the rules of St. Cæsarius of Aries for nuns, no male clothing was to be taken into the convent for the purpose of washing or mending. Even in old age, a certain anxiety about chastity still remained. One of the brothers, we are told in The Paradise (p. 132) said to Abbâ Zeno, "Behold thou hast grown old, how is the matter of fornication?" The venerable saint replied, "It knocketh, but it passeth on."
"Oh, how many times," wrote St. Jerome to Eustochium, the virgin to whom he sent one of his longest and most captivating letters, "when I was in the desert, in that vast emptiness scorched by the blazing sun, offering a dreadful place for monks to dwell, I imagined myself in the pleasures of Rome! I was alone, filled with bitterness. I wore a miserable sack, and my skin was as dark as an Ethiopian's. Every day I wept and groaned, and if sleep overcame me against my will, my emaciated body lay on the bare ground. I won't even mention my food and drink, for in the desert even the sick only have cold water to drink, and cooked food is considered a luxury. Well, I, who had condemned myself to this prison out of fear of hell, a companion to scorpions and wild beasts, often pictured myself in the company of girls. My face was pale from fasting and my mind, trapped in my cold body, burned with desire; the fires of lust would still blaze in a body that seemed already dead. Then, deprived of all help, I threw myself at the feet of Jesus, washing them with my tears and drying them with my hair, trying to subdue my rebellious flesh through prolonged fasts. I remember more than once passing the night crying out and striking my breast until God granted me peace." "Our century," wrote St. Chrysostom in his Discourse to Those Who Keep Virgins in Their Houses, "has seen many men who have chained their bodies, dressed in sackcloth, retreated to mountaintops where they lived in constant vigilance and fasting, providing examples of the most extreme discipline while forbidding any women from entering their humble homes; and yet, despite all the strictness they imposed on themselves, they struggled to control the rage of their passions." Hilarion, Jerome recounts, saw visions of naked women when he lay down on his solitary bed and imagined delicious food when he sat at his meager table. Such experiences made the early saints very cautious. "They used to say," we read in an intriguing history of the Egyptian anchorites, Palladius's Paradise of the Holy Fathers, from the fourth century (A. W. Budge, The Paradise, vol. ii, p. 129), "that Abbâ Isaac went out and found a woman's footprint on the road, and he contemplated it in his mind and destroyed it saying, 'If a brother sees it, he may fall.'" Likewise, according to the rules of St. Cæsarius of Aries for nuns, no male clothing was allowed into the convent for washing or mending. Even in old age, certain worries about chastity lingered. One of the brothers, we learn in The Paradise (p. 132), asked Abbâ Zeno, "Look, you've grown old. How is it with fornication?" The venerable saint replied, "It knocks, but it passes on."
As the centuries went by the same strenuous anxiety to guard chastity still remained, and the old struggle constantly reappeared (see, e.g., Migne's Dictionnaire d'Ascétisme, art. "Démon, Tentation du"). Some saints, it is true, like Luigi di Gonzaga, were so angelically natured that they never felt the sting of sexual desire. These seem to have been the exception. St. Benedict and St. Francis experienced the difficulty of subduing the flesh. St. Magdalena de Pozzi, in order to dispel sexual desires, would roll on thorny bushes till the blood came. Some saints kept a special cask of cold water in their cells to stand in (Lea, Sacerdotal Celibacy, vol. i, p. 124). On the other hand, the Blessed Angela de Fulginio tells us in her Visiones (cap. XIX) that, until forbidden by her confessor, she would place hot coals in her secret parts, hoping by material fire to extinguish the fire of concupiscence. St. Aldhelm, the holy Bishop of Sherborne, in the eighth century, also adopted a homeopathic method of treatment, though of a more literal kind, for William of Malmsbury states that when tempted by the flesh he would have women to sit and lie by him until he grew calm again; the method proved very successful, for the reason, it was thought, that the Devil felt he had been made a fool of.
As the centuries passed, the same intense anxiety to protect chastity continued, and the ongoing struggle repeatedly resurfaced (see, e.g., Migne's Dictionnaire d'Ascétisme, art. "Démon, Tentation du"). Some saints, like Luigi di Gonzaga, were so pure-hearted that they never felt the pangs of sexual desire. They were the exception, though. St. Benedict and St. Francis faced the challenge of controlling their desires. St. Magdalena de Pozzi, to suppress her sexual urges, would roll on thorny bushes until she bled. Some saints kept a special barrel of cold water in their cells to stand in (Lea, Sacerdotal Celibacy, vol. i, p. 124). Conversely, Blessed Angela de Fulginio recounts in her Visiones (cap. XIX) that, until her confessor forbade her, she would place hot coals on her private parts, hoping that physical fire would quench her sexual passions. St. Aldhelm, the holy Bishop of Sherborne in the eighth century, also used a literal homeopathic approach; William of Malmsbury reported that when tempted by lust, he would have women sit and lie next to him until he calmed down again; this method was thought to be very effective because it was believed that the Devil felt he had been outsmarted.
In time the Catholic practice and theory of asceticism became more formalized and elaborated, and its beneficial effects were held to extend beyond the individual himself. "Asceticism from the Christian point of view," writes Brénier de Montmorand in an interesting study ("Ascétisme et Mysticisme," Revue Philosophique, March, 1904) "is nothing else than all the therapeutic measures making for moral purification. The Christian ascetic is an athlete struggling to transform his corrupt nature and make a road to God through the obstacles due to his passions and the world. He is not working in his own interests alone, but—by virtue of the reversibility of merit which compensates that of solidarity in error—for the good and for the salvation of the whole of society."
Over time, the Catholic approach to asceticism became more structured and detailed, and its positive impacts were believed to go beyond just the individual. "Asceticism from a Christian perspective," writes Brénier de Montmorand in an intriguing study ("Ascétisme et Mysticisme," Revue Philosophique, March, 1904), "is simply all the therapeutic methods aimed at moral purification. The Christian ascetic is like an athlete striving to change his flawed nature and create a path to God despite the challenges posed by his desires and the world. He isn't just working for his own benefit; rather, due to the idea of merit being transferable—which balances out the solidarity in wrongdoing—he is also striving for the good and salvation of society as a whole."
This is the aspect of early Christian asceticism most often emphasized. But there is another aspect which may be less familiar, but has been by no means less important. Primitive Christian chastity was on one side a strenuous discipline. On another side it was a romance, and this indeed was its most specifically Christian side, for athletic asceticism has been associated with the most various religious and philosophic beliefs. If, indeed, it had not possessed the charm of a new sensation, of a delicious freedom, of an unknown adventure, it would never have conquered the European world. There are only a few in that world who have in them the stuff of moral athletes; there are many who respond to the attraction of romance.
This is the part of early Christian asceticism that’s most often highlighted. However, there’s another aspect that might be less known but is just as significant. Early Christian chastity was, on one hand, a rigorous discipline. On the other hand, it was a romantic journey, and this was truly its most distinctly Christian element, since athletic asceticism has been linked to various religious and philosophical ideologies. If it hadn’t included the allure of a new experience, a sense of freedom, and the thrill of an unknown adventure, it would never have spread across Europe. There are only a few people in that world who have the qualities of moral athletes; many are drawn to the appeal of romance.
The Christians rejected the grosser forms of sexual indulgence, but in doing so they entered with a more delicate ardor into the more refined forms of sexual intimacy. They cultivated a relationship of brothers and sisters to each other, they kissed one another; at one time, in the spiritual orgy of baptism, they were not ashamed to adopt complete nakedness.[74]
The Christians turned down cruder forms of sexual indulgence, but in doing so, they embraced more subtle and passionate forms of sexual intimacy. They fostered a sibling-like relationship with each other, sharing kisses; at one point, during the spiritual high of baptism, they weren't ashamed to be completely naked.
A very instructive picture of the forms which chastity assumed among the early Christians is given us in the treatise of Chrysostom Against Those who Keep Virgins in their Houses. Our fathers, Chrysostom begins, only knew two forms of sexual intimacy, marriage and fornication. Now a third form has appeared: men introduce young girls into their houses and keep them there permanently, respecting their virginity. "What," Chrysostom asks, "is the reason? It seems to me that life in common with a woman is sweet, even outside conjugal union and fleshly commerce. That is my feeling; and perhaps it is not my feeling alone; it may also be that of these men. They would not hold their honor so cheap nor give rise to such scandals if this pleasure were not violent and tyrannical.... That there should really be a pleasure in this which produces a love more ardent than conjugal union may surprise you at first. But when I give you the proofs you will agree that it is so." The absence of restraint to desire in marriage, he continues, often leads to speedy disgust, and even apart from this, sexual intercourse, pregnancy, delivery, lactation, the bringing up of children, and all the pains and anxieties that accompany these things soon destroy youth and dull the point of pleasure. The virgin is free from these burdens. She retains her vigor and youthfulness, and even at the age of forty may rival the young nubile girl. "A double ardor thus burns in the heart of him who lives with her, and the gratification of desire never extinguishes the bright flame which ever continues to increase in strength." Chrysostom describes minutely all the little cares and attentions which the modern girls of his time required, and which these men delighted to expend on their virginal sweethearts whether in public or in private. He cannot help thinking, however, that the man who lavishes kisses and caresses on a woman whose virginity he retains is putting himself somewhat in the position of Tantalus. But this new refinement of tender chastity, which came as a delicious discovery to the early Christians who had resolutely thrust away the licentiousness of the pagan world, was deeply rooted, as we discover from the frequency with which the grave Fathers of the Church, apprehensive of scandal, felt called upon to reprove it, though their condemnation is sometimes not without a trace of secret sympathy.[75]
A very insightful depiction of how chastity was perceived among early Christians can be found in Chrysostom's treatise Against Those who Keep Virgins in their Houses. Chrysostom begins by stating that our ancestors recognized only two forms of sexual intimacy: marriage and fornication. However, a third form has emerged: men are bringing young girls into their homes and keeping them there indefinitely, while supposedly honoring their virginity. "What," Chrysostom asks, "is the reason for this? It seems to me that living with a woman is pleasurable, even without marriage or physical relations. That’s how I feel, and maybe I'm not alone; perhaps these men feel the same way. They wouldn’t lower their honor or cause such scandals if this pleasure wasn’t compelling and overpowering... You might be surprised that there could be a pleasure here that inspires a deeper love than marriage. But once I provide evidence, you’ll see that it’s true." He continues by explaining that the lack of restraint in marital desire often leads to quick disillusionment, and even aside from that, the realities of sexual relations, pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, and raising children—with all their accompanying struggles—quickly sap youth and dull the pleasure. The virgin is free from these issues. She maintains her vitality and youthfulness, and can still compare to a young woman even at the age of forty. "A double passion therefore burns in the heart of the man who lives with her, and the satisfaction of desire does not diminish the bright flame, which keeps intensifying." Chrysostom carefully details the small acts of care and attention that the modern girls of his time needed, which these men enjoyed providing to their virtuous sweethearts, whether in public or private. However, he can’t help but think that the man who showers kisses and affection on a woman whose virginity he preserves is somewhat putting himself in a Tantalus-like position. This new form of delicate chastity, which was a delightful discovery for early Christians who had firmly rejected the indulgences of the pagan world, was deeply ingrained, as we see from how often the solemn Fathers of the Church, concerned about scandal, felt the need to criticize it, though sometimes their condemnation hints at a tacit sympathy.[75]
There was one form in which the new Christian chastity flourished exuberantly and unchecked: it conquered literature. The most charming, and, we may be sure, the most popular literature of the early Church lay in the innumerable romances of erotic chastity—to some extent, it may well be, founded on fact—which are embodied to-day in the Acta Sanctorum. We can see in even the most simple and non-miraculous early Christian records of the martyrdom of women that the writers were fully aware of the delicate charm of the heroine who, like Perpetua at Carthage, tossed by wild cattle in the arena, rises to gather her torn garment around her and to put up her disheveled hair.[76] It was an easy step to the stories of romantic adventure. Among these delightful stories I may refer especially to the legend of Thekla, which has been placed, incorrectly it may be, as early as the first century, "The Bride and Bridegroom of India" in Judas Thomas's Acts, "The Virgin of Antioch" as narrated by St. Ambrose, the history of "Achilleus and Nereus," "Mygdonia and Karish," and "Two Lovers of Auvergne" as told by Gregory of Tours. Early Christian literature abounds in the stories of lovers who had indeed preserved their chastity, and had yet discovered the most exquisite secrets of love.
There was one way in which the new Christian concept of chastity thrived abundantly and without restraint: it took over literature. The most delightful and, we can be certain, the most popular literature of the early Church consisted of countless romances centered around erotic chastity—perhaps, to some degree, based on real events—which are now found in the Acta Sanctorum. Even in the simplest and least miraculous early Christian accounts of women martyrs, it's clear that the writers recognized the delicate charm of heroines who, like Perpetua in Carthage, were tossed by wild animals in the arena, only to rise and gather their torn garments around them and fix their disheveled hair.[76] It was a natural progression to the tales of romantic adventure. Among these delightful stories, I should highlight the legend of Thekla, which may have been misdated to the first century, "The Bride and Bridegroom of India" in Judas Thomas's Acts, "The Virgin of Antioch" as told by St. Ambrose, the story of "Achilleus and Nereus," "Mygdonia and Karish," and "Two Lovers of Auvergne" as recounted by Gregory of Tours. Early Christian literature is filled with tales of lovers who managed to maintain their chastity while also uncovering the most exquisite secrets of love.
Thekla's day is the twenty-third of September. There is a very good Syriac version (by Lipsius and others regarded as more primitive than the Greek version) of the Acts of Paul and Thekla (see, e.g., Wright's Apocryphal Acts). These Acts belong to the latter part of the second century. The story is that Thekla, refusing to yield to the passion of the high priest of Syria, was put, naked but for a girdle (subligaculum) into the arena on the back of a lioness, which licked her feet and fought for her against the other beasts, dying in her defense. The other beasts, however, did her no harm, and she was finally released. A queen loaded her with money, she modified her dress to look like a man, travelled to meet Paul, and lived to old age. Sir W. M. Ramsay has written an interesting study of these Acts (The Church in the Roman Empire, Ch. XVI). He is of opinion that the Acts are based on a first century document, and is able to disentangle many elements of truth from the story. He states that it is the only evidence we possess of the ideas and actions of women during the first century in Asia Minor, where their position was so high and their influence so great. Thekla represents the assertion of woman's rights, and she administered the rite of baptism, though in the existing versions of the Acts these features are toned down or eliminated.
Thekla's day is September 23rd. There is a very good Syriac version (by Lipsius and others considered more primitive than the Greek version) of the Acts of Paul and Thekla (see, e.g., Wright's Apocryphal Acts). These Acts date back to the later part of the second century. The story goes that Thekla, refusing to give in to the desires of the high priest of Syria, was put, naked except for a girdle (subligaculum), into the arena on the back of a lioness, which licked her feet and fought against the other beasts, dying to protect her. However, the other beasts did her no harm, and she was eventually freed. A queen showered her with money, she changed her outfit to look like a man, traveled to meet Paul, and lived to an old age. Sir W. M. Ramsay has written an interesting study of these Acts (The Church in the Roman Empire, Ch. XVI). He believes that the Acts are based on a first-century document and can identify many true elements within the story. He states that this is the only evidence we have of the ideas and actions of women during the first century in Asia Minor, where their status was quite high and their influence significant. Thekla symbolizes the fight for women's rights, and she performed the baptism rite, although in the current versions of the Acts, these aspects are downplayed or removed.
Some of the most typical of these early Christian romances are described as Gnostical in origin, with something of the germs of Manichæan dualism which were held in the rich and complex matrix of Gnosticism, while the spirit of these romances is also largely Montanist, with the combined chastity and ardor, the pronounced feminine tone due to its origin in Asia Minor, which marked Montanism. It cannot be denied, however, that they largely passed into the main stream of Christian tradition, and form an essential and important part of that tradition. (Renan, in his Marc-Aurèle, Chs. IX and XV, insists on the immense debt of Christianity to Gnostic and Montanist contributions). A characteristic example is the story of "The Betrothed of India" in Judas Thomas's Acts (Wright's Apocryphal Acts). Judas Thomas was sold by his master Jesus to an Indian merchant who required a carpenter to go with him to India. On disembarking at the city of Sandaruk they heard the sounds of music and singing, and learnt that it was the wedding-feast of the King's daughter, which all must attend, rich and poor, slaves and freemen, strangers and citizens. Judas Thomas went, with his new master, to the banquet and reclined with a garland of myrtle placed on his head. When a Hebrew flute-player came and stood over him and played, he sang the songs of Christ, and it was seen that he was more beautiful than all that were there and the King sent for him to bless the young couple in the bridal chamber. And when all were gone out and the door of the bridal chamber closed, the bridegroom approached the bride, and saw, as it were, Judas Thomas still talking with her. But it was our Lord who said to him, "I am not Judas, but his brother." And our Lord sat down on the bed beside the young people and began to say to them: "Remember, my children, what my brother spake with you, and know to whom he committed you, and know that if ye preserve yourselves from this filthy intercourse ye become pure temples, and are saved from afflictions manifest and hidden, and from the heavy care of children, the end whereof is bitter sorrow. For their sakes ye will become oppressors and robbers, and ye will be grievously tortured for their injuries. For children are the cause of many pains; either the King falls upon them or a demon lays hold of them, or paralysis befalls them. And if they be healthy they come to ill, either by adultery, or theft, or fornication, or covetousness, or vain-glory. But if ye will be persuaded by me, and keep yourselves purely unto God, ye shall have living children to whom not one of these blemishes and hurts cometh nigh; and ye shall be without care and without grief and without sorrow, and ye shall hope for the time when ye shall see the true wedding-feast." The young couple were persuaded, and refrained from lust, and our Lord vanished. And in the morning, when it was dawn, the King had the table furnished early and brought in before the bridegroom and bride. And he found them sitting the one opposite the other, and the face of the bride was uncovered and the bridegroom was very cheerful. The mother of the bride saith to her: "Why art thou sitting thus, and art not ashamed, but art as if, lo, thou wert married a long time, and for many a day?" And her father, too, said; "Is it thy great love for thy husband that prevents thee from even veiling thyself?" And the bride answered and said: "Truly, my father, I am in great love, and am praying to my Lord that I may continue in this love which I have experienced this night. I am not veiled, because the veil of corruption is taken from me, and I am not ashamed, because the deed of shame has been removed far from me, and I am cheerful and gay, and despise this deed of corruption and the joys of this wedding-feast, because I am invited to the true wedding-feast. I have not had intercourse with a husband, the end whereof is bitter repentance, because I am betrothed to the true Husband." The bridegroom answered also in the same spirit, very naturally to the dismay of the King, who sent for the sorcerer whom he had asked to bless his unlucky daughter. But Judas Thomas had already left the city and at his inn the King's stewards found only the flute-player, sitting and weeping because he had not taken her with him. She was glad, however, when she heard what had happened, and hastened to the young couple, and lived with them ever afterwards. The King also was finally reconciled, and all ended chastely, but happily.
Some of the most typical early Christian romances are seen as having Gnostic roots, mixed with bits of Manichaean dualism, within the rich and complex world of Gnosticism. The spirit of these stories also reflects a strong Montanist influence, featuring a blend of purity and passion, along with a notable feminine perspective stemming from its origins in Asia Minor, which characterized Montanism. However, it's undeniable that these tales largely integrated into mainstream Christian tradition, forming an essential and significant part of it. (Renan, in his Marc-Aurèle, Chs. IX and XV, emphasizes how much Christianity owes to Gnostic and Montanist influences). A notable example is the story of "The Betrothed of India" in Judas Thomas's Acts (Wright's Apocryphal Acts). Judas Thomas was sold by his master Jesus to an Indian merchant who needed a carpenter for his journey to India. After they arrived at the city of Sandaruk, they heard music and singing, discovering that it was the wedding celebration of the King's daughter, which everyone, rich and poor, slaves and free, strangers and locals, was required to attend. Judas Thomas went to the feast with his new master and reclined with a myrtle wreath on his head. When a Hebrew flute player came and stood over him to play, he sang the songs of Christ, appearing more beautiful than everyone there, and the King sent for him to bless the young couple in the bridal chamber. When everyone had left and the bridal chamber door was closed, the bridegroom approached the bride and seemed to see Judas Thomas still conversing with her. But it was our Lord who spoke to him, saying, "I am not Judas, but his brother." Our Lord then sat beside the young couple and said: "Remember, my children, what my brother told you, and know to whom he entrusted you. If you keep yourselves from this sinful interaction, you will become pure temples and will be saved from both obvious and hidden afflictions, as well as from the heavy burden of children, which ultimately leads to bitter sorrow. For their sake, you might become oppressors and robbers, and you will suffer greatly for their actions. Children cause many pains; either the King strikes them down, or a demon takes hold of them, or they suffer paralysis. If they are healthy, they still come to harm, either through adultery, theft, fornication, covetousness, or vanity. But if you will listen to me and remain pure for God, you will have live children to whom none of these blemishes and pains will come near; you will be without worry, without grief, and without sorrow, and you will long for the time when you will see the true wedding feast." The young couple was convinced and chose to abstain from lust, and our Lord disappeared. The next morning, at dawn, the King had the table set early and brought it in for the bridegroom and bride. He found them sitting facing each other, the bride's face uncovered and the bridegroom looking very happy. The bride's mother asked her: "Why are you sitting like this and not feeling ashamed, as if you've been married for a long time?" Her father added, "Is your great love for your husband keeping you from even veiling yourself?" The bride responded, "Truly, my father, I am deeply in love, and I am praying to my Lord that I may continue in this love that I have experienced this night. I am not veiled because the veil of corruption has been taken from me, and I am not ashamed because the act of shame is far from me. I am joyful and carefree, and I look down on this act of corruption and the joys of this wedding feast because I am invited to the true wedding feast. I haven't had sexual relations with a husband, the outcome of which is bitter regret, because I am engaged to the true Husband." The bridegroom answered in the same spirit, naturally disconcerting the King, who sent for the sorcerer he had asked to bless his unfortunate daughter. But Judas Thomas had already left the city, and at his inn, the King's stewards found only the flute player sitting and weeping because he hadn’t taken her with him. She was, however, glad when she heard what had happened and quickly went to the young couple, living with them happily ever after. The King was also eventually reconciled, and everything ended chaste but joyful.
In these same Judas Thomas's Acts, which are not later than the fourth century, we find (eighth act) the story of Mygdonia and Karish. Mygdonia, the wife of Karish, is converted by Thomas and flees from her husband, naked save for the curtain of the chamber door which she has wrapped around her, to her old nurse. With the nurse she goes to Thomas, who pours holy oil over her head, bidding the nurse to anoint her all over with it; then a cloth is put round her loins and he baptizes her; then she is clothed and he gives her the sacrament. The young rapture of chastity grows lyrical at times, and Judas Thomas breaks out: "Purity is the athlete who is not overcome. Purity is the truth that blencheth not. Purity is worthy before God of being to Him a familiar handmaiden. Purity is the messenger of concord which bringeth the tidings of peace."
In these same Judas Thomas's Acts, dating no later than the fourth century, we find (eighth act) the story of Mygdonia and Karish. Mygdonia, Karish's wife, is converted by Thomas and runs away from her husband, only wearing the curtain from the chamber door wrapped around her, to her old nurse. With her nurse, she goes to Thomas, who pours holy oil over her head and tells the nurse to anoint her all over with it; then a cloth is wrapped around her waist, and he baptizes her; afterward, she is clothed, and he gives her the sacrament. The young excitement of chastity becomes lyrical at times, and Judas Thomas exclaims: "Purity is the athlete who cannot be defeated. Purity is the truth that remains steadfast. Purity is deserving before God of being His devoted servant. Purity is the messenger of harmony that brings news of peace."
Another romance of chastity is furnished by the episode of Drusiana in The History of the Apostles traditionally attributed to Abdias, Bishop of Babylon (Bk. v, Ch. IV, et seq.). Drusiana is the wife of Andronicus, and is so pious that she will not have intercourse with him. The youth Callimachus falls madly in love with her, and his amorous attempts involve many exciting adventures, but the chastity of Drusiana is finally triumphant.
Another tale of purity is presented in the story of Drusiana in The History of the Apostles, traditionally attributed to Abdias, Bishop of Babylon (Bk. v, Ch. IV, et seq.). Drusiana is the wife of Andronicus and is so devout that she refuses to sleep with him. The young man Callimachus becomes infatuated with her, and his romantic pursuits lead to many thrilling adventures, but in the end, Drusiana's purity prevails.
A characteristic example of the literature we are here concerned with is St. Ambrose's story of "The Virgin in the Brothel" (narrated in his De Virginibus, Migne's edition of Ambrose's Works, vols. iii-iv, p. 211). A certain virgin, St. Ambrose tells us, who lately lived at Antioch, was condemned either to sacrifice to the gods or to go to the brothel. She chose the latter alternative. But the first man who came in to her was a Christian soldier who called her "sister," and bade her have no fear. He proposed that they should exchange clothes. This was done and she escaped, while the soldier was led away to death. At the place of execution, however, she ran up and exclaimed that it was not death she feared but shame. He, however, maintained that he had been condemned to death in her place. Finally the crown of martyrdom for which they contended was adjudged to both.
A notable example of the literature we're discussing is St. Ambrose's story "The Virgin in the Brothel" (found in his De Virginibus, Migne's edition of Ambrose's Works, vols. iii-iv, p. 211). St. Ambrose tells us about a virgin who lived in Antioch and faced the choice of either sacrificing to the gods or going to the brothel. She chose the latter option. However, the first man who came to her was a Christian soldier who called her "sister" and told her not to be afraid. He suggested they swap clothes. She agreed, and she managed to escape while the soldier was taken away to be executed. At the execution site, she ran up and declared that it wasn't death she feared, but shame. He insisted that he had been condemned to death in her place. In the end, both were granted the crown of martyrdom for which they struggled.
We constantly observe in the early documents of this romantic literature of chastity that chastity is insisted on by no means chiefly because of its rewards after death, nor even because the virgin who devotes herself to it secures in Christ an ever-young lover whose golden-haired beauty is sometimes emphasized. Its chief charm is represented as lying in its own joy and freedom and the security it involves from all the troubles, inconveniences and bondages of matrimony. This early Christian movement of romantic chastity was clearly, in large measure, a revolt of women against men and marriage. This is well brought out in the instructive story, supposed to be of third century origin, of the eunuchs Achilleus and Nereus, as narrated in the Acta Sanctorum, May 12th. Achilleus and Nereus were Christian eunuchs of the bedchamber to Domitia, a virgin of noble birth, related to the Emperor Domitian and betrothed to Aurelian, son of a Consul. One day, as their mistress was putting on her jewels and her purple garments embroidered with gold, they began in turn to talk to her about all the joys and advantages of virginity, as compared to marriage with a mere man. The conversation is developed at great length and with much eloquence. Domitia was finally persuaded. She suffered much from Aurelian in consequence, and when he obtained her banishment to an island she went thither with Achilleus and Nereus, who were put to death. Incidentally, the death of Felicula, another heroine of chastity, is described. When elevated on the rack because she would not marry, she constantly refused to deny Jesus, whom she called her lover. "Ego non nego amatorem meum!"
We often notice in the early documents of this romantic literature about chastity that the emphasis on chastity comes not primarily from its rewards in the afterlife, nor even because the virgin who dedicates herself to it gains an ever-young lover in Christ, whose golden-haired beauty is sometimes highlighted. Its main appeal is described as lying in its own joy and freedom, along with the safety it offers from the troubles, inconveniences, and constraints of marriage. This early Christian movement of romantic chastity was clearly, to a large extent, a rebellion by women against men and marriage. This is well illustrated in the informative story, believed to be from the third century, of the eunuchs Achilleus and Nereus, as narrated in the Acta Sanctorum, May 12th. Achilleus and Nereus were Christian eunuchs serving Domitia, a virgin of noble birth, related to Emperor Domitian and engaged to Aurelian, the son of a Consul. One day, while their mistress was adorning herself with jewels and her purple garments embroidered with gold, they took turns discussing the joys and benefits of virginity compared to marrying a mere man. The conversation is extensive and eloquent. Domitia was eventually convinced. She suffered greatly because of Aurelian, and when he arranged for her banishment to an island, she went there with Achilleus and Nereus, who were executed. Additionally, the death of Felicula, another heroine of chastity, is noted. When she was tortured for refusing to marry, she consistently refused to deny Jesus, whom she called her lover. "Ego non nego amatorem meum!"
A special department of this literature is concerned with stories of the conversions or the penitence of courtesans. St. Martinianus, for instance (Feb. 13), was tempted by the courtesan Zoe, but converted her. The story of St. Margaret of Cortona (Feb. 22), a penitent courtesan, is late, for she belongs to the thirteenth century. The most delightful document in this literature is probably the latest, the fourteenth century Italian devotional romance called The Life of Saint Mary Magdalen, commonly associated with the name of Frate Domenico Cavalca. (It has been translated into English). It is the delicately and deliciously told romance of the chaste and passionate love of the sweet sinner, Mary Magdalene, for her beloved Master.
A special area of this literature focuses on stories about the conversions or repentance of courtesans. For example, St. Martinianus (Feb. 13) was tempted by the courtesan Zoe, but he managed to convert her. The story of St. Margaret of Cortona (Feb. 22), a penitent courtesan, comes from the thirteenth century, making it a later addition. The most captivating document in this collection is likely the most recent one, a fourteenth-century Italian devotional romance called The Life of Saint Mary Magdalen, often linked to Frate Domenico Cavalca. (It has been translated into English.) This work beautifully and engagingly narrates the pure yet passionate love of the sweet sinner, Mary Magdalene, for her beloved Master.
As time went on the insistence on the joys of chastity in this life became less marked, and chastity is more and more regarded as a state only to be fully rewarded in a future life. Even, however, in Gregory of Tours's charming story of "The Two Lovers of Auvergne," in which this attitude is clear, the pleasures of chaste love in this life are brought out as clearly as in any of the early romances (Historia Francorum, lib. i, cap. XLII). Two senators of Auvergne each had an only child, and they betrothed them to each other. When the wedding day came and the young couple were placed in bed, the bride turned to the wall and wept bitterly. The bridegroom implored her to tell him what was the matter, and, turning towards him, she said that if she were to weep all her days she could never wash away her grief for she had resolved to give her little body immaculate to Christ, untouched by men, and now instead of immortal roses she had only had on her brow faded roses, which deformed rather than adorned it, and instead of the dowry of Paradise which Christ had promised her she had become the consort of a merely mortal man. She deplored her sad fate at considerable length and with much gentle eloquence. At length the bridegroom, overcome by her sweet words, felt that eternal life had shone before him like a great light, and declared that if she wished to abstain from carnal desires he was of the same mind. She was grateful, and with clasped hands they fell asleep. For many years they thus lived together, chastely sharing the same bed. At length she died and was buried, her lover restoring her immaculate to the hands of Christ. Soon afterwards he died also, and was placed in a separate tomb. Then a miracle happened which made manifest the magnitude of this chaste love, for the two bodies were found mysteriously placed together. To this day, Gregory concludes (writing in the sixth century), the people of the place call them "The Two Lovers."
As time passed, the emphasis on the joys of chastity in this life became less significant, and chastity came to be seen more as something that would only be truly rewarded in an afterlife. However, even in Gregory of Tours's delightful story "The Two Lovers of Auvergne," where this perspective is evident, the pleasures of pure love in this life are highlighted as clearly as in any of the early romances (Historia Francorum, lib. i, cap. XLII). Two senators from Auvergne each had an only child, and they arranged for them to marry. When the wedding day arrived and the young couple was placed in bed, the bride turned to the wall and wept deeply. The bridegroom pleaded with her to share what was wrong, and when she turned to him, she expressed that even if she cried every day, she could never wash away her sadness because she had decided to dedicate her life to Christ, untouched by men. Instead of receiving eternal roses, she felt she only had wilted roses on her brow, which disfigured her rather than adorned her. Instead of the promised dowry of Paradise that Christ had offered her, she found herself bonded to a mere mortal man. She lamented her unfortunate fate at length with much gentle eloquence. Eventually, the bridegroom, moved by her sweet words, felt that eternal life shone before him like a bright light and declared that if she wanted to avoid carnal desires, he felt the same way. She was thankful, and with clasped hands, they fell asleep. For many years, they lived together this way, chastely sharing the same bed. Eventually, she died and was buried, her lover restoring her purity to the hands of Christ. Soon after, he died as well and was placed in a separate tomb. Then a miracle occurred that revealed the depth of their chaste love, for the two bodies were found mysteriously placed together. To this day, Gregory concludes (writing in the sixth century), the people of the area call them "The Two Lovers."
Although Renan (Marc-Aurèle, Ch. XV) briefly called attention to the existence of this copious early Christian literature setting forth the romance of chastity, it seems as yet to have received little or no study. It is, however, of considerable importance, not merely for its own sake, but on account of its psychological significance in making clear the nature of the motive forces which made chastity easy and charming to the people of the early Christian world, even when it involved complete abstinence from sexual intercourse. The early Church anathematized the eroticism of the Pagan world, and exorcized it in the most effectual way by setting up a new and more exquisite eroticism of its own.
Although Renan (Marc-Aurèle, Ch. XV) briefly pointed out the existence of this rich early Christian literature showcasing the story of chastity, it seems to have received little to no study so far. However, it is quite important, not only on its own merits but also for its psychological significance in clarifying the underlying motives that made chastity attractive and appealing to the people of the early Christian world, even when it required complete abstinence from sexual intercourse. The early Church condemned the eroticism of the Pagan world and effectively exorcised it by establishing a new and more refined eroticism of its own.
During the Middle Ages the primitive freshness of Christian chastity began to lose its charm. No more romances of chastity were written, and in actual life men no longer sought daring adventures in the field of chastity. So far as the old ideals survived at all it was in the secular field of chivalry. The last notable figure to emulate the achievements of the early Christians was Robert of Arbrissel in Normandy.
During the Middle Ages, the naive appeal of Christian chastity started to fade. People stopped writing romantic stories about chastity, and in reality, men no longer looked for bold adventures in that area. If the old ideals stuck around at all, it was mainly in the secular realm of chivalry. The last significant person to follow the example of the early Christians was Robert of Arbrissel in Normandy.
Robert of Arbrissel, who founded, in the eleventh century, the famous and distinguished Order of Fontevrault for women, was a Breton. This Celtic origin is doubtless significant, for it may explain his unfailing ardor and gaiety, and his enthusiastic veneration for womanhood. Even those of his friends who deprecated what they considered his scandalous conduct bear testimony to his unfailing and cheerful temperament, his alertness in action, his readiness for any deed of humanity, and his entire freedom from severity. He attracted immense crowds of people of all conditions, especially women, including prostitutes, and his influence over women was great. Once he went into a brothel to warm his feet, and, incidentally, converted all the women there. "Who are you?" asked one of them, "I have been here twenty-five years and nobody has ever come here to talk about God." Robert's relation with his nuns at Fontevrault was very intimate, and he would often sleep with them. This is set forth precisely in letters written by friends of his, bishops and abbots, one of whom remarks that Robert had "discovered a new but fruitless form of martyrdom." A royal abbess of Fontevrault in the seventeenth century, pretending that the venerated founder of the order could not possibly have been guilty of such scandalous conduct, and that the letters must therefore be spurious, had the originals destroyed, so far as possible. The Bollandists, in an unscholarly and incomplete account of the matter (Acta Sanctorum, Feb. 25), adopted this view. J. von Walter, however, in a recent and thorough study of Robert of Arbrissel (Die Ersten Wanderprediger Frankreichs, Theil I), shows that there is no reason whatever to doubt the authentic and reliable character of the impugned letters.
Robert of Arbrissel, who founded the renowned Order of Fontevrault for women in the eleventh century, was from Brittany. His Celtic background is likely important, as it may explain his constant enthusiasm and cheerfulness, as well as his deep respect for womanhood. Even those friends of his who disapproved of what they saw as his scandalous behavior acknowledged his joyful personality, his eagerness to take action, his willingness to help others, and his complete lack of harshness. He drew large crowds of people from all walks of life, especially women, including prostitutes, and he had a significant influence over them. One time, he entered a brothel to warm his feet and ended up converting all the women inside. "Who are you?" one asked. "I've been here for twenty-five years, and no one has ever come to talk about God." Robert's relationship with his nuns at Fontevrault was very close, and he often slept near them. This is clearly documented in letters from his friends, bishops, and abbots, one of whom noted that Robert had "discovered a new but fruitless form of martyrdom." In the seventeenth century, a royal abbess of Fontevrault, claiming that the revered founder of the order could not have acted so scandalously, insisted that the letters must be fake and had the originals destroyed as much as possible. The Bollandists, in an unacademic and incomplete account of the situation (Acta Sanctorum, Feb. 25), accepted this view. However, J. von Walter, in a recent and comprehensive study of Robert of Arbrissel (Die Ersten Wanderprediger Frankreichs, Theil I), demonstrates that there is no reason to doubt the authenticity and reliability of the disputed letters.
The early Christian legends of chastity had, however, their successors. Aucassin et Nicolette, which was probably written in Northern France towards the end of the twelfth century, is above all the descendant of the stories in the Acta Sanctorum and elsewhere. It embodied their spirit and carried it forward, uniting their delicate feeling for chastity and purity with the ideal of monogamic love. Aucassin et Nicolette was the death-knell of the primitive Christian romance of chastity. It was the discovery that the chaste refinements of delicacy and devotion were possible within the strictly normal sphere of sexual love.
The early Christian legends about chastity did have successors. Aucassin et Nicolette, likely written in Northern France towards the end of the twelfth century, is primarily a continuation of the stories found in the Acta Sanctorum and other works. It captured their essence and advanced it, blending their refined appreciation for chastity and purity with the ideal of monogamous love. Aucassin et Nicolette marked the end of the early Christian romantic tales of chastity. It revealed that the subtle qualities of delicacy and devotion could exist within the normal bounds of sexual love.
There were at least two causes which tended to extinguish the primitive Christian attraction to chastity, even apart from the influence of the Church authorities in repressing its romantic manifestations. In the first place, the submergence of the old pagan world, with its practice and, to some extent, ideal of sexual indulgence, removed the foil which had given grace and delicacy to the tender freedom of the young Christians. In the second place, the austerities which the early Christians had gladly practised for the sake of their soul's health, were robbed of their charm and spontaneity by being made a formal part of codes of punishment for sin, first in the Penitentials and afterwards at the discretion of confessors. This, it may be added, was rendered the more necessary because the ideal of Christian chastity was no longer largely the possession of refined people who had been rendered immune to Pagan license by being brought up in its midst, and even themselves steeped in it. It was clearly from the first a serious matter for the violent North Africans to maintain the ideal of chastity, and when Christianity spread to Northern Europe it seemed almost a hopeless task to acclimatize its ideals among the wild Germans. Hereafter it became necessary for celibacy to be imposed on the regular clergy by the stern force of ecclesiastical authority, while voluntary celibacy was only kept alive by a succession of religious enthusiasts perpetually founding new Orders. An asceticism thus enforced could not always be accompanied by the ardent exaltation necessary to maintain it, and in its artificial efforts at self-preservation it frequently fell from its insecure heights to the depths of unrestrained license.[77] This fatality of all hazardous efforts to overpass humanity's normal limits begun to be realized after the Middle Ages were over by clear-sighted thinkers. "Qui veut faire l'ange," said Pascal, pungently summing up this view of the matter, "fait la bête." That had often been illustrated in the history of the Church.
There were at least two reasons that led to the decline of the early Christian appeal of chastity, even aside from the Church authorities suppressing its romantic expressions. First, the disappearance of the old pagan world, with its practices and, to some degree, ideals of sexual freedom, took away the contrast that had given elegance and subtlety to the tender liberties of young Christians. Second, the strict self-discipline that early Christians willingly embraced for the health of their souls lost its allure and naturalness when it became a formal part of punishment codes for sin, initially in the Penitentials and later at the discretion of confessors. It’s worth noting that this became increasingly necessary because the ideal of Christian chastity was no longer primarily held by refined individuals who had been sheltered from pagan excesses by their upbringing in that environment, even if they themselves were influenced by it. It was particularly tough for the passionate North Africans to uphold the ideal of chastity, and when Christianity spread to Northern Europe, it seemed almost impossible to adapt its ideals among the wild Germans. Subsequently, it became necessary for celibacy to be enforced on the regular clergy by strict ecclesiastical authority, while voluntary celibacy was sustained only by a series of religious enthusiasts constantly establishing new Orders. Such enforced asceticism couldn't always be matched with the intense passion needed to maintain it, and in its forced attempts at self-preservation, it frequently slipped from its precarious heights to the depths of unrestrained indulgence.[77] This ongoing struggle to exceed humanity's normal limits began to be recognized by insightful thinkers after the Middle Ages. "Qui veut faire l'ange," Pascal remarked sharply, "fait la bête." This concept had often been demonstrated in the history of the Church.
The Penitentials began to come into use in the seventh century, and became of wide prevalence and authority during the ninth and tenth centuries. They were bodies of law, partly spiritual and partly secular, and were thrown into the form of catalogues of offences with the exact measure of penance prescribed for each offence. They represented the introduction of social order among untamed barbarians, and were codes of criminal law much more than part of a system of sacramental confession and penance. In France and Spain, where order on a Christian basis already existed, they were little needed. They had their origin in Ireland and England, and especially flourished in Germany; Charlemagne supported them (see, e.g., Lea, History of Auricular Confession, vol. ii, p. 96, also Ch. XVII; Hugh Williams, edition of Gildas, Part II, Appendix 3; the chief Penitentials are reproduced in Wasserschleben's Bussordnungen).
The Penitentials started to be used in the seventh century and became widely accepted and authoritative during the ninth and tenth centuries. They were collections of laws that were partly spiritual and partly secular, formatted as lists of offenses with specific penance prescribed for each one. They represented the establishment of social order among unruly groups and were more about criminal law than a system of sacramental confession and penance. In France and Spain, where there was already some order based on Christianity, their need was limited. They originated in Ireland and England and particularly thrived in Germany; Charlemagne supported them (see, e.g., Lea, History of Auricular Confession, vol. ii, p. 96, also Ch. XVII; Hugh Williams, edition of Gildas, Part II, Appendix 3; the main Penitentials are included in Wasserschleben's Bussordnungen).
In 1216 the Lateran Council, under Innocent III, made confession obligatory. The priestly prerogative of regulating the amount of penance according to circumstances, with greater flexibility than the rigid Penitentials admitted, was first absolutely asserted by Peter of Poitiers. Then Alain de Lille threw aside the Penitentials as obsolete, and declared that the priest himself must inquire into the circumstances of each sin and weigh precisely its guilt (Lea, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 171).
In 1216, the Lateran Council, led by Innocent III, made confession mandatory. Peter of Poitiers was the first to strongly affirm the priestly authority to adjust the penance based on the situation, offering more flexibility than the strict Penitentials allowed. Then, Alain de Lille dismissed the Penitentials as outdated and stated that the priest must examine the specifics of each sin and carefully assess its level of guilt (Lea, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 171).
Long before this period, however, the ideals of chastity, so far as they involved any considerable degree of continence, although they had become firmly hardened into the conventional traditions and ideals of the Christian Church, had ceased to have any great charm or force for the people living in Christendom. Among the Northern barbarians, with different traditions of a more vigorous and natural order behind them, the demands of sex were often frankly exhibited. The monk Ordericus Vitalis, in the eleventh century, notes what he calls the "lasciviousness" of the wives of the Norman conquerors of England who, when left alone at home, sent messages that if their husbands failed to return speedily they would take new ones. The celibacy of the clergy was only established with the very greatest difficulty, and when it was established, priests became unchaste. Archbishop Odo of Rouen, in the thirteenth century, recorded in the diary of his diocesan visitations that there was one unchaste priest in every five parishes, and even as regards the Italy of the same period the friar Salimbene in his remarkable autobiography shows how little chastity was regarded in the religious life. Chastity could now only be maintained by force, usually the moral force of ecclesiastical authority, which was itself undermined by unchastity, but sometimes even physical force. It was in the thirteenth century, in the opinion of some, that the girdle of chastity (cingula castitatis) first begins to appear, but the chief authority, Caufeynon (La Ceinture de Chasteté, 1904) believes it only dates from the Renaissance (Schultz, Das Höfische Leben zur Zeit der Minnesänger, vol. i, p. 595; Dufour, Histoire de la Prostitution, vol. v, p. 272; Krauss, Anthropophyteia, vol. iii, p. 247). In the sixteenth century convents were liable to become almost brothels, as we learn on the unimpeachable authority of Burchard, a Pope's secretary, in his Diarium, edited by Thuasne who brings together additional authorities for this statement in a footnote (vol. ii, p. 79); that they remained so in the eighteenth century we see clearly in the pages of Casanova's Mémoires, and in many other documents of the period.
Long before this time, though, the ideals of chastity, particularly those involving any significant degree of self-control, had become deeply entrenched in the traditional beliefs and values of the Christian Church, but they lost much of their appeal and impact for people living in Christendom. Among the Northern barbarians, who had their own stronger and more natural traditions, sexual needs were often openly displayed. The monk Ordericus Vitalis, writing in the eleventh century, mentions what he calls the "lasciviousness" of the wives of the Norman conquerors of England, who, when their husbands were away, sent messages saying that if their husbands didn’t come back quickly, they would find new ones. The celibacy of the clergy was established only with great difficulty, and once it was in place, many priests remained unchaste. Archbishop Odo of Rouen, in the thirteenth century, noted in his diary during diocesan visitations that there was one unchaste priest in every five parishes, and regarding Italy during the same period, the friar Salimbene reveals how little chastity was valued in religious life. Chastity could now only be upheld through force—usually the moral force of ecclesiastical authority, which was itself weakened by unchastity, but sometimes through physical force as well. Some believe the girdle of chastity (cingula castitatis) began to appear in the thirteenth century, while the leading authority, Caufeynon (La Ceinture de Chasteté, 1904), argues it only originated during the Renaissance (Schultz, Das Höfische Leben zur Zeit der Minnesänger, vol. i, p. 595; Dufour, Histoire de la Prostitution, vol. v, p. 272; Krauss, Anthropophyteia, vol. iii, p. 247). In the sixteenth century, convents often functioned almost like brothels, as confirmed by Burchard, a Pope's secretary, in his Diarium, edited by Thuasne, who includes additional sources for this in a footnote (vol. ii, p. 79); and that they continued to be so in the eighteenth century is evident in the pages of Casanova's Mémoires, as well as in numerous other documents from that era.
The Renaissance and the rise of humanism undoubtedly affected the feeling towards asceticism and chastity. On the one hand a new and ancient sanction was found for the disregard of virtues which men began to look upon as merely monkish, and on the other hand the finer spirits affected by the new movement began to realize that chastity might be better cultivated and observed by those who were free to do as they would than by those who were under the compulsion of priestly authority. That is the feeling that prevails in Montaigne, and that is the idea of Rabelais when he made it the only rule of his Abbey of Thelème: "Fay ce que vouldras."
The Renaissance and the rise of humanism definitely changed attitudes toward asceticism and chastity. On one hand, a new and ancient justification was found for ignoring virtues that people began to see as simply monkish. On the other hand, those inspired by this new movement started to realize that chastity could be better practiced and respected by those who were free to make their own choices rather than by those who were forced by priestly authority. This perspective is evident in Montaigne's work and reflects Rabelais's belief when he established it as the only rule of his Abbey of Thelème: "Do what you will."
A little later this doctrine was repeated in varying tones by many writers more or less tinged by the culture brought into fashion by the Renaissance. "As long as Danae was free," remarks Ferrand in his sixteenth century treatise, De la Maladie d'Amour, "she was chaste." And Sir Kenelm Digby, the latest representative of the Renaissance spirit, insists in his Private Memoirs that the liberty which Lycurgus, "the wisest human law-maker that ever was," gave to women to communicate their bodies to men to whom they were drawn by noble affection, and the hope of generous offspring, was the true cause why "real chastity flourished in Sparta more than in any other part of the world."
A little later, this idea was echoed in different ways by many writers influenced by the culture popularized during the Renaissance. "As long as Danae was free," notes Ferrand in his sixteenth-century treatise, De la Maladie d'Amour, "she was chaste." And Sir Kenelm Digby, the most recent representative of the Renaissance spirit, argues in his Private Memoirs that the freedom Lycurgus, "the wisest human law-maker ever," granted to women to connect with men they felt noble affection for, and the hope of having generous offspring, was the real reason why "true chastity thrived in Sparta more than anywhere else in the world."
In Protestant countries the ascetic ideal of chastity was still further discredited by the Reformation movement which was in considerable part a revolt against compulsory celibacy. Religion was thus no longer placed on the side of chastity. In the eighteenth century, if not earlier, the authority of Nature also was commonly invoked against chastity. It has thus happened that during the past two centuries serious opinion concerning chastity has only been partially favorable to it. It began to be felt that an unhappy and injurious mistake had been perpetrated by attempting to maintain a lofty ideal which encouraged hypocrisy. "The human race would gain much," as Sénancour wrote early in the nineteenth century in his remarkable book on love, "if virtue were made less laborious. The merit would not be so great, but what is the use of an elevation which can rarely be sustained?"[78]
In Protestant countries, the ascetic ideal of chastity lost credibility even more due to the Reformation, which largely revolted against mandatory celibacy. Religion was no longer aligned with chastity. By the eighteenth century, if not earlier, the authority of Nature was often cited against chastity. As a result, over the past two centuries, serious opinions about chastity have only been somewhat supportive. People began to realize that it was a harmful and misguided mistake to uphold a lofty ideal that promoted hypocrisy. "Humanity would benefit greatly," as Sénancour wrote in his remarkable book on love in the early nineteenth century, "if virtue were made less burdensome. The merit wouldn't be as significant, but what's the point of an ideal that can rarely be maintained?"[78]
There can be no doubt that the undue discredit into which the idea of chastity began to fall from the eighteenth century onwards was largely due to the existence of that merely external and conventional physical chastity which was arbitrarily enforced so far as it could be enforced,—and is indeed in some degree still enforced, nominally or really,—upon all respectable women outside marriage. The conception of the physical virtue of virginity had degraded the conception of the spiritual virtue of chastity. A mere routine, it was felt, prescribed to a whole sex, whether they would or not, could never possess the beauty and charm of a virtue. At the same time it began to be realized that, as a matter of fact, the state of compulsory virginity is not only not a state especially favorable to the cultivation of real virtues, but that it is bound up with qualities which are no longer regarded as of high value.[79]
There’s no denying that the unfair stigma surrounding the idea of chastity started to decline from the eighteenth century onward. This was mainly due to the superficial and conventional physical chastity that was enforced as much as it could be— and is still, in some ways, enforced either officially or unofficially— on all respectable women outside of marriage. The idea of physical virginity diminished the perception of the spiritual value of chastity. It became clear that a routine imposed on an entire gender, whether they agreed with it or not, could never have the beauty and allure of a true virtue. At the same time, it was recognized that the mandatory state of virginity not only doesn’t foster real virtues but is also associated with qualities that are no longer seen as valuable.
"How arbitrary, artificial, contrary to Nature, is the life now imposed upon women in this matter of chastity!" wrote James Hinton forty years ago. "Think of that line: 'A woman who deliberates is lost.' We make danger, making all womanhood hang upon a point like this, and surrounding it with unnatural and preternatural dangers. There is a wanton unreason embodied in the life of woman now; the present 'virtue' is a morbid unhealthy plant. Nature and God never poised the life of a woman upon such a needle's point. The whole modern idea of chastity has in it sensual exaggeration, surely, in part, remaining to us from other times, with what was good in it in great part gone."
"How arbitrary, artificial, and contrary to nature is the life imposed on women regarding chastity!" wrote James Hinton forty years ago. "Think of that line: 'A woman who hesitates is doomed.' We create danger by making all of womanhood depend on something like this, surrounding it with unnatural and exaggerated threats. There is a reckless irrationality in the life of women today; the current idea of 'virtue' is a sickly, unhealthy concept. Nature and God never balanced a woman's life on such a fine point. The whole modern concept of chastity is filled with sensual exaggeration, which we inherited in part from earlier times, while much of the good has largely faded away."
Mérimée pointed out the same desiccating influence of virginity. In a letter dated 1859 he wrote: "I think that nowadays people attach far too much importance to chastity. Not that I deny that chastity is a virtue, but there are degrees in virtues just as there are in vices. It seems to be absurd that a woman should be banished from society for having had a lover, while a woman who is miserly, double-faced and spiteful goes everywhere. The morality of this age is assuredly not that which is taught in the Gospel. In my opinion it is better to love too much than not enough. Nowadays dry hearts are stuck up on a pinnacle" (Revue des Deux Mondes, April, 1896).
Mérimée pointed out the same draining effect of virginity. In a letter from 1859, he wrote: "I believe that nowadays people pay way too much attention to chastity. It's not that I deny that chastity is a virtue, but there are different levels of virtues just like there are with vices. It's ridiculous that a woman should be excluded from society for having had a lover, while a woman who is stingy, two-faced, and bitter is accepted everywhere. The morality of this age is definitely not what is taught in the Gospel. Personally, I think it's better to love too much than not enough. These days, dry hearts are placed on a pedestal" (Revue des Deux Mondes, April, 1896).
Dr. H. Paul has developed an allied point. She writes: "There are girls who, even as children, have prostituted themselves by masturbation and lascivious thoughts. The purity of their souls has long been lost and nothing remains unknown to them, but—they have preserved their hymens! That is for the sake of the future husband. Let no one dare to doubt their innocence with that unimpeachable evidence! And if another girl, who has passed her childhood in complete purity, now, with awakened senses and warm impetuous womanliness, gives herself to a man in love or even only in passion, they all stand up and scream that she is 'dishonored!' And, not least, the prostituted girl with the hymen. It is she indeed who screams loudest and throws the biggest stones. Yet the 'dishonored' woman, who is sound and wholesome, need not fear to tell what she has done to the man who desires her in marriage, speaking as one human being to another. She has no need to blush, she has exercised her human rights, and no reasonable man will on that account esteem her the less" (Dr. H. Paul, "Die Ueberschätzung der Jungfernschaft," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. ii, p. 14, 1907).
Dr. H. Paul has made a related point. She writes: "There are girls who, even as children, have engaged in prostitution through masturbation and erotic thoughts. The purity of their souls has long been lost, and nothing is unknown to them, but—they have kept their hymens! That is for the sake of their future husbands. Let no one dare to question their innocence with that undeniable proof! Yet if another girl, who has spent her childhood completely pure, now embraces her feelings and passionate womanhood, and gives herself to a man out of love or even just passion, everyone stands up and yells that she is 'dishonored!' And not least, it's the prostituted girl with the hymen. She is the one who screams the loudest and throws the biggest stones. However, the 'dishonored' woman, who is healthy and wholesome, shouldn’t hesitate to share what she has done with the man who wants to marry her, speaking as one person to another. She has no reason to be embarrassed; she has exercised her human rights, and no reasonable man will think less of her for it" (Dr. H. Paul, "Die Ueberschätzung der Jungfernschaft," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. ii, p. 14, 1907).
In a similar spirit writes F. Erhard (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. i, p. 408): "Virginity in one sense has its worth, but in the ordinary sense it is greatly overestimated. Apart from the fact that a girl who possesses it may yet be thoroughly perverted, this over-estimation of virginity leads to the girl who is without it being despised, and has further resulted in the development of a special industry for the preparation, by means of a prudishly cloistral education, of girls who will bring to their husbands the peculiar dainty of a bride who knows nothing about anything. Naturally, this can only be achieved at the expense of any rational education. What the undeveloped little goose may turn into, no man can foresee."
In a similar vein, F. Erhard writes in Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Vol. I, p. 408: "Virginity has some value, but it is often overrated. Aside from the fact that a girl who is a virgin can still be completely corrupted, this overvaluation leads to the disdain for girls who aren't virgins. It has also resulted in a particular industry dedicated to grooming girls through an overly sheltered education so they can bring their husbands the unusual novelty of a bride who knows nothing at all. Naturally, this can only be done at the cost of any meaningful education. What the undeveloped young woman might become is unpredictable."
Freud (Sexual-Probleme, March, 1908) also points out the evil results of the education for marriage which is given to girls on the basis of this ideal of virginity. "Education undertakes the task of repressing the girl's sensuality until the time of betrothal. It not only forbids sexual relations and sets a high premium on innocence, but it also withdraws the ripening womanly individuality from temptation, maintaining a state of ignorance concerning the practical side of the part she is intended to play in life, and enduring no stirring of love which cannot lead to marriage. The result is that when she is suddenly permitted to fall in love by the authority of her elders, the girl cannot bring her psychic disposition to bear, and goes into marriage uncertain of her own feelings. As a consequence of this artificial retardation of the function of love she brings nothing but deception to the husband who has set all his desires upon her, and manifests frigidity in her physical relations with him."
Freud (Sexual-Probleme, March, 1908) also highlights the negative effects of the education girls receive for marriage based on the ideal of virginity. "Education takes on the task of suppressing a girl's sexuality until she gets engaged. It not only forbids sexual relationships and places a high value on innocence, but it also keeps her developing womanly individuality away from temptation, ensuring she remains ignorant of the practical aspects of the role she is meant to play in life, and allows no stirring of love that cannot lead to marriage. The result is that when she is suddenly allowed to fall in love by the authority of her elders, the girl cannot apply her emotional state properly, and enters marriage unsure of her own feelings. Because of this artificial delay in the development of love, she brings nothing but deception to the husband who has pinned all his hopes on her, and shows a lack of passion in her physical relationship with him."
Sénancour (De l'Amour, vol. i, p. 285) even believes that, when it is possible to leave out of consideration the question of offspring, not only will the law of chastity become equal for the two sexes, but there will be a tendency for the situation of the sexes to be, to some extent, changed. "Continence becomes a counsel rather than a precept, and it is in women that the voluptuous inclination will be regarded with most indulgence. Man is made for work; he only meets pleasure in passing; he must be content that women should occupy themselves with it more than he. It is men whom it exhausts, and men must always, in part, restrain their desires."
Sénancour (De l'Amour, vol. i, p. 285) even thinks that, when we can set aside the issue of having children, the standard of chastity will become equal for both sexes, and there will be a shift in how the sexes are viewed, at least to some degree. "Self-control becomes more of a suggestion than a rule, and people will show more leniency towards women’s desires. Men are meant for work; they only encounter pleasure briefly; they should accept that women engage with it more than they do. It wears men out, and they must always, to some extent, rein in their desires."
As, however, we liberate ourselves from the bondage of a compulsory physical chastity, it becomes possible to rehabilitate chastity as a virtue. At the present day it can no longer be said that there is on the part of thinkers and moralists any active hostility to the idea of chastity; there is, on the contrary, a tendency to recognize the value of chastity. But this recognition has been accompanied by a return to the older and sounder conception of chastity. The preservation of a rigid sexual abstinence, an empty virginity, can only be regarded as a pseudo-chastity. The only positive virtue which Aristotle could have recognized in this field was a temperance involving restraint of the lower impulses, a wise exercise and not a non-exercise.[80] The best thinkers of the Christian Church adopted the same conception; St. Basil in his important monastic rules laid no weight on self-discipline as an end in itself, but regarded it as an instrument for enabling the spirit to gain power over the flesh. St. Augustine declared that continence is only excellent when practised in the faith of the highest good,[81] and he regarded chastity as "an orderly movement of the soul subordinating lower things to higher things, and specially to be manifested in conjugal relationships"; Thomas Aquinas, defining chastity in much the same way, defined impurity as the enjoyment of sexual pleasure not according to right reason, whether as regards the object or the conditions.[82] But for a time the voices of the great moralists were unheard. The virtue of chastity was swamped in the popular Christian passion for the annihilation of the flesh, and that view was, in the sixteenth century, finally consecrated by the Council of Trent, which formally pronounced an anathema upon anyone who should declare that the state of virginity and celibacy was not better than the state of matrimony. Nowadays the pseudo-chastity that was of value on the simple ground that any kind of continence is of higher spiritual worth than any kind of sexual relationship belongs to the past, except for those who adhere to ancient ascetic creeds. The mystic value of virginity has gone; it seems only to arouse in the modern man's mind the idea of a piquancy craved by the hardened rake;[83] it is men who have themselves long passed the age of innocence who attach so much importance to the innocence of their brides. The conception of life-long continence as an ideal has also gone; at the best it is regarded as a mere matter of personal preference. And the conventional simulation of universal chastity, at the bidding of respectability, is coming to be regarded as a hindrance rather than a help to the cultivation of any real chastity.[84]
As we free ourselves from the constraints of enforced physical purity, it becomes possible to reframe chastity as a virtue. Nowadays, it can’t be said that thinkers and moralists actively oppose the idea of chastity; on the contrary, there’s a growing recognition of its value. However, this recognition is accompanied by a return to an older, more sensible understanding of chastity. Strict sexual abstinence, or empty virginity, can only be viewed as a false form of chastity. The only true virtue that Aristotle could acknowledge in this area was temperance, which involves controlling lower impulses—a wise practice rather than a total lack of action. The best thinkers of the Christian Church shared this view; St. Basil, in his important monastic rules, didn't emphasize self-discipline as an end in itself but saw it as a means to empower the spirit over the flesh. St. Augustine stated that continence is truly admirable only when practiced in pursuit of the highest good, and he viewed chastity as "an orderly movement of the soul subordinating lower things to higher things, especially in marital relationships." Thomas Aquinas, who defined chastity similarly, described impurity as enjoying sexual pleasure in ways that aren’t guided by reason, whether regarding the object or the circumstances. For a time, however, the voices of great moralists went unheard. The virtue of chastity was overwhelmed by the popular Christian desire to suppress the flesh, a view that was reinforced by the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century, which formally condemned anyone claiming that virginity and celibacy were not superior to marriage. Nowadays, the false chastity that was valued simply because any kind of self-restraint is seen as spiritually superior to any sexual relationship is a thing of the past, except for those who cling to ancient ascetic beliefs. The mystical value of virginity has faded; it now evokes in the modern man’s mind only the notion of allure desired by the seasoned libertine; it’s men who have long lost their innocence who place such importance on their brides' purity. The idea of lifelong continence as an ideal has also disappeared; at best, it’s viewed simply as a matter of personal choice. Furthermore, the conventional pretense of universal chastity, driven by the desire for respectability, is increasingly viewed as an obstacle rather than a support for fostering any genuine sense of chastity.
The chastity that is regarded by the moralist of to-day as a virtue has its worth by no means in its abstinence. It is not, in St. Theresa's words, the virtue of the tortoise which withdraws its limbs under its carapace. It is a virtue because it is a discipline in self-control, because it helps to fortify the character and will, and because it is directly favorable to the cultivation of the most beautiful, exalted, and effective sexual life. So viewed, chastity may be opposed to the demands of debased mediæval Catholicism, but it is in harmony with the demands of our civilized life to-day, and by no means at variance with the requirements of Nature.
The chastity that today's moralists see as a virtue isn't valued simply for its abstinence. It's not, as St. Theresa put it, a virtue of the tortoise that pulls its limbs back under its shell. It's a virtue because it involves self-discipline, strengthens character and will, and promotes the development of a beautiful, elevated, and fulfilling sexual life. When understood this way, chastity may contradict the demands of corrupt medieval Catholicism, but it aligns with the expectations of our modern civilized life and is entirely consistent with the needs of Nature.
There is always an analogy between the instinct of reproduction and the instinct of nutrition. In the matter of eating it is the influence of science, of physiology, which has finally put aside an exaggerated asceticism, and made eating "pure." The same process, as James Hinton well pointed out, has been made possible in the sexual relationships; "science has in its hands the key to purity."[85]
There’s always a comparison between the instinct to reproduce and the instinct to eat. When it comes to eating, it’s the influence of science and physiology that has ultimately moved us away from extreme asceticism and made eating more "pure." The same change, as James Hinton noted, has also happened in sexual relationships; "science holds the key to purity."[85]
Many influences have, however, worked together to favor an insistence on chastity. There has, in the first place, been an inevitable reaction against the sexual facility which had come to be regarded as natural. Such facility was found to have no moral value, for it tended to relaxation of moral fibre and was unfavorable to the finest sexual satisfaction. It could not even claim to be natural in any broad sense of the word, for, in Nature generally, sexual gratification tends to be rare and difficult.[86] Courtship is arduous and long, the season of love is strictly delimited, pregnancy interrupts sexual relationships. Even among savages, so long as they have been untainted by civilization, virility is usually maintained by a fine asceticism; the endurance of hardship, self-control and restraint, tempered by rare orgies, constitute a discipline which covers the sexual as well as every other department of savage life. To preserve the same virility in civilized life, it may well be felt, we must deliberately cultivate a virtue which under savage conditions of life is natural.[87]
Many influences have come together to promote the importance of chastity. First, there has been a necessary backlash against the sexual freedom that was becoming seen as normal. This freedom was found to lack moral value, as it led to a weakening of moral integrity and was detrimental to the highest forms of sexual satisfaction. It couldn't even be considered truly natural in a broader sense, because in Nature, sexual gratification tends to be rare and challenging. Courtship is tough and lengthy, the season for love is strictly limited, and pregnancy disrupts sexual relationships. Even among primitive peoples who haven’t been corrupted by civilization, masculinity is usually maintained through a certain level of self-discipline; enduring hardships, practicing self-control and restraint, with infrequent indulgences, creates a discipline that encompasses sexuality as well as all other aspects of their lives. To maintain the same level of masculinity in civilized society, it seems necessary for us to intentionally cultivate a virtue that is instinctual under primitive conditions.
The influence of Nietzsche, direct and indirect, has been on the side of the virtue of chastity in its modern sense. The command: "Be hard," as Nietzsche used it, was not so much an injunction to an unfeeling indifference towards others as an appeal for a more strenuous attitude towards one's self, the cultivation of a self-control able to gather up and hold in the forces of the soul for expenditure on deliberately accepted ends. "A relative chastity," he wrote, "a fundamental and wise foresight in the face of erotic things, even in thought, is part of a fine reasonableness in life, even in richly endowed and complete natures."[88] In this matter Nietzsche is a typical representative of the modern movement for the restoration of chastity to its proper place as a real and beneficial virtue, and not a mere empty convention. Such a movement could not fail to make itself felt, for all that favors facility and luxurious softness in sexual matters is quickly felt to degrade character as well as to diminish the finest erotic satisfaction. For erotic satisfaction, in its highest planes, is only possible when we have secured for the sexual impulse a high degree of what Colin Scott calls "irradiation," that is to say a wide diffusion through the whole of the psychic organism. And that can only be attained by placing impediments in the way of the swift and direct gratification of sexual desire, by compelling it to increase its force, to take long circuits, to charge the whole organism so highly that the final climax of gratified love is not the trivial detumescence of a petty desire but the immense consummation of a longing in which the whole soul as well as the whole body has its part. "Only the chaste can be really obscene," said Huysmans. And on a higher plane, only the chaste can really love.
Nietzsche's influence, both directly and indirectly, has supported the idea of chastity in its modern meaning. The command: "Be hard," as Nietzsche understood it, was more about encouraging a rigorous attitude toward oneself than advocating for unfeeling indifference toward others. It called for developing self-control that can harness and direct the soul's energies toward consciously chosen goals. He wrote, "A relative chastity, a fundamental and wise foresight in the face of erotic things, even in thought, is part of a fine reasonableness in life, even in those who are richly endowed and complete."[88] In this regard, Nietzsche exemplifies the modern movement to restore chastity to its rightful status as a genuine and beneficial virtue, rather than just an empty social convention. Such a movement is bound to resonate, as anything that promotes ease and luxury in sexual matters is quickly recognized as degrading to character and diminishing true erotic satisfaction. The highest forms of erotic satisfaction can only occur when we ensure that sexual impulses are widely distributed throughout our mental and emotional being, as Colin Scott describes as "irradiation." This is achieved by putting obstacles in the way of instant sexual gratification, forcing desire to intensify which allows it to take longer paths. This charging of the entire being results in a climactic experience of love that is not merely the deflation of a small desire, but rather the profound culmination of a longing that engages both the soul and the body completely. "Only the chaste can be really obscene," Huysmans said. On a deeper level, only the chaste can truly love.
"Physical purity," remarks Hans Menjago ("Die Ueberschätzung der Physischen Reinheit," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. ii, Part VIII) "was originally valued as a sign of greater strength of will and firmness of character, and it marked a rise above primitive conditions. This purity was difficult to preserve in those unsure days; it was rare and unusual. From this rarity rose the superstition of supernatural power residing in the virgin. But this has no meaning as soon as such purity becomes general and a specially conspicuous degree of firmness of character is no longer needed to maintain it.... Physical purity can only possess value when it is the result of individual strength of character, and not when it is the result of compulsory rules of morality."
"Physical purity," says Hans Menjago ("Die Ueberschätzung der Physischen Reinheit," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. ii, Part VIII), "was originally seen as a sign of greater willpower and strong character, representing an elevation above primitive states. This purity was hard to maintain in those uncertain times; it was rare and exceptional. From this rarity emerged the superstition that supernatural power exists in the virgin. However, this idea loses significance once such purity becomes common, and a distinct level of character strength is no longer required to keep it... Physical purity can only hold value when it results from individual character strength, not when it comes from enforced moral standards."
Konrad Höller, who has given special attention to the sexual question in schools, remarks in relation to physical exercise: "The greatest advantage of physical exercises, however, is not the development of the active and passive strength of the body and its skill, but the establishment and fortification of the authority of the will over the body and its needs, so much given up to indolence. He who has learnt to endure and overcome, for the sake of a definite aim, hunger and thirst and fatigue, will be the better able to withstand sexual impulses and the temptation to gratify them, when better insight and æsthetic feeling have made clear to him, as one used to maintain authority over his body, that to yield would be injurious or disgraceful" (K. Höller, "Die Aufgabe der Volksschule," Sexualpädagogik, p. 70). Professor Schäfenacker (id., p. 102), who also emphasizes the importance of self-control and self-restraint, thinks a youth must bear in mind his future mission, as citizen and father of a family.
Konrad Höller, who has focused on the sexual question in schools, comments on physical exercise: "The biggest benefit of physical exercise isn't just the development of the body's strength and skills, but rather the establishment and reinforcement of willpower over the body and its desires, which are often given over to laziness. Someone who has learned to endure and overcome, for a specific goal, hunger, thirst, and fatigue, will be better equipped to resist sexual urges and the temptation to act on them when a clearer understanding and a sense of aesthetics have shown him, as someone who is used to controlling his body, that giving in would be harmful or shameful" (K. Höller, "Die Aufgabe der Volksschule," Sexualpädagogik, p. 70). Professor Schäfenacker (id., p. 102), who also underscores the importance of self-control and self-restraint, believes that a young person must keep in mind their future role as a citizen and a father.
A subtle and penetrative thinker of to-day, Jules de Gaultier, writing on morals without reference to this specific question, has discussed what new internal inhibitory motives we can appeal to in replacing the old external inhibition of authority and belief which is now decayed. He answers that the state of feeling on which old faiths were based still persists. "May not," he asks, "the desire for a thing that we love and wish for beneficently replace the belief that a thing is by divine will, or in the nature of things? Will not the presence of a bridle on the frenzy of instinct reveal itself as a useful attitude adopted by instinct itself for its own conservation, as a symptom of the force and health of instinct? Is not empire over oneself, the power of regulating one's acts, a mark of superiority and a motive for self-esteem? Will not this joy of pride have the same authority in preserving the instincts as was once possessed by religious fear and the pretended imperatives of reason?" (Jules de Gaultier, La Dépendance de la Morale et l'Indépendance des Mœurs, p. 153.)
A insightful and deep thinker of today, Jules de Gaultier, writing about morality without specifically addressing this question, has explored what new internal motivators we can rely on to replace the old external controls of authority and belief that have now faded. He responds that the emotional state which supported old beliefs still exists. "Could it be," he asks, "that the desire for something we love and wish for could beneficially take the place of the belief that something is due to divine will, or the nature of things? Will the presence of self-control over instinctual impulses show itself as a helpful approach adopted by instinct for its own preservation, as a sign of the strength and vitality of instinct? Isn't self-mastery, the ability to regulate one's actions, a sign of superiority and a source of self-esteem? Will not this prideful joy hold the same authority in preserving the instincts as the religious fear and supposed demands of reason once did?" (Jules de Gaultier, La Dépendance de la Morale et l'Indépendance des Mœurs, p. 153.)
H. G. Wells (in A Modern Utopia), pointing out the importance of chastity, though rejecting celibacy, invokes, like Jules de Gaultier, the motive of pride. "Civilization has developed far more rapidly than man has modified. Under the unnatural perfection of security, liberty, and abundance our civilization has attained, the normal untrained human being is disposed to excess in almost every direction; he tends to eat too much and too elaborately, to drink too much, to become lazy faster than his work can be reduced, to waste his interest upon displays, and to make love too much and too elaborately. He gets out of training, and concentrates upon egoistic or erotic broodings. Our founders organized motives from all sorts of sources, but I think the chief force to give men self-control is pride. Pride may not be the noblest thing in the soul, but it is the best king there, for all that. They looked to it to keep a man clean and sound and sane. In this matter, as in all matters of natural desire, they held no appetite must be glutted, no appetite must have artificial whets, and also and equally that no appetite should be starved. A man must come from the table satisfied, but not replete. And, in the matter of love, a straight and clean desire for a clean and straight fellow-creature was our founders' ideal. They enjoined marriage between equals as the duty to the race, and they framed directions of the precisest sort to prevent that uxorious inseparableness, that connubiality, that sometimes reduces a couple of people to something jointly less than either."
H. G. Wells (in A Modern Utopia) highlights the importance of chastity while rejecting celibacy, similar to Jules de Gaultier, by mentioning pride as a motivating factor. “Civilization has advanced much faster than humans have evolved. In the unnatural perfection of security, freedom, and abundance that our civilization has achieved, the average untrained person tends to indulge excessively in almost every way; they often eat too much and too elaborately, drink too much, become lazy quicker than they can work, waste their interests on showy distractions, and engage in love too much and too extravagantly. They fall out of shape and focus on self-centered or erotic thoughts. Our founders arranged motives from various sources, but I believe pride is the main force that promotes self-control in people. Pride may not be the highest quality in a person’s character, but it is the best ruler there is. They relied on it to keep a person clean, healthy, and sane. In this area, as in all aspects of natural desire, they believed that no appetite should be overindulged, no appetite should be artificially stimulated, and equally, no appetite should be deprived. A person should leave the table satisfied, but not stuffed. And regarding love, the ideal for our founders was a sincere and pure desire for a genuine and honest fellow human. They advocated for marriage between equals as a duty to society, and they crafted detailed guidelines to prevent that overly clingy attachment, that marital bond, which sometimes turns a couple into something collectively less than either individual.”
With regard to chastity as an element of erotic satisfaction, Edward Carpenter writes (Love's Coming of Age, p. 11): "There is a kind of illusion about physical desire similar to that which a child suffers from when, seeing a beautiful flower, it instantly snatches the same, and destroys in a few moments the form and fragrance which attracted it. He only gets the full glory who holds himself back a little, and truly possesses, who is willing, if need be, not to possess. He is indeed a master of life who, accepting the grosser desires as they come to his body, and not refusing them, knows how to transform them at will into the most rare and fragrant flowers of human emotion."
Regarding chastity as a part of erotic satisfaction, Edward Carpenter writes (Love's Coming of Age, p. 11): "There’s a certain illusion about physical desire that's similar to what a child experiences when it sees a beautiful flower, instantly grabs it, and quickly destroys the shape and scent that drew it in. Only those who hold back a little and truly possess it, who are willing, if necessary, not to possess, get to enjoy the full glory. He is truly a master of life who, by acknowledging the more basic desires as they arise in his body and not rejecting them, knows how to transform them at will into the most rare and fragrant flowers of human emotion."
Beyond its functions in building up character, in heightening and ennobling the erotic life, and in subserving the adequate fulfilment of family and social duties, chastity has a more special value for those who cultivate the arts. We may not always be inclined to believe the writers who have declared that their verse alone is wanton, but their lives chaste. It is certainly true, however, that a relationship of this kind tends to occur. The stuff of the sexual life, as Nietzsche says, is the stuff of art; if it is expended in one channel it is lost for the other. The masters of all the more intensely emotional arts have frequently cultivated a high degree of chastity. This is notably the case as regards music; one thinks of Mozart,[89] of Beethoven, of Schubert, and many lesser men. In the case of poets and novelists chastity may usually seem to be less prevalent but it is frequently well-marked, and is not seldom disguised by the resounding reverberations which even the slightest love-episode often exerts on the poetic organism. Goethe's life seems, at a first glance, to be a long series of continuous love-episodes. Yet when we remember that it was the very long life of a man whose vigor remained until the end, that his attachments long and profoundly affected his emotional life and his work, and that with most of the women he has immortalized he never had actual sexual relationships at all, and when we realize, moreover, that, throughout, he accomplished an almost inconceivably vast amount of work, we shall probably conclude that sexual indulgence had a very much smaller part in Goethe's life than in that of many an average man on whom it leaves no obvious emotional or intellectual trace whatever. Sterne, again, declared that he must always have a Dulcinea dancing in his head, yet the amount of his intimate relations with women appears to have been small. Balzac spent his life toiling at his desk and carrying on during many years a love correspondence with a woman he scarcely ever saw and at the end only spent a few months of married life with. The like experience has befallen many artistic creators. For, in the words of Landor, "absence is the invisible and incorporeal mother of ideal beauty."
Beyond its role in shaping character, enriching and elevating our romantic lives, and supporting the fulfillment of family and social responsibilities, chastity holds a unique significance for those who pursue the arts. We might be skeptical of the writers who claim their poetry is provocative while their lives are chaste, but it is indeed the case that such a connection often exists. As Nietzsche suggests, the essence of our sexual lives is also the essence of art; if it’s invested in one area, it’s lost for the other. Many creators of deeply emotional art have often embraced a significant degree of chastity. This is especially true in music; think of Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, and many others. While poets and novelists may seem less chaste, this quality is often pronounced and can be obscured by the powerful impacts that even brief romantic encounters can have on the artistic mind. At first glance, Goethe's life appears to be filled with continuous love affairs. However, considering that he lived a long life full of vigor until the end, that his relationships deeply influenced his emotional world and creativity, and that with most women he immortalized, he never had any sexual relations at all, along with the staggering amount of work he produced, we might conclude that sexual indulgence played a significantly smaller role in Goethe's life than in the average man, who often leaves no visible emotional or intellectual mark from such experiences. Sterne claimed he always needed a Dulcinea in his thoughts, yet his actual romantic encounters seem to have been limited. Balzac dedicated his life to writing and maintained a long-distance love correspondence with a woman he rarely met, ultimately spending only a few months married to her. Many other artists have had similar experiences. As Landor said, "absence is the invisible and incorporeal mother of ideal beauty."
We do well to remember that, while the auto-erotic manifestations through the brain are of infinite variety and importance, the brain and the sexual organs are yet the great rivals in using up bodily energy, and that there is an antagonism between extreme brain vigor and extreme sexual vigor, even although they may sometimes both appear at different periods in the same individual.[90] In this sense there is no paradox in the saying of Ramon Correa that potency is impotence and impotence potency, for a high degree of energy, whether in athletics or in intellect or in sexual activity, is unfavorable to the display of energy in other directions. Every high degree of potency has its related impotencies.
We should keep in mind that, while the brain's auto-erotic expressions are incredibly diverse and significant, the brain and the sexual organs are major competitors for our body’s energy, and there is a conflict between extreme brainpower and extreme sexual energy, even though they may both show up at different times in the same person.[90] In this way, there’s no contradiction in Ramon Correa's statement that potency is impotence and impotence is potency, because a high level of energy—whether in sports, intellect, or sexual activity—can hinder the performance of energy in other areas. Every high level of potency comes with its own related deficiencies.
It may be added that we may find a curiously inconsistent proof of the excessive importance attached to sexual function by a society which systematically tries to depreciate sex, in the disgrace which is attributed to the lack of "virile" potency. Although civilized life offers immense scope for the activities of sexually impotent persons, the impotent man is made to feel that, while he need not be greatly concerned if he suffers from nervous disturbances of digestion, if he should suffer just as innocently from nervous disturbances of the sexual impulse, it is almost a crime. A striking example of this was shown, a few years ago, when it was plausibly suggested that Carlyle's relations with his wife might best be explained by supposing that he suffered from some trouble of sexual potency. At once admirers rushed forward to "defend" Carlyle from this "disgraceful" charge; they were more shocked than if it had been alleged that he was a syphilitic. Yet impotence is, at the most, an infirmity, whether due to some congenital anatomical defect or to a disturbance of nervous balance in the delicate sexual mechanism, such as is apt to occur in men of abnormally sensitive temperament. It is no more disgraceful to suffer from it than from dyspepsia, with which, indeed, it may be associated. Many men of genius and high moral character have been sexually deformed. This was the case with Cowper (though this significant fact is suppressed by his biographers); Ruskin was divorced for a reason of this kind; and J. S. Mill, it is said, was sexually of little more than infantile development.
It’s interesting to note the inconsistent evidence of the importance society places on sexual function, despite its efforts to downplay sex. The shame linked to lacking "manly" potency is a reflection of this. Although modern life provides plenty of opportunities for those who are sexually impotent, these men often feel that while it’s not a big deal to have issues with their digestion, experiencing problems with their sexual drive is almost considered a crime. A striking example occurred a few years ago when someone suggested that the complexity of Carlyle’s relationship with his wife could be due to erectile issues. Immediately, his supporters rushed to "defend" him against this "shameful" accusation; they were more upset than if it were claimed he had syphilis. Yet impotence is basically just a condition, whether caused by a physical defect or a nervous system imbalance, which can happen to men with particularly sensitive personalities. It’s no more shameful to experience this than to have dyspepsia, which it can indeed accompany. Many brilliant and morally upright men have had sexual issues. Cowper’s situation is one example (although his biographers tend to hide this fact); Ruskin was divorced for a similar reason; and it’s said that J. S. Mill had barely developed sexual characteristics.
Up to this point I have been considering the quality of chastity and the quality of asceticism in their most general sense and without any attempt at precise differentiation.[91] But if we are to accept these as modern virtues, valid to-day, it is necessary that we should be somewhat more precise in defining them. It seems most convenient, and most strictly accordant also with etymology, if we agree to mean by asceticism or ascesis, the athlete quality of self-discipline, controlling, by no means necessarily for indefinitely prolonged periods, the gratification of the sexual impulse. By chastity, which is primarily the quality of purity, and secondarily that of holiness, rather than of abstinence, we may best understand a due proportion between erotic claims and the other claims of life. "Chastity," as Ellen Key well says, "is harmony between body and soul in relation to love." Thus comprehended, asceticism is the virtue of control that leads up to erotic gratification, and chastity is the virtue which exerts its harmonizing influence in the erotic life itself.
Up to this point, I've been looking at the concepts of chastity and asceticism in a very general way and without trying to differentiate them precisely. But if we want to accept these as modern virtues that are relevant today, we need to be a bit clearer in how we define them. It seems most convenient, and aligns with their etymology, if we agree to define asceticism or ascesis as the athlete-like quality of self-discipline, which controls the gratification of sexual desires, not necessarily for extended periods. Chastity, which primarily refers to purity and secondarily to holiness rather than just abstinence, can be understood as a proper balance between sexual desires and other life demands. "Chastity," as Ellen Key aptly states, "is harmony between body and soul in relation to love." Understood this way, asceticism is the virtue of control that leads up to sexual gratification, while chastity is the virtue that brings harmony into the erotic life itself.
It will be seen that asceticism by no means necessarily involves perpetual continence. Properly understood, asceticism is a discipline, a training, which has reference to an end not itself. If it is compulsorily perpetual, whether at the dictates of a religious dogma, or as a mere fetish, it is no longer on a natural basis, and it is no longer moral, for the restraint of a man who has spent his whole life in a prison is of no value for life. If it is to be natural and to be moral asceticism must have an end outside itself, it must subserve the ends of vital activity, which cannot be subserved by a person who is engaged in a perpetual struggle with his own natural instincts. A man may, indeed, as a matter of taste or preference, live his whole life in sexual abstinence, freely and easily, but in that case he is not an ascetic, and his abstinence is neither a subject for applause nor for criticism.
It’s important to understand that asceticism doesn’t necessarily mean constant abstinence from physical pleasures. When properly understood, asceticism is a form of discipline or training aimed at a goal beyond itself. If it becomes an enforced state—whether because of a religious belief or simply as a personal obsession—it loses its natural foundation and moral value; for example, the restraint of someone who has spent their entire life in prison holds no significance for living. For asceticism to be natural and moral, it must have an objective outside itself. It should support the goals of vital activity, which a person cannot do if they are constantly battling their own natural instincts. A person might choose to live their entire life in sexual abstinence out of personal preference, and if they do so freely and comfortably, they aren’t truly an ascetic, and their choice isn’t something to be praised or criticized.
In the same way chastity, far from involving sexual abstinence, only has its value when it is brought within the erotic sphere. A purity that is ignorance, when the age of childish innocence is once passed, is mere stupidity; it is nearer to vice than to virtue. Nor is purity consonant with effort and struggle; in that respect it differs from asceticism. "We conquer the bondage of sex," Rosa Mayreder says, "by acceptance, not by denials, and men can only do this with the help of women." The would-be chastity of cold calculation is equally unbeautiful and unreal, and without any sort of value. A true and worthy chastity can only be supported by an ardent ideal, whether, as among the early Christians, this is the erotic ideal of a new romance, or, as among ourselves, a more humanly erotic ideal. "Only erotic idealism," says Ellen Key, "can arouse enthusiasm for chastity." Chastity in a healthily developed person can thus be beautifully exercised only in the actual erotic life; in part it is the natural instinct of dignity and temperance; in part it is the art of touching the things of sex with hands that remember their aptness for all the fine ends of life. Upon the doorway of entrance to the inmost sanctuary of love there is thus the same inscription as on the doorway to the Epidaurian Sanctuary of Aesculapius: "None but the pure shall enter here."
In the same way, chastity, rather than being just about abstaining from sex, only has value when it's connected to the erotic realm. A purity that comes from ignorance, after the time of childhood innocence is gone, is just foolishness; it's closer to vice than to virtue. Purity also doesn't align with effort and struggle, which sets it apart from asceticism. "We overcome the bondage of sex," Rosa Mayreder says, "through acceptance, not denial, and men can only achieve this with women's support." The supposed chastity of cold calculation is equally unattractive and unrealistic, lacking any real value. True and meaningful chastity can only be upheld by a passionate ideal, whether, as with the early Christians, it’s the erotic ideal of a new romance, or, as it is today, a more humanly erotic ideal. "Only erotic idealism," says Ellen Key, "can inspire enthusiasm for chastity." Chastity in a well-developed person can thus be beautifully practiced only in actual erotic life; partly it is the natural instinct for dignity and moderation; partly it is the skill of engaging with sexual matters in a way that remembers their capacity for all the good things in life. On the entrance to the deepest sanctuary of love, there is the same inscription as on the entrance to the Epidaurian Sanctuary of Aesculapius: "Only the pure shall enter here."
It will be seen that the definition of chastity remains somewhat lacking in precision. That is inevitable. We cannot grasp purity tightly, for, like snow, it will merely melt in our hands. "Purity itself forbids too minute a system of rules for the observance of purity," well says Sidgwick (Methods of Ethics, Bk. iii, Ch. IX). Elsewhere (op. cit., Bk. iii, Ch. XI) he attempts to answer the question: What sexual relations are essentially impure? and concludes that no answer is possible. "There appears to be no distinct principle, having any claim to self-evidence, upon which the question can be answered so as to command general assent." Even what is called "Free Love," he adds, "in so far as it is earnestly advocated as a means to a completer harmony of sentiment between men and women, cannot be condemned as impure, for it seems paradoxical to distinguish purity from impurity merely by less rapidity of transition."
The definition of chastity is still a bit unclear. That's unavoidable. We can't hold onto purity tightly, because, like snow, it will just slip away. "Purity itself prevents us from creating too detailed a set of rules for maintaining it," as Sidgwick wisely states (Methods of Ethics, Bk. iii, Ch. IX). In another part of his work (op. cit., Bk. iii, Ch. XI), he tries to tackle the question: What sexual relationships are fundamentally impure? He concludes that there's no definitive answer. "There seems to be no clear principle that anyone would universally accept to answer this question." He even points out that what’s called "Free Love," when genuinely promoted as a way to achieve better harmony between men and women, can't be labeled as impure, as it seems contradictory to separate purity from impurity just based on the speed of transition.
Moll, from the standpoint of medical psychology, reaches the same conclusion as Sidgwick from that of ethics. In a report on the "Value of Chastity for Men," published as an appendix to the third edition (1899) of his Konträre Sexualempfindung, the distinguished Berlin physician discusses the matter with much vigorous common sense, insisting that "chaste and unchaste are relative ideas." We must not, he states, as is so often done, identify "chaste" with "sexually abstinent." He adds that we are not justified in describing all extra-marital sexual intercourse as unchaste, for, if we do so, we shall be compelled to regard nearly all men, and some very estimable women, as unchaste. He rightly insists that in this matter we must apply the same rule to women as to men, and he points out that even when it involves what may be technically adultery sexual intercourse is not necessarily unchaste. He takes the case of a girl who, at eighteen, when still mentally immature, is married to a man with whom she finds it impossible to live and a separation consequently occurs, although a divorce may be impossible to obtain. If she now falls passionately in love with a man her love may be entirely chaste, though it involves what is technically adultery.
Moll, from the perspective of medical psychology, arrives at the same conclusion as Sidgwick does from an ethical standpoint. In a report on the "Value of Chastity for Men," published as an appendix to the third edition (1899) of his Konträre Sexualempfindung, the renowned Berlin physician addresses the topic with a lot of practical common sense, asserting that "chaste and unchaste are relative ideas." He emphasizes that we shouldn't, as is commonly done, equate "chaste" with "sexually abstinent." He argues that we are not justified in labeling all extra-marital sexual intercourse as unchaste because doing so would lead us to classify nearly all men, as well as some very respectable women, as unchaste. He rightly insists that the same standards should apply to women as to men, pointing out that even when it involves what might technically be considered adultery, sexual intercourse is not necessarily unchaste. He illustrates this with the example of a girl who, at eighteen and still mentally immature, marries a man with whom she cannot live, leading to a separation, even if a divorce is unattainable. If she then falls passionately in love with another man, her love may be entirely chaste, despite technically being considered adultery.
In thus understanding asceticism and chastity, and their beneficial functions in life, we see that they occupy a place midway between the artificially exaggerated position they once held and that to which they were degraded by the inevitable reaction of total indifference or actual hostility which followed. Asceticism and chastity are not rigid categorical imperatives; they are useful means to desirable ends; they are wise and beautiful arts. They demand our estimation, but not our over-estimation. For in over-estimating them, it is too often forgotten, we over-estimate the sexual instinct. The instinct of sex is indeed extremely important. Yet it has not that all-embracing and supereminent importance which some, even of those who fight against it, are accustomed to believe. That artificially magnified conception of the sexual impulse is fortified by the artificial emphasis placed upon asceticism. We may learn the real place of the sexual impulse in learning how we may reasonably and naturally view the restraints on that impulse.
In understanding asceticism and chastity, along with their positive roles in life, we recognize that they hold a position that’s balanced between the extreme views they once had and the neglect or outright rejection that followed. Asceticism and chastity aren't rigid rules; they're valuable tools for achieving worthwhile goals; they represent wise and beautiful practices. They deserve our appreciation, but not our excessive admiration. Because when we overvalue them, we often forget to acknowledge the significance of the sexual instinct. The sexual instinct is indeed very important. However, it doesn’t hold the overwhelming and supreme importance that some people, even those who oppose it, tend to believe. This inflated view of the sexual drive is reinforced by the undue emphasis placed on asceticism. We can understand the true role of the sexual impulse by considering how we can reasonably and naturally approach the restrictions on that impulse.
For Blake and for Shelley, as well as, it may be added, for Hinton, chastity, as Todhunter remarks in his Study of Shelley, is "a type of submission to the actual, a renunciation of the infinite, and is therefore hated by them. The chaste man, i.e., the man of prudence and self-control, is the man who has lost the nakedness of his primitive innocence."
For Blake and Shelley, and also for Hinton, chastity, as Todhunter points out in his Study of Shelley, is "a form of submission to reality, a rejection of the infinite, and is therefore despised by them. The chaste man, i.e., the man of caution and self-discipline, is the one who has lost the purity of his original innocence."
For evidence of the practices of savages in this matter, see Appendix A to the third volume of these Studies, "The Sexual Instinct in Savages." Cf. also Chs. IV and VII of Westermarck's History of Human Marriage, and also Chs. XXXVIII and XLI of the same author's Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii; Frazer's Golden Bough contains much bearing on this subject, as also Crawley's Mystic Rose.
For examples of the customs of primitive people regarding this topic, see Appendix A in the third volume of these Studies, "The Sexual Instinct in Savages." Also refer to Chs. IV and VII of Westermarck's History of Human Marriage, as well as Chs. XXXVIII and XLI of the same author's Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii; Frazer's Golden Bough has a lot of relevant information on this topic, as does Crawley's Mystic Rose.
See, e.g., Westermarck, Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, pp. 412 et seq.
See, e.g. Westermarck, Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, pp. 412 et seq.
Thus an old Maori declared, a few years ago, that the decline of his race has been entirely due to the loss of the ancient religious faith in the tabu. "For," said he (I quote from an Auckland newspaper), "in the olden-time our tapu ramified the whole social system. The head, the hair, spots where apparitions appeared, places which the tohungas proclaimed as sacred, we have forgotten and disregarded. Who nowadays thinks of the sacredness of the head? See when the kettle boils, the young man jumps up, whips the cap off his head, and uses it for a kettle-holder. Who nowadays but looks on with indifference when the barber of the village, if he be near the fire, shakes the loose hair off his cloth into it, and the joke and the laughter goes on as if no sacred operation had just been concluded. Food is consumed on places which, in bygone days, it dared not even be carried over."
A few years ago, an older Maori said that the decline of his people is entirely due to losing their ancient religious faith in the tabu. "In the past," he stated (I quote from an Auckland newspaper), "our tapu influenced the entire social structure. We have forgotten and ignored the sacredness of the head, the hair, spots where spirits appeared, and places declared sacred by the tohungas. Who today thinks about the sacredness of the head? When the kettle boils, the young guy jumps up, takes off his cap, and uses it as a kettle-holder. Who nowadays is indifferent when the village barber, if he’s near the fire, shakes the loose hair off his cloth into it, and everyone just laughs and jokes as if no sacred act just happened? Food is eaten in places where, in the past, it couldn’t even be carried over.”
Thus, long before Christian monks arose, the ascetic life of the cloister on very similar lines existed in Egypt in the worship of Serapis (Dill, Roman Society, p. 79).
Thus, long before Christian monks emerged, a similar ascetic lifestyle in the cloister existed in Egypt in the worship of Serapis (Dill, Roman Society, p. 79).
At night, in the baptistry, with lamps dimly burning, the women were stripped even of their tunics, plunged three times in the pool, then anointed, dressed in white, and kissed.
At night, in the baptistry, with lamps softly glowing, the women were stripped of their tunics, dipped three times in the pool, then anointed, dressed in white, and kissed.
Thus Jerome, in his letter to Eustochium, refers to those couples who "share the same room, often even the same bed, and call us suspicious if we draw any conclusions," while Cyprian (Epistola, 86) is unable to approve of those men he hears of, one a deacon, who live in familiar intercourse with virgins, even sleeping in the same bed with them, for, he declares, the feminine sex is weak and youth is wanton.
Thus Jerome, in his letter to Eustochium, refers to those couples who "share the same room, often even the same bed, and call us suspicious if we draw any conclusions," while Cyprian (Epistola, 86) cannot approve of certain men he hears about, one being a deacon, who maintain close relationships with virgins, even sleeping in the same bed with them, for he declares that women are weak and young people are often reckless.
Perpetua (Acta Sanctorum, March 7) is termed by Hort and Mayor "that fairest flower in the garden of post-Apostolic Christendom." She was not, however, a virgin, but a young mother with a baby at her breast.
Perpetua (Acta Sanctorum, March 7) is described by Hort and Mayor as "the most beautiful flower in the garden of post-Apostolic Christianity." However, she wasn't a virgin; she was a young mother with a baby at her breast.
The strength of early Christian asceticism lay in its spontaneous and voluntary character. When, in the ninth century, the Carlovingians attempted to enforce monastic and clerical celibacy, the result was a great outburst of unchastity and crime; nunneries became brothels, nuns were frequently guilty of infanticide, monks committed unspeakable abominations, the regular clergy formed incestuous relations with their nearest female relatives (Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, vol. i, pp, 155 et seq.).
The strength of early Christian asceticism was its spontaneous and voluntary nature. In the ninth century, when the Carolingians tried to impose monastic and clerical celibacy, it led to a significant rise in immorality and crime; nunneries turned into brothels, nuns often committed infanticide, monks engaged in unspeakable acts, and the regular clergy developed incestuous relationships with their closest female relatives (Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, vol. i, pp. 155 et seq.).
Sénancour, De l'Amour, vol. ii, p. 233. Islam has placed much less stress on chastity than Christianity, but practically, it would appear, there is often more regard for chastity under Mohammedan rule than under Christian rule. Thus it is stated by "Viator" (Fortnightly Review, Dec., 1908) that formerly, under Turkish Moslem rule, it was impossible to buy the virtue of women in Bosnia, but that now, under the Christian rule of Austria, it is everywhere possible to buy women near the Austrian frontier.
Sénancour, De l'Amour, vol. ii, p. 233. Islam emphasizes chastity less than Christianity, but in practice, it seems that there is often more respect for chastity under Muslim rule than under Christian rule. "Viator" states in the Fortnightly Review (Dec., 1908) that in the past, under Turkish Muslim rule, it was impossible to buy the virtue of women in Bosnia, but now, under the Christian rule of Austria, it is possible to buy women near the Austrian border.
The basis of this feeling was strengthened when it was shown by scholars that the physical virtue of "virginity" had been masquerading under a false name. To remain a virgin seems to have meant at the first, among peoples of early Aryan culture, by no means to take a vow of chastity, but to refuse to submit to the yoke of patriarchal marriage. The women who preferred to stand outside marriage were "virgins," even though mothers of large families, and Æschylus speaks of the Amazons as "virgins," while in Greek the child of an unmarried girl was always "the virgin's son." The history of Artemis, the most primitive of Greek deities, is instructive from this point of view. She was originally only virginal in the sense that she rejected marriage, being the goddess of a nomadic and matriarchal hunting people who had not yet adopted marriage, and she was the goddess of childbirth, worshipped with orgiastic dances and phallic emblems. It was by a late transformation that Artemis became the goddess of chastity (Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, vol. ii, pp. 442 et seq.; Sir W. M. Ramsay, Cities of Phrygia, vol. i, p. 96; Paul Lafargue, "Les Mythes Historiques," Revue des Idées, Dec., 1904).
The foundation of this feeling was reinforced when scholars demonstrated that the physical virtue of "virginity" had been misrepresented. To be a virgin originally seemed to mean, among early Aryan cultures, not taking a vow of chastity, but rather refusing to enter the constraints of patriarchal marriage. Women who chose to remain outside of marriage were labeled "virgins," even if they were mothers of multiple children, and Æschylus referred to the Amazons as "virgins," while in Greek, the child of an unmarried woman was always called "the virgin's son." The story of Artemis, the most ancient of Greek deities, is revealing in this context. She was initially virginal only in the sense that she rejected marriage, as she was the goddess of a nomadic, matriarchal hunting society that had not yet embraced marriage, and she was also the goddess of childbirth, honored with ecstatic dances and phallic symbols. It was through a later change that Artemis became recognized as the goddess of chastity (Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, vol. ii, pp. 442 et seq.; Sir W. M. Ramsay, Cities of Phrygia, vol. i, p. 96; Paul Lafargue, "Les Mythes Historiques," Revue des Idées, Dec., 1904).
See, e.g., Nicomachean Ethics, Bk. iii, Ch. XIII.
See, e.g., Nicomachean Ethics, Bk. iii, Ch. XIII.
De Civitate Dei, lib. xv, cap. XX. A little further on (lib. xvi, cap. XXV) he refers to Abraham as a man able to use women as a man should, his wife temperately, his concubine compliantly, neither immoderately.
De Civitate Dei, lib. xv, cap. XX. A bit later (lib. xvi, cap. XXV), he mentions Abraham as a man who can relate to women appropriately, treating his wife with moderation and his concubine with willingness, without excess in either case.
Summa, Migne's edition, vol. iii, qu. 154, art. I.
Summa, Migne's edition, vol. iii, qu. 154, art. I.
See the Study of Modesty in the first volume of these Studies.
See the Study of Modesty in the first volume of these Studies.
The majority of chaste youths, remarks an acute critic of modern life (Hellpach, Nervosität und Kultur, p. 175), are merely actuated by traditional principles, or by shyness, fear of venereal infections, lack of self-confidence, want of money, very seldom by any consideration for a future wife, and that indeed would be a tragi-comic error, for a woman lays no importance on intact masculinity. Moreover, he adds, the chaste man is unable to choose a wife wisely, and it is among teachers and clergymen—the chastest class—that most unhappy marriages are made. Milton had already made this fact an argument for facility of divorce.
Most chaste young people, as noted by a sharp observer of modern life (Hellpach, Nervosität und Kultur, p. 175), are driven primarily by traditional values, shyness, fear of sexually transmitted infections, low self-esteem, or financial issues, and very rarely by any thoughts of a future wife. In fact, that would be a tragi-comic mistake, as women don't place much value on a man's virginity. Additionally, he points out that the chaste man struggles to choose a wife wisely, and it's among teachers and clergymen—the most chaste group—where many unhappy marriages occur. Milton had already cited this reality as an argument for easier divorce.
"In eating," said Hinton, "we have achieved the task of combining pleasure with an absence of 'lust.' The problem for man and woman is so to use and possess the sexual passion as to make it the minister to higher things, with no restraint on it but that. It is essentially connected with things of the spiritual order, and would naturally revolve round them. To think of it as merely bodily is a mistake."
"In eating," Hinton said, "we've managed to blend pleasure with a lack of 'lust.' The challenge for both men and women is to channel and embrace their sexual passion in a way that serves greater purposes, with no limitations other than that. It's fundamentally linked to spiritual matters and should naturally revolve around them. To view it as just a physical experience is a misunderstanding."
See "Analysis of the Sexual Impulse," and Appendix, "The Sexual Instinct in Savages," in vol. iii of these Studies.
See "Analysis of the Sexual Impulse," and Appendix, "The Sexual Instinct in Savages," in vol. iii of these Studies.
I have elsewhere discussed more at length the need in modern civilized life of a natural and sincere asceticism (see Affirmations, 1898) "St. Francis and Others."
I have previously talked more in-depth about the necessity of a genuine and natural form of asceticism in today's civilized life (see Affirmations, 1898) "St. Francis and Others."
Der Wille zur Macht, p. 392.
Der Wille zur Macht, p. 392.
At the age of twenty-five, when he had already produced much fine work, Mozart wrote in his letters that he had never touched a woman, though he longed for love and marriage. He could not afford to marry, he would not seduce an innocent girl, a venial relation was repulsive to him.
At twenty-five, after creating a lot of great work, Mozart wrote in his letters that he had never been with a woman, even though he wanted love and marriage. He couldn't afford to get married, and he didn't want to seduce an innocent girl; the idea of a casual relationship disgusted him.
Reibmayr, Die Entwicklungsgeschichte des Talentes und Genies., Bd. i, p. 437.
Reibmayr, The Development History of Talent and Genius., Vol. 1, p. 437.
We may exclude altogether, it is scarcely necessary to repeat, the quality of virginity—that is to say, the possession of an intact hymen—since this is a merely physical quality with no necessary ethical relationships. The demand for virginity in women is, for the most part, either the demand for a better marketable article, or for a more powerful stimulant to masculine desire. Virginity involves no moral qualities in its possessor. Chastity and asceticism, on the other hand, are meaningless terms, except as demands made by the spirit on itself or on the body it controls.
We can completely disregard the quality of virginity—that is, having an intact hymen—since it's just a physical attribute with no essential ethical implications. The demand for virginity in women is mostly about wanting a more appealing product or a stronger trigger for male desire. Virginity doesn't carry any moral value for the person who has it. In contrast, chastity and asceticism are pointless concepts, except as expectations that the spirit places on itself or on the body it governs.
CHAPTER VI.
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE.
The Influence of Tradition—The Theological Conception of Lust—Tendency of These Influences to Degrade Sexual Morality—Their Result in Creating the Problem of Sexual Abstinence—The Protests Against Sexual Abstinence—Sexual Abstinence and Genius—Sexual Abstinence in Women—The Advocates of Sexual Abstinence—Intermediate Attitude—Unsatisfactory Nature of the Whole Discussion—Criticism of the Conception of Sexual Abstinence—Sexual Abstinence as Compared to Abstinence from Food—No Complete Analogy—The Morality of Sexual Abstinence Entirely Negative—Is It the Physician's Duty to Advise Extra-Conjugal Sexual Intercourse?—Opinions of Those Who Affirm or Deny This Duty—The Conclusion Against Such Advice—The Physician Bound by the Social and Moral Ideas of His Age—The Physician as Reformer—Sexual Abstinence and Sexual Hygiene—Alcohol—The Influence of Physical and Mental Exercise—The Inadequacy of Sexual Hygiene in This Field—The Unreal Nature of the Conception of Sexual Abstinence—The Necessity of Replacing It by a More Positive Ideal.
The Influence of Tradition—The Theological View of Lust—How These Influences Lower Sexual Morality—Their Role in Creating the Issue of Sexual Abstinence—The Pushback Against Sexual Abstinence—Sexual Abstinence and Genius—Sexual Abstinence in Women—Supporters of Sexual Abstinence—A Middle Ground—The Unsatisfactory Nature of the Entire Discussion—Critique of the Idea of Sexual Abstinence—Sexual Abstinence Compared to Abstaining from Food—No Complete Analogy—The Morality of Sexual Abstinence is Entirely Negative—Is It a Doctor's Responsibility to Recommend Sex Outside of Marriage?—Views of Those Who Support or Oppose This Responsibility—The Conclusion Against Such Advice—The Doctor is Bound by the Social and Moral Norms of Their Time—The Doctor as a Reformist—Sexual Abstinence and Sexual Health—Alcohol—The Impact of Physical and Mental Exercise—The Insufficiency of Sexual Health in This Area—The Unrealistic Nature of the Concept of Sexual Abstinence—The Need to Replace It with a More Positive Ideal.
When we look at the matter from a purely abstract or even purely biological point of view, it might seem that in deciding that asceticism and chastity are of high value for the personal life we have said all that is necessary to say. That, however, is very far from being the case. We soon realize here, as at every point in the practical application of sexual psychology, that it is not sufficient to determine the abstractly right course along biological lines. We have to harmonize our biological demands with social demands. We are ruled not only by natural instincts but by inherited traditions, that in the far past were solidly based on intelligible grounds, and that even still, by the mere fact of their existence, exert a force which we cannot and ought not to ignore.
When we look at this issue from a purely abstract or even biological perspective, it might seem like we’ve covered everything by saying that asceticism and chastity are important for personal life. However, that’s far from the truth. We soon realize, as we do in every aspect of applying sexual psychology, that it’s not enough to figure out the right biological approach. We need to balance our biological needs with social needs. We are influenced not just by natural instincts but also by inherited traditions that were once based on clear reasons and still, just by existing, hold a power that we can’t and shouldn’t ignore.
In discussing the valuation of the sexual impulse we found that we had good ground for making a very high estimate of love. In discussing chastity and asceticism we found that they also are highly to be valued. And we found that, so far from any contradiction being here involved, love and chastity are intertwined in all their finest developments, and that there is thus a perfect harmony in apparent opposition. But when we come to consider the matter in detail, in its particular personal applications, we find that a new factor asserts itself. We find that our inherited social and religious traditions exert a pressure, all on one side, which makes it impossible to place the relations of love and chastity simply on the basis of biology and reason. We are confronted at the outset by our traditions. On the one side these traditions have weighted the word "lust"—considered as expressing all the manifestations of the sexual impulse which are outside marriage or which fail to have marriage as their direct and ostentatious end—with deprecatory and sinister meanings. And on the other side these traditions have created the problem of "sexual abstinence," which has nothing to do with either asceticism or chastity as these have been defined in the previous chapter, but merely with the purely negative pressure on the sexual impulse, exerted, independently of the individual's wishes, by his religious and social environment.
In discussing the value of sexual desire, we found solid reasons to hold love in high regard. When examining chastity and self-discipline, we also discovered they deserve significant appreciation. Moreover, we realized that, rather than being contradictory, love and chastity are beautifully intertwined in their deepest expressions, which creates a perfect harmony in what seems like contradiction. However, when we delve into specifics and personal situations, a new factor comes into play. We see that our inherited social and religious traditions apply pressure from one side, making it difficult to assess the relationship between love and chastity solely through biology and logic. We are immediately faced with these traditions. On one side, they have loaded the term "lust"—which describes all sexual expressions outside marriage or those that don't lead directly to marriage—with negative and troubling connotations. On the other side, these traditions have introduced the issue of "sexual abstinence," which is unrelated to self-discipline or chastity as defined in the previous chapter. Instead, it’s just the negative pressure on sexual desire imposed, regardless of a person's wishes, by their religious and social surroundings.
The theological conception of "lust," or "libido," as sin, followed logically the early Christian conception of "the flesh," and became inevitable as soon as that conception was firmly established. Not only, indeed, had early Christian ideals a degrading influence on the estimation of sexual desire per se, but they tended to depreciate generally the dignity of the sexual relationship. If a man made sexual advances to a woman outside marriage, and thus brought her within the despised circle of "lust," he was injuring her because he was impairing her religious and moral value.[92] The only way he could repair the damage done was by paying her money or by entering into a forced and therefore probably unfortunate marriage with her. That is to say that sexual relationships were, by the ecclesiastical traditions, placed on a pecuniary basis, on the same level as prostitution. By its well-meant intentions to support the theological morality which had developed on an ascetic basis, the Church was thus really undermining even that form of sexual relationship which it sanctified.
The religious idea of "lust," or "libido," as a sin logically followed the early Christian view of "the flesh," and became unavoidable once that view was firmly established. Not only did early Christian ideals negatively affect the perception of sexual desire per se, but they also tended to undervalue the dignity of sexual relationships. If a man made sexual advances to a woman outside of marriage, bringing her into the despised circle of "lust," he was harming her by diminishing her religious and moral worth.[92] The only way he could fix the harm was by paying her money or entering into a forced and likely unhappy marriage with her. This meant that sexual relationships were, according to ecclesiastical traditions, placed on a financial basis, comparable to prostitution. In its well-intentioned efforts to uphold the theological morality that developed on an ascetic foundation, the Church was, in fact, undermining even that type of sexual relationship it claimed to sanctify.
Gregory the Great ordered that the seducer of a virgin shall marry her, or, in case of refusal, be severely punished corporally and shut up in a monastery to perform penance. According to other ecclesiastical rules, the seducer of a virgin, though held to no responsibility by the civil forum, was required to marry her, or to find a husband and furnish a dowry for her. Such rules had their good side, and were especially equitable when seduction had been accomplished by deceit. But they largely tended in practice to subordinate all questions of sexual morality to a money question. The reparation to the woman, also, largely became necessary because the ecclesiastical conception of lust caused her value to be depreciated by contact with lust, and the reparation might be said to constitute a part of penance. Aquinas held that lust, in however slight a degree, is a mortal sin, and most of the more influential theologians took a view nearly or quite as rigid. Some, however, held that a certain degree of delectation is possible in these matters without mortal sin, or asserted, for instance, that to feel the touch of a soft and warm hand is not mortal sin so long as no sexual feeling is thereby aroused. Others, however, held that such distinctions are impossible, and that all pleasures of this kind are sinful. Tomás Sanchez endeavored at much length to establish rules for the complicated problems of delectation that thus arose, but he was constrained to admit that no rules are really possible, and that such matters must be left to the judgment of a prudent man. At that point casuistry dissolves and the modern point of view emerges (see, e.g., Lea, History of Auricular Confession, vol. ii, pp. 57, 115, 246, etc.).
Gregory the Great decreed that anyone who seduces a virgin must either marry her or, if they refuse, face severe punishment and be confined to a monastery for penance. According to other church rules, even if the civil court found no responsibility, the seducer was still required to marry her or find her a husband and provide a dowry. These rules had their merits, especially when the seduction involved deception. However, they often ended up treating all issues of sexual morality as financial matters. Compensation to the woman became essential as the church’s view of lust diminished her worth through its association with lustful acts, and this compensation could be seen as a form of penance. Aquinas believed that any level of lust is a mortal sin, and most prominent theologians held similarly strict views. Some, though, argued that a certain amount of enjoyment could occur in these situations without constituting a mortal sin, suggesting, for example, that feeling the touch of a soft, warm hand isn’t a mortal sin as long as it doesn’t provoke sexual feelings. Others contended that such differentiations are impossible and deemed all such pleasures as sinful. Tomás Sanchez tried extensively to set rules for the complex issues surrounding enjoyment that arose from this, but ultimately he had to accept that no clear rules could be established, and these matters should be left to the judgment of a reasonable person. At that point, casuistry breaks down, and a modern perspective begins to take shape (see, e.g., Lea, History of Auricular Confession, vol. ii, pp. 57, 115, 246, etc.).
Even to-day the influence of the old traditions of the Church still unconsciously survives among us. That is inevitable as regards religious teachers, but it is found also in men of science, even in Protestant countries. The result is that quite contradictory dogmas are found side by side, even in the same writer. On the one hand, the manifestations of the sexual impulse are emphatically condemned as both unnecessary and evil; on the other hand, marriage, which is fundamentally (whatever else it may also be) a manifestation of the sexual impulse, receives equally emphatic approval as the only proper and moral form of living.[93] There can be no reasonable doubt whatever that it is to the surviving and pervading influence of the ancient traditional theological conception of libido that we must largely attribute the sharp difference of opinions among physicians on the question of sexual abstinence and the otherwise unnecessary acrimony with which these opinions have sometimes been stated.
Even today, the influence of the old traditions of the Church still unconsciously exists among us. This is inevitable when it comes to religious teachers, but it can also be seen in men of science, even in Protestant countries. The result is that quite contradictory beliefs coexist, even within the same writer. On one hand, the expressions of the sexual impulse are strongly condemned as unnecessary and wrong; on the other, marriage, which is essentially (regardless of what else it may be) an expression of the sexual impulse, receives equal praise as the only proper and moral way of living. There can be no reasonable doubt that it is the lingering and widespread influence of the ancient traditional theological view of *libido* that we must largely blame for the significant differences of opinion among physicians on the issue of sexual abstinence and the otherwise unwarranted bitterness with which these opinions have sometimes been expressed.
On the one side, we find the emphatic statement that sexual intercourse is necessary and that health cannot be maintained unless the sexual activities are regularly exercised.
On one hand, there's a strong belief that sexual intercourse is essential and that good health can't be maintained unless sexual activities are practiced regularly.
"All parts of the body which are developed for a definite use are kept in health, and in the enjoyment of fair growth and of long youth, by the fulfilment of that use, and by their appropriate exercise in the employment to which they are accustomed." In that statement, which occurs in the great Hippocratic treatise "On the Joints," we have the classic expression of the doctrine which in ever varying forms has been taught by all those who have protested against sexual abstinence. When we come down to the sixteenth century outbreak of Protestantism we find that Luther's revolt against Catholicism was in part a protest against the teaching of sexual abstinence. "He to whom the gift of continence is not given," he said in his Table Talk, "will not become chaste by fasting and vigils. For my own part I was not excessively tormented [though elsewhere he speaks of the great fires of lust by which he had been troubled], but all the same the more I macerated myself the more I burnt." And three hundred years later, Bebel, the would-be nineteenth century Luther of a different Protestantism, took the same attitude towards sexual abstinence, while Hinton the physician and philosopher, living in a land of rigid sexual conventionalism and prudery, and moved by keen sympathy for the sufferings he saw around him, would break into passionate sarcasm when confronted by the doctrine of sexual abstinence. "There are innumerable ills—terrible destructions, madness even, the ruin of lives—for which the embrace of man and woman would be a remedy. No one thinks of questioning it. Terrible evils and a remedy in a delight and joy! And man has chosen so to muddle his life that he must say: 'There, that would be a remedy, but I cannot use it. I must be virtuous!'"
"All parts of the body that are developed for a specific purpose stay healthy and enjoy proper growth and extended youth through the fulfillment of that purpose and their regular exercise in the activities they are used to." This statement, found in the classic Hippocratic text "On the Joints," captures the fundamental belief expressed by all those who have opposed sexual abstinence over time. If we look at the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century, we can see that Luther's challenge to Catholicism partly stemmed from this opposition to the teaching of sexual abstinence. He stated in his Table Talk, "He who is not granted the gift of self-control will not become chaste through fasting and vigils. Personally, I wasn’t excessively tormented [though at other times he talked about the intense desires that troubled him], yet the more I punished myself, the more I burned." Fast forward three hundred years, and Bebel, often seen as a 19th-century Luther of a different Protestantism, held the same view against sexual abstinence. Meanwhile, Hinton, a physician and philosopher living in a society marked by strict sexual norms and prudishness, passionately criticized the doctrine of sexual abstinence. "There are countless problems—terrible damages, even madness, the destruction of lives—for which the union of a man and woman would be a solution. No one thinks of questioning it. Terrible hardships and a remedy found in joy and pleasure! Yet, man has chosen to complicate his life to the point where he must declare: 'There, that could be a solution, but I can’t use it. I must be virtuous!'"
If we confine ourselves to modern times and to fairly precise medical statements, we find in Schurig's Spermatologia (1720, pp. 274 et seq.), not only a discussion of the advantages of moderate sexual intercourse in a number of disorders, as witnessed by famous authorities, but also a list of results—including anorexia, insanity, impotence, epilepsy, even death—which were believed to have been due to sexual abstinence. This extreme view of the possible evils of sexual abstinence seems to have been part of the Renaissance traditions of medicine stiffened by a certain opposition between religion and science. It was still rigorously stated by Lallemand early in the nineteenth century. Subsequently, the medical statements of the evil results of sexual abstinence became more temperate and measured, though still often pronounced. Thus Gyurkovechky believes that these results may be as serious as those of sexual excess. Krafft-Ebing showed that sexual abstinence could produce a state of general nervous excitement (Jahrbuch für Psychiatrie, Bd. viii, Heft 1 and 2). Schrenck-Notzing regards sexual abstinence as a cause of extreme sexual hyperæsthesia and of various perversions (in a chapter on sexual abstinence in his Kriminalpsychologische und Psychopathologische Studien, 1902, pp. 174-178). He records in illustration the case of a man of thirty-six who had masturbated in moderation as a boy, but abandoned the practice entirely, on moral grounds, twenty years ago, and has never had sexual intercourse, feeling proud to enter marriage a chaste man, but now for years has suffered greatly from extreme sexual hyperæsthesia and concentration of thought on sexual subjects, notwithstanding a strong will and the resolve not to masturbate or indulge in illicit intercourse. In another case a vigorous and healthy man, not inverted, and with strong sexual desires, who remained abstinent up to marriage, suffers from psychic impotence, and his wife remains a virgin notwithstanding all her affection and caresses. Ord considered that sexual abstinence might produce many minor evils. "Most of us," he wrote (British Medical Journal, Aug. 2, 1884) "have, no doubt, been consulted by men, chaste in act, who are tormented by sexual excitement. They tell one stories of long-continued local excitement, followed by intense muscular weariness, or by severe aching pain in the back and legs. In some I have had complaints of swelling and stiffness in the legs, and of pains in the joints, particularly in the knees;" he gives the case of a man who suffered after prolonged chastity from inflammatory conditions of knees and was only cured by marriage. Pearce Gould, it may be added, finds that "excessive ungratified sexual desire" is one of the causes of acute orchitis. Remondino ("Some Observations on Continence as a Factor in Health and Disease," Pacific Medical Journal, Jan., 1900) records the case of a gentleman of nearly seventy who, during the prolonged illness of his wife, suffered from frequent and extreme priapism, causing insomnia. He was very certain that his troubles were not due to his continence, but all treatment failed and there were no spontaneous emissions. At last Remondino advised him to, as he expresses it, "imitate Solomon." He did so, and all the symptoms at once disappeared. This case is of special interest, because the symptoms were not accompanied by any conscious sexual desire. It is no longer generally believed that sexual abstinence tends to produce insanity, and the occasional cases in which prolonged and intense sexual desire in young women is followed by insanity will usually be found to occur on a basis of hereditary degeneration. It is held by many authorities, however, that minor mental troubles, of a more or less vague character, as well as neurasthenia and hysteria, are by no means infrequently due to sexual abstinence. Thus Freud, who has carefully studied angstneurosis, the obsession of anxiety, finds that it is a result of sexual abstinence, and may indeed be considered as a vicarious form of such abstinence (Freud, Sammlung Kleiner Schriften zur Neurosenlehre, 1906, pp. 76 et seq.).
If we focus on modern times and fairly precise medical statements, we find in Schurig's Spermatologia (1720, pp. 274 et seq.) not only a discussion of the benefits of moderate sexual intercourse for various disorders, supported by well-known authorities, but also a list of consequences—including anorexia, insanity, impotence, epilepsy, and even death—that were thought to result from sexual abstinence. This extreme perspective on the potential dangers of sexual abstinence seems to reflect the Renaissance medical traditions, combined with a certain tension between religion and science. It was still firmly expressed by Lallemand in the early nineteenth century. After that, medical opinions on the negative effects of sexual abstinence became more moderate and measured, though they were still frequently asserted. Gyurkovechky believes these effects can be as serious as those of sexual excess. Krafft-Ebing demonstrated that sexual abstinence could lead to a state of general nervous excitement (Jahrbuch für Psychiatrie, Bd. viii, Heft 1 and 2). Schrenck-Notzing views sexual abstinence as a cause of extreme sexual hypersensitivity and various perversions (in a chapter on sexual abstinence in his Kriminalpsychologische und Psychopathologische Studien, 1902, pp. 174-178). He notes the case of a thirty-six-year-old man who masturbated moderately as a boy but completely stopped twenty years ago on moral grounds and has never had sexual intercourse; he feels proud to enter marriage as a chaste man but has suffered for years from extreme sexual hypersensitivity and obsessive thoughts about sex, despite having a strong will and a commitment not to masturbate or engage in illicit sexual relations. In another case, a vigorous and healthy man with strong sexual desires remained abstinent until marriage but suffers from psychic impotence, and his wife remains a virgin despite her affection and caresses. Ord believed that sexual abstinence could cause many minor issues. "Most of us," he wrote (British Medical Journal, Aug. 2, 1884), "have probably been consulted by men, chaste in action, who are tormented by sexual excitement. They share stories of prolonged local arousal, followed by intense muscle fatigue or severe aching pain in the back and legs. In some cases, I have heard complaints of swelling and stiffness in the legs, and joint pain, especially in the knees;" he describes a man who suffered from inflammatory conditions of the knees after extended chastity and was only cured by marriage. Pearce Gould adds that "excessive unfulfilled sexual desire" can lead to acute orchitis. Remondino ("Some Observations on Continence as a Factor in Health and Disease," Pacific Medical Journal, Jan., 1900) recounts the case of a nearly seventy-year-old gentleman who, during his wife's extended illness, suffered from frequent and extreme priapism, leading to insomnia. He was convinced that his issues were not due to his continence, but all treatments failed, and there were no spontaneous emissions. Eventually, Remondino advised him to, as he put it, "imitate Solomon." He did so, and all the symptoms vanished at once. This case is particularly interesting because the symptoms occurred without any conscious sexual desire. It is no longer widely accepted that sexual abstinence leads to insanity, and the rare cases where prolonged and intense sexual desire in young women results in insanity typically occur in individuals with a genetic predisposition. However, many experts believe that minor mental issues, which can be somewhat vague, as well as neurasthenia and hysteria, often arise from sexual abstinence. Freud, who has closely examined angstneurosis, which is the obsession with anxiety, finds that it is a result of sexual abstinence and can actually be seen as a substitute form of that abstinence (Freud, Sammlung Kleiner Schriften zur Neurosenlehre, 1906, pp. 76 et seq.).
The whole subject of sexual abstinence has been discussed at length by Nyström, of Stockholm, in Das Geschlechtsleben und seine Gesetze, Ch. III. He concludes that it is desirable that continence should be preserved as long as possible in order to strengthen the physical health and to develop the intelligence and character. The doctrine of permanent sexual abstinence, however, he regards as entirely false, except in the case of a small number of religious or philosophic persons. "Complete abstinence during a long period of years cannot be borne without producing serious results both on the body and the mind.... Certainly, a young man should repress his sexual impulses as long as possible and avoid everything that may artificially act as a sexual stimulant. If, however, he has done so, and still suffers from unsatisfied normal sexual desires, and if he sees no possibility of marriage within a reasonable time, no one should dare to say that he is committing a sin if, with mutual understanding, he enters into sexual relations with a woman friend, or forms temporary sexual relationships, provided, that is, that he takes the honorable precaution of begetting no children, unless his partner is entirely willing to become a mother, and he is prepared to accept all the responsibilities of fatherhood." In an article of later date ("Die Einwirkung der Sexuellen Abstinenz auf die Gesundheit," Sexual-Probleme, July, 1908) Nyström vigorously sums up his views. He includes among the results of sexual abstinence orchitis, frequent involuntary seminal emissions, impotence, neurasthenia, depression, and a great variety of nervous disturbances of vaguer character, involving diminished power of work, limited enjoyment of life, sleeplessness, nervousness, and pre-occupation with sexual desires and imaginations. More especially there is heightened sexual irritability with erections, or even seminal emissions on the slightest occasion, as on gazing at an attractive woman or in social intercourse with her, or in the presence of works of art representing naked figures. Nyström has had the opportunity of investigating and recording ninety cases of persons who have presented these and similar symptoms as the result, he believes, of sexual abstinence. He has published some of these cases (Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Oct., 1908), but it may be added that Rohleder ("Die Abstinentia Sexualis," ib., Nov., 1908) has criticized these cases, and doubts whether any of them are conclusive. Rohleder believes that the bad results of sexual abstinence are never permanent, and also that no anatomically pathological states (such as orchitis) can be thereby produced. But he considers, nevertheless, that even incomplete and temporary sexual abstinence may produce fairly serious results, and especially neurasthenic disturbances of various kinds, such as nervous irritability, anxiety, depression, disinclination for work; also diurnal emissions, premature ejaculations, and even a state approaching satyriasis; and in women hysteria, hystero-epilepsy, and nymphomaniacal manifestations; all these symptoms may, however, he believes, be cured when the abstinence ceases.
The whole topic of sexual abstinence has been thoroughly discussed by Nyström from Stockholm in Das Geschlechtsleben und seine Gesetze, Ch. III. He concludes that it’s beneficial to maintain continence for as long as possible to boost physical health and develop intelligence and character. However, he views the idea of permanent sexual abstinence as completely false, except for a small number of religious or philosophical individuals. "Complete abstinence over many years is unsustainable and can lead to serious consequences for both body and mind.... Certainly, a young man should control his sexual urges for as long as he can and avoid anything that might act as an artificial sexual stimulant. However, if he has done this and still experiences unfulfilled normal sexual desires, and if he sees no chance of marriage in the foreseeable future, no one should claim he’s committing a sin if, with mutual agreement, he engages in sexual relations with a female friend, or forms temporary sexual relationships, as long as he takes the responsible precaution to avoid fathering any children unless his partner fully agrees to become a mother and he is prepared to take on all responsibilities of fatherhood." In a later article ("Die Einwirkung der Sexuellen Abstinenz auf die Gesundheit," Sexual-Probleme, July, 1908), Nyström forcefully summarizes his views. He notes that the effects of sexual abstinence can include orchitis, frequent involuntary ejaculation, impotence, neurasthenia, depression, and a wide range of vague nervous disturbances that lead to reduced work capacity, decreased enjoyment of life, insomnia, nervousness, and an obsessive focus on sexual desires and fantasies. Particularly, there is increased sexual irritability with erections, or even ejaculation with the slightest provocation, such as looking at an attractive woman or socializing with her, or being in the presence of artworks depicting nude figures. Nyström has been able to study and document ninety cases of individuals who exhibited these and similar symptoms as a result, he believes, of sexual abstinence. He has published some of these cases (Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Oct., 1908), but it should be noted that Rohleder ("Die Abstinentia Sexualis," ib., Nov., 1908) has criticized these cases and doubts their conclusiveness. Rohleder believes that the negative effects of sexual abstinence are never permanent and that no anatomically pathological conditions (such as orchitis) can arise from it. Nevertheless, he argues that even incomplete and temporary sexual abstinence may lead to fairly serious issues, especially various neurasthenic disorders like nervous irritability, anxiety, depression, reluctance to work; as well as nocturnal emissions, premature ejaculations, and even a condition resembling satyriasis; and in women, hysteria, hystero-epilepsy, and signs of nymphomania; he believes all these symptoms can be treated once abstinence ends.
Many advocates of sexual abstinence have attached importance to the fact that men of great genius have apparently been completely continent throughout life. This is certainly true (see ante, p. 173). But this fact can scarcely be invoked as an argument in favor of the advantages of sexual abstinence among the ordinary population. J. F. Scott selects Jesus, Newton, Beethoven, and Kant as "men of vigor and mental acumen who have lived chastely as bachelors." It cannot, however, be said that Dr. Scott has been happy in the four figures whom he has been able to select from the whole history of human genius as examples of life-long sexual abstinence. We know little with absolute certainty of Jesus, and even if we reject the diagnosis which Professor Binet-Sanglé (in his Folie de Jesus) has built up from a minute study of the Gospels, there are many reasons why we should refrain from emphasizing the example of his sexual abstinence; Newton, apart from his stupendous genius in a special field, was an incomplete and unsatisfactory human being who ultimately reached a condition very like insanity; Beethoven was a thoroughly morbid and diseased man, who led an intensely unhappy existence; Kant, from first to last, was a feeble valetudinarian. It would probably be difficult to find a healthy normal man who would voluntarily accept the life led by any of these four, even as the price of their fame. J. A. Godfrey (Science of Sex, pp. 139-147) discusses at length the question whether sexual abstinence is favorable to ordinary intellectual vigor, deciding that it is not, and that we cannot argue from the occasional sexual abstinence of men of genius, who are often abnormally constituted, and physically below the average, to the normally developed man. Sexual abstinence, it may be added, is by no means always a favorable sign, even in men who stand intellectually above the average. "I have not obtained the impression," remarks Freud (Sexual-Probleme, March, 1908), "that sexual abstinence is helpful to energetic and independent men of action or original thinkers, to courageous liberators or reformers. The sexual conduct of a man is often symbolic of his whole method of reaction in the world. The man who energetically grasps the object of his sexual desire may be trusted to show a similarly relentless energy in the pursuit of other aims."
Many supporters of sexual abstinence highlight that highly intelligent men seem to have lived completely celibate lives. This is certainly true (see ante, p. 173). However, this fact can hardly be used as proof of the benefits of sexual abstinence among the general population. J. F. Scott points to Jesus, Newton, Beethoven, and Kant as "men of vigor and intelligence who lived chastely as bachelors." However, it's questionable whether Dr. Scott has chosen his four examples wisely from the entire history of human genius to illustrate lifelong sexual abstinence. We know very little for certain about Jesus, and even if we dismiss the diagnosis presented by Professor Binet-Sanglé (in his Folie de Jesus) based on a detailed analysis of the Gospels, there are many reasons to avoid emphasizing his example of sexual abstinence. Newton, despite his incredible genius in a specific area, was an incomplete and unsatisfactory person who ultimately experienced a state very close to insanity; Beethoven was a deeply troubled and ill man who lived a very unhappy life; Kant, throughout, was a frail invalid. It's likely hard to find a healthy, well-adjusted man who would willingly choose the lifestyle of any of these four, even in exchange for their fame. J. A. Godfrey (Science of Sex, pp. 139-147) extensively discusses whether sexual abstinence is beneficial for average intellectual vigor and concludes that it is not. We can't make inferences from the occasional sexual abstinence of genius men, who are often abnormally constituted and physically below average, to the normally developed man. Additionally, it should be noted that sexual abstinence isn't always a positive sign, even in men who are intellectually above average. "I have not gotten the impression," Freud remarks (Sexual-Probleme, March, 1908), "that sexual abstinence benefits energetic and independent men of action or original thinkers, courageous liberators or reformers. A man's sexual behavior often reflects his overall approach to the world. A man who passionately pursues his sexual desires can be expected to show similar relentless energy in the pursuit of other goals."
Many, though not all, who deny that prolonged sexual abstinence is harmless, include women in this statement. There are some authorities indeed who believe that, whether or not any conscious sexual desire is present, sexual abstinence is less easily tolerated by women than by men.[94]
Many, though not everyone, who argue that long-term sexual abstinence isn't harmless, include women in this viewpoint. There are some experts who actually believe that, regardless of whether there's any conscious sexual desire, women find sexual abstinence harder to handle than men do.[94]
Cabanis, in his famous and pioneering work, Rapports du Physique et du Moral, said in 1802, that women not only bear sexual excess more easily than men, but sexual privations with more difficulty, and a cautious and experienced observer of to-day, Löwenfeld (Sexualleben und Nervenleiden, 1899, p. 53), while not considering that normal women bear sexual abstinence less easily than men, adds that this is not the case with women of neuropathic disposition, who suffer much more from this cause, and either masturbate when sexual intercourse is impossible or fall into hystero-neurasthenic states. Busch stated (Das Geschlechtsleben des Weibes, 1839, vol. i, pp. 69, 71) that not only is the working of the sexual functions in the organism stronger in women than in men, but that the bad results of sexual abstinence are more marked in women. Sir Benjamin Brodie said long ago that the evils of continence to women are perhaps greater than those of incontinence, and to-day Hammer (Die Gesundheitlichen Gefahren der Geschlechtlichen Enthaltsamkeit, 1904) states that, so far as reasons of health are concerned, sexual abstinence is no more to be recommended to women than to men. Nyström is of the same opinion, though he thinks that women bear sexual abstinence better than men, and has discussed this special question at length in a section of his Geschlechtsleben und seine Gesetze. He agrees with the experienced Erb that a large number of completely chaste women of high character, and possessing distinguished qualities of mind and heart, are more or less disordered through their sexual abstinence; this is specially often the case with women married to impotent men, though it is frequently not until they approach the age of thirty, Nyström remarks, that women definitely realize their sexual needs.
Cabanis, in his well-known and groundbreaking work, Rapports du Physique et du Moral, stated in 1802 that women not only handle sexual excess more easily than men but also struggle more with sexual deprivation. A careful and knowledgeable observer today, Löwenfeld (Sexualleben und Nervenleiden, 1899, p. 53), while not claiming that normal women find sexual abstinence harder than men, notes that it is different for women with neuropathic tendencies, who suffer much more from this issue and often resort to masturbation when intercourse is not an option or develop hystero-neurasthenic conditions. Busch mentioned (Das Geschlechtsleben des Weibes, 1839, vol. i, pp. 69, 71) that the sexual functions in women are more vigorous than in men, and the negative effects of sexual abstinence are more pronounced in women. Sir Benjamin Brodie observed long ago that the disadvantages of continence for women may be greater than those of incontinence, and today Hammer (Die Gesundheitlichen Gefahren der Geschlechtlichen Enthaltsamkeit, 1904) asserts that, regarding health, sexual abstinence should not be recommended to women any more than to men. Nyström shares this view, though he believes that women manage sexual abstinence better than men, discussing this topic at length in a section of his Geschlechtsleben und seine Gesetze. He agrees with the experienced Erb that many completely chaste women of high character, who possess exceptional qualities of mind and heart, are somewhat disrupted by their sexual abstinence; this is particularly common among women married to impotent men. However, Nyström observes that it is often only as they approach the age of thirty that women fully realize their sexual needs.
A great many women who are healthy, chaste, and modest, feel at times such powerful sexual desire that they can scarcely resist the temptation to go into the street and solicit the first man they meet. Not a few such women, often of good breeding, do actually offer themselves to men with whom they may have perhaps only the slightest acquaintance. Routh records such cases (British Gynæcological Journal, Feb., 1887), and most men have met with them at some time. When a woman of high moral character and strong passions is subjected for a very long period to the perpetual strain of such sexual craving, especially if combined with love for a definite individual, a chain of evil results, physical and moral, may be set up, and numerous distinguished physicians have recorded such cases, which terminated at once in complete recovery as soon as the passion was gratified. Lauvergne long since described a case. A fairly typical case of this kind was reported in detail by Brachet (De l'Hypochondrie, p. 69) and embodied by Griesinger in his classic work on "Mental Pathology." It concerned a healthy married lady, twenty-six years old, having three children. A visiting acquaintance completely gained her affections, but she strenuously resisted the seducing influence, and concealed the violent passion that he had aroused in her. Various serious symptoms, physical and mental, slowly began to appear, and she developed what seemed to be signs of consumption. Six months' stay in the south of France produced no improvement, either in the bodily or mental symptoms. On returning home she became still worse. Then she again met the object of her passion, succumbed, abandoned her husband and children, and fled with him. Six months later she was scarcely recognizable; beauty, freshness and plumpness had taken the place of emaciation; while the symptoms of consumption and all other troubles had entirely disappeared. A somewhat similar case is recorded by Camill Lederer, of Vienna (Monatsschrift für Harnkrankheiten und Sexuelle Hygiene, 1906, Heft 3). A widow, a few months after her husband's death, began to cough, with symptoms of bronchial catarrh, but no definite signs of lung disease. Treatment and change of climate proved entirely unavailing to effect a cure. Two years later, as no signs of disease had appeared in the lungs, though the symptoms continued, she married again. Within a very few weeks all symptoms had disappeared, and she was entirely fresh and well.
A lot of women who are healthy, pure, and modest sometimes feel such intense sexual desire that they can barely resist the urge to go out and approach the first man they see. Several of these women, often from good backgrounds, actually do make advances to men with whom they might have only the slightest connection. Routh documented such instances in the British Gynæcological Journal, Feb., 1887, and most men have encountered them at some point. When a woman of strong morals and intense feelings is subjected to the endless strain of such sexual yearning for a long time, especially if it’s combined with love for a specific person, a series of negative physical and moral effects can occur. Many respected physicians have noted cases where the symptoms completely disappeared once the woman’s desire was fulfilled. Lauvergne described one such case long ago. A fairly typical instance was detailed by Brachet in De l'Hypochondrie, p. 69, and included by Griesinger in his classic work on "Mental Pathology." It involved a healthy 26-year-old married woman with three children. A visiting acquaintance won her affection completely, but she strongly resisted his seductive advance and hid the intense feelings he had stirred in her. Various serious physical and mental symptoms began to emerge, and she developed what appeared to be signs of tuberculosis. Six months in the south of France brought no improvement, either physically or mentally. Upon returning home, her condition worsened. Then she met the object of her desire again, surrendered, left her husband and children, and ran away with him. Six months later, she was barely recognizable; her beauty, vitality, and fullness had replaced her previous emaciation, and all signs of tuberculosis and other issues had completely vanished. A similar case was reported by Camill Lederer from Vienna in the Monatsschrift für Harnkrankheiten und Sexuelle Hygiene, 1906, Heft 3. A widow, a few months after her husband's death, started coughing with symptoms of bronchial inflammation but showed no definite signs of lung disease. Treatment and a change of climate did nothing to cure her condition. Two years later, since no lung disease had emerged despite ongoing symptoms, she remarried. Within just a few weeks, all her symptoms disappeared, and she felt fresh and completely healthy.
Numerous distinguished gynæcologists have recorded their belief that sexual excitement is a remedy for various disorders of the sexual system in women, and that abstinence is a cause of such disorders. Matthews Duncan said that sexual excitement is the only remedy for amenorrhœa; "the only emmenagogue medicine that I know of," he wrote (Medical Times, Feb. 2, 1884), "is not to be found in the Pharmacopœia: it is erotic excitement. Of the value of erotic excitement there is no doubt." Anstie, in his work on Neuralgia, refers to the beneficial effect of sexual intercourse on dysmenorrhœa, remarking that the necessity of the full natural exercise of the sexual function is shown by the great improvement in such cases after marriage, and especially after childbirth. (It may be remarked that not all authorities find dysmenorrhœa benefited by marriage, and some consider that the disease is often thereby aggravated; see, e.g., Wythe Cook, American Journal Obstetrics, Dec., 1893.) The distinguished gynæcologist, Tilt, at a somewhat earlier date (On Uterine and Ovarian Inflammation, 1862, p. 309), insisted on the evil results of sexual abstinence in producing ovarian irritation, and perhaps subacute ovaritis, remarking that this was specially pronounced in young widows, and in prostitutes placed in penitentiaries. Intense desire, he pointed out, determines organic movements resembling those required for the gratification of the desire. These burning desires, which can only be quenched by their legitimate satisfaction, are still further heightened by the erotic influence of thoughts, books, pictures, music, which are often even more sexually stimulating than social intercourse with men, but the excitement thus produced is not relieved by that natural collapse which should follow a state of vital turgescence. After referring to the biological facts which show the effect of psychic influences on the formative powers of the ovario-uterine organs in animals, Tilt continues: "I may fairly infer that similar incitements on the mind of females may have a stimulating effect on the organs of ovulation. I have frequently known menstruation to be irregular, profuse, or abnormal in type during courtship in women in whom nothing similar had previously occurred, and that this protracted the treatment of chronic ovaritis and of uterine inflammation." Bonnifield, of Cincinnati (Medical Standard, Dec., 1896), considers that unsatisfied sexual desire is an important cause of catarrhal endometritis. It is well known that uterine fibroids bear a definite relation to organic sexual activity, and that sexual abstinence, more especially the long-continued deprivation of pregnancy, is a very important cause of the disease. This is well shown by an analysis by A. E. Giles (Lancet, March 2, 1907) of one hundred and fifty cases. As many as fifty-six of these cases, more than a third, were unmarried women, though nearly all were over thirty years of age. Of the ninety-four married women, thirty-four had never been pregnant; of those who had been pregnant, thirty-six had not been so for at least ten years. Thus eighty-four per cent, had either not been pregnant at all, or had had no pregnancy for at least ten years. It is, therefore, evident that deprivation of sexual function, whether or not involving abstinence from sexual intercourse, is an important cause of uterine fibroid tumors. Balls-Headley, of Victoria (Evolution of the Diseases of Women, 1894, and "Etiology of Diseases of Female Genital Organs," Allbutt and Playfair, System of Gynæcology,) believes that unsatisfied sexual desire is a factor in very many disorders of the sexual organs in women. "My views," he writes in a private letter, "are founded on a really special gynæcological practice of twenty years, during which I have myself taken about seven thousand most careful records. The normal woman is sexually well-formed and her sexual feelings require satisfaction in the direction of the production of the next generation, but under the restrictive and now especially abnormal conditions of civilization some women undergo hereditary atrophy, and the uterus and sexual feelings are feeble; in others of good average local development the feeling is in restraint; in others the feelings, as well as the organs, are strong, and if normal use be withheld evils ensue. Bearing in mind these varieties of congenital development in relation to the respective condition of virginity, or sterile or parous married life, the mode of occurrence and of progress of disease grows on the physician's mind, and there is no more occasion for bewilderment than to the mathematician studying conic sections, when his knowledge has grown from the basis of the science. The problem is suggested: Has a crowd of unassociated diseases fallen as through a sieve on woman, or have these affections almost necessarily ensued from the circumstances of her unnatural environment?" It may be added that Kisch (Sexual Life of Woman), while protesting against any exaggerated estimate of the effects of sexual abstinence, considers that in women it may result, not only in numerous local disorders, but also in nervous disturbance, hysteria, and even insanity, while in neurasthenic women "regulated sexual intercourse has an actively beneficial effect which is often striking."
Numerous respected gynecologists have noted their belief that sexual arousal is a treatment for various disorders of the female sexual system and that abstaining from sexual activity can lead to these disorders. Matthews Duncan stated that sexual arousal is the only remedy for amenorrhea; "the only emmenagogue medicine that I know of," he wrote (Medical Times, Feb. 2, 1884), "is not in the Pharmacopoeia: it is erotic excitement. There’s no doubt about the value of erotic excitement." Anstie, in his work on Neuralgia, pointed out the positive effects of sexual intercourse on dysmenorrhea, noting that the need for fully exercising the sexual function is evident from the significant improvement seen in such cases after marriage and especially after childbirth. (It's worth mentioning that not all experts agree that dysmenorrhea improves with marriage; some believe it can actually worsen the condition; see, e.g., Wythe Cook, American Journal Obstetrics, Dec., 1893.) The renowned gynecologist, Tilt, emphasized earlier (On Uterine and Ovarian Inflammation, 1862, p. 309) the harmful effects of sexual abstinence in causing ovarian irritation and potentially subacute ovaritis, particularly pronounced in young widows and prostitutes in penitentiaries. He pointed out that intense desire triggers organic processes similar to those needed for fulfilling that desire. These strong desires, which can only be satisfied through legitimate means, are further intensified by erotic thoughts, books, images, and music which can be even more stimulating than social intercourse with men; however, the excitement generated does not result in the natural collapse that should follow a state of heightened vitality. After discussing biological evidence of how psychic influences affect the reproductive organs in animals, Tilt goes on: "I can reasonably infer that similar mental stimuli for women may have a stimulating effect on the ovulation organs. I've often noticed menstruation to be irregular, heavy, or abnormal in women during courtship when nothing similar had previously occurred, which complicates the treatment of chronic ovaritis and uterine inflammation." Bonnifield, of Cincinnati (Medical Standard, Dec., 1896), believes that unfulfilled sexual desire plays a major role in catarrhal endometritis. It is well-known that uterine fibroids are closely related to sexual activity and that sexual abstinence, particularly prolonged periods without pregnancy, significantly contributes to the disease. This is evident in an analysis by A. E. Giles (Lancet, March 2, 1907) of one hundred and fifty cases. A staggering fifty-six of these cases, over a third, were unmarried women, nearly all over thirty years old. Of the ninety-four married women, thirty-four had never been pregnant; of those who had been pregnant, thirty-six had not done so in at least ten years. Therefore, eighty-four percent had either never been pregnant or had not been pregnant for at least ten years. It's clear that a lack of sexual function, whether it involves abstaining from sexual intercourse or not, is a significant cause of uterine fibroid tumors. Balls-Headley, of Victoria (Evolution of the Diseases of Women, 1894, and "Etiology of Diseases of Female Genital Organs," Allbutt and Playfair, System of Gynæcology), believes that unfulfilled sexual desire is a contributing factor in many disorders affecting women's sexual organs. "My views," he writes in a private letter, "are based on two decades of specialized gynecological practice during which I have meticulously recorded around seven thousand cases. The normal woman is sexually well-formed, and her sexual feelings require fulfillment towards the goal of producing the next generation. However, under the restrictive and increasingly abnormal conditions of civilization, some women experience hereditary atrophy, leading to weak uteruses and sexual feelings; in others with normal physical development, feelings are suppressed; in others, both feelings and organs are strong, and if normal usage is denied, negative consequences follow. Keeping in mind these variations in congenital development regarding virginity, sterility, and married life with children, the occurrence and progression of disease becomes clearer to the physician. There is no more confusion than there is for a mathematician studying conic sections as his understanding grows from the foundational knowledge of the science. The question arises: Has a collection of unrelated diseases fallen upon women, or have these conditions almost necessarily resulted from the circumstances of their unnatural environment?" It’s also worth noting that Kisch (Sexual Life of Woman), while cautioning against overestimating the effects of sexual abstinence, believes that in women it can lead not only to various local disorders but also to nervous issues, hysteria, and even insanity. He adds that in neurasthenic women, "regulated sexual intercourse has a notably positive effect that can be quite remarkable."
It is important to remark that the evil results of sexual abstinence in women, in the opinion of many of those who insist upon their importance, are by no means merely due to unsatisfied sexual desire. They may be pronounced even when the woman herself has not the slightest consciousness of sexual needs. This was clearly pointed out forty years ago by the sagacious Anstie (op. cit.) In women, especially, he remarks, "a certain restless hyperactivity of mind, and perhaps of body also, seems to be the expression of Nature's unconscious resentment of the neglect of sexual functions." Such women, he adds, have kept themselves free from masturbation "at the expense of a perpetual and almost fierce activity of mind and muscle." Anstie had found that some of the worst cases of the form of nervosity and neurasthenia which he termed "spinal irritation," often accompanied by irritable stomach and anæmia, get well on marriage. "There can be no question," he continues, "that a very large proportion of these cases in single women (who form by far the greater number of subjects of spinal irritation) are due to this conscious or unconscious irritation kept up by an unsatisfied sexual want. It is certain that very many young persons (women more especially) are tormented by the irritability of the sexual organs without having the least consciousness of sexual desire, and present the sad spectacle of a vie manquée without ever knowing the true source of the misery which incapacitates them for all the active duties of life. It is a singular fact that in occasional instances one may even see two sisters, inheriting the same kind of nervous organization, both tormented with the symptoms of spinal irritation and both probably suffering from repressed sexual functions, but of whom one shall be pure-minded and entirely unconscious of the real source of her troubles, while the other is a victim to conscious and fruitless sexual irritation." In this matter Anstie may be regarded as a forerunner of Freud, who has developed with great subtlety and analytic power the doctrine of the transformation of repressed sexual instinct in women into morbid forms. He considers that the nervosity of to-day is largely due to the injurious action on the sexual life of that repression of natural instincts on which our civilization is built up. (Perhaps the clearest brief statement of Freud's views on the matter is to be found in a very suggestive article, "Die 'Kulturelle' Sexualmoral und die Moderne Nervosität," in Sexual-Probleme, March, 1908, reprinted in the second series of Freud's Sammlung Kleiner Schriften zur Neurosenlehre, 1909). We possess the aptitude, he says, of sublimating and transforming our sexual activities into other activities of a psychically related character, but non-sexual. This process cannot, however, be carried out to an unlimited extent any more than can the conversion of heat into mechanical work in our machines. A certain amount of direct sexual satisfaction is for most organizations indispensable, and the renunciation of this individually varying amount is punished by manifestations which we are compelled to regard as morbid. The process of sublimation, under the influence of civilization, leads both to sexual perversions and to psycho-neuroses. These two conditions are closely related, as Freud views the process of their development; they stand to each other as positive and negative, sexual perversions being the positive pole and psycho-neuroses the negative. It often happens, he remarks, that a brother may be sexually perverse, while his sister, with a weaker sexual temperament, is a neurotic whose symptoms are a transformation of her brother's perversion; while in many families the men are immoral, the women pure and refined but highly nervous. In the case of women who have no defect of sexual impulse there is yet the same pressure of civilized morality pushing them into neurotic states. It is a terribly serious injustice, Freud remarks, that the civilized standard of sexual life is the same for all persons, because though some, by their organization, may easily accept it, for others it involves the most difficult psychic sacrifices. The unmarried girl, who has become nervously weak, cannot be advised to seek relief in marriage, for she must be strong in order to "bear" marriage, while we urge a man on no account to marry a girl who is not strong. The married woman who has experienced the deceptions of marriage has usually no way of relief left but by abandoning her virtue. "The more strenuously she has been educated, and the more completely she has been subjected to the demands of civilization, the more she fears this way of escape, and in the conflict between her desires and her sense of duty, she also seeks refuge—in neurosis. Nothing protects her virtue so surely as disease." Taking a still wider view of the influence of the narrow "civilized" conception of sexual morality on women, Freud finds that it is not limited to the production of neurotic conditions; it affects the whole intellectual aptitude of women. Their education denies them any occupation with sexual problems, although such problems are so full of interest to them, for it inculcates the ancient prejudice that any curiosity in such matters is unwomanly and a proof of wicked inclinations. They are thus terrified from thinking, and knowledge is deprived of worth. The prohibition to think extends, automatically and inevitably, far beyond the sexual sphere. "I do not believe," Freud concludes, "that there is any opposition between intellectual work and sexual activity such as was supposed by Möbius. I am of opinion that the unquestionable fact of the intellectual inferiority of so many women is due to the inhibition of thought imposed upon them for the purpose of sexual repression."
It’s important to note that the negative effects of sexual abstinence in women, according to many who emphasize their significance, aren't solely caused by unfulfilled sexual desire. These effects can be apparent even when the woman herself is completely unaware of any sexual needs. This was clearly pointed out forty years ago by the insightful Anstie (op. cit.). In women, he notes, "a certain restless hyperactivity of mind, and perhaps of body as well, seems to reflect Nature's unconscious resentment of the neglect of sexual functions." Such women, he adds, often avoid masturbation "at the cost of a continual and almost intense activity of mind and muscle." Anstie observed that some of the most severe cases of what he called "spinal irritation"—often linked to an irritable stomach and anemia—improved after marriage. "There can be no doubt," he goes on, "that a significant number of these cases in single women (who are by far the majority suffering from spinal irritation) stem from this conscious or unconscious irritation fueled by an unfulfilled sexual need. It's clear that many young individuals (especially women) are troubled by the irritability of the sexual organs without any awareness of sexual desire, presenting the unfortunate picture of a vie manquée without ever understanding the true source of the distress that incapacitates them for the active responsibilities of life. It’s a noteworthy case that in some instances, two sisters, sharing the same kind of nervous disposition, may both suffer from symptoms of spinal irritation and both likely experience suppressed sexual functions, yet one will be virtuous and completely unaware of the root of her difficulties, while the other succumbs to conscious and fruitless sexual irritation." In this respect, Anstie can be seen as a precursor to Freud, who has developed with great insight and analytical depth the idea of transforming repressed sexual instincts in women into pathological forms. He argues that today’s nervosity is largely a result of the harmful effects on sexual life stemming from the repression of natural instincts, which our civilization is founded on. (Perhaps the clearest concise statement of Freud's views on this matter can be found in a thought-provoking article, "Die 'Kulturelle' Sexualmoral und die Moderne Nervosität," in Sexual-Probleme, March 1908, reprinted in the second series of Freud's Sammlung Kleiner Schriften zur Neurosenlehre, 1909). He asserts that we have the capacity to sublimate and transform our sexual activities into other, psychically related activities that are non-sexual. However, this process cannot be carried out indefinitely, much like converting heat into mechanical work in our machines. A certain level of direct sexual satisfaction is essential for most individuals, and the forgoing of this personally variable amount results in symptoms we must consider as pathological. The process of sublimation, influenced by civilization, leads to both sexual perversions and psycho-neuroses. These two conditions are closely interconnected, as Freud perceives their development; they exist as positive and negative, with sexual perversions being the positive pole and psycho-neuroses the negative. He notes that it’s common for a brother to be sexually perverse, while his sister, with a weaker sexual disposition, becomes neurotic, with symptoms that reflect her brother’s perversion; many families showcase men who are immoral while the women remain pure and refined yet very nervous. In cases where women don't have deficiencies in sexual impulse, they still face the pressure of civilized morality pushing them into neurotic conditions. Freud remarks that it’s a profound injustice that the civilized standard of sexual life applies equally to everyone, because while some can easily adapt to it, for others it requires immense psychic sacrifices. The unmarried girl suffering from nervous weakness cannot be advised to seek relief in marriage, as she needs to be strong to "bear" marriage, while we advise a man never to marry a girl who isn't robust. The married woman who has faced the disillusionments of marriage often finds herself with no escape other than abandoning her virtue. "The stricter her upbringing, and the more completely she has conformed to the demands of civilization, the more she fears this avenue of escape, and in the struggle between her desires and her sense of duty, she seeks refuge—in neurosis. Nothing protects her virtue as effectively as illness." Expanding the discussion on the narrow "civilized" view of sexual morality's impact on women, Freud concludes that it does not merely lead to neurotic conditions; it impacts women's whole intellectual capacity. Their education discourages any engagement with sexual problems, even though these issues are highly relevant to them, reinforcing the old belief that any curiosity about such matters is unfeminine and a sign of wicked tendencies. They are thus frightened away from thinking, and knowledge is stripped of its significance. The prohibition against thinking naturally and inevitably extends far beyond the sexual realm. "I don’t believe," Freud concludes, "that there's any conflict between intellectual work and sexual activity, as suggested by Möbius. I believe that the undeniable intellectual inferiority seen in many women results from the suppression of thought imposed on them to facilitate sexual repression."
It is only of recent years that this problem has been realized and faced, though solitary thinkers, like Hinton, have been keenly conscious of its existence; for "sorrowing virtue," as Mrs. Ella Wheeler Wilcox puts it, "is more ashamed of its woes than unhappy sin, because the world has tears for the latter and only ridicule for the former." "It is an almost cynical trait of our age," Hellpach wrote a few years ago, "that it is constantly discussing the theme of prostitution, of police control, of the age of consent, of the 'white slavery,' and passes over the moral struggle of woman's soul without an attempt to answer her burning questions."
It’s only in recent years that this issue has been recognized and confronted, even though individual thinkers like Hinton have been acutely aware of its existence. As Mrs. Ella Wheeler Wilcox puts it, “sorrowing virtue” is often more embarrassed by its pains than unhappy sin, because society shows compassion for the latter but only mocks the former. “It’s an almost cynical characteristic of our time,” Hellpach wrote a few years ago, “that it constantly talks about prostitution, police regulation, the age of consent, and 'white slavery,' while ignoring the moral struggles of women's souls and failing to address their urgent questions.”
On the other hand we find medical writers not only asserting with much moral fervor that sexual intercourse outside marriage is always and altogether unnecessary, but declaring, moreover, the harmlessness or even the advantages of sexual abstinence.
On the other hand, we see medical writers not only insisting with a lot of moral passion that sexual intercourse outside of marriage is always completely unnecessary, but also claiming, in addition, that sexual abstinence is harmless or even has its advantages.
Ribbing, the Swedish professor, in his Hygiène Sexuelle, advocates sexual abstinence outside marriage, and asserts its harmlessness. Gilles de la Tourette, Féré, and Augagneur in France agree. In Germany Fürbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 228) asserts that continence is possible and necessary, though admitting that it may, however, mean serious mischief in exceptional cases. Eulenburg (Sexuale Neuropathie, p. 14) doubts whether anyone, who otherwise lived a reasonable life, ever became ill, or more precisely neurasthenic, through sexual abstinence. Hegar, replying to the arguments of Bebel in his well-known book on women, denies that sexual abstinence can ever produce satyriasis or nymphomania. Näcke, who has frequently discussed the problem of sexual abstinence (e.g., Archiv für Kriminal-Anthropologie, 1903, Heft 1, and Sexual-Probleme, June, 1908), maintains that sexual abstinence can, at most, produce rare and slight unfavorable results, and that it is no more likely to produce insanity, even in predisposed individuals, than are the opposite extremes of sexual excess and masturbation. He adds that, so far as his own observations are concerned, the patients in asylums suffer scarcely at all from their compulsory sexual abstinence.
Ribbing, the Swedish professor, in his Hygiène Sexuelle, advocates for sexual abstinence outside of marriage and claims it's harmless. Gilles de la Tourette, Féré, and Augagneur in France agree. In Germany, Fürbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 228) asserts that self-control is possible and necessary, although he acknowledges that it can sometimes cause serious problems in rare cases. Eulenburg (Sexuale Neuropathie, p. 14) questions whether anyone who otherwise lives a reasonable life ever becomes ill, or more specifically neurasthenic, due to sexual abstinence. Hegar, responding to Bebel's arguments in his well-known book on women, argues that sexual abstinence cannot cause satyriasis or nymphomania. Näcke, who has often discussed the issue of sexual abstinence (e.g., Archiv für Kriminal-Anthropologie, 1903, Heft 1, and Sexual-Probleme, June, 1908), asserts that sexual abstinence can at most lead to rare and minor negative outcomes, and that it is no more likely to cause insanity, even in predisposed individuals, than the extremes of sexual excess and masturbation. He adds that, based on his own observations, patients in asylums suffer very little from their enforced sexual abstinence.
It is in England, however, that the virtues of sexual abstinence have been most loudly and emphatically proclaimed, sometimes indeed with considerable lack of cautious qualification. Acton, in his Reproductive Organs, sets forth the traditional English view, as well as Beale in his Morality and the Moral Question. A more distinguished representative of the same view was Paget, who, in his lecture on "Sexual Hypochondriasis," coupled sexual intercourse with "theft or lying." Sir William Gowers (Syphilis and the Nervous System, 1892, p. 126) also proclaims the advantages of "unbroken chastity," more especially as a method of avoiding syphilis. He is not hopeful, however, even as regards his own remedy, for he adds: "We can trace small ground for hope that the disease will thus be materially reduced." He would still, however, preach chastity to the individual, and he does so with all the ascetic ardor of a mediæval monk. "With all the force that any knowledge I possess, and any authority I have, can give, I assert that no man ever yet was in the slightest degree or way the worse for continence or better for incontinence. From the latter all are worse morally; a clear majority are worse physically; and in no small number the result is, and ever will be, utter physical shipwreck on one of the many rocks, sharp, jagged-edged, which beset the way, or on one of the many beds of festering slime which no care can possibly avoid." In America the same view widely prevails, and Dr. J. F. Scott, in his Sexual-Instinct (second edition, 1908, Ch. III), argues very vigorously and at great length in favor of sexual abstinence. He will not even admit that there are two sides to the question, though if that were the case, the length and the energy of his arguments would be unnecessary.
It’s in England that the benefits of sexual abstinence have been most loudly and emphatically promoted, sometimes without much careful consideration. Acton, in his Reproductive Organs, presents the traditional English view, as does Beale in his Morality and the Moral Question. A more notable advocate of the same perspective was Paget, who, in his lecture on "Sexual Hypochondriasis," compared sexual intercourse to "theft or lying." Sir William Gowers (Syphilis and the Nervous System, 1892, p. 126) also emphasizes the benefits of "unbroken chastity," especially as a means to prevent syphilis. However, he isn't optimistic about his own solution, adding: "We can see little ground for hope that the disease will thus be materially reduced." Still, he insists on promoting chastity to individuals, doing so with all the fervor of a medieval monk. "With all the strength that any knowledge I have, and any authority I hold, can provide, I claim that no man has ever been worse off for practicing continence or better off for being incontinent. From the latter, all are worse morally; a clear majority are worse physically; and for a number, the outcome is, and will always be, total physical ruin on one of the many sharp, jagged rocks that obstruct the path, or on one of the many beds of festering slime that no caution can possibly evade." In America, this view is also widely accepted, and Dr. J. F. Scott, in his Sexual-Instinct (second edition, 1908, Ch. III), passionately and extensively argues in favor of sexual abstinence. He won’t even consider that there are two sides to the issue, which, if true, would make the length and intensity of his arguments unnecessary.
Among medical authorities who have discussed the question of sexual abstinence at length it is not, indeed, usually possible to find such unqualified opinions in its favor as those I have quoted. There can be no doubt, however, that a large proportion of physicians, not excluding prominent and distinguished authorities, when casually confronted with the question whether sexual abstinence is harmless, will at once adopt the obvious path of least resistance and reply: Yes. In only a few cases will they even make any qualification of this affirmative answer. This tendency is very well illustrated by an inquiry made by Dr. Ludwig Jacobsohn, of St. Petersburgh ("Die Sexuelle Enthaltsamkeit im Lichte der Medizin," St. Petersburger Medicinische Wochenschrift, March 17, 1907). He wrote to over two hundred distinguished Russian and German professors of physiology, neurology, psychiatry, etc., asking them if they regarded sexual abstinence as harmless. The majority returned no answer; eleven Russian and twenty-eight Germans replied, but four of them merely said that "they had no personal experience," etc.; there thus remained thirty-five. Of these E. Pflüger, of Bonn, was skeptical of the advantage of any propaganda of abstinence: "if all the authorities in the world declared the harmlessness of abstinence that would have no influence on youth. Forces are here in play that break through all obstacles." The harmlessness of abstinence was affirmed by Kräpelin, Cramer, Gärtner, Tuczek, Schottelius, Gaffky, Finkler, Selenew, Lassar, Seifert, Gruber; the last, however, added that he knew very few abstinent young men, and himself only considered abstinence good before full development, and intercourse not dangerous in moderation even before then. Brieger knew cases of abstinence without harmful results, but himself thought that no general opinion could be given. Jürgensen said that abstinence in itself is not harmful, but that in some cases intercourse exerts a more beneficial influence. Hoffmann said that abstinence is harmless, adding that though it certainly leads to masturbation, that is better than gonorrhœa, to say nothing of syphilis, and is easily kept within bounds. Strümpell replied that sexual abstinence is harmless, and indirectly useful as preserving from the risk of venereal disease, but that sexual intercourse, being normal, is always more desirable. Hensen said that abstinence is not to be unconditionally approved. Rumpf replied that abstinence was not harmful for most before the age of thirty, but after that age there was a tendency to mental obsessions, and marriage should take place at twenty-five. Leyden also considered abstinence harmless until towards thirty, when it leads to psychic anomalies, especially states of anxiety, and a certain affectation. Hein replied that abstinence is harmless for most, but in some leads to hysterical manifestations and indirectly to bad results from masturbation, while for the normal man abstinence cannot be directly beneficial, since intercourse is natural. Grützner thought that abstinence is almost never harmful. Nescheda said it is harmless in itself, but harmful in so far as it leads to unnatural modes of gratification. Neisser believes that more prolonged abstinence than is now usual would be beneficial, but admitted the sexual excitations of our civilization; he added that of course he saw no harm for healthy men in intercourse. Hoche replied that abstinence is quite harmless in normal persons, but not always so in abnormal persons. Weber thought it had a useful influence in increasing will-power. Tarnowsky said it is good in early manhood, but likely to be unfavorable after twenty-five. Orlow replied that, especially in youth, it is harmless, and a man should be as chaste as his wife. Popow said that abstinence is good at all ages and preserves the energy. Blumenau said that in adult age abstinence is neither normal nor beneficial, and generally leads to masturbation, though not generally to nervous disorders; but that even masturbation is better than syphilis. Tschiriew saw no harm in abstinence up to thirty, and thought sexual weakness more likely to follow excess than abstinence. Tschish regarded abstinence as beneficial rather than harmful up to twenty-five or twenty-eight, but thought it difficult to decide after that age when nervous alterations seem to be caused. Darkschewitcz regarded abstinence as harmless up to twenty-five. Fränkel said it was harmless for most, but that for a considerable proportion of people intercourse is a necessity. Erb's opinion is regarded by Jacobsohn as standing alone; he placed the age below which abstinence is harmless at twenty; after that age he regarded it as injurious to health, seriously impeding work and capacity, while in neurotic persons it leads to still more serious results. Jacobsohn concludes that the general opinion of those answering the inquiry may thus be expressed: "Youth should be abstinent. Abstinence can in no way injure them; on the contrary, it is beneficial. If our young people will remain abstinent and avoid extra-conjugal intercourse they will maintain a high ideal of love and preserve themselves from venereal diseases."
Among medical experts who have extensively discussed the topic of sexual abstinence, it’s not easy to find such strong opinions in favor of it as I’ve quoted. However, it’s clear that a significant number of doctors, including well-known and respected authorities, when casually asked if sexual abstinence is harmless, will typically take the easy way out and say: Yes. Only a few will even qualify this affirmative response. This tendency is highlighted by a survey conducted by Dr. Ludwig Jacobsohn from St. Petersburg ("Die Sexuelle Enthaltsamkeit im Lichte der Medizin," St. Petersburger Medicinische Wochenschrift, March 17, 1907). He wrote to over two hundred prominent Russian and German professors of physiology, neurology, psychiatry, etc., asking whether they considered sexual abstinence to be harmless. Most didn’t respond; eleven Russians and twenty-eight Germans replied, but four of them simply stated that "they had no personal experience," etc.; thus, thirty-five remained. Among these, E. Pflüger from Bonn questioned the value of promoting abstinence: "Even if all the authorities declared abstinence to be harmless, it wouldn’t affect youth. There are forces at play here that break through all barriers." The harmlessness of abstinence was confirmed by Kräpelin, Cramer, Gärtner, Tuczek, Schottelius, Gaffky, Finkler, Selenew, Lassar, Seifert, Gruber; however, the last noted that he knew very few abstinent young men and believed abstinence was only beneficial before full development, with intercourse being not harmful in moderation even before then. Brieger had seen cases of abstinence without harmful effects, but he thought no general opinion could be established. Jürgensen stated that abstinence in itself isn’t harmful, but in certain instances, intercourse may have a more positive effect. Hoffmann claimed abstinence is harmless, adding that while it may lead to masturbation, that is preferable to gonorrhea, not to mention syphilis, and is easily managed. Strümpell responded that sexual abstinence is harmless and can even be indirectly useful because it reduces the risk of venereal diseases, but that sexual intercourse, being normal, is always more desirable. Hensen noted that abstinence should not be unconditionally endorsed. Rumpf indicated that abstinence isn’t harmful for most before age thirty, but beyond that age, there tends to be mental obsessions, advising marriage should occur by twenty-five. Leyden also thought abstinence was harmless until around thirty, when it could lead to psychological issues, especially anxiety, and some affectation. Hein noted that abstinence is harmless for most, but in some cases, it leads to hysterical symptoms and indirectly causes bad effects from masturbation, while for a normal man, abstinence can’t be directly beneficial since intercourse is natural. Grützner believed abstinence is almost never harmful. Nescheda stated it is harmless on its own, but can be damaging as it can promote unnatural ways of gratification. Neisser thought that longer periods of abstinence than are currently common would be beneficial, but acknowledged the sexual pressures of our society; he stated that of course he saw no harm for healthy men in sexual intercourse. Hoche remarked that abstinence is quite harmless for normal individuals, but not always so for those who are abnormal. Weber believed it helps increase willpower. Tarnowsky said it’s good in early adulthood but may be unfavorable after twenty-five. Orlow replied that especially during youth, abstinence is harmless, and a man should be as chaste as his wife. Popow stated that abstinence is good at all ages and helps preserve energy. Blumenau argued that in adulthood, abstinence is neither normal nor beneficial, and typically leads to masturbation, although not usually to nervous disorders; however, even masturbation is better than syphilis. Tschiriew saw no harm in abstaining until thirty and thought sexual weakness was more likely due to excess than to abstinence. Tschish viewed abstinence as more beneficial than harmful until twenty-five or twenty-eight, but found it hard to decide after that age when nervous issues seem to arise. Darkschewitcz regarded abstinence as harmless until twenty-five. Fränkel posited that it is harmless for most, but for a significant number of people, intercourse is a necessity. Erb's opinion is considered unique; he set the age under which abstinence is harmless at twenty; beyond that, he deemed it harmful to health, seriously affecting work and ability, while in neurotic individuals, it could lead to even more severe consequences. Jacobsohn concluded that the general opinion of those who responded to the inquiry could be summarized as: "Youth should practice abstinence. Abstinence can in no way harm them; on the contrary, it is beneficial. If our young people remain abstinent and avoid extramarital intercourse, they will uphold a high ideal of love and protect themselves from venereal diseases."
The harmlessness of sexual abstinence was likewise affirmed in America in a resolution passed by the American Medical Association in 1906. The proposition thus formally accepted was thus worded: "Continence is not incompatible with health." It ought to be generally realized that abstract propositions of this kind are worthless, because they mean nothing. Every sane person, when confronted by the demand to boldly affirm or deny the proposition, "Continence is not incompatible with health," is bound to affirm it. He might firmly believe that continence is incompatible with the health of most people, and that prolonged continence is incompatible with anyone's health, and yet, if he is to be honest in the use of language, it would be impossible for him to deny the vague and abstract proposition that "Continence is not incompatible with health." Such propositions are therefore not only without value, but actually misleading.
The harmlessness of sexual abstinence was also affirmed in America in a resolution passed by the American Medical Association in 1906. The proposition that was formally accepted was worded as follows: "Continence is not incompatible with health." It should be understood that abstract statements like this are meaningless because they convey no real meaning. Any rational person, when faced with the choice to confidently affirm or deny the statement, "Continence is not incompatible with health," is inclined to agree. They may strongly believe that continence is harmful to most people's health, and that prolonged abstinence is detrimental to anyone's health, but if they are honest with their language, it would be impossible for them to deny the vague and abstract statement that "Continence is not incompatible with health." Such statements are therefore not only worthless, but also misleading.
It is obvious that the more extreme and unqualified opinions in favor of sexual abstinence are based not on medical, but on what the writers regard as moral considerations. Moreover, as the same writers are usually equally emphatic in regard to the advantages of sexual intercourse in marriage, it is clear that they have committed themselves to a contradiction. The same act, as Näcke rightly points out, cannot become good or bad according as it is performed in or out of marriage. There is no magic efficacy in a few words pronounced by a priest or a government official.
It’s clear that the more extreme and unqualified opinions supporting sexual abstinence are based not on medical facts, but on what the authors consider moral reasons. Additionally, since these same authors are typically just as adamant about the benefits of sexual intercourse within marriage, it’s evident that they’ve created a contradiction. As Näcke rightly points out, the same action cannot be deemed good or bad depending on whether it takes place inside or outside of marriage. There’s no magical power in a few words spoken by a priest or a government official.
Remondino (loc. cit.) remarks that the authorities who have committed themselves to declarations in favor of the unconditional advantages of sexual abstinence tend to fall into three errors: (1) they generalize unduly, instead of considering each case individually, on its own merits; (2) they fail to realize that human nature is influenced by highly mixed and complex motives and cannot be assumed to be amenable only to motives of abstract morality; (3) they ignore the great army of masturbators and sexual perverts who make no complaint of sexual suffering, but by maintaining a rigid sexual abstinence, so far as normal relationships are concerned, gradually drift into currents whence there is no return.
Remondino (loc. cit.) points out that the authorities who advocate for the absolute benefits of sexual abstinence tend to make three main mistakes: (1) they overly generalize, rather than considering each case on its own terms; (2) they don't recognize that human nature is shaped by a mix of complex motives and can't simply be understood through the lens of abstract morality; (3) they overlook the significant number of masturbators and sexual deviants who do not express any sexual distress, but by rigidly adhering to abstinence from normal relationships, gradually get caught in a situation from which there is no escape.
Between those who unconditionally affirm or deny the harmlessness of sexual abstinence we find an intermediate party of authorities whose opinions are more qualified. Many of those who occupy this more guarded position are men whose opinions carry much weight, and it is probable that with them rather than with the more extreme advocates on either side the greater measure of reason lies. So complex a question as this cannot be adequately investigated merely in the abstract, and settled by an unqualified negative or affirmative. It is a matter in which every case requires its own special and personal consideration.
Between those who completely agree or disagree about the harmlessness of sexual abstinence, there’s a middle group of authorities whose views are more nuanced. Many of these individuals hold influential opinions, and it’s likely that they represent a more reasonable perspective than the extreme advocates on either side. A question as complex as this can’t be properly examined just in theory and resolved with a simple yes or no. Each situation needs its own specific and individual consideration.
"Where there is such a marked opposition of opinion truth is not exclusively on one side," remarks Löwenfeld (Sexualleben und Nervenleiden, second edition, p. 40). Sexual abstinence is certainly often injurious to neuropathic persons. (This is now believed by a large number of authorities, and was perhaps first decisively stated by Krafft-Ebing, "Ueber Neurosen durch Abstinenz," Jahrbuch für Psychiatrie, 1889, p. 1). Löwenfeld finds no special proclivity to neurasthenia among the Catholic clergy, and when it does occur, there is no reason to suppose a sexual causation. "In healthy and not hereditarily neuropathic men complete abstinence is possible without injury to the nervous system." Injurious effects, he continues, when they appear, seldom occur until between twenty-four and thirty-six years of age, and even then are not usually serious enough to lead to a visit to a doctor, consisting mainly in frequency of nocturnal emissions, pain in testes or rectum, hyperæsthesia in the presence of women or of sexual ideas. If, however, conditions arise which specially stimulate the sexual emotions, neurasthenia may be produced. Löwenfeld agrees with Freud and Gattel that the neurosis of anxiety tends to occur in the abstinent, careful examination showing that the abstinence is a factor in its production in both sexes. It is common among young women married to much older men, often appearing during the first years of marriage. Under special circumstances, therefore, abstinence can be injurious, but on the whole the difficulties due to such abstinence are not severe, and they only exceptionally call forth actual disturbance in the nervous or psychic spheres. Moll takes a similar temperate and discriminating view. He regards sexual abstinence before marriage as the ideal, but points out that we must avoid any doctrinal extremes in preaching sexual abstinence, for such preaching will merely lead to hypocrisy. Intercourse with prostitutes, and the tendency to change a woman like a garment, induce loss of sensitiveness to the spiritual and personal element in woman, while the dangers of sexual abstinence must no more be exaggerated than the dangers of sexual intercourse (Moll, Libido Sexualis, 1898, vol. i, p. 848; id., Konträre Sexualempfindung, 1899, p. 588). Bloch also (in a chapter on the question of sexual abstinence in his Sexualleben unserer Zeit, 1908) takes a similar standpoint. He advocates abstention during early life and temporary abstention in adult life, such abstention being valuable, not only for the conservation and transformation of energy, but also to emphasize the fact that life contains other matters to strive for beyond the ends of sex. Redlich (Medizinische Klinik, 1908, No. 7) also, in a careful study of the medical aspects of the question, takes an intermediate standpoint in relation to the relative advantages and disadvantages of sexual abstinence. "We may say that sexual abstinence is not a condition which must, under all circumstances and at any price, be avoided, though it is true that for the majority of healthy adult persons regular sexual intercourse is advantageous, and sometimes is even to be recommended."
"Where there is such a clear divide in opinion, truth isn't solely on one side," notes Löwenfeld (Sexualleben und Nervenleiden, second edition, p. 40). Sexual abstinence can definitely harm people with neuropathic conditions. (Many experts now believe this, and it was perhaps first clearly mentioned by Krafft-Ebing, "Ueber Neurosen durch Abstinenz," Jahrbuch für Psychiatrie, 1889, p. 1). Löwenfeld finds no particular tendency toward neurasthenia among Catholic clergy, and when it does happen, there's no reason to assume it's caused by sexual factors. "In healthy men who aren't genetically predisposed to neuropathy, complete abstinence can occur without damaging the nervous system." He adds that when harmful effects do show up, they usually happen between the ages of twenty-four and thirty-six, and even then, they're not typically serious enough to require a doctor's visit, mostly consisting of frequent nocturnal emissions, pain in the testes or rectum, and heightened sensitivity in the presence of women or sexual thoughts. However, if circumstances specifically stimulate sexual feelings, neurasthenia may develop. Löwenfeld agrees with Freud and Gattel that anxiety neurosis is likely in those who are abstinent, with careful analysis showing that abstinence contributes to its development in both genders. This is often seen among young women married to much older men, frequently surfacing in the early years of marriage. Therefore, under certain conditions, abstinence can be harmful, but overall, the problems resulting from abstinence are not severe and rarely cause significant distress in the nervous or psychological areas. Moll shares a similar balanced perspective. He sees sexual abstinence before marriage as ideal but emphasizes that we need to avoid extreme teachings on sexual abstinence since such teachings can lead to hypocrisy. Engaging with prostitutes and the mindset of treating women as interchangeable leads to a loss of awareness of the spiritual and personal aspects of women, and the risks of sexual abstinence shouldn't be overstated any more than the risks of sexual intercourse (Moll, Libido Sexualis, 1898, vol. i, p. 848; id., Konträre Sexualempfindung, 1899, p. 588). Bloch also adopts a similar stance in a chapter discussing sexual abstinence in his Sexualleben unserer Zeit, 1908. He promotes abstention during youth and temporary abstention in adulthood, noting that such abstention is valuable not only for conserving and transforming energy but also to highlight that life has goals beyond just sexual ones. Redlich (Medizinische Klinik, 1908, No. 7) also presents a thoughtful analysis of the medical implications, taking a moderate view on the advantages and disadvantages of sexual abstinence. "We can say that sexual abstinence isn't a state to be avoided at all costs; however, it's true that for most healthy adults, regular sexual intercourse is beneficial and sometimes even advisable."
It may be added that from the standpoint of Christian religious morality this same attitude, between the extremes of either party, recognizing the advantages of sexual abstinence, but not insisting that they shall be purchased at any price, has also found representation. Thus, in England, an Anglican clergyman, the Rev. H. Northcote (Christianity and Sex Problems, pp. 58, 60) deals temperately and sympathetically with the difficulties of sexual abstinence, and is by no means convinced that such abstinence is always an unmixed advantage; while in Germany a Catholic priest, Karl Jentsch (Sexualethik, Sexualjustiz, Sexualpolizei, 1900) sets himself to oppose the rigorous and unqualified assertions of Ribbing in favor of sexual abstinence. Jentsch thus expresses what he conceives ought to be the attitude of fathers, of public opinion, of the State and the Church towards the young man in this matter: "Endeavor to be abstinent until marriage. Many succeed in this. If you can succeed, it is good. But, if you cannot succeed, it is unnecessary to cast reproaches on yourself and to regard yourself as a scoundrel or a lost sinner. Provided that you do not abandon yourself to mere enjoyment or wantonness, but are content with what is necessary to restore your peace of mind, self-possession, and cheerful capacity for work, and also that you observe the precautions which physicians or experienced friends impress upon you."
It can be noted that from the perspective of Christian moral teachings, this same view, positioned between the extremes of either side, acknowledges the benefits of sexual abstinence without insisting that it should come at any cost. This viewpoint has also found expression. Thus, in England, an Anglican clergyman, the Rev. H. Northcote (Christianity and Sex Problems, pp. 58, 60), addresses the challenges of sexual abstinence in a balanced and empathetic way, and he is not entirely convinced that such abstinence is always completely beneficial. Meanwhile, in Germany, a Catholic priest, Karl Jentsch (Sexualethik, Sexualjustiz, Sexualpolizei, 1900), sets out to challenge the strict and absolute claims made by Ribbing advocating for sexual abstinence. Jentsch articulates what he believes should be the stance of fathers, public opinion, the State, and the Church towards young men on this issue: "Try to remain abstinent until marriage. Many people succeed in this. If you can manage it, that's great. But if you can't, there's no need to blame yourself or see yourself as a bad person or a lost sinner. As long as you don’t give in to just pleasure or excess, but are satisfied with what you need to maintain your peace of mind, self-control, and positive ability to work, and also follow the advice that doctors or experienced friends give you."
When we thus analyze and investigate the the three main streams of expert opinions in regard to this question of sexual abstinence—the opinions in favor of it, the opinions in opposition to it, and the opinions which take an intermediate course—we can scarcely fail to conclude how unsatisfactory the whole discussion is. The state of "sexual abstinence" is a completely vague and indefinite state. The indefinite and even meaningless character of the expression "sexual abstinence" is shown by the frequency with which those who argue about it assume that it can, may, or even must, involve masturbation. That fact alone largely deprives it of value as morality and altogether as abstinence. At this point, indeed, we reach the most fundamental criticism to which the conception of "sexual abstinence" lies open. Rohleder, an experienced physician and a recognized authority on questions of sexual pathology, has submitted the current views on "sexual abstinence" to a searching criticism in a lengthy and important paper.[95] He denies altogether that strict sexual abstinence exists at all. "Sexual abstinence," he points out, in any strict scenes of the term, must involve abstinence not merely from sexual intercourse but from auto-erotic manifestations, from masturbation, from homosexual acts, from all sexually perverse practices. It must further involve a permanent abstention from indulgence in erotic imaginations and voluptuous reverie. When, however, it is possible thus to render the whole psychic field a tabula rasa so far as sexual activity is concerned—and if it fails to be so constantly and consistently there is no strict sexual abstinence—then, Rohleder points out, we have to consider whether we are not in presence of a case of sexual anæsthesia, of anaphrodisia sexualis. That is a question which is rarely, if ever, faced by those who discuss sexual abstinence. It is, however, an extremely pertinent question, because, as Rohleder insists, if sexual anæsthesia exists the question of sexual abstinence falls to the ground, for we can only "abstain" from actions that are in our power. Complete sexual anæsthesia is, however, so rare a state that it may be practically left out of consideration, and as the sexual impulse, if it exists, must by physiological necessity sometimes become active in some shape—even if only, according to Freud's view, by transformation into some morbid neurotic condition—we reach the conclusion that "sexual abstinence" is strictly impossible. Rohleder has met with a few cases in which there seemed to him no escape from the conclusion that sexual abstinence existed, but in all of these he subsequently found that he was mistaken, usually owing to the practice of masturbation, which he believes to be extremely common and very frequently accompanied by a persistent attempt to deceive the physician concerning its existence. The only kind of "sexual abstinence" that exists is a partial and temporary abstinence. Instead of saying, as some say, "Permanent abstinence is unnatural and cannot exist without physical and mental injury," we ought to say, Rohleder believes, "Permanent abstinence is unnatural and has never existed."
When we analyze and look into the three main perspectives of expert opinions regarding sexual abstinence—those in support of it, those against it, and those that take a middle ground—we can't help but notice how unconvincing the whole discussion is. The term "sexual abstinence" is completely vague and unclear. This ambiguity is highlighted by how often those debating it assume it can, may, or even has to include masturbation. That fact alone significantly undermines its value as a moral concept and entirely as a form of abstinence. At this point, we arrive at the most fundamental critique of the idea of "sexual abstinence." Rohleder, an experienced doctor and a recognized authority on sexual pathology, has subjected the prevailing opinions on "sexual abstinence" to thorough scrutiny in a lengthy and significant paper.[95] He altogether denies the existence of strict sexual abstinence. "Sexual abstinence," he points out, in any strict sense of the term, must include abstinence not just from sexual intercourse but also from auto-erotic feelings, masturbation, homosexual acts, and all sexually deviant practices. It must also involve a permanent avoidance of indulging in erotic fantasies and sensual daydreams. However, if we can clear the entire psychological landscape of sexual activity and if it doesn't consistently remain that way, then, as Rohleder notes, we need to consider whether we're actually dealing with a case of sexual numbness, or anaphrodisia sexualis. That’s a question rarely addressed by those discussing sexual abstinence. Yet, it’s a highly relevant issue, because, as Rohleder argues, if sexual numbness exists, then the idea of sexual abstinence becomes irrelevant, since we can only "abstain" from actions that we have control over. Complete sexual numbness is, however, such a rare state that it can practically be disregarded. Furthermore, since the sexual impulse, if it exists, must, for physiological reasons, sometimes manifest in some form—even if only, according to Freud, by turning into some unhealthy neurotic condition—we conclude that "sexual abstinence" is strictly impossible. Rohleder has encountered a few cases where it seemed undeniable that sexual abstinence was present, but in each of these cases, he later found he was mistaken, usually because of the presence of masturbation, which he believes is extremely common and often accompanied by a persistent effort to mislead the doctor about its existence. The only form of "sexual abstinence" that exists is a partial and temporary one. Instead of saying, as some do, "Permanent abstinence is unnatural and cannot exist without causing physical and mental harm," we should say, as Rohleder believes, "Permanent abstinence is unnatural and has never existed."
It is impossible not to feel as we contemplate this chaotic mass of opinions, that the whole discussion is revolving round a purely negative idea, and that fundamental fact is responsible for what at first seem to be startling conflicts of statement. If indeed we were to eliminate what is commonly regarded as the religious and moral aspect of the matter—an aspect, be it remembered, which has no bearing on the essential natural facts of the question—we cannot fail to perceive that these ostentatious differences of conviction would be reduced within very narrow and trifling limits.
It’s hard not to feel that as we look at this chaotic mix of opinions, the whole discussion centers around a purely negative idea. This core fact explains what initially appears to be surprising contradictions in statements. If we were to remove what is usually seen as the religious and moral side of the issue—an aspect, we should note, that doesn't affect the fundamental natural facts of the question—we would clearly see that these showy differences in beliefs would shrink down to very small and insignificant limits.
We cannot strictly coordinate the impulse of reproduction with the impulse of nutrition. There are very important differences between them, more especially the fundamental difference that while the satisfaction of the one impulse is absolutely necessary both to the life of the individual and of the race, the satisfaction of the other is absolutely necessary only to the life of the race. But when we reduce this question to one of "sexual abstinence" we are obviously placing it on the same basis as that of abstinence from food, that is to say at the very opposite pole to which we place it when (as in the previous chapter) we consider it from the point of view of asceticism and chastity. It thus comes about that on this negative basis there really is an interesting analogy between nutritive abstinence, though necessarily only maintained incompletely and for a short time, and sexual abstinence, maintained more completely and for a longer time. A patient of Janet's seems to bring out clearly this resemblance. Nadia, whom Janet was able to study during five years, was a young woman of twenty-seven, healthy and intelligent, not suffering from hysteria nor from anorexia, for she had a normal appetite. But she had an idea; she was anxious to be slim and to attain this end she cut down her meals to the smallest size, merely a little soup and a few eggs. She suffered much from the abstinence she thus imposed on herself, and was always hungry, though sometimes her hunger was masked by the inevitable stomach trouble caused by so long a persistence in this régime. At times, indeed, she had been so hungry that she had devoured greedily whatever she could lay her hands on, and not infrequently she could not resist the temptation to eat a few biscuits in secret. Such actions caused her horrible remorse, but, all the same, she would be guilty of them again. She realized the great efforts demanded by her way of life, and indeed looked upon herself as a heroine for resisting so long. "Sometimes," she told Janet, "I passed whole hours in thinking about food, I was so hungry. I swallowed my saliva, I bit my handkerchief, I rolled on the ground, I wanted to eat so badly. I searched books for descriptions of meals and feasts, I tried to deceive my hunger by imagining that I too was enjoying all these good things. I was really famished, and in spite of a few weaknesses for biscuits I know that I showed much courage."[96] Nadia's motive idea, that she wished to be slim, corresponds to the abstinent man's idea that he wishes to be "moral," and only differs from it by having the advantage of being somewhat more positive and personal, for the idea of the person who wishes to avoid sexual indulgence because it is "not right" is often not merely negative but impersonal and imposed by the social and religious environment. Nadia's occasional outbursts of reckless greediness correspond to the sudden impulses to resort to prostitution, and her secret weaknesses for biscuits, followed by keen remorse, to lapses into the habit of masturbation. Her fits of struggling and rolling on the ground are precisely like the outbursts of futile desire which occasionally occur to young abstinent men and women in health and strength. The absorption in thoughts about meals and in literary descriptions of meals is clearly analogous to the abstinent man's absorption in wanton thoughts and erotic books. Finally, Nadia's conviction that she is a heroine corresponds exactly to the attitude of self-righteousness which often marks the sexually abstinent.
We can't strictly align the urge to reproduce with the urge to eat. There are significant differences between them, especially the key difference that while satisfying one is essential for both individual and species survival, the other is only essential for the survival of the species. However, when we frame the question in terms of "sexual abstinence," we are essentially equating it with abstaining from food, putting it at the opposite end of the spectrum from where we place it when (as discussed in the previous chapter) we look at it through the lens of asceticism and chastity. This leads to an intriguing analogy between dietary abstinence, which can be only temporarily and incompletely upheld, and sexual abstinence, which can be upheld more fully and for a longer time. One of Janet's patients highlights this similarity. Nadia, whom Janet studied for five years, was a healthy, intelligent twenty-seven-year-old woman who did not suffer from hysteria or anorexia but had a normal appetite. She had a goal; she wanted to be slim, and to achieve this, she reduced her meals to a minimum, just a bit of soup and a few eggs. She suffered greatly from the abstinence she imposed on herself, always feeling hungry, although at times her hunger was masked by the digestive issues that arose from sticking to this régime for so long. There were times when her hunger was so intense that she would eagerly eat anything within reach, and she often couldn’t resist sneaking a few biscuits when no one was watching. Such actions filled her with guilt, yet she would repeat them regardless. She recognized the immense effort her lifestyle required and even considered herself a hero for resisting for so long. "Sometimes," she told Janet, "I spent hours just thinking about food, I was so hungry. I swallowed my saliva, bit my handkerchief, rolled on the ground—I wanted to eat so badly. I looked up descriptions of meals and feasts in books, trying to fool my hunger by imagining I was enjoying all those delicious things. I was truly starving, and despite my occasional weakness for biscuits, I know I showed a lot of courage."[96] Nadia's desire to be slim corresponds to the abstinent man's wish to be "moral," differing mainly in that it is somewhat more positive and personal; the desire to avoid sexual indulgence because it is "wrong" is often not just negative but is also impersonal and influenced by societal and religious norms. Nadia's sporadic urges to indulge in food reflect the sudden urges some may have to engage in prostitution, while her secret cravings for biscuits followed by guilt mirror slips into masturbation. Her struggles and rolling on the ground are akin to the bursts of unproductive desire that young men and women abstaining from sex may experience. Her fixation on food and literature about meals parallels the way abstinent individuals can become absorbed in erotic thoughts and literature. Finally, Nadia's belief that she is a heroine perfectly reflects the self-righteous attitude often found in those who are sexually abstinent.
If we turn to Freud's penetrating and suggestive study of the problem of sexual abstinence in relation to "civilized" sexual morality, we find that, though he makes no reference to the analogy with abstinence from food, his words would for the most part have an equal application to both cases. "The task of subduing so powerful an instinct as the sexual impulse, otherwise than by giving it satisfaction," he writes, "is one which may employ the whole strength of a man. Subjugation through sublimation, by guiding the sexual forces into higher civilizational paths, may succeed with a minority, and even with these only for a time, least easily during the years of ardent youthful energy. Most others become neurotic or otherwise come to grief. Experience shows that the majority of people constituting our society are constitutionally unequal to the task of abstinence. We say, indeed, that the struggle with this powerful impulse and the emphasis the struggle involves on the ethical and æsthetic forces in the soul's life 'steels' the character, and for a few favorably organized natures this is true; it must also be acknowledged that the differentiation of individual character so marked in our time only becomes possible through sexual limitations. But in by far the majority of cases the struggle with sensuality uses up the available energy of character, and this at the very time when the young man needs all his strength in order to win his place in the world."[97]
If we look at Freud's insightful study of the issue of sexual abstinence in relation to "civilized" sexual morality, we find that, although he doesn't mention the comparison with abstaining from food, his points largely apply to both situations. "The challenge of controlling such a powerful instinct as the sexual drive, other than by satisfying it," he writes, "can occupy all of a person's strength. Subduing it through sublimation, by directing sexual energy into higher cultural avenues, may work for a minority, and even for them only temporarily, especially during the intense energy of youth. Most others become neurotic or face difficulties. Experience shows that the majority of people in our society are not naturally capable of abstinence. We often claim that the battle against this strong impulse and the focus on ethical and aesthetic aspects of the soul's life 'strengthens' character, and for some well-suited individuals, this is indeed true; however, it must also be acknowledged that the distinct differentiation of individual character seen in our time can only happen through sexual limitations. But in most cases, the struggle against sensuality drains the available energy of character, particularly at a time when young people need all their strength to establish their place in the world."[97]
When we have put the problem on this negative basis of abstinence it is difficult to see how we can dispute the justice of Freud's conclusions. They hold good equally for abstinence from food and abstinence from sexual love. When we have placed the problem on a more positive basis, and are able to invoke the more active and fruitful motives of asceticism and chastity this unfortunate fight against a natural impulse is abolished. If chastity is an ideal of the harmonious play of all the organic impulses of the soul and body, if asceticism, properly understood, is the athletic striving for a worthy object which causes, for the time, an indifference to the gratification of sexual impulses, we are on wholesome and natural ground, and there is no waste of energy in fruitless striving for a negative end, whether imposed artificially from without, as it usually is, or voluntarily chosen by the individual himself.
When we frame the problem in terms of abstinence, it’s hard to challenge Freud's conclusions. They apply equally to abstaining from food and sexual love. However, when we approach the issue from a more positive perspective and focus on the active and constructive motives behind asceticism and chastity, this unfortunate struggle against a natural impulse disappears. If chastity is about harmonizing all the natural urges of the soul and body, and if asceticism, when understood correctly, is about striving for a meaningful goal that temporarily makes one indifferent to sexual desires, then we are on healthy and natural ground. There's no wasted energy in fruitless efforts for a negative outcome, whether that’s imposed from the outside, as it often is, or chosen voluntarily by the individual.
For there is really no complete analogy between sexual desire and hunger, between abstinence from sexual relations and abstinence from food. When we put them both on the basis of abstinence we put them on a basis which covers the impulse for food but only half covers the impulse for sexual love. We confer no pleasure and no service on our food when we eat it. But the half of sexual love, perhaps the most important and ennobling half, lies in what we give and not in what we take. To reduce this question to the low level of abstinence, is not only to centre it in a merely negative denial but to make it a solely self-regarding question. Instead of asking: How can I bring joy and strength to another? we only ask: How can I preserve my empty virtue?
For there isn't a complete comparison between sexual desire and hunger, or between refraining from sex and refraining from food. When we frame both in terms of abstinence, we’re addressing the need for food but only partially covering the need for sexual love. Eating doesn’t bring us pleasure or service. However, the essence of sexual love, perhaps the most significant and uplifting part, lies in what we give, not just in what we receive. Reducing this issue to mere abstinence focuses solely on a negative denial and turns it into a self-centered question. Instead of asking: How can I bring joy and strength to someone else? we only ask: How can I maintain my empty virtue?
Therefore it is that from whatever aspect we consider the question,—whether in view of the flagrant contradiction between the authorities who have discussed this question, or of the illegitimate mingling here of moral and physiological considerations, or of the merely negative and indeed unnatural character of the "virtue" thus set up, or of the failure involved to grasp the ennoblingly altruistic and mutual side of sexual love,—from whatever aspect we approach the problem of "sexual abstinence" we ought only to agree to do so under protest.
Therefore, no matter how we look at the question—whether it's considering the blatant contradictions among the authorities who have discussed it, the inappropriate mix of moral and physiological factors, the purely negative and actually unnatural nature of the "virtue" being established, or the failure to understand the uplifting, altruistic, and mutual aspects of sexual love—whenever we approach the problem of "sexual abstinence," we should only agree to do so with reservations.
If we thus decide to approach it, and if we have reached the conviction—which, in view of all the evidence we can scarcely escape—that, while sexual abstinence in so far as it may be recognized as possible is not incompatible with health, there are yet many adults for whom it is harmful, and a very much larger number for whom when prolonged it is undesirable, we encounter a serious problem. It is a problem which confronts any person, and especially the physician, who may be called upon to give professional advice to his fellows on this matter. If sexual relationships are sometimes desirable for unmarried persons, or for married persons who, for any reason, are debarred from conjugal union, is a physician justified in recommending such sexual relationships to his patient? This is a question that has frequently been debated and decided in opposing senses.
If we choose to tackle it this way, and if we’ve come to the conclusion—which, based on all the evidence, is hard to avoid—that while sexual abstinence is generally not unhealthy when it can be practiced, there are still many adults for whom it can be harmful, and many more for whom, if prolonged, it is undesirable, we face a serious issue. This issue presents itself to anyone, especially a doctor, who might be asked to provide professional advice on this topic. If sexual relationships are sometimes beneficial for single people, or for married individuals who, for whatever reason, can’t engage in sexual union, is a doctor right to recommend such relationships to their patient? This is a question that has often been debated and answered in conflicting ways.
Various distinguished physicians, especially in Germany, have proclaimed the duty of the doctor to recommend sexual intercourse to his patient whenever he considers it desirable. Gyurkovechky, for instance, has fully discussed this question, and answered it in the affirmative. Nyström (Sexual-Probleme, July, 1908, p. 413) states that it is the physician's duty, in some cases of sexual weakness, when all other methods of treatment have failed, to recommend sexual intercourse as the best remedy. Dr. Max Marcuse stands out as a conspicuous advocate of the unconditional duty of the physician to advocate sexual intercourse in some cases, both to men and to women, and has on many occasions argued in this sense (e.g., Darf der Arzt zum Ausserehelichen Geschlechtsverkehr raten? 1904). Marcuse is strongly of opinion that a physician who, allowing himself to be influenced by moral, sociological, or other considerations, neglects to recommend sexual intercourse when he considers it desirable for the patient's health, is unworthy of his profession, and should either give up medicine or send his patients to other doctors. This attitude, though not usually so emphatically stated, seems to be widely accepted. Lederer goes even further when he states (Monatsschrift für Harnkrankheiten und Sexuelle Hygiene, 1906, Heft 3) that it is the physician's duty in the case of a woman who is suffering from her husband's impotence, to advise her to have intercourse with another man, adding that "whether she does so with her husband's consent is no affair of the physician's, for he is not the guardian of morality, but the guardian of health." The physicians who publicly take this attitude are, however, a small minority. In England, so far as I am aware, no physician of eminence has openly proclaimed the duty of the doctor to advise sexual intercourse outside marriage, although, it is scarcely necessary to add, in England, as elsewhere, it happens that doctors, including women doctors, from time to time privately point out to their unmarried and even married patients, that sexual intercourse would probably be beneficial.
Various well-known doctors, especially in Germany, have stated that it's a doctor's responsibility to recommend sexual intercourse to their patients whenever they think it's appropriate. Gyurkovechky, for example, has thoroughly discussed this issue and answered it positively. Nyström (Sexual-Probleme, July 1908, p. 413) mentions that in some cases of sexual weakness, when all other treatments have failed, it's the doctor's duty to suggest sexual intercourse as the best solution. Dr. Max Marcuse is a prominent supporter of the unconditional responsibility of physicians to promote sexual intercourse in some cases, for both men and women, and has often argued this point (e.g., Darf der Arzt zum Ausserehelichen Geschlechtsverkehr raten? 1904). Marcuse strongly believes that a physician who, swayed by moral, sociological, or other factors, fails to recommend sexual intercourse when they deem it necessary for the patient's health, is unworthy of the profession and should either leave medicine or refer their patients to other doctors. While this viewpoint is not usually expressed so strongly, it seems to be broadly accepted. Lederer goes even further when he states (Monatsschrift für Harnkrankheiten und Sexuelle Hygiene, 1906, Heft 3) that it is a doctor's duty to advise a woman suffering from her husband's impotence to engage in intercourse with another man, adding that "whether she does so with her husband's consent is not the doctor's concern, as he is not the guardian of morality, but of health." However, those physicians who publicly hold this view are a small minority. In England, as far as I know, no prominent physician has openly declared the duty of doctors to advise sexual intercourse outside of marriage, although, it’s worth noting that in England, as elsewhere, doctors, including female doctors, do occasionally suggest to their unmarried and even married patients that sexual intercourse might be beneficial.
The duty of the physician to recommend sexual intercourse has been denied as emphatically as it has been affirmed. Thus Eulenburg (Sexuale Neuropathie, p. 43), would by no means advise extra-conjugal relations to his patient; "such advice is quite outside the physician's competence." It is, of course, denied by those who regard sexual abstinence as always harmless, if not beneficial. But it is also denied by many who consider that, under some circumstances, sexual intercourse would do good.
The responsibility of a doctor to suggest sexual intercourse has been denied just as strongly as it has been supported. For example, Eulenburg (Sexuale Neuropathie, p. 43) would definitely not recommend extramarital relations to his patient, stating that "such advice is completely beyond the physician's role." Naturally, this view is rejected by those who believe that sexual abstinence is always harmless, if not actually helpful. However, it is also rejected by many who think that in certain situations, sexual intercourse could have positive effects.
Moll has especially, and on many occasions, discussed the duty of the physician in relation to the question of advising sexual intercourse outside marriage (e.g., in his comprehensive work, Aerztliche Ethik, 1902; also Zeitschrift für Aerztliche Fortbildung, 1905, Nos. 12-15; Mutterschutz, 1905, Heft 3; Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. ii, Heft 8). At the outset Moll had been disposed to assert the right of the physician to recommend sexual intercourse under some circumstances; "so long as marriage is unduly delayed and sexual intercourse outside marriage exists," he wrote (Die Conträre Sexualempfindung, second edition, p. 287), "so long, I think, we may use such intercourse therapeutically, provided that the rights of no third person (husband or wife) are injured." In all his later writings, however, Moll ranges himself clearly and decisively on the opposite side. He considers that the physician has no right to overlook the possible results of his advice in inflicting venereal disease, or, in the case of a woman, pregnancy, on his patient, and he believes that these serious results are far more likely to happen than is always admitted by those who defend the legitimacy of such advice. Nor will Moll admit that the physician is entitled to overlook the moral aspects of the question. A physician may know that a poor man could obtain many things good for his health by stealing, but he cannot advise him to steal. Moll takes the case of a Catholic priest who is suffering from neurasthenia due to sexual abstinence. Even although the physician feels certain that the priest may be able to avoid all the risks of disease as well as of publicity, he is not entitled to urge him to sexual intercourse. He has to remember that in thus causing a priest to break his vows of chastity he may induce a mental conflict and a bitter remorse which may lead to the worst results, even on his patient's physical health. Similar results, Moll remarks, may follow such advice when given to a married man or woman, to say nothing of possible divorce proceedings and accompanying evils.
Moll has particularly and repeatedly discussed the physician's responsibility regarding the issue of advising sexual intercourse outside of marriage (e.g., in his comprehensive work, Aerztliche Ethik, 1902; also Zeitschrift für Aerztliche Fortbildung, 1905, Nos. 12-15; Mutterschutz, 1905, Heft 3; Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. ii, Heft 8). Initially, Moll was inclined to claim that a physician could recommend sexual intercourse under certain circumstances; "as long as marriage is unduly delayed and sexual intercourse outside of marriage takes place," he wrote (Die Conträre Sexualempfindung, second edition, p. 287), "I believe we can use such intercourse therapeutically, as long as the rights of no third person (husband or wife) are violated." However, in all his later writings, Moll decisively takes a clear stance against this idea. He argues that a physician shouldn’t disregard the potential outcomes of his advice in spreading venereal disease or, in the case of a woman, causing pregnancy, and he believes that these serious outcomes are much more likely to occur than is often acknowledged by those who support the legitimacy of such advice. Moll also rejects the notion that a physician can ignore the moral implications of the issue. A physician may understand that a poor person could gain many health benefits by stealing, but he cannot advise that person to steal. Moll cites the case of a Catholic priest suffering from neurasthenia due to sexual abstinence. Even if the physician is confident that the priest could avoid all risks of disease and publicity, he isn’t justified in encouraging him to have sexual intercourse. The physician must consider that urging a priest to break his vows of chastity could lead to a mental conflict and severe remorse, potentially harming his patient’s physical health. Moll notes that similar consequences might arise from giving such advice to a married man or woman, not to mention the possibility of divorce proceedings and related issues.
Rohleder (Vorlesungen über Geschlechtstrieb und Gesamtes Geschlechtsleben der Menschen) adopts a somewhat qualified attitude in this matter. As a general rule he is decidedly against recommending sexual intercourse outside marriage to those who are suffering from partial or temporary abstinence (the only form of abstinence he recognizes), partly on the ground that the evils of abstinence are not serious or permanent, and partly because the patient is fairly certain to exercise his own judgment in the matter. But in some classes of cases he recommends such intercourse, and notably to bisexual persons, on the ground that he is thus preserving his patient from the criminal risks of homosexual practices.
Rohleder (Vorlesungen über Geschlechtstrieb und Gesamtes Geschlechtsleben der Menschen) has a somewhat nuanced view on this topic. Generally, he strongly opposes suggesting sexual intercourse outside of marriage to individuals dealing with partial or temporary abstinence (the only kind of abstinence he acknowledges). He believes that the negative effects of abstinence are neither severe nor long-lasting and that patients are likely to make their own decisions in this area. However, in certain cases, he does recommend such intercourse, especially for bisexual individuals, arguing that it helps keep his patients safe from the legal dangers of homosexual behavior.
It seems to me that there should be no doubt whatever as to the correct professional attitude of the physician in relation to this question of advice concerning sexual intercourse. The physician is never entitled to advise his patient to adopt sexual intercourse outside marriage nor any method of relief which is commonly regarded as illegitimate. It is said that the physician has nothing to do with considerations of conventional morality. If he considers that champagne would be good for a poor patient he ought to recommend him to take champagne; he is not called upon to consider whether the patient will beg, borrow, or steal the champagne. But, after all, even if that be admitted, it must still be said that the physician knows that the champagne, however obtained, is not likely to be poisonous. When, however, he prescribes sexual intercourse, with the same lofty indifference to practical considerations, he has no such knowledge. In giving such a prescription the physician has in fact not the slightest knowledge of what he may be prescribing. He may be giving his patient a venereal disease; he may be giving the anxieties and responsibilities of an illegitimate child; the prescriber is quite in the dark. He is in the same position as if he had prescribed a quack medicine of which the composition was unknown to him, with the added disadvantage that the medicine may turn out to be far more potently explosive than is the case with the usually innocuous patent medicine. The utmost that a physician can properly permit himself to do is to put the case impartially before his patient and to present to him all the risks. The solution must be for the patient himself to work out, as best he can, for it involves social and other considerations which, while they are indeed by no means outside the sphere of medicine, are certainly entirely outside the control of the individual private practitioner of medicine.
It seems to me that there should be no doubt at all about the right professional attitude of a doctor when it comes to giving advice about sexual intercourse. A doctor should never advise their patient to engage in sexual intercourse outside of marriage or any method of relief that is generally considered unacceptable. Some say that a doctor shouldn’t worry about conventional morality. If they believe that champagne would benefit a sick patient, they should suggest they drink champagne; they don’t need to consider whether the patient will steal, borrow, or beg for it. However, even if we accept that point, it must still be acknowledged that a doctor knows the champagne, regardless of how it's obtained, is unlikely to be harmful. When a doctor prescribes sexual intercourse with the same disregard for practical concerns, they lack that same knowledge. By giving such a prescription, a doctor really has no idea of what they may be recommending. They could be exposing their patient to a sexually transmitted disease or the stress and responsibilities of an unplanned child; the prescriber is completely in the dark. They are in the same situation as if they prescribed a questionable medicine without knowing its ingredients, but with the added risk that the medicine could be much more dangerous than typical over-the-counter options. The most a doctor can appropriately do is to lay out the facts for their patient and explain all the risks involved. The solution must ultimately be up to the patient to figure out, as it involves social and other factors that, while definitely relevant to medicine, are entirely beyond the control of the individual private practitioner.
Moll also is of opinion that this impartial presentation of the case for and against sexual intercourse corresponds to the physician's duty in the matter. It is, indeed, a duty which can scarcely be escaped by the physician in many cases. Moll points out that it can by no means be assimilated, as some have supposed, with the recommendation of sexual intercourse. It is, on the contrary, he remarks, much more analogous to the physician's duty in reference to operations. He puts before the patient the nature of the operation, its advantages and its risks, but he leaves it to the patient's judgment to accept or reject the operation. Lewitt also (Geschlechtliche Enthaltsamkeit und Gesundheitsstörungen, 1905), after discussing the various opinions on this question, comes to the conclusion that the physician, if he thinks that intercourse outside marriage might be beneficial, should explain the difficulties and leave the patient himself to decide.
Moll also believes that presenting the arguments for and against sexual intercourse in an unbiased way aligns with a physician's responsibility in this area. In many situations, it's a duty that a physician can't easily avoid. Moll notes that this should not be confused with promoting sexual intercourse, as some have suggested. Instead, he argues that it is much more similar to a physician's responsibilities regarding surgical procedures. He explains the nature of the procedure, its benefits, and its risks, but ultimately leaves the decision to the patient. Lewitt also (Geschlechtliche Enthaltsamkeit und Gesundheitsstörungen, 1905), after exploring various viewpoints on this issue, concludes that if a physician believes that intercourse outside of marriage could be beneficial, they should discuss the challenges and allow the patient to make their own choice.
There is another reason why, having regard to the prevailing moral opinions at all events among the middle classes, a physician should refrain from advising extra-conjugal intercourse: he places himself in a false relation to his social environment. He is recommending a remedy the nature of which he could not publicly avow, and so destroying the public confidence in himself. The only physician who is morally entitled to advise his patients to enter into extra-conjugal relationships is one who openly acknowledges that he is prepared to give such advice. The doctor who is openly working for social reform has perhaps won the moral right to give advice in accordance with the tendency of his public activity, but even then his advice may be very dubiously judicious, and he would be better advised to confine his efforts at social reform to his public activities. The voice of the physician, as Professor Max Flesch of Frankfort observes, is more and more heard in the development and new growth of social institutions; he is a natural leaders in such movements, and proposals for reform properly come from him. "But," as Flesch continues, "publicly to accept the excellence of existing institutions and in the privacy of the consulting-room to give advice which assumes the imperfection of those institutions is illogical and confusing. It is the physician's business to give advice which is in accordance with the interests of the community as a whole, and those interests require that sexual relationships should be entered into between healthy men and women who are able and willing to accept the results of their union. That should be the physician's rule of conduct. Only so can he become, what to-day he is often proclaimed to be, the leader of the nation."[98] This view is not, as we see, entirely in accord with that which assumes that the physician's duty is solely and entirely to his patient, without regard to the bearing of his advice on social conduct. The patient's interests are primary, but they are not entitled to be placed in antagonism to the interests of society. The advice given by the wise physician must always be in harmony with the social and moral tone of his age. Thus it is that the tendency among the younger generation of physicians to-day to take an active interest in raising that tone and in promoting social reform—a tendency which exists not only in Germany where such interests have long been acute, but also in so conservative a land as England—is full of promise for the future.
There’s another reason why, considering the dominant moral views among the middle class, a doctor should avoid advising extramarital relationships: it puts him in a contradictory position within his social surroundings. He’s suggesting a solution that he couldn't openly support, which undermines public trust in him. The only doctor who can ethically advise his patients to pursue extramarital affairs is one who openly admits he is willing to do so. A doctor who is genuinely advocating for social reform might have earned the moral right to offer such advice, but even then, his suggestions could be questionable, and it would be wiser for him to limit his reform efforts to his public work. As Professor Max Flesch of Frankfurt notes, the voice of the physician is increasingly influential in shaping and developing social institutions; they are natural leaders in these initiatives, and proposals for change should ideally come from them. “But,” Flesch continues, “to publicly support the value of existing institutions while privately giving advice that suggests those institutions are flawed is illogical and confusing. It’s the doctor’s role to offer guidance that aligns with the interests of the community as a whole, and those interests dictate that sexual relationships should occur between healthy men and women who are capable and willing to accept the consequences of their union. This should be the doctor's guiding principle. Only then can he truly become what he is often said to be, a leader of the nation.”[98] This perspective, as we can see, does not entirely align with the view that a doctor’s duty is solely to their patient, without considering how their advice impacts social behavior. The patient’s interests come first, but they shouldn’t be set against the interests of society. The advice from a wise physician must always resonate with the social and moral standards of their time. Therefore, the current inclination among younger doctors to actively engage in improving that standard and promoting social reform—a trend that not only exists in Germany, where these issues have been prominent for a long time, but also in a traditionally conservative country like England—is very promising for the future.
The physician is usually content to consider his duty to his patient in relationship to sexual abstinence as sufficiently fulfilled when he attempts to allay sexual hyperæsthesia by medical or hygienic treatment. It can scarcely be claimed, however, that the results of such treatment are usually satisfactory, and sometimes indeed the treatment has a result which is the reverse of that intended. The difficulty generally is that in order to be efficacious the treatment must be carried to an extreme which exhausts or inhibits not only the genital activities alone but the activities of the whole organism, and short of that it may prove a stimulant rather than a sedative. It is difficult and usually impossible to separate out a man's sexual activities and bring influence to bear on these activities alone. Sexual activity is so closely intertwined with the other organic activities, erotic exuberance is so much a flower which is rooted in the whole organism, that the blow which crushes it may strike down the whole man. The bromides are universally recognized as powerful sexual sedatives, but their influence in this respect only makes itself felt when they have dulled all the finest energies of the organism. Physical exercise is universally recommended to sexually hyperæsthetic patients. Yet most people, men and women, find that physical exercise is a positive stimulus to sexual activity. This is notably so as regards walking, and exuberantly energetic young women who are troubled by the irritant activity of their healthy sexual emotions sometimes spend a large part of their time in the vain attempt to lull their activity by long walks. Physical exercise only proves efficacious in this respect when it is carried to an extent which produces general exhaustion. Then indeed the sexual activity is lulled; but so are all the mental and physical activities. It is undoubtedly true that exercises and games of all sorts for young people of both sexes have a sexually hygienic as well as a generally hygienic influence which is undoubtedly beneficial. They are, on all grounds, to be preferred to prolonged sedentary occupations. But it is idle to suppose that games and exercises will suppress the sexual impulses, for in so far as they favor health, they favor all the impulses that are the result of health. The most that can be expected is that they may tend to restrain the manifestations of sex by dispersing the energy they generate.
The doctor typically feels that their responsibility towards their patient regarding sexual abstinence is adequately met when they try to reduce sexual sensitivity through medical or hygiene treatments. However, it can hardly be argued that these treatments often yield satisfactory results; sometimes, they even backfire. The challenge is that, for the treatment to be effective, it often has to go to such extremes that it drains or inhibits not just sexual functions, but the entire body's activities. If it doesn’t, it can actually act as a stimulant rather than a calming agent. It's tough, and usually impossible, to isolate a person's sexual activities and influence them without affecting other aspects of their health. Sexual behavior is deeply interconnected with all bodily functions; sexual vitality is so tied to the overall organism that any force that suppresses it can hinder the individual as a whole. Bromides are widely recognized as strong sexual suppressants, but they only show this effect when they dull all the finer energies of the body. Physical exercise is generally recommended for patients with heightened sexual sensitivity. Yet many individuals, both men and women, find that physical activity actually stimulates sexual desire. This is particularly true for walking, as enthusiastic young women who struggle with the stimulating effects of their healthy sexual feelings often spend a large part of their time trying to calm down by going for long walks. Physical exercise is only truly effective for this purpose when it leads to complete exhaustion. At that point, sexual activity is subdued; but so are all mental and physical functions. It’s undoubtedly true that various sports and activities for young people of both genders have a positive impact on sexual health as well as overall well-being. They are certainly better than long periods of sitting still. But it’s unrealistic to think that games and exercises will completely suppress sexual urges; they encourage good health, which in turn supports all healthy impulses. The most one can hope for is that they may help modulate sexual expression by dispersing the energy they create.
There are many physical rules and precautions which are advocated, not without reason, as tending to inhibit or diminish sexual activity. The avoidance of heat and the cultivation of cold is one of the most important of these. Hot climates, a close atmosphere, heavy bed-clothing, hot baths, all tend powerfully to excite the sexual system, for that system is a peripheral sensory organ, and whatever stimulates the skin generally, stimulates the sexual system.[99] Cold, which contracts the skin, also deadens the sexual feelings, a fact which the ascetics of old knew and acted upon. The garments and the posture of the body are not without influence. Constriction or pressure in the neighborhood of the sexual region, even tight corsets, as well as internal pressure, as from a distended bladder, are sources of sexual irritation. Sleeping on the back, which congests the spinal centres, also acts in the same way, as has long been known by those who attend to sexual hygiene; thus it is stated that in the Franciscan order it is prohibited to lie on the back. Food and drink are, further, powerful sexual stimulants. This is true even of the simplest and most wholesome nourishment, but it is more especially true of flesh meat, and, above all, of alcohol in its stronger forms such as spirits, liqueurs, sparkling and heavy wines, and even many English beers. This has always been clearly realized by those who cultivate asceticism, and it is one of the powerful reasons why alcohol should not be given in early youth. As St. Jerome wrote, when telling Eustochium that she must avoid wine like poison, "wine and youth are the two fires of lust. Why add oil to the flame?"[100] Idleness, again, especially when combined with rich living, promotes sexual activity, as Burton sets forth at length in his Anatomy of Melancholy, and constant occupation, on the other hand, concentrates the wandering activities.
There are many physical rules and precautions that are suggested, not without reason, to help reduce or limit sexual activity. One of the most important is avoiding heat and embracing cold. Hot climates, stuffy environments, heavy bedding, and hot baths all strongly stimulate the sexual system, as this system is a peripheral sensory organ; whatever excites the skin generally excites the sexual system.[99] Cold, which tightens the skin, also dulls sexual feelings, a fact that ancient ascetics understood and took to heart. Clothing and body posture also have an impact. Tightness or pressure around the sexual area, even from corsets, as well as internal pressure, like a full bladder, can be sources of sexual irritation. Sleeping on your back, which can congest the spinal centers, has the same effect, as has been long recognized by those who practice sexual hygiene; for instance, it is noted that the Franciscan order prohibits lying on your back. Food and drink are also significant sexual stimulants. This applies even to the simplest and healthiest foods, but it especially rings true for meat and, above all, strong alcoholic beverages like spirits, liqueurs, sparkling and heavy wines, and even many English beers. This has always been clearly understood by those who pursue asceticism, and it's one of the key reasons why alcohol should not be consumed in youth. As St. Jerome wrote to Eustochium, warning her to avoid wine like poison, "wine and youth are the two fires of lust. Why add oil to the flame?"[100] Laziness, especially when paired with indulgent living, encourages sexual activity, as Burton elaborates in his Anatomy of Melancholy, while constant engagement, on the other hand, focuses wandering energies.
Mental exercise, like physical exercise, has sometimes been advocated as a method of calming sexual excitement, but it seems to be equally equivocal in its action. If it is profoundly interesting and exciting it may stir up rather than lull the sexual emotions. If it arouses little interest it is unable to exert any kind of influence. This is true even of mathematical occupations which have been advocated by various authorities, including Broussais, as aids to sexual hygiene.[101] "I have tried mechanical mental work," a lady writes, "such as solving arithmetical or algebraic problems, but it does no good; in fact it seems only to increase the excitement." "I studied and especially turned my attention to mathematics," a clergyman writes, "with a view to check my sexual tendencies. To a certain extent I was successful. But at the approach of an old friend, a voice or a touch, these tendencies came back again with renewed strength. I found mathematics, however, the best thing on the whole to take off my attention from women, better than religious exercises which I tried when younger (twenty-two to thirty)." At the best, however, such devices are of merely temporary efficacy.
Mental exercise, like physical exercise, has sometimes been suggested as a way to calm sexual excitement, but it seems to have inconsistent effects. If it's really engaging and stimulating, it might actually increase sexual emotions instead of calming them. If it doesn’t capture much interest, it can't have any real impact. This applies even to mathematical activities that various experts, including Broussais, have promoted as aids to sexual health.[101] "I have tried doing mechanical mental tasks," a woman writes, "like solving arithmetic or algebra problems, but it doesn’t help; in fact, it seems to heighten my excitement." "I focused on studying, especially mathematics," a clergyman writes, "to control my sexual urges. I was somewhat successful. But when an old friend approached me, through a voice or a touch, those urges returned with even more intensity. However, I found mathematics to be the best distraction from women, even better than religious practices I tried when I was younger (from twenty-two to thirty)." At best, though, such methods are only temporarily effective.
It is easier to avoid arousing the sexual impulses than to impose silence on them by hygienic measures when once they are aroused. It is, therefore, in childhood and youth that all these measures may be most reasonably observed in order to avoid any premature sexual excitement. In one group of stolidly normal children influences that might be expected to act sexually pass away unperceived. At the other extreme, another group of children are so neurotically and precociously sensitive that no precautions will preserve them from such influences. But between these groups there is another, probably much the largest, who resist slight sexual suggestions but may succumb to stronger or longer influences, and on these the cares of sexual hygiene may profitably be bestowed.[102]
It’s easier to prevent sexual impulses from being triggered than to silence them through hygiene once they are aroused. Therefore, it’s best to implement all these measures during childhood and adolescence to avoid premature sexual excitement. In one group of typically developing children, influences that might normally trigger sexual feelings go unnoticed. In contrast, another group of children is so neurotically and precociously sensitive that no precautions can protect them from such influences. However, there is a third, likely much larger group that resists minor sexual suggestions but may give in to stronger or prolonged influences, and this group can benefit from sexual hygiene practices.[102]
After puberty, when the spontaneous and inner voice of sex may at any moment suddenly make itself heard, all hygienic precautions are liable to be flung to the winds, and even the youth or maiden most anxious to retain the ideals of chastity can often do little but wait till the storm has passed. It sometimes happens that a prolonged period of sexual storm and stress occurs soon after puberty, and then dies away although there has been little or no sexual gratification, to be succeeded by a period of comparative calm. It must be remembered that in many, and perhaps most, individuals, men and women, the sexual appetite, unlike hunger or thirst, can after a prolonged struggle, be reduced to a more or less quiescent state which, far from injuring, may even benefit the physical and psychic vigor generally. This may happen whether or not sexual gratification has been obtained. If there has never been any such gratification, the struggle is less severe and sooner over, unless the individual is of highly erotic temperament. If there has been gratification, if the mind is filled not merely with desires but with joyous experience to which the body also has grown accustomed, then the struggle is longer and more painfully absorbing. The succeeding relief, however, if it comes, is sometimes more complete and is more likely to be associated with a state of psychic health. For the fundamental experiences of life, under normal conditions, bring not only intellectual sanity, but emotional pacification. A conquest of the sexual appetites which has never at any period involved a gratification of these appetites seldom produces results that commend themselves as rich and beautiful.
After puberty, when the sudden and internal urge for sex can emerge at any moment, all hygiene practices can easily be abandoned, and even the young man or woman most eager to uphold the ideals of chastity may find it hard to do anything but wait for the storm to pass. Sometimes, an intense period of sexual desire and tension follows soon after puberty, which then fades away even if there has been little or no sexual fulfillment, leading to a phase of relative calm. It's important to note that in many, if not most, individuals—both men and women—the sexual drive, unlike hunger or thirst, can be subdued to a more or less dormant state after a prolonged struggle, which may actually benefit overall physical and mental well-being. This can happen whether or not sexual satisfaction has been achieved. If there has never been any satisfaction, the struggle is usually less intense and resolves more quickly, unless the person has a highly erotic temperament. If there has been satisfaction, and the mind is filled not just with desires but with joyful experiences that the body has also become accustomed to, then the struggle tends to be longer and more painfully consuming. However, when relief finally comes, it can sometimes be more fulfilling and is more likely to be accompanied by good mental health. In normal circumstances, the fundamental experiences of life provide not only clarity of thought but also emotional peace. Successfully managing sexual desires that have never been satisfied typically doesn’t produce results that feel fulfilling or beautiful.
In these combats there are, however, no permanent conquests. For a very large number of people, indeed, though there may be emotional changes and fluctuations dependent on a variety of circumstances, there can scarcely be said to be any conquest at all. They are either always yielding to the impulses that assail them, or always resisting those impulses, in the first case with remorse, in the second with dissatisfaction. In either case much of their lives, at the time when life is most vigorous, is wasted. With women, if they happen to be of strong passions and reckless impulses to abandonment, the results may be highly enervating, if not disastrous to the general psychic life. It is to this cause, indeed, that some have been inclined to attribute the frequent mediocrity of women's work in artistic and intellectual fields. Women of intellectual force are frequently if not generally women of strong passions, and if they resist the tendency to merge themselves in the duties of maternity their lives are often wasted in emotional conflict and their psychic natures impoverished.[103]
In these battles, there are no lasting victories. For a large number of people, while there may be emotional shifts and ups and downs based on various circumstances, it’s hard to say there’s any true victory at all. They are either constantly giving in to the urges that attack them or always fighting against those urges, feeling guilty in the first case and discontented in the second. In both scenarios, a lot of their lives, especially when life is at its most vibrant, is wasted. For women, if they have intense passions and reckless impulses to give in, the outcome can be really draining, if not damaging to their overall mental well-being. Some have suggested that this is why women’s contributions in artistic and intellectual areas often tend to be mediocre. Women with intellectual strength are often, if not usually, women with intense passions, and if they resist the pull to lose themselves in the responsibilities of motherhood, their lives can often be spent in emotional turmoil, leaving their mental states diminished.[103]
The extent to which sexual abstinence and the struggles it involves may hamper and absorb the individual throughout life is well illustrated in the following case. A lady, vigorous, robust, and generally healthy, of great intelligence and high character, has reached middle life without marrying, or ever having sexual relationships. She was an only child, and when between three and four years of age, a playmate some six years older, initiated her into the habit of playing with her sexual parts. She was, however, at this age quite devoid of sexual feelings, and the habit dropped naturally, without any bad effects, as soon as she left the neighborhood of this girl a year or so later. Her health was good and even brilliant, and she developed vigorously at puberty. At the age of sixteen, however, a mental shock caused menstruation to diminish in amount during some years, and simultaneously with this diminution persistent sexual excitement appeared spontaneously, for the first time. She regarded such feelings as abnormal and unhealthy, and exerted all her powers of self-control in resisting them. But will power had no effect in diminishing the feelings. There was constant and imperious excitement, with the sense of vibration, tension, pressure, dilatation and tickling, accompanied, it may be, by some ovarian congestion, for she felt that on the left side there was a network of sexual nerves, and retroversion of the uterus was detected some years later. Her life was strenuous with many duties, but no occupation could be pursued without this undercurrent of sexual hyperæsthesia involving perpetual self-control. This continued more or less acutely for many years, when menstruation suddenly stopped altogether, much before the usual period of the climacteric. At the same time the sexual excitement ceased, and she became calm, peaceful, and happy. Diminished menstruation was associated with sexual excitement, but abundant menstruation and its complete absence were both accompanied by the relief of excitement. This lasted for two years. Then, for the treatment of a trifling degree of anæmia, she was subjected to a long, and, in her case, injudicious course of hypodermic injections of strychnia. From that time, five years ago, up to the present, there has been constant sexual excitement, and she has always to be on guard lest she should be overtaken by a sexual spasm. Her torture is increased by the fact that her traditions make it impossible for her (except under very exceptional circumstances) to allude to the cause of her sufferings. "A woman is handicapped," she writes. "She may never speak to anyone on such a subject. She must live her tragedy alone, smiling as much as she can under the strain of her terrible burden." To add to her trouble, two years ago, she felt impelled to resort to masturbation, and has done so about once a month since; this not only brings no real relief, and leaves irritability, wakefulness, and dark marks under the eyes, but is a cause of remorse to her, for she regards masturbation as entirely abnormal and unnatural. She has tried to gain benefit, not merely by the usual methods of physical hygiene, but by suggestion, Christian Science, etc., but all in vain. "I may say," she writes, "that it is the most passionate desire of my heart to be freed from this bondage, that I may relax the terrible years-long tension of resistance, and be happy in my own way. If I had this affliction once a month, once a week, even twice a week, to stand against it would be child's play. I should scorn to resort to unnatural means, however moderately. But self-control itself has its revenges, and I sometimes feel as if it is no longer to be borne."
The impact of sexual abstinence and the challenges it brings can significantly affect a person throughout their life, as shown in the following case. A woman, energetic, healthy, and highly intelligent, reached middle age without marrying or having any sexual relationships. She was an only child and, at around three to four years old, a playmate who was six years older introduced her to touching her own body. However, at that age, she had no sexual feelings, and the behavior faded naturally without any negative effects once she moved away from that girl about a year later. Her health was excellent, and she developed normally during puberty. At sixteen, though, a mental shock caused her periods to become lighter for several years, and at the same time, she unexpectedly began experiencing persistent sexual arousal for the first time. She saw these feelings as abnormal and unhealthy and tried her best to resist them. However, willpower did nothing to lessen these feelings. She constantly felt a strong sense of excitement, along with sensations of vibration, tension, pressure, expansion, and tickling, which might have been accompanied by some ovarian congestion. She sensed a network of sexual nerves on her left side, and years later, doctors noticed a retroversion of the uterus. Her life was filled with responsibilities, but she couldn’t pursue any activity without this ongoing sexual hypersensitivity requiring continual self-control. This continued intensely for many years until menstruation suddenly stopped much earlier than expected for menopause. At the same time, the sexual excitement disappeared, and she felt calm, at peace, and happy. Reduced menstruation was linked with sexual excitement, but heavy menstruation and complete cessation of it both brought relief from that excitement. This state lasted for two years. Then, to treat a minor case of anemia, she underwent a lengthy and, in her situation, inappropriate course of strychnine injections. Since then, five years ago until now, she has experienced constant sexual arousal and has to stay vigilant to avoid being overwhelmed by sexual urges. Her distress is compounded by the fact that her upbringing makes it nearly impossible for her to speak about her suffering (except under very rare circumstances). "A woman is at a disadvantage," she writes. "She cannot discuss such matters with anyone. She must endure her tragedy in silence, trying to smile as much as possible under the weight of her terrible burden." To worsen her situation, two years ago, she felt compelled to turn to masturbation, and she has done it about once a month since; this not only fails to provide real relief, leaving her feeling irritable, restless, and with dark circles under her eyes, but it also brings remorse, as she views masturbation as completely abnormal and unnatural. She has sought help not only through standard practices of physical health but also through various therapies and suggestions, but all have been unsuccessful. "I can say," she writes, "that it's my deepest longing to be freed from this bondage, so I can relax the terrible, years-long struggle against it and find happiness in my own way. If I only faced this issue once a month, once a week, or even twice a week, resisting it would feel like child's play. I would refuse to resort to unnatural methods, no matter how slight. But self-control has its consequences, and sometimes it feels unbearable."
Thus while it is an immense benefit in physical and psychic development if the eruption of the disturbing sexual emotions can be delayed until puberty or adolescence, and while it is a very great advantage, after that eruption has occurred, to be able to gain control of these emotions, to crush altogether the sexual nature would be a barren, if not, indeed, a perilous victory, bringing with it no satisfaction. "If I had only had three weeks' happiness," said a woman, "I would not quarrel with Fate, but to have one's whole life so absolutely empty is horrible." If such vacuous self-restraint may, by courtesy, be termed a virtue, it is but a negative virtue. The persons who achieve it, as the result of congenitally feeble sexual aptitudes, merely (as Gyurkovechky, Fürbringer, and Löwenfeld have all alike remarked) made a virtue of their weakness. Many others, whose instincts were less weak, when they disdainfully put to flight the desires of sex in early life, have found that in later life that foe returns in tenfold force and perhaps in unnatural shapes.[104]
Thus, while it's a huge benefit for physical and mental development if the surge of confusing sexual feelings can be postponed until puberty or adolescence, and while it’s really advantageous to gain control over these emotions after they arise, completely suppressing sexual desires would be a hollow, if not risky, win that brings no satisfaction. “If I had just three weeks of happiness,” a woman said, “I wouldn’t complain about Fate, but having my whole life feel completely empty is horrible.” If this empty self-control can, for the sake of courtesy, be called a virtue, it's just a negative virtue. The people who achieve it because of naturally low sexual urges simply (as Gyurkovechky, Fürbringer, and Löwenfeld have all noted) turned their inability into a virtue. Many others, whose instincts are stronger, have found that when they dismiss their sexual desires in their early years, those very desires can come back later with even greater intensity and possibly in unnatural forms.[104]
The conception of "sexual abstinence" is, we see, an entirely false and artificial conception. It is not only ill-adjusted to the hygienic facts of the case but it fails even to invoke any genuinely moral motive, for it is exclusively self-regarding and self-centred. It only becomes genuinely moral, and truly inspiring, when we transform it into the altruistic virtue of self-sacrifice. When we have done so we see that the element of abstinence in it ceases to be essential, "Self-sacrifice," writes the author of a thoughtful book on the sexual life, "is acknowledged to be the basis of virtue; the noblest instances of self-sacrifice are those dictated by sexual affection. Sympathy is the secret of altruism; nowhere is sympathy more real and complete than in love. Courage, both moral and physical, the love of truth and honor, the spirit of enterprise, and the admiration of moral worth, are all inspired by love as by nothing else in human nature. Celibacy denies itself that inspiration or restricts its influence, according to the measure of its denial of sexual intimacy. Thus the deliberate adoption of a consistently celibate life implies the narrowing down of emotional and moral experience to a degree which is, from the broad scientific standpoint, unjustified by any of the advantages piously supposed to accrue from it."[105]
The idea of "sexual abstinence" is completely misguided and artificial. It doesn't align with the hygiene facts at all, and it lacks any true moral motivation because it's all about self-interest. It only becomes genuinely moral and truly inspiring when we turn it into the selfless virtue of self-sacrifice. Once we do that, we realize that the aspect of abstinence isn’t crucial. “Self-sacrifice,” says the author of a thoughtful book on sexual life, “is recognized as the foundation of virtue; the greatest examples of self-sacrifice come from sexual love. Sympathy is the key to altruism; nowhere is sympathy more genuine and complete than in love. Love inspires courage, both moral and physical, a commitment to truth and honor, a spirit of adventure, and admiration for moral excellence, more than anything else in human nature. Celibacy limits this inspiration or reduces its impact, depending on how much it rejects sexual intimacy. Therefore, choosing to live a completely celibate life means narrowing one’s emotional and moral experiences to an extent that is, from a broad scientific viewpoint, unjustified by any perceived benefits from it.”[105]
In a sane natural order all the impulses are centred in the fulfilment of needs and not in their denial. Moreover, in this special matter of sex, it is inevitable that the needs of others, and not merely the needs of the individual himself, should determine action. It is more especially the needs of the female which are the determining factor; for those needs are more various, complex and elusive, and in his attentiveness to their gratification the male finds a source of endless erotic satisfaction. It might be thought that the introduction of an altruistic motive here is merely the claim of theoretical morality insisting that there shall be a firm curb on animal instinct. But, as we have again and again seen throughout the long course of these Studies, it is not so. The animal instinct itself makes this demand. It is a biological law that rules throughout the zoölogical world and has involved the universality of courtship. In man it is only modified because in man sexual needs are not entirely concentrated in reproduction, but more or less penetrate the whole of life.
In a healthy natural order, all impulses focus on meeting needs rather than denying them. Additionally, when it comes to sex, it’s essential that the needs of others—not just the individual’s own needs—drive actions. Specifically, it’s the needs of females that are the key factor; these needs tend to be more varied, complex, and subtle, and the male finds endless erotic satisfaction in paying attention to their fulfillment. One might think that introducing an altruistic motive here is just a theoretical moral argument demanding control over animal instincts. However, as we have repeatedly observed throughout these Studies, that’s not the case. The animal instinct itself requires this. It is a biological law that applies universally across the animal kingdom and is the basis for courtship everywhere. In humans, this is only modified because sexual needs are not solely focused on reproduction but permeate much of life.
While from the point of view of society, as from that of Nature, the end and object of the sexual impulse is procreation, and nothing beyond procreation, that is by no means true for the individual, whose main object it must be to fulfil himself harmoniously with that due regard for others which the art of living demands. Even if sexual relationships had no connection with procreation whatever—as some Central Australian tribes believe—they would still be justifiable, and are, indeed, an indispensable aid to the best moral development of the individual, for it is only in so intimate a relationship as that of sex that the finest graces and aptitudes of life have full scope. Even the saints cannot forego the sexual side of life. The best and most accomplished saints from Jerome to Tolstoy—even the exquisite Francis of Assisi—had stored up in their past all the experiences that go to the complete realization of life, and if it were not so they would have been the less saints.
While society and Nature may see procreation as the sole purpose of the sexual impulse, that's not necessarily how individuals experience it. For a person, the main goal should be to live harmoniously, taking into account the well-being of others, which is essential for a fulfilling life. Even if sexual relationships had no connection to procreation—like some Central Australian tribes believe—they would still be valid and crucial for the individual's moral growth. It's in the deep connection of a sexual relationship that one can fully express the finest qualities of life. Even saints can't ignore the sexual aspect of existence. The greatest and most revered saints, from Jerome to Tolstoy—even the beautiful Francis of Assisi—have all drawn from a rich history of experiences that contribute to a complete understanding of life. If this weren't the case, they wouldn't be as saintly.
The element of positive virtue thus only enters when the control of the sexual impulse has passed beyond the stage of rigid and sterile abstinence and has become not merely a deliberate refusal of what is evil in sex, but a deliberate acceptance of what is good. It is only at that moment that such control becomes a real part of the great art of living. For the art of living, like any other art, is not compatible with rigidity, but lies in the weaving of a perpetual harmony between refusing and accepting, between giving and taking.[106]
The aspect of positive virtue only comes into play when managing the sexual urge moves beyond mere strict and lifeless abstinence. It turns into a conscious choice not just to reject what is negative about sex but to actively embrace what is beneficial. Only then does this management become a genuine part of the true art of living. The art of living, like any other form of art, doesn’t thrive on rigidity; it’s about creating a continuous balance between saying no and saying yes, between giving and receiving.[106]
The future, it is clear, belongs ultimately to those who are slowly building up sounder traditions into the structure of life. The "problem of sexual abstinence" will more and more sink into insignificance. There remain the great solid fact of love, the great solid fact of chastity. Those are eternal. Between them there is nothing but harmony. The development of one involves the development of the other.
The future clearly belongs to those who are gradually establishing more solid traditions in life. The "issue of sexual abstinence" will increasingly become irrelevant. What remains are the fundamental realities of love and chastity. Those are timeless. Between them there is only harmony. The growth of one involves the growth of the other.
It has been necessary to treat seriously this problem of "sexual abstinence" because we have behind us the traditions of two thousand years based on certain ideals of sexual law and sexual license, together with the long effort to build up practices more or less conditioned by those ideals. We cannot immediately escape from these traditions even when we question their validity for ourselves. We have not only to recognize their existence, but also to accept the fact that for some time to come they must still to a considerable extent control the thoughts and even in some degree the actions of existing communities.
It’s important to seriously address the issue of "sexual abstinence" because we have two thousand years of traditions grounded in specific ideals of sexual laws and freedoms, along with a long history of practices shaped by those ideals. We can’t just dismiss these traditions, even when we challenge their relevance to us. We must not only acknowledge their presence but also accept that for the foreseeable future, they will still significantly influence the thoughts and, to some extent, the actions of current communities.
It is undoubtedly deplorable. It involves the introduction of an artificiality into a real natural order. Love is real and positive; chastity is real and positive. But sexual abstinence is unreal and negative, in the strict sense perhaps impossible. The underlying feelings of all those who have emphasized its importance is that a physiological process can be good or bad according as it is or is not carried out under certain arbitrary external conditions, which render it licit or illicit. An act of sexual intercourse under the name of "marriage" is beneficial; the very same act, under the name of "incontinence," is pernicious. No physiological process, and still less any spiritual process, can bear such restriction. It is as much as to say that a meal becomes good or bad, digestible or indigestible, according as a grace is or is not pronounced before the eating of it.
It’s definitely unfortunate. It introduces artificiality into a natural order. Love is genuine and positive; chastity is genuine and positive. But sexual abstinence is unrealistic and negative, and arguably impossible. The underlying sentiment of those who stress its importance is that a physiological process can be deemed good or bad based on whether it's performed under certain arbitrary external conditions that make it acceptable or unacceptable. Engaging in sexual intercourse termed “marriage” is beneficial; the exact same act referred to as “incontinence” is harmful. No physiological process, let alone any spiritual process, can withstand such limitations. It’s like saying that a meal becomes good or bad, edible or inedible, depending on whether a blessing is said before eating it.
It is deplorable because, such a conception being essentially unreal, an element of unreality is thus introduced into a matter of the gravest concern alike to the individual and to society. Artificial disputes have been introduced where no matter of real dispute need exist. A contest has been carried on marked by all the ferocity which marks contests about metaphysical or pseudo-metaphysical differences having no concrete basis in the actual world. As will happen in such cases, there has, after all, been no real difference between the disputants because the point they quarreled over was unreal. In truth each side was right and each side was wrong.
It’s unfortunate because this idea is fundamentally baseless, introducing an element of unreality into a matter that is critically important for both individuals and society. Fake conflicts have been created where no real dispute should exist. A battle has been fought with all the intensity typical of arguments over metaphysical or pseudo-metaphysical differences that have no real grounding in the actual world. As tends to happen in such situations, there has ultimately been no real difference between the people involved because the issue they argued about was not real. In reality, both sides were correct and both sides were incorrect.
It is necessary, we see, that the balance should be held even. An absolute license is bad; an absolute abstinence—even though some by nature or circumstances are urgently called to adopt it—is also bad. They are both alike away from the gracious equilibrium of Nature. And the force, we see, which naturally holds this balance even is the biological fact that the act of sexual union is the satisfaction of the erotic needs, not of one person, but of two persons.
It is essential, as we observe, that balance is maintained. Having complete freedom is harmful; complete restraint—even if some individuals are naturally or circumstantially compelled to adopt it—is also detrimental. Both extremes stray from the harmonious equilibrium of Nature. The natural force that maintains this balance is the biological reality that engaging in sexual union fulfills the erotic needs of not just one person, but of both individuals.
This view was an ambiguous improvement on the view, universally prevalent, as Westermarck has shown, among primitive peoples, that the sexual act involves indignity to a woman or depreciation of her only in so far as she is the property of another person who is the really injured party.
This perspective was a somewhat better take on the widely accepted view, as Westermarck has demonstrated, among primitive societies, that the sexual act is seen as degrading to a woman or diminishes her only because she belongs to someone else, who is the one truly wronged.
This implicit contradiction has been acutely pointed out from the religious side by the Rev. H. Northcote, Christianity and Sex Problems, p. 53.
This hidden contradiction has been sharply highlighted from a religious perspective by Rev. H. Northcote, Christianity and Sex Problems, p. 53.
It has already been necessary to discuss this point briefly in "The Sexual Impulse in Women," vol. iii of these Studies.
It has already been necessary to discuss this point briefly in "The Sexual Impulse in Women," vol. iii of these Studies.
"Die Abstinentia Sexualis," Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Nov., 1908.
"Sexual Abstinence," Journal of Sexual Science, Nov., 1908.
P. Janet, "La Maladie du Scrupule," Revue Philosophique, May, 1901.
P. Janet, "The Illness of Scruples," Philosophical Review, May, 1901.
S. Freud, Sexual-Probleme, March, 1908. As Adele Schreiber also points out (Mutterschutz, Jan., 1907, p. 30), it is not enough to prove that abstinence is not dangerous; we have to remember that the spiritual and physical energy used up in repressing this mighty instinct often reduces a joyous and energetic nature to a weary and faded shadow. Similarly, Helene Stöcker (Die Liebe und die Frauen, p. 105) says: "The question whether abstinence is harmful is, to say the truth, a ridiculous question. One needs to be no nervous specialist to know, as a matter of course, that a life of happy love and marriage is the healthy life, and its complete absence cannot fail to lead to severe psychic depression, even if no direct physiological disturbances can be demonstrated."
S. Freud, Sexual-Probleme, March, 1908. As Adele Schreiber also points out (Mutterschutz, Jan., 1907, p. 30), it’s not enough to show that abstinence isn’t dangerous; we need to remember that the mental and physical energy spent on suppressing this powerful instinct often turns a joyful and lively person into a tired and faded shell of themselves. Similarly, Helene Stöcker (Die Liebe und die Frauen, p. 105) says: "The question of whether abstinence is harmful is, to be honest, a silly question. You don’t need to be a nervous specialist to know, as a matter of course, that a life filled with happy love and marriage is a healthy life, and its complete absence is bound to lead to serious mental depression, even if no direct physical issues can be shown."
Max Flesch, "Ehe, Hygine und Sexuelle Moral," Mutterschutz, 1905, Heft 7.
Max Flesch, "Marriage, Hygiene, and Sexual Morality," Mother Protection, 1905, Issue 7.
See the Section on Touch in the fourth volume of these Studies.
See the section on Touch in the fourth volume of these Studies.
"I have had two years' close experience and connexion with the Trappists," wrote Dr. Butterfield, of Natal (British Medical Journal, Sept. 15, 1906, p. 668), "both as medical attendant and as being a Catholic in creed myself. I have studied them and investigated their life, habits and diet, and though I should be very backward in adopting it myself, as not suited to me individually, the great bulk of them are in absolute ideal health and strength, seldom ailing, capable of vast work, mental and physical. Their life is very simple and very regular. A healthier body of men and women, with perfect equanimity of temper—this latter I lay great stress on—it would be difficult to find. Health beams in their eyes and countenance and actions. Only in sickness or prolonged journeys are they allowed any strong foods—meats, eggs, etc.—or any alcohol."
"I have had two years of close experience and connection with the Trappists,” wrote Dr. Butterfield of Natal (British Medical Journal, Sept. 15, 1906, p. 668), “both as their medical attendant and as a fellow Catholic. I have studied them and looked into their way of life, habits, and diet, and even though I personally wouldn’t adopt it, since it doesn’t suit me, the vast majority of them are in absolutely ideal health and strength, rarely getting sick, and are capable of immense mental and physical work. Their lifestyle is very simple and very regular. It would be hard to find a healthier group of men and women, with perfect calmness of temperament—something I emphasize. Health shines in their eyes, faces, and actions. They’re only allowed strong foods—like meats, eggs, and so on—or any alcohol during illness or long journeys."
Féré, L'Instinct Sexuel, second edition, p. 332.
Féré, L'Instinct Sexuel, second edition, p. 332.
Rural life, as we have seen when discussing its relation to sexual precocity, is on one side the reverse of a safeguard against sexual influences. But, on the other hand, in so far as it involves hard work and simple living under conditions that are not nervously stimulating, it is favorable to a considerably delayed sexual activity in youth and to a relative continence. Ammon, in the course of his anthropological investigations of Baden conscripts, found that sexual intercourse was rare in the country before twenty, and even sexual emissions during sleep rare before nineteen or twenty. It is said, also, he repeats, that no one has a right to run after girls who does not yet carry a gun, and the elder lads sometimes brutally ill-treat any younger boy found going about with a girl. No doubt this is often preliminary to much license later.
Rural life, as we've seen when discussing its connection to early sexual behavior, is one aspect that does not protect against sexual influences. However, because it involves hard work and simple living in environments that are not overly stimulating, it actually promotes a significant delay in sexual activity among young people and encourages self-control. Ammon, during his research on young men from Baden, discovered that sexual intercourse was uncommon in the countryside before the age of twenty, and even incidents of nocturnal emissions were rare before nineteen or twenty. He also notes that it's said no one has the right to pursue girls if they haven't yet reached the age to carry a gun, and older boys sometimes harshly bully any younger boy seen with a girl. This dynamic surely sets the stage for much more freedom later on.
The numerical preponderance which celibate women teachers have now gained in the American school system has caused much misgiving among many sagacious observers, and is said to be unsatisfactory in its results on the pupils of both sexes. A distinguished authority, Professor McKeen Cattell ("The School and the Family," Popular Science Monthly, Jan., 1909), referring to this preponderance of "devitalized and unsexed spinsters," goes so far as to say that "the ultimate result of letting the celibate female be the usual teacher has been such as to make it a question whether it would not be an advantage to the country if the whole school plant could be scrapped."
The significant number of unmarried women teachers in the American school system has raised concerns among many wise observers and is believed to have unsatisfactory effects on students of both genders. A notable expert, Professor McKeen Cattell ("The School and the Family," Popular Science Monthly, Jan., 1909), commenting on the prevalence of "devitalized and unsexed spinsters," even suggests that "the ultimate result of allowing celibate women to be the typical teacher raises the question of whether it might be beneficial for the country if the entire school system were dismantled."
Corre (Les Criminels, p. 351) mentions that of thirteen priests convicted of crime, six were guilty of sexual attempts on children, and of eighty-three convicted lay teachers, forty-eight had committed similar offenses. This was at a time when lay teachers were in practice almost compelled to live a celibate life; altered conditions have greatly diminished this class of offense among them. Without going so far as crime, many moral and religious men, clergymen and others, who have led severely abstinent lives in youth, sometimes experience in middle age or later the eruption of almost uncontrollable sexual impulses, normal or abnormal. In women such manifestations are apt to take the form of obsessional thoughts of sexual character, as e.g., the case (Comptes-Rendus Congrès International de Médecine, Moscow, 1897, vol. iv, p. 27) of a chaste woman who was compelled to think about and look at the sexual organs of men.
Corre (Les Criminels, p. 351) notes that out of thirteen priests convicted of crimes, six were guilty of sexual advances toward children, and out of eighty-three convicted lay teachers, forty-eight had committed similar offenses. This was during a time when lay teachers were almost forced to live a celibate lifestyle; changes in circumstances have significantly reduced these kinds of offenses among them. Without crossing into criminal behavior, many moral and religious individuals, including clergymen and others, who have lived strict abstinent lives in their youth, sometimes face almost uncontrollable sexual urges, whether normal or abnormal, in middle age or later. In women, such urges often manifest as obsessive sexual thoughts, as seen in the case (Comptes-Rendus Congrès International de Médecine, Moscow, 1897, vol. iv, p. 27) of a chaste woman who was compelled to think about and look at the male sexual organs.
J. A. Godfrey, The Science of Sex, p. 138.
J. A. Godfrey, The Science of Sex, p. 138.
See, e.g., Havelock Ellis, "St. Francis and Others," Affirmations.
See, e.g., Havelock Ellis, "St. Francis and Others," Affirmations.
CHAPTER VII.
PROSTITUTION.
I. The Orgy:—The Religious Origin of the Orgy—The Feast of Fools—Recognition of the Orgy by the Greeks and Romans—The Orgy Among Savages—The Drama—The Object Subserved by the Orgy.
I. The Orgy:—The Religious Origin of the Orgy—The Feast of Fools—Recognition of the Orgy by the Greeks and Romans—The Orgy Among Savages—The Drama—The Purpose Served by the Orgy.
II. The Origin and Development of Prostitution:—The Definition of Prostitution—Prostitution Among Savages—The Conditions Under Which Professional Prostitution Arises—Sacred Prostitution—The Rite of Mylitta—The Practice of Prostitution to Obtain a Marriage Portion—The Rise of Secular Prostitution in Greece—Prostitution in the East—India, China, Japan, etc.—Prostitution in Rome—The Influence of Christianity on Prostitution—The Effort to Combat Prostitution—The Mediæval Brothel—The Appearance of the Courtesan—Tullia D'Aragona—Veronica Franco—Ninon de Lenclos—Later Attempts to Eradicate Prostitution—The Regulation of Prostitution—Its Futility Becoming Recognized.
II. The Origin and Development of Prostitution:—The Definition of Prostitution—Prostitution Among Primitive Societies—The Conditions That Lead to Professional Prostitution—Sacred Prostitution—The Rite of Mylitta—The Practice of Prostitution to Secure a Marriage Dowry—The Emergence of Secular Prostitution in Greece—Prostitution in the East—India, China, Japan, etc.—Prostitution in Rome—The Impact of Christianity on Prostitution—The Efforts to Fight Prostitution—The Medieval Brothel—The Rise of the Courtesan—Tullia D'Aragona—Veronica Franco—Ninon de Lenclos—Subsequent Efforts to Eliminate Prostitution—The Regulation of Prostitution—The Growing Recognition of Its Futility.
III. The Causes of Prostitution:—Prostitution as a Part of the Marriage System—The Complex Causation of Prostitution—The Motives Assigned by Prostitutes—(1) Economic Factor of Prostitution—Poverty Seldom the Chief Motive for Prostitution—But Economic Pressure Exerts a Real Influence—The Large Proportion of Prostitutes Recruited from Domestic Service—Significance of This Fact—(2) The Biological Factor of Prostitution—The So-called Born-Prostitute—Alleged Identity with the Born-Criminal—The Sexual Instinct in Prostitutes—The Physical and Psychic Characters of Prostitutes—(3) Moral Necessity as a Factor in the Existence of Prostitution—The Moral Advocates of Prostitution—The Moral Attitude of Christianity Towards Prostitution—The Attitude of Protestantism—Recent Advocates of the Moral Necessity of Prostitution—(4) Civilizational Value as a Factor of Prostitution—The Influence of Urban Life—The Craving for Excitement—Why Servant-girls so Often Turn to Prostitution—The Small Part Played by Seduction—Prostitutes Come Largely from the Country—The Appeal of Civilization Attracts Women to Prostitution—The Corresponding Attraction Felt by Men—The Prostitute as Artist and Leader of Fashion—The Charm of Vulgarity.
III. The Causes of Prostitution:—Prostitution as a Part of the Marriage System—The Complex Causes of Prostitution—The Reasons Given by Prostitutes—(1) Economic Factors of Prostitution—Poverty is Rarely the Main Reason for Prostitution—However, Economic Pressure Has a Real Impact—A Large Number of Prostitutes Come from Domestic Work—The Importance of This Fact—(2) The Biological Factors of Prostitution—The So-called Born-Prostitute—Claims of Similarity with the Born-Criminal—The Sexual Instinct in Prostitutes—The Physical and Psychological Traits of Prostitutes—(3) Moral Necessity as a Factor in the Existence of Prostitution—The Moral Supporters of Prostitution—The Moral Stance of Christianity Towards Prostitution—The Position of Protestantism—Recent Supporters of the Moral Necessity of Prostitution—(4) Civilizational Value as a Factor of Prostitution—The Impact of Urban Life—The Desire for Excitement—Why Servant-Girls Often Turn to Prostitution—The Minor Role of Seduction—Prostitutes Mostly Come from Rural Areas—The Allure of Civilization Draws Women to Prostitution—The Corresponding Attraction Felt by Men—The Prostitute as an Artist and Trendsetter—The Appeal of Vulgarity.
IV. The Present Social Attitude Towards Prostitution:—The Decay of the Brothel—The Tendency to the Humanization of Prostitution—The Monetary Aspects of Prostitution—The Geisha—The Hetaira—The Moral Revolt Against Prostitution—Squalid Vice Based on Luxurious Virtue—The Ordinary Attitude Towards Prostitutes—Its Cruelty Absurd—The Need of Reforming Prostitution—The Need of Reforming Marriage—These These Two Needs Closely Correlated—The Dynamic Relationships Involved.
IV. The Present Social Attitude Towards Prostitution:—The Decline of the Brothel—The Shift Towards the Humanization of Prostitution—The Financial Aspects of Prostitution—The Geisha—The Hetaira—The Moral Uprising Against Prostitution—Squalid Vice Based on Luxurious Virtue—The Common Attitude Towards Prostitutes—Its Cruelty is Absurd—The Need to Reform Prostitution—The Need to Reform Marriage—These Two Needs are Closely Linked—The Dynamic Relationships Involved.
I. The Orgy.
Traditional morality, religion, and established convention combine to promote not only the extreme of rigid abstinence but also that of reckless license. They preach and idealize the one extreme; they drive those who cannot accept it to adopt the opposite extreme. In the great ages of religion it even happens that the severity of the rule of abstinence is more or less deliberately tempered by the permission for occasional outbursts of license. We thus have the orgy, which flourished in mediæval days and is, indeed, in its largest sense, a universal manifestation, having a function to fulfil in every orderly and laborious civilization, built up on natural energies that are bound by more or less inevitable restraints.
Traditional morality, religion, and established customs come together to encourage not just strict abstinence but also reckless freedom. They promote and idealize one extreme while pushing those who can’t accept it to swing to the opposite extreme. In the height of religious eras, the strictness of the abstinence rules is sometimes intentionally softened by allowing occasional bursts of excess. This leads to the orgy, which thrived in medieval times and is, in fact, a universal phenomenon that serves a purpose in every organized and hardworking society, built on natural energies that are inevitably constrained.
The consideration of the orgy, it may be said, lifts us beyond the merely sexual sphere, into a higher and wider region which belongs to religion. The Greek orgeia referred originally to ritual things done with a religious purpose, though later, when dances of Bacchanals and the like lost their sacred and inspiring character, the idea was fostered by Christianity that such things were immoral.[107] Yet Christianity was itself in its origin an orgy of the higher spiritual activities released from the uncongenial servitude of classic civilization, a great festival of the poor and the humble, of the slave and the sinner. And when, with the necessity for orderly social organization, Christianity had ceased to be this it still recognized, as Paganism had done, the need for an occasional orgy. It appears that in 743 at a Synod held in Hainault reference was made to the February debauch (de Spurcalibus in februario) as a pagan practice; yet it was precisely this pagan festival which was embodied in the accepted customs of the Christian Church as the chief orgy of the ecclesiastical year, the great Carnival prefixed to the long fast of Lent. The celebration on Shrove Tuesday and the previous Sunday constituted a Christian Bacchanalian festival in which all classes joined. The greatest freedom and activity of physical movement was encouraged; "some go about naked without shame, some crawl on all fours, some on stilts, some imitate animals."[108] As time went on the Carnival lost its most strongly marked Bacchanalian features, but it still retains its essential character as a permitted and temporary relaxation of the tension of customary restraints and conventions. The Mediæval Feast of Fools—a New Year's Revel well established by the twelfth century, mainly in France—presented an expressive picture of a Christian orgy in its extreme form, for here the most sacred ceremonies of the Church became the subject of fantastic parody. The Church, according to Nietzsche's saying, like all wise legislators, recognized that where great impulses and habits have to be cultivated, intercalary days must be appointed in which these impulses and habits may be denied, and so learn to hunger anew.[109] The clergy took the leading part in these folk-festivals, for to the men of that age, as Méray remarks, "the temple offered the complete notes of the human gamut; they found there the teaching of all duties, the consolation of all sorrows, the satisfaction of all joys. The sacred festivals of mediæval Christianity were not a survival from Roman times; they leapt from the very heart of Christian society."[110] But, as Méray admits, all great and vigorous peoples, of the East and the West, have found it necessary sometimes to play with their sacred things.
The idea of the orgy can be seen as taking us beyond just the sexual realm into a broader, more profound aspect that connects to religion. The Greek term orgeia originally referred to rituals performed with a religious intention. However, later on, when Bacchanalian dances and similar celebrations lost their sacred and uplifting qualities, Christianity promoted the belief that such activities were immoral.[107] Despite this, Christianity itself began as an explosion of higher spiritual pursuits freed from the restrictive nature of classical civilization, acting as a grand festival for the poor, the humble, the enslaved, and the sinful. When social organization became necessary and Christianity evolved beyond this initial state, it still acknowledged the need for occasional celebration, similar to pagan traditions. In 743, a Synod held in Hainault noted the February debauch (de Spurcalibus in februario) as a pagan practice. Ironically, this very pagan festival became integrated into the customs of the Christian Church as the main festivity of the ecclesiastical year, the grand Carnival preceding the long fast of Lent. The celebrations on Shrove Tuesday and the preceding Sunday formed a Christian Bacchanalian festival where everyone participated. They encouraged the greatest freedom and physical expression; "some go about naked without shame, some crawl on all fours, some on stilts, some imitate animals."[108] Over time, the Carnival lost many of its Bacchanalian traits, but it still kept its essential nature as a temporary and allowed break from the pressure of societal norms and conventions. The Medieval Feast of Fools—a New Year's celebration that was well established in the twelfth century, primarily in France—illustrated a highly exaggerated Christian orgy, turning the Church's most sacred ceremonies into absurd parodies. According to Nietzsche, the Church, like all wise lawmakers, understood that when powerful impulses and customs need to be nurtured, special days should be set aside for those impulses and customs to be repressed, allowing one to experience a renewed hunger for them.[109] The clergy played a prominent role in these community celebrations, as, according to Méray, "the temple provided the full spectrum of human experience; they found there the teachings of all duties, the comfort for all sorrows, and the fulfillment of all joys." The sacred festivals of medieval Christianity didn't merely carry over from Roman times; they sprang from the very essence of Christian society."[110] However, as Méray concedes, all great and vibrant cultures, both Eastern and Western, often find it necessary to playfully engage with their sacred traditions.
Among the Greeks and Romans this need is everywhere visible, not only in their comedy and their literature generally, but in everyday life. As Nietzsche truly remarks (in his Geburt der Tragödie) the Greeks recognized all natural impulses, even those that are seemingly unworthy, and safeguarded them from working mischief by providing channels into which, on special days and in special rites, the surplus of wild energy might harmlessly flow. Plutarch, the last and most influential of the Greek moralists, well says, when advocating festivals (in his essay "On the Training of Children"), that "even in bows and harps we loosen their strings that we may bend and wind them up again." Seneca, perhaps the most influential of Roman if not of European moralists, even recommended occasional drunkenness. "Sometimes," he wrote in his De Tranquillilate, "we ought to come even to the point of intoxication, not for the purpose of drowning ourselves but of sinking ourselves deep in wine. For it washes away cares and raises our spirits from the lowest depths. The inventor of wine is called Liber because he frees the soul from the servitude of care, releases it from slavery, quickens it, and makes it bolder for all undertakings." The Romans were a sterner and more serious people than the Greeks, but on that very account they recognized the necessity of occasionally relaxing their moral fibres in order to preserve their tone, and encouraged the prevalence of festivals which were marked by much more abandonment than those of Greece. When these festivals began to lose their moral sanction and to fall into decay the decadence of Rome had begun.
Among the Greeks and Romans, this need is clearly evident, not just in their comedy and literature in general, but in everyday life. As Nietzsche rightly points out (in his Birth of Tragedy), the Greeks acknowledged all natural impulses, even those that may seem unworthy, and protected them from causing harm by creating outlets where, on special days and during specific rituals, excess wild energy could flow harmlessly. Plutarch, the last and most influential of the Greek moralists, aptly states, while promoting festivals (in his essay "On the Training of Children"), that "even in bows and harps we loosen their strings so we can bend and wind them up again." Seneca, possibly the most influential Roman, if not European, moralist, even suggested occasional drunkenness. "Sometimes," he wrote in his On Tranquility, "we should go so far as to get intoxicated, not to drown our sorrows but to immerse ourselves in wine. For it washes away worries and lifts our spirits from the lowest lows. The creator of wine is called Liber because he frees the soul from the burdens of worry, liberates it from slavery, energizes it, and encourages boldness in all endeavors." The Romans were more serious and stern than the Greeks, but because of that, they understood the need to occasionally relax their moral standards to maintain their strength and promoted festivals characterized by far more abandon than those in Greece. When these festivals began to lose their moral support and started to decline, the decay of Rome had already begun.
All over the world, and not excepting the most primitive savages—for even savage life is built up on systematic constraints which sometimes need relaxation—the principle of the orgy is recognized and accepted. Thus Spencer and Gillen describe[111] the Nathagura or fire-ceremony of the Warramunga tribe of Central Australia, a festival taken part in by both sexes, in which all the ordinary rules of social life are broken, a kind of Saturnalia in which, however, there is no sexual license, for sexual license is, it need scarcely be said, no essential part of the orgy, even when the orgy lightens the burden of sexual constraints. In a widely different part of the world, in British Columbia, the Salish Indians, according to Hill Tout,[112] believed that, long before the whites came, their ancestors observed a Sabbath or seventh day ceremony for dancing and praying, assembling at sunrise and dancing till noon. The Sabbath, or periodically recurring orgy,—not a day of tension and constraint but a festival of joy, a rest from all the duties of everyday life,—has, as we know, formed an essential part of many of the orderly ancient civilizations on which our own has been built;[113] it is highly probable that the stability of these ancient civilizations was intimately associated with their recognition of the need of a Sabbath orgy. Such festivals are, indeed, as Crawley observes, processes of purification and reinvigoration, the effort to put off "the old man" and put on "the new man," to enter with fresh energy on the path of everyday life.[114]
All over the world, including among the most primitive tribes—since even tribal life involves structured limitations that sometimes need a break—the idea of the orgy is acknowledged and embraced. For example, Spencer and Gillen describe[111] the Nathagura or fire-ceremony of the Warramunga tribe in Central Australia. This festival involves both men and women, where all the usual social rules are disregarded, resembling a kind of Saturnalia. However, there isn't any sexual freedom allowed, because it should be clear that sexual freedom isn't a necessary element of the orgy, even when the orgy helps alleviate sexual restrictions. In a completely different part of the world, the Salish Indians of British Columbia, according to Hill Tout,[112] believed that long before white settlers arrived, their ancestors practiced a Sabbath or seventh-day ceremony for dancing and praying, gathering at sunrise and dancing until noon. The Sabbath, or regularly occurring orgy—not a time of stress and restriction, but a celebration of joy and a break from daily responsibilities—has, as we know, been a crucial part of many of the structured ancient civilizations that have influenced our own;[113] it is very likely that the stability of these ancient civilizations was closely tied to their acknowledgment of the necessity for a Sabbath orgy. Such festivals are, as Crawley points out, means of purification and revitalization, efforts to shed "the old man" and embrace "the new man," preparing to approach everyday life with renewed energy.[114]
The orgy is an institution which by no means has its significance only for the past. On the contrary, the high tension, the rigid routine, the gray monotony of modern life insistently call for moments of organic relief, though the precise form that that orgiastic relief takes must necessarily change with other social changes. As Wilhelm von Humboldt said, "just as men need suffering in order to become strong so they need joy in order to become good." Charles Wagner, insisting more recently (in his Jeunesse) on the same need of joy in our modern life, regrets that dancing in the old, free, and natural manner has gone out of fashion or become unwholesome. Dancing is indeed the most fundamental and primitive form of the orgy, and that which most completely and healthfully fulfils its object. For while it is undoubtedly, as we see even among animals, a process by which sexual tumescence is accomplished,[115] it by no means necessarily becomes focused in sexual detumescence but it may itself become a detumescent discharge of accumulated energy. It was on this account that, at all events in former days, the clergy in Spain, on moral grounds, openly encouraged the national passion for dancing. Among cultured people in modern times, the orgy tends to take on a purely cerebral form, which is less wholesome because it fails to lead to harmonious discharge along motor channels. In these comparatively passive forms, however, the orgy tends to become more and more pronounced under the conditions of civilization. Aristotle's famous statement concerning the function of tragedy as "purgation" seems to be a recognition of the beneficial effects of the orgy.[116] Wagner's music-dramas appeal powerfully to this need; the theatre, now as ever, fulfils a great function of the same kind, inherited from the ancient days when it was the ordered expression of a sexual festival.[117] The theatre, indeed, tends at the present time to assume a larger importance and to approximate to the more serious dramatic performances of classic days by being transferred to the day-time and the open-air. France has especially taken the initiative in these performances, analogous to the Dionysiac festivals of antiquity and the Mysteries and Moralities of the Middle Ages. The movement began some years ago at Orange. In 1907 there were, in France, as many as thirty open-air theatres ("Théâtres de la Nature," "Théâtres du Soleil," etc.,) while it is in Marseilles that the first formal open-air theatre has been erected since classic days.[118] In England, likewise, there has been a great extension of popular interest in dramatic performances, and the newly instituted Pageants, carried out and taken part in by the population of the region commemorated in the Pageant, are festivals of the same character. In England, however, at the present time, the real popular orgiastic festivals are the Bank holidays, with which may be associated the more occasional celebrations, "Maffekings," etc., often called out by comparatively insignificant national events but still adequate to arouse orgiastic emotions as genuine as those of antiquity, though they are lacking in beauty and religious consecration. It is easy indeed for the narrowly austere person to view such manifestations with a supercilious smile, but in the eyes of the moralist and the philosopher these orgiastic festivals exert a salutary and preservative function. In every age of dull and monotonous routine—and all civilization involves such routine—many natural impulses and functions tend to become suppressed, atrophied, or perverted. They need these moments of joyous exercise and expression, moments in which they may not necessarily attain their full activity but in which they will at all events be able, as Cyples expresses it, to rehearse their great possibilities.[119]
The orgy is an institution that is still relevant today. In fact, the high stress, strict routines, and dull monotony of modern life strongly call for moments of organic relief, even if the exact form of that relief changes with social evolution. As Wilhelm von Humboldt stated, "just as people need suffering to become strong, they also need joy to become good." More recently, Charles Wagner, in his Jeunesse, emphasized the need for joy in modern life, lamenting that dancing in the old, free, and natural way has fallen out of fashion or become unhealthy. Dancing is indeed the most basic and primal form of the orgy and effectively fulfills its purpose. While it undoubtedly serves as a way to achieve sexual arousal, it doesn't always lead to sexual release but can instead serve as a way to discharge built-up energy. For this reason, in earlier times, clergy in Spain openly encouraged the national passion for dancing on moral grounds. Among cultured people today, the orgy often takes on a more cerebral form, which is less beneficial since it doesn't promote healthy expression through physical activity. However, even these comparatively passive forms of the orgy are becoming more pronounced in civilized conditions. Aristotle's famous observation about tragedy serving as "purgation" seems to recognize the positive effects of the orgy. Wagner's music-dramas strongly appeal to this need; the theater, now as ever, plays an important role, carrying on the tradition from ancient days when it was a structured expression of a sexual festival. Currently, theater is becoming increasingly significant, moving closer to the serious dramatic performances of classical days, especially as more events are held during the day and in open-air settings. France has particularly led the way in these performances, reminiscent of the Dionysian festivals of the past and the Mysteries and Moralities of the Middle Ages. This movement began several years ago in Orange. By 1907, there were as many as thirty open-air theaters in France ("Théâtres de la Nature," "Théâtres du Soleil," etc.), with the first official open-air theater built in Marseille since classical times. Similarly, in England, there has been a significant increase in public interest in dramatic performances, with newly established Pageants organized and participated in by local communities commemorating the event. However, in England today, the true popular orgiastic festivals are the Bank holidays, often accompanied by occasional celebrations like "Maffekings," triggered by relatively minor national events but still capable of stirring orgiastic emotions akin to those of ancient times, although lacking in beauty and religious significance. It’s easy for someone with rigid views to look down on these expressions, but for moralists and philosophers, these orgiastic festivals serve a beneficial and preserving role. In every era of dull routine—and all civilizations have such routines—many natural impulses and functions tend to be suppressed, weakened, or distorted. They need moments of joyful expression and activity, even if they don't reach their full potential, so they can, as Cyples puts it, rehearse their great possibilities.
II. The Origin and Development of Prostitution.
The more refined forms of the orgy flourish in civilization, although on account of their mainly cerebral character they are not the most beneficent or the most effective. The more primitive and muscular forms of the orgy tend, on the other hand, under the influence of civilization, to fall into discredit and to be so far as possible suppressed altogether. It is partly in this way that civilization encourages prostitution. For the orgy in its primitive forms, forbidden to show itself openly and reputably, seeks the darkness, and allying itself with a fundamental instinct to which civilized society offers no complete legitimate satisfaction, it firmly entrenches itself in the very centre of civilized life, and thereby constitutes a problem of immense difficulty and importance.[120]
The more sophisticated types of orgies thrive in civilization, but because they are mostly intellectual, they aren't the most beneficial or effective. In contrast, the more primitive and physical types of orgies tend to lose favor under civilization's influence and are often suppressed as much as possible. This is partly how civilization promotes prostitution. The primitive forms of orgies, unable to express themselves openly and respectably, seek out secrecy. They connect with a basic instinct that civilized society doesn't fully satisfy, deeply embedding themselves in the core of civilized life, and this creates a significant and challenging problem.[120]
It is commonly said that prostitution has existed always and everywhere. That statement is far from correct. A kind of amateur prostitution is occasionally found among savages, but usually it is only when barbarism is fully developed and is already approaching the stage of civilization that well developed prostitution is found. It exists in a systematic form in every civilization.
It’s often said that prostitution has always existed everywhere. That statement is not entirely accurate. Some basic forms of prostitution can sometimes be seen among primitive societies, but typically, it’s only when a society has reached a certain level of barbarism and is starting to move towards civilization that well-established prostitution becomes apparent. It exists in a structured form in every civilization.
What is prostitution? There has been considerable discussion as to the correct definition of prostitution.[121] The Roman Ulpian said that a prostitute was one who openly abandons her body to a number of men without choice, for money.[122] Not all modern definitions have been so satisfactory. It is sometimes said a prostitute is a woman who gives herself to numerous men. To be sound, however, a definition must be applicable to both sexes alike and we should certainly hesitate to describe a man who had sexual intercourse with many women as a prostitute. The idea of venality, the intention to sell the favors of the body, is essential to the conception of prostitution. Thus Guyot defines a prostitute as "any person for whom sexual relationships are subordinated to gain."[123] It is not, however, adequate to define a prostitute simply as a woman who sells her body. That is done every day by women who become wives in order to gain a home and a livelihood, yet, immoral as this conduct may be from any high ethical standpoint, it would be inconvenient and even misleading to call it prostitution.[124] It is better, therefore, to define a prostitute as a woman who temporarily sells her sexual favors to various persons. Thus, according to Wharton's Law-lexicon a prostitute is "a woman who indiscriminately consorts with men for hire"; Bonger states that "those women are prostitutes who sell their bodies for the exercise of sexual acts and make of this a profession";[125] Richard again states that "a prostitute is a woman who publicly gives herself to the first comer in return for a pecuniary remuneration."[126] As, finally, the prevalence of homosexuality has led to the existence of male prostitutes, the definition must be put in a form irrespective of sex, and we may, therefore, say that a prostitute is a person who makes it a profession to gratify the lust of various persons of the opposite sex or the same sex.
What is prostitution? There has been a lot of debate about the right definition of prostitution.[121] The Roman Ulpian defined a prostitute as someone who openly offers her body to multiple men without choice, in exchange for money.[122] Not all modern definitions are that clear. It's sometimes said that a prostitute is a woman who gives herself to many men. However, a solid definition should apply to both genders, and we should definitely think twice before calling a man who sleeps with many women a prostitute. The idea of selling sexual favors is central to understanding prostitution. Thus, Guyot defines a prostitute as "any person for whom sexual relationships are subordinated to gain."[123] However, it’s not enough to define a prostitute simply as a woman who sells her body. That happens every day with women who marry to secure a home and a livelihood. While this might be seen as morally questionable from a high ethical perspective, it would be misleading to label it as prostitution.[124] It is better to define a prostitute as a woman who temporarily sells her sexual favors to various people. According to Wharton’s Law-lexicon, a prostitute is "a woman who indiscriminately consorts with men for hire"; Bonger says that "those women are prostitutes who sell their bodies for sexual acts and make this their profession";[125] Richard states that "a prostitute is a woman who publicly gives herself to the first person for financial compensation."[126] As the rise of homosexuality has led to male prostitutes, the definition needs to be inclusive of all genders. So we can say that a prostitute is a person who makes it their profession to satisfy the sexual desires of various people, regardless of gender.
It is essential that the act of prostitution should be habitually performed with "various persons." A woman who gains her living by being mistress to a man, to whom she is faithful, is not a prostitute, although she often becomes one afterwards, and may have been one before. The exact point at which a woman begins to be a prostitute is a question of considerable importance in countries in which prostitutes are subject to registration. Thus in Berlin, not long ago, a girl who was mistress to a rich cavalry officer and supported by him, during the illness of the officer accidentally met a man whom she had formerly known, and once or twice invited him to see her, receiving from him presents in money. This somehow came to the knowledge of the police, and she was arrested and sentenced to one day's imprisonment as an unregistered prostitute. On appeal, however, the sentence was annulled. Liszt, in his Strafrecht, lays it down that a girl who obtains whole or part of her income from "fixed relationships" is not practicing unchastity for gain in the sense of the German law (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang 1, Heft 9, p. 345).
It’s crucial that prostitution happens regularly with "different people." A woman who makes her living as a mistress to one man, to whom she is loyal, isn’t considered a prostitute, although she might become one later, and may have been one before. The specific moment a woman becomes a prostitute is an important issue in countries where prostitutes need to register. For example, not long ago in Berlin, a girl who was the mistress of a wealthy cavalry officer and financially dependent on him met a man she had known before during the officer's illness. She invited him over a couple of times and received money gifts from him. This eventually came to the police's attention, and she was arrested and sentenced to one day in jail as an unregistered prostitute. However, her sentence was overturned on appeal. Liszt, in his Strafrecht, states that a girl who gets all or part of her income from "stable relationships" is not considered to be engaging in unchastity for profit under German law (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang 1, Heft 9, p. 345).
It is not altogether easy to explain the origin of the systematized professional prostitution with the existence of which we are familiar in civilization. The amateur kind of prostitution which has sometimes been noted among primitive peoples—the fact, that is, that a man may give a woman a present in seeking to persuade her to allow him to have intercourse with her—is really not prostitution as we understand it. The present in such a case is merely part of a kind of courtship leading to a temporary relationship. The woman more or less retains her social position and is not forced to make an avocation of selling herself because henceforth no other career is possible to her. When Cook came to New Zealand his men found that the women were not impregnable, "but the terms and manner of compliance were as decent as those in marriage among us," and according "to their notions the agreement was as innocent." The consent of the woman's friends was necessary, and when the preliminaries were settled it was also necessary to treat this "Juliet of a night" with "the same delicacy as is here required with the wife for life, and the lover who presumed to take any liberties by which this was violated was sure to be disappointed."[127] In some of the Melanesian Islands, it is said that women would sometimes become prostitutes, or on account of their bad conduct be forced to become prostitutes for a time; they were not, however, particularly despised, and when they had in this way accumulated a certain amount of property they could marry well, after which it would not be proper to refer to their former career.[128]
It’s not exactly easy to explain where the organized professional prostitution we see in our society comes from. The casual kind of prostitution that’s sometimes observed among primitive people—where a man might give a woman a gift to persuade her to sleep with him—is really not prostitution in the way we think of it. In that case, the gift is just part of a type of courtship leading to a temporary relationship. The woman usually keeps her social standing and isn’t forced into selling herself because no other career options are available to her. When Cook arrived in New Zealand, his men found that the women were not off-limits, "but the terms and manner of compliance were as decent as those in marriage among us," and according to their views, the agreement was completely innocent. The consent of the woman's friends was necessary, and once the details were settled, it was also crucial to treat this "Juliet for a night" with "the same delicacy as is here required with the wife for life, and the lover who presumed to take any liberties violating this would surely be disappointed." In some of the Melanesian Islands, it’s said that women would sometimes turn to prostitution, or due to their bad behavior might be forced to do so for a time; however, they weren’t particularly looked down upon, and when they had managed to gather a certain amount of property, they could marry well, at which point it would be inappropriate to mention their past profession.
When prostitution first arises among a primitive people it sometimes happens that little or no stigma is attached to it for the reason that the community has not yet become accustomed to attach any special value to the presence of virginity. Schurtz quotes from the old Arabic geographer Al-Bekri some interesting remarks about the Slavs: "The women of the Slavs, after they have married, are faithful to their husbands. If, however, a young girl falls in love with a man she goes to him and satisfies her passion. And if a man marries and finds his wife a virgin he says to her: 'If you were worth anything men would have loved you, and you would have chosen one who would have taken away your virginity.' Then he drives her away and renounces her." It is a feeling of this kind which, among some peoples, leads a girl to be proud of the presents she has received from her lovers and to preserve them as a dowry for her marriage, knowing that her value will thus be still further heightened. Even among the Southern Slavs of modern Europe, who have preserved much of the primitive sexual freedom, this freedom, as Krauss, who has minutely studied the manners and customs of these peoples, declares, is fundamentally different from vice, licentiousness, or immodesty.[129]
When prostitution first emerges among a primitive society, it sometimes carries little or no stigma because the community hasn’t yet learned to place any special value on virginity. Schurtz references the old Arabic geographer Al-Bekri, who made some intriguing comments about the Slavs: "Slavic women, after they marry, are loyal to their husbands. However, if a young girl falls in love with a man, she goes to him and fulfills her desires. If a man marries and discovers that his wife is a virgin, he tells her, 'If you were valuable, men would have loved you, and you would have chosen someone who would have taken your virginity.' Then he sends her away and disavows her." This kind of attitude, found among certain cultures, leads some girls to take pride in the gifts they receive from their lovers and keep them as a dowry for their marriage, knowing this will increase their worth. Even among the Southern Slavs of modern Europe, who maintain much of the primitive sexual freedom, this freedom, as Krauss—who has closely examined the customs and traditions of these peoples—points out, is fundamentally different from vice, promiscuity, or indecency.[129]
Prostitution tends to arise, as Schurtz has pointed out, in every society in which early marriage is difficult and intercourse outside marriage is socially disapproved. "Venal women everywhere appear as soon as the free sexual intercourse of young people is repressed, without the necessary consequences being impeded by unusually early marriages."[130] The repression of sexual intimacies outside marriage is a phenomenon of civilization, but it is not itself by any means a measure of a people's general level, and may, therefore, begin to appear at an early period. But it is important to remember that the primitive and rudimentary forms of prostitution, when they occur, are merely temporary, and frequently—though not invariably—involve no degrading influence on the woman in public estimation, sometimes indeed increasing her value as a wife. The woman who sells herself for money purely as a professional matter, without any thought of love or passion, and who, by virtue of her profession, belongs to a pariah class definitely and rigidly excluded from the main body of her sex, is a phenomenon which can seldom be found except in developed civilization. It is altogether incorrect to speak of prostitutes as a mere survival from primitive times.
Prostitution tends to emerge, as Schurtz has noted, in every society where early marriage is difficult and premarital sex is socially frowned upon. "Venal women appear everywhere as soon as the free sexual interactions of young people are suppressed, without the necessary consequences being hindered by exceptionally early marriages." [130] The repression of sexual relationships outside marriage is a phenomenon of civilization, but it doesn't necessarily indicate a society's overall level and can, therefore, begin to occur early on. However, it's essential to remember that the primitive and basic forms of prostitution, when they do occur, are usually temporary and often—though not always—don't carry a degrading impact on the woman’s reputation, sometimes even enhancing her value as a wife. The woman who sells herself for money purely as a profession, without any consideration of love or desire, and who, due to her profession, belongs to a marginalized group that's clearly excluded from the majority of her gender, is a phenomenon that is rarely found outside of advanced civilization. It is completely inaccurate to describe prostitutes as merely a remnant from primitive times.
On the whole, while among savages sexual relationships are sometimes free before marriage, as well as on the occasion of special festivals, they are rarely truly promiscuous and still more rarely venal. When savage women nowadays sell themselves, or are sold by their husbands, it has usually been found that we are concerned with the contamination of European civilization.
On the whole, while among primitive cultures sexual relationships are sometimes casual before marriage and during special festivals, they are rarely genuinely promiscuous and even less often transactional. When women in these cultures sell themselves, or are sold by their husbands, it is usually linked to the influence of European civilization.
The definite ways in which professional prostitution may arise are no doubt many.[131] We may assent to the general principle, laid down by Schurtz, that whenever the free union of young people is impeded under conditions in which early marriage is also difficult prostitution must certainly arise. There are, however, different ways in which this principle may take shape. So far as our western civilization is concerned—the civilization, that is to say, which has its cradle in the Mediterranean basin—it would seem that the origin of prostitution is to be found primarily in a religious custom, religion, the great conserver of social traditions, preserving in a transformed shape a primitive freedom that was passing out of general social life.[132] The typical example is that recorded by Herodotus, in the fifth century before Christ, at the temple of Mylitta, the Babylonian Venus, where every woman once in her life had to come and give herself to the first stranger who threw a coin in her lap, in worship of the goddess. The money could not be refused, however small the amount, but it was given as an offertory to the temple, and the woman, having followed the man and thus made oblation to Mylitta, returned home and lived chastely ever afterwards.[133] Very similar customs existed in other parts of Western Asia, in North Africa, in Cyprus and other islands of the Eastern Mediterranean, and also in Greece, where the Temple of Aphrodite on the fort at Corinth possessed over a thousand hierodules, dedicated to the service of the goddess, from time to time, as Strabo states, by those who desired to make thank-offering for mercies vouchsafed to them. Pindar refers to the hospitable young Corinthian women ministrants whose thoughts often turn towards Ourania Aphrodite[134] in whose temple they burned incense; and Athenæus mentions the importance that was attached to the prayers of the Corinthian prostitutes in any national calamity.[135]
The ways in which professional prostitution can arise are definitely numerous.[131] We can agree with the general idea put forth by Schurtz that whenever young people's freedom to be together is restricted and early marriage is also tough, prostitution is likely to emerge. However, there are various forms this principle can take. When it comes to our Western civilization—the one that originated in the Mediterranean region—it seems that the roots of prostitution lie mainly in a religious custom, where religion, the great keeper of social traditions, maintains a transformed version of a primitive freedom that was fading from social life.[132] A classic example is the one noted by Herodotus from the fifth century BCE, at the temple of Mylitta, the Babylonian Venus, where every woman, at least once in her life, had to go and give herself to the first stranger who tossed a coin into her lap, as an act of worship to the goddess. The money couldn't be refused, no matter how little, as it was considered an offering to the temple, and after following the man and thus making an offering to Mylitta, the woman would return home and live chastely from that point on.[133] Very similar customs existed in other areas of Western Asia, North Africa, Cyprus and other islands in the Eastern Mediterranean, as well as in Greece, where the Temple of Aphrodite at Corinth housed over a thousand hierodules, dedicated to serving the goddess. This was done periodically by those wishing to give thanks for blessings they had received, as noted by Strabo. Pindar speaks of the welcoming young women in Corinth who often thought about Ourania Aphrodite[134] in whose temple they burned incense; and Athenæus mentions the significance placed on the prayers of Corinthian prostitutes during times of national crisis.[135]
We seem here to be in the presence, not merely of a religiously preserved survival of a greater sexual freedom formerly existing,[136] but of a specialized and ritualized development of that primitive cult of the generative forces of Nature which involves the belief that all natural fruitfulness is associated with, and promoted by, acts of human sexual intercourse which thus acquire a religious significance. At a later stage acts of sexual intercourse having a religious significance become specialized and localized in temples, and by a rational transition of ideas it becomes believed that such acts of sexual intercourse in the service of the god, or with persons devoted to the god's service, brought benefits to the individual who performed them, more especially, if a woman, by insuring her fertility. Among primitive peoples generally this conception is embodied mainly in seasonal festivals, but among the peoples of Western Asia who had ceased to be primitive, and among whom traditional priestly and hieratic influences had acquired very great influence, the earlier generative cult had thus, it seems probable, naturally changed its form in becoming attached to the temples.[137]
We seem to be witnessing not just a religiously preserved remnant of a once greater sexual freedom, [136] but a specialized and ritualized evolution of that ancient worship of Nature's generative forces. This involves the belief that all natural fertility is connected to and encouraged by human sexual intercourse, which takes on religious significance. Over time, these acts of intercourse gain religious meaning and become more specialized and focused in temples. Gradually, it is believed that engaging in these acts for the sake of the god, or with individuals dedicated to the god's service, brings benefits to the person performing them, especially for women, ensuring their fertility. Among primitive societies, this idea mainly expresses itself in seasonal festivals, but among the peoples of Western Asia, who were no longer primitive and had been significantly influenced by traditional priestly and ritualistic practices, it seems likely that the earlier generative worship naturally evolved to become associated with the temples.[137]
The theory that religious prostitution developed, as a general rule, out of the belief that the generative activity of human beings possessed a mysterious and sacred influence in promoting the fertility of Nature generally seems to have been first set forth by Mannhardt in his Antike Wald- und Feldkulte (pp. 283 et seq.). It is supported by Dr. F. S. Krauss ("Beischlafausübung als Kulthandlung," Anthropophyteia, vol. iii, p. 20), who refers to the significant fact that in Baruch's time, at a period long anterior to Herodotus, sacred prostitution took place under the trees. Dr. J. G. Frazer has more especially developed this conception of the origin of sacred prostitution in his Adonis, Attis, Osiris. He thus summarizes his lengthy discussion: "We may conclude that a great Mother Goddess, the personification of all the reproductive energies of nature, was worshipped under different names, but with a substantial similarity of myth and ritual by many peoples of western Asia; that associated with her was a lover, or rather series of lovers, divine yet mortal, with whom she mated year by year, their commerce being deemed essential to the propagation of animals and plants, each in their several kind; and further, that the fabulous union of the divine pair was simulated, and, as it were, multiplied on earth by the real, though temporary, union of the human sexes at the sanctuary of the goddess for the sake of thereby ensuring the fruitfulness of the ground and the increase of man and beast. In course of time, as the institution of individual marriage grew in favor, and the old communism fell more and more into discredit, the revival of the ancient practice, even for a single occasion in a woman's life, became ever more repugnant to the moral sense of the people, and accordingly they resorted to various expedients for evading in practice the obligation which they still acknowledged in theory.... But while the majority of women thus contrived to observe the form of religion without sacrificing their virtue, it was still thought necessary to the general welfare that a certain number of them should discharge the old obligation in the old way. These became prostitutes, either for life or for a term of years, at one of the temples: dedicated to the service of religion, they were invested with a sacred character, and their vocation, far from being deemed infamous, was probably long regarded by the laity as an exercise of more than common virtue, and rewarded with a tribute of mixed wonder, reverence, and pity, not unlike that which in some parts of the world is still paid to women who seek to honor their Creator in a different way by renouncing the natural functions of their sex and the tenderest relations of humanity" (J. G. Frazer, Adonis, Attis, Osiris, 1907, pp. 23 et seq.).
The idea that religious prostitution emerged largely from the belief that human reproduction had a mysterious and sacred power in enhancing the fertility of nature was first put forth by Mannhardt in his Antike Wald- und Feldkulte (pp. 283 et seq.). This theory is backed by Dr. F. S. Krauss ("Beischlafausübung als Kulthandlung," Anthropophyteia, vol. iii, p. 20), who points out that during Baruch's time, well before Herodotus, sacred prostitution happened under trees. Dr. J. G. Frazer has elaborately developed this idea about the origins of sacred prostitution in his Adonis, Attis, Osiris. He summarizes his extensive discussion by stating: "We can conclude that a great Mother Goddess, representing all the reproductive forces of nature, was worshipped under different names but with a significant similarity in myth and rituals by many peoples of Western Asia; that she had a lover, or rather a series of lovers, who were both divine and mortal, with whom she united every year, and this relationship was considered vital for the reproduction of animals and plants, each in their own kind; and notably, the mythical union of this divine couple was reenacted, so to speak, on earth through the real, albeit temporary, unions of humans at the goddess's sanctuary, all in the aim of ensuring the fertility of the land and the growth of humans and animals. Over time, as individual marriage became more favored and the old communal practices lost respect, the revival of the ancient custom, even for just one occasion in a woman’s life, became increasingly unacceptable to the moral standards of the community, so they found various ways to avoid in practice what they still acknowledged in theory.... But while most women managed to follow religious practices without compromising their virtue, it was still considered necessary for the general good that some should fulfill the old obligation in the traditional manner. These women became prostitutes, either for life or for a set number of years, at one of the temples: dedicated to religious service, they were given a sacred character, and their roles were not viewed as disgraceful; instead, they were likely seen by the public as embodying a higher form of virtue, receiving a mixture of awe, respect, and pity, similar to the regard still held in some parts of the world for women who honor their Creator by renouncing their natural functions and the closest human relationships” (J. G. Frazer, Adonis, Attis, Osiris, 1907, pp. 23 et seq.).
It is difficult to resist the conclusion that this theory represents the central and primitive idea which led to the development of sacred prostitution. It seems equally clear, however, that as time went on, and especially as temple cults developed and priestly influence increased, this fundamental and primitive idea tended to become modified, and even transformed. The primitive conception became specialized in the belief that religious benefits, and especially the gift of fruitfulness, were gained by the worshipper, who thus sought the goddess's favor by an act of unchastity which might be presumed to be agreeable to an unchaste deity. The rite of Mylitta, as described by Herodotus, was a late development of this kind in an ancient civilization, and the benefit sought was evidently for the worshipper herself. This has been pointed out by Dr. Westermarck, who remarks that the words spoken to the woman by her partner as he gives her the coin—"May the goddess be auspicious to thee!"—themselves indicate that the object of the act was to insure her fertility, and he refers also to the fact that strangers frequently had a semi-supernatural character, and their benefits a specially efficacious character (Westermarck, Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, p. 446). It may be added that the rite of Mylitta thus became analogous with another Mediterranean rite, in which the act of simulating intercourse with the representative of a god, or his image, ensured a woman's fertility. This is the rite practiced by the Egyptians of Mendes, in which a woman went through the ceremony of simulated intercourse with the sacred goat, regarded as the representative of a deity of Pan-like character (Herodotus, Bk. ii, Ch. XLVI; and see Dulaure, Des Divinités Génératrices, Ch. II; cf. vol. v of these Studies, "Erotic Symbolism," Sect. IV). This rite was maintained by Roman women, in connection with the statues of Priapus, to a very much later date, and St. Augustine mentions how Roman matrons placed the young bride on the erect member of Priapus (De Civitate Dei, Bk. iii, Ch. IX). The idea evidently running through this whole group of phenomena is that the deity, or the representative or even mere image of the deity, is able, through a real or simulated act of intercourse, to confer on the worshipper a portion of its own exalted generative activity.
It’s hard to ignore the idea that this theory is the core and basic concept that led to the rise of sacred prostitution. However, it’s also clear that as time passed, especially with the growth of temple cults and the increasing influence of priests, this fundamental idea evolved and even changed significantly. The original notion became specifically tied to the belief that worshippers could gain religious benefits, especially the ability to bear children, by seeking the goddess’s favor through acts of unchastity that might please an unchaste deity. The rite of Mylitta, as described by Herodotus, was a later development in an ancient culture, where the benefit sought was clearly for the worshipper herself. Dr. Westermarck noted that the words spoken to the woman by her partner as he gives her the coin—“May the goddess be favorable to you!"—indicate that the purpose of the act was to ensure her fertility. He also pointed out that strangers often had a semi-supernatural quality, and their benefits were especially powerful (Westermarck, Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, p. 446). Additionally, the rite of Mylitta became similar to another Mediterranean rite, where simulating intercourse with a god’s representative or image was believed to ensure a woman’s fertility. This is similar to the practice among the Egyptians of Mendes, where a woman participated in a ceremony of simulated intercourse with a sacred goat, seen as a representation of a deity with a Pan-like nature (Herodotus, Bk. ii, Ch. XLVI; and see Dulaure, Des Divinités Génératrices, Ch. II; cf. vol. v of these Studies, "Erotic Symbolism," Sect. IV). This rite continued among Roman women for much longer, in connection with the statues of Priapus, and St. Augustine noted how Roman matrons placed a young bride on the erect member of Priapus (De Civitate Dei, Bk. iii, Ch. IX). The underlying idea throughout this whole phenomenon is that the deity, or its representative or even just an image of the deity, can, through a real or simulated act of intercourse, bestow on the worshipper a part of its own powerful generative ability.
At a later period, in Corinth, prostitutes were still the priestesses of Venus, more or less loosely attached to her temples, and so long as that was the case they enjoyed a considerable degree of esteem. At this stage, however, we realize that religious prostitution was developing a utilitarian side. These temples flourished chiefly in sea-coast towns, in islands, in large cities to which many strangers and sailors came. The priestesses of Cyprus burnt incense on her altars and invoked her sacred aid, but at the same time Pindar addresses them as "young girls who welcome all strangers and give them hospitality." Side by side with the religious significance of the act of generation the needs of men far from home were already beginning to be definitely recognized. The Babylonian woman had gone to the temple of Mylitta to fulfil a personal religious duty; the Corinthian priestess had begun to act as an avowed minister to the sexual needs of men in strange cities.
At a later time in Corinth, prostitutes were still the priestesses of Venus, somewhat loosely connected to her temples, and as long as that was the case, they enjoyed a significant level of respect. However, at this point, we see that religious prostitution was developing a more practical aspect. These temples thrived mainly in coastal towns, on islands, and in large cities that attracted many visitors and sailors. The priestesses of Cyprus burned incense on her altars and called for her sacred help, but at the same time, Pindar describes them as "young girls who welcome all strangers and offer them hospitality." Alongside the religious importance of the act of creation, the needs of men far from home were starting to be clearly acknowledged. The Babylonian woman went to the temple of Mylitta to fulfill a personal religious obligation; the Corinthian priestess had begun to openly serve the sexual needs of men in unfamiliar cities.
The custom which Herodotus noted in Lydia of young girls prostituting themselves in order to acquire a marriage portion which they may dispose of as they think fit (Bk. I, Ch. 93) may very well have developed (as Frazer also believes) out of religious prostitution; we can indeed trace its evolution in Cyprus where eventually, at the period when Justinian visited the island, the money given by strangers to the women was no longer placed on the altar but put into a chest to form marriage-portions for them. It is a custom to be found in Japan and various other parts of the world, notably among the Ouled-Nail of Algeria,[138] and is not necessarily always based on religious prostitution; but it obviously cannot exist except among peoples who see nothing very derogatory in free sexual intercourse for the purpose of obtaining money, so that the custom of Mylitta furnished a natural basis for it.[139]
The practice that Herodotus observed in Lydia, where young girls would engage in prostitution to raise a dowry that they could use as they wished (Bk. I, Ch. 93), may have originated (as Frazer also suggests) from religious prostitution. We can indeed trace its development in Cyprus, where by the time Justinian visited the island, the money given by strangers to these women was no longer placed on the altar but instead put into a chest to create dowries for them. This practice is seen in Japan and various other regions around the world, particularly among the Ouled-Nail of Algeria,[138] and it isn't always rooted in religious prostitution. However, it clearly cannot exist in societies that view free sexual relations for payment as something shameful, which means the custom related to Mylitta naturally supported it.[139]
As a more spiritual conception of religion developed, and as the growth of civilization tended to deprive sexual intercourse of its sacred halo, religious prostitution in Greece was slowly abolished, though on the coasts of Asia Minor both religious prostitution and prostitution for the purpose of obtaining a marriage portion persisted to the time of Constantine, who put an end to these ancient customs.[140] Superstition was on the side of the old religious prostitution; it was believed that women who had never sacrificed to Aphrodite became consumed by lust, and according to the legend recorded by Ovid—a legend which seems to point to a certain antagonism between sacred and secular prostitution—this was the case with the women who first became public prostitutes. The decay of religious prostitution, doubtless combined with the cravings always born of the growth of civilization, led up to the first establishment, attributed by legend to Solon, of a public brothel, a purely secular establishment for a purely secular end: the safeguarding of the virtue of the general population and the increase of the public revenue. With that institution the evolution of prostitution, and of the modern marriage system of which it forms part, was completed. The Athenian dikterion is the modern brothel; the dikteriade is the modern state-regulated prostitute. The free hetairæ, indeed, subsequently arose, educated women having no taint of the dikterion, but they likewise had no official part in public worship.[141] The primitive conception of the sanctity of sexual intercourse in the divine service had been utterly lost.
As a more spiritual understanding of religion emerged and as civilization progressed, it gradually stripped sexual intercourse of its sacred significance, resulting in the decline of religious prostitution in Greece. However, on the coasts of Asia Minor, both religious prostitution and the practice of seeking a dowry through prostitution continued until the time of Constantine, who put an end to these ancient traditions.[140] Superstition supported the old religious prostitution; it was believed that women who had never made offerings to Aphrodite were driven by uncontrollable lust. According to a legend mentioned by Ovid, which suggests a conflict between sacred and secular prostitution, this applied to the women who initially became public prostitutes. The decline of religious prostitution, likely combined with the desires arising from civilization's advancement, led to the legendary establishment of a public brothel, credited to Solon, which was a purely secular institution aimed at protecting the virtue of the general populace and boosting public revenue. This marked the completion of the evolution of prostitution and its connection to the modern marriage system. The Athenian dikterion is the equivalent of the modern brothel; the dikteriade represents the modern state-regulated prostitute. The independent hetairæ later emerged, educated women without ties to the dikterion, but they also had no formal involvement in public worship.[141] The original idea of the sanctity of sexual intercourse in divine service was completely lost.
A fairly typical example of the conditions existing among savages is to be found in the South Sea Island of Rotuma, where "prostitution for money or gifts was quite unknown." Adultery after marriage was also unknown. But there was great freedom in the formation of sexual relationships before marriage (J. Stanley Gardiner, Journal Anthropological Institute, February, 1898, p. 409). Much the same is said of the Bantu Ba mbola of Africa (op. cit., July-December, 1905, p. 410).
A pretty typical example of the conditions among indigenous people can be found on the South Sea Island of Rotuma, where "prostitution for money or gifts was completely unheard of." Adultery after marriage was also unheard of. However, there was a lot of freedom in forming sexual relationships before marriage (J. Stanley Gardiner, Journal Anthropological Institute, February, 1898, p. 409). The same is said about the Bantu Ba Mbolas of Africa (op. cit., July-December, 1905, p. 410).
Among the early Cymri of Wales, representing a more advanced social stage, prostitution appears to have been not absolutely unknown, but public prostitution was punished by loss of valuable privileges (R. B. Holt, "Marriage Laws and Customs of the Cymri," Journal Anthropological Institute, August-November, 1898, pp. 161-163).
Among the early Welsh Cymri, who were at a more advanced social level, prostitution seems to have existed but was not entirely accepted. Public prostitution was met with penalties, including the loss of important privileges (R. B. Holt, "Marriage Laws and Customs of the Cymri," Journal Anthropological Institute, August-November, 1898, pp. 161-163).
Prostitution was practically unknown in Burmah, and regarded as shameful before the coming of the English and the example of the modern Hindus. The missionaries have unintentionally, but inevitably, favored the growth of prostitution by condemning free unions (Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, November, 1903, p. 720). The English brought prostitution to India. "That was not specially the fault of the English," said a Brahmin to Jules Bois, "it is the crime of your civilization. We have never had prostitutes. I mean by that horrible word the brutalized servants of the gross desire of the passerby. We had, and we have, castes of singers and dancers who are married to trees—yes, to trees—by touching ceremonies which date from Vedic times; our priests bless them and receive much money from them. They do not refuse themselves to those who love them and please them. Kings have made them rich. They represent all the arts; they are the visible beauty of the universe" (Jules Bois, Visions de l'Inde, p. 55).
Prostitution was almost nonexistent in Burma and was seen as shameful before the arrival of the English and the influence of modern Hindus. The missionaries, although unintentionally, have contributed to the rise of prostitution by criticizing free unions (Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, November 1903, p. 720). The English introduced prostitution to India. "That wasn't specifically the fault of the English," a Brahmin told Jules Bois, "it's the flaw of your civilization. We’ve never had prostitutes. By that terrible term, I mean the degraded individuals who serve the crude desires of passersby. We had, and still have, groups of singers and dancers who are married to trees—yes, to trees—through touching ceremonies that date back to Vedic times; our priests bless them and receive lots of money from them. They don’t refuse those who love and please them. Kings have made them wealthy. They embody all the arts; they are the visible beauty of the universe" (Jules Bois, Visions de l'Inde, p. 55).
Religious prostitutes, it may be added, "the servants of the god," are connected with temples in Southern India and the Deccan. They are devoted to their sacred calling from their earliest years, and it is their chief business to dance before the image of the god, to whom they are married (though in Upper India professional dancing girls are married to inanimate objects), but they are also trained in arousing and assuaging the desires of devotees who come on pilgrimage to the shrine. For the betrothal rites by which, in India, sacred prostitutes are consecrated, see, e.g., A. Van Gennep, Rites de Passage, p. 142.
Religious prostitutes, often referred to as "the servants of the god," are associated with temples in Southern India and the Deccan. They dedicate themselves to this sacred role from a young age, primarily performing dances before the image of their god, to whom they are considered married (although in Upper India, professional dancing girls are married to lifeless objects). They are also trained in stirring and calming the desires of pilgrims who visit the shrine. For the betrothal rites that consecrate sacred prostitutes in India, see, e.g., A. Van Gennep, Rites de Passage, p. 142.
In many parts of Western Asia, where barbarism had reached a high stage of development, prostitution was not unknown, though usually disapproved. The Hebrews knew it, and the historical Biblical references to prostitutes imply little reprobation. Jephtha was the son of a prostitute, brought up with the legitimate children, and the story of Tamar is instructive. But the legal codes were extremely severe on Jewish maidens who became prostitutes (the offense was quite tolerable in strange women), while Hebrew moralists exercised their invectives against prostitution; it is sufficient to refer to a well-known passage in the Book of Proverbs (see art. "Harlot," by Cheyne, in the Encyclopædia Biblica). Mahomed also severely condemned prostitution, though somewhat more tolerant to it in slave women; according to Haleby, however, prostitution was practically unknown in Islam during the first centuries after the Prophet's time.
In many areas of Western Asia, where barbarism had developed significantly, prostitution was present, though typically frowned upon. The Hebrews were aware of it, and historical references in the Bible to prostitutes suggest little disapproval. Jephtha was the son of a prostitute, raised alongside legitimate children, and the story of Tamar is informative. However, the legal codes were very harsh on Jewish maidens who became prostitutes (the act was more acceptable when it involved foreign women), while Hebrew moralists criticized prostitution; it's enough to mention a well-known passage in the Book of Proverbs (see art. "Harlot," by Cheyne, in the Encyclopædia Biblica). Muhammad also strongly condemned prostitution, although he was somewhat more lenient towards it when it involved slave women; according to Haleby, prostitution was effectively nonexistent in Islam during the early centuries after the Prophet's time.
The Persian adherents of the somewhat ascetic Zendavesta also knew prostitution, and regarded it with repulsion: "It is the Gahi [the courtesan, as an incarnation of the female demon, Gahi], O Spitama Zarathustra! who mixes in her the seed of the faithful and the unfaithful, of the worshipper of Mazda and the worshipper of the Dævas, of the wicked and the righteous. Her look dries up one-third of the mighty floods that run from the mountains, O Zarathustra; her look withers one-third of the beautiful, golden-hued, growing plants, O Zarathustra; her look withers one-third of the strength of Spenta Armaiti [the earth]; and her touch withers in the faithful one-third of his good thoughts, of his good words, of his good deeds, one-third of his strength, of his victorious power, of his holiness. Verily I say unto thee, O Spitama Zarathustra! such creatures ought to be killed even more than gliding snakes, than howling wolves, than the she-wolf that falls upon the fold, or than the she-frog that falls upon the waters with her thousandfold brood" (Zend-Avesta, the Vendidad, translated by James Darmesteter, Farfad XVIII).
The Persian followers of the somewhat ascetic Zendavesta also recognized prostitution and viewed it with disgust: "It is the Gahi [the courtesan, as an embodiment of the female demon, Gahi], O Spitama Zarathustra! who mixes within her the seed of both the faithful and the unfaithful, of the worshippers of Mazda and the worshippers of the Dævas, of the wicked and the righteous. Her gaze dries up one-third of the powerful rivers that flow from the mountains, O Zarathustra; her gaze withers one-third of the beautiful, golden-hued, thriving plants, O Zarathustra; her gaze withers one-third of the strength of Spenta Armaiti [the earth]; and her touch diminishes in the faithful one-third of his good thoughts, good words, good deeds, one-third of his strength, his victorious power, his holiness. Truly I tell you, O Spitama Zarathustra! such beings should be eliminated even more than slithering snakes, howling wolves, the she-wolf that attacks the flock, or the she-frog that descends upon the waters with her countless offspring" (Zend-Avesta, the Vendidad, translated by James Darmesteter, Farfad XVIII).
In practice, however, prostitution is well established in the modern East. Thus in the Tartar-Turcoman region houses of prostitution lying outside the paths frequented by Christians have been described by a writer who appears to be well informed ("Orientalische Prostitution," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, 1907, Bd. ii, Heft 1). These houses are not regarded as immoral or forbidden, but as places in which the visitor will find a woman who gives him for a few hours the illusion of being in his own home, with the pleasure of enjoying her songs, dances, and recitations, and finally her body. Payment is made at the door, and no subsequent question of money arises; the visitor is henceforth among friends, almost as if in his own family. He treats the prostitute almost as if she were his wife, and no indecorum or coarseness of speech occurs. "There is no obscenity in the Oriental brothel." At the same time there is no artificial pretence of innocence.
In reality, though, prostitution is a well-established part of modern Eastern society. For example, in the Tartar-Turcoman region, there are houses of prostitution located away from the areas frequented by Christians, as noted by a knowledgeable writer ("Orientalische Prostitution," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, 1907, Bd. ii, Heft 1). These houses are not seen as immoral or prohibited; instead, they are viewed as places where visitors can experience the comfort of having a woman who offers them, for a few hours, the illusion of being at home, enjoying her songs, dances, and stories, and ultimately her body. Payment is handled at the entrance, and there are no further financial discussions; from that point on, the visitor feels like he is among friends, almost as if he were with family. He interacts with the prostitute as if she were his wife, and there is no indecency or vulgarity in conversation. "There is no obscenity in the Oriental brothel." Moreover, there is no fake pretense of innocence.
In Eastern Asia, among the peoples of Mongolian stock, especially in China, we find prostitution firmly established and organized on a practical business basis. Prostitution is here accepted and viewed with no serious disfavor, but the prostitute herself is, nevertheless, treated with contempt. Young children are frequently sold to be trained to a life of prostitution, educated accordingly, and kept shut up from the world. Young widows (remarriage being disapproved) frequently also slide into a life of prostitution. Chinese prostitutes often end through opium and the ravages of syphilis (see, e.g., Coltman's The Chinese, 1900, Ch. VII). In ancient China, it is said prostitutes were a superior class and occupied a position somewhat similar to that of the hetairæ in Greece. Even in modern China, however, where they are very numerous, and the flower boats, in which in towns by the sea they usually live, very luxurious, it is chiefly for entertainment, according to some writers, that they are resorted to. Tschang Ki Tong, military attaché in Paris (as quoted by Ploss and Bartels), describes the flower boat as less analogous to a European brothel than to a café chantant; the young Chinaman comes here for music, for tea, for agreeable conversation with the flower-maidens, who are by no means necessarily called upon to minister to the lust of their visitors.
In East Asia, particularly among Mongolian people in China, prostitution is well-established and operates as a practical business. It's accepted and not seriously frowned upon, but the sex workers themselves are still treated with disdain. Young children are often sold to be groomed for a life of prostitution, educated for it, and kept away from the outside world. Young widows, who are discouraged from remarrying, often end up in prostitution as well. Chinese sex workers frequently succumb to opium addiction and the effects of syphilis (see, e.g., Coltman's The Chinese, 1900, Ch. VII). In ancient China, it is said that prostitutes were considered a superior class and held a position somewhat similar to that of the hetairæ in Greece. Even in modern China, where they are quite numerous and the flower boats where they typically live are luxurious, some writers claim that they mainly serve as entertainment. Tschang Ki Tong, a military attaché in Paris (as quoted by Ploss and Bartels), describes the flower boat as being less like a European brothel and more like a café chantant; young men come here for music, tea, and pleasant conversation with the flower maidens, who are not necessarily expected to fulfill their visitors' sexual desires.
In Japan, the prostitute's lot is not so degraded as in China. The greater refinement of Japanese civilization allows the prostitute to retain a higher degree of self-respect. She is sometimes regarded with pity, but less often with contempt. She may associate openly with men, ultimately be married, even to men of good social class, and rank as a respectable woman. "In riding from Tokio to Yokohama, the past winter," Coltman observes (op. cit., p. 113), "I saw a party of four young men and three quite pretty and gaily-painted prostitutes, in the same car, who were having a glorious time. They had two or three bottles of various liquors, oranges, and fancy cakes, and they ate, drank and sang, besides playing jokes on each other and frolicking like so many kittens. You may travel the whole length of the Chinese Empire and never witness such a scene." Yet the history of Japanese prostitutes (which has been written in an interesting and well-informed book, The Nightless City, by an English student of sociology who remains anonymous) shows that prostitution in Japan has not only been severely regulated, but very widely looked down upon, and that Japanese prostitutes have often had to suffer greatly; they were at one time practically slaves and often treated with much hardship. They are free now, and any condition approaching slavery is strictly prohibited and guarded against. It would seem, however, that the palmiest days of Japanese prostitution lay some centuries back. Up to the middle of the eighteenth century Japanese prostitutes were highly accomplished in singing, dancing, music, etc. Towards this period, however, they seem to have declined in social consideration and to have ceased to be well educated. Yet even to-day, says Matignon ("La Prostitution au Japon," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, October, 1906), less infamy attaches to prostitution in Japan than in Europe, while at the same time there is less immorality in Japan than in Europe. Though prostitution is organized like the postal or telegraph service, there is also much clandestine prostitution. The prostitution quarters are clean, beautiful and well-kept, but the Japanese prostitutes have lost much of their native good taste in costume by trying to imitate European fashions. It was when prostitution began to decline two centuries ago, that the geishas first appeared and were organized in such a way that they should not, if possible, compete as prostitutes with the recognized and licensed inhabitants of the Yoshiwara, as the quarter is called to which prostitutes are confined. The geishas, of course, are not prostitutes, though their virtue may not always be impregnable, and in social position they correspond to actresses in Europe.
In Japan, the situation for prostitutes is not as degraded as it is in China. The higher refinement of Japanese society allows prostitutes to maintain a greater sense of self-respect. They are sometimes seen with pity, but less often with disdain. They can openly associate with men, eventually get married—sometimes even to respectable men—and be considered respectable women. "While traveling from Tokyo to Yokohama last winter," Coltman notes (op. cit., p. 113), "I saw a group of four young men and three pretty, brightly painted prostitutes in the same train car, having a fantastic time. They had two or three bottles of different liquors, oranges, and fancy cakes, and they ate, drank, sang, played pranks on each other, and frolicked like kittens. You could travel the entire length of the Chinese Empire and never see such a scene." However, the history of Japanese prostitutes (noted in an interesting and well-informed book, The Nightless City, by an anonymous English sociology student) demonstrates that prostitution in Japan has been heavily regulated and widely looked down upon, and that Japanese prostitutes have often faced significant hardships; they were once nearly enslaved and often treated very poorly. They are free now, and any conditions resembling slavery are strictly prohibited. Nevertheless, it seems the prime days of Japanese prostitution were centuries ago. Up until the middle of the eighteenth century, Japanese prostitutes were highly skilled in singing, dancing, and music. However, during this period, their social status appears to have declined, and they became less educated. Even today, Matignon states ("La Prostitution au Japon," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, October 1906) that less stigma is attached to prostitution in Japan than in Europe, while there is also less immorality in Japan than in Europe. Although prostitution is organized similarly to postal or telegraph services, there is also a significant amount of clandestine prostitution. The prostitution districts are clean, beautiful, and well-maintained, but Japanese prostitutes have lost much of their original sense of style by attempting to imitate European fashions. It was when prostitution began to decline two centuries ago that geishas first appeared and were organized in a way to avoid directly competing as prostitutes with the recognized and licensed workers of Yoshiwara, the district where prostitutes are confined. Geishas, of course, are not prostitutes, although their virtue may not always be completely secure, and socially they are comparable to actresses in Europe.
In Korea, at all events before Korea fell into the hands of the Japanese, it would seem that there was no distinction between the class of dancing girls and prostitutes. "Among the courtesans," Angus Hamilton states, "the mental abilities are trained and developed with a view to making them brilliant and entertaining companions. These 'leaves of sunlight' are called gisaing, and correspond to the geishas of Japan. Officially, they are attached to a department of government, and are controlled by a bureau of their own, in common with the Court musicians. They are supported from the national treasury, and they are in evidence at official dinners and all palace entertainments. They read and recite; they dance and sing; they become accomplished artists and musicians. They dress with exceptional taste; they move with exceeding grace; they are delicate in appearance, very frail and very human, very tender, sympathetic, and imaginative." But though they are certainly the prettiest women in Korea, move in the highest society, and might become concubines of the Emperor, they are not allowed to marry men of good class (Angus Hamilton, Korea, p. 52).
In Korea, at least before the country was taken over by the Japanese, there wasn't a difference between dancing girls and prostitutes. "Among the courtesans," Angus Hamilton mentions, "their mental skills are honed and developed to make them captivating and entertaining companions. These 'leaves of sunlight' are called gisaing, similar to the geishas of Japan. They are officially attached to a government department and overseen by their own bureau, just like the Court musicians. They're funded by the national treasury and are present at official dinners and all palace events. They read and recite; they dance and sing; they become skilled artists and musicians. They dress with exceptional style; they move with great elegance; they appear delicate, very fragile, and very human, gentle, empathetic, and imaginative." However, even though they are undoubtedly the most beautiful women in Korea, are part of high society, and could become concubines of the Emperor, they are not allowed to marry men of good standing (Angus Hamilton, Korea, p. 52).
The history of European prostitution, as of so many other modern institutions, may properly be said to begin in Rome. Here at the outset we already find that inconsistently mixed attitude towards prostitution which to-day is still preserved. In Greece it was in many respects different. Greece was nearer to the days of religious prostitution, and the sincerity and refinement of Greek civilization made it possible for the better kind of prostitute to exert, and often be worthy to exert, an influence in all departments of life which she has never been able to exercise since, except perhaps occasionally, in a much slighter degree, in France. The course, vigorous, practical Roman was quite ready to tolerate the prostitute, but he was not prepared to carry that toleration to its logical results; he never felt bound to harmonize inconsistent facts of life. Cicero, a moralist of no mean order, without expressing approval of prostitution, yet could not understand how anyone should wish to prohibit youths from commerce with prostitutes, such severity being out of harmony with all the customs of the past or the present.[142] But the superior class of Roman prostitutes, the bonæ mulieres, had no such dignified position as the Greek hetairæ. Their influence was indeed immense, but it was confined, as it is in the case of their European successors to-day, to fashions, customs, and arts. There was always a certain moral rigidity in the Roman which prevented him from yielding far in this direction. He encouraged brothels, but he only entered them with covered head and face concealed in his cloak. In the same way, while he tolerated the prostitute, beyond a certain point he sharply curtailed her privileges. Not only was she deprived of all influence in the higher concerns of life, but she might not even wear the vitta or the stola; she could indeed go almost naked if she pleased, but she must not ape the emblems of the respectable Roman matron.[143]
The history of European prostitution, like many other modern institutions, really starts in Rome. From the beginning, we see a mixed attitude towards prostitution that still exists today. In Greece, the situation was different in many ways. Greece was closer to the days of religious prostitution, and the sincerity and refinement of Greek civilization allowed some prostitutes to have, and often deserve, influence in all areas of life, a level of influence they have rarely held since, except maybe occasionally in France. The straightforward, practical Romans were willing to tolerate prostitution, but they weren’t prepared to take that tolerance to its logical conclusion; they didn’t feel the need to reconcile contradictory aspects of life. Cicero, a notable moralist, didn’t approve of prostitution but couldn’t understand why anyone would want to stop young men from interacting with prostitutes, as such strictness was inconsistent with all past and present customs. However, the higher class of Roman prostitutes, the bonæ mulieres, didn’t hold a dignified position like the Greek hetairæ. Their influence was significant but limited, much like their European counterparts today, to trends, customs, and arts. There was always a certain moral rigidity in the Romans that kept them from fully accepting this. They supported brothels, but they only entered them with their heads covered and their faces hidden in their cloaks. Similarly, while they tolerated prostitutes, they sharply limited their privileges. Not only were they excluded from any significant role in higher life, but they were also forbidden from wearing the vitta or the stola; they could almost go naked if they wanted, but they couldn’t imitate the symbols of respectable Roman matrons.
The rise of Christianity to political power produced on the whole less change of policy than might have been anticipated. The Christian rulers had to deal practically as best they might with a very mixed, turbulent, and semi-pagan world. The leading fathers of the Church were inclined to tolerate prostitution for the avoidance of greater evils, and Christian emperors, like their pagan predecessors, were willing to derive a tax from prostitution. The right of prostitution to exist was, however, no longer so unquestionably recognized as in pagan days, and from time to time some vigorous ruler sought to repress prostitution by severe enactments. The younger Theodosius and Valentinian definitely ordained that there should be no more brothels and that anyone giving shelter to a prostitute should be punished. Justinian confirmed that measure and ordered that all panders were to be exiled on pain of death. These enactments were quite vain. But during a thousand years they were repeated again and again in various parts of Europe, and invariably with the same fruitless or worse than fruitless results. Theodoric, king of the Visigoths, punished with death those who promoted prostitution, and Recared, a Catholic king of the same people in the sixth century, prohibited prostitution altogether and ordered that a prostitute, when found, should receive three hundred strokes of the whip and be driven out of the city. Charlemagne, as well as Genserich in Carthage, and later Frederick Barbarossa in Germany, made severe laws against prostitution which were all of no effect, for even if they seemed to be effective for the time the reaction was all the greater afterwards.[144]
The rise of Christianity to political power led to less change in policy than expected. The Christian rulers had to cope with a chaotic, mixed, and semi-pagan world as best they could. The main leaders of the Church were inclined to tolerate prostitution to avoid worse problems, and Christian emperors, like their pagan predecessors, were willing to collect taxes from prostitution. However, the recognition of prostitution's right to exist was no longer as unquestioned as it had been in pagan times, and occasionally some strong rulers tried to crack down on it with strict laws. The younger Theodosius and Valentinian clearly stated that there should be no more brothels and that anyone who sheltered a prostitute would be punished. Justinian upheld that decision and commanded that all pimps be exiled under the threat of death. These laws were largely ineffective. Yet, for a thousand years, they were repeated across various parts of Europe, consistently yielding the same ineffective or even worse outcomes. Theodoric, king of the Visigoths, sentenced to death those who promoted prostitution, and Recared, a Catholic king of the same people in the sixth century, banned prostitution entirely and ordered that any prostitute found should receive three hundred lashes and be expelled from the city. Charlemagne, Genserich in Carthage, and later Frederick Barbarossa in Germany enforced strict laws against prostitution, all of which had no real effect, as even if they seemed to work temporarily, the backlash was always more significant later.
It is in France that the most persistent efforts have been made to combat prostitution. Most notable of all were the efforts of the King and Saint, Louis IX. In 1254 St. Louis ordained that prostitutes should be driven out altogether and deprived of all their money and goods, even to their mantles and gowns. In 1256 he repeated this ordinance and in 1269, before setting out for the Crusades, he ordered the destruction of all places of prostitution. The repetition of those decrees shows how ineffectual they were. They even made matters worse, for prostitutes were forced to mingle with the general population and their influence was thus extended. St. Louis was unable to put down prostitution even in his own camp in the East, and it existed outside his own tent. His legislation, however, was frequently imitated by subsequent rulers of France, even to the middle of the seventeenth century, always with the same ineffectual and worse results. In 1560 an edict of Charles IX abolished brothels, but the number of prostitutes was thereby increased rather than diminished, while many new kinds of brothels appeared in unsuspected shapes and were more dangerous than the more recognized brothels which had been suppressed.[145] In spite of all such legislation, or because of it, there has been no country in which prostitution has played a more conspicuous part.[146]
It is in France that the most persistent efforts have been made to combat prostitution. Most notable of all were the efforts of the King and Saint, Louis IX. In 1254, St. Louis ordered that prostitutes should be expelled entirely and stripped of all their money and belongings, even their cloaks and dresses. In 1256, he repeated this order, and in 1269, before heading to the Crusades, he commanded the destruction of all places of prostitution. The repeated decrees show how ineffective they were. They even made things worse, as prostitutes were forced to blend in with the general population, which extended their influence. St. Louis was unable to eliminate prostitution even in his own camp in the East, and it was present right outside his tent. However, his legislation was often imitated by later rulers of France, even up to the mid-seventeenth century, always with the same ineffective and detrimental outcomes. In 1560, an edict from Charles IX abolished brothels, but this only increased the number of prostitutes rather than decreasing it, while many new types of brothels emerged in unexpected forms and were more dangerous than the previously recognized brothels that had been closed down.[145] Despite all this legislation, or because of it, there has been no country in which prostitution has played a more prominent role.[146]
At Mantua, so great was the repulsion aroused by prostitutes that they were compelled to buy in the markets any fruit or bread that had been soiled by the mere touch of their hands. It was so also in Avignon in 1243. In Catalonia they could not sit at the same table as a lady or a knight or kiss any honorable person.[147] Even in Venice, the paradise of prostitution, numerous and severe regulations were passed against it, and it was long before the Venetian rulers resigned themselves to its toleration and regulation.[148]
At Mantua, the disgust directed at prostitutes was so intense that they were forced to buy any fruit or bread in the markets that had been touched by their hands. The same was true in Avignon in 1243. In Catalonia, they couldn’t sit at the same table as a lady or a knight or kiss any respectable person.[147] Even in Venice, often seen as the center of prostitution, many strict laws were enacted against it, and it took a long time for the Venetian leaders to accept its existence and regulate it.[148]
The last vigorous attempt to uproot prostitution in Europe was that of Maria Theresa at Vienna in the middle of the eighteenth century. Although of such recent date it may be mentioned here because it was mediæval alike in its conception and methods. Its object indeed, was to suppress not only prostitution, but fornication generally, and the means adopted were fines, imprisonment, whipping and torture. The supposed causes of fornication were also dealt with severely; short dresses were prohibited; billiard rooms and cafés were inspected; no waitresses were allowed, and when discovered, a waitress was liable to be handcuffed and carried off by the police. The Chastity Commission, under which these measures were rigorously carried out, was, apparently, established in 1751 and was quietly abolished by the Emperor Joseph II, in the early years of his reign. It was the general opinion that this severe legislation was really ineffective, and that it caused much more serious evils than it cured.[149] It is certain in any case that, for a long time past, illegitimacy has been more prevalent in Vienna than in any other great European capital.
The last strong effort to eliminate prostitution in Europe was made by Maria Theresa in Vienna in the mid-eighteenth century. Even though it's relatively recent, it deserves mention here because it was medieval in its ideas and methods. The goal was to not only suppress prostitution but also fornication in general, and the methods used included fines, imprisonment, whipping, and torture. The assumed causes of fornication were also harshly punished; short dresses were banned, billiard halls and cafés were inspected, and waitresses were not allowed. If caught, a waitress could be handcuffed and taken away by the police. The Chastity Commission, which enforced these measures strictly, was apparently established in 1751 and was quietly disbanded by Emperor Joseph II in the early years of his reign. The general opinion was that this strict legislation was actually ineffective and created far more serious problems than it solved.[149] It is certain that, for a long time before, illegitimacy has been more common in Vienna than in any other major European capital.
Yet the attitude towards prostitutes was always mixed and inconsistent at different places or different times, or even at the same time and place. Dufour has aptly compared their position to that of the mediæval Jews; they were continually persecuted, ecclesiastically, civilly, and socially, yet all classes were glad to have recourse to them and it was impossible to do without them. In some countries, including England in the fourteenth century, a special costume was imposed on prostitutes as a mark of infamy.[150] Yet in many respects no infamy whatever attached to prostitution. High placed officials could claim payment of their expenses incurred in visiting prostitutes when traveling on public business. Prostitution sometimes played an official part in festivities and receptions accorded by great cities to royal guests, and the brothel might form an important part of the city's hospitality. When the Emperor Sigismund came to Ulm in 1434 the streets were illuminated at such times as he or his suite desired to visit the common brothel. Brothels under municipal protection are found in the thirteenth century in Augsburg, in Vienna, in Hamburg.[151] In France the best known abbayes of prostitutes were those of Toulouse and Montpellier.[152] Durkheim is of opinion that in the early middle ages, before this period, free love and marriage were less severely differentiated. It was the rise of the middle class, he considers, anxious to protect their wives and daughters, which led to a regulated and publicly recognized attempt to direct debauchery into a separate channel, brought under control.[153] These brothels constituted a kind of public service, the directors of them being regarded almost as public officials, bound to keep a certain number of prostitutes, to charge according to a fixed tariff, and not to receive into their houses girls belonging to the neighborhood. The institutions of this kind lasted for three centuries. It was, in part, perhaps, the impetus of the new Protestant movement, but mainly the terrible devastation produced by the introduction of syphilis from America at the end of the fifteenth century which, as Burckhardt and others have pointed out, led to the decline of the mediæval brothels.[154]
Yet the attitude toward sex workers has always been mixed and inconsistent, varying by location and time, or even within the same place and period. Dufour has aptly compared their situation to that of medieval Jews; they were constantly persecuted—religiously, legally, and socially—yet all social classes were eager to use their services, making it impossible to do without them. In some countries, like England in the fourteenth century, sex workers were required to wear a specific outfit as a badge of shame.[150] Yet, in many ways, there was no real shame attached to prostitution. High-ranking officials could claim reimbursement for expenses when visiting sex workers while on official business. Prostitution sometimes played a formal role in celebrations and receptions held by major cities for royal visitors, and brothels could be an important aspect of a city's hospitality. When Emperor Sigismund visited Ulm in 1434, the streets were lit whenever he or his entourage wanted to go to the public brothel. Municipalities provided protection for brothels as early as the thirteenth century in Augsburg, Vienna, and Hamburg.[151] In France, the most famous abbayes of sex workers were in Toulouse and Montpellier.[152] Durkheim suggests that in the early Middle Ages, before this time, the distinctions between free love and marriage were less strict. He believes it was the rise of the middle class, eager to protect their wives and daughters, that led to a regulated and publicly acknowledged effort to channel debauchery into a separate framework that could be controlled.[153] These brothels served a kind of public interest, with their managers seen as public officials, obligated to maintain a certain number of sex workers, charge set prices, and not allow local girls into their establishments. These institutions lasted for three centuries. The decline of medieval brothels was influenced in part by the rise of the new Protestant movement, but mainly by the devastating spread of syphilis from America at the end of the fifteenth century, which, as Burckhardt and others have noted, contributed to their downfall.[154]
The superior modern prostitute, the "courtesan" who had no connection with the brothel, seems to have been the outcome of the Renaissance and made her appearance in Italy at the end of the fifteenth century. "Courtesan" or "cortegiana" meant a lady following the court, and the term began at this time to be applied to a superior prostitute observing a certain degree of decorum and restraint.[155] In the papal court of Alexander Borgia the courtesan flourished even when her conduct was not altogether dignified. Burchard, the faithful and unimpeachable chronicler of this court, describes in his diary how, one evening, in October, 1501, the Pope sent for fifty courtesans to be brought to his chamber; after supper, in the presence of Cæsar Borgia and his young sister Lucrezia, they danced with the servitors and others who were present, at first clothed, afterwards naked. The candlesticks with lighted candles were then placed upon the floor and chestnuts thrown among them, to be gathered by the women crawling between the candlesticks on their hands and feet. Finally a number of prizes were brought forth to be awarded to those men "qui pluries dictos meretrices carnaliter agnoscerent," the victor in the contest being decided according to the judgment of the spectators.[156] This scene, enacted publicly in the Apostolic palace and serenely set forth by the impartial secretary, is at once a notable episode in the history of modern prostitution and one of the most illuminating illustrations we possess of the paganism of the Renaissance.
The modern high-class prostitute, the "courtesan," who had no ties to a brothel, seems to have emerged during the Renaissance and first appeared in Italy at the end of the fifteenth century. "Courtesan" or "cortegiana" referred to a lady associated with the court, and around this time, the term began to be used for a higher-class prostitute who maintained a certain level of decorum and restraint.[155] In the papal court of Alexander Borgia, the courtesan thrived even when her behavior wasn't completely dignified. Burchard, the reliable and trustworthy chronicler of this court, details in his diary how, one evening in October 1501, the Pope called for fifty courtesans to be brought to his chamber; after dinner, in the presence of Cæsar Borgia and his young sister Lucrezia, they danced with the attendants and others present, first clothed and then naked. Candlesticks with lit candles were placed on the floor with chestnuts scattered among them for the women to crawl between on their hands and knees to collect. Finally, several prizes were presented to be awarded to those men "qui pluries dictos meretrices carnaliter agnoscerent," with the winner of the contest determined by the judgment of the audience.[156] This scene, performed publicly in the Apostolic palace and calmly recounted by the impartial secretary, represents a significant moment in the history of modern prostitution and one of the clearest examples we have of the paganism of the Renaissance.
Before the term "courtesan" came into repute, prostitutes were even in Italy commonly called "sinners," peccatrice. The change, Graf remarks in a very interesting study of the Renaissance prostitute ("Una Cortigiana fra Mille," Attraverso il Cinquecento, pp. 217-351), "reveals a profound alteration in ideas and in life;" a term that suggested infamy gave place to one that suggested approval, and even honor, for the courts of the Renaissance period represented the finest culture of the time. The best of these courtesans seem to have been not altogether unworthy of the honor they received. We can detect this in their letters. There is a chapter on the letters of Renaissance prostitutes, especially those of Camilla de Pisa which are marked by genuine passion, in Lothar Schmidt's Frauenbriefe der Renaissance. The famous Imperia, called by a Pope in the early years of the sixteenth century "nobilissimum Romæ scortum," knew Latin and could write Italian verse. Other courtesans knew Italian and Latin poetry by heart, while they were accomplished in music, dancing, and speech. We are reminded of ancient Greece, and Graf, discussing how far the Renaissance courtesans resembled the hetairæ, finds a very considerable likeness, especially in culture and influence, though with some differences due to the antagonism between religion and prostitution at the later period.
Before the term "courtesan" became popular, prostitutes in Italy were often referred to as "sinners," peccatrice. The shift, as Graf notes in an intriguing study of the Renaissance prostitute ("Una Cortigiana fra Mille," Attraverso il Cinquecento, pp. 217-351), "shows a profound change in ideas and in life;" a term that suggested shame was replaced by one that implied respect, and even honor, as the courts of the Renaissance represented the peak of culture at the time. The best of these courtesans seem to have been somewhat deserving of the respect they received. We can see this in their letters. There is a chapter on the letters of Renaissance prostitutes, particularly those of Camilla de Pisa, which are full of genuine emotion, in Lothar Schmidt's Frauenbriefe der Renaissance. The famous Imperia, who was referred to by a Pope in the early sixteenth century as "nobilissimum Romæ scortum," knew Latin and could write Italian poetry. Other courtesans had Italian and Latin poems memorized, and they were skilled in music, dancing, and speaking. This reminds us of ancient Greece, and Graf, when discussing how similar the Renaissance courtesans were to the hetairæ, finds a significant similarity, especially in culture and influence, though with some differences due to the conflict between religion and prostitution in that later period.
The most distinguished figure in every respect among the courtesans of that time was certainly Tullia D'Aragona. She was probably the daughter of Cardinal D'Aragona (an illegitimate scion of the Spanish royal family) by a Ferrarese courtesan who became his mistress. Tullia has gained a high reputation by her verse. Her best sonnet is addressed to a youth of twenty, whom she passionately loved, but who did not return her love. Her Guerrino Meschino, a translation from the Spanish, is a very pure and chaste work. She was a woman of refined instincts and aspirations, and once at least she abandoned her life of prostitution. She was held in high esteem and respect. When, in 1546, Cosimo, Duke of Florence, ordered all prostitutes to wear a yellow veil or handkerchief as a public badge of their profession, Tullia appealed to the Duchess, a Spanish lady of high character, and received permission to dispense with this badge on account of her "rara scienzia di poesia et filosofia." She dedicated her Rime to the Duchess. Tullia D'Aragona was very beautiful, with yellow hair, and remarkably large and bright eyes, which dominated those who came near her. She was of proud bearing and inspired unusual respect (G. Biagi, "Un' Etera Romana," Nuova Antologia, vol. iv, 1886, pp. 655-711; S. Bongi, Rivista critica della Letteratura Italiana, 1886, IV, p. 186).
The most prominent figure among the courtesans of that time was definitely Tullia D'Aragona. She was likely the daughter of Cardinal D'Aragona (an illegitimate member of the Spanish royal family) by a courtesan from Ferrara who became his mistress. Tullia earned a strong reputation through her poetry. Her best sonnet is dedicated to a twenty-year-old youth she loved passionately, even though he didn’t return her feelings. Her Guerrino Meschino, a translation from Spanish, is a very pure and chaste work. She was a woman of refined instincts and aspirations, and at least once, she turned away from her life as a prostitute. She was highly regarded and respected. When, in 1546, Cosimo, Duke of Florence, required all prostitutes to wear a yellow veil or handkerchief as a public sign of their profession, Tullia appealed to the Duchess, a Spanish woman of high character, and received permission to forgo this badge because of her "rare knowledge of poetry and philosophy." She dedicated her Rime to the Duchess. Tullia D'Aragona was very beautiful, with blonde hair and strikingly large, bright eyes that captivated those who approached her. She had a proud demeanor and commanded exceptional respect (G. Biagi, "Un' Etera Romana," Nuova Antologia, vol. iv, 1886, pp. 655-711; S. Bongi, Rivista critica della Letteratura Italiana, 1886, IV, p. 186).
Tullia D'Aragona was clearly not a courtesan at heart. Perhaps the most typical example of the Renaissance courtesan at her best is furnished by Veronica Franco, born in 1546 at Venice, of middle class family and in early life married to a doctor. Of her also it has been said that, while by profession a prostitute, she was by inclination a poet. But she appears to have been well content with her profession, and never ashamed of it. Her life and character have been studied by Arturo Graf, and more slightly in a little book by Tassini. She was highly cultured, and knew several languages; she also sang well and played on many instruments. In one of her letters she advises a youth who was madly in love with her that if he wishes to obtain her favors he must leave off importuning her and devote himself tranquilly to study. "You know well," she adds, "that all those who claim to be able to gain my love, and who are extremely dear to me, are strenuous in studious discipline.... If my fortune allowed it I would spend all my time quietly in the academies of virtuous men." The Diotimas and Aspasias of antiquity, as Graf comments, would not have demanded so much of their lovers. In her poems it is possible to trace some of her love histories, and she often shows herself torn by jealousy at the thought that perhaps another woman may approach her beloved. Once she fell in love with an ecclesiastic, possibly a bishop, with whom she had no relationships, and after a long absence, which healed her love, she and he became sincere friends. Once she was visited by Henry III of France, who took away her portrait, while on her part she promised to dedicate a book to him; she so far fulfilled this as to address some sonnets to him and a letter; "neither did the King feel ashamed of his intimacy with the courtesan," remarks Graf, "nor did she suspect that he would feel ashamed of it." When Montaigne passed through Venice she sent him a little book of hers, as we learn from his Journal, though they do not appear to have met. Tintoret was one of her many distinguished friends, and she was a strenuous advocate of the high qualities of modern, as compared with ancient, art. Her friendships were affectionate, and she even seems to have had various grand ladies among her friends. She was, however, so far from being ashamed of her profession of courtesan that in one of her poems she affirms she has been taught by Apollo other arts besides those he is usually regarded as teaching:
Tullia D'Aragona was clearly not a courtesan at heart. Perhaps the most typical example of the Renaissance courtesan at her best is provided by Veronica Franco, born in 1546 in Venice, from a middle-class family and married early in life to a doctor. It has also been said about her that, while she worked as a prostitute, her true passion was poetry. However, she seemed quite satisfied with her profession and was never ashamed of it. Arturo Graf has studied her life and character, and there is a smaller book by Tassini that touches on her as well. She was highly educated, spoke several languages, sang beautifully, and played multiple instruments. In one of her letters, she advises a young man who was madly in love with her that if he wants to win her affection, he should stop pestering her and dedicate himself calmly to his studies. "You know well," she adds, "that all those who claim they can win my love, and who are very dear to me, are deeply committed to their studies.... If my circumstances allowed, I would spend all my time peacefully in the academies of virtuous men." As Graf points out, the Diotimas and Aspasias of ancient times wouldn't have required so much from their lovers. In her poems, you can trace some of her love stories, and she often reveals her jealousy at the thought of another woman getting close to her beloved. Once, she fell in love with a churchman, possibly a bishop, with whom she had no intimate relations, and after a long absence that healed her feelings, they became genuine friends. At one point, Henry III of France visited her, taking her portrait with him, while she promised to dedicate a book to him; she managed to fulfill this promise by writing him some sonnets and a letter. "Neither did the King feel ashamed of his connection with the courtesan," notes Graf, "nor did she imagine he would feel embarrassed about it." When Montaigne passed through Venice, she sent him one of her little books, as mentioned in his Journal, although they did not appear to meet. Tintoret was one of her many distinguished friends, and she strongly supported the value of modern art compared to ancient art. Her friendships were warm, and she even seemed to have various noble ladies among her friends. However, she was so far from being ashamed of her role as a courtesan that in one of her poems, she claims to have learned from Apollo other arts beyond the ones he is usually thought to teach:
In a certain catalogo of the prices of Venetian courtesans Veronica is assigned only 2 scudi for her favors, while the courtesan to whom the catalogue is dedicated is set down at 25 scudi. Graf thinks there may be some mistake or malice here, and an Italian gentleman of the time states that she required not less than 50 scudi from those to whom she was willing to accord what Montaigne called the "negotiation entière."
In a particular catalog of the prices of Venetian courtesans, Veronica is listed as charging only 2 scudi for her favors, while the courtesan the catalog is centered around is priced at 25 scudi. Graf believes there might be some error or ill intent involved, and an Italian gentleman from that time claims she demanded no less than 50 scudi from those she was willing to engage in what Montaigne referred to as the "full negotiation."
In regard to this matter it may be mentioned that, as stated by Bandello, it was the custom for a Venetian prostitute to have six or seven gentlemen at a time as her lovers. Each was entitled to come to sup and sleep with her on one night of the week, leaving her days free. They paid her so much per month, but she always definitely reserved the right to receive a stranger passing through Venice, if she wished, changing the time of her appointment with her lover for the night. The high and special prices which we find recorded are, of course, those demanded from the casual distinguished stranger who came to Venice as, once in the sixteenth century, Montaigne came.
In relation to this topic, it’s worth noting that, as Bandello pointed out, it was common for a Venetian prostitute to have six or seven gentlemen as her lovers at once. Each gentleman was allowed to dine and spend the night with her one night a week, keeping her days free. They paid her a monthly fee, but she always retained the right to entertain any passing stranger in Venice if she chose, shifting her appointment with her regular lover for the evening. The high and special rates we see documented were, of course, those charged to distinguished strangers visiting Venice, much like Montaigne did in the sixteenth century.
In 1580 (when not more than thirty-four) Veronica confessed to the Holy Office that she had had six children. In the same year she formed the design of founding a home, which should not be a monastery, where prostitutes who wished to abandon their mode of life could find a refuge with their children, if they had any. This seems to have led to the establishment of a Casa del Soccorso. In 1591 she died of fever, reconciled with God and blessed by many unfortunates. She had a good heart and a sound intellect, and was the last of the great Renaissance courtesans who revived Greek hetairism (Graf, Attraverso il Cinquecento, pp. 217-351). Even in sixteenth century Venice, however, it will be seen, Veronica Franco seems to have been not altogether at peace in the career of a courtesan. She was clearly not adapted for ordinary marriage, yet under the most favorable conditions that the modern world has ever offered it may still be doubted whether a prostitute's career can offer complete satisfaction to a woman of large heart and brain.
In 1580, at just thirty-four years old, Veronica admitted to the Holy Office that she had six children. That same year, she envisioned creating a home—not a monastery—where women who wanted to leave prostitution could find shelter along with their children, if they had any. This idea seems to have led to the establishment of a Casa del Soccorso. In 1591, she died of fever, reconciled with God and blessed by many who had suffered. She had a good heart and a sharp mind, and she was the last of the great Renaissance courtesans who revived the tradition of Greek hetairism (Graf, Attraverso il Cinquecento, pp. 217-351). Even in sixteenth-century Venice, it's evident that Veronica Franco was not entirely content in her role as a courtesan. While she clearly wasn't suited for a conventional marriage, it remains questionable whether a prostitute's lifestyle can truly fulfill a woman of great heart and intellect, even under the best circumstances the modern world has ever provided.
Ninon de Lenclos, who is frequently called "the last of the great courtesans," may seem an exception to the general rule as to the inability of a woman of good heart, high character, and fine intelligence to find satisfaction in a prostitute's life. But it is a total misconception alike of Ninon de Lenclos's temperament and her career to regard her as in any true sense a prostitute at all. A knowledge of even the barest outlines of her life ought to prevent such a mistake. Born early in the seventeenth century, she was of good family on both sides; her mother was a woman of severe life, but her father, a gentleman of Touraine, inspired her with his own Epicurean philosophy as well as his love of music. She was extremely well educated. At the age of sixteen or seventeen she had her first lover, the noble and valiant Gaspard de Coligny; he was followed for half a century by a long succession of other lovers, sometimes more than one at a time; three years was the longest period during which she was faithful to one lover. Her attractions lasted so long that, it is said, three generations of Sévignés were among her lovers. Tallemant des Réaux enables us to study in detail her liaisons.
Ninon de Lenclos, often referred to as "the last of the great courtesans," might appear to defy the notion that a woman with a good heart, strong character, and sharp mind can't find fulfillment in a prostitute's life. However, it's a complete misunderstanding of Ninon de Lenclos's nature and her life to see her as a true prostitute. Just knowing the basics of her life should clear up that misconception. Born in the early seventeenth century, she came from a reputable family on both sides; her mother was quite austere, but her father, a gentleman from Touraine, instilled in her his Epicurean beliefs and love for music. She was exceptionally well-educated. At around sixteen or seventeen, she had her first lover, the noble and brave Gaspard de Coligny, followed by a long stream of partners for the next fifty years, sometimes even more than one at a time; the longest she stayed faithful to any one lover was three years. Her allure lasted so long that, reportedly, three generations of Sévignés were among her lovers. Tallemant des Réaux gives us a detailed look at her liaisons.
It is not, however, the abundance of lovers which makes a woman a prostitute, but the nature of her relationships with them. Sainte-Beuve, in an otherwise admirable study of Ninon de Lenclos (Causeries du Lundi, vol. iv), seems to reckon her among the courtesans. But no woman is a prostitute unless she uses men as a source of pecuniary gain. Not only is there no evidence that this was the case with Ninon, but all the evidence excludes such a relationship. "It required much skill," said Voltaire, "and a great deal of love on her part, to induce her to accept presents." Tallemant, indeed, says that she sometimes took money from her lovers, but this statement probably involves nothing beyond what is contained in Voltaire's remark, and, in any case, Tallemant's gossip, though usually well-informed, was not always reliable. All are agreed as to her extreme disinterestedness.
It’s not the number of lovers that makes a woman a prostitute, but the nature of her relationships with them. Sainte-Beuve, in an otherwise great study of Ninon de Lenclos (Causeries du Lundi, vol. iv), seems to classify her among the courtesans. However, no woman is a prostitute unless she uses men to make money. There’s no evidence that this was true for Ninon, and all the evidence suggests the opposite. "It took a lot of skill," said Voltaire, "and a great deal of love on her part to get her to accept gifts." Tallemant does say that she sometimes accepted money from her lovers, but this likely doesn’t mean anything beyond what Voltaire mentioned, and Tallemant's gossip, while often accurate, wasn’t always trustworthy. Everyone agrees on her exceptional selflessness.
When we hear precisely of Ninon de Lenclos in connection with money, it is not as receiving a gift, but only as repaying a debt to an old lover, or restoring a large sum left with her for safe keeping when the owner was exiled. Such incidents are far from suggesting the professional prostitute of any age; they are rather the relationships which might exist between men friends. Ninon de Lenclos's character was in many respects far from perfect, but she combined many masculine virtues, and especially probity, with a temperament which, on the whole, was certainly feminine; she hated hypocrisy, and she was never influenced by pecuniary considerations. She was, moreover, never reckless, but always retained a certain self-restraint and temperance, even in eating and drinking, and, we are told, she never drank wine. She was, as Sainte-Beuve has remarked, the first to realize that there must be the same virtues for men and for women, and that it is absurd to reduce all feminine virtues to one. "Our sex has been burdened with all the frivolities," she wrote, "and men have reserved to themselves the essential qualities: I have made myself a man." She sometimes dressed as a man when riding (see, e.g., Correspondence Authentique of Ninon de Lenclos, with a good introduction by Emile Colombey). Consciously or not, she represented a new feminine idea at a period when—as we may see in many forgotten novels written by the women of that time—ideas were beginning to emerge in the feminine sphere. She was the first, and doubtless, from one point of view, the most extreme representative of a small and distinguished group of French women among whom Georges Sand is the finest personality.
When we specifically hear about Ninon de Lenclos in relation to money, it's not about receiving a gift but rather paying back a debt to an old lover or returning a large sum she held for safekeeping while the owner was in exile. These situations don’t imply the image of a professional prostitute from any era; instead, they resemble relationships that might exist between male friends. Ninon de Lenclos had a character that was far from perfect, but she embodied many masculine virtues, particularly honesty, alongside a temperament that was predominantly feminine; she despised hypocrisy and was never swayed by financial considerations. Additionally, she was never reckless, always maintaining a level of self-control and moderation, even in her eating and drinking habits, and it's said she never drank wine. As Sainte-Beuve noted, she was one of the first to understand that men and women should share the same virtues and that it was ridiculous to limit all feminine virtues to a single definition. "Our sex has been burdened with all the frivolities," she wrote, "and men have reserved for themselves the essential qualities: I have made myself a man." She sometimes dressed as a man while riding (see, e.g., Correspondence Authentique of Ninon de Lenclos, with a good introduction by Emile Colombey). Consciously or not, she represented a new feminine idea during a time when—evident in many forgotten novels written by women of that era—new ideas were beginning to emerge in the female sphere. She was the first and, in some respects, the most radical representative of a small but distinguished group of French women, among whom Georges Sand stands out as the most notable figure.
Thus it is idle to attempt to adorn the history of prostitution with the name of Ninon de Lenclos. A debauched old prostitute would never, like Ninon towards the end of her long life, have been able to retain or to conquer the affection and the esteem of many of the best men and women of her time; even to the austere Saint-Simon it seemed that there reigned in her little court a decorum which the greatest princesses cannot achieve. She was not a prostitute, but a woman of unique personality with a little streak of genius in it. That she was inimitable we need not perhaps greatly regret. In her old age, in 1699, her old friend and former lover, Saint-Evremond, wrote to her, with only a little exaggeration, that there were few princesses and few saints who would not leave their courts and their cloisters to change places with her. "If I had known beforehand what my life would be I would have hanged myself," was her oft-quoted answer. It is, indeed, a solitary phrase that slips in, perhaps as the expression of a momentary mood; one may make too much of it. More truly characteristic is the fine saying in which her Epicurean philosophy seems to stretch out towards Nietzsche: "La joie de l'esprit en marque la force."
It's pointless to try to embellish the history of prostitution with the name of Ninon de Lenclos. A debauched old prostitute would never, like Ninon in the later years of her long life, have been able to earn or maintain the affection and respect of many of the finest men and women of her time; even the strict Saint-Simon felt that there was a sense of decorum in her little court that the greatest princesses couldn't achieve. She wasn't a prostitute but a woman of exceptional character with a hint of genius. We might not greatly regret that she was inimitable. In her old age, in 1699, her longtime friend and former lover, Saint-Evremond, wrote to her, with a touch of exaggeration, that there were few princesses and few saints who wouldn’t leave their courts and cloisters to trade places with her. "If I had known beforehand what my life would be, I would have hanged myself," was her oft-quoted reply. This is, indeed, a solitary remark that might slip in as a reflection of a fleeting mood; one could read too much into it. More significantly, her Epicurean philosophy seems to reach out toward Nietzsche in her elegant saying: "La joie de l'esprit en marque la force."
The frank acceptance of prostitution by the spiritual or even the temporal power has since the Renaissance become more and more exceptional. The opposite extreme of attempting to uproot prostitution has also in practice been altogether abandoned. Sporadic attempts have indeed been made, here and there, to put down prostitution with a strong hand even in quite modern times. It is now, however, realized that in such a case the remedy is worse than the disease.
The open acceptance of prostitution by both spiritual and secular authorities has become increasingly rare since the Renaissance. On the other hand, the extreme of trying to eliminate prostitution entirely has also been practically abandoned. There have been occasional attempts in more recent times to crack down on prostitution forcefully. However, it is now understood that in these cases, the solution can be worse than the problem itself.
In 1860 a Mayor of Portsmouth felt it his duty to attempt to suppress prostitution. "In the early part of his mayoralty," according to a witness before the Select Committee on the Contagious Diseases Acts (p. 393), "there was an order passed that every beerhouse-keeper and licensed victualer in the borough known to harbor these women would be dealt with, and probably lose his license. On a given day about three hundred or four hundred of these forlorn outcasts were bundled wholesale into the streets, and they formed up in a large body, many of them with only a shift and a petticoat on, and with a lot of drunken men and boys with a fife and fiddle they paraded the streets for several days. They marched in a body to the workhouse, but for many reasons they were refused admittance.... These women wandered about for two or three days shelterless, and it was felt that the remedy was very much worse than the disease, and the women were allowed to go back to their former places."
In 1860, a Mayor of Portsmouth took it upon himself to try to eliminate prostitution. "In the early part of his term," a witness stated before the Select Committee on the Contagious Diseases Acts (p. 393), "there was an order that any beerhouse owner and licensed seller in the borough known to harbor these women would face consequences, likely losing their license. On a specific day, about three hundred or four hundred of these unfortunate individuals were rounded up and taken to the streets. They gathered in a large group, many wearing only a shift and a petticoat, and along with a bunch of drunken men and boys playing a fife and fiddle, they paraded the streets for several days. They marched as a group to the workhouse, but for various reasons were turned away.... These women roamed around for two or three days without shelter, and it became clear that the solution was much worse than the problem, leading to the decision to let the women return to their previous situations."
Similar experiments have been made even more recently in America. "In Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, in 1891, the houses of prostitutes were closed, the inmates turned out upon the streets, and were refused lodging and even food by the citizens of that place. A wave of popular remonstrance, all over the country, at the outrage on humanity, created a reaction which resulted in a last condition by no means better than the first." In the same year also a similar incident occurred in New York with the same unfortunate results (Isidore Dyer, "The Municipal Control of Prostitution in the United States," report presented to the Brussels International Conference in 1899).
Similar experiments have been conducted even more recently in America. "In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in 1891, the houses of prostitutes were shut down, the residents forced out onto the streets, and were denied shelter and even food by the local citizens. A wave of public outcry across the country against this inhumanity sparked a backlash that led to a situation that was no better than the original one." The same year, a similar event happened in New York with the same unfortunate outcomes (Isidore Dyer, "The Municipal Control of Prostitution in the United States," report presented to the Brussels International Conference in 1899).
There grew up instead the tendency to regulate prostitution, to give it a semi-official toleration which enabled the authorities to exercise a control over it, and to guard as far as possible against its evil by medical and police inspection. The new brothel system differed from the ancient mediæval houses of prostitution in important respects; it involved a routine of medical inspection and it endeavored to suppress any rivalry by unlicensed prostitutes outside. Bernard Mandeville, the author of the Fable of the Bees, and an acute thinker, was a pioneer in the advocacy of this system. In 1724, in his Modest Defense of Publick Stews, he argues that "the encouraging of public whoring will not only prevent most of the mischievous effects of this vice, but even lessen the quantity of whoring in general, and reduce it to the narrowest bounds which it can possibly be contained in." He proposed to discourage private prostitution by giving special privileges and immunities to brothels by Act of Parliament. His scheme involved the erection of one hundred brothels in a special quarter of the city, to contain two thousand prostitutes and one hundred matrons of ability and experience with physicians and surgeons, as well as commissioners to oversee the whole. Mandeville was regarded merely as a cynic or worse, and his scheme was ignored or treated with contempt. It was left to the genius of Napoleon, eighty years later, to establish the system of "maisons de tolérance," which had so great an influence over modern European practice during a large part of the last century and even still in its numerous survivals forms the subject of widely divergent opinions.
There developed a trend to regulate prostitution, allowing a semi-official tolerance that enabled the authorities to maintain control and mitigate its negative effects through medical and police inspections. The new brothel system had significant differences from the medieval brothels; it included routine medical inspections and aimed to suppress competition from unlicensed prostitutes outside. Bernard Mandeville, the author of the Fable of the Bees and a sharp thinker, was a pioneer in supporting this system. In 1724, in his Modest Defense of Publick Stews, he argued that "encouraging public whoring will not only prevent most of the harmful effects of this vice but also reduce the overall amount of whoring and keep it to the smallest limits possible." He suggested discouraging private prostitution by granting special privileges and protections to brothels through an Act of Parliament. His plan involved creating one hundred brothels in a designated area of the city, which would house two thousand prostitutes and one hundred experienced matrons, along with physicians and surgeons, and commissioners to oversee it all. Mandeville was seen merely as a cynic or worse, and his proposal was ignored or dismissed. It took the brilliance of Napoleon, eighty years later, to establish the system of "maisons de tolérance," which significantly impacted modern European practices for much of the last century and still prompts a variety of opinions today.
On the whole, however, it must be said that the system of registering, examining, and regularizing prostitutes now belongs to the past. Many great battles have been fought over this question; the most important is that which raged for many years in England over the Contagious Diseases Acts, and is embodied in the 600 pages of a Report by a Select Committee on these Acts issued in 1882. The majority of the members of the Committee reported favorably to the Acts which were, notwithstanding, repealed in 1886, since which date no serious attempt has been made in England to establish them again.
On the whole, though, it has to be acknowledged that the system of registering, examining, and regulating prostitutes now belongs to the past. Many significant battles have been fought over this issue; the most notable was the one that lasted for many years in England regarding the Contagious Diseases Acts, which is outlined in the 600 pages of a Report by a Select Committee on these Acts issued in 1882. The majority of the Committee members reported positively on the Acts, which were, nevertheless, repealed in 1886, and since then, no serious effort has been made in England to re-establish them.
At the present time, although the old system still stands in many countries with the inert stolidity of established institutions, it no longer commands general approval. As Paul and Victor Margueritte have truly stated, in the course of an acute examination of the phenomena of state-regulated prostitution as found in Paris, the system is "barbarous to start with and almost inefficacious as well." The expert is every day more clearly demonstrating its inefficacy while the psychologist and the sociologist are constantly becoming more convinced that it is barbarous.
Right now, even though the old system is still in place in many countries like a stubborn institution, it doesn't receive widespread support anymore. As Paul and Victor Margueritte correctly pointed out in their thorough analysis of state-regulated prostitution in Paris, the system is "barbaric from the start and pretty much ineffective too." Experts are increasingly showing how ineffective it is, while psychologists and sociologists are becoming more convinced of its barbarism.
It can indeed by no means be said that any unanimity has been attained. It is obviously so urgently necessary to combat the flood of disease and misery which proceeds directly from the spread of syphilis and gonorrhœa, and indirectly from the prostitution which is the chief propagator of these diseases, that we cannot be surprised that many should eagerly catch at any system which seems to promise a palliation of the evils. At the present time, however, it is those best acquainted with the operation of the system of control who have most clearly realized that the supposed palliation is for the most part illusory,[157] and in any case attained at the cost of the artificial production of other evils. In France, where the system of the registration and control of prostitutes has been established for over a century,[158] and where consequently its advantages, if such there are, should be clearly realized, it meets with almost impassioned opposition from able men belonging to every section of the community. In Germany the opposition to regularized control has long been led by well-equipped experts, headed by Blaschko of Berlin. Precisely the same conclusions are being reached in America. Gottheil, of New York, finds that the municipal control of prostitution is "neither successful nor desirable." Heidingsfeld concludes that the regulation and control system in force in Cincinnati has done little good and much harm; under the system among the private patients in his own clinic the proportion of cases of both syphilis and gonorrhœa has increased; "suppression of prostitutes is impossible and control is impracticable."[159]
It cannot be claimed that any agreement has been reached. It's clearly urgent to fight against the wave of disease and suffering caused by the spread of syphilis and gonorrhea, and the prostitution that mainly spreads these diseases. Therefore, it's no surprise that many people are quick to grasp any system that appears to offer relief from these issues. However, those who understand the control system best realize that the supposed relief is mostly an illusion,[157] and achieved at the expense of creating other problems. In France, where the registration and control of prostitutes has been established for over a century,[158] and where its benefits, if any, should be obvious, it faces passionate opposition from capable individuals across all sectors of society. In Germany, the resistance to regulated control has long been led by knowledgeable experts, including Blaschko from Berlin. The same conclusions are being drawn in America. Gottheil from New York states that municipal control of prostitution is "neither successful nor desirable." Heidingsfeld concludes that the regulation and control system in Cincinnati has done little good and much harm; in his own clinic, the number of cases of both syphilis and gonorrhea has increased under this system; "suppressing prostitution is impossible and control is impractical."[159]
It is in Germany that the attempt to regulate prostitution still remains most persistent, with results that in Germany itself are regarded as unfortunate. Thus the German law inflicts a penalty on householders who permit illegitimate sexual intercourse in their houses. This is meant to strike the unlicensed prostitute, but it really encourages prostitution, for a decent youth and girl who decide to form a relationship which later may develop into marriage, and which is not illegal (for extra-marital sexual intercourse per se is not in Germany, as it is by the antiquated laws of several American States, a punishable offense), are subjected to so much trouble and annoyance by the suspicious police that it is much easier for the girl to become a prostitute and put herself under the protection of the police. The law was largely directed against those who live on the profits of prostitution. But in practice it works out differently. The prostitute simply has to pay extravagantly high rents, so that her landlord really lives on the fruits of her trade, while she has to carry on her business with increased activity and on a larger scale in order to cover her heavy expenses (P. Hausmeister, "Zur Analyse der Prostitution," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. ii, 1907, p. 294).
In Germany, the effort to regulate prostitution is still quite persistent, but the results are considered unfortunate there. The German law imposes penalties on homeowners who allow illegal sexual activity in their properties. This aims to target unlicensed prostitutes, but it actually encourages prostitution because a decent young man and woman who want to start a relationship that could lead to marriage — which isn’t illegal (since extra-marital sexual intercourse per se isn't punishable in Germany, unlike in the outdated laws of several American states) — face so much trouble and scrutiny from suspicious police that it becomes much easier for the woman to turn to prostitution, attracting police protection instead. The law was mainly aimed at those profiting from prostitution, but in practice, it plays out differently. The prostitute simply ends up paying excessively high rents, allowing her landlord to benefit from her trade, while she has to work even harder and on a larger scale just to cover her hefty expenses (P. Hausmeister, "Zur Analyse der Prostitution," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, vol. ii, 1907, p. 294).
In Italy, opinion on this matter is much divided. The regulation of prostitution has been successively adopted, abandoned, and readopted. In Switzerland, the land of governmental experiments, various plans are tried in different cantons. In some there is no attempt to interfere with prostitution, except under special circumstances; in others all prostitution, and even fornication generally, is punishable; in Geneva only native prostitutes are permitted to practice; in Zurich, since 1897, prostitution is prohibited, but care is taken to put no difficulties in the path of free sexual relationships which are not for gain. With these different regulations, morals in Switzerland generally are said to be much on the same level as elsewhere (Moreau-Christophe, Du Problème de la Misère, vol. iii, p. 259). The same conclusion holds good of London. A disinterested observer, Félix Remo (La Vie Galante en Angleterre, 1888, p. 237), concluded that, notwithstanding its free trade in prostitution, its alcoholic excesses, its vices of all kinds, "London is one of the most moral capitals in Europe." The movement towards freedom in this matter has been evidenced in recent years by the abandonment of the system of regulation by Denmark in 1906.
In Italy, opinions on this issue are very divided. The regulation of prostitution has been adopted, dropped, and then adopted again multiple times. In Switzerland, known for its government experiments, different cantons are testing various plans. In some areas, there’s no interference with prostitution unless there are specific circumstances; in others, all prostitution, and even casual sex, is punishable. In Geneva, only local prostitutes are allowed to work; in Zurich, since 1897, prostitution is banned, but there are no obstacles to consensual sexual relationships that aren't for profit. Despite these varying regulations, Switzerland's morals are generally considered to be about the same as those in other places (Moreau-Christophe, Du Problème de la Misère, vol. iii, p. 259). The same conclusion applies to London. An impartial observer, Félix Remo (La Vie Galante en Angleterre, 1888, p. 237), found that despite its open prostitution market, alcohol abuse, and various vices, “London is one of the most moral capitals in Europe.” The push for freedom in this area was also seen in recent years when Denmark abandoned its regulation system in 1906.
Even the most ardent advocates of the registration of prostitutes recognize that not only is the tendency of civilization opposed rather than favorable to the system, but that in the numerous countries where the system persists registered prostitutes are losing ground in the struggle against clandestine prostitutes. Even in France, the classic land of police-controlled prostitutes, the "maisons de tolérance" have long been steadily decreasing in number, by no means because prostitution is decreasing but because low-class brasseries and small cafés-chantants, which are really unlicensed brothels, are taking their place.[160]
Even the most passionate supporters of registering sex workers acknowledge that the overall direction of society is more against than in favor of this system. In many countries where this practice continues, registered sex workers are losing ground to those who operate underground. Even in France, the historic center for regulated sex work, the number of "maisons de tolérance" has been steadily declining, not because sex work is diminishing but because low-end brasseries and small cafés-chantants, which function as unlicensed brothels, are taking their place.[160]
The wholesale regularization of prostitution in civilized centres is nowadays, indeed, advocated by few, if any, of the authorities who belong to the newer school. It is at most claimed as desirable in certain places under special circumstances.[161] Even those who would still be glad to see prostitution thoroughly in the control of the police now recognize that experience shows this to be impossible. As many girls begin their career as prostitutes at a very early age, a sound system of regulation should be prepared to enroll as permanent prostitutes even girls who are little more than children. That, however, is a logical conclusion against which the moral sense, and even the common sense, of a community instinctively revolts. In Paris girls may not be inscribed as prostitutes until they have reached the age of sixteen and some consider even that age too low.[162] Moreover, whenever she becomes diseased, or grows tired of her position, the registered woman may always slip out of the hands of the police and establish herself elsewhere as a clandestine prostitute. Every rigid attempt to keep prostitution within the police ring leads to offensive interference with the actions and the freedom of respectable women which cannot fail to be intolerable in any free community. Even in a city like London, where prostitution is relatively free, the supervision of the police has led to scandalous police charges against women who have done nothing whatever which should legitimately arouse suspicion of their behavior. The escape of the infected woman from the police cordon has, it is obvious, an effect in raising the apparent level of health of registered women, and the police statistics are still further fallaciously improved by the fact that the inmates of brothels are older on the average than clandestine prostitutes and have become immune to disease.[163] These facts are now becoming fairly obvious and well recognized. The state regulation of prostitution is undesirable, on moral grounds for the oft-emphasized reason that it is only applied to one sex, and on practical grounds because it is ineffective. Society allows the police to harass the prostitute with petty persecutions under the guise of charges of "solicitation," "disorderly conduct," etc., but it is no longer convinced that she ought to be under the absolute control of the police.
The complete regularization of prostitution in civilized areas is now advocated by very few, if any, authorities from the newer school. It's only considered desirable in certain places under specific circumstances.[161] Even those who would like to see prostitution fully under police control now recognize that experience shows this is impossible. Many girls start their careers as prostitutes at a very young age, so a sound regulation system would have to include girls who are barely more than children. However, this conclusion is logically sound but instinctively rejected by the moral and common sense of a community. In Paris, girls can only be registered as prostitutes once they reach the age of sixteen, and some people believe even that age is too low.[162] Furthermore, whenever a registered woman contracts a disease or grows bored with her situation, she can easily escape the police's control and operate as an unregistered prostitute elsewhere. Any strict effort to confine prostitution to police oversight leads to offensive intrusions in the lives and freedoms of respectable women, which is unbearable in any free society. Even in a city like London, where prostitution is relatively tolerated, police oversight has resulted in scandalous accusations against women who haven't done anything to arouse legitimate suspicion about their behavior. It’s clear that when an infected woman slips away from police control, it artificially raises the perceived health levels of registered women; police statistics are further distorted because the women in brothels tend to be older and have developed immunity to disease.[163] These facts are increasingly evident and widely acknowledged. State regulation of prostitution is seen as undesirable on moral grounds, primarily because it applies only to one gender, and on practical grounds because it is ineffective. Society permits the police to harass prostitutes with minor persecutions under the pretense of "solicitation," "disorderly conduct," and so on, but it is no longer convinced that they should be completely under police control.
The problem of prostitution, when we look at it narrowly, seems to be in the same position to-day as at any time in the course of the past three thousand years. In order, however, to comprehend the real significance of prostitution, and to attain a reasonable attitude towards it, we must look at it from a broader point of view; we must consider not only its evolution and history, but its causes and its relation to the wider aspects of modern social life. When we thus view the problem from a broader standpoint we shall find that there is no conflict between the claims of ethics and those of social hygiene, and that the coördinated activity of both is involved in the progressive refinement and purification of civilized sexual relationships.
The issue of prostitution, when we examine it closely, appears to be in the same state today as it has been for the past three thousand years. However, to truly understand the meaning of prostitution and to develop a reasonable perspective on it, we need to approach it from a wider angle; we should look not just at its evolution and history, but also at its causes and its connection to the broader aspects of modern social life. When we consider the issue from this wider perspective, we will realize that there is no conflict between ethical concerns and those of social health, and that the combined efforts of both are crucial in the ongoing improvement and refinement of civilized sexual relationships.
III. The Causes of Prostitution.
The history of the rise and development of prostitution enables us to see that prostitution is not an accident of our marriage system, but an essential constituent which appears concurrently with its other essential constituents. The gradual development of the family on a patriarchal and largely monogamic basis rendered it more and more difficult for a woman to dispose of her own person. She belongs in the first place to her father, whose interest it was to guard her carefully until a husband appeared who could afford to purchase her. In the enhancement of her value the new idea of the market value of virginity gradually developed, and where a "virgin" had previously meant a woman who was free to do as she would with her own body its meaning was now reversed and it came to mean a woman who was precluded from having intercourse with men. When she was transferred from her father to a husband, she was still guarded with the same care; husband and father alike found their interest in preserving their women from unmarried men. The situation thus produced resulted in the existence of a large body of young men who were not yet rich enough to obtain wives, and a large number of young women, not yet chosen as wives, and many of whom could never expect to become wives. At such a point in social evolution prostitution is clearly inevitable; it is not so much the indispensable concomitant of marriage as an essential part of the whole system. Some of the superfluous or neglected women, utilizing their money value and perhaps at the same time reviving traditions of an earlier freedom, find their social function in selling their favors to gratify the temporary desires of the men who have not yet been able to acquire wives. Thus every link in the chain of the marriage system is firmly welded and the complete circle formed.
The history of the rise and development of prostitution shows us that it’s not just a byproduct of our marriage system, but a fundamental part that exists alongside its other key aspects. As families gradually evolved to become more patriarchal and predominantly monogamous, it became increasingly difficult for women to have control over their own bodies. Initially, a woman belonged to her father, who had the responsibility to protect her until a husband came along who could pay to take her. With the increase in her value, the concept of the market value of virginity started to take shape, and the term "virgin," which once indicated a woman who could make her own choices about her body, shifted to mean a woman who was expected to refrain from sexual activity with men. When she was passed from her father to her husband, she was still protected in the same way; both her husband and father were invested in keeping their women away from unmarried men. This situation led to a significant number of young men who were not wealthy enough to marry, along with many young women who had not yet been chosen as brides and many of whom would never get that opportunity. At this stage in social evolution, prostitution is undoubtedly unavoidable; it serves not merely as a companion to marriage, but as a vital aspect of the entire system. Some neglected or surplus women, recognizing their monetary value and possibly drawing on earlier traditions of freedom, find their role in society by selling their favors to satisfy the temporary needs of men who have yet to secure wives. Thus, every link in the marriage system is tightly interconnected, completing the cycle.
But while the history of the rise and development of prostitution shows us how indestructible and essential an element prostitution is of the marriage system which has long prevailed in Europe—under very varied racial, political, social, and religious conditions—it yet fails to supply us in every respect with the data necessary to reach a definite attitude towards prostitution to-day. In order to understand the place of prostitution in our existing system, it is necessary that we should analyze the chief factors of prostitution. We may most conveniently learn to understand these if we consider prostitution, in order, under four aspects. These are: (1) economic necessity; (2) biological predisposition; (3) moral advantages; and (4) what may be called its civilizational value.
But while the history of the rise and development of prostitution shows us how essential and resilient prostitution is as a part of the marriage system that has long existed in Europe—under various racial, political, social, and religious conditions—it still doesn’t provide us with all the information we need to form a clear opinion about prostitution today. To understand the role of prostitution in our current system, we need to analyze the main factors of prostitution. We can best understand these by looking at prostitution from four angles. These are: (1) economic necessity; (2) biological predisposition; (3) moral advantages; and (4) what we can refer to as its civilizational value.
While these four factors of prostitution seem to me those that here chiefly concern us, it is scarcely necessary to point out that many other causes contribute to produce and modify prostitution. Prostitutes themselves often seek to lead other girls to adopt the same paths; recruits must be found for brothels, whence we have the "white slave trade," which is now being energetically combated in many parts of the world; while all the forms of seduction towards this life are favored and often predisposed to by alcoholism. It will generally be found that several causes have combined to push a girl into the career of prostitution.
While these four factors of prostitution seem to be the main ones affecting us here, it's important to note that many other causes also play a role in creating and shaping prostitution. Prostitutes often try to lead other girls down the same path; there’s a constant need for new recruits for brothels, which has led to the "white slave trade," something that is currently being actively fought against in many parts of the world. Additionally, various forms of seduction into this lifestyle are often enabled and influenced by alcoholism. Generally, it can be seen that several causes have come together to push a girl into the profession of prostitution.
The ways in which various factors of environment and suggestion unite to lead a girl into the paths of prostitution are indicated in the following statement in which a correspondent has set forth his own conclusions on this matter as a man of the world: "I have had a somewhat varied experience among loose women, and can say, without hesitation, that not more than 1 per cent, of the women I have known could be regarded as educated. This indicates that almost invariably they are of humble origin, and the terrible cases of overcrowding that are daily brought to light suggest that at very early ages the sense of modesty becomes extinct, and long before puberty a familiarity with things sexual takes place. As soon as they are old enough these girls are seduced by their sweethearts; the familiarity with which they regard sexual matters removes the restraint which surrounds a girl whose early life has been spent in decent surroundings. Later they go to work in factories and shops; if pretty and attractive, they consort with managers and foremen. Then the love of finery, which forms so large a part of the feminine character, tempts the girl to become the 'kept' woman of some man of means. A remarkable thing in this connection is the fact that they rarely enjoy excitement with their protectors, preferring rather the coarser embraces of some man nearer their own station in life, very often a soldier. I have not known many women who were seduced and deserted, though this is a fiction much affected by prostitutes. Barmaids supply a considerable number to the ranks of prostitution, largely on account of their addiction to drink; drunkenness invariably leads to laxness of moral restraint in women. Another potent factor in the production of prostitutes lies in the flare of finery flaunted by some friend who has adopted the life. A girl, working hard to live, sees some friend, perhaps making a call in the street where the hard-working girl lives, clothed in finery, while she herself can hardly get enough to eat. She has a conversation with her finely-clad friend who tells her how easily she can earn money, explaining what a vital asset the sexual organs are, and soon another one is added to the ranks."
The ways in which different environmental factors and social influences lead a girl into prostitution are highlighted in the following statement where a correspondent shares his own conclusions on this issue as someone experienced in life: "I’ve had a somewhat varied experience with loose women, and I can say, without a doubt, that no more than 1 percent of the women I've known could be considered educated. This shows that almost all of them come from humble backgrounds, and the awful cases of overcrowding that come to light daily suggest that very early on, the sense of modesty disappears, and long before puberty, they become familiar with sexual matters. As soon as they are old enough, these girls are seduced by their boyfriends; their casual attitude towards sex removes the constraints that surround a girl who has grown up in decent conditions. Later, they start working in factories and shops; if they are pretty and attractive, they socialize with managers and foremen. Then, the desire for nice things, which is a big part of a woman’s nature, tempts the girl to become the 'kept' woman of a wealthy man. Interestingly, they rarely find excitement with their protectors, instead preferring the rougher embraces of someone closer to their own social status, often a soldier. I haven't known many women who were seduced and then abandoned, even though this is a narrative often used by prostitutes. Barmaids contribute a significant number to the ranks of prostitution, largely due to their drinking habits; intoxication usually leads to a loss of moral restraint in women. Another strong factor in creating prostitutes is the showiness of some friend who has taken on that lifestyle. A girl, working hard to survive, sees a friend, perhaps visiting her on the street where she lives, dressed in fancy clothes, while she herself can barely afford enough to eat. She talks to her well-dressed friend who tells her how easily she can earn money, explaining how valuable sexual appeal can be, and soon, another one joins the ranks."
There is some interest in considering the reasons assigned for prostitutes entering their career. In some countries this has been estimated by those who come closely into official or other contact with prostitutes. In other countries, it is the rule for girls, before they are registered as prostitutes, to state the reasons for which they desire to enter the career.
There is some interest in looking at the reasons why prostitutes choose this line of work. In some countries, people who have direct contact with prostitutes have estimated these reasons. In other countries, it is standard for girls to explain their reasons for wanting to enter the profession before they are registered as prostitutes.
Parent-Duchâtelet, whose work on prostitutes in Paris is still an authority, presented the first estimate of this kind. He found that of over five thousand prostitutes, 1441 were influenced by poverty, 1425 by seduction of lovers who had abandoned them, 1255 by the loss of parents from death or other cause. By such an estimate, nearly the whole number are accounted for by wretchedness, that is by economic causes, alone (Parent-Duchâtelet, De la Prostitution, 1857, vol. i, p. 107).
Parent-Duchâtelet, whose research on prostitutes in Paris is still highly regarded, provided the first estimate of this kind. He found that out of over five thousand prostitutes, 1,441 were driven by poverty, 1,425 by the seduction of lovers who had left them, and 1,255 by the loss of parents due to death or other reasons. This estimate shows that nearly all of them can be attributed to misery, specifically economic factors alone (Parent-Duchâtelet, De la Prostitution, 1857, vol. i, p. 107).
In Brussels during a period of twenty years (1865-1884) 3505 women were inscribed as prostitutes. The causes they assigned for desiring to take to this career present a different picture from that shown by Parent-Duchâtelet, but perhaps a more reliable one, although there are some marked and curious discrepancies. Out of the 3505, 1523 explained that extreme poverty was the cause of their degradation; 1118 frankly confessed that their sexual passions were the cause; 420 attributed their fall to evil company; 316 said they were disgusted and weary of their work, because the toil was so arduous and the pay so small; 101 had been abandoned by their lovers; 10 had quarrelled with their parents; 7 were abandoned by their husbands; 4 did not agree with their guardians; 3 had family quarrels; 2 were compelled to prostitute themselves by their husbands, and 1 by her parents (Lancet, June 28, 1890, p. 1442).
In Brussels over a span of twenty years (1865-1884), 3,505 women were registered as prostitutes. The reasons they gave for choosing this path paint a different picture than what Parent-Duchâtelet described, but perhaps a more accurate one, despite some significant and interesting discrepancies. Of the 3,505, 1,523 stated that extreme poverty was the reason for their situation; 1,118 openly admitted that their sexual desires were a factor; 420 blamed harmful influences from others; 316 expressed frustration and exhaustion from their work due to its difficulty and low pay; 101 had been left by their partners; 10 had fallen out with their parents; 7 were deserted by their husbands; 4 did not see eye to eye with their guardians; 3 faced family disputes; 2 were forced into prostitution by their husbands, and 1 by her parents (Lancet, June 28, 1890, p. 1442).
In London, Merrick found that of 16,022 prostitutes who passed through his hands during the years he was chaplain at Millbank prison, 5061 voluntarily left home or situation for "a life of pleasure;" 3363 assigned poverty as the cause; 3154 were "seduced" and drifted on to the street; 1636 were betrayed by promises of marriage and abandoned by lover and relations. On the whole, Merrick states, 4790, or nearly one-third of the whole number, may be said to owe the adoption of their career directly to men, 11,232 to other causes. He adds that of those pleading poverty a large number were indolent and incapable (G. P. Merrick, Work Among the Fallen, p. 38).
In London, Merrick found that out of 16,022 prostitutes who came through his care while he was chaplain at Millbank prison, 5,061 left home or their jobs voluntarily for "a life of pleasure;" 3,363 cited poverty as their reason; 3,154 were "seduced" and ended up on the street; 1,636 were deceived by promises of marriage and abandoned by their lovers and families. Overall, Merrick notes that 4,790, or nearly one-third of the total, can be said to have chosen this path directly due to men, while 11,232 attributed their situation to other factors. He also points out that many of those citing poverty were lazy and unable to improve their circumstances (G. P. Merrick, Work Among the Fallen, p. 38).
Logan, an English city missionary with an extensive acquaintance with prostitutes, divided them into the following groups: (1) One-fourth of the girls are servants, especially in public houses, beer shops, etc., and thus led into the life; (2) one-fourth come from factories, etc.; (3) nearly one-fourth are recruited by procuresses who visit country towns, markets, etc.; (4) a final group includes, on the one hand, those who are induced to become prostitutes by destitution, or indolence, or a bad temper, which unfits them for ordinary avocations, and, on the other hand, those who have been seduced by a false promise of marriage (W. Logan, The Great Social Evil, 1871, p. 53).
Logan, an English city missionary with extensive knowledge of prostitutes, categorized them into the following groups: (1) One-fourth of the women are servants, particularly in brothels, pubs, and similar places, which is how they ended up in this lifestyle; (2) another one-fourth come from factories and similar jobs; (3) nearly one-fourth are recruited by pimps who visit small towns, markets, etc.; (4) the final group includes those who are pushed into prostitution due to poverty, laziness, or a bad attitude that makes them unsuitable for regular jobs, as well as those who have been lured into it by false promises of marriage (W. Logan, The Great Social Evil, 1871, p. 53).
In America Sanger has reported the results of inquiries made of two thousand New York prostitutes as to the causes which induced them to take up their avocation:
In America, Sanger has shared the results of surveys conducted with two thousand New York prostitutes about the reasons that led them to choose their profession:
Destitution 525 Inclination 513 Seduced and abandoned 258 Drink and desire for drink 181 Ill-treatment by parents, relations, or husbands 164 As an easy life 124 Bad company 84 Persuaded by prostitutes 71 Too idle to work 29 Violated 27 Seduced on emigrant ship 16 Seduced in emigrant boarding homes 8 ----- 2,000
Destitution 525 Inclination 513 Seduced and abandoned 258 Drink and craving for alcohol 181 Abuse by parents, relatives, or partners 164 Seeking a carefree lifestyle 124 Negative influences 84 Coerced by sex workers 71 Too lazy to work 29 Assaulted 27 Lured on emigrant ships 16 Lured in emigrant boarding houses 8 ----- 2,000
(Sanger, History of Prostitution, p. 488.)
(Sanger, History of Prostitution, p. 488.)
In America, again, more recently, Professor Woods Hutchinson put himself into communication with some thirty representative men in various great metropolitan centres, and thus summarizes the answers as regards the etiology of prostitution:
In America, once again, more recently, Professor Woods Hutchinson reached out to about thirty influential individuals in various major cities, and he summarizes their responses regarding the causes of prostitution:
Per cent. Love of display, luxury and idleness 42.1 Bad family surroundings 23.8 Seduction in which they were innocent victims 11.3 Lack of employment 9.4 Heredity 7.8 Primary sexual appetite 5.6
Percent. Love of show, luxury, and laziness 42.1 Poor family environment 23.8 Seduction in which they were unsuspecting victims 11.3 Lack of job opportunities 9.4 Genetics 7.8 Basic sexual desire 5.6
(Woods Hutchinson, "The Economics of Prostitution," American Gynæcologic and Obstetric Journal, September, 1895; Id., The Gospel According to Darwin, p. 194.)
(Woods Hutchinson, "The Economics of Prostitution," American Gynæcologic and Obstetric Journal, September, 1895; Id., The Gospel According to Darwin, p. 194.)
In Italy, in 1881, among 10,422 inscribed prostitutes from the age of seventeen upwards, the causes of prostitution were classified as follows:
In Italy, in 1881, out of 10,422 registered prostitutes aged seventeen and older, the reasons for prostitution were categorized as follows:
Vice and depravity 2,752 Death of parents, husband, etc. 2,139 Seduction by lover 1,653 Seduction by employer 927 Abandoned by parents, husband, etc. 794 Love of luxury 698 Incitement by lover or other persons outside family 666 Incitement by parents or husband 400 To support parents or children 393
Vice and depravity 2,752 Death of parents, husband, etc. 2,139 Seduction by lover 1,653 Seduction by employer 927 Abandoned by parents, husband, etc. 794 Love of luxury 698 Incitement by lover or other people outside family 666 Incitement by parents or husband 400 To support parents or children 393
(Ferriani, Minorenni Delinquenti, p. 193.) The reasons assigned by Russian prostitutes for taking up their career are (according to Federow) as follows:
(Ferriani, Minorenni Delinquenti, p. 193.) The reasons assigned by Russian prostitutes for choosing this line of work are (according to Federow) as follows:
38.5 per cent. insufficient wages. 21. per cent. desire for amusement. 14. per cent. loss of place. 9.5 per cent. persuasion by women friends. 6.5 per cent. loss of habit of work. 5.5 per cent. chagrin, and to punish lover. .5 per cent. drunkenness.
38.5% insufficient wages. 21% desire for entertainment. 14% job loss. 9.5% influence from female friends. 6.5% loss of work habits. 5.5% disappointment, and to get back at a partner. 0.5% intoxication.
(Summarized in Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Nov. 15, 1901.)
(Summarized in Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Nov. 15, 1901.)
1. The Economic Causation of Prostitution.—Writers on prostitution frequently assert that economic conditions lie at the root of prostitution and that its chief cause is poverty, while prostitutes themselves often declare that the difficulty of earning a livelihood in other ways was a main cause in inducing them to adopt this career. "Of all the causes of prostitution," Parent-Duchâtelet wrote a century ago, "particularly in Paris, and probably in all large cities, none is more active than lack of work and the misery which is the inevitable result of insufficient wages." In England, also, to a large extent, Sherwell states, "morals fluctuate with trade."[164] It is equally so in Berlin where the number of registered prostitutes increases during bad years.[165] It is so also in America. It is the same in Japan; "the cause of causes is poverty."[166]
1. The Economic Causation of Prostitution.—Writers on prostitution often say that economic conditions are at the heart of the issue and that poverty is the main cause. Prostitutes themselves frequently mention that the struggle to make a living through other means pushed them toward this profession. "Of all the causes of prostitution," Parent-Duchâtelet wrote a century ago, "especially in Paris and likely in all large cities, none is more significant than unemployment and the misery that comes from low wages." In England, to a great extent, Sherwell notes, "morals fluctuate with trade."[164] The same is true in Berlin, where the number of registered prostitutes rises during economic downturns.[165] This holds true in America as well. It's also the case in Japan; "the root cause is poverty."[166]
Thus the broad and general statement that prostitution is largely or mainly an economic phenomenon, due to the low wages of women or to sudden depressions in trade, is everywhere made by investigators. It must, however, be added that these general statements are considerably qualified in the light of the detailed investigations made by careful inquirers. Thus Ströhmberg, who minutely investigated 462 prostitutes, found that only one assigned destitution as the reason for adopting her career, and on investigation this was found to be an impudent lie.[167] Hammer found that of ninety registered German prostitutes not one had entered on the career out of want or to support a child, while some went on the street while in the possession of money, or without wishing to be paid.[168] Pastor Buschmann, of the Teltow Magdalene Home in Berlin, finds that it is not want but indifference to moral considerations which leads girls to become prostitutes. In Germany, before a girl is put on the police register, due care is always taken to give her a chance of entering a Home and getting work; in Berlin, in the course of ten years, only two girls—out of thousands—were willing to take advantage of this opportunity. The difficulty experienced by English Rescue Homes in finding girls who are willing to be "rescued" is notorious. The same difficulty is found in other cities, even where entirely different conditions prevail; thus it is found in Madrid, according to Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo, that the prostitutes who enter the Homes, notwithstanding all the devotion of the nuns, on leaving at once return to their old life. While the economic factor in prostitution undoubtedly exists, the undue frequency and emphasis with which it is put forward and accepted is clearly due, in part to ignorance of the real facts, in part to the fact that such an assumption appeals to those whose weakness it is to explain all social phenomena by economic causes, and in part to its obvious plausibility.[169]
Thus, it's a common view that prostitution is mostly an economic issue, stemming from low wages for women or sudden economic downturns. However, it's important to note that these general views are significantly qualified by the detailed research conducted by diligent investigators. For example, Ströhmberg, who thoroughly studied 462 prostitutes, discovered that only one claimed poverty as the reason for her career choice, which was later revealed to be a bold-faced lie. Hammer found that among ninety registered German prostitutes, not a single one entered the profession due to financial need or to support a child; rather, some took to the streets while having money or without wanting to be paid. Pastor Buschmann from the Teltow Magdalene Home in Berlin notes that it’s not need but a disregard for moral values that drives girls to become prostitutes. In Germany, before a girl is registered by the police, efforts are made to give her a chance to enter a Home and find work; in Berlin, over ten years, only two girls—out of thousands—chose to take that opportunity. The struggle that English Rescue Homes face in finding girls willing to be "rescued" is widely known. The same challenge is evident in other cities, even in very different circumstances; for instance, in Madrid, according to Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo, the prostitutes who enter the Homes, despite the dedicated efforts of the nuns, return to their previous lives as soon as they leave. While the economic aspect of prostitution certainly exists, the overemphasis on it arises partly from a lack of understanding of the real facts, partly from a tendency among some to explain all social issues through economic factors, and partly because the notion is seemingly plausible.
Prostitutes are mainly recruited from the ranks of factory girls, domestic servants, shop girls, and waitresses. In some of these occupations it is difficult to obtain employment all the year round. In this way many milliners, dressmakers and tailoresses become prostitutes when business is slack, and return to business when the season begins. Sometimes the regular work of the day is supplemented concurrently by prostitution in the street in the evening. It is said, possibly with some truth, that amateur prostitution of this kind is extremely prevalent in England, as it is not checked by the precautions which, in countries where prostitution is regulated, the clandestine prostitute must adopt in order to avoid registration. Certain public lavatories and dressing-rooms in central London are said to be used by the girls for putting on, and finally washing off before going home, the customary paint.[170] It is certain that in England a large proportion of parents belonging to the working and even lower middle class ranks are unacquainted with the nature of the lives led by their own daughters. It must be added, also, that occasionally this conduct of the daughter is winked at or encouraged by the parents; thus a correspondent writes that he "knows some towns in England where prostitution is not regarded as anything disgraceful, and can remember many cases where the mother's house has been used by the daughter with the mother's knowledge."
Prostitutes are mainly recruited from factory workers, domestic helpers, shop assistants, and waitresses. In some of these jobs, it’s hard to find work year-round. As a result, many milliners, dressmakers, and tailors turn to prostitution when business is slow, then go back to their work when the season picks up. Sometimes, they balance regular daytime jobs with street prostitution in the evenings. It’s suggested—maybe with some truth—that casual prostitution like this is quite common in England, as it isn’t restricted by the precautions that clandestine prostitutes in regulated countries must take to avoid registration. Certain public restrooms and changing rooms in central London are reportedly used by these women to apply and later wash off their makeup before heading home.[170] It’s clear that many parents in the working and even lower middle classes in England are unaware of the lives their own daughters are living. It should also be noted that sometimes this behavior is overlooked or even encouraged by parents; one correspondent mentions knowing towns in England where prostitution isn’t seen as shameful, and recalls instances where daughters have used their mothers’ homes with their mothers’ knowledge.
Acton, in a well-informed book on London prostitution, written in the middle of the last century, said that prostitution is "a transitory stage, through which an untold number of British women are ever on their passage."[171] This statement was strenuously denied at the time by many earnest moralists who refused to admit that it was possible for a woman who had sunk into so deep a pit of degradation ever to climb out again, respectably safe and sound. Yet it is certainly true as regards a considerable proportion of women, not only in England, but in other countries also. Thus Parent-Duchâtelet, the greatest authority on French prostitution, stated that "prostitution is for the majority only a transitory stage; it is quitted usually during the first year; very few prostitutes continue until extinction." It is difficult, however, to ascertain precisely of how large a proportion this is true; there are no data which would serve as a basis for exact estimation,[172] and it is impossible to expect that respectable married women would admit that they had ever been "on the streets"; they would not, perhaps, always admit it even to themselves.
Acton, in a well-researched book on London prostitution written in the middle of the last century, noted that prostitution is "a temporary phase through which countless British women continuously pass."[171] This claim was strongly rejected at the time by many serious moralists who refused to accept that a woman who had fallen into such a deep pit of degradation could ever rise again, safely and decently. Yet, it is certainly true for a significant number of women, not only in England but also in other countries. For instance, Parent-Duchâtelet, the leading expert on French prostitution, stated that "for most, prostitution is only a temporary phase; it usually ends within the first year; very few prostitutes continue until death." However, it's challenging to determine exactly what proportion this applies to; there are no data to provide a basis for precise estimation,[172] and it's unrealistic to think that respectable married women would admit they had ever been "on the streets"; they might not even acknowledge it to themselves.
The following case, though noted down over twenty years ago, is fairly typical of a certain class, among the lower ranks of prostitution, in which the economic factor counts for much, but in which we ought not too hastily to assume that it is the sole factor.
The following case, recorded over twenty years ago, is quite typical of a certain group among the lower levels of prostitution, where the economic factor plays a significant role, but we shouldn't be too quick to assume that it's the only factor.
Widow, aged thirty, with two children. Works in an umbrella manufactory in the East End of London, earning eighteen shillings a week by hard work, and increasing her income by occasionally going out on the streets in the evenings. She haunts a quiet side street which is one of the approaches to a large city railway terminus. She is a comfortable, almost matronly-looking woman, quietly dressed in a way that is only noticeable from the skirts being rather short. If spoken to she may remark that she is "waiting for a lady friend," talks in an affected way about the weather, and parenthetically introduces her offers. She will either lead a man into one of the silent neighboring lanes filled with warehouses, or will take him home with her. She is willing to accept any sum the man may be willing or able to give; occasionally it is a sovereign, sometimes it is only a sixpence; on an average she earns a few shillings in an evening. She had only been in London for ten months; before that she lived in Newcastle. She did not go on the streets there; "circumstances alter cases," she sagely remarks. Though not speaking well of the police, she says they do not interfere with her as they do with some of the girls. She never gives them money, but hints that it is sometimes necessary to gratify their desires in order to keep on good terms with them.
Widow, 30 years old, with two kids. Works in an umbrella factory in the East End of London, making eighteen shillings a week through hard work, and boosting her income by occasionally working the streets in the evenings. She frequents a quiet side street that leads to a major city railway station. She looks like a comfortable, almost matronly woman, dressed modestly, with a skirt that's a bit short. If someone talks to her, she might say she's "waiting for a lady friend," makes small talk about the weather, and casually slips in her offers. She will either take a man to one of the quiet nearby alleyways filled with warehouses or invite him back to her place. She’s open to taking whatever amount the man is willing or able to give; sometimes it’s a sovereign, but often it’s just a sixpence; on average, she makes a few shillings in an evening. She has only been in London for ten months; before that, she lived in Newcastle. She didn’t work the streets there; "circumstances change things," she wisely says. Although she doesn’t have a high opinion of the police, she claims they don’t bother her like they do some of the other girls. She never gives them money, but suggests that sometimes it’s necessary to meet their needs to stay on good terms with them.
It must always be remembered, for it is sometimes forgotten by socialists and social reformers, that while the pressure of poverty exerts a markedly modifying influence on prostitution, in that it increases the ranks of the women who thereby seek a livelihood and may thus be properly regarded as a factor of prostitution, no practicable raising of the rate of women's wages could possibly serve, directly and alone, to abolish prostitution. De Molinari, an economist, after remarking that "prostitution is an industry" and that if other competing industries can offer women sufficiently high pecuniary inducements they will not be so frequently attracted to prostitution, proceeds to point out that that by no means settles the question. "Like every other industry prostitution is governed by the demand of the need to which it responds. As long as that need and that demand persist, they will provoke an offer. It is the need and the demand that we must act on, and perhaps science will furnish us the means to do so."[173] In what way Molinari expects science to diminish the demand for prostitutes, however, is not clearly brought out.
It should always be kept in mind, as it’s sometimes overlooked by socialists and social reformers, that while the pressure of poverty has a significant effect on prostitution by increasing the number of women who turn to it for a living and can be seen as a factor in prostitution, simply raising women’s wages alone won’t eliminate prostitution. De Molinari, an economist, notes that “prostitution is an industry” and that if other competing industries can offer women high enough financial incentives, they won’t be as drawn to prostitution. However, he points out that this doesn’t fully address the issue. “Like any other industry, prostitution is driven by the demand for the need it fulfills. As long as that need and demand exist, they will create an offer. It’s the need and demand we need to focus on, and maybe science will provide us the tools to do so.”[173] However, it’s not clear how Molinari expects science to reduce the demand for prostitutes.
Not only have we to admit that no practicable rise in the rate of wages paid to women in ordinary industries can possibly compete with the wages which fairly attractive women of quite ordinary ability can earn by prostitution,[174] but we have also to realize that a rise in general prosperity—which alone can render a rise of women's wages healthy and normal—involves a rise in the wages of prostitution, and an increase in the number of prostitutes. So that if good wages is to be regarded as the antagonist of prostitution, we can only say that it more than gives back with one hand what it takes with the other. To so marked a degree is this the case that Després in a detailed moral and demographic study of the distribution of prostitution in France comes to the conclusion that we must reverse the ancient doctrine that "poverty engenders prostitution" since prostitution regularly increases with wealth,[175] and as a département rises in wealth and prosperity, so the number both of its inscribed and its free prostitutes rises also. There is indeed a fallacy here, for while it is true, as Després argues, that wealth demands prostitution, it is also true that a wealthy community involves the extreme of poverty as well as of riches and that it is among the poorer elements that prostitution chiefly finds its recruits. The ancient dictum that "poverty engenders prostitution" still stands, but it is complicated and qualified by the complex conditions of civilization. Bonger, in his able discussion of the economic side of the question, has realized the wide and deep basis of prostitution when he reaches the conclusion that it is "on the one hand the inevitable complement of the existing legal monogamy, and on the other hand the result of the bad conditions in which many young girls grow up, the result of the physical and psychical wretchedness in which the women of the people live, and the consequence also of the inferior position of women in our actual society."[176] A narrowly economic consideration of prostitution can by no means bring us to the root of the matter.
Not only do we have to acknowledge that no significant increase in wages for women in regular jobs can compete with what reasonably attractive women of average ability can earn from prostitution,[174] but we also need to understand that an overall improvement in prosperity—which is the only way to make an increase in women's wages healthy and normal—also leads to higher wages in prostitution and a rise in the number of prostitutes. So if good wages are seen as a solution to prostitution, we can only say that it more than gives back with one hand what it takes with the other. This is so evident that Després, in a detailed moral and demographic study of the distribution of prostitution in France, concludes that we must overturn the old belief that "poverty leads to prostitution," given that prostitution regularly increases with wealth,[175] and as a region becomes wealthier and more prosperous, the number of both registered and unregistered prostitutes also rises. There is indeed a misconception here because, while it is true, as Després points out, that wealth creates a demand for prostitution, it is also true that a wealthy community includes extreme poverty along with riches, and that it is mainly from the poorer segments that prostitution primarily recruits its members. The old saying that "poverty engenders prostitution" still holds, but it is complicated and affected by the complex conditions of society. Bonger, in his insightful discussion of the economic aspects, recognizes the deep and broad roots of prostitution when he concludes that it is "on one hand the inevitable complement of the current legal monogamy, and on the other hand the result of the poor conditions in which many young girls grow up, the physical and mental suffering that women face in our society, and also the subordinate position of women in our current social structure."[176] A purely economic view of prostitution cannot truly address the root of the issue.
One circumstance alone should have sufficed to indicate that the inability of many women to secure "a living wage," is far from being the most fundamental cause of prostitution: a large proportion of prostitutes come from the ranks of domestic service. Of all the great groups of female workers, domestic servants are the freest from economic anxieties; they do not pay for food or for lodging; they often live as well as their mistresses, and in a large proportion of cases they have fewer money anxieties than their mistresses. Moreover, they supply an almost universal demand, so that there is never any need for even very moderately competent servants to be in want of work. They constitute, it is true, a very large body which could not fail to supply a certain contingent of recruits to prostitution. But when we see that domestic service is the chief reservoir from which prostitutes are drawn, it should be clear that the craving for food and shelter is by no means the chief cause of prostitution.
One fact alone should have been enough to show that the inability of many women to earn "a living wage" is far from the main cause of prostitution: a large percentage of prostitutes come from domestic service. Out of all the major groups of female workers, domestic servants are the least burdened by financial worries; they don’t have to pay for food or housing; they often live just as well as their employers, and in many cases, they have fewer financial concerns than their employers. Additionally, they meet a nearly universal demand, so there’s never a need for even fairly competent servants to struggle to find work. It is true that they represent a very large group that could certainly provide a certain number of recruits to prostitution. But when we see that domestic service is the primary source from which prostitutes are taken, it should be evident that the need for food and shelter is definitely not the main cause of prostitution.
It may be added that, although the significance of this predominance of servants among prostitutes is seldom realized by those who fancy that to remove poverty is to abolish prostitution, it has not been ignored by the more thoughtful students of social questions. Thus Sherwell, while pointing out truly that, to a large extent, "morals fluctuate with trade," adds that, against the importance of the economic factor, it is a suggestive and in every way impressive fact that the majority of the girls who frequent the West End of London (88 per cent., according to the Salvation Army's Registers) are drawn from domestic service where the economic struggle is not severely felt (Arthur Sherwell, Life in West London, Ch. V, "Prostitution").
It’s worth mentioning that, although many people believe that eliminating poverty will end prostitution, they often overlook the significance of the high number of servants among prostitutes. This aspect hasn't escaped the attention of more insightful social scholars. Sherwell notes, rightly, that "morals fluctuate with trade" to a considerable degree. However, he also highlights a striking and significant fact: the majority of the women who visit the West End of London (88 percent, based on the Salvation Army's Records) come from domestic service, where the economic pressures aren't as intense. (Arthur Sherwell, Life in West London, Ch. V, "Prostitution").
It is at the same time worthy of note that by the conditions of their lives servants, more than any other class, resemble prostitutes (Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo have pointed this out in La Mala Vida en Madrid, p. 240). Like prostitutes, they are a class of women apart; they are not entitled to the considerations and the little courtesies usually paid to other women; in some countries they are even registered, like prostitutes; it is scarcely surprising that when they suffer from so many of the disadvantages of the prostitute, they should sometimes desire to possess also some of her advantages. Lily Braun (Frauenfrage, pp. 389 et seq.) has set forth in detail these unfavorable conditions of domestic labor as they bear on the tendency of servant-girls to become prostitutes. R. de Ryckère, in his important work, La Servante Criminelle (1907, pp. 460 et seq.; cf., the same author's article, "La Criminalité Ancillaire," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, July and December, 1906), has studied the psychology of the servant-girl. He finds that she is specially marked by lack of foresight, vanity, lack of invention, tendency to imitation, and mobility of mind. These are characters which ally her to the prostitute. De Ryckère estimates the proportion of former servants among prostitutes generally as fifty per cent., and adds that what is called the "white slavery" here finds its most complacent and docile victims. He remarks, however, that the servant prostitute is, on the whole, not so much immoral as non-moral.
It’s worth noting that due to their living conditions, servants, more than any other group, are similar to prostitutes (as pointed out by Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo in La Mala Vida en Madrid, p. 240). Like prostitutes, they are a separate class of women; they don’t receive the same respect and small courtesies typically extended to other women. In some countries, they’re even registered like prostitutes. It’s not surprising that when they face numerous disadvantages similar to those of prostitutes, they may wish to have some of the advantages as well. Lily Braun (Frauenfrage, pp. 389 et seq.) details these unfavorable conditions of domestic work and how they contribute to servant girls becoming prostitutes. R. de Ryckère, in his significant work, La Servante Criminelle (1907, pp. 460 et seq.; cf., the same author’s article, "La Criminalité Ancillaire," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, July and December, 1906), studied the psychology of servant girls. He finds that they typically lack foresight, are vain, inventive, prone to imitation, and have a restless mind. These traits connect them to prostitutes. De Ryckère estimates that about fifty percent of prostitutes were once servants, and he adds that what is termed "white slavery" often finds its most compliant and submissive victims in this group. He notes, however, that servant prostitutes are generally not so much immoral as they are non-moral.
In Paris Parent-Duchâtelet found that, in proportion to their number, servants furnished the largest contingent to prostitution, and his editors also found that they head the list (Parent-Duchâtelet, edition 1857, vol. i, p. 83). Among clandestine prostitutes at Paris, Commenge has more recently found that former servants constitute forty per cent. In Bordeaux Jeannel (De le Prostitution Publique, p. 102) also found that in 1860 forty per cent, of prostitutes had been servants, seamstresses coming next with thirty-seven per cent.
In Paris, Parent-Duchâtelet found that, relative to their numbers, servants made up the largest group involved in prostitution. His editors also confirmed that they top the list (Parent-Duchâtelet, edition 1857, vol. i, p. 83). More recently, Commenge discovered that among clandestine prostitutes in Paris, former servants account for forty percent. In Bordeaux, Jeannel (De la Prostitution Publique, p. 102) also reported that in 1860, forty percent of prostitutes had previously been servants, with seamstresses coming next at thirty-seven percent.
In Germany and Austria it has long been recognized that domestic service furnishes the chief number of recruits to prostitution. Lippert, in Germany, and Gross-Hoffinger, in Austria, pointed out this predominance of maid-servants and its significance before the middle of the nineteenth century, and more recently Blaschko has stated ("Hygiene der Syphilis" in Weyl's Handbuch der Hygiene, Bd. ii, p. 40) that among Berlin prostitutes in 1898 maid-servants stand at the head with fifty-one per cent. Baumgarten has stated that in Vienna the proportion of servants is fifty-eight per cent.
In Germany and Austria, it's been recognized for a long time that domestic work provides the majority of recruits to prostitution. Lippert in Germany and Gross-Hoffinger in Austria highlighted the dominance of maid-servants and its importance before the mid-nineteenth century. More recently, Blaschko noted ("Hygiene der Syphilis" in Weyl's Handbuch der Hygiene, Bd. ii, p. 40) that in 1898, maid-servants made up fifty-one percent of prostitutes in Berlin. Baumgarten reported that in Vienna, the proportion of servants is fifty-eight percent.
In England, according to the Report of a Select Committee of the Lords on the laws for the protection of children, sixty per cent, of prostitutes have been servants. F. Remo, in his Vie Galante en Angleterre, states the proportion as eighty per cent. It would appear to be even higher as regards the West End of London. Taking London as a whole the extensive statistics of Merrick (Work Among the Fallen), chaplain of the Millbank Prison, showed that out of 14,790 prostitutes, 5823, or about forty per cent., had previously been servants, laundresses coming next, and then dressmakers; classifying his data somewhat more summarily and roughly, Merrick found that the proportion of servants was fifty-three per cent.
In England, the Report of a Select Committee of the Lords on the laws for the protection of children states that sixty percent of prostitutes have been servants. F. Remo, in his Vie Galante en Angleterre, puts this figure at eighty percent. It seems to be even higher when looking specifically at the West End of London. When considering London as a whole, extensive statistics from Merrick (Work Among the Fallen), the chaplain of Millbank Prison, showed that out of 14,790 prostitutes, 5,823, or about forty percent, had previously worked as servants. Laundresses followed next, and then dressmakers. When Merrick summarized his data more roughly, he found that the percentage of servants was fifty-three percent.
In America, among two thousand prostitutes, Sanger states that forty-three per cent, had been servants, dressmakers coming next, but at a long interval, with six per cent. (Sanger, History of Prostitution, p. 524). Among Philadelphia prostitutes, Goodchild states that "domestics are probably in largest proportion," although some recruits may be found from almost any occupation.
In America, out of two thousand prostitutes, Sanger reports that forty-three percent had previously worked as servants, with dressmakers coming in next at a distant six percent. (Sanger, History of Prostitution, p. 524). Goodchild mentions that among Philadelphia prostitutes, "domestics are probably in the largest proportion," although some may come from nearly any occupation.
It is the same in other countries. In Italy, according to Tammeo (La Prostituzione, p. 100), servants come first among prostitutes with a proportion of twenty-eight per cent., followed by the group of dressmakers, tailoresses and milliners, seventeen per cent. In Sardinia, A Mantegazza states, most prostitutes are servants from the country. In Russia, according to Fiaux, the proportion is forty-five per cent. In Madrid, according to Eslava (as quoted by Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo (La Mala Vida, en Madrid, p. 239)), servants come at the head of registered prostitutes with twenty-seven per cent.—almost the same proportion as in Italy—and are followed by dressmakers. In Sweden, according to Welander (Monatshefte für Praktische Dermatologie, 1899, p. 477) among 2541 inscribed prostitutes, 1586 (or sixty-two per cent.) were domestic servants; at a long interval followed 210 seamstresses, then 168 factory workers, etc.
It’s the same in other countries. In Italy, according to Tammeo (La Prostituzione, p. 100), domestic workers make up the largest group among prostitutes at twenty-eight percent, followed by dressmakers, tailors, and milliners at seventeen percent. In Sardinia, A Mantegazza points out that most prostitutes are country servants. In Russia, Fiaux reports that the figure is forty-five percent. In Madrid, Eslava (as quoted by Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo (La Mala Vida, en Madrid, p. 239)) states that domestic workers lead the registered prostitutes at twenty-seven percent—almost the same proportion as in Italy—and are followed by dressmakers. In Sweden, according to Welander (Monatshefte für Praktische Dermatologie, 1899, p. 477), of 2541 registered prostitutes, 1586 (or sixty-two percent) were domestic workers; followed at a distance by 210 seamstresses, then 168 factory workers, and so on.
2. The Biological Factor of Prostitution.—Economic considerations, as we see, have a highly important modificatory influence on prostitution, although it is by no means correct to assert that they form its main cause. There is another question which has exercised many investigators: To what extent are prostitutes predestined to this career by organic constitution? It is generally admitted that economic and other conditions are an exciting cause of prostitution; in how far are those who succumb predisposed by the possession of abnormal personal characteristics? Some inquirers have argued that this predisposition is so marked that prostitution may fairly be regarded as a feminine equivalent for criminality, and that in a family in which the men instinctively turn to crime, the women instinctively turn to prostitution. Others have as strenuously denied this conclusion.
2. The Biological Factor of Prostitution.—Economic factors, as we can see, have a significant modifying influence on prostitution, although it's not entirely accurate to say that they are its primary cause. There's another question that many researchers have looked into: To what extent are prostitutes destined for this lifestyle because of their biological makeup? It's widely accepted that economic and other conditions are a triggering factor of prostitution; but to what degree are those who get involved predisposed by having abnormal personal traits? Some researchers have claimed that this predisposition is so strong that prostitution can be seen as a female counterpart to criminal behavior, suggesting that in families where men naturally lean toward crime, women tend to gravitate toward prostitution. Others have strongly contested this idea.
Lombroso has more especially advocated the doctrine that prostitution is the vicarious equivalent of criminality. In this he was developing the results reached, in the important study of the Jukes family, by Dugdale, who found that "there where the brothers commit crime, the sisters adopt prostitution;" the fines and imprisonments of the women of the family were not for violations of the right of property, but mainly for offences against public decency. "The psychological as well as anatomical identity of the criminal and the born prostitute," Lombroso and Ferrero concluded, "could not be more complete: both are identical with the moral insane, and therefore, according to the axiom, equal to each other. There is the same lack of moral sense, the same hardness of heart, the same precocious taste for evil, the same indifference to social infamy, the same volatility, love of idleness, and lack of foresight, the same taste for facile pleasures, for the orgy and for alcohol, the same, or almost the same, vanity. Prostitution is only the feminine side of criminality. And so true is it that prostitution and criminality are two analogous, or, so to say, parallel, phenomena, that at their extremes they meet. The prostitute is, therefore, psychologically a criminal: if she commits no offenses it is because her physical weakness, her small intelligence, the facility of acquiring what she wants by more easy methods, dispenses her from the necessity of crime, and on these very grounds prostitution represents the specific form of feminine criminality." The authors add that "prostitution is, in a certain sense, socially useful as an outlet for masculine sexuality and a preventive of crime" (Lombroso and Ferrero, La Donna Delinquente, 1893, p. 571).
Lombroso particularly promoted the idea that prostitution is a substitute for criminal behavior. He was building on findings from Dugdale's significant study of the Jukes family, which showed that "where the brothers commit crimes, the sisters turn to prostitution." The women in the family faced fines and imprisonment not for stealing or property crimes, but mostly for offenses related to public decency. "The psychological and anatomical similarities between criminals and born prostitutes," Lombroso and Ferrero concluded, "could not be clearer: both are fundamentally similar to the morally insane, and thus, according to the principle, they are equal. They share the same lack of moral understanding, the same coldness of heart, the same early inclination towards wrongdoing, the same indifference to social disgrace, the same volatility, preference for idleness, and lack of foresight, the same taste for easy pleasures, extravagant parties, and alcohol, and nearly the same vanity. Prostitution is simply the female version of criminal behavior. So much so that prostitution and criminality are two similar, or essentially parallel, phenomena that converge at their extremes. Therefore, the prostitute is, psychologically, a criminal: if she doesn’t commit crimes, it’s because her physical weakness, limited intelligence, and ability to obtain what she wants through easier means spare her from resorting to crime. For these reasons, prostitution represents a specific form of female criminality." The authors also note that "prostitution is, in a certain way, socially beneficial as a release for male sexuality and a deterrent for crime" (Lombroso and Ferrero, La Donna Delinquente, 1893, p. 571).
Those who have opposed this view have taken various grounds, and by no means always understood the position they are attacking. Thus W. Fischer (in Die Prostitution) vigorously argues that prostitution is not an inoffensive equivalent of criminality, but a factor of criminality. Féré, again (in Dégénérescence et Criminalité), asserts that criminality and prostitution are not equivalent, but identical. "Prostitutes and criminals," he holds, "have as a common character their unproductiveness, and consequently they are both anti-social. Prostitution thus constitutes a form of criminality." The essential character of criminals is not, however, their unproductiveness, for that they share with a considerable proportion of the wealthiest of the upper classes; it must be added, also, that the prostitute, unlike the criminal, is exercising an activity for which there is a demand, for which she is willingly paid, and for which she has to work (it has sometimes been noted that the prostitute looks down on the thief, who "does not work"); she is carrying on a profession, and is neither more nor less productive than those who carry on many more reputable professions. Aschaffenburg, also believing himself in opposition to Lombroso, argues, somewhat differently from Féré, that prostitution is not indeed, as Féré said, a form of criminality, but that it is too frequently united with criminality to be regarded as an equivalent. Mönkemöller has more recently supported the same view. Here, however, as usual, there is a wide difference of opinion as to the proportion of prostitutes of whom this is true. It is recognized by all investigators to be true of a certain number, but while Baumgarten, from an examination of eight thousand prostitutes, only found a minute proportion who were criminals, Ströhmberg found that among 462 prostitutes there were as many as 175 thieves. From another side, Morasso (as quoted in Archivio di Psichiatria, 1896, fasc. I), on the strength of his own investigations, is more clearly in opposition to Lombroso, since he protests altogether against any purely degenerative view of prostitutes which would in any way assimilate them with criminals.
Those who disagree with this perspective have taken various positions and often don't fully grasp the argument they're criticizing. For example, W. Fischer (in Die Prostitution) strongly argues that prostitution isn't a harmless version of criminal behavior, but rather a contributing factor to it. Féré (in Dégénérescence et Criminalité) claims that criminality and prostitution aren't just similar, but the same. He asserts, "Both prostitutes and criminals share a common trait of being unproductive, and therefore, they are both anti-social. Prostitution is thus a form of criminality." However, the core characteristic of criminals isn't their unproductiveness, which is also seen in many wealthy individuals from the upper classes. It's worth noting that, unlike criminals, prostitutes engage in an activity that is in demand, for which they are willingly compensated, and for which they must put in effort (it's sometimes pointed out that prostitutes look down on thieves because they "don't work"). They are pursuing a profession and are neither more nor less productive than those in many other respected professions. Aschaffenburg, believing he opposes Lombroso, argues differently from Féré, stating that while prostitution isn't a form of criminality, it's often associated with it too closely to be considered equivalent. Mönkemöller has recently supported this view as well. However, there is a wide variety of opinions on how many prostitutes this applies to. All researchers agree that it holds true for some, but while Baumgarten found only a tiny fraction of criminals among eight thousand prostitutes, Ströhmberg discovered that there were 175 thieves among 462 prostitutes. Additionally, Morasso (as quoted in Archivio di Psichiatria, 1896, fasc. I), based on his own research, is firmly against Lombroso's view, as he completely rejects any purely degenerative perspective on prostitutes that would link them to criminals.
The question of the sexuality of prostitutes, which has a certain bearing on the question of their tendency to degeneration, has been settled by different writers in different senses. While some, like Morasso, assert that sexual impulse is a main cause inducing women to adopt a prostitute's career, others assert that prostitutes are usually almost devoid of sexual impulse. Lombroso refers to the prevalence of sexual frigidity among prostitutes.[177] In London, Merrick, speaking from a knowledge of over 16,000 prostitutes, states that he has met with "only a very few cases" in which gross sexual desire has been the motive to adopt a life of prostitution. In Paris, Raciborski had stated at a much earlier period that "among prostitutes one finds very few who are prompted to libertinage by sexual ardor."[178] Commenge, again, a careful student of the Parisian prostitute, cannot admit that sexual desire is to be classed among the serious causes of prostitution. "I have made inquiries of thousands of women on this point," he states, "and only a very small number have told me that they were driven to prostitution for the satisfaction of sexual needs. Although girls who give themselves to prostitution are often lacking in frankness, on this point, I believe, they have no wish to deceive. When they have sexual needs they do not conceal them, but, on the contrary, show a certain amour-propre in acknowledging them, as a sufficient sort of justification for their life; so that if only a very small minority avow this motive the reason is that for the great majority it has no existence."
The issue of the sexuality of prostitutes, which is somewhat related to their tendency toward degeneration, has been addressed by different authors in various ways. Some, like Morasso, argue that sexual desire is a major reason why women become prostitutes, while others claim that most prostitutes are almost entirely lacking in sexual impulse. Lombroso notes the common occurrence of sexual frigidity among prostitutes. [177] In London, Merrick, drawing from his knowledge of over 16,000 prostitutes, says he has encountered "only a very few cases" where strong sexual desire motivated someone to pursue a life of prostitution. In Paris, Raciborski stated much earlier that "among prostitutes, very few are driven to libertinage by sexual passion." [178] Commenge, another careful observer of the Parisian prostitutes, argues that sexual desire shouldn't be considered one of the main reasons for prostitution. "I have asked thousands of women about this," he says, "and only a very small number have told me they resorted to prostitution for the sake of satisfying sexual needs. Although women who engage in prostitution are often not very open about this, I believe they aren’t trying to deceive. When they have sexual needs, they don't hide them but, rather, take pride in acknowledging them as a kind of justification for their lifestyle; so, the reason that only a very small minority admit to this motivation is that for the vast majority, it simply doesn’t exist."
There can be no doubt that the statements made regarding the sexual frigidity of prostitutes are often much too unqualified. This is in part certainly due to the fact that they are usually made by those who speak from a knowledge of old prostitutes whose habitual familiarity with normal sexual intercourse in its least attractive aspects has resulted in complete indifference to such intercourse, so far as their clients are concerned.[179] It may be stated with truth that to the woman of deep passions the ephemeral and superficial relationships of prostitution can offer no temptation. And it may be added that the majority of prostitutes begin their career at a very early age, long before the somewhat late period at which in women the tendency for passion to become strong, has yet arrived.[180] It may also be said that an indifference to sexual relationships, a tendency to attach no personal value to them, is often a predisposing cause in the adoption of a prostitute's career; the general mental shallowness of prostitutes may well be accompanied by shallowness of physical emotion. On the other hand, many prostitutes, at all events early in their careers, appear to show a marked degree of sensuality, and to women of coarse sexual fibre the career of prostitution has not been without attractions from this point of view; the gratification of physical desire is known to act as a motive in some cases and is clearly indicated in others.[181] This is scarcely surprising when we remember that prostitutes are in a very large proportion of cases remarkably robust and healthy persons in general respects.[182] They withstand without difficulty the risks of their profession, and though under its influence the manifestations of sexual feeling can scarcely fail to become modified or perverted in course of time, that is no proof of the original absence of sexual sensibility. It is not even a proof of its loss, for the real sexual nature of the normal prostitute, and her possibilities of sexual ardor, are chiefly manifested, not in her professional relations with her clients, but in her relations with her "fancy boy" or "bully."[183] It is quite true that the conditions of her life often make it practically advantageous to the prostitute to have attached to her a man who is devoted to her interests and will defend them if necessary, but that is only a secondary, occasional, and subsidiary advantage of the "fancy boy," so far as prostitutes generally are concerned. She is attracted to him primarily because he appeals to her personally and she wants him for herself. The motive of her attachment is, above all, erotic, in the full sense, involving not merely sexual relations but possession and common interests, a permanent and intimate life led together. "You know that what one does in the way of business cannot fill one's heart," said a German prostitute; "Why should we not have a husband like other women? I, too, need love. If that were not so we should not want a bully." And he, on his part, reciprocates this feeling and is by no means merely moved by self-interest.[184]
There’s no doubt that the claims about the sexual indifference of prostitutes are often way too extreme. This is partly because these statements usually come from people who base their opinions on encounters with older prostitutes, who have become completely indifferent to sexual relations due to their constant exposure to its less appealing sides when it comes to their clients.[179] You could say that for a woman with deep passions, the temporary and surface-level connections found in prostitution hold no allure. It’s also true that most prostitutes start their careers at a very young age, long before women typically develop stronger passions. [180] You could argue that indifference toward sexual relationships, seeing no personal value in them, often contributes to a woman choosing prostitution; the general emotional shallowness that some prostitutes exhibit might go hand in hand with shallow physical emotions. On the flip side, many prostitutes, especially early in their careers, display a notable level of sensuality, and for women with a coarse sense of sexuality, prostitution can indeed be appealing from that perspective; seeking physical pleasure is known to motivate some and is clearly expressed in others.[181] This isn’t surprising when you consider that many prostitutes are generally quite strong and healthy individuals.[182] They manage to handle the risks of their profession without much difficulty, and while their expressions of sexual feelings may change or become distorted over time due to their work, that doesn’t mean they originally lacked sexual sensitivity. It also doesn't prove they've lost it, since the true sexual nature and potential passion of a typical prostitute mostly show up in her interactions with her "fancy boy" or "bully."[183] It's true that the living conditions often make it almost beneficial for a prostitute to have a man attached to her who cares about her well-being and will defend her if needed, but that's only a secondary and occasional advantage regarding "fancy boys" in general. She is drawn to him mainly because he appeals to her personally, and she wants him for herself. Her attachment is primarily motivated by erotic feelings, involving not just sexual relations but also a desire for possession and shared interests, leading to a permanent and intimate life together. "You know that what one does for work cannot fill one's heart,” said a German prostitute; “Why shouldn't we have a husband like other women? I also need love. If that weren’t the case, we wouldn’t need a bully." And he, in return, shares this sentiment and is not just driven by self-interest.[184]
One of my correspondents, who has had much experience of prostitutes, not only in Britain, but also in Germany, France, Belgium and Holland, has found that the normal manifestations of sexual feeling are much more common in British than in continental prostitutes. "I should say," he writes, "that in normal coitus foreign women are generally unconscious of sexual excitement. I don't think I have ever known a foreign woman who had any semblance of orgasm. British women, on the other hand, if a man is moderately kind, and shows that he has some feelings beyond mere sensual gratification, often abandon themselves to the wildest delights of sexual excitement. Of course in this life, as in others, there is keen competition, and a woman, to vie with her competitors, must please her gentlemen friends; but a man of the world can always distinguish between real and simulated passion." (It is possible, however, that he may be most successful in arousing the feelings of his own fellow-country women.) On the other hand, this writer finds that the foreign women are more anxious to provide for the enjoyment of their temporary consorts and to ascertain what pleases them. "The foreigner seems to make it the business of her life to discover some abnormal mode of sexual gratification for her consort." For their own pleasure also foreign prostitutes frequently ask for cunnilinctus, in preference to normal coitus, while anal coitus is also common. The difference evidently is that the British women, when they seek gratification, find it in normal coitus, while the foreign women prefer more abnormal methods. There is, however, one class of British prostitutes which this correspondent finds to be an exception to the general rule: the class of those who are recruited from the lower walks of the stage. "Such women are generally more licentious—that is to say, more acquainted with the bizarre in sexualism—than girls who come from shops or bars; they show a knowledge of fellatio, and even anal coitus, and during menstruation frequently suggest inter-mammary coitus."
One of my correspondents, who has a lot of experience with prostitutes, not just in Britain but also in Germany, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands, has found that typical expressions of sexual feeling are much more common in British than in continental prostitutes. "I would say," he writes, "that in normal sex, foreign women are generally unaware of sexual excitement. I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a foreign woman who had even a hint of orgasm. British women, on the other hand, if a man is reasonably kind and shows that he has feelings beyond just physical pleasure, often lose themselves in the greatest pleasures of sexual excitement. Of course, like in any other profession, there is fierce competition, and to compete, a woman must please her clients; but a worldly man can always tell the difference between real and feigned passion." (It’s possible, however, that he may be most successful in stirring the emotions of women from his own country.) On the flip side, this writer observes that foreign women are more eager to ensure the enjoyment of their temporary partners and to understand what pleases them. "The foreign woman seems to make it her life's mission to discover some unusual way of sexual pleasure for her partner." For their own enjoyment as well, foreign prostitutes often request cunnilinctus, preferring it to normal sex, while anal sex is also common. The clear difference is that British women, when seeking pleasure, find it in normal intercourse, while foreign women lean toward more unconventional methods. However, there is one group of British prostitutes that this correspondent finds to be an exception to the general rule: those who come from lower levels of the theater. "Such women tend to be more promiscuous—that is, more familiar with the bizarre aspects of sexuality—than girls who work in shops or bars; they demonstrate an understanding of fellatio, and even anal sex, and during their periods often suggest inter-mammary sex."
On the whole it would appear that prostitutes, though not usually impelled to their life by motives of sensuality, on entering and during the early part of their career possess a fairly average amount of sexual impulse, with variations in both directions of excess and deficiency as well as of perversion. At a somewhat later period it is useless to attempt to measure the sexual impulse of prostitutes by the amount of pleasure they take in the professional performance of sexual intercourse. It is necessary to ascertain whether they possess sexual instincts which are gratified in other ways. In a large proportion of cases this is found to be so. Masturbation, especially, is extremely common among prostitutes everywhere; however prevalent it may be among women who have no other means of obtaining sexual gratification it is admitted by all to be still more prevalent among prostitutes, indeed almost universal.[185]
Overall, it seems that prostitutes, although not usually driven to their profession by desires for sex, generally have a typical level of sexual drive when they first start out, with some experiencing both higher and lower levels as well as various forms of sexual deviation. Later on, it’s no longer effective to gauge prostitutes' sexual urges based on how much enjoyment they get from having sex as part of their job. It's important to find out if they have sexual instincts that are satisfied in different ways. In many cases, this is indeed the situation. Masturbation, in particular, is extremely common among prostitutes everywhere; while it may also be widespread among women without other ways to find sexual satisfaction, it's widely recognized that it's even more common among prostitutes, practically universal.[185]
Homosexuality, though not so common as masturbation, is very frequently found among prostitutes—in France, it would seem, more frequently than in England—and it may indeed be said that it occurs more often among prostitutes than among any other class of women. It is favored by the acquired distaste for normal coitus due to professional intercourse with men, which leads homosexual relationships to be regarded as pure and ideal by comparison. It would appear also that in a considerable proportion of cases prostitutes present a congenital condition of sexual inversion, such a condition, with an accompanying indifference to intercourse with men, being a predisposing cause of the adoption of a prostitute's career. Kurella even regards prostitutes as constituting a sub-variety of congenital inverts. Anna Rüling in Germany states that about twenty per cent. prostitutes are homosexual; when asked what induced them to become prostitutes, more than one inverted woman of the street has replied to her that it was purely a matter of business, sexual feeling not coming into the question except with a friend of the same sex.[186]
Homosexuality, while not as common as masturbation, is often found among prostitutes—in France, it seems to occur more frequently than in England—and it can be said that it happens more among prostitutes than in any other group of women. This is influenced by their developed aversion to traditional intercourse due to their work with men, which makes homosexual relationships seem more pure and ideal in comparison. It also appears that a significant number of prostitutes have a natural tendency towards sexual inversion, which, along with a lack of interest in intercourse with men, may encourage them to pursue a career in prostitution. Kurella even suggests that prostitutes represent a subcategory of congenital inverts. Anna Rüling in Germany claims that about twenty percent of prostitutes are homosexual; when asked why they became prostitutes, many of these women have stated it was strictly a business decision, with sexual attraction only coming into play with same-sex friends.[186]
The occurrence of congenital inversion among prostitutes—although we need not regard prostitutes as necessarily degenerate as a class—suggests the question whether we are likely to find an unusually large number of physical and other anomalies among them. It cannot be said that there is unanimity of opinion on this point. For some authorities prostitutes are merely normal ordinary women of low social rank, if indeed their instincts are not even a little superior to those of the class in which they were born. Other investigators find among them so large a proportion of individuals deviating from the normal that they are inclined to place prostitutes generally among one or other of the abnormal classes.[187]
The occurrence of congenital inversion among sex workers—though we shouldn't assume sex workers are inherently degenerate as a group—raises the question of whether we might find a significantly higher number of physical and other anomalies among them. There isn't a consensus on this issue. Some experts consider sex workers to be just ordinary women of low social status, and their instincts may even be slightly better than those of the class they come from. Other researchers identify such a high percentage of individuals who differ from the norm that they tend to categorize sex workers as belonging to one or another of the abnormal groups.[187]
Baumgarten, in Vienna, from a knowledge of over 8000 prostitutes, concluded that only a very minute proportion are either criminal or psychopathic in temperament or organization (Archiv für Kriminal-Anthropologie, vol. xi, 1902). It is not clear, however, that Baumgarten carried out any detailed and precise investigations. Mr. Lane, a London police magistrate, has stated as the result of his own observation, that prostitution is "at once a symptom and outcome of the same deteriorated physique and decadent moral fibre which determine the manufacture of male tramps, petty thieves, and professional beggars, of whom the prostitute is in general the female analogue" (Ethnological Journal, April, 1905, p. 41). This estimate is doubtless correct as regards a considerable proportion of the women, often enfeebled by drink, who pass through the police courts, but it could scarcely be applied without qualification to prostitutes generally.
Baumgarten, in Vienna, analyzed data from over 8,000 prostitutes and concluded that only a very small percentage are either criminal or have a psychopathic temperament or personality (Archiv für Kriminal-Anthropologie, vol. xi, 1902). However, it's unclear if Baumgarten conducted any thorough and precise investigations. Mr. Lane, a police magistrate in London, stated based on his own observations that prostitution is "both a symptom and a result of the same deteriorated physical condition and weakened moral character that lead to the creation of male tramps, petty thieves, and professional beggars, of whom the prostitute is generally the female equivalent" (Ethnological Journal, April, 1905, p. 41). This assessment is likely accurate for a significant number of women, often weakened by alcohol, who appear in police courts, but it can hardly be applied to all prostitutes without further qualification.
Morasso (Archivio di Psichiatria, 1896, fasc. I) has protested against a purely degenerative view of prostitutes on the strength of his own observations. There is, he states, a category of prostitutes, unknown to scientific inquirers, which he calls that of the prostitute di alto bordo. Among these the signs of degeneration, physical or moral, are not to be found in greater number than among women who do not belong to prostitution. They reveal all sorts of characters, some of them showing great refinement, and are chiefly marked off by the possession of an unusual degree of sexual appetite. Even among the more degraded group of the bassa prostituzione, he asserts, we find a predominance of sexual, as well as professional, characters, rather than the signs of degeneration. It is sufficient to quote one more testimony, as set down many years ago by a woman of high intelligence and character, Mrs. Craik, the novelist: "The women who fall are by no means the worst of their station," she wrote. "I have heard it affirmed by more than one lady—by one in particular whose experience was as large as her benevolence—that many of them are of the very best, refined, intelligent, truthful, and affectionate. 'I don't know how it is,' she would say, 'whether their very superiority makes them dissatisfied with their own rank—such brutes or clowns as laboring men often are!—so that they fall easier victims to the rank above them; or whether, though this theory will shock many people, other virtues can exist and flourish entirely distinct from, and after the loss of, that which we are accustomed to believe the indispensable prime virtue of our sex—chastity. I cannot explain it; I can only say that it is so, that some of my most promising village girls have been the first to come to harm; and some of the best and most faithful servants I ever had, have been girls who have fallen into shame, and who, had I not gone to the rescue and put them in the way to do well, would infallibly have become "lost women"'" (A Woman's Thoughts About Women, 1858, p. 291). Various writers have insisted on the good moral qualities of prostitutes. Thus in France, Despine first enumerates their vices as (1) greediness and love of drink, (2) lying, (3) anger, (4) want of order and untidiness, (5) mobility of character, (6) need of movement, (7) tendency to homosexuality; and then proceeds to detail their good qualities: their maternal and filial affection, their charity to each other; and their refusal to denounce each other; while they are frequently religious, sometimes modest, and generally very honest (Despine, Psychologie Naturelle, vol. iii, pp. 207 et seq.; as regards Sicilian prostitutes, cf. Callari, Archivio di Psichiatria, fasc. IV, 1903). The charity towards each other, often manifested in distress, is largely neutralized by a tendency to professional suspicion and jealousy of each other.
Morasso (Archivio di Psichiatria, 1896, fasc. I) has argued against a purely negative view of prostitutes based on his own observations. He points out that there is a category of prostitutes, unknown to researchers, which he refers to as prostitutes di alto bordo. Among these women, signs of physical or moral decline are not more prevalent than among women outside of prostitution. They display a variety of personalities, some of which are highly refined, and are mainly distinguished by having an unusually high sexual drive. Even within the more degraded group known as bassa prostituzione, he claims we observe more sexual and professional traits rather than signs of decline. One more quote is worth mentioning, from a highly intelligent and principled woman, Mrs. Craik, the novelist: "The women who fall are by no means the worst of their class," she wrote. "I have heard it confirmed by more than one lady—particularly one whose experience matched her kindness—that many of them are among the very best: refined, intelligent, truthful, and affectionate. 'I don't know what it is,' she said, 'whether their very superiority makes them unhappy with their own status—considering how crude or boorish laboring men often are!—which leads them to become easier targets for those who are above them; or whether, though this idea might upset many, other virtues can exist and prosper completely separate from, and even after losing, what we typically think of as the fundamental virtue of our gender—chastity. I can't explain it; I can only say it's true that some of my most promising village girls have been the first to fall, and some of the best and most loyal servants I've ever had were girls who have faced shame, and who, if I hadn't rescued them and guided them to do well, would definitely have become 'lost women'" (A Woman's Thoughts About Women, 1858, p. 291). Various writers have pointed out the good moral attributes of prostitutes. For instance, in France, Despine first lists their vices as (1) greed and drinking, (2) dishonesty, (3) anger, (4) disorganization and messiness, (5) fluctuating character, (6) need for change, (7) a tendency toward homosexuality; then he outlines their positive qualities: their compassion for mothers and children, their support for one another, and their unwillingness to betray each other; they are often religious, sometimes modest, and generally quite honest (Despine, Psychologie Naturelle, vol. iii, pp. 207 et seq.; regarding Sicilian prostitutes, cf. Callari, Archivio di Psichiatria, fasc. IV, 1903). The kindness they show each other, particularly in times of trouble, is often countered by a tendency for professional suspicion and jealousy among themselves.
Lombroso believes that the basis of prostitution must be found in moral idiocy. If by moral idiocy we are to understand a condition at all closely allied with insanity, this assertion is dubious. There seems no clear relationship between prostitution and insanity, and Tammeo has shown (La Prostituzione, p. 76) that the frequency of prostitutes in the various Italian provinces is in inverse ratio to the frequency of insane persons; as insanity increases, prostitution decreases. But if we mean a minor degree of moral imbecility—that is to say, a bluntness of perception for the ordinary moral considerations of civilization which, while it is largely due to the hardening influence of an unfavorable early environment, may also rest on a congenital predisposition—there can be no doubt that moral imbecility of slight degree is very frequently found among prostitutes. It would be plausible, doubtless, to say that every woman who gives her virginity in exchange for an inadequate return is an imbecile. If she gives herself for love, she has, at the worst, made a foolish mistake, such as the young and inexperienced may at any time make. But if she deliberately proposes to sell herself, and does so for nothing or next to nothing, the case is altered. The experiences of Commenge in Paris are instructive on this point. "For many young girls," he writes, "modesty has no existence, they experience no emotion in showing themselves completely undressed, they abandon themselves to any chance individual whom they will never see again. They attach no importance to their virginity; they are deflowered under the strangest conditions, without the least thought or care about the act they are accomplishing. No sentiment, no calculation, pushes them into a man's arms. They let themselves go without reflexion and without motive, in an almost animal manner, from indifference and without pleasure." He was acquainted with forty-five girls between the ages of twelve and seventeen who were deflowered by chance strangers whom they never met again; they lost their virginity, in Dumas's phrase, as they lost their milk-teeth, and could give no plausible account of the loss. A girl of fifteen, mentioned by Commenge, living with her parents who supplied all her wants, lost her virginity by casually meeting a man who offered her two francs if she would go with him; she did so without demur and soon begun to accost men on her own account. A girl of fourteen, also living comfortably with her parents, sacrificed her virginity at a fair in return for a glass of beer, and henceforth begun to associate with prostitutes. Another girl of the same age, at a local fête, wishing to go round on the hobby horse, spontaneously offered herself to the man directing the machinery for the pleasure of a ride. Yet another girl, of fifteen, at another fête, offered her virginity in return for the same momentary joy (Commenge, Prostitution Clandestine, 1897, pp. 101 et seq.). In the United States, Dr. W. Travis Gibb, examining physician to the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, bears similar testimony to the fact that in a fairly large proportion of "rape" cases the child is the willing victim. "It is horribly pathetic," he says (Medical Record, April 20, 1907), "to learn how far a nickel or a quarter will go towards purchasing the virtue of these children."
Lombroso believes that the root of prostitution lies in moral stupidity. If we understand moral stupidity as a condition closely related to insanity, this claim is questionable. There doesn't seem to be a direct connection between prostitution and insanity, and Tammeo has shown (La Prostituzione, p. 76) that the number of prostitutes in different Italian regions is inversely related to the number of insane individuals; as insanity increases, prostitution decreases. However, if we mean a lesser degree of moral incapacity—that is, a dullness in understanding the regular moral values of society, which is largely influenced by a harsh early environment but may also stem from a natural predisposition—there's no doubt that slight moral incapacity is often found among prostitutes. It could be reasonable to say that any woman who sells her virginity for little in return is being foolish. If she gives herself for love, then she has, at worst, made a silly mistake, which young and inexperienced people can do at any time. But if she chooses to sell herself knowingly, and does this for practically nothing, the situation changes. Commenge’s experiences in Paris illustrate this point well. "For many young girls," he writes, "modesty doesn’t exist; they feel no shame in being completely undressed, and they often give themselves to random strangers they will never see again. They don’t value their virginity; they lose it under the strangest circumstances, without any thought about what they are doing. No feelings, no calculations, push them into a man’s arms. They surrender without reflection and without purpose, almost like animals, out of indifference and without pleasure." He knew forty-five girls aged twelve to seventeen who lost their virginity to chance strangers whom they never saw again; they lost their virginity, in Dumas's words, like losing their baby teeth, and could provide no reasonable explanation for the loss. A fifteen-year-old girl mentioned by Commenge, living with her parents who provided everything she needed, lost her virginity after casually meeting a man who offered her two francs if she would go with him; she went without question and soon started to approach men herself. A fourteen-year-old girl, also living comfortably with her parents, gave up her virginity at a fair for a glass of beer, and afterwards started to hang around with prostitutes. Another girl of the same age, at a local fair, wanting to ride a hobby horse, spontaneously offered herself to the man running the machinery for a ride. Yet another fifteen-year-old girl, at another fair, offered her virginity in exchange for the same fleeting pleasure (Commenge, Prostitution Clandestine, 1897, pp. 101 et seq.). In the United States, Dr. W. Travis Gibb, examining physician for the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, gives similar evidence that a significant number of "rape" cases involve children who are willing victims. "It is tragically revealing," he says (Medical Record, April 20, 1907), "to realize how far a nickel or a quarter can go in purchasing the virtue of these children."
In estimating the tendency of prostitutes to display congenital physical anomalies, the crudest and most obvious test, though not a precise or satisfactory one, is the general impression produced by the face. In France, when nearly 1000 prostitutes were divided into five groups from the point of view of their looks, only from seven to fourteen per cent, were found to belong to the first group, or that of those who could be said to possess youth and beauty (Jeannel, De la Prostitution Publique, 1860, p. 168). Woods Hutchinson, again, judging from an extensive acquaintance with London, Paris, Vienna, New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago, asserts that a handsome or even attractive-looking prostitute, is rare, and that the general average of beauty is lower than in any other class of women. "Whatever other evils," he remarks, "the fatal power of beauty may be responsible for, it has nothing to do with prostitution" (Woods Hutchinson, "The Economics of Prostitution," American Gynæcological and Obstetric Journal, September, 1895). It must, of course, be borne in mind that these estimates are liable to be vitiated through being based chiefly on the inspection of women who most obviously belong to the class of prostitutes and have already been coarsened by their profession.
When looking at the tendency of prostitutes to show congenital physical anomalies, the simplest and most obvious method, although not very precise or satisfactory, is to consider the general impression made by their faces. In France, when almost 1,000 prostitutes were separated into five groups based on their appearance, only about seven to fourteen percent were found in the first group, which included those who could be considered youthful and attractive (Jeannel, De la Prostitution Publique, 1860, p. 168). Woods Hutchinson, drawing from his extensive experience in London, Paris, Vienna, New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago, states that attractive or even good-looking prostitutes are rare, and that the overall level of beauty is lower than in any other group of women. "Whatever other problems," he comments, "the dangerous power of beauty may cause, it has nothing to do with prostitution" (Woods Hutchinson, "The Economics of Prostitution," American Gynæcological and Obstetric Journal, September, 1895). It's important to remember that these estimates may be skewed because they mainly depend on the observation of women who clearly belong to the profession and have already been hardened by their experiences.
If we may conclude—and the fact is probably undisputed—that beautiful, agreeable, and harmoniously formed faces are rare rather than common among prostitutes, we may certainly say that minute examination will reveal a large number of physical abnormalities. One of the earliest important physical investigations of prostitutes was that of Dr. Pauline Tarnowsky in Russia (first published in the Vratch in 1887, and afterwards as Etudes anthropométriques sur les Prostituées et les Voleuses). She examined fifty St. Petersburg prostitutes who had been inmates of a brothel for not less than two years, and also fifty peasant women of, so far as possible, the same age and mental development. She found that (1) the prostitute showed shorter anterior-posterior and transverse diameters of skull; (2) a proportion equal to eighty-four per cent. showed various signs of physical degeneration (irregular skull, asymmetry of face, anomalies of hard palate, teeth, ears, etc.). This tendency to anomaly among the prostitutes was to some extent explained when it was found that about four-fifths of them had parents who were habitual drunkards, and nearly one-fifth were the last survivors of large families; such families have been often produced by degenerate parents.
If we can conclude—and it's probably a widely accepted fact—that beautiful, pleasant, and well-proportioned faces are more rare than common among prostitutes, we can certainly say that a close examination will reveal a significant number of physical abnormalities. One of the earliest significant physical studies of prostitutes was conducted by Dr. Pauline Tarnowsky in Russia (first published in the Vratch in 1887, and later as Etudes anthropométriques sur les Prostituées et les Voleuses). She examined fifty prostitutes from St. Petersburg who had lived in a brothel for at least two years, along with fifty peasant women of, as far as possible, the same age and mental development. She found that (1) the prostitutes had shorter front-to-back and side-to-side measurements of the skull; (2) a proportion of eighty-four percent displayed various signs of physical degeneration (irregularly shaped skull, facial asymmetry, anomalies of the hard palate, teeth, ears, etc.). This tendency for anomalies among the prostitutes was somewhat explained when it was discovered that about four-fifths of them had parents who were habitual alcoholics, and nearly one-fifth were the last survivors of large families; such families have often been the result of degenerate parents.
The frequency of hereditary degeneration has been noted by Bonhoeffer among German prostitutes. He investigated 190 Breslau prostitutes in prison, and therefore of a more abnormal class than ordinary prostitutes, and found that 102 were hereditarily degenerate, and mostly with one or both parents who were drunkards; 53 also showed feeble-mindedness (Zeitschrift für die Gesamte Strafwissenschaft, Bd. xxiii, p. 106).
The frequency of hereditary degeneration has been observed by Bonhoeffer among German prostitutes. He studied 190 prostitutes in prison in Breslau, who were from a more troubled background than typical prostitutes, and found that 102 were hereditarily degenerate, mostly with one or both parents who were alcoholics; 53 also showed signs of mental impairment (Zeitschrift für die Gesamte Strafwissenschaft, Bd. xxiii, p. 106).
The most detailed examinations of ordinary non-criminal prostitutes, both anthropometrically and as regards the prevalence of anomalies, have been made in Italy, though not on a sufficiently large number of subjects to yield absolutely decisive results. Thus Fornasari made a detailed examination of sixty prostitutes belonging chiefly to Emilia and Venice, and also of twenty-seven others belonging to Bologna, the latter group being compared with a third group of twenty normal women belonging to Bologna (Archivio di Psichiatria, 1892, fasc. VI). The prostitutes were found to be of lower type than the normal individuals, having smaller heads and larger faces. As the author himself points out, his subjects were not sufficiently numerous to justify far-reaching generalizations, but it may be worth while to summarize some of his results. At equal heights the prostitutes showed greater weight; at equal ages they were of shorter stature than other women, not only of well-to-do, but of the poor class: height of face, bi-zygomatic diameter (though not the distance between zygomas), the distance from chin to external auditory meatus, and the size of the jaw were all greater in the prostitutes; the hands were longer and broader, compared to the palm, than in ordinary women; the foot also was longer in prostitutes, and the thigh, as compared to the calf, was larger. It is noteworthy that in most particulars, and especially in regard to head measurements, the variations were much greater among the prostitutes than among the other women examined; this is to some extent, though not entirely, to be accounted for by the slightly greater number of the former.
The most thorough studies of regular non-criminal prostitutes, both in terms of body measurements and the occurrence of anomalies, have been conducted in Italy, although not on a large enough group to produce completely conclusive results. For instance, Fornasari performed an in-depth analysis of sixty prostitutes primarily from Emilia and Venice, along with twenty-seven others from Bologna, comparing them to a third group of twenty ordinary women from Bologna (Archivio di Psichiatria, 1892, fasc. VI). The findings indicated that the prostitutes were considered to be of a lower type than the normal individuals, displaying smaller heads and larger faces. As the author notes, his sample size was not sufficient to draw broad conclusions, but it may be useful to summarize some of his findings. At the same height, the prostitutes weighed more; at the same age, they were shorter than other women, both from wealthy and poorer backgrounds: the height of the face, the bi-zygomatic width (though not the distance between zygomas), the distance from the chin to the external ear, and the jaw size were all greater in the prostitutes; their hands were longer and broader compared to the palm than in typical women; their feet were also longer, and their thighs, relative to their calves, were larger. Notably, in most aspects, especially regarding head measurements, the variations were much greater among the prostitutes than among the other women examined; this can be partially explained, though not entirely, by the slightly larger number of the former.
Ardu (in the same number of the Archivio) gave the result of observations (undertaken at Lombroso's suggestion) as to the frequency of abnormalities among prostitutes. The subjects were seventy-four in number and belonged to Professor Giovannini's Clinica Sifilopatica at Turin. The abnormalities investigated were virile distribution of hair on pubes, chest, and limbs, hypertrichosis on forehead, left-handedness, atrophy of nipple, and tattooing (which was only found once). Combining Ardu's observations with another series of observations on fifty-five prostitutes examined by Lombroso, it is found that virile disposition of hair is found in fifteen per cent. as against six per cent. in normal women; some degree of hypertrichosis in eighteen per cent.; left-handedness in eleven per cent. (but in normal women as high as twelve per cent. according to Gallia); and atrophy of nipple in twelve per cent.
Ardu (in the same issue of the Archivio) reported on observations (made at Lombroso's suggestion) regarding the frequency of abnormalities among prostitutes. The subjects included seventy-four individuals from Professor Giovannini's Clinica Sifilopatica in Turin. The abnormalities investigated were male-pattern hair distribution on the pubic area, chest, and limbs, excessive hair growth on the forehead, left-handedness, nipple atrophy, and tattooing (which was observed only once). By combining Ardu's findings with another set of observations on fifty-five prostitutes examined by Lombroso, it was determined that male-pattern hair distribution occurs in fifteen percent of the subjects, compared to six percent in normal women; some form of excessive hair growth in eighteen percent; left-handedness in eleven percent (but it occurs as high as twelve percent in normal women, according to Gallia); and nipple atrophy in twelve percent.
Giuffrida-Ruggeri, again (Atti della, Società Romana di Antropologia, 1897, p. 216), on examining eighty-two prostitutes found anomalies in the following order of decreasing frequency: tendency of eyebrows to meet, lack of cranial symmetry, depression at root of nose, defective development of calves, hypertrichosis and other anomalies of hair, adherent or absent lobule, prominent zigoma, prominent forehead or frontal bones, bad implantation of teeth, Darwinian tubercle of ear, thin vertical lips. These signs are separately of little or no importance, though together not without significance as an indication of general anomaly.
Giuffrida-Ruggeri, again (Atti della, Società Romana di Antropologia, 1897, p. 216), when examining eighty-two prostitutes, found anomalies in the following order of decreasing frequency: a tendency for eyebrows to meet, lack of cranial symmetry, a depression at the root of the nose, underdeveloped calves, excessive hair growth and other hair anomalies, fused or absent earlobes, prominent cheekbones, a prominent forehead or frontal bones, poor alignment of teeth, Darwinian tubercle of the ear, and thin vertical lips. While these signs are individually of little or no significance, collectively they indicate a general anomaly.
More recently Ascarilla, in an elaborate study (Archivio di Psichiatria, 1906, fasc. VI, p. 812) of the finger prints of prostitutes, comes to the conclusion that even in this respect prostitutes tend to form a class showing morphological inferiority to normal women. The patterns tend to show unusual simplicity and uniformity, and the significance of this is indicated by the fact that a similar uniformity is shown by the finger prints of the insane and deaf-mutes (De Sanctis and Toscano, Atti Società Romana Antropologia, vol. viii, 1901, fasc. II).
More recently, Ascarilla, in a detailed study (Archivio di Psichiatria, 1906, fasc. VI, p. 812) of the fingerprints of prostitutes, concludes that even in this aspect, prostitutes tend to belong to a group that displays morphological inferiority compared to normal women. The patterns tend to exhibit unusual simplicity and uniformity, and the importance of this is highlighted by the fact that a similar uniformity appears in the fingerprints of the insane and deaf-mutes (De Sanctis and Toscano, Atti Società Romana Antropologia, vol. viii, 1901, fasc. II).
In Chicago Dr. Harriet Alexander, in conjunction with Dr. E. S. Talbot and Dr. J. G. Kiernan, examined thirty prostitutes in the Bridewell, or House of Correction; only the "obtuse" class of professional prostitutes reach this institution, and it is not therefore surprising that they were found to exhibit very marked stigmata of degeneracy. In race nearly half of those examined were Celtic Irish. In sixteen the zygomatic processes were unequal and very prominent. Other facial asymmetries were common. In three cases the heads were of Mongoloid type; sixteen were epignathic, and eleven prognathic; five showed arrest of development of face. Brachycephaly predominated (seventeen cases); the rest were mesaticephalic; there were no dolichocephals. Abnormalities in shape of the skull were numerous, and twenty-nine had defective ears. Four were demonstrably insane, and one was an epileptic (H. C. B. Alexander, "Physical Abnormalities in Prostitutes," Chicago Academy of Medicine, April, 1893; E. S. Talbot, Degeneracy, p. 320; Id., Irregularities of the Teeth, fourth edition, p. 141).
In Chicago, Dr. Harriet Alexander, along with Dr. E. S. Talbot and Dr. J. G. Kiernan, examined thirty prostitutes at the Bridewell, or House of Correction. Only the "less sophisticated" group of professional prostitutes make it to this institution, so it’s not surprising they showed clear signs of degeneration. Almost half of those examined were Celtic Irish. In sixteen cases, the cheekbones were uneven and very prominent. Other facial asymmetries were common. Three had heads of Mongoloid type; sixteen were epignathic, and eleven were prognathic; five showed signs of arrested development of the face. Brachycephaly was the most common (seventeen cases); the others were mesaticephalic; there were no dolichocephals. There were many skull shape abnormalities, and twenty-nine had malformed ears. Four were clearly insane, and one was epileptic (H. C. B. Alexander, "Physical Abnormalities in Prostitutes," Chicago Academy of Medicine, April, 1893; E. S. Talbot, Degeneracy, p. 320; Id., Irregularities of the Teeth, fourth edition, p. 141).
It would seem, on the whole, so far as the evidence at present goes, that prostitutes are not quite normal representatives of the ranks into which they were born. There has been a process of selection of individuals who slightly deviate congenitally from the normal average and are, correspondingly, slightly inapt for normal life.[188] The psychic characteristics which accompany such deviation are not always necessarily of an obviously unfavorable nature; the slightly neurotic girl of low class birth—disinclined for hard work, through defective energy, and perhaps greedy and selfish—may even seem to possess a refinement superior to her station. While, however, there is a tendency to anomaly among prostitutes, it must be clearly recognized that that tendency remains slight so long as we consider impartially the whole class of prostitutes. Those investigators who have reached the conclusion that prostitutes are a highly degenerate and abnormal class have only observed special groups of prostitutes, more especially those who are frequently found in prison. It is not possible to form a just conception of prostitutes by studying them only in prison, any more than it would be possible to form a just conception of clergymen, doctors, or lawyers by studying them exclusively in prison, and this remains true even although a much larger proportion of prostitutes than of members of the more reputable professions pass through prisons; that fact no doubt partly indicates the greater abnormality of prostitutes.
It seems that, overall, based on the current evidence, prostitutes are not entirely typical representatives of the social class they were born into. There has been a selection process for individuals who are slightly different from the average and are, as a result, somewhat ill-suited for normal life.[188] The psychological traits that come with this difference aren’t always obviously negative; a slightly neurotic girl from a low-class background—unwilling to work hard due to low energy and perhaps a bit greedy and selfish—might even appear to have a sophistication that surpasses her social status. However, while there is some tendency towards abnormality among prostitutes, it’s important to recognize that this tendency remains slight when we consider the entire group of prostitutes fairly. Those researchers who claim that prostitutes are a severely degenerate and abnormal group have only looked at specific subgroups of prostitutes, particularly those frequently found in prison. It’s not possible to form a fair understanding of prostitutes by studying them only in prison, just as it wouldn’t be fair to understand clergymen, doctors, or lawyers by only looking at them in prison. This holds true even though a larger percentage of prostitutes than of those in more respected professions have been incarcerated; that fact likely suggests some level of greater abnormality among prostitutes.
It has, of course, to be remembered that the special conditions of the lives of prostitutes tend to cause in them the appearance of certain professional characteristics which are entirely acquired and not congenital. In that way we may account for the gradual modification of the feminine secondary and tertiary sexual characters, and the appearance of masculine characters, such as the frequent deep voice, etc.[189] But with all due allowance for these acquired characters, it remains true that such comparative investigations as have so far been made, although inconclusive, seem to indicate that, even apart from the prevalence of acquired anomalies, the professional selection of their avocation tends to separate out from the general population of the same social class, individuals who possess anthropometrical characters varying in a definite direction. The observations thus made seem, in this way, to indicate that prostitutes tend to be in weight over the average, though not in stature, that in length of arm they are inferior though the hands are longer (this has been found alike in Italy and Russia); they have smaller ankles and larger calves, and still larger thighs in proportion to their large calves. The estimated skull capacity and the skull circumference and diameters are somewhat below the normal, not only when compared with respectable women but also with thieves; there is a tendency to brachycephaly (both in Italy and Russia); the cheek-bones are usually prominent and the jaws developed; the hair is darker than in respectable women though less so than in thieves; it is also unusually abundant, not only on the head but also on the pudenda and elsewhere; the eyes have been found to be decidedly darker than those of either respectable women or criminals.[190]
It’s important to remember that the unique circumstances of prostitutes' lives often lead to certain traits that are completely learned and not inherent. This explains the gradual changes in their feminine secondary and tertiary sexual characteristics, and the emergence of masculine traits, like a deep voice, etc. However, even considering these acquired traits, it remains true that comparative studies conducted so far, though inconclusive, seem to suggest that the nature of their profession tends to attract individuals from the same social class who have specific physical traits that lean in a certain direction. These observations indicate that prostitutes tend to weigh more than average, although they are not taller. They have shorter arms despite having longer hands (this has been observed in both Italy and Russia); their ankles are smaller, but their calves are larger, and their thighs are even bigger in proportion to their calves. The estimated skull capacity, circumference, and diameters are somewhat below normal when compared to respectable women and even thieves; there seems to be a tendency toward a round skull shape (seen in both Italy and Russia); their cheekbones are usually prominent, and their jaws are more developed. Their hair tends to be darker than that of respectable women, but lighter than that of thieves; it's also unusually thick, both on their heads and in other areas. Lastly, their eyes have been found to be significantly darker than those of either respectable women or criminals.
So far as the evidence goes it serves to indicate that prostitutes tend to approximate to the type which, as was shown in the previous volume, there is reason to regard as specially indicative of developed sexuality. It is, however, unnecessary to discuss this question until our anthropometrical knowledge of prostitutes is more extended and precise.
So far as the evidence goes, it suggests that prostitutes tend to resemble the type that, as shown in the previous volume, is particularly indicative of developed sexuality. However, it is unnecessary to discuss this question until our anthropometric knowledge of prostitutes is more extensive and precise.
3. The Moral Justification of Prostitution.—There are and always have been moralists—many of them people whose opinions are deserving of the most serious respect—who consider that, allowing for the need of improved hygienic conditions, the existence of prostitution presents no serious problem for solution. It is, at most, they say, a necessary evil, and, at best, a beneficent institution, the bulwark of the home, the inevitable reverse of which monogamy is the obverse. "The immoral guardian of public morality," is the definition of prostitutes given by one writer, who takes the humble view of the matter, and another, taking the loftier ground, writes: "The prostitute fulfils a social mission. She is the guardian of virginal modesty, the channel to carry off adulterous desire, the protector of matrons who fear late maternity; it is her part to act as the shield of the family." "Female Decii," said Balzac in his Physiologie du Mariage of prostitutes, "they sacrifice themselves for the republic and make of their bodies a rampart for the protection of respectable families." In the same way Schopenhauer called prostitutes "human sacrifices on the altar of monogamy." Lecky, again, in an oft-quoted passage of rhetoric,[191] may be said to combine both the higher and the lower view of the prostitute's mission in human society, to which he even seeks to give a hieratic character. "The supreme type of vice," he declared, "she is ultimately the most efficient guardian of virtue. But for her, the unchallenged purity of countless happy homes would be polluted, and not a few who, in the pride of their untempted chastity, think of her with an indignant shudder, would have known the agony of remorse and of despair. On that one degraded and ignoble form are concentrated the passions that might have filled the world with shame. She remains, while creeds and civilizations rise and fall, the eternal priestess of humanity, blasted for the sins of the people."[192]
3. The Moral Justification of Prostitution.—There have always been moralists—many of whom have opinions that deserve serious respect—who believe that, given the need for better hygiene, prostitution itself is not a serious issue that needs solving. They argue it is, at most, a necessary evil and, at best, a beneficial institution, a support system for families, the unavoidable opposite of monogamy. One writer described prostitutes as "the immoral guardians of public morality," while another, taking a more elevated view, stated: "The prostitute fulfills a social mission. She safeguards purity, channels away adulterous desires, and protects women who fear late motherhood; her role is to serve as a shield for families." Balzac referred to prostitutes in his Physiologie du Mariage as "Female Decii," saying they sacrifice themselves for society and use their bodies as a defense for respectable families. Similarly, Schopenhauer described prostitutes as "human sacrifices on the altar of monogamy." Lecky, again, in a well-known rhetorical passage,[191] seems to merge both the higher and lower perspectives of the prostitute's role in society, aiming to assign it a solemn significance. "The ultimate symbol of vice," he stated, "she is paradoxically the most effective guardian of virtue. Without her, the unblemished purity of countless happy homes would be tainted, and many who, in their pride of being untempted, look at her in disgust would have faced the torment of regret and despair. All the shameful passions that could have pervaded the world are focused on that one degraded figure. She endures, while beliefs and cultures rise and fall, as the eternal priestess of humanity, condemned for the sins of the people."[192]
I am not aware that the Greeks were greatly concerned with the moral justification of prostitution. They had not allowed it to assume very offensive forms and for the most part they were content to accept it. The Romans usually accepted it, too, but, we gather, not quite so easily. There was an austerely serious, almost Puritanic, spirit in the Romans of the old stock and they seem sometimes to have felt the need to assure themselves that prostitution really was morally justifiable. It is significant to note that they were accustomed to remember that Cato was said to have expressed satisfaction on seeing a man emerge from a brothel, for otherwise he might have gone to lie with his neighbor's wife.[193]
I’m not aware that the Greeks had a major concern about the moral justification of prostitution. They didn’t let it turn into something very offensive and were mostly okay with it. The Romans usually accepted it too, but it seems they found it a bit harder to do. There was a serious, almost Puritan vibe among the old-school Romans, and they often felt the need to convince themselves that prostitution was morally okay. It’s worth noting that they liked to recall that Cato was said to be satisfied when he saw a man leaving a brothel, as it meant he might not be going to sleep with his neighbor’s wife.[193]
The social necessity of prostitution is the most ancient of all the arguments of moralists in favor of the toleration of prostitutes; and if we accept the eternal validity of the marriage system with which prostitution developed, and of the theoretical morality based on that system, this is an exceedingly forcible, if not an unanswerable, argument.
The social need for prostitution is the oldest argument used by moralists to support the acceptance of prostitutes. If we acknowledge the ongoing relevance of the marriage system that gave rise to prostitution and the moral theories built on that system, this argument becomes very compelling, if not impossible to refute.
The advent of Christianity, with its special attitude towards the "flesh," necessarily caused an enormous increase of attention to the moral aspects of prostitution. When prostitution was not morally denounced, it became clearly necessary to morally justify it; it was impossible for a Church, whose ideals were more or less ascetic, to be benevolently indifferent in such a matter. As a rule we seem to find throughout that while the more independent and irresponsible divines take the side of denunciation, those theologians who have had thrust upon them the grave responsibilities of ecclesiastical statesmanship have rather tended towards the reluctant moral justification of prostitution. Of this we have an example of the first importance in St. Augustine, after St. Paul the chief builder of the Christian Church. In a treatise written in 386 to justify the Divine regulation of the world, we find him declaring that just as the executioner, however repulsive he may be, occupies a necessary place in society, so the prostitute and her like, however sordid and ugly and wicked they may be, are equally necessary; remove prostitutes from human affairs and you would pollute the world with lust: "Aufer meretrices de rebus humanis, turbaveris omnia libidinibus."[194] Aquinas, the only theological thinker of Christendom who can be named with Augustine, was of the same mind with him on this question of prostitution. He maintained the sinfulness of fornication but he accepted the necessity of prostitution as a beneficial part of the social structure, comparing it to the sewers which keep a palace pure.[195] "Prostitution in towns is like the sewer in a palace; take away the sewers and the palace becomes an impure and stinking place." Liguori, the most influential theologian of more modern times, was of the like opinion.
The rise of Christianity, with its unique view on the "flesh," led to a significant increase in focus on the moral implications of prostitution. When prostitution wasn't outright condemned, it became necessary to morally justify it; a Church that held ascetic ideals couldn't just ignore such matters. Generally, we see that while more independent and irresponsible clergy tend to denounce prostitution, those theologians burdened with the serious responsibilities of church leadership often lean toward reluctantly justifying it. A key example of this is St. Augustine, who, after St. Paul, was a major architect of the Christian Church. In a treatise written in 386 to rationalize the Divine order of the world, he stated that just as an executioner, no matter how unpleasant, has a necessary role in society, so too do prostitutes and others like them, regardless of how sordid and immoral they may be; if you removed prostitutes from human affairs, you would fill the world with lust: "Aufer meretrices de rebus humanis, turbaveris omnia libidinibus." Aquinas, the only theological thinker in Christendom who can be compared to Augustine, shared his views on prostitution. He acknowledged the wrongness of fornication but accepted the need for prostitution as a beneficial part of social order, likening it to sewers that maintain a palace's cleanliness. "Prostitution in towns is like the sewer in a palace; take away the sewers and the palace becomes an impure and stinking place." Liguori, the most influential theologian of more recent times, held a similar opinion.
This wavering and semi-indulgent attitude towards prostitution was indeed generally maintained by theologians. Some, following Augustine and Aquinas, would permit prostitution for the avoidance of greater evils; others were altogether opposed to it; others, again, would allow it in towns but nowhere else. It was, however, universally held by theologians that the prostitute has a right to her wages, and is not obliged to make restitution.[196] The earlier Christian moralists found no difficulty in maintaining that there is no sin in renting a house to a prostitute for the purposes of her trade; absolution was always granted for this and abstention not required.[197] Fornication, however, always remained a sin, and from the twelfth century onwards the Church made a series of organized attempts to reclaim prostitutes. All Catholic theologians hold that a prostitute is bound to confess the sin of prostitution, and most, though not all, theologians have believed that a man also must confess intercourse with a prostitute. At the same time, while there was a certain indulgence to the prostitute herself, the Church was always very severe on those who lived on the profits of promoting prostitution, on the lenones. Thus the Council of Elvira, which was ready to receive without penance the prostitute who married, refused reconciliation, even at death, to persons who had been guilty of lenocinium.[198]
This inconsistent and somewhat lenient attitude toward prostitution was generally upheld by theologians. Some, following Augustine and Aquinas, allowed for prostitution to prevent greater evils; others were completely against it; and some permitted it in cities but not elsewhere. However, it was widely accepted by theologians that a prostitute has the right to her earnings and is not required to repay them.[196] Earlier Christian moralists had no problem arguing that renting a house to a prostitute for her work involved no sin; absolution was always granted for this, and abstention was not necessary.[197] Fornication, however, was always considered a sin, and from the twelfth century onward, the Church made organized efforts to reclaim prostitutes. All Catholic theologians agree that a prostitute must confess the sin of prostitution, and most, though not all, theologians believe that a man must also confess to having intercourse with a prostitute. At the same time, while there was some leniency towards the prostitute herself, the Church was very harsh towards those who profited from promoting prostitution, known as the lenones. Thus, the Council of Elvira, which welcomed the prostitute who married without requiring penance, denied reconciliation, even at the point of death, to those guilty of lenocinium.[198]
Protestantism, in this as in many other matters of sexual morality, having abandoned the confessional, was usually able to escape the necessity for any definite and responsible utterances concerning the moral status of prostitution. When it expressed any opinion, or sought to initiate any practical action, it naturally founded itself on the Biblical injunctions against fornication, as expressed by St. Paul, and showed no mercy for prostitutes and no toleration for prostitution. This attitude, which was that of the Puritans, was the more easy since in Protestant countries, with the exception of special districts at special periods—such as Geneva and New England in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries—theologians have in these matters been called upon to furnish religious exhortation rather than to carry out practical policies. The latter task they have left to others, and a certain confusion and uncertainty has thus often arisen in the lay Protestant mind. This attitude in a thoughtful and serious writer, is well illustrated in England by Burton, writing a century after the Reformation. He refers with mitigated approval to "our Pseudo-Catholics," who are severe with adultery but indulgent to fornication, being perhaps of Cato's mind that it should be encouraged to avoid worse mischiefs at home, and who holds brothels "as necessary as churches" and "have whole Colleges of Courtesans in their towns and cities." "They hold it impossible," he continues, "for idle persons, young, rich and lusty, so many servants, monks, friars, to live honest, too tyrannical a burden to compel them to be chaste, and most unfit to suffer poor men, younger brothers and soldiers at all to marry, as also diseased persons, votaries, priests, servants. Therefore as well to keep and ease the one as the other, they tolerate and wink at these kind of brothel-houses and stews. Many probable arguments they have to prove the lawfulness, the necessity, and a toleration of them, as of usery; and without question in policy they are not to be contradicted, but altogether in religion."[199]
Protestantism, like in many other areas of sexual morality, moved away from confession, often avoiding the need to take a clear stance on the moral implications of prostitution. When it did share an opinion or tried to promote action, it based its views on the Biblical warnings against fornication mentioned by St. Paul, showing little compassion for prostitutes and no tolerance for prostitution itself. This perspective, common among the Puritans, was easier to maintain since, in Protestant countries—aside from specific districts during certain times, like Geneva and New England in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries—religious leaders were more focused on offering moral guidance than implementing practical policies. They left practical actions to others, leading to confusion and uncertainty among ordinary Protestants. A thoughtful and serious writer from England, Burton, illustrates this view a century after the Reformation. He speaks with some disapproval of "our Pseudo-Catholics," who are harsh on adultery but lenient towards fornication, possibly believing, like Cato, that it should be encouraged to prevent greater issues at home. He argues that brothels are "as necessary as churches" and notes that these places have entire Colleges of Courtesans in their towns and cities. "They believe it's impossible," he continues, "for idle young men, rich and lustful servants, monks, and friars to live honorably; it's too much to expect them to be chaste. It's also inappropriate to deny poor men, younger brothers, and soldiers the chance to marry, as well as those who are ill, devoted to religion, or servants. So, to help both groups, they tolerate and ignore these types of brothels and stews. They have many compelling arguments to justify the legality, necessity, and toleration of them, much like with usury; and undoubtedly in terms of policy, they can't be contradicted, but they absolutely can be in matters of faith." [199]
It was not until the beginning of the following century that the ancient argument of St. Augustine for the moral justification of prostitution was boldly and decisively stated in Protestant England, by Bernard Mandeville in his Fable of the Bees, and at its first promulgation it seemed so offensive to the public mind that the book was suppressed. "If courtesans and strumpets were to be prosecuted with as much rigor as some silly people would have it," Mandeville wrote, "what locks or bars would be sufficient to preserve the honor of our wives and daughters?... It is manifest that there is a necessity of sacrificing one part of womankind to preserve the other, and prevent a filthiness of a more heinous nature. From whence I think I may justly conclude that chastity may be supported by incontinence, and the best of virtues want the assistance of the worst of vices."[200] After Mandeville's time this view of prostitution began to become common in Protestant as well as in other countries, though it was not usually so clearly expressed.
It wasn't until the beginning of the next century that St. Augustine's ancient argument for the moral justification of prostitution was boldly and decisively stated in Protestant England by Bernard Mandeville in his Fable of the Bees. At first, this idea was so shocking to the public that the book was banned. "If courtesans and strumpets were to be prosecuted as strictly as some foolish people would want," Mandeville wrote, "what locks or bars would be enough to protect the honor of our wives and daughters?... It is clear that we need to sacrifice one part of women to protect the other and avoid a much worse kind of filth. From this, I think it's fair to conclude that chastity can be upheld by incontinence, and the best virtues sometimes need the help of the worst vices." [200] After Mandeville’s time, this perspective on prostitution began to gain acceptance in Protestant and other countries, although it wasn't usually stated as clearly.
It may be of interest to gather together a few more modern examples of statements brought forward for the moral justification of prostitution.
It might be worthwhile to collect a few more current examples of arguments presented for the moral justification of prostitution.
Thus in France Meusnier de Querlon, in his story of Psaphion, written in the middle of the eighteenth century, puts into the mouth of a Greek courtesan many interesting reflections concerning the life and position of the prostitute. She defends her profession with much skill, and argues that while men imagine that prostitutes are merely the despised victims of their pleasures, these would-be tyrants are really dupes who are ministering to the needs of the women they trample beneath their feet, and themselves equally deserve the contempt they bestow. "We return disgust for disgust, as they must surely perceive. We often abandon to them merely a statue, and while inflamed by their own desires they consume themselves on insensible charms, our tranquil coldness leisurely enjoys their sensibility. Then it is we resume all our rights. A little hot blood has brought these proud creatures to our feet, and rendered us mistresses of their fate. On which side, I ask, is the advantage?" But all men, she adds, are not so unjust towards the prostitute, and she proceeds to pronounce a eulogy, not without a slight touch of irony in it, of the utility, facility, and convenience of the brothel.
Thus in France, Meusnier de Querlon, in his story of Psaphion, written in the mid-eighteenth century, has a Greek courtesan express many intriguing thoughts about the life and status of prostitutes. She skillfully defends her profession and argues that while men think of prostitutes as merely the despised victims of their pleasures, these would-be tyrants are actually fools who cater to the needs of the women they trample on and are equally worthy of the contempt they show. "We return disgust for disgust, as they must surely see. We often leave them with nothing but a statue, and while driven by their own desires, they wear themselves down over unresponsive charms, our calm detachment allows us to enjoy their sensitivity. Then it is we reclaim all our rights. A little hot blood has brought these proud beings to our feet and made us the mistresses of their fate. On which side, I ask, is the advantage?" But not all men, she adds, are so unfair to the prostitute, and she proceeds to offer a eulogy, tinged with a bit of irony, about the usefulness, ease, and convenience of the brothel.
A large number of the modern writers on prostitution insist on its socially beneficial character. Thus Charles Richard concludes his book on the subject with the words: "The conduct of society with regard to prostitution must proceed from the principle of gratitude without false shame for its utility, and compassion for the poor creatures at whose expense this is attained" (La Prostitution devant le Philosophe, 1882, p. 171). "To make marriage permanent is to make it difficult," an American medical writer observes; "to make it difficult is to defer it; to defer it is to maintain in the community an increasing number of sexually perfect individuals, with normal, or, in cases where repression is prolonged, excessive sexual appetites. The social evil is the natural outcome of the physical nature of man, his inherited impulses, and the artificial conditions under which he is compelled to live" ("The Social Evil," Medicine, August and September, 1906). Woods Hutchinson, while speaking with strong disapproval of prostitution and regarding prostitutes as "the worst specimens of the sex," yet regards prostitution as a social agency of the highest value. "From a medico-economic point of view I venture to claim it as one of the grand selective and eliminative agencies of nature, and of highest value to the community. It may be roughly characterized as a safety valve for the institution of marriage" (The Gospel According to Darwin, p. 193; cf. the same author's article on "The Economics of Prostitution," summarized in Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, November 21, 1895). Adolf Gerson, in a somewhat similar spirit, argues ("Die Ursache der Prostitution," Sexual-Probleme, September, 1908) that "prostitution is one of the means used by Nature to limit the procreative activity of men, and especially to postpone the period of sexual maturity." Molinari considers that the social benefits of prostitution have been manifested in various ways from the first; by sterilizing, for instance, the more excessive manifestations of the sexual impulse prostitution suppressed the necessity for the infanticide of superfluous children, and led to the prohibition of that primitive method of limiting the population (G. de Molinari, La Viriculture, p. 45). In quite another way than that mentioned by Molinari, prostitution has even in very recent times led to the abandonment of infanticide. In the Chinese province of Ping-Yang, Matignon states, it was usual not many years ago for poor parents to kill forty per cent. of the girl children, or even all of them, at birth, for they were too expensive to rear and brought nothing in, since men who wished to marry could easily obtain a wife in the neighboring province of Wenchu, where women were very easy to obtain. Now, however, the line of steamships along the coast makes it very easy for girls to reach the brothels of Shang-Hai, where they can earn money for their families; the custom of killing them has therefore died out (Matignon, Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, 1896, p. 72). "Under present conditions," writes Dr. F. Erhard ("Auch ein Wort zur Ehereform," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang I, Heft 9), "prostitution (in the broadest sense, including free relationships) is necessary in order that young men may, in some degree, learn to know women, for conventional conversation cannot suffice for this; an exact knowledge of feminine thought and action is, however, necessary for a proper choice, since it is seldom possible to rely on the certainty of instinct. It is good also that men should wear off their horns before marriage, for the polygamous tendency will break through somewhere. Prostitution will only spoil those men in whom there is not much to spoil, and if the desire for marriage is thus lost, the man's unbegotten children may have cause to thank him." Neisser, Näcke, and many others, have pleaded for prostitution, and even for brothels, as "necessary evils."
A lot of modern writers on prostitution argue that it has social benefits. For instance, Charles Richard ends his book on the topic with this: "Society's approach to prostitution should come from gratitude for its usefulness, without any false shame, and with compassion for the vulnerable individuals affected by it" (La Prostitution devant le Philosophe, 1882, p. 171). An American medical writer notes, "Making marriage permanent makes it harder; making it harder delays it; delaying it keeps more sexually mature individuals in the community with normal or, in cases of prolonged repression, excessive sexual desires. The social issue is a natural result of human physical nature, inherited impulses, and the artificial conditions imposed on them" ("The Social Evil," Medicine, August and September, 1906). Although Woods Hutchinson strongly condemns prostitution and sees prostitutes as "the worst examples of women," he views prostitution as a highly valuable social mechanism. "From a medical-economic perspective, I assert it as one of nature's key selective and eliminative forces, and of great importance to society. It can be roughly seen as a safety valve for marriage" (The Gospel According to Darwin, p. 193; cf. the same author's article on "The Economics of Prostitution," summarized in Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, November 21, 1895). In a somewhat similar vein, Adolf Gerson argues ("Die Ursache der Prostitution," Sexual-Probleme, September 1908) that "prostitution is one of the ways nature limits men's reproductive activities, particularly by postponing the age of sexual maturity." Molinari believes that the societal benefits of prostitution have appeared in various forms from the beginning; for example, by controlling the more extreme expressions of sexual impulses, prostitution has reduced the need for infanticide of excess children, thus putting an end to that primitive population control method (G. de Molinari, La Viriculture, p. 45). Recently, prostitution has even contributed to the decline of infanticide. In the Chinese province of Ping-Yang, Matignon mentions, it was common a few years ago for poor parents to kill about forty percent of their newborn daughters, or even all of them, because they were too costly to raise and offered no return, as men seeking wives could easily find one in the nearby province of Wenchu, where women were readily available. However, now the line of steamships along the coast allows girls to easily reach the brothels in Shang-Hai, where they can earn money for their families; thus, the practice of killing them has faded (Matignon, Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, 1896, p. 72). "Under current conditions," writes Dr. F. Erhard ("Auch ein Wort zur Ehereform," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang I, Heft 9), "prostitution (in the broadest sense, including casual relationships) is necessary for young men to somewhat understand women, as conventional conversation is not enough; a precise understanding of feminine thoughts and actions is essential for making the right choice since one cannot always rely on instinct. It is also beneficial for men to relieve themselves of their urges before marriage, as their polygamous tendencies may emerge somewhere. Prostitution will only negatively impact those men who have little to lose, and if it diminishes their desire for marriage, their unborn children may have reasons to be grateful to them." Neisser, Näcke, and many others have advocated for prostitution, and even for brothels, as "necessary evils."
It is scarcely necessary to add that many, among even the strongest upholders of the moral advantages of prostitution, believe that some improvement in method is still desirable. Thus Bérault looks forward to a time when regulated brothels will become less contemptible. Various improvements may, he thinks, in the near future, "deprive them of the barbarous attributes which mark them out for the opprobrium of the skeptical or ignorant multitude, while their recognizable advantages will put an end to the contempt aroused by their cynical aspect" (La Maison de Tolérance, Thèse de Paris, 1904).
It's hardly necessary to mention that many, even among the strongest supporters of the moral benefits of prostitution, believe that some changes in approach are still needed. For example, Bérault anticipates a time when regulated brothels will be viewed more favorably. He believes that various improvements may soon "remove the savage characteristics that lead to their condemnation by the skeptical or uninformed crowd, while their obvious benefits will eliminate the disdain caused by their cynical appearance" (La Maison de Tolérance, Thèse de Paris, 1904).
4. The Civilizational Value of Prostitution.—The moral argument for prostitution is based on the belief that our marriage system is so infinitely precious that an institution which serves as its buttress must be kept in existence, however ugly or otherwise objectionable it may in itself be. There is, however, another argument in support of prostitution which scarcely receives the emphasis it deserves. I refer to its influence in adding an element, in some form or another necessary, of gaiety and variety to the ordered complexity of modern life, a relief from the monotony of its mechanical routine, a distraction from its dull and respectable monotony. This is distinct from the more specific function of prostitution as an outlet for superfluous sexual energy, and may even affect those who have little or no commerce with prostitutes. This element may be said to constitute the civilizational value of prostitution.
4. The Civilizational Value of Prostitution.—The moral argument for prostitution comes from the idea that our marriage system is so incredibly valuable that we must keep an institution that supports it, no matter how unpleasant or objectionable it may be on its own. However, there's another argument in favor of prostitution that doesn’t get the attention it deserves. I'm talking about its role in adding an essential element of fun and variety to the structured complexity of modern life, providing a break from the monotony of its mechanical routine, and serving as a distraction from its dull and respectable sameness. This is different from the specific role of prostitution as a way to release excess sexual energy and can even impact those who have little or no interaction with sex workers. This aspect can be seen as the civilizational value of prostitution.
It is not merely the general conditions of civilization, but more specifically the conditions of urban life, which make this factor insistent. Urban life imposes by the stress of competition a very severe and exacting routine of dull work. At the same time it makes men and women more sensitive to new impressions, more enamored of excitement and change. It multiplies the opportunities of social intercourse; it decreases the chances of detection of illegitimate intercourse while at the same time it makes marriage more difficult, for, by heightening social ambitions and increasing the expenses of living, it postpones the time when a home can be created. Urban life delays marriage and yet renders the substitutes for marriage more imperative.[201]
It's not just the overall conditions of society, but more specifically the conditions of city life, that make this factor urgent. City living imposes a tough and demanding routine of monotonous work due to the pressure of competition. At the same time, it makes people more sensitive to new experiences and more attracted to excitement and change. It increases chances for social interaction; it lowers the likelihood of being caught in inappropriate relationships while also making marriage harder. By raising social ambitions and increasing living costs, it delays the time when a home can be established. City life postpones marriage but makes alternatives to marriage feel more necessary.[201]
There cannot be the slightest doubt that it is this motive—the effort to supplement the imperfect opportunities for self-development offered by our restrained, mechanical, and laborious civilization—which plays one of the chief parts in inducing women to adopt, temporarily or permanently, a prostitute's life. We have seen that the economic factor is not, as was once supposed, by any means predominant in this choice. Nor, again, is there any reason to suppose that an over-mastering sexual impulse is a leading factor. But a large number of young women turn instinctively to a life of prostitution because they are moved by an obscure impulse which they can scarcely define to themselves or express, and are often ashamed to confess. It is, therefore, surprising that this motive should find so large a place even in the formal statistics of the factors of prostitution. Merrick, in London, found that 5000, or nearly a third, of the prostitutes he investigated, voluntarily gave up home or situation "for a life of pleasure," and he puts this at the head of the causes of prostitution.[202] In America Sanger found that "inclination" came almost at the head of the causes of prostitution, while Woods Hutchinson found "love of display, luxury and idleness" by far at the head. "Disgusted and wearied with work" is the reason assigned by a large number of Belgian girls when stating to the police their wish to be enrolled as prostitutes. In Italy a similar motive is estimated to play an important part. In Russia "desire for amusement" comes second among the causes of prostitution. There can, I think, be little doubt that, as a thoughtful student of London life has concluded, the problem of prostitution is "at bottom a mad and irresistible craving for excitement, a serious and wilful revolt against the monotony of commonplace ideals, and the uninspired drudgery of everyday life."[203] It is this factor of prostitution, we may reasonably conclude, which is mainly responsible for the fact, pointed out by F. Schiller,[204] that with the development of civilization the supply of prostitutes tends to outgrow the demand.
There’s no doubt that one of the main reasons women choose to live as prostitutes, whether temporarily or permanently, is their desire to compensate for the limited opportunities for self-growth in our structured, mechanical, and demanding society. We’ve seen that the economic factor isn't the primary driver of this choice, as was previously thought. Additionally, there’s no strong reason to believe that an overpowering sexual desire is a major factor either. Many young women instinctively turn to a life of prostitution due to a vague impulse that they can barely articulate to themselves or are often embarrassed to admit. It’s surprising that this motive shows up prominently even in official statistics about prostitution. Merrick found in London that 5,000, or nearly a third, of the prostitutes he studied willingly left their homes or jobs "for a life of pleasure," which he listed as the main cause of prostitution.[202] In America, Sanger discovered that "inclination" ranked high among the reasons for prostitution, while Woods Hutchinson identified "love of display, luxury and idleness" as the top reason. Many Belgian girls told the police that they wanted to become prostitutes because they were "disgusted and tired of work." A similar motivation is believed to be significant in Italy. In Russia, "desire for amusement" ranks as the second reason for prostitution. I think it's clear that, as a thoughtful observer of London life concluded, the root of the prostitution issue is "an intense and uncontrollable craving for excitement, a serious and deliberate rebellion against the dullness of ordinary ideals and the uninspired grind of daily life."[203] It’s reasonable to conclude that this aspect of prostitution is mainly responsible for the observation made by F. Schiller,[204] that as civilization progresses, the supply of prostitutes tends to exceed the demand.
Charles Booth seems to be of the same opinion, and quotes (Life and Labor of the People, Third Series, vol. vii, p. 364) from a Rescue Committee Report: "The popular idea is, that these women are eager to leave a life of sin. The plain and simple truth is that, for the most part, they have no desire at all to be rescued. So many of these women do not, and will not, regard prostitution as a sin. 'I am taken out to dinner and to some place of amusement every night; why should I give it up?'" Merrick, who found that five per cent. of 14,000 prostitutes who passed through Millbank Prison, were accustomed to combine religious observance with the practice of their profession, also remarks in regard to their feelings about morality: "I am convinced that there are many poor men and women who do not in the least understand what is implied in the term 'immorality.' Out of courtesy to you, they may assent to what you say, but they do not comprehend your meaning when you talk of virtue or purity; you are simply talking over their heads" (Merrick, op. cit., p. 28). The same attitude may be found among prostitutes everywhere. In Italy Ferriani mentions a girl of fifteen who, when accused of indecency with a man in a public garden, denied with tears and much indignation. He finally induced her to confess, and then asked her: "Why did you try to make me believe you were a good girl?" She hesitated, smiled, and said: "Because they say girls ought not to do what I do, but ought to work. But I am what I am, and it is no concern of theirs." This attitude is often more than an instinctive feeling; in intelligent prostitutes it frequently becomes a reasoned conviction. "I can bear everything, if so it must be," wrote the author of the Tagebuch einer Verlorenen (p. 291), "even serious and honorable contempt, but I cannot bear scorn. Contempt—yes, if it is justified. If a poor and pretty girl with sick and bitter heart stands alone in life, cast off, with temptations and seductions offering on every side, and, in spite of that, out of inner conviction she chooses the grey and monotonous path of renunciation and middle-class morality, I recognize in that girl a personality, who has a certain justification in looking down with contemptuous pity on weaker girls. But those geese who, under the eyes of their shepherds and life-long owners, have always been pastured in smooth green fields, have certainly no right to laugh scornfully at others who have not been so fortunate." Nor must it be supposed that there is necessarily any sophistry in the prostitute's justification of herself. Some of our best thinkers and observers have reached a conclusion that is not dissimilar. "The actual conditions of society are opposed to any high moral feeling in women," Marro observes (La Pubertà, p. 462), "for between those who sell themselves to prostitution and those who sell themselves to marriage, the only difference is in price and duration of the contract."
Charles Booth appears to share the same view and cites (Life and Labor of the People, Third Series, vol. vii, p. 364) from a Rescue Committee Report: "The common belief is that these women are eager to escape a life of sin. The plain truth is that, for the most part, they don't want to be rescued at all. Many of these women do not, and will not, see prostitution as a sin. 'I go out to dinner and to various places for fun every night; why should I stop that?'" Merrick, who found that five percent of the 14,000 prostitutes who went through Millbank Prison engaged in religious observance alongside their profession, also notes regarding their views on morality: "I am convinced that many poor men and women do not at all understand what is implied by the term 'immorality.' Out of politeness to you, they may agree with what you say, but they do not grasp your meaning when you talk about virtue or purity; you are simply speaking over their heads" (Merrick, op. cit., p. 28). This same attitude can be found among prostitutes everywhere. In Italy, Ferriani mentions a fifteen-year-old girl who, when accused of being indecent with a man in a public park, denied it tearfully and with great indignation. He eventually got her to confess and then asked her: "Why did you try to convince me that you were a good girl?" She hesitated, smiled, and said: "Because they say girls shouldn't do what I do, but should work. But I am what I am, and it's none of their business." This attitude often goes beyond just instinct; among intelligent prostitutes, it frequently develops into a well-reasoned conviction. "I can endure anything, if that's how it has to be," wrote the author of the Tagebuch einer Verlorenen (p. 291), "even serious and honorable contempt, but I cannot endure scorn. Contempt—yes, if it is deserved. If a poor and pretty girl with a sick and bitter heart stands alone in life, abandoned, with temptations and seductions all around her, and despite that, out of inner conviction, she chooses the dull and monotonous path of renunciation and middle-class morality, I see in that girl a personality who has a certain justification for looking down with contemptuous pity on weaker girls. But those privileged ones who, under the watchful eyes of their guardians and lifelong owners, have always grazed in lush green fields, have absolutely no right to mock scornfully at others who have not been so fortunate." It should not be assumed that there’s necessarily any dishonesty in the prostitute's justification of herself. Some of our most thoughtful observers have come to a similar conclusion. "The actual conditions of society are contrary to any high moral feeling in women," Marro observes (La Pubertà, p. 462), "because the only difference between those who sell themselves into prostitution and those who sell themselves into marriage is the price and duration of the contract."
We have already seen how very large a part in prostitution is furnished by those who have left domestic service to adopt this life (ante p. 264). It is not difficult to find in this fact evidence of the kind of impulse which impels a woman to adopt the career of prostitution. "The servant, in our society of equality," wrote Goncourt, recalling somewhat earlier days when she was often admitted to a place in the family life, "has become nothing but a paid pariah, a machine for doing household work, and is no longer allowed to share the employer's human life."[205] And in England, even half a century ago, we already find the same statements concerning the servant's position: "domestic service is a complete slavery," with early hours and late hours, and constant running up and down stairs till her legs are swollen; "an amount of ingenuity appears too often to be exercised, worthy of a better cause, in obtaining the largest possible amount of labor out of the domestic machine"; in addition she is "a kind of lightning conductor," to receive the ill-temper and morbid feelings of her mistress and the young ladies; so that, as some have said, "I felt so miserable I did not care what became of me, I wished I was dead."[206] The servant is deprived of all human relationships; she must not betray the existence of any simple impulse, or natural need. At the same time she lives on the fringe of luxury; she is surrounded by the tantalizing visions of pleasure and amusement for which her fresh young nature craves.[207] It is not surprising that, repelled by unrelieved drudgery and attracted by idle luxury, she should take the plunge which will alone enable her to enjoy the glittering aspects of civilization which seem so desirable to her.[208]
We have already seen how significant a role in prostitution is played by those who have left domestic work to take up this lifestyle (ante p. 264). It's not hard to find evidence in this situation of the kind of impulse that drives a woman to choose a career in prostitution. "The servant, in our society of equality," wrote Goncourt, reflecting on earlier times when she often had a place in family life, "has become nothing but a paid outcast, a machine for doing housework, and is no longer allowed to be part of her employer's human life." [205] Even in England, half a century ago, similar statements about the servant's position appeared: "domestic service is a type of complete slavery," with early mornings and late nights, and constant running up and down stairs until her legs swell; "an amount of creativity often seems to be employed, deserving of a better cause, in squeezing out the maximum amount of labor from the domestic worker"; additionally, she acts as "a kind of lightning rod," absorbing the bad moods and negative feelings of her employer and the young ladies; so that, as some have said, "I felt so miserable I didn't care what happened to me, I wished I was dead." [206] The servant is stripped of all human connections; she cannot show any simple emotions or natural needs. At the same time, she exists on the edge of luxury; she is surrounded by the enticing images of pleasure and entertainment that her young, vibrant self yearns for. [207] It’s not surprising that, turned off by relentless drudgery and drawn in by idle luxury, she would take the leap that would allow her to enjoy the sparkling aspects of civilization that seem so appealing to her. [208]
It is sometimes stated that the prevalence of prostitution among girls who were formerly servants is due to the immense numbers of servants who are seduced by their masters or the young men of the family, and are thus forced on to the streets. Undoubtedly in a certain proportion of cases, perhaps sometimes a fairly considerable proportion, this is a decisive factor in the matter, but it scarcely seems to be the chief factor. The existence of relationships between servants and masters, it must be remembered, by no means necessarily implies seduction. In a large number of cases the servant in a household is, in sexual matters, the teacher rather than the pupil. (In "The Sexual Impulse in Women," in the third volume of these Studies, I have discussed the part played by servants as sexual initiators of the young boys in the households in which they are placed.) The more precise statistics of the causes of prostitution seldom assign seduction as the main determining factor in more than about twenty per cent. of cases, though this is obviously one of the most easily avowable motives (see ante, p. 256). Seduction by any kind of employer constitutes only a proportion (usually less than half) even of these cases. The special case of seduction of servants by masters can thus play no very considerable part as a factor of prostitution.
It’s sometimes said that the high rates of prostitution among girls who used to be servants are due to the large number of those girls who are seduced by their employers or the young men in the household, which then pushes them onto the streets. While this is definitely a factor for some cases, and perhaps even a significant one, it doesn’t seem to be the main reason. It’s important to remember that relationships between servants and their employers don’t necessarily mean seduction. In many situations, the servant is actually the one teaching rather than being taught in sexual matters. (In "The Sexual Impulse in Women," in the third volume of these Studies, I discuss how servants act as sexual initiators for the young boys in the families where they work.) More detailed statistics about the reasons behind prostitution rarely identify seduction as the primary cause in more than about twenty percent of cases, even though it’s one of the easier motives to admit (see ante, p. 256). Seduction by any kind of employer accounts for only a portion (usually less than half) of those cases. Therefore, the specific instance of masters seducing their servants doesn’t play a significant role as a factor in prostitution.
The statistics of the parentage of illegitimate children have some bearing on this question. In a series of 180 unmarried mothers assisted by the Berlin Bund für Mutterschutz, particulars are given of the occupations both of the mothers, and, as far as possible, of the fathers. The former were one-third servant-girls, and the great majority of the remainder assistants in trades or girls carrying on work at home. At the head of the fathers (among 120 cases) came artisans (33), followed by tradespeople (22); only a small proportion (20 to 25) could be described as "gentlemen," and even this proportion loses some of its significance when it is pointed out that some of the girls were also of the middle-class; in nineteen cases the fathers were married men (Mutterschutz, January, 1907, p. 45).
The statistics on the parentage of children born out of wedlock are relevant to this issue. In a study of 180 unmarried mothers supported by the Berlin Bund für Mutterschutz, details are provided about the occupations of both the mothers and, where possible, the fathers. One-third of the mothers were domestic workers, and most of the others were assistants in various trades or engaged in work from home. Among the fathers (from 120 cases), the largest group were artisans (33), followed by tradespeople (22); only a small percentage (20 to 25) could be classified as "gentlemen," and this percentage loses some of its significance since some of the girls were also from middle-class backgrounds. In nineteen cases, the fathers were married men (Mutterschutz, January, 1907, p. 45).
Most authorities in most countries are of opinion that girls who eventually (usually between the ages of fifteen and twenty) become prostitutes have lost their virginity at an early age, and in the great majority of cases through men of their own class. "The girl of the people falls by the people," stated Reuss in France (La Prostitution, p. 41). "It is her like, workers like herself, who have the first fruits of her beauty and virginity. The man of the world who covers her with gold and jewels only has their leavings." Martineau, again (De la Prostitution Clandestine, 1885), showed that prostitutes are usually deflowered by men of their own class. And Jeannel, in Bordeaux, found reason for believing that it is not chiefly their masters who lead servants astray; they often go into service because they have been seduced in the country, while lazy, greedy, and unintelligent girls are sent from the country into the town to service. In Edinburgh, W. Tait (Magdalenism, 1842) found that soldiers more than any other class in the community are the seducers of women, the Highlanders being especially notorious in this respect. Soldiers have this reputation everywhere, and in Germany especially it is constantly found that the presence of the soldiery in a country district, as at the annual manœuvres, is the cause of unchastity and illegitimate births; it is so also in Austria, where, long ago, Gross-Hoffinger stated that soldiers were responsible for at least a third of all illegitimate births, a share out of all proportion to their numbers. In Italy, Marro, investigating the occasion of the loss of virginity in twenty-two prostitutes, found that ten gave themselves more or less spontaneously to lovers or masters, ten yielded in the expectation of marriage, and two were outraged (La Pubertà, p. 461). The loss of virginity, Marro adds, though it may not be the direct cause of prostitution, often leads on to it. "When a door has once been broken in," a prostitute said to him, "it is difficult to keep it closed." In Sardinia, as A. Mantegazza and Ciuffo found, prostitutes are very largely servants from the country who have already been deflowered by men of their own class.
Most authorities in most countries believe that girls who eventually become prostitutes, usually between the ages of fifteen and twenty, have lost their virginity at a young age, and in most cases this happens with men from their own social class. “The girl of the people falls by the people,” stated Reuss in France (La Prostitution, p. 41). “It is her peers, workers like herself, who have the first claims on her beauty and virginity. The wealthy man who adorns her with gold and jewels only gets what’s left.” Martineau also pointed out in (De la Prostitution Clandestine, 1885) that prostitutes are usually deflowered by men from their own class. Jeannel, in Bordeaux, found evidence that it's not mostly masters who lead servants astray; they often enter service because they’ve been seduced in the countryside, while lazy, greedy, and unintelligent girls are sent from the country to the city for work. In Edinburgh, W. Tait (Magdalenism, 1842) found that soldiers, more than any other class, are the seducers of women, with Highlanders being particularly notorious in this regard. Soldiers have this reputation everywhere, and especially in Germany, it’s often seen that the presence of soldiers in rural areas, such as during annual maneuvers, leads to promiscuity and illegitimate births; this is also true in Austria, where long ago, Gross-Hoffinger stated that soldiers were responsible for at least a third of all illegitimate births, a number disproportionately high compared to their size. In Italy, Marro, investigating the reasons behind the loss of virginity in twenty-two prostitutes, found that ten more or less willingly gave themselves to lovers or masters, ten did so in the hope of marriage, and two were assaulted (La Pubertà, p. 461). Marro adds that while the loss of virginity may not directly cause prostitution, it often leads to it. “Once a door has been broken down,” a prostitute told him, “it’s hard to keep it closed.” In Sardinia, as A. Mantegazza and Ciuffo discovered, many prostitutes are primarily servants from the countryside who have already been deflowered by men from their own class.
This civilizational factor of prostitution, the influence of luxury and excitement and refinement in attracting the girl of the people, as the flame attracts the moth, is indicated by the fact that it is the country-dwellers who chiefly succumb to the fascination. The girls whose adolescent explosive and orgiastic impulses, sometimes increased by a slight congenital lack of nervous balance, have been latent in the dull monotony of country life and heightened by the spectacle of luxury acting on the unrelieved drudgery of town life, find at last their complete gratification in the career of a prostitute. To the town girl, born and bred in the town, this career has not usually much attraction, unless she has been brought up from the first in an environment that predisposes her to adopt it. She is familiar from childhood with the excitements of urban civilization and they do not intoxicate her; she is, moreover, more shrewd to take care of herself than the country girl, and too well acquainted with the real facts of the prostitute's life to be very anxious to adopt her career. Beyond this, also, it is probable that the stocks she belongs to possess a native or acquired power of resistance to unbalancing influences which has enabled them to survive in urban life. She has become immune to the poisons of that life.[209]
This societal factor of prostitution, the appeal of luxury and excitement that draws in girls from working-class backgrounds like moths to a flame, is evident in the fact that it's mainly rural girls who fall for this allure. These girls, whose intense adolescent desires have been suppressed by the dull routine of country life, are often intensified by the sight of luxury in the drudgery of city life, ultimately finding fulfillment in the life of a prostitute. For girls raised in the city, this path isn't usually appealing unless they've grown up in an environment that pushes them toward it. They're familiar with the thrills of urban life from a young age, so they don’t find them intoxicating; they are also generally more street-smart than rural girls and know too much about the harsh realities of a prostitute's life to eagerly embrace that career. Furthermore, it's likely that their social background provides them with a natural or learned resilience against life’s destabilizing influences, allowing them to thrive in city life. They've become immune to the negative aspects of that lifestyle.[209]
In all great cities a large proportion, if not the majority, of the inhabitants have usually been born outside the city (in London only about fifty per cent. of heads of households are definitely reported as born in London); and it is not therefore surprising that prostitutes also should often be outsiders. Still it remains a significant fact that so typically urban a phenomenon as prostitution should be so largely recruited from the country. This is everywhere the case. Merrick enumerates the regions from which came some 14,000 prostitutes who passed through Millbank Prison. Middlesex, Kent, Surrey, Essex and Devon are the counties that stand at the head, and Merrick estimates that the contingent of London from the four counties which make up London was 7000, or one-half of the whole; military towns like Colchester and naval ports like Plymouth supply many prostitutes to London; Ireland furnished many more than Scotland, and Germany far more than any other European country, France being scarcely represented at all (Merrick, Work Among the Fallen, 1890, pp. 14-18). It is, of course, possible that the proportions among those who pass through a prison do not accurately represent the proportions among prostitutes generally. The registers of the London Salvation Army Rescue Home show that sixty per cent. of the girls and women come from the provinces (A. Sherwell, Life in West London, Ch. V). This is exactly the same proportion as Tait found among prostitutes generally, half a century earlier, in Edinburgh. Sanger found that of 2000 prostitutes in New York as many as 1238 were born abroad (706 in Ireland), while of the remaining 762 only half were born in the State of New York, and clearly (though the exact figures are not given) a still smaller proportion in New York City. Prostitutes come from the North—where the climate is uncongenial, and manufacturing and sedentary occupations prevail—much more than from the South; thus Maine, a cold bleak maritime State, sent twenty-four of these prostitutes to New York, while equidistant Virginia, which at the same rate should have sent seventy-two, only sent nine; there was a similar difference between Rhode Island and Maryland (Sanger, History of Prostitution, p. 452). It is instructive to see here the influence of a dreary climate and monotonous labor in stimulating the appetite for a "life of pleasure." In France, as shown by a map in Parent-Duchâtelet's work (vol. i, pp. 37-64, 1857), if the country is divided into five zones, on the whole running east and west, there is a steady and progressive decrease in the number of prostitutes each zone sends to Paris, as we descend southwards. Little more than a third seem to belong to Paris, and, as in America, it is the serious and hard-working North, with its relatively cold climate, which furnishes the largest contingent; even in old France, Dufour remarks (op. cit., vol. iv, Ch. XV), prostitution, as the fabliaux and romans show, was less infamous in the langue d'oil than in the langue d'oc, so that they were doubtless rare in the South. At a later period Reuss states (La Prostitution, p. 12) that "nearly all the prostitutes of Paris come from the provinces." Jeannel found that of one thousand Bordeaux prostitutes only forty-six belonged to the city itself, and Potton (Appendix to Parent-Duchâtelet, vol. ii, p. 446) states that of nearly four thousand Lyons prostitutes only 376 belonged to Lyons. In Vienna, in 1873, Schrank remarks that of over 1500 prostitutes only 615 were born in Vienna. The general rule, it will be seen, though the variations are wide, is that little more than a third of a city's prostitutes are children of the city.
In every major city, a large portion, if not the majority, of the residents were usually born outside the city (in London, only about fifty percent of heads of households are actually reported as being born in London); so it’s not surprising that prostitutes often come from outside as well. However, it remains a noteworthy fact that such a distinctly urban issue as prostitution is largely filled by people from rural areas. This is true everywhere. Merrick lists the regions from which around 14,000 prostitutes who passed through Millbank Prison came. Middlesex, Kent, Surrey, Essex, and Devon lead the list, and Merrick estimates that about 7,000, or half of the total, came from the four counties that comprise London; military towns like Colchester and naval ports like Plymouth also send many prostitutes to London, while Ireland provided many more than Scotland, and Germany outnumbered all other European countries, with France hardly contributing at all (Merrick, Work Among the Fallen, 1890, pp. 14-18). Of course, the figures for those who pass through a prison might not accurately represent the overall proportions among prostitutes. The London Salvation Army Rescue Home records show that sixty percent of the girls and women come from outside London (A. Sherwell, Life in West London, Ch. V). This is exactly the same proportion that Tait found among prostitutes in Edinburgh fifty years earlier. Sanger found that out of 2,000 prostitutes in New York, as many as 1,238 were born abroad (706 in Ireland), while of the remaining 762, only half were born in New York State, and clearly (though the exact figures aren't provided) an even smaller percentage were born in New York City. Prostitutes come from the North—where the climate is harsh, and jobs tend to be in manufacturing and sedentary work—far more than from the South; for example, Maine, a cold and bleak coastal state, sent twenty-four prostitutes to New York, while Virginia, which is the same distance away and should have sent seventy-two at that rate, only sent nine; there was a similar difference between Rhode Island and Maryland (Sanger, History of Prostitution, p. 452). It’s interesting to observe how a dreary climate and monotonous work can increase the desire for a "life of pleasure." In France, as shown by a map in Parent-Duchâtelet's work (vol. i, pp. 37-64, 1857), if the country is divided into five zones stretching east to west, there is a consistent and gradual decrease in the number of prostitutes each zone sends to Paris as we move south. A little over a third seem to belong to Paris, and like in America, it’s the serious and industrious North, with its relatively colder climate, that provides the largest share; even in old France, Dufour notes (op. cit., vol. iv, Ch. XV) that prostitution, as shown in the fabliaux and romans, was viewed with less infamy in the northern regions than in the southern areas, so it was undoubtedly rare in the South. Later, Reuss states (La Prostitution, p. 12) that "almost all the prostitutes of Paris come from the provinces." Jeannel found that of one thousand Bordeaux prostitutes, only forty-six were from the city itself, and Potton (Appendix to Parent-Duchâtelet, vol. ii, p. 446) states that out of nearly four thousand prostitutes in Lyons, only 376 were from Lyons. In Vienna, in 1873, Schrank notes that out of over 1,500 prostitutes, only 615 were born in Vienna. The general rule, despite the wide variations, is that just a bit more than a third of a city's prostitutes are locals.
It is interesting to note that this tendency of the prostitute to reach cities from afar, this migratory tendency—which they nowadays share with waiters—is no merely modern phenomenon. "There are few cities in Lombardy, or France, or Gaul," wrote St. Boniface nearly twelve centuries ago, "in which there is not an adulteress or prostitute of the English nation," and the Saint attributes this to the custom of going on pilgrimage to foreign shrines. At the present time there is no marked English element among Continental prostitutes. Thus in Paris, according to Reuss (La Prostitution, p. 12), the foreign prostitutes in decreasing order are Belgian, German (Alsace-Lorraine), Swiss (especially Geneva), Italian, Spanish, and only then English. Connoisseurs in this matter say, indeed, that the English prostitute, as compared with her Continental (and especially French) sister, fails to show to advantage, being usually grasping as regards money and deficient in charm.
It’s interesting to note that the trend of prostitutes migrating to cities isn’t just a modern thing; it’s something they share today with waiters. “There are few cities in Lombardy, France, or Gaul,” wrote St. Boniface nearly twelve centuries ago, “where you won’t find an adulteress or prostitute from England,” and the Saint linked this to the practice of going on pilgrimage to foreign shrines. Nowadays, there isn't a noticeable English presence among prostitutes in Europe. For instance, in Paris, according to Reuss (La Prostitution, p. 12), the foreign prostitutes rank in this order: Belgian, German (from Alsace-Lorraine), Swiss (especially from Geneva), Italian, Spanish, and only then English. Experts in this field say that the English prostitute, compared to her Continental (especially French) counterparts, tends to come off poorly, often being more money-minded and lacking in charm.
It is the appeal of civilization, though not of what is finest and best in civilization, which more than any other motive, calls women to the career of a prostitute. It is now necessary to point out that for the man also, the same appeal makes itself felt in the person of the prostitute. The common and ignorant assumption that prostitution exists to satisfy the gross sensuality of the young unmarried man, and that if he is taught to bridle gross sexual impulse or induced to marry early the prostitute must be idle, is altogether incorrect. If all men married when quite young, not only would the remedy be worse than the disease—a point which it would be out of place to discuss here—but the remedy would not cure the disease. The prostitute is something more than a channel to drain off superfluous sexual energy, and her attraction by no means ceases when men are married, for a large number of the men who visit prostitutes, if not the majority, are married. And alike whether they are married or unmarried the motive is not one of uncomplicated lust.
It’s the allure of civilization, although not its highest and best aspects, that primarily draws women to become prostitutes. It’s also important to highlight that this same allure affects men through the figure of the prostitute. The widespread and naïve belief that prostitution exists solely to fulfill the crude sensual desires of young unmarried men is completely wrong. The idea that if men are taught to control their baser sexual impulses or encouraged to marry young, prostitutes would then be out of work, is simply misguided. If all men were to marry young, the solution would actually cause more problems than it solves—a discussion that’s beyond the scope of this text—but it wouldn't eliminate the underlying issue. A prostitute serves a purpose beyond just being a release for excess sexual energy, and her appeal doesn’t fade once men are married; in fact, a significant number of the men who seek out prostitutes, if not the majority, are already married. Whether they are married or single, the motivation behind their actions is not just simple lust.
In England, a well-informed writer remarks that "the value of marriage as a moral agent is evidenced by the fact that all the better-class prostitutes in London are almost entirely supported by married men," while in Germany, as stated in the interesting series of reminiscences by a former prostitute, Hedwig Hard's Beichte einer Gefallenen, (p. 208), the majority of the men who visit prostitutes are married. The estimate is probably excessive. Neisser states that only twenty-five per cent. of cases of gonorrhœa occur in married men. This indication is probably misleading in the opposite direction, as the married would be less reckless than the young and unmarried. As regards the motives which lead married men to prostitutes, Hedwig Hard narrates from her own experiences an incident which is instructive and no doubt typical. In the town in which she lived quietly as a prostitute a man of the best social class was introduced by a friend, and visited her habitually. She had often seen and admired his wife, who was one of the beauties of the place, and had two charming children; husband and wife seemed devoted to each other, and every one envied their happiness. He was a man of intellect and culture who encouraged Hedwig's love of books; she became greatly attached to him, and one day ventured to ask him how he could leave his lovely and charming wife to come to one who was not worthy to tie her shoe-lace. "Yes, my child," he answered, "but all her beauty and culture brings nothing to my heart. She is cold, cold as ice, proper, and, above all, phlegmatic. Pampered and spoilt, she lives only for herself; we are two good comrades, and nothing more. If, for instance, I come back from the club in the evening and go to her bed, perhaps a little excited, she becomes nervous and she thinks it improper to wake her. If I kiss her she defends herself, and tells me that I smell horribly of cigars and wine. And if perhaps I attempt more, she jumps out of bed, bristles up as though I were assaulting her, and threatens to throw herself out of the window if I touch her. So, for the sake of peace, I leave her alone and come to you." There can be no doubt whatever that this is the experience of many married men who would be well content to find the sweetheart as well as the friend in their wives. But the wives, from a variety of causes, have proved incapable of becoming the sexual mates of their husbands. And the husbands, without being carried away by any impulse of strong passion or any desire for infidelity, seek abroad what they cannot find at home.
In England, a knowledgeable writer points out that "the value of marriage as a moral force is clear from the fact that almost all the higher-class prostitutes in London are primarily supported by married men." Meanwhile, in Germany, as shared in the intriguing series of recollections by former prostitute Hedwig Hard in Beichte einer Gefallenen (p. 208), most of the men visiting prostitutes are married. This estimate is likely too high. Neisser claims that only twenty-five percent of gonorrhea cases happen in married men. This statistic may be misleading, as married men might be less reckless than younger, single men. Regarding the reasons that lead married men to seek out prostitutes, Hedwig Hard recounts an instructive and probably typical incident from her own experiences. In the town where she discreetly worked as a prostitute, a man from a high social class was introduced to her by a friend and became a regular visitor. She had often seen and admired his wife, who was one of the local beauties and had two lovely children. The couple seemed devoted to each other, and everyone envied their happiness. He was an intelligent and cultured man who encouraged Hedwig's love of literature; she grew very attached to him and, one day, dared to ask how he could leave his beautiful, charming wife to come to someone who wasn’t worthy of tying her shoelaces. "Yes, my child," he replied, "but all her beauty and culture mean nothing to my heart. She is cold, as cold as ice, proper, and above all, phlegmatic. Spoiled and pampered, she lives only for herself; we are merely good comrades, nothing more. For instance, if I come back from the club in the evening and go to her bed, maybe a little excited, she gets nervous and thinks it’s inappropriate to wake her. If I kiss her, she pushes me away and says I smell terribly of cigars and wine. And if I attempt anything more, she jumps out of bed, acts as if I’m attacking her, and threatens to throw herself out of the window if I touch her. So, for the sake of peace, I leave her alone and come to you." There’s no doubt that many married men share this experience, wishing to find both a lover and a friend in their wives. Yet, for various reasons, wives have proven unable to be their husbands' sexual partners. And the husbands, without any strong passion or desire for infidelity, seek outside what they can't find at home.
This is not the only reason why married men visit prostitutes. Even men who are happily married to women in all chief respects fitted to them, are apt to find, after some years of married life, a mysterious craving for variety. They are not tired of their wives, they have not the least wish or intention to abandon them, they will not, if they can help it, give them the slightest pain. But from time to time they are led by an almost irresistible and involuntary impulse to seek a temporary intimacy with women to whom nothing would persuade them to join themselves permanently. Pepys, whose Diary, in addition to its other claims upon us, is a psychological document of unique importance, furnishes a very characteristic example of this kind of impulse. He had married a young and charming wife, to whom he is greatly attached, and he lives happily with her, save for a few occasional domestic quarrels soon healed by kisses; his love is witnessed by his jealousy, a jealousy which, as he admits, is quite unreasonable, for she is a faithful and devoted wife. Yet a few years after marriage, and in the midst of a life of strenuous official activity, Pepys cannot resist the temptation to seek the temporary favors of other women, seldom prostitutes, but nearly always women of low social class—shop women, workmen's wives, superior servant-girls. Often he is content to invite them to a quiet ale-house, and to take a few trivial liberties. Sometimes they absolutely refuse to allow more than this; when that happens he frequently thanks Almighty God (as he makes his entry in his Diary at night) that he has been saved from temptation and from loss of time and money; in any case, he is apt to vow that it shall never occur again. It always does occur again. Pepys is quite sincere with himself; he makes no attempt at justification or excuse; he knows that he has yielded to a temptation; it is an impulse that comes over him at intervals, an impulse that he seems unable long to resist. Throughout it all he remains an estimable and diligent official, and in most respects a tolerably virtuous man, with a genuine dislike of loose people and loose talk. The attitude of Pepys is brought out with incomparable simplicity and sincerity because he is setting down these things for his own eyes only, but his case is substantially that of a vast number of other men, perhaps indeed of the typical homme moyen sensuel (see Pepys, Diary, ed. Wheatley; e.g., vol. iv, passim).
This isn't the only reason married men visit prostitutes. Even men who are happily married to women who suit them in every important way often find, after several years of marriage, a mysterious craving for variety. They’re not tired of their wives, they don’t have any desire or intention to leave them, and they wouldn't want to cause them any pain if they can help it. But occasionally, they feel an almost irresistible and involuntary urge to seek a temporary connection with women they would never consider being with long-term. Pepys, whose Diary is not only noteworthy for other reasons but also serves as a unique psychological record, provides a telling example of this kind of urge. He married a young and charming wife, to whom he is very attached, and he lives happily with her, aside from a few minor domestic disputes that are quickly resolved with kisses; his love is evident in his jealousy, which he admits is quite unreasonable since she is a loyal and devoted wife. Yet a few years into their marriage, and while leading a busy professional life, Pepys can't resist the temptation to seek out the temporary companionship of other women, rarely prostitutes but almost always women of lower social status—shop girls, the wives of laborers, and upper servant girls. Often, he’s content to invite them to a quiet bar and engage in some trivial flirtations. Sometimes they flat-out refuse to let it go any further; when that happens, he often thanks God (as he notes in his Diary at night) that he has been spared from temptation and from wasting time and money; regardless, he tends to promise that it will never happen again. But it always does happen again. Pepys is completely honest with himself; he doesn't try to justify or excuse his actions; he knows he’s given in to temptation; it's an impulse that strikes him from time to time, one he seems unable to resist for long. Throughout all this, he remains a respectable and hardworking official, and in most ways, a fairly virtuous man, with a genuine disdain for promiscuous people and inappropriate conversation. Pepys’s attitude is expressed with unmatched simplicity and sincerity because he writes these things only for himself, but his situation reflects that of many other men, possibly even the typical homme moyen sensuel (see Pepys, Diary, ed. Wheatley; e.g., vol. iv, passim).
There is a third class of married men, less considerable in number but not unimportant, who are impelled to visit prostitutes: the class of sexually perverted men. There are a great many reasons why such men may desire to be married, and in some cases they marry women with whom they find it possible to obtain the particular form of sexual gratification they crave. But in a large proportion of cases this is not possible. The conventionally bred woman often cannot bring herself to humor even some quite innocent fetishistic whim of her husband's, for it is too alien to her feelings and too incomprehensible to her ideas, even though she may be genuinely in love with him; in many cases the husband would not venture to ask, and scarcely even wish, that his wife should lend herself to play the fantastic or possibly degrading part his desires demand. In such a case he turns naturally to the prostitute, the only woman whose business it is to fulfil his peculiar needs. Marriage has brought no relief to these men, and they constitute a noteworthy proportion of a prostitute's clients in every great city. The most ordinary prostitute of any experience can supply cases from among her own visitors to illustrate a treatise of psychopathic sexuality. It may suffice here to quote a passage from the confessions of a young London (Strand) prostitute as written down from her lips by a friend to whom I am indebted for the document; I have merely turned a few colloquial terms into more technical forms. After describing how, when she was still a child of thirteen in the country, a rich old gentleman would frequently come and exhibit himself before her and other girls, and was eventually arrested and imprisoned, she spoke of the perversities she had met with since she had become a prostitute. She knew a young man, about twenty-five, generally dressed in a sporting style, who always came with a pair of live pigeons, which he brought in a basket. She and the girl with whom she lived had to undress and take the pigeons and wring their necks; he would stand in front of them, and as the necks were wrung orgasm occurred. Once a man met her in the street and asked her if he might come with her and lick her boots. She agreed, and he took her to a hotel, paid half a guinea for a room, and, when she sat down, got under the table and licked her boots, which were covered with mud; he did nothing more. Then there were some things, she said, that were too dirty to repeat; well, one man came home with her and her friend and made them urinate into his mouth. She also had stories of flagellation, generally of men who whipped the girls, more rarely of men who liked to be whipped by them. One man, who brought a new birch every time, liked to whip her friend until he drew blood. She knew another man who would do nothing but smack her nates violently. Now all these things, which come into the ordinary day's work of the prostitute, are rooted in deep and almost irresistible impulses (as will be clear to any reader of the discussion of Erotic Symbolism in the previous volume of these Studies). They must find some outlet. But it is only the prostitute who can be relied upon, through her interests and training, to overcome the natural repulsion to such actions, and gratify desires which, without gratification, might take on other and more dangerous forms.
There’s a third group of married men, fewer in number but still significant, who feel compelled to visit prostitutes: the group of sexually disturbed men. Many reasons exist for why such men may want to be married, and sometimes they marry women who can meet their specific sexual needs. However, in many cases, this isn’t possible. A conventionally raised woman often can’t bring herself to indulge even some innocent fetish of her husband’s because it feels too foreign and incomprehensible to her, even if she loves him. In many situations, the husband wouldn’t dare to ask, nor would he even want his wife to play the strange or potentially degrading role that he desires. Therefore, he naturally turns to a prostitute, the only woman whose job it is to cater to his unusual needs. Marriage hasn’t offered these men any relief, and they make up a significant portion of a prostitute’s clients in every major city. The average experienced prostitute can share stories from among her visitors that illustrate a study of psychopathic sexuality. It’s enough to quote a passage from the confessions of a young London (Strand) prostitute, recorded by a friend, to whom I’m grateful for the document; I’ve simply updated a few colloquial terms to more technical language. She described how, when she was only thirteen in the countryside, a wealthy old man would often come and expose himself to her and other girls, and eventually, he was arrested and imprisoned. She spoke about the oddities she encountered since becoming a prostitute. She knew a young man, around twenty-five, who typically dressed in sporty clothes and always brought a pair of live pigeons in a basket. She and her roommate had to undress and wring the pigeons' necks while he stood in front of them, and as they squeezed the necks, they would orgasm. One time, a man approached her on the street and asked if he could join her and lick her boots. She agreed, and he took her to a hotel, paid for a room, and when she sat down, he crawled under the table and licked her muddy boots; he did nothing else. Then there were some things she said were too disgusting to repeat; for instance, one man came home with her and her friend and made them urinate into his mouth. She also had stories about whipping, mostly men who liked to whip the girls, and less often, men who wanted to be whipped by them. One man, who brought a new birch every time, enjoyed whipping her friend until he drew blood. She knew another man who only liked to smack her behind hard. All these incidents, which are part of the daily life of a prostitute, are based on deep and almost uncontrollable urges (as any reader familiar with the discussion of Erotic Symbolism in the previous volume of these Studies will understand). They need some outlet. But only a prostitute can be trusted, through her interests and training, to overcome the natural aversion to such actions and satisfy desires that, if left unfulfilled, could turn into other, more dangerous forms.
Although Woods Hutchinson quotes with approval the declaration of a friend, "Out of thousands I have never seen one with good table manners," there is still a real sense in which the prostitute represents, however inadequately, the attraction of civilization. "There was no house in which I could habitually see a lady's face and hear a lady's voice," wrote the novelist Anthony Trollope in his Autobiography, concerning his early life in London. "No allurement to decent respectability came in my way. It seems to me that in such circumstances the temptations of loose life will almost certainly prevail with a young man. The temptation at any rate prevailed with me." In every great city, it has been said, there are thousands of men who have no right to call any woman but a barmaid by her Christian name.[210] All the brilliant fever of civilization pulses round them in the streets but their lips never touch it. It is the prostitute who incarnates this fascination of the city, far better than the virginal woman, even if intimacy with her were within reach. The prostitute represents it because she herself feels it, because she has even sacrificed her woman's honor in the effort to identify herself with it. She has unbridled feminine instincts, she is a mistress of the feminine arts of adornment, she can speak to him concerning the mysteries of womanhood and the luxuries of sex with an immediate freedom and knowledge the innocent maiden cloistered in her home would be incapable of. She appeals to him by no means only because she can gratify the lower desires of sex, but also because she is, in her way, an artist, an expert in the art of feminine exploitation, a leader of feminine fashions. For she is this, and there are, as Simmel has stated in his Philosophie der Mode, good psychological reasons why she always should be this. Her uncertain social position makes all that is conventional and established hateful to her, while her temperament makes perpetual novelty delightful. In new fashions she finds "an æsthetic form of that instinct of destruction which seems peculiar to all pariah existences, in so far as they are not completely enslaved in spirit."
Although Woods Hutchinson agrees with a friend's statement, "Out of thousands, I've never seen one with good table manners," there is a real way in which the prostitute represents, even if inadequately, the allure of civilization. "There wasn't a house where I could regularly see a woman's face and hear a woman's voice," wrote the novelist Anthony Trollope in his Autobiography, reflecting on his early life in London. "No temptation toward decent respectability came my way. It seems to me that in such circumstances, the temptations of a loose life will almost certainly win over a young man. The temptation, at least, won me over." In every major city, it has been said, there are thousands of men who can only call a woman by her first name if she’s a barmaid.[210] The vibrant energy of civilization surrounds them in the streets, but they never engage with it. The prostitute embodies this fascination with the city far better than an innocent woman would, even if he could access her. She represents it because she feels it herself, having sacrificed her honor in trying to connect with it. She has unrestrained feminine instincts, she's skilled in the arts of femininity, and she can speak to him about the mysteries of womanhood and the pleasures of sex with a directness and understanding that an unsuspecting maiden sheltered at home wouldn't have. She attracts him not just because she can fulfill his base desires but also because she is, in her own way, an artist, a specialist in feminine allure, and a trendsetter in women's fashions. She embodies this, and as Simmel noted in his Philosophie der Mode, there are solid psychological reasons why this should always be the case. Her unstable social status makes her reject anything conventional and established, while her nature finds constant novelty exhilarating. In new fashions, she discovers "an aesthetic form of that instinct for destruction that seems unique to all outcast lives, as long as they aren't completely enslaved in spirit."
"However surprising it may seem to some," a modern writer remarks, "prostitutes must be put on the same level as artists. Both use their gifts and talents for the joy and pleasure of others, and, as a rule, for payment. What is the essential difference between a singer who gives pleasure to hearers by her throat and a prostitute who gives pleasure to those who seek her by another part of her body? All art works on the senses." He refers to the significant fact that actors, and especially actresses, were formerly regarded much as prostitutes are now (R. Hellmann, Ueber Geschlechtsfreiheit, pp. 245-252).
"However surprising it may seem to some," a modern writer remarks, "prostitutes should be regarded on the same level as artists. Both use their abilities and talents for the joy and pleasure of others, and, usually, for payment. What is the essential difference between a singer who delights listeners with her voice and a prostitute who pleasures those who seek her with another part of her body? All art engages the senses." He points out the significant fact that actors, and especially actresses, were once viewed much like prostitutes are today (R. Hellmann, Ueber Geschlechtsfreiheit, pp. 245-252).
Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo (La Mala Vida en Madrid, p. 242) trace the same influence still lower in the social scale. They are describing the more squalid kind of café chantant, in which, in Spain and elsewhere, the most vicious and degenerate feminine creatures become waitresses (and occasionally singers and dancers), playing the part of amiable and distinguished hetairæ to the public of carmen and shop-boys who frequent these resorts. "Dressed with what seems to the youth irreproachable taste, with hair elaborately prepared, and clean face adorned with flowers or trinkets, affable and at times haughty, superior in charm and in finery to the other women he is able to know, the waitresses become the most elevated example of the femme galante whom he is able to contemplate and talk to, the courtesan of his sphere."
Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo (La Mala Vida en Madrid, p. 242) discuss the same influence further down the social ladder. They describe a more run-down type of café chantant, where, in Spain and elsewhere, the most depraved and degenerate women work as waitresses (and sometimes singers and dancers), acting as charming and sophisticated hetairæ for the crowd of carmen and shopboys who visit these places. "Dressed in what seems to the young men to be impeccable taste, with intricately styled hair and clean faces adorned with flowers or trinkets, friendly yet at times aloof, more enchanting and better dressed than the other women he can meet, the waitresses represent the highest example of the femme galante he can observe and converse with, the courtesan of his world."
But while to the simple, ignorant, and hungry youth the prostitute appeals as the embodiment of many of the refinements and perversities of civilization, on many more complex and civilized men she exerts an attraction of an almost reverse kind. She appeals by her fresh and natural coarseness, her frank familiarity with the crudest facts of life; and so lifts them for a moment out of the withering atmosphere of artificial thought and unreal sentiment in which so many civilized persons are compelled to spend the greater part of their lives. They feel in the words which the royal friend of a woman of this temperament is said to have used in explaining her incomprehensible influence over him: "She is so splendidly vulgar!"
But while the naïve, uninformed, and hungry youth find the prostitute to be the personification of many of the complexities and oddities of civilization, she attracts many more sophisticated and cultured men in a nearly opposite way. They are drawn to her fresh and unrefined nature, her open familiarity with the harsh realities of life; and for a moment, she lifts them out of the stifling environment of artificial thinking and false emotions that so many civilized people have to navigate through most of their lives. They resonate with the words allegedly spoken by a royal friend of a woman like this in describing her baffling hold over him: "She is so wonderfully vulgar!"
In illustration of this aspect of the appeal of prostitution, I may quote a passage in which the novelist, Hermant, in his Confession d'un Enfant d'Hier (Lettre VII), has set down the reasons which may lead the super-refined child of a cultured age, yet by no means radically or completely vicious, to find satisfaction in commerce with prostitutes: "As long as my heart was not touched the object of my satisfaction was completely indifferent to me. I was, moreover, a great lover of absolute liberty, which is only possible in the circle of these anonymous creatures and in their reserved dwelling. There everything became permissible. With other women, however low we may seek them, certain convenances must be observed, a kind of protocol. To these one can say everything: one is protected by incognito and assured that nothing will be divulged. I profited by this freedom, which suited my age, but with a perverse fancy which was not characteristic of my years. I scarcely know where I found what I said to them, for it was the opposite of my tastes, which were simple, and, if I may venture to say so, classic. It is true that, in matters of love, unrestrained naturalism always tends to perversion, a fact that can only seem paradoxical at first sight. Primitive peoples have many traits in common with degenerates. It was, however, only in words that I was unbridled; and that was the only occasion on which I can recollect seriously lying. But that necessity, which I then experienced, of expelling a lower depth of ignoble instincts, seems to me characteristic and humiliating. I may add that even in the midst of these dissipations I retained a certain reserve. The contacts to which I exposed myself failed to soil me; nothing was left when I had crossed the threshold. I have always retained, from that forcible and indifferent commerce, the habit of attributing no consequence to the action of the flesh. The amorous function, which religion and morality have surrounded with mystery or seasoned with sin, seems to me a function like any other, a little vile, but agreeable, and one to which the usual epilogue is too long.... This kind of companionship only lasted for a short time." This analysis of the attitude of a certain common type of civilized modern man seems to be just, but it may perhaps occur to some readers that a commerce which led to "the action of the flesh" being regarded as of no consequence can scarcely be said to have left no taint.
To illustrate this point about the appeal of prostitution, I can quote a passage from the novelist Hermant in his Confession d'un Enfant d'Hier (Letter VII), where he explains the reasons that might lead a refined child of a cultured age, who isn't completely immoral, to find satisfaction in engaging with prostitutes: "As long as I wasn't emotionally invested, the object of my satisfaction was entirely irrelevant to me. Additionally, I was a huge fan of absolute freedom, which is only possible in the circle of these anonymous individuals and in their secluded spaces. There, everything became acceptable. With other women, no matter how low we might seek them, certain social norms must be observed, a sort of protocol. With these women, you can say anything; you’re protected by anonymity and ensured that nothing will be revealed. I took advantage of this freedom, which suited my age, yet I had a perverse inclination that wasn't typical for someone my age. I hardly know where I found the words I said to them, as they were contrary to my simple tastes, which I could even describe as classic. It’s true that in matters of love, unrestrained naturalism tends to lead to perversion, a fact that may seem paradoxical at first glance. Primitive people share many traits with degenerates. However, I was only uninhibited in my words; that was the only time I can recall genuinely lying. But that need I felt then to rid myself of a lower depth of ignoble instincts seems to me both characteristic and humiliating. I should add that even amid these indulgences, I maintained a certain reserve. The encounters I put myself in didn’t tarnish me; nothing remained once I crossed the threshold. I’ve always kept, from that forceful and unfeeling commerce, the habit of attributing no significance to physical actions. The act of love, which religion and morality have wrapped in mystery or tainted with sin, seems to me just another function, a bit vile but enjoyable, and one that has an overly lengthy conclusion.... This kind of relationship was only short-lived." This analysis of the mindset of a particular common type of civilized modern man appears to be accurate, but some readers might think that a relationship that considered "the action of the flesh" insignificant could hardly be said to have left no stain.
In a somewhat similar manner, Henri de Régnier, in his novel, Les Rencontres de Monsieur Bréot (p. 50), represents Bercaillé as deliberately preferring to take his pleasures with servant-girls rather than with ladies, for pleasure was, to his mind, a kind of service, which could well be accommodated with the services they are accustomed to give; and then they are robust and agreeable, they possess the naïveté which is always charming in the common people, and they are not apt to be repelled by those little accidents which might offend the fastidious sensibilities of delicately bred ladies.
In a somewhat similar way, Henri de Régnier, in his novel, Les Rencontres de Monsieur Bréot (p. 50), shows Bercaillé as intentionally choosing to enjoy his pleasures with servant girls instead of with ladies, because he sees pleasure as a form of service that fits well with the services they're used to providing; plus, they are strong and enjoyable, they have the naïveté that is always charming in everyday people, and they aren't likely to be bothered by those little mishaps that might upset the delicate sensibilities of well-bred women.
Bloch, who has especially emphasized this side of the appeal of prostitution (Das Sexualleben unserer Zeit, pp. 359-362), refers to the delicate and sensitive young Danish writer, J. P. Jakobsen, who seems to have acutely felt the contrast between the higher and more habitual impulses, and the occasional outburst of what he felt to be lower instincts; in his Niels Lyhne he describes the kind of double life in which a man is true for a fortnight to the god he worships, and is then overcome by other powers which madly bear him in their grip towards what he feels to be humiliating, perverse, and filthy. "At such moments," Bloch remarks, "the man is another being. The 'two souls' in the breast become a reality. Is that the famous scholar, the lofty idealist, the fine-souled æsthetician, the artist who has given us so many splendid and pure works in poetry and painting? We no longer recognize him, for at such moments another being has come to the surface, another nature is moving within him, and with the power of an elementary force is impelling him towards things at which his 'upper consciousness,' the civilized man within him, would shudder." Bloch believes that we are here concerned with a kind of normal masculine masochism, which prostitution serves to gratify.
Bloch, who has particularly highlighted this aspect of the allure of prostitution (Das Sexualleben unserer Zeit, pp. 359-362), mentions the sensitive young Danish writer J. P. Jakobsen, who seemed to intensely feel the disparity between higher, more habitual urges and the occasional surge of what he perceived as lower instincts. In his Niels Lyhne, he describes the double life of a man who is true for a fortnight to the deity he adores, only to then be overcome by other forces that wildly pull him towards what he considers humiliating, perverse, and filthy. "At such moments," Bloch notes, "the man becomes a different person. The 'two souls' within him become a reality. Is that the renowned scholar, the lofty idealist, the kind-hearted aesthetician, the artist who has produced so many beautiful and pure works in poetry and painting? We can no longer recognize him, for at such times, another being emerges, another nature stirs within him, and with the strength of a primal force, drives him toward things that his 'higher consciousness,' the civilized man inside him, would recoil from." Bloch argues that this involves a form of normal masculine masochism, which prostitution helps to fulfill.
IV. The Present Social Attitude Towards Prostitution.
We have now surveyed the complex fact of prostitution in some of its most various and typical aspects, seeking to realise, intelligently and sympathetically, the fundamental part it plays as an elementary constituent of our marriage system. Finally we have to consider the grounds on which prostitution now appears to a large and growing number of persons not only an unsatisfactory method of sexual gratification but a radically bad method.
We have now looked at the complicated issue of prostitution in some of its most varied and typical aspects, trying to understand, thoughtfully and empathetically, the essential role it plays as a basic component of our marriage system. Lastly, we need to examine the reasons why prostitution now seems to a large and increasing number of people not only an unsatisfactory way to seek sexual pleasure but a fundamentally negative approach.
The movement of antagonism towards prostitution manifests itself most conspicuously, as might beforehand have been anticipated, by a feeling of repugnance towards the most ancient and typical, once the most credited and best established prostitutional manifestation, the brothel. The growth of this repugnance is not confined to one or two countries but is international, and may thus be regarded as corresponding to a real tendency in our civilization. It is equally pronounced in prostitutes themselves and in the people who are their clients. The distaste on the one side increases the distaste on the other. Since only the most helpless or the most stupid prostitutes are nowadays willing to accept the servitude of the brothel, the brothel-keeper is forced to resort to extraordinary methods for entrapping victims, and even to take part in that cosmopolitan trade in "white slaves" which exists solely to feed brothels.[211] This state of things has a natural reaction in prejudicing the clients of prostitution against an institution which is going out of fashion and out of credit. An even more fundamental antipathy is engendered by the fact that the brothel fails to respond to the high degree of personal freedom and variety which civilization produces, and always demands even when it fails to produce. On one side the prostitute is disinclined to enter into a slavery which usually fails even to bring her any reward; on the other side her client feels it as part of the fascination of prostitution under civilized conditions that he shall enjoy a freedom and choice the brothel cannot provide.[212] Thus it comes about that brothels which once contained nearly all the women who made it a business to minister to the sexual needs of men, now contain only a decreasing minority, and that the transformation of cloistered prostitution into free prostitution is approved by many social reformers as a gain to the cause of morality.[213]
The negative attitude towards prostitution is most clearly seen, as might have been expected, in the strong dislike for brothels, which were once the most recognized and established forms of prostitution. This growing aversion isn't limited to just one or two countries; it's widespread and reflects a true trend in our society. This dislike is felt both by prostitutes and their clients. The distaste from one side only intensifies the distaste from the other. Since only the most vulnerable or naïve prostitutes are now willing to take on the brothel's constraints, brothel owners are forced to use extreme methods to lure in victims and even participate in the international "white slave" trade, which exists only to supply brothels. This situation naturally leads to clients developing a prejudice against an institution that is becoming outdated and unreliable. An even deeper dislike arises because brothels do not meet the high levels of personal freedom and variety that modern society produces, which are always sought after even when they’re not fully realized. On one side, prostitutes are reluctant to enter into arrangements that often don't even offer them any benefits. On the other side, clients find part of the appeal of prostitution in contemporary society is the freedom and choice that brothels cannot provide. As a result, brothels that once housed nearly all women catering to men's sexual needs now contain only a dwindling minority, and many social reformers view the shift from confined prostitution to more liberated prostitution as a positive step for morality.
The decay of brothels, whether as cause or as effect, has been associated with a vast increase of prostitution outside brothels. But the repugnance to brothels in many essential respects also applies to prostitution generally, and, as we shall see, it is exerting a profoundly modifying influence on that prostitution.
The decline of brothels, whether as a cause or effect, has been linked to a huge rise in prostitution outside of them. However, the aversion to brothels in many important ways also applies to prostitution as a whole, and, as we will see, it is having a significant impact on that type of prostitution.
The changing feeling in regard to prostitution seems to express itself mainly in two ways. On the one hand there are those who, without desiring to abolish prostitution, resent the abnegation which accompanies it, and are disgusted by its sordid aspects. They may have no moral scruples against prostitution, and they know no reason why a woman should not freely do as she will with her own person. But they believe that, if prostitution is necessary, the relationships of men with prostitutes should be humane and agreeable to each party, and not degrading to either. It must be remembered that under the conditions of civilized urban life, the discipline of work is often too severe, and the excitements of urban existence too constant, to render an abandonment to orgy a desirable recreation. The gross form of orgy appeals, not to the town-dweller but to the peasant, and to the sailor or soldier who reaches the town after long periods of dreary routine and emotional abstinence. It is a mistake, even, to suppose that the attraction of prostitution is inevitably associated with the fulfilment of the sexual act. So far is this from being the case that the most attractive prostitute may be a woman who, possessing few sexual needs of her own, desires to please by the charm of her personality; these are among those who most often find good husbands. There are many men who are even well content merely to have a few hours' free intimacy with an agreeable woman, without any further favor, although that may be open to them. For a very large number of men under urban conditions of existence the prostitute is ceasing to be the degraded instrument of a moment's lustful desire; they seek an agreeable human person with whom they may find relaxation from the daily stress or routine of life. When an act of prostitution is thus put on a humane basis, although it by no means thereby becomes conducive to the best development of either party, it at least ceases to be hopelessly degrading. Otherwise it would not have been possible for religious prostitution to flourish for so long in ancient days among honorable women of good birth on the shores of the Mediterranean, even in regions like Lydia, where the position of women was peculiarly high.[214]
The changing views on prostitution mostly show themselves in two ways. On one hand, there are people who, while not wanting to eliminate prostitution, are bothered by the self-denial that comes with it and are disgusted by its grim realities. They might not have any moral issues with prostitution, and they see no reason why a woman shouldn’t have the freedom to do what she wants with her own body. However, they believe that if prostitution is inevitable, then the relationships between men and prostitutes should be respectful and enjoyable for both, rather than degrading. It's important to remember that in urban life, the pressures of work can be intense, and the excitement of city living is ever-present, making total indulgence in wild behavior an unappealing pastime. The coarse allure of wild parties doesn't attract city dwellers but rather farmers, sailors, or soldiers who come to the city after long stretches of monotonous routines and emotional restraint. It’s also a misconception to think that the appeal of prostitution is inherently linked to the sexual act itself. In fact, the most appealing prostitute might be a woman who has few sexual needs of her own and wants to charm with her personality; these women often end up with good husbands. Many men are even perfectly happy just enjoying a few hours of intimacy with a pleasant woman, without expecting anything more, even if they could have it. For a large number of men living in cities, the prostitute is transitioning from being a mere tool for a fleeting sexual desire to being a likable person with whom they can unwind from the daily strains of life. When prostitution is approached on a humane level, it may not lead to the best outcomes for either party, but at least it stops being completely degrading. Otherwise, religious prostitution wouldn’t have thrived for so long in ancient times among respectable women of high status along the Mediterranean, even in places like Lydia, where women held a uniquely elevated position.[214]
It is true that the monetary side of prostitution would still exist. But it is possible to exaggerate its importance. It must be pointed out that, though it is usual to speak of the prostitute as a woman who "sells herself," this is rather a crude and inexact way of expressing, in its typical form, the relationship of a prostitute to her client. A prostitute is not a commodity with a market-price, like a loaf or a leg of mutton. She is much more on a level with people belonging to the professional classes, who accept fees in return for services rendered; the amount of the fee varies, on the one hand in accordance with professional standing, on the other hand in accordance with the client's means, and under special circumstances may be graciously dispensed with altogether. Prostitution places on a venal basis intimate relationships which ought to spring up from natural love, and in so doing degrades them. But strictly speaking there is in such a case no "sale." To speak of a prostitute "selling herself" is scarcely even a pardonable rhetorical exaggeration; it is both inexact and unjust.[215]
It’s true that the financial aspect of prostitution would still be present. However, its significance can be overstated. It’s important to note that, although people often refer to a prostitute as a woman who "sells herself," this is a rather simplistic and inaccurate way of describing, in general, the relationship between a prostitute and her client. A prostitute is not a product with a set price, like a loaf of bread or a piece of meat. She is much more comparable to people in professional fields who charge fees for services provided; the fee amount can change based on professional reputation and the client’s financial situation, and in certain circumstances, it might even be waived entirely. Prostitution turns intimate relationships, which should develop from genuine love, into something transactional, thereby degrading them. But technically speaking, there is no actual "sale" happening in this context. Referring to a prostitute as "selling herself" is hardly justifiable rhetoric; it is both inaccurate and unfair.[215]
This tendency in an advanced civilization towards the humanization of prostitution is the reverse process, we may note, to that which takes place at an earlier stage of civilization when the ancient conception of the religious dignity of prostitution begins to fall into disrepute. When men cease to reverence women who are prostitutes in the service of a goddess they set up in their place prostitutes who are merely abject slaves, flattering themselves that they are thereby working in the cause of "progress" and "morality." On the shores of the Mediterranean this process took place more than two thousand years ago, and is associated with the name of Solon. To-day we may see the same process going on in India. In some parts of India (as at Jejuri, near Poonah) first born girls are dedicated to Khandoba or other gods; they are married to the god and termed muralis. They serve in the temple, sweep it, and wash the holy vessels, also they dance, sing and prostitute themselves. They are forbidden to marry, and they live in the homes of their parents, brothers, or sisters; being consecrated to religious service, they are untouched by degradation. Nowadays, however, Indian "reformers," in the name of "civilization and science," seek to persuade the muralis that they are "plunged in a career of degradation." No doubt in time the would-be moralists will drive the muralis out of their temples and their homes, deprive them of all self-respect, and convert them into wretched outcasts, all in the cause of "science and civilization" (see, e.g., an article by Mrs. Kashibai Deodhar, The New Reformer, October, 1907). So it is that early reformers create for the reformers of a later day the task of humanizing prostitution afresh.
This trend in advanced societies toward the humanization of prostitution is the opposite of what happens earlier in a civilization when the old idea of the religious significance of prostitution starts to decline. When men stop respecting women who are prostitutes dedicated to a goddess, they replace them with prostitutes who are just miserable slaves, mistakenly believing that they're promoting "progress" and "morality." This shift occurred over two thousand years ago along the Mediterranean, linked to Solon. Today, we can observe a similar trend in India. In some regions, like Jejuri near Poonah, firstborn girls are dedicated to Khandoba or other deities; they are married to the god and called muralis. They work in the temple, clean it, and wash the holy vessels, while also dancing, singing, and engaging in prostitution. They are not allowed to marry, and they live with their parents, brothers, or sisters; because they are devoted to religious service, they are not seen as degraded. However, nowadays, Indian "reformers," in the name of "civilization and science," try to convince the muralis that they are "stuck in a degrading career." Eventually, these self-appointed moralists will likely push the muralis out of their temples and homes, strip them of their self-respect, and turn them into miserable outcasts, all in the name of "science and civilization" (see, e.g., an article by Mrs. Kashibai Deodhar, The New Reformer, October, 1907). Thus, early reformers create a challenge for later reformers to once again humanize prostitution.
There can be no doubt that this more humane conception of prostitution is to-day beginning to be realized in the actual civilized life of Europe. Thus in writing of prostitution in Paris, Dr. Robert Michels ("Erotische Streifzüge," Mutterschutz, 1906, Heft 9, p. 368) remarks: "While in Germany the prostitute is generally considered as an 'outcast' creature, and treated accordingly, an instrument of masculine lust to be used and thrown away, and whom one would under no circumstances recognize in public, in France the prostitute plays in many respects the part which once give significance and fame to the hetairæ of Athens." And after describing the consideration and respect which the Parisian prostitute is often able to require of her friends, and the non-sexual relation of comradeship which she can enter into with other men, the writer continues: "A girl who certainly yields herself for money, but by no means for the first comer's money, and who, in addition to her 'business friends,' feels the need of, so to say, non-sexual companions with whom she can associate in a free comrade-like way, and by whom she is treated and valued as a free human being, is not wholly lost for the moral worth of humanity." All prostitution is bad, Michels concludes, but we should have reason to congratulate ourselves if love-relationships of this Parisian species represented the lowest known form of extra-conjugal sexuality. (As bearing on the relative consideration accorded to prostitutes I may mention that a Paris prostitute remarked to a friend of mine that Englishmen would ask her questions which no Frenchman would venture to ask.)
There’s no doubt that this more compassionate view of prostitution is starting to be recognized in today's civilized life in Europe. Dr. Robert Michels writes about prostitution in Paris in his work "Erotische Streifzüge" (Mutterschutz, 1906, Heft 9, p. 368) and notes: "While in Germany, prostitutes are generally seen as 'outcasts' and treated as instruments of male desire to be used and discarded, and someone who would never be acknowledged in public, in France, prostitutes often play a role similar to that which once gave significance and esteem to the hetairæ of Athens." After discussing the respect and consideration that a Parisian prostitute can often demand from her acquaintances, and the non-sexual friendships she can form with men, he adds: "A girl who does sell her body for money, but certainly not to just anyone, and who, in addition to her 'business acquaintances,' seeks out non-sexual companions with whom she can bond freely, and who treat and value her as a free human being, is not completely lost to the moral worth of humanity." Michels concludes that while all prostitution is bad, we should consider ourselves fortunate if love relationships like those in Paris were the least known form of extra-marital sexuality. (As a note on the relative treatment of prostitutes, I can share that a Parisian prostitute told a friend of mine that Englishmen would ask her questions that no Frenchman would ever dare to ask.)
It is not, however, only in Paris, although here more markedly and prominently, that this humanizing change in prostitution is beginning to make itself felt. It is manifested, for instance, in the greater openness of a man's sexual life. "While he formerly slinked into a brothel in a remote street," Dr. Willy Hellpach remarks (Nervosität und Kultur, p. 169), "he now walks abroad with his 'liaison,' visiting the theatres and cafés, without indeed any anxiety to meet his acquaintances, but with no embarrassment on that point. The thing is becoming more commonplace, more—natural." It is also, Hellpach proceeds to point out, thus becoming more moral also, and much unwholesome prudery and pruriency is being done away with.
It's not just in Paris, although it’s more noticeable and prominent here, that this shift towards a more humane approach to prostitution is starting to be seen. For example, it shows in how openly men are living their sexual lives. "While he used to sneak into a brothel on a quiet street," Dr. Willy Hellpach notes (Nervosität und Kultur, p. 169), "he now strolls around with his 'partner,' going to theaters and cafés without worrying about running into people he knows, and he feels no embarrassment about it. It’s becoming more normal, more—natural." Hellpach also points out that this is making it more moral, as a lot of unhealthy prudishness and excessive sexual repression is being eliminated.
In England, where change is slow, this tendency to the humanization of prostitution may be less pronounced. But it certainly exists. In the middle of the last century Lecky wrote (History of European Morals, vol. ii, p. 285) that habitual prostitution "is in no other European country so hopelessly vicious or so irrevocable." That statement, which was also made by Parent-Duchâtelet and other foreign observers, is fully confirmed by the evidence on record. But it is a statement which would hardly be made to-day, except perhaps, in reference to special confined areas of our cities. It is the same in America, and we may doubtless find this tendency reflected in the report on The Social Evil (1902), drawn up by a committee in New York, who gave it (p. 176) as one of their chief recommendations that prostitution should no longer be regarded as a crime, in which light, one gathers, it had formerly been regarded in New York. That may seem but a small step in the path of humanization, but it is in the right direction.
In England, where change is slow, the trend toward the humanization of prostitution might be less noticeable. But it definitely exists. In the mid-1900s, Lecky wrote in his *History of European Morals* (vol. ii, p. 285) that habitual prostitution "is in no other European country so hopelessly vicious or so irrevocable." This claim, also made by Parent-Duchâtelet and other foreign observers, is fully supported by existing evidence. However, it's a statement that would rarely be made today, except maybe in reference to specific areas of our cities. The same is true in America, and we can certainly see this trend reflected in the report on *The Social Evil* (1902), prepared by a committee in New York. They stated (p. 176) that one of their main recommendations was that prostitution should no longer be seen as a crime, which suggests it had previously been viewed that way in New York. While this may seem like a small step toward humanization, it is a step in the right direction.
It is by no means only in lands of European civilization that we may trace with developing culture the refinement and humanization of the slighter bonds of relationship with women. In Japan exactly the same demands led, several centuries ago, to the appearance of the geisha. In the course of an interesting and precise study of the geisha Mr. R. T. Farrer remarks (Nineteenth Century, April, 1904): "The geisha is in no sense necessarily a courtesan. She is a woman educated to attract; perfected from her childhood in all the intricacies of Japanese literature; practiced in wit and repartee; inured to the rapid give-and-take of conversation on every topic, human and divine. From her earliest youth she is broken into an inviolable charm of manner incomprehensible to the finest European, yet she is almost invariably a blossom of the lower classes, with dumpy claws, and squat, ugly nails. Her education, physical and moral, is far harder than that of the ballerina, and her success is achieved only after years of struggle and a bitter agony of torture.... And the geisha's social position may be compared with that of the European actress. The Geisha-house offers prizes as desirable as any of the Western stage. A great geisha with twenty nobles sitting round her, contending for her laughter, and kept in constant check by the flashing bodkin of her wit, holds a position no less high and famous than that of Sarah Bernhardt in her prime. She is equally sought, equally flattered, quite as madly adored, that quiet little elderly plain girl in dull blue. But she is prized thus primarily for her tongue, whose power only ripens fully as her physical charms decline. She demands vast sums for her owners, and even so often appears and dances only at her own pleasure. Few, if any, Westerners ever see a really famous geisha. She is too great to come before a European, except for an august or imperial command. Finally she may, and frequently does, marry into exalted places. In all this there is not the slightest necessity for any illicit relation."
It’s not just in European countries that we can see how evolving culture leads to a refinement and humanization of relationships with women. In Japan, similar demands led to the emergence of the geisha several centuries ago. In a fascinating and detailed study of the geisha, Mr. R. T. Farrer notes (Nineteenth Century, April 1904): "The geisha is not necessarily a courtesan. She is a woman trained to charm; honed since childhood in the complexities of Japanese literature; skilled in wit and repartee; accustomed to the quick back-and-forth of conversation on every imaginable topic. From her early years, she develops an irresistible charm that is often beyond the understanding of the most refined Europeans, yet she typically comes from the lower classes, with thick fingers and short, unattractive nails. Her physical and moral training is much more intense than that of a ballerina, and her success comes only after years of intense effort and painful struggle.... The geisha's social standing can be compared to that of a European actress. The Geisha house offers rewards as enticing as those on the Western stage. A top geisha surrounded by twenty nobles vying for her laughter, constantly challenged by her quick wit, holds a status as prestigious and celebrated as that of Sarah Bernhardt in her prime. She is equally sought after, equally flattered, just as madly adored, that quiet little plain girl in dull blue. But she is valued mainly for her conversation, which only truly flourishes as her physical beauty fades. She brings in a significant income for her owners and often performs and dances only at her own discretion. Few, if any, Westerners ever meet a really famous geisha. She is too esteemed to appear before a European unless summoned by high authority or an emperor. Ultimately, she may, and often does, marry into high society. In all of this, there is no need for any illicit relationships."
In some respects the position of the ancient Greek hetaira was more analogous to that of the Japanese geisha than to that of the prostitute in the strict sense. For the Greeks, indeed, the hetaira, was not strictly a porne or prostitute at all. The name meant friend or companion, and the woman to whom the name was applied held an honorable position, which could not be accorded to the mere prostitute. Athenæus (Bk. xiii, Chs. XXVIII-XXX) brings together passages showing that the hetaira could be regarded as an independent citizen, pure, simple, and virtuous, altogether distinct from the common crew of prostitutes, though these might ape her name. The hetairæ "were almost the only Greek women," says Donaldson (Woman, p. 59), "who exhibited what was best and noblest in women's nature." This fact renders it more intelligible why a woman of such intellectual distinction as Aspasia should have been a hetaira. There seems little doubt as to her intellectual distinction. "Æschines, in his dialogue entitled 'Aspasia,'" writes Gomperz, the historian of Greek philosophy (Greek Thinkers, vol. iii, pp. 124 and 343), "puts in the mouth of that distinguished woman an incisive criticism of the mode of life traditional for her sex. It would be exceedingly strange," Gomperz adds, in arguing that an inference may thus be drawn concerning the historical Aspasia, "if three authors—Plato, Xenophon and Æschines—had agreed in fictitiously enduing the companion of Pericles with what we might very reasonably have expected her to possess—a highly cultivated mind and intellectual influence." It is even possible that the movement for woman's right which, as we dimly divine through the pages of Aristophanes, took place in Athens in the fourth century B. C., was led by hetairæ. According to Ivo Bruns (Frauenemancipation in Athen, 1900, p. 19) "the most certain information which we possess concerning Aspasia bears a strong resemblance to the picture which Euripides and Aristophanes present to us of the leaders of the woman movement." It was the existence of this movement which made Plato's ideas on the community of women appear far less absurd than they do to us. It may perhaps be thought by some that this movement represented on a higher plane that love of distruction, or, as we should better say, that spirit of revolt and aspiration, which Simmel finds to mark the intellectual and artistic activity of those who are unclassed or dubiously classed in the social hierarchy. Ninon de Lenclos, as we have seen, was not strictly a courtesan, but she was a pioneer in the assertion of woman's rights. Aphra Behn who, a little later in England, occupied a similarly dubious social position, was likewise a pioneer in generous humanitarian aspirations, which have since been adopted in the world at large.
In some ways, the role of the ancient Greek hetaira was more similar to that of the Japanese geisha than to that of a prostitute in the strict sense. For the Greeks, the hetaira was not really a porne or prostitute at all. The term meant friend or companion, and the women known by this name held a respectable position that could not be granted to mere prostitutes. Athenæus (Bk. xiii, Chs. XXVIII-XXX) brings together passages showing that the hetaira could be seen as an independent citizen—pure, simple, and virtuous—clearly distinct from the usual prostitutes, even if some of them tried to adopt her title. The hetairæ "were almost the only Greek women," says Donaldson (Woman, p. 59), "who displayed what was best and noblest in women's nature." This insight helps us understand why a woman of such intellectual distinction as Aspasia would be a hetaira. There's little doubt about her intellectual prowess. "Æschines, in his dialogue entitled 'Aspasia,'" writes Gomperz, the historian of Greek philosophy (Greek Thinkers, vol. iii, pp. 124 and 343), "quotes that distinguished woman making a sharp critique of the traditional lifestyle expected of her sex. It would be very strange," Gomperz continues, in his argument that we can draw conclusions about the historical Aspasia, "if three authors—Plato, Xenophon, and Æschines—had all agreed in fictitiously giving the companion of Pericles what we would reasonably expect her to have—a highly cultivated mind and intellectual influence." It’s even possible that the movement for women's rights, which we can dimly perceive through Aristophanes' works, was led by hetairæ in Athens during the fourth century B.C. According to Ivo Bruns (Frauenemancipation in Athen, 1900, p. 19), "the most reliable information we have about Aspasia closely resembles the image that Euripides and Aristophanes present of the leaders of the women's movement." The existence of this movement made Plato's ideas about communal living for women seem much less absurd than they do to us today. Some might think that this movement represented, on a higher level, that desire for change, or, as we’d put it, that spirit of rebellion and ambition that Simmel finds characteristic of those unclassified or ambiguously classified in the social hierarchy. Ninon de Lenclos, as we’ve seen, was not strictly a courtesan, but she was a trailblazer in the fight for women’s rights. Aphra Behn, who later occupied a similarly questionable social position in England, was also a pioneer in advocating for broad humanitarian goals that have since been embraced globally.
These refinements of prostitution may be said to be chiefly the outcome of the late and more developed stages in civilization. As Schurtz has put it (Altersklassen und Männerbünde, p. 191): "The cheerful, skilful and artistically accomplished hetaira frequently stands as an ideal figure in opposition to the intellectually uncultivated wife banished to the interior of the house. The courtesan of the Italian Renaissance, Japanese geishas, Chinese flower-girls, and Indian bayaderas, all show some not unnoble features, the breath of a free artistic existence. They have achieved—with, it is true, the sacrifice of their highest worth—an independence from the oppressive rule of man and of household duties, and a part of the feminine endowment which is so often crippled comes in them to brilliant development. Prostitution in its best form may thus offer a path by which these feminine characteristics may exert a certain influence on the development of civilization. We may also believe that the artistic activity of women is in some measure able to offer a counterpoise to the otherwise less pleasant results of sexual abandonment, preventing the coarsening and destruction of the emotional life; in his Magda Sudermann has described a type of woman who, from the standpoint of strict morality, is open to condemnation, but in her art finds a foothold, the strength of which even ill-will must unwillingly recognize." In his Sex and Character, Weininger has developed in a more extreme and extravagant manner the conception of the prostitute as a fundamental and essential part of life, a permanent feminine type.
These updates to prostitution can mainly be seen as the result of recent and more advanced stages of civilization. As Schurtz noted (Altersklassen und Männerbünde, p. 191): "The lively, skilled, and artistically talented hetaira often serves as an ideal figure in contrast to the uneducated wife confined to the home. The courtesans of the Italian Renaissance, Japanese geishas, Chinese flower girls, and Indian bayaderas all exhibit some admirable qualities, embodying a taste of a free artistic life. They have achieved—though at the cost of their highest value—an independence from the burdensome control of men and household responsibilities, allowing their often-restricted feminine gifts to blossom. Prostitution at its best can thus provide a way for these feminine traits to influence the growth of civilization. We can also believe that women's artistic contributions may help balance out the otherwise negative effects of sexual freedom, safeguarding the richness of emotional experiences; in his Magda, Sudermann portrays a type of woman who, from a strict moral standpoint, could be criticized, but who finds a grounding in her art, which even critics must reluctantly acknowledge." In his Sex and Character, Weininger has explored the idea of the prostitute as a fundamental and essential aspect of life, representing a lasting feminine archetype.
There are others, apparently in increasing numbers, who approach the problem of prostitution not from an æsthetic standpoint but from a moral standpoint. This moral attitude is not, however, that conventionalized morality of Cato and St. Augustine and Lecky, set forth in previous pages, according to which the prostitute in the street must be accepted as the guardian of the wife in the home. These moralists reject indeed the claim of that belief to be considered moral at all. They hold that it is not morally possible that the honor of some women shall be purchaseable at the price of the dishonor of other women, because at such a price virtue loses all moral worth. When they read that, as Goncourt stated, "the most luxurious articles of women's trousseaux, the bridal chemises of girls with dowries of six hundred thousand francs, are made in the prison of Clairvaux,"[216] they see the symbol of the intimate dependence of our luxurious virtue on our squalid vice. And while they accept the historical and sociological evidence which shows that prostitution is an inevitable part of the marriage system which still survives among us, they ask whether it is not possible so to modify our marriage system that it shall not be necessary to divide feminine humanity into "disreputable" women, who make sacrifices which it is dishonorable to make, and "respectable" women, who take sacrifices which it cannot be less dishonorable to accept.
There are apparently more and more people who approach the issue of prostitution not from an aesthetic point of view but from a moral one. This moral perspective is not the traditional morality of Cato, St. Augustine, and Lecky, as discussed in previous pages, which posits that the street prostitute should be seen as the protector of the wife at home. These moralists actually reject any claim that this belief can be considered moral at all. They argue that it’s not morally acceptable for the honor of some women to be bought at the expense of the dishonor of others, because at that price, virtue loses all its moral value. When they read that, as Goncourt stated, "the most luxurious items of women's trousseaux, the bridal nightgowns of girls with dowries of six hundred thousand francs, are made in the prison of Clairvaux,"[216] they see the symbol of the close connection between our luxury virtue and our sordid vice. And while they acknowledge the historical and sociological evidence that shows prostitution is an unavoidable part of the marriage system that still exists among us, they question whether it’s possible to change our marriage system in such a way that we don’t have to categorize women into "disreputable" women, who make sacrifices that are dishonorable, and "respectable" women, who accept sacrifices that are equally dishonorable.
Prostitutes, a distinguished man of science has said (Duclaux, L'Hygiène Sociale, p. 243), "have become things which the public uses when it wants them, and throws on the dungheap when it has made them vile. In its pharisaism it even has the insolence to treat their trade as shameful, as though it were not just as shameful to buy as to sell in this market." Bloch (Sexualleben unserer Zeit, Ch. XV) insists that prostitution must be ennobled, and that only so can it be even diminished. Isidore Dyer, of New Orleans, also argues that we cannot check prostitution unless we create "in the minds of men and women a spirit of tolerance instead of intolerance of fallen women." This point may be illustrated by a remark by the prostitute author of the Tagebuch einer Verlorenen. "If the profession of yielding the body ceased to be a shameful one," she wrote, "the army of 'unfortunates' would diminish by four-fifths—I will even say nine-tenths. Myself, for example! How gladly would I take a situation as companion or governess!" "One of two things," wrote the eminent sociologist Tarde ("La Morale Sexuelle," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, January, 1907), "either prostitution will disappear through continuing to be dishonorable and will be replaced by some other institution which will better remedy the defects of monogamous marriage, or it will survive by becoming respectable, that is to say, by making itself respected, whether liked or disliked." Tarde thought this might perhaps come about by a better organization of prostitutes, a more careful selection among those who desired admission to their ranks and the cultivation of professional virtues which would raise their moral level. "If courtesans fulfil a need," Balzac had already said in his Physiologie du Mariage, "they must become an institution."
Prostitutes, as a distinguished man of science has stated (Duclaux, L'Hygiène Sociale, p. 243), "have turned into objects that the public uses when needed and discards like trash when deemed worthless. In its hypocrisy, it even has the audacity to regard their profession as shameful, as though buying were not just as shameful as selling in this market." Bloch (Sexualleben unserer Zeit, Ch. XV) argues that prostitution needs to be dignified if it is to even be reduced. Isidore Dyer, from New Orleans, also contends that we can't curb prostitution unless we foster "a spirit of tolerance instead of intolerance towards fallen women." This point can be illustrated by a comment from the prostitute author of the Tagebuch einer Verlorenen. "If yielding one's body stopped being shameful," she wrote, "the number of 'unfortunates' would shrink by four-fifths—I'll even say nine-tenths. Personally, for instance! How happily I would accept a position as a companion or governess!" "One of two outcomes," wrote the prominent sociologist Tarde ("La Morale Sexuelle," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, January, 1907), "either prostitution will vanish by remaining dishonorable and will be replaced by another institution that better addresses the failings of monogamous marriage, or it will persist by becoming respectable, meaning it will earn respect, whether loved or hated." Tarde believed this could possibly happen through better organization among prostitutes, careful selection of those wanting to join their ranks, and the cultivation of professional virtues that would elevate their moral standards. "If courtesans fulfill a need," Balzac had already noted in his Physiologie du Mariage, "they must become an institution."
This moral attitude is supported and enforced by the inevitable democratic tendency of civilization which, although it by no means destroys the idea of class, undermines that idea as the mark of fundamental human distinctions and renders it superficial. Prostitution no longer makes a woman a slave; it ought not to make her even a pariah: "My body is my own," said the young German prostitute of to-day, "and what I do with it is nobody else's concern." When the prostitute was literally a slave moral duty towards her was by no means necessarily identical with moral duty towards the free woman. But when, even in the same family, the prostitute may be separated by a great and impassable social gulf from her married sister, it becomes possible to see, and in the opinion of many imperatively necessary to see, that a readjustment of moral values is required. For thousands of years prostitution has been defended on the ground that the prostitute is necessary to ensure the "purity of women." In a democratic age it begins to be realized that prostitutes also are women.
This moral attitude is backed up and reinforced by the inevitable democratic trends of civilization which, while it doesn't eliminate the concept of class, weakens that idea as a fundamental distinction among humans and makes it seem less important. Prostitution no longer turns a woman into a slave; it shouldn't even make her a social outcast: "My body is my own," said , the young German prostitute today, "and what I do with it is nobody else's business." When the prostitute was essentially a slave, moral responsibilities towards her weren't necessarily the same as those towards a free woman. But when, even within the same family, the prostitute can be separated by a significant and unbridgeable social divide from her married sister, it's possible to recognize, and many believe it's crucial to acknowledge, that a reassessment of moral values is needed. For thousands of years, prostitution has been justified on the basis that prostitutes are necessary to maintain the "purity of women." In a democratic era, people are starting to realize that prostitutes are also women.
The developing sense of a fundamental human equality underlying the surface divisions of class tends to make the usual attitude towards the prostitute, the attitude of her clients even more than that of society generally, seem painfully cruel. The callous and coarsely frivolous tone of so many young men about prostitutes, it has been said, is "simply cruelty of a peculiarly brutal kind," not to be discerned in any other relation of life.[217] And if this attitude is cruel even in speech it is still more cruel in action, whatever attempts may be made to disguise its cruelty.
The growing awareness of a basic human equality that exists beneath the visible class divisions makes the typical view of prostitutes, especially from their clients more than from society at large, seem incredibly harsh. The insensitive and dismissive attitudes of many young men towards prostitutes have been described as "simply a particularly brutal kind of cruelty," unlike anything found in other aspects of life.[217] And if this attitude is cruel even in words, it's even more cruel in actions, no matter how much people may try to hide its cruelty.
Canon Lyttelton's remarks may be taken to refer chiefly to young men of the upper middle class. Concerning what is perhaps the usual attitude of lower middle class people towards prostitution, I may quote from a remarkable communication which has reached me from Australia: "What are the views of a young man brought up in a middle-class Christian English family on prostitutes? Take my father, for instance. He first mentioned prostitutes to me, if I remember rightly, when speaking of his life before marriage. And he spoke of them as he would speak of a horse he had hired, paid for, and dismissed from his mind when it had rendered him service. Although my mother was so kind and good she spoke of abandoned women with disgust and scorn as of some unclean animal. As it flatters vanity and pride to be able with good countenance and universal consent to look down on something, I soon grasped the situation and adopted an attitude which is, in the main, that of most middle-class Christian Englishmen towards prostitutes. But as puberty develops this attitude has to be accommodated with the wish to make use of this scum, these moral lepers. The ordinary young man, who likes a spice of immorality and has it when in town, and thinks it is not likely to come to his mother's or sisters' ears, does not get over his arrogance and disgust or abate them in the least. He takes them with him, more or less disguised, to the brothel, and they color his thoughts and actions all the time he is sleeping with prostitutes, or kissing them, or passing his hands over them, as he would over a mare, getting as much as he can for his money. To tell the truth, on the whole, that was my attitude too. But if anyone had asked me for the smallest reason for this attitude, for this feeling of superiority, pride, hauteur, and prejudice, I should, like any other 'respectable' young man, have been entirely at a loss, and could only have gaped foolishly."
Canon Lyttelton's comments seem to be primarily about young men from the upper middle class. Regarding the typical perspective of lower middle-class individuals toward prostitution, I can quote an insightful account that I've received from Australia: "What does a young man raised in a middle-class Christian English family think about prostitutes? Take my dad, for instance. He first brought up the topic of prostitutes, if I remember correctly, when he was talking about his life before marriage. He mentioned them in the same way he would talk about a horse he rented, paid for, and then forgot about once it had served its purpose. Even though my mother was kind and good-hearted, she spoke of fallen women with disgust and contempt, like they were some filthy animal. It flatters one's ego and pride to look down on something with a clear conscience and the agreement of others, so I quickly understood the situation and adopted a view that is largely shared by most middle-class Christian Englishmen regarding prostitutes. However, as puberty hits, this perspective has to adjust to the desire to engage with this undesirable group, these moral outcasts. The average young man, who enjoys a bit of immorality when he's out in the city and believes it won't reach his mother's or sisters' ears, still holds onto his arrogance and disgust, without softening those feelings at all. He brings those feelings with him, more or less hidden, to the brothel, and they shade his thoughts and actions the entire time he is with prostitutes, or kissing them, or touching them, as he would a mare, trying to get as much as he can for his money. Honestly, that was my attitude too. But if anyone had asked me for the slightest reason behind this viewpoint, this feeling of superiority, pride, hauteur, and bias, I would have, like any other 'respectable' young man, been completely speechless and could only stare blankly."
From the modern moral standpoint which now concerns us, not only is the cruelty involved in the dishonor of the prostitute absurd, but not less absurd, and often not less cruel, seems the honor bestowed on the respectable women on the other side of the social gulf. It is well recognized that men sometimes go to prostitutes to gratify the excitement aroused by fondling their betrothed.[218] As the emotional and physical results of ungratified excitement are not infrequently more serious in women than in men, the betrothed women in these cases are equally justified in seeking relief from other men, and the vicious circle of absurdity might thus be completed.
From a modern moral perspective, not only is the cruelty of shaming prostitutes ridiculous, but the honor given to respectable women on the other side of the social divide is equally absurd and often just as cruel. It's widely acknowledged that men sometimes visit prostitutes to satisfy the thrill they get from touching their fiancées. Since the emotional and physical consequences of unfulfilled excitement can be more severe for women than for men, the fiancées in these situations are just as justified in seeking relief from other men, which completes this cycle of absurdity.
From the point of view of the modern moralist there is another consideration which was altogether overlooked in the conventional and traditional morality we have inherited, and was indeed practically non-existent in the ancient days when that morality was still a living reality. Women are no longer divided only into the two groups of wives who are to be honored, and prostitutes who are the dishonored guardians of that honor; there is a large third class of women who are neither wives nor prostitutes. For this group of the unmarried virtuous the traditional morality had no place at all; it simply ignored them. But the new moralist, who is learning to recognize both the claims of the individual and the claims of society, begins to ask whether on the one hand these women are not entitled to the satisfaction of their affectional and emotional impulses if they so desire, and on the other hand whether, since a high civilization involves a diminished birthrate, the community is not entitled to encourage every healthy and able-bodied woman to contribute to maintain the birthrate when she so desires.
From the perspective of today's moral thinkers, there’s another aspect that was completely overlooked in the traditional morality we’ve inherited, which was basically non-existent in ancient times when that morality was a living part of society. Women are no longer just split into two categories: wives who are to be respected and prostitutes who are seen as dishonorable custodians of that respect; there’s now a significant third group of women who are neither wives nor prostitutes. For this group of unmarried virtuous women, traditional morality had no recognition at all; it simply ignored them. However, the new moral thinker, who is beginning to acknowledge both individual rights and societal responsibilities, starts to question whether, on one hand, these women shouldn’t be entitled to have their emotional and affectionate needs met if they wish, and on the other, whether, since advanced civilizations tend to have lower birthrates, the community shouldn’t encourage every healthy and capable woman to contribute to maintaining the birthrate if she desires to do so.
All the considerations briefly indicated in the preceding pages—the fundamental sense of human equality generated by our civilization, the repugnance to cruelty which accompanies the refinement of urban life, the ugly contrast of extremes which shock our developing democratic tendencies, the growing sense of the rights of the individual to authority over his own person, the no less strongly emphasized right of the community to the best that the individual can yield—all these considerations are every day more strongly influencing the modern moralist to assume towards the prostitute an attitude altogether different from that of the morality which we derived from Cato and Augustine. He sees the question in a larger and more dynamic manner. Instead of declaring that it is well worth while to tolerate and at the same time to condemn the prostitute, in order to preserve the sanctity of the wife in her home, he is not only more inclined to regard each as the proper guardian of her own moral freedom, but he is less certain about the time-honored position of the prostitute, and moreover, by no means sure that the wife in the home may not be fully as much in need of rescuing as the prostitute in the street; he is prepared to consider whether reform in this matter is not most likely to take place in the shape of a fairer apportionment of sexual privileges and sexual duties to women generally, with an inevitably resultant elevation in the sexual lives of men also.
All the points mentioned in the previous pages—the basic sense of human equality created by our society, the aversion to cruelty that comes with the sophistication of city life, the shocking contrast of extremes that challenge our developing democratic ideals, the increasing recognition of individual rights to control over one’s own body, and the equally important right of the community to benefit from what the individual can contribute—all these factors are increasingly shaping the modern moralist’s perspective on prostitutes, leading them to adopt a view that is completely different from the moral values inherited from Cato and Augustine. They see the issue in a broader and more dynamic way. Instead of saying that it’s worthwhile to tolerate and condemn the prostitute to maintain the sanctity of the wife at home, they tend to view each woman as the rightful guardian of her own moral freedom and are less convinced about the traditional role of the prostitute. Additionally, they are not at all sure that the wife at home isn’t just as much in need of rescue as the prostitute on the street. They are open to the idea that reform in this area is more likely to happen through a fairer distribution of sexual privileges and duties among all women, which would also elevate men’s sexual lives as a result.
The revolt of many serious reformers against the injustice and degradation now involved by our system of prostitution is so profound that some have declared themselves ready to accept any revolution of ideas which would bring about a more wholesome transmutation of moral values. "Better indeed were a saturnalia of free men and women," exclaims Edward Carpenter (Love's Coming of Age, p. 62), "than the spectacle which, as it is, our great cities present at night."
The revolt of many serious reformers against the injustice and degradation caused by our prostitution system is so intense that some have said they are willing to embrace any radical change in ideas that would lead to a healthier transformation of moral values. "Better indeed were a festival of free men and women," exclaims Edward Carpenter (Love's Coming of Age, p. 62), "than the scene that our major cities display at night."
Even those who would be quite content with as conservative a treatment as possible of social institutions still cannot fail to realize that prostitution is unsatisfactory, unless we are content to make very humble claims of the sexual act. "The act of prostitution," Godfrey declares (The Science of Sex, p. 202), "may be physiologically complete, but it is complete in no other sense. All the moral and intellectual factors which combine with physical desire to form the perfect sexual attraction are absent. All the higher elements of love—admiration, respect, honor, and self-sacrificing devotion—are as foreign to prostitution as to the egoistic act of masturbation. The principal drawbacks to the morality of the act lie in its associations more than in the act itself. Any affectional quality which a more or less promiscuous connection might possess is at once destroyed by the intrusion of the monetary element. In the resulting degradation the woman has the largest share, since it makes her a pariah and involves her in all the hardening and depraving influences of social ostracism. But her degradation only serves to render her influence on her partners more demoralizing. Prostitution," he concludes, "has a strong tendency towards emphasizing the naturally selfish attitude of men towards women, and encouraging them in the delusion, born of unregulated passions, that the sexual act itself is the aim and end of the sex life. Prostitution can therefore make no claim to afford even a temporary solution to the sex problem. It fulfils only that mission which has made it a 'necessary evil'—the mission of palliative to the physical rigors of celibacy and monogamy. It does so at the cost of a considerable amount of physical and moral deterioration, much of which is undoubtedly due to the action of society in completing the degradation of the prostitute by persistent ostracism. Prostitution was not so great an evil when it was not thought so great, yet even at its best it was a real evil, a melancholy and sordid travesty of sincere and natural passional relations. It is an evil which we are bound to have with us so long as celibacy is a custom and monogamy a law." It is the wife as well as the prostitute who is degraded by a system which makes venal love possible. "The time has gone past," the same writer remarks elsewhere (p. 195) "when a mere ceremony can really sanctify what is base and transform lust and greed into the sincerity of sexual affection. If, to enter into sexual connections with a man for a solely material end is a disgrace to humanity, it is a disgrace under the marriage bond just as much as apart from the hypocritical blessing of the church or the law. If the public prostitute is a being who deserves to be treated as a pariah, it is hopelessly irrational to withhold every sort of moral opprobrium from the woman who leads a similar life under a different set of external circumstances. Either the prostitute wife must come under the moral ban, or there must be an end to the complete ostracism under which the prostitute labors."
Even those who would be okay with a very conservative approach to social institutions can't ignore that prostitution is problematic, unless we're willing to settle for very low expectations of the sexual act. "The act of prostitution," Godfrey states (The Science of Sex, p. 202), "might be physically complete, but it's lacking in every other way. All the moral and intellectual factors that combine with physical desire to create true sexual attraction are missing. All the higher aspects of love—admiration, respect, honor, and selfless devotion—are completely absent in prostitution, much like in the selfish act of masturbation. The main issues with the morality of the act stem from its associations rather than the act itself. Any emotional quality a somewhat casual connection might have is instantly destroyed by the introduction of money. In this resulting degradation, women bear the brunt of the burden, as it turns them into outcasts and subjects them to all the harsh and corrupting effects of social exclusion. Yet, their degradation only makes their influence on their partners more corrupting. Prostitution,” he concludes, “tends to highlight men’s naturally selfish attitudes toward women and reinforces the misguided belief, fueled by unchecked desires, that the sexual act is the ultimate goal of sex life. Therefore, prostitution doesn't provide even a temporary fix for the sex problem. It only fulfills the role that has made it a 'necessary evil'—the role of easing the physical demands of celibacy and monogamy. It does so at the expense of significant physical and moral decline, much of which is undoubtedly a result of society's role in further degrading the prostitute through ongoing exclusion. Prostitution was not seen as such a significant evil when it wasn’t viewed that way, yet even at its best, it was still a genuine evil, a sad and sordid distortion of honest and natural passionate relationships. It’s an evil that we will continue to face as long as celibacy is a tradition and monogamy is enforced by law." It is not just the prostitute who is demeaned by a system that makes paid love possible; the wife suffers as well. "The time has passed," the same writer notes elsewhere (p. 195), "when a mere ceremony can truly sanctify what is immoral and transform lust and greed into the authenticity of sexual affection. If entering into a sexual relationship with a man purely for financial gain is a disgrace to humanity, it is just as disgraceful under the marriage bond as it is outside the hypocritical blessing of the church or the law. If the public prostitute deserves to be treated as an outcast, it's completely irrational to exempt from moral condemnation the woman who lives a similar life under different circumstances. Either the prostitute wife must be subject to moral condemnation, or we must end the total exclusion that the prostitute faces."
The thinker who more clearly and fundamentally than others, and first of all, realized the dynamical relationships of prostitution, as dependent upon a change in the other social relationships of life, was James Hinton. More than thirty years ago, in fragmentary writings that still remain unpublished, since he never worked them into an orderly form, Hinton gave vigorous and often passionate expression to this fundamental idea. It may be worth while to quote a few brief passages from Hinton's MSS.: "I feel that the laws of force should hold also amid the waves of human passion, that the relations of mechanics are true, and will rule also in human life.... There is a tension, a crushing of the soul, by our modern life, and it is ready for a sudden spring to a different order in which the forces shall rearrange themselves. It is a dynamical question presented in moral terms.... Keeping a portion of the woman population without prospect of marriage means having prostitutes, that is women as instruments of man's mere sensuality, and this means the killing, in many of them, of all pure love or capacity of it. This is the fact we have to face.... To-day I saw a young woman whose life was being consumed by her want of love, a case of threatened utter misery: now see the price at which we purchase her ill-health; for her ill-health we pay the crushing of another girl into hell. We give that for it; her wretchedness of soul and body are bought by prostitution; we have prostitutes made for that.... We devote some women recklessly to perdition to make a hothouse Heaven for the rest.... One wears herself out in vainly trying to endure pleasures she is not strong enough to enjoy, while other women are perishing for lack of these very pleasures. If marriage is this, is it not embodied lust? The happy Christian homes are the true dark places of the earth.... Prostitution for man, restraint for woman—they are two sides of the same thing, and both are denials of love, like luxury and asceticism. The mountains of restraint must be used to fill up the abysses of luxury."
The thinker who understood better than anyone else the dynamic relationships of prostitution, viewing them as linked to changes in other social aspects of life, was James Hinton. Over thirty years ago, in scattered writings that remain unpublished because he never organized them, Hinton expressed this essential idea with vigor and often passion. It's worth quoting a few brief passages from Hinton's manuscripts: "I believe that the laws of force should apply even amid the tumult of human passion, that the principles of mechanics hold true, and will govern human life as well.... There is a tension, a crushing of the soul, in our modern life, and it's poised for a sudden leap into a different order where the forces will rearrange themselves. It's a dynamic issue framed in moral terms.... Keeping part of the female population without the possibility of marriage leads to the existence of prostitutes, meaning women reduced to mere instruments of male desire, which results in the killing of all pure love or the ability to love in many of them. This is the reality we must confront.... Today, I encountered a young woman whose life was being drained by her lack of love, a situation leading to deep misery: consider the cost at which we maintain her ill-health; for her suffering, we sacrifice the well-being of another girl, pushing her into hell. We exchange that for her pain; her wretched state of mind and body is financed by prostitution; we create prostitutes for that.... We recklessly condemn some women to destruction to create a twisted paradise for the others.... One woman exhausts herself trying to endure pleasures she's not strong enough to appreciate, while other women are dying from the absence of these very pleasures. If marriage is like this, isn't it just embodied lust? The so-called happy Christian homes are the true dark places of the earth.... Prostitution for men, restraint for women—these are two sides of the same coin, and both reject love, like luxury and asceticism. The mountains of restraint must be used to fill the chasms of luxury."
Some of Hinton's views were set forth by a writer intimately acquainted with him in a pamphlet entitled The Future of Marriage: An Eirenicon for a Question of To-day, by a Respectable Woman (1885). "When once the conviction is forced home upon the 'good' women," the writer remarks, "that their place of honor and privilege rests upon the degradation of others as its basis, they will never rest till they have either abandoned it or sought for it some other pedestal. If our inflexible marriage system has for its essential condition the existence side by side with it of prostitution, then one of two things follows: either prostitution must be shown to be compatible with the well-being, moral and physical, of the women who practice it, or our marriage system must be condemned. If it was clearly put before anyone, he could not seriously assert that to be 'virtue' which could only be practiced at the expense of another's vice.... Whilst the laws of physics are becoming so universally recognized that no one dreams of attempting to annihilate a particle of matter, or of force, yet we do not instinctively apply the same conception to moral forces, but think and act as if we could simply do away with an evil, while leaving unchanged that which gives it its strength. This is the only view of the social problem which can give us hope. That prostitution should simply cease, leaving everything else as it is, would be disastrous if it were possible. But it is not possible. The weakness of all existing efforts to put down prostitution is that they are directed against it as an isolated thing, whereas it is only one of the symptoms proceeding from a common disease."
Some of Hinton's views were expressed by a writer who knew him well in a pamphlet titled The Future of Marriage: An Eirenicon for a Question of To-day, by a Respectable Woman (1885). "Once the 'good' women realize," the writer states, "that their honor and privilege are based on the degradation of others, they won’t stop until they either give it up or find a different foundation for it. If our rigid marriage system requires the existence of prostitution alongside it, then one of two things must happen: either prostitution must be shown to be compatible with the well-being—both moral and physical—of the women involved, or our marriage system must be condemned. If this were clearly explained to anyone, they couldn't seriously claim that something is 'virtuous' if it only exists at the expense of someone else's vice.... While the laws of physics are so widely recognized that no one thinks about trying to eliminate a particle of matter or force, we don't instinctively apply the same understanding to moral forces. Instead, we believe we can just get rid of an evil while leaving the conditions that empower it unchanged. This is the only perspective on the social issue that offers hope. The idea that prostitution could simply end while everything else remains the same would be catastrophic if it were possible. But it's not possible. The failure of all current efforts to eliminate prostitution is that they treat it as an isolated issue, when it is actually just one symptom of a larger problem."
Ellen Key, who during recent years has been the chief apostle of a gospel of sexual morality based on the needs of women as the mothers of the race, has, in a somewhat similar spirit, denounced alike prostitution and rigid marriage, declaring (in her Essays on Love and Marriage) that "the development of erotic personal consciousness is as much hindered by socially regulated 'morality' as by socially regulated 'immorality,'" and that "the two lowest and socially sanctioned expressions of sexual dualism, rigid marriage and prostitution, will gradually become impossible, because with the conquest of the idea of erotic unity they will no longer correspond to human needs."
Ellen Key, who in recent years has been the main advocate for a message of sexual morality centered on women's needs as the mothers of society, has, in a similar vein, criticized both prostitution and strict marriage. She states in her Essays on Love and Marriage that "the growth of personal erotic awareness is hindered as much by socially enforced 'morality' as by socially enforced 'immorality,'" and that "the two least favorable and socially accepted forms of sexual duality, strict marriage and prostitution, will eventually become unfeasible because as we embrace the concept of erotic unity, they will no longer meet human needs."
We may sum up the present situation as regards prostitution by saying that on the one hand there is a tendency for its elevation, in association with the growing humanity and refinement of civilization, characteristics which must inevitably tend to mark more and more both those women who become prostitutes and those men who seek them; on the other hand, but perhaps through the same dynamic force, there is a tendency towards the slow elimination of prostitution by the successful competition of higher and purer methods of sexual relationship freed from pecuniary considerations. This refinement and humanization, this competition by better forms of sexual love, are indeed an essential part of progress as civilization becomes more truly sound, wholesome, and sincere.
We can sum up the current state of prostitution by saying that, on one hand, there's a trend towards its elevation, linked to the increasing humanity and sophistication of society—qualities that are bound to impact more and more both the women who become prostitutes and the men who seek them. On the other hand, perhaps driven by the same dynamics, there's a slow movement towards the gradual elimination of prostitution, thanks to the successful rise of healthier and more genuine ways of engaging in sexual relationships that aren't influenced by financial factors. This advancement and humanization, this competition from better forms of sexual love, are indeed crucial to progress as society becomes more genuinely healthy, wholesome, and authentic.
This moral change cannot, it seems probable, fail to be accompanied by the realization that the facts of human life are more important than the forms. For all changes from lower to higher social forms, from savagery to civilization, are accompanied—in so far as they are vital changes—by a slow and painful groping towards the truth that it is only in natural relations that sanity and sanctity can be found, for, as Nietzsche said, the "return" to Nature should rather be called the "ascent." Only so can we achieve the final elimination from our hearts of that clinging tradition that there is any impurity or dishonor in acts of love for which the reasonable, and not merely the conventional, conditions have been fulfilled. For it is vain to attempt to cleanse our laws, or even our by-laws, until we have first cleansed our hearts.
This moral change will probably be accompanied by the realization that the facts of human life are more important than the forms. All shifts from lower to higher social structures, from savagery to civilization, involve—if they are significant changes—a slow and difficult movement toward the truth that true sanity and sanctity can only be found in natural relationships. As Nietzsche said, the "return" to Nature should actually be called the "ascent." Only then can we finally rid ourselves of the lingering belief that there is any impurity or dishonor in acts of love when the reasonable, not just the conventional, conditions have been met. It's pointless to try to cleanse our laws or even our by-laws until we have first cleansed our hearts.
It would be out of place here to push further the statement of the moral question as it is to-day beginning to shape itself in the sphere of sex. In a psychological discussion we are only concerned to set down the actual attitude of the moralist, and of civilization. The practical outcome of that attitude must be left to moralists and sociologists and the community generally to work out.
It wouldn't be appropriate here to elaborate further on the moral question that's starting to take form today in the realm of sex. In a psychological discussion, our focus is solely on outlining the current stance of moralists and society. The real implications of that stance should be left to moralists, sociologists, and the community at large to figure out.
Our inquiry has also, it may be hoped, incidentally tended to show that in practically dealing with the question of prostitution it is pre-eminently necessary to remember the warning which, as regards many other social problems, has been embodied by Herbert Spencer in his famous illustration of the bent iron plate. In trying to make the bent plate smooth, it is useless, Spencer pointed out, to hammer directly on the buckled up part; if we do so we merely find that we have made matters worse; our hammering, to be effective, must be around, and not directly on, the offensive elevation we wish to reduce; only so can the iron plate be hammered smooth.[219] But this elementary law has not been understood by moralists. The plain, practical, common-sense reformer, as he fancied himself to be—from the time of Charlemagne onwards—has over and over again brought his heavy fist directly down on to the evil of prostitution and has always made matters worse. It is only by wisely working outside and around the evil that we can hope to lessen it effectually. By aiming to develop and raise the relationships of men to women, and of women to women, by modifying our notions of sexual relationships, and by introducing a saner and truer conception of womanhood and of the responsibilities of women as well as of men, by attaining, socially as well as economically, a higher level of human living—it is only by such methods as these that we can reasonably expect to see any diminution and alleviation of the evil of prostitution. So long as we are incapable of such methods we must be content with the prostitution we deserve, learning to treat it with the pity, and the respect, which so intimate a failure of our civilization is entitled to.
Our investigation has also, hopefully, shown that when dealing with the issue of prostitution, it’s crucial to keep in mind the warning that Herbert Spencer illustrated with his well-known example of the bent iron plate. He pointed out that trying to smooth out the bent plate by hammering directly on the warped area is pointless; if we do that, we only make things worse. Our hammering must focus around, not directly on, the raised part we want to flatten; only then can the iron plate be smoothed out.[219] However, moralists have not grasped this basic principle. The straightforward, practical reformer, as he imagined himself to be—from the time of Charlemagne onward—has repeatedly come down hard on the issue of prostitution and has only made it worse. We can only hope to effectively reduce it by carefully addressing the surrounding issues. By working to improve the relationships between men and women, and among women, by shifting our views on sexual relationships, and by presenting a healthier and more accurate understanding of womanhood and the responsibilities of both women and men, and by achieving a higher standard of living socially and economically—we can reasonably expect to see any decrease and alleviation of the problem of prostitution. As long as we are incapable of such approaches, we must accept the prostitution we have earned, learning to address it with the compassion and respect that such a deep failure of our civilization deserves.
See, e.g., Cheetham's Hulsean Lectures, The Mysteries, Pagan and Christian, pp. 123, 136.
See, e.g., Cheetham's Hulsean Lectures, The Mysteries, Pagan and Christian, pp. 123, 136.
Hormayr's Taschenbuch, 1835, p. 255. Hagelstange, in a chapter on mediæval festivals in his Süddeutsches Bauernleben im Mittelalter, shows how, in these Christian orgies which were really of pagan origin, the German people reacted with tremendous and boisterous energy against the laborious and monotonous existence of everyday life.
Hormayr's Taschenbuch, 1835, p. 255. Hagelstange, in a chapter on medieval festivals in his Süddeutsches Bauernleben im Mittelalter, illustrates how, during these Christian celebrations that actually had pagan roots, the German people responded with incredible and lively energy against the tedious and repetitive nature of daily life.
This was clearly realized by the more intelligent upholders of the Feast of Fools. Austere persons wished to abolish this Feast, and in a remarkable petition sent up to the Theological Faculty of Paris (and quoted by Flogel, Geschichte des Grotesk-Komischen, fourth edition, p. 204) the case for the Feast is thus presented: "We do this according to ancient custom, in order that folly, which is second nature to man and seems to be inborn, may at least once a year have free outlet. Wine casks would burst if we failed sometimes to remove the bung and let in air. Now we are all ill-bound casks and barrels which would let out the wine of wisdom if by constant devotion and fear of God we allowed it to ferment. We must let in air so that it may not be spoilt. Thus on some days we give ourselves up to sport, so that with the greater zeal we may afterwards return to the worship of God." The Feast of Fools was not suppressed until the middle of the sixteenth century, and relics of it persisted (as at Aix) till near the end of the eighteenth century.
This was clearly understood by the more enlightened supporters of the Feast of Fools. Serious individuals wanted to get rid of this Feast, and in a notable petition sent to the Theological Faculty of Paris (quoted by Flogel, Geschichte des Grotesk-Komischen, fourth edition, p. 204), the argument for the Feast is presented like this: "We do this according to ancient tradition, so that folly, which is a natural part of being human and seems to be inherent, can have a free outlet at least once a year. Wine barrels would burst if we didn't sometimes remove the stopper and let in air. Now we are all poorly bound casks and barrels that would let out the wine of wisdom if we allowed it to ferment through constant devotion and fear of God. We need to let in air so that it doesn't spoil. So, on certain days we indulge in merriment, so that with greater enthusiasm we can return to the worship of God." The Feast of Fools was not abolished until the mid-sixteenth century, and traces of it lingered (as in Aix) until nearly the end of the eighteenth century.
A Méray, La Vie au Temps des Libres Prêcheurs, vol. ii, Ch. X. A good and scholarly account of the Feast of Fools is given by E. K. Chambers, The Mediæval Stage, Ch. XIII. It is true that the Church and the early Fathers often anathematized the theatre. But Gregory of Nazianzen wished to found a Christian theatre; the Mediæval Mysteries were certainly under the protection of the clergy; and St. Thomas Aquinas, the greatest of the schoolmen, only condemns the theatre with cautious qualifications.
A Méray, Life in the Time of the Free Preachers, vol. ii, Ch. X. E. K. Chambers provides a thorough and scholarly overview of the Feast of Fools in The Medieval Stage, Ch. XIII. It's true that the Church and early Church Fathers often condemned the theater. However, Gregory of Nazianzen wanted to establish a Christian theater; the Medieval Mysteries were definitely supported by the clergy; and St. Thomas Aquinas, the foremost of the scholars, only criticizes the theater with careful qualifications.
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, Ch. XII.
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, Ch. XII.
Journal Anthropological Institute, July-Dec., 1904, p. 329.
Journal of the Anthropological Institute, July-Dec., 1904, p. 329.
Westermarck (Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, pp. 283-9) shows how widespread is the custom of setting apart a periodical rest day.
Westermarck (Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, pp. 283-9) demonstrates how common it is to have a regular day of rest.
A. E. Crawley, The Mystic Rose, pp. 273 et seq., Crawley brings into association with this function of great festivals the custom, found in some parts of the world, of exchanging wives at these times. "It has nothing whatever to do with the marriage system, except as breaking it for a season, women of forbidden degree being lent, on the same grounds as conventions and ordinary relations are broken at festivals of the Saturnalia type, the object being to change life and start afresh, by exchanging every thing one can, while the very act of exchange coincides with the other desire, to weld the community together" (Ib., p. 479).
A. E. Crawley, The Mystic Rose, pp. 273 et seq., Crawley connects this role of major festivals with the practice, found in some cultures, of swapping wives during these events. "It has nothing to do with the marriage system, except as a temporary break, with women of prohibited status being borrowed, just like how conventions and normal relationships are set aside during festivals similar to the Saturnalia, with the goal of refreshing life and starting anew by exchanging everything possible, while the very act of exchange aligns with another goal, which is to strengthen the community" (Ib., p. 479).
See "The Analysis of the Sexual Impulse" in vol. iii of these Studies.
See "The Analysis of the Sexual Impulse" in vol. iii of these Studies.
G. Murray, Ancient Greek Literature, p. 211.
G. Murray, Ancient Greek Literature, p. 211.
The Greek drama probably arose out of a folk-festival of more or less sexual character, and it is even possible that the mediæval drama had a somewhat similar origin (see Donaldson, The Greek Theatre; Gilbert Murray, loc. cit.; Karl Pearson, The Chances of Death, vol. ii, pp. 135-6, 280 et seq.).
The Greek drama likely originated from a folk festival that had more or less sexual themes, and it’s also possible that medieval drama had a similar background (see Donaldson, The Greek Theatre; Gilbert Murray, loc. cit.; Karl Pearson, The Chances of Death, vol. ii, pp. 135-6, 280 et seq.).
R. Canudo, "Les Chorèges Français," Mercure de France, May 1, 1907, p. 180.
R. Canudo, "The French Choruses," Mercure de France, May 1, 1907, p. 180.
"This is, in fact," Cyples declares (The Process of Human Experience, p. 743), "Art's great function—to rehearse within us greater egoistic possibilities, to habituate us to larger actualizations of personality in a rudimentary manner," and so to arouse, "aimlessly but splendidly, the sheer as yet unfulfilled possibilities within us."
"This is, in fact," Cyples declares (The Process of Human Experience, p. 743), "Art's great function—to help us explore greater self-centered possibilities, to get us used to bigger expressions of personality in a basic way," and so to inspire, "aimlessly but wonderfully, the pure yet unfulfilled potential inside us."
Even when monotonous labor is intellectual, it is not thereby protected against degrading orgiastic reactions. Prof. L. Gurlitt shows (Die Neue Generation, January, 1909, pp. 31-6) how the strenuous, unremitting intellectual work of Prussian seminaries leads among both teachers and scholars to the worst forms of the orgy.
Even when repetitive mental work is involved, it doesn't shield people from degrading and excessive reactions. Prof. L. Gurlitt explains (Die Neue Generation, January, 1909, pp. 31-6) how the intense, relentless intellectual effort in Prussian seminaries results in extreme behavior among both teachers and academics.
Rabutaux discusses various definitions of prostitution, De la Prostitution en Europe, pp. 119 et seq. For the origin of the names to designate the prostitute, see Schrader, Reallexicon, art. "Beischläferin."
Rabutaux talks about different definitions of prostitution, De la Prostitution en Europe, pp. 119 et seq. For the origin of the terms used to describe a prostitute, see Schrader, Reallexicon, art. "Beischläferin."
Digest, lib. xxiii, tit. ii, p. 43. If she only gave herself to one or two persons, though for money, it was not prostitution.
Digest, lib. xxiii, tit. ii, p. 43. If she only gave herself to one or two people, even for money, it wasn't considered prostitution.
Guyot, La Prostitution, p. 8. The element of venality is essential, and religious writers (like Robert Wardlaw, D. D., of Edinburgh, in his Lectures on Female Prostitution, 1842, p. 14) who define prostitution as "the illicit intercourse of the sexes," and synonymous with theological "fornication," fall into an absurd confusion.
Guyot, La Prostitution, p. 8. The aspect of money-making is crucial, and religious authors (like Robert Wardlaw, D. D., from Edinburgh, in his Lectures on Female Prostitution, 1842, p. 14) who describe prostitution as "the illegal relationship between the sexes," equating it with theological "fornication," create a ridiculous misunderstanding.
"Such marriages are sometimes stigmatized as 'legalized prostitution,'" remarks Sidgwick (Methods of Ethics, Bk. iii, Ch. XI), "but the phrase is felt to be extravagant and paradoxical."
"Such marriages are sometimes labeled as 'legalized prostitution,'" comments Sidgwick (Methods of Ethics, Bk. iii, Ch. XI), "but this term is considered excessive and contradictory."
Bonger, Criminalité et Conditions Economiques, p. 378. Bonger believes that the act of prostitution is "intrinsically equal to that of a man or woman who contracts a marriage for economical reasons."
Bonger, Criminalité et Conditions Economiques, p. 378. Bonger believes that engaging in prostitution is "essentially the same as a man or woman who enters a marriage for financial reasons."
E. Richard, La Prostitution à Paris, 1890, p. 44. It may be questioned whether publicity or notoriety should form an essential part of the definition; it seems, however, to be involved, or the prostitute cannot obtain clients. Reuss states that she must, in addition, be absolutely without means of subsistence; that is certainly not essential. Nor is it necessary, as the Digest insisted, that the act should be performed "without pleasure;" that may be as it will, without affecting the prostitutional nature of the act.
E. Richard, La Prostitution à Paris, 1890, p. 44. It's worth questioning whether publicity or notoriety should be a key part of the definition; however, it seems to be necessary, otherwise the prostitute cannot attract clients. Reuss argues that she must also be completely without any means of support; that’s certainly not essential. Nor is it necessary, as the Digest emphasized, for the act to be performed "without pleasure;" that can be the case or not, without impacting the nature of the act of prostitution.
Hawkesworth, Account of the Voyages, etc., 1775, vol. ii, p. 254.
Hawkesworth, Account of the Voyages, etc., 1775, vol. ii, p. 254.
R. W. Codrington, The Melanesians, p. 235.
R. W. Codrington, The Melanesians, p. 235.
F. S. Krauss, Romanische Forschungen, 1903, p. 290.
F. S. Krauss, Romanische Forschungen, 1903, p. 290.
H. Schurtz, Altersklassen und Männerbünde, 1902, p. 190. In this work Schurtz brings together (pp. 189-201) some examples of the germs of prostitution among primitive peoples. Many facts and references are given by Westermarck (History of Human Marriage, pp. 66 et seq., and Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, pp. 441 et seq.).
H. Schurtz, Age Groups and Male Societies, 1902, p. 190. In this work, Schurtz compiles (pp. 189-201) some examples of the beginnings of prostitution among primitive societies. Many facts and references are provided by Westermarck (History of Human Marriage, pp. 66 et seq., and Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, pp. 441 et seq.).
Bachofen (more especially in his Mutterrecht and Sage von Tanaquil) argued that even religious prostitution sprang from the resistance of primitive instincts to the individualization of love. Cf. Robertson Smith, Religion of Semites, second edition, p. 59.
Bachofen (especially in his Mutterrecht and Sage von Tanaquil) argued that even religious prostitution originated from the pushback of basic instincts against the personal nature of love. Cf. Robertson Smith, Religion of Semites, second edition, p. 59.
Whatever the reason may be, there can be no doubt that there is a widespread tendency for religion and prostitution to be associated; it is possibly to some extent a special case of that general connection between the religious and sexual impulses which has been discussed elsewhere (Appendix C to vol. i of these Studies). Thus A. B. Ellis, in his book on The Ewe-speaking Peoples of West Africa (pp. 124, 141) states that here women dedicated to a god become promiscuous prostitutes. W. G. Sumner (Folkways, Ch. XVI) brings together many facts concerning the wide distribution of religious prostitution.
Whatever the reason may be, there’s no doubt that there’s a common link between religion and prostitution; it might be a specific case of the broader connection between religious and sexual impulses that has been discussed elsewhere (Appendix C to vol. i of these Studies). For instance, A. B. Ellis, in his book The Ewe-speaking Peoples of West Africa (pp. 124, 141), notes that women dedicated to a god often become promiscuous prostitutes. W. G. Sumner (Folkways, Ch. XVI) compiles many examples regarding the widespread occurrence of religious prostitution.
Herodotus, Bk. I, Ch. CXCIX; Baruch, Ch. VI, p. 43. Modern scholars confirm the statements of Herodotus from the study of Babylonian literature, though inclined to deny that religious prostitution occupied so large a place as he gives it. A tablet of the Gilgamash epic, according to Morris Jastrow, refers to prostitutes as attendants of the goddess Ishtar in the city Uruk (or Erech), which was thus a centre, and perhaps the chief centre, of the rites described by Herodotus (Morris Jastrow, The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, 1898, p. 475). Ishtar was the goddess of fertility, the great mother goddess, and the prostitutes were priestesses, attached to her worship, who took part in ceremonies intended to symbolize fertility. These priestesses of Ishtar were known by the general name Kadishtu, "the holy ones" (op. cit., pp. 485, 660).
Herodotus, Bk. I, Ch. CXCIX; Baruch, Ch. VI, p. 43. Modern scholars confirm Herodotus's statements based on Babylonian literature studies, although they tend to downplay the extent of religious prostitution he describes. A tablet from the Gilgamash epic, according to Morris Jastrow, mentions prostitutes as attendants of the goddess Ishtar in the city of Uruk (or Erech), which was a key, and possibly the primary, center for the rites mentioned by Herodotus (Morris Jastrow, The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, 1898, p. 475). Ishtar was the goddess of fertility, the great mother goddess, and the prostitutes were priestesses devoted to her worship, participating in ceremonies meant to symbolize fertility. These priestesses of Ishtar were referred to collectively as Kadishtu, meaning "the holy ones" (op. cit., pp. 485, 660).
It is usual among modern writers to associate Aphrodite Pandemos, rather than Ourania, with venal or promiscuous sexuality, but this is a complete mistake, for the Aphrodite Pandemos was purely political and had no sexual significance. The mistake was introduced, perhaps intentionally, by Plato. It has been suggested that that arch-juggler, who disliked democratic ideas, purposely sought to pervert and vulgarize the conception of Aphrodite Pandemos (Farnell, Cults of Greek States, vol. ii, p. 660).
It’s common for modern writers to link Aphrodite Pandemos with cheap or casual sex rather than with Ourania, but this is a total misunderstanding. Aphrodite Pandemos was purely political and had no sexual meaning. This mistake may have been introduced on purpose by Plato. It has been suggested that this master manipulator, who opposed democratic ideas, intentionally tried to distort and cheapen the concept of Aphrodite Pandemos (Farnell, Cults of Greek States, vol. ii, p. 660).
Athenæus, Bk. xiii, cap. XXXII. It appears that the only other Hellenic community where the temple cult involved unchastity was a city of the Locri Epizephyrii (Farnell, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 636).
Athenæus, Bk. xiii, cap. XXXII. It seems that the only other Greek community where the temple worship involved promiscuity was a city of the Locri Epizephyrii (Farnell, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 636).
I do not say an earlier "promiscuity," for the theory of a primitive sexual promiscuity is now widely discredited, though there can be no reasonable doubt that the early prevalence of mother-right was more favorable to the sexual freedom of women than the later patriarchal system. Thus in very early Egyptian days a woman could give her favors to any man she chose by sending him her garment, even if she were married. In time the growth of the rights of men led to this being regarded as criminal, but the priestesses of Amen retained the privilege to the last, as being under divine protection (Flinders Petrie, Egyptian Tales, pp. 10, 48).
I don't refer to earlier "promiscuity," since the idea of primitive sexual promiscuity is now largely discredited. However, it's clear that the early system of mother-right allowed women more sexual freedom than the later patriarchal system did. In very early Egypt, a woman could express her interest in any man she wanted by sending him her garment, even if she was married. Over time, as men's rights increased, this was seen as inappropriate, but the priestesses of Amen kept this privilege until the end, as they were considered to be under divine protection (Flinders Petrie, Egyptian Tales, pp. 10, 48).
It should be added that Farnell ("The Position of Women in Ancient Religion," Archiv für Religionswissenschaft, 1904, p. 88) seeks to explain the religious prostitution of Babylonia as a special religious modification of the custom of destroying virginity before marriage in order to safeguard the husband from the mystic dangers of defloration. E. S. Hartland, also ("Concerning the Rite at the Temple of Mylitta," Anthropological Essays Presented to E. B. Tyler, p. 189), suggests that this was a puberty rite connected with ceremonial defloration. This theory is not, however, generally accepted by Semitic scholars.
It should be noted that Farnell ("The Position of Women in Ancient Religion," Archiv für Religionswissenschaft, 1904, p. 88) attempts to explain the religious prostitution of Babylonia as a specific religious variation of the practice of losing virginity before marriage to protect the husband from the mystical risks of defloration. E. S. Hartland, in addition ("Concerning the Rite at the Temple of Mylitta," Anthropological Essays Presented to E. B. Tyler, p. 189), suggests that this was a coming-of-age ritual associated with ceremonial defloration. However, this theory is not widely accepted by Semitic scholars.
The girls of this tribe, who are remarkably pretty, after spending two or three years in thus amassing a little dowry, return home to marry, and are said to make model wives and mothers. They are described by Bertherand in Parent-Duchâtelet, La Prostitution à Paris, vol. ii, p. 539.
The girls in this tribe, who are really attractive, spend two or three years saving up a small dowry before returning home to get married, and it's said that they become excellent wives and mothers. Bertherand describes them in Parent-Duchâtelet, La Prostitution à Paris, vol. ii, p. 539.
In Abyssinia (according to Fiaschi, British Medical Journal, March 13, 1897), where prostitution has always been held in high esteem, the prostitutes, who are now subject to medical examination twice a week, still attach no disgrace to their profession, and easily find husbands afterwards. Potter (Sohrab and Rustem, pp. 168 et seq.) gives references as regards peoples, widely dispersed in the Old World and the New, among whom the young women have practiced prostitution to obtain a dowry.
In Abyssinia (as noted by Fiaschi, British Medical Journal, March 13, 1897), where prostitution has always been respected, the prostitutes, who now undergo medical examinations twice a week, still face no shame in their profession and can easily find husbands afterwards. Potter (Sohrab and Rustem, pp. 168 et seq.) provides references about various cultures, both in the Old World and the New, where young women have engaged in prostitution to secure a dowry.
At Tralles, in Lydia, even in the second century A.D., as Sir W. M. Ramsay notes (Cities of Phrygia, vol. i, pp. 94, 115), sacred prostitution was still an honorable practice for women of good birth who "felt themselves called upon to live the divine life under the influence of divine inspiration."
At Tralles, in Lydia, even in the second century A.D., as Sir W. M. Ramsay notes (Cities of Phrygia, vol. i, pp. 94, 115), sacred prostitution was still seen as an honorable practice for women of good family who "felt they were meant to live a divine life inspired by a higher calling."
The gradual secularization of prostitution from its earlier religious form has been traced by various writers (see, e.g., Dupouey, La Prostitution dans l'Antiquité). The earliest complimentary reference to the Hetaira in literature is to be found, according to Benecke (Antimachus of Colophon, p. 36), in Bacchylides.
The slow shift away from the religious roots of prostitution has been noted by several authors (see, e.g., Dupouey, La Prostitution dans l'Antiquité). The first positive mention of the Hetaira in literature can be found, according to Benecke (Antimachus of Colophon, p. 36), in Bacchylides.
Cicero, Oratio prô Coelio, Cap. XX.
Cicero, Oration for Caelius, Chap. 20.
Pierre Dufour, Histoire de la Prostitution, vol. ii, Chs. XIX-XX. The real author of this well-known history of prostitution, which, though not scholarly in its methods, brings together a great mass of interesting information, is said to be Paul Lacroix.
Pierre Dufour, Histoire de la Prostitution, vol. ii, Chs. XIX-XX. The true author of this famous history of prostitution, which, while not scholarly in its approach, compiles a significant amount of intriguing information, is believed to be Paul Lacroix.
Rabutaux, in his Histoire de la Prostitution en Europe, describes many attempts to suppress prostitution; cf. Dufour, op. cit., vol. iii.
Rabutaux, in his Histoire de la Prostitution en Europe, describes many efforts to eliminate prostitution; cf. Dufour, op. cit., vol. iii.
Dufour, op. cit., vol. vi, Ch. XLI. It was in the reign of the homosexual Henry III that the tolerance of brothels was established.
Dufour, op. cit., vol. vi, Ch. XLI. It was during the reign of the gay Henry III that the acceptance of brothels was established.
In the eighteenth century, especially, houses of prostitution in Paris attained to an astonishing degree of elaboration and prosperity. Owing to the constant watchful attention of the police a vast amount of detailed information concerning these establishments was accumulated, and during recent years much of it has been published. A summary of this literature will be found in Dühren's Neue Forshungen über den Marquis de Sade und seine Zeit, 1904, pp. 97 et seq.
In the eighteenth century, especially, brothels in Paris reached an incredible level of complexity and success. Thanks to the constant vigilance of the police, a wealth of detailed information about these establishments was gathered, and in recent years, much of it has been published. A summary of this literature can be found in Dühren's Neue Forschungen über den Marquis de Sade und seine Zeit, 1904, pp. 97 et seq.
Rabutaux, op. cit., p. 54.
Rabutaux, op. cit., p. 54.
Calza has written the history of Venetian prostitution; and some of the documents he found have been reproduced by Mantegazza, Gli Amori degli Uomimi, cap. XIV. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, a comparatively late period, Coryat visited Venice, and in his Crudities gives a full and interesting account of its courtesans, who then numbered, he says, at least 20,000; the revenue they brought into the State maintained a dozen galleys.
Calza has documented the history of prostitution in Venice; some of the documents he discovered have been included by Mantegazza in Gli Amori degli Uomini, chapter XIV. At the start of the seventeenth century, which is relatively late, Coryat visited Venice and in his Crudities provides a detailed and engaging account of its courtesans, who he claims numbered at least 20,000 at that time; the income they generated for the State supported a dozen galleys.
J. Schrank, Die Prostitution in Wien, Bd. I, pp. 152-206.
J. Schrank, Prostitution in Vienna, Vol. I, pp. 152-206.
U. Robert, Les Signes d'Infamie au Moyen Age, Ch. IV.
U. Robert, Les Signes d'Infamie au Moyen Age, Ch. IV.
Rudeck (Geschichte der öffentlichen Sittlichkeit in Deutschland, pp. 26-36) gives many details concerning the important part played by prostitutes and brothels in mediæval German life.
Rudeck (Geschichte der öffentlichen Sittlichkeit in Deutschland, pp. 26-36) provides a lot of information about the significant role that prostitutes and brothels had in medieval German life.
They are described by Rabutaux, op. cit., pp. 90 et seq.
They are described by Rabutaux, op. cit., pp. 90 et seq.
L'Année Sociologique, seventh year, 1904, p. 440.
L'Année Sociologique, seventh year, 1904, p. 440.
Bloch, Der Ursprung der Syphilis. As regards the German "Frauenhausen" see Max Bauer, Das Geschlechtsleben in der Deutschen Vergangenheit, pp. 133-214. In Paris, Dufour states (op. cit., vol. v, Ch. XXXIV), brothels under the ordinances of St. Louis had many rights which they lost at last in 1560, when they became merely tolerated houses, without statutes, special costumes, or confinement to special streets.
Bloch, Der Ursprung der Syphilis. Regarding the German "Frauenhausen," see Max Bauer, Das Geschlechtsleben in der Deutschen Vergangenheit, pp. 133-214. In Paris, Dufour notes (op. cit., vol. v, Ch. XXXIV) that brothels under the ordinances of St. Louis had many rights, which they ultimately lost in 1560, when they became just tolerated establishments, without regulations, special outfits, or restrictions to specific streets.
"Cortegiana, hoc est meretrix honesta," wrote Burchard, the Pope's Secretary, at the beginning of the sixteenth century, Diarium, ed. Thuasne, vol. ii, p. 442; other authorities are quoted by Thuasne in a note.
"Cortegiana, which means an honorable prostitute," wrote Burchard, the Pope's Secretary, at the beginning of the sixteenth century, Diarium, ed. Thuasne, vol. ii, p. 442; other authorities are quoted by Thuasne in a note.
Burchard, Diarium, vol. iii, p. 167. Thuasne quotes other authorities in confirmation.
Burchard, Diarium, vol. iii, p. 167. Thuasne cites other sources to confirm this.
The example of Holland, where some large cities have adopted the regulation of prostitution and others have not, is instructive as regards the illusory nature of the advantages of regulation. In 1883 Dr. Després brought forward figures, supplied by Dutch officials, showing that in Rotterdam, where prostitution was regulated, both prostitution and venereal diseases were more prevalent than in Amsterdam, a city without regulation (A. Després, La Prostitution en France, p. 122).
The example of Holland, where some big cities have regulated prostitution and others haven't, is insightful regarding the misleading benefits of regulation. In 1883, Dr. Després presented data from Dutch officials indicating that in Rotterdam, where prostitution was regulated, both prostitution and sexually transmitted diseases were more common than in Amsterdam, a city without regulation (A. Després, La Prostitution en France, p. 122).
It was in 1802 that the medical inspection of prostitutes in Paris brothels was introduced, though not until 1825 fully established and made general.
It was in 1802 that the medical inspection of prostitutes in Paris brothels was introduced, though it wasn't fully established and made widespread until 1825.
M. L. Heidingsfeld, "The Control of Prostitution," Journal American Medical Association, January 30, 1904.
M. L. Heidingsfeld, "The Control of Prostitution," Journal of the American Medical Association, January 30, 1904.
See, e.g., G. Bérault, La Maison de Tolérance, Thèse de Paris, 1904.
See, e.g., G. Bérault, La Maison de Tolérance, Thesis of Paris, 1904.
Thus the circumstances of the English army in India are of a special character. A number of statements (from the reports of committees, official publications, etc.) regarding the good influence of regulation in reducing venereal diseases in India are brought together by Surgeon-Colonel F. H. Welch, "The Prevention of Syphilis," Lancet, August 12, 1899. The system has been abolished, but only as the result of a popular outcry and not on the question of its merits.
Thus, the situation of the English army in India is quite unique. A number of statements (from committee reports, official publications, etc.) about how regulations have positively impacted the reduction of venereal diseases in India are compiled by Surgeon-Colonel F. H. Welch in "The Prevention of Syphilis," Lancet, August 12, 1899. The system has been abolished, but only due to public outcry and not based on the evaluation of its merits.
Thus Richard, who accepts regulation and was instructed to report on it for the Paris Municipal Council, would not have girls inscribed as professional prostitutes until they are of age and able to realize what they are binding themselves to (E. Richard, La Prostitution à Paris, p. 147). But at that age a large proportion of prostitutes have been practicing their profession for years.
Thus Richard, who supports regulation and was asked to report on it for the Paris Municipal Council, wouldn’t have girls labeled as professional prostitutes until they are of age and can understand what they are committing to (E. Richard, La Prostitution à Paris, p. 147). But by that age, a significant number of prostitutes have already been in the profession for years.
In Germany, where the cure of infected prostitutes under regulation is nearly everywhere compulsory, usually at the cost of the community, it is found that 18 is the average age at which they are affected by syphilis; the average age of prostitutes in brothels is higher than that of those outside, and a much larger proportion have therefore become immune to disease (Blaschko, "Hygiene der Syphilis," in Weyl's Handbuch der Hygiene, Bd. ii, p. 62, 1900).
In Germany, where treating infected sex workers under regulation is almost always mandatory, typically funded by the community, it has been observed that 18 is the average age at which they contract syphilis. The average age of sex workers in brothels is older than that of those working outside, resulting in a much larger proportion who have become immune to disease (Blaschko, "Hygiene der Syphilis," in Weyl's Handbuch der Hygiene, Bd. ii, p. 62, 1900).
A. Sherwell, Life in West London, 1897, Ch. V.
A. Sherwell, Life in West London, 1897, Ch. V.
Bonger brings together statistics illustrating this point, op. cit., pp. 402-6.
Bonger presents statistics that highlight this point, op. cit., pp. 402-6.
The Nightless City, p. 125.
The City That Never Sleeps, p. 125.
Ströhmberg, as quoted by Aschaffenburg, Das Verbrechen, 1903, p. 77.
Ströhmberg, as referenced by Aschaffenburg, Das Verbrechen, 1903, p. 77.
Monatsschrift für Harnkrankheiten und Sexuelle Hygiene, 1906. Heft 10, p. 460. But this cause is undoubtedly effective in some cases of unmarried women in Germany unable to get work (see article by Sister Henrietta Arendt, Police-Assistant at Stuttgart, Sexual-Probleme, December, 1908).
Monthly Journal for Urinary Diseases and Sexual Hygiene, 1906. Issue 10, p. 460. However, this issue is certainly a factor in some cases of unmarried women in Germany who can't find work (see article by Sister Henrietta Arendt, Police Assistant in Stuttgart, Sexual Problems, December, 1908).
Thus, for instance, we find Irma von Troll-Borostyáni saying in her book, Im Freien Reich (p. 176): "Go and ask these unfortunate creatures if they willingly and freely devoted themselves to vice. And nearly all of them will tell you a story of need and destitution, of hunger and lack of work, which compelled them to it, or else of love and seduction and the fear of the discovery of their false step which drove them out of their homes, helpless and forsaken, into the pool of vice from which there is hardly any salvation." It is, of course, quite true that the prostitute is frequently ready to tell such stories to philanthropic persons who expect to hear them, and sometimes even put the words into her mouth.
Thus, for example, we see Irma von Troll-Borostyáni saying in her book, Im Freien Reich (p. 176): "Go and ask these unfortunate people if they willingly and freely chose to live a life of vice. Almost all of them will share a story about need and poverty, about hunger and unemployment that forced them into it, or about love and seduction and the fear of being discovered for their mistakes that drove them away from their homes, helpless and abandoned, into the depths of vice from which there is hardly any way out." It is, of course, true that the prostitute often is willing to share such stories with compassionate individuals who expect to hear them, and sometimes even have those words put in her mouth.
C. Booth, Life and Labour, final volume, p. 125. Similarly in Sweden, Kullberg states that girls of thirteen to seventeen, living at home with their parents in comfortable circumstances, have often been found on the streets.
C. Booth, Life and Labour, final volume, p. 125. Similarly in Sweden, Kullberg mentions that girls aged thirteen to seventeen, living at home with their parents in comfortable situations, are often found on the streets.
W. Acton, Prostitution, 1870, pp. 39, 49.
W. Acton, Prostitution, 1870, pp. 39, 49.
In Lyons, according to Potton, of 3884 prostitutes, 3194 abandoned, or apparently abandoned, their profession; in Paris a very large number became servants, dressmakers, or tailoresses, occupations which, in many cases, doubtless, they had exercised before (Parent-Duchâtelet, De la Prostitution, 1857, vol. i, p. 584; vol. ii, p. 451). Sloggett (quoted by Acton) stated that at Davenport, 250 of the 1775 prostitutes there married. It is well known that prostitutes occasionally marry extremely well. It was remarked nearly a century ago that marriages of prostitutes to rich men were especially frequent in England, and usually turned out well; the same seems to be true still. In their own social rank they not infrequently marry cabmen and policemen, the two classes of men with whom they are brought most closely in contact in the streets. As regards Germany, C. K. Schneider (Die Prostituirte und die Gesellschaft), states that young prostitutes take up all sorts of occupations and situations, sometimes, if they have saved a little money, establishing a business, while old prostitutes become procuresses, brothel-keepers, lavatory women, and so on. Not a few prostitutes marry, he adds, but the proportion among inscribed German prostitutes is very small, less than 2 per cent.
In Lyons, Potton reported that out of 3,884 prostitutes, 3,194 left, or seemingly left, their trade; in Paris, a significant number transitioned to jobs as servants, dressmakers, or tailors, many of which they had likely done before (Parent-Duchâtelet, De la Prostitution, 1857, vol. i, p. 584; vol. ii, p. 451). Sloggett (cited by Acton) noted that in Davenport, 250 out of 1,775 prostitutes got married. It's well known that prostitutes occasionally end up marrying quite well. Nearly a century ago, it was observed that marriages between prostitutes and wealthy men were particularly common in England, and these unions often turned out positively; this still seems to hold true. Within their own social circles, they often marry cab drivers and police officers, who are the two types of men they interact with most often on the streets. In Germany, C. K. Schneider (Die Prostituirte und die Gesellschaft) mentions that young prostitutes take on various jobs and roles, sometimes starting their own businesses if they've saved some money, while older prostitutes tend to become pimps, brothel owners, restroom attendants, and so forth. He adds that a number of prostitutes do marry, but the percentage among registered German prostitutes is quite low, less than 2 percent.
G. de Molinari, La Viriculture, 1897, p. 155.
G. de Molinari, La Viriculture, 1897, p. 155.
Reuss and other writers have reproduced typical extracts from the private account books of prostitutes, showing the high rate of their earnings. Even in the common brothels, in Philadelphia (according to Goodchild, "The Social Evil in Philadelphia," Arena, March, 1896), girls earn twenty dollars or more a week, which is far more than they could earn in any other occupation open to them.
Reuss and other writers have shared typical excerpts from the personal ledgers of sex workers, highlighting their high earnings. Even in regular brothels, in Philadelphia (according to Goodchild, "The Social Evil in Philadelphia," Arena, March, 1896), girls make twenty dollars or more a week, which is significantly more than they could earn in any other jobs available to them.
A. Després, La Prostitution en France, 1883.
A. Later, Prostitution in France, 1883.
Bonger, Criminalité et Conditions Economiques, 1905, pp. 378-414.
Bonger, Crime and Economic Conditions, 1905, pp. 378-414.
La Donna Delinquente, p. 401.
The Woman Criminal, p. 401.
Raciborski, Traité de l'Impuissance, p. 20. It may be added that Bergh, a leading authority on the anatomical peculiarities of the external female sexual organs, who believe that strong development of the external genital organs accompanies libidinous tendencies, has not found such development to be common among prostitutes.
Raciborski, Traité de l'Impuissance, p. 20. It can be noted that Bergh, a key expert on the anatomical features of the external female sexual organs, who believes that the strong development of these organs is linked to sexual desire, has not found this development to be common among prostitutes.
Hammer, who has had much opportunity of studying the psychology of prostitutes, remarks that he has seen no reason to suspect sexual coldness (Monatsschrift für Harnkrankheiten und Sexuelle Hygiene, 1906, Heft 2, p. 85), although, as he has elsewhere stated, he is of opinion that indolence, rather than excess of sensuality, is the chief cause of prostitution.
Hammer, who has had ample opportunity to study the psychology of prostitutes, notes that he has seen no reason to suspect sexual coldness (Monatsschrift für Harnkrankheiten und Sexuelle Hygiene, 1906, Heft 2, p. 85). However, as he has stated elsewhere, he believes that laziness, rather than an excess of sensuality, is the primary cause of prostitution.
See "The Sexual Impulse in Women," in the third volume of these Studies.
See "The Sexual Impulse in Women," in the third volume of these Studies.
Tait stated that in Edinburgh many married women living with their husbands in comfortable circumstances, and having children, were found to be acting as prostitutes, that is, in the regular habit of making assignations with strangers (W. Tait, Magdalenism in Edinburgh, 1842, p. 16).
Tait noted that in Edinburgh, many married women living comfortably with their husbands and children were found to be engaging in prostitution, meaning they regularly arranged meetings with strangers (W. Tait, Magdalenism in Edinburgh, 1842, p. 16).
Janke brings together opinions to this effect, Die Willkürliche Hervorbringen des Geschlechts, p. 275. "If we compare a prostitute of thirty-five with her respectable sister," Acton remarked (Prostitution, 1870, p. 39), "we seldom find that the constitutional ravages often thought to be necessary consequences of prostitution exceed those attributable to the cares of a family and the heart-wearing struggles of virtuous labor."
Janke gathers opinions to this effect, Die Willkürliche Hervorbringen des Geschlechts, p. 275. "If we compare a thirty-five-year-old prostitute with her respectable sister," Acton noted (Prostitution, 1870, p. 39), "we rarely find that the physical damage often believed to result from prostitution is greater than what comes from the stresses of a family and the exhausting efforts of honorable work."
Hirschfeld states (Wesen der Liebe, p. 35) that the desire for intercourse with a sympathetic person is heightened, and not decreased, by a professional act of coitus.
Hirschfeld states (Wesen der Liebe, p. 35) that the desire for sex with a sympathetic person is increased, not decreased, by a professional act of sex.
This has been clearly shown by Hans Ostwald (from whom I take the above-quoted observation of a prostitute), one of the best authorities on prostitute life and character; see, e.g., his article, "Die erotischen Beziehungen zwischen Dirne und Zuhälter," Sexual-Probleme, June, 1908. In the subsequent number of the same periodical (July, 1908, p. 393) Dr. Max Marcuse supports Ostwald's experiences, and says that the letters of prostitutes and their bullies are love-letters exactly like those of respectable people of the same class, and with the same elements of love and jealousy; these relationships, he remarks, often prove very enduring. The prostitute author of the Tagebuch einer Verlorenen (p. 147) also has some remarks on the prostitute's relations to her bully, stating that it is simply the natural relationship of a girl to her lover.
This has been clearly shown by Hans Ostwald (from whom I take the above-quoted observation of a prostitute), one of the leading authorities on the lives and characters of prostitutes; see, e.g., his article, "Die erotischen Beziehungen zwischen Dirne und Zuhälter," Sexual-Probleme, June, 1908. In the next issue of the same journal (July, 1908, p. 393), Dr. Max Marcuse backs up Ostwald’s findings and states that the letters of prostitutes and their pimps are love letters just like those of respectable people in the same class, filled with the same elements of love and jealousy; these relationships, he notes, often turn out to be quite lasting. The prostitute author of the Tagebuch einer Verlorenen (p. 147) also shares her thoughts on the prostitute's relationship with her pimp, suggesting that it is simply the natural relationship of a girl to her lover.
Thus Moraglia found that among 180 prostitutes in North Italian brothels, and among 23 elegant Italian and foreign cocottes, every one admitted that she masturbated, preferably by friction of the clitoris; 113 of them, the majority, declared that they preferred solitary or mutual masturbation to normal coitus. Hammer states (Zehn Lebensläufe Berliner Kontrollmädchen in Ostwald's series of "Grosstadt Dokumente," 1905) that when in hospital all but three or four of sixty prostitutes masturbate, and those who do not are laughed at by the rest.
Thus, Moraglia discovered that among 180 prostitutes in North Italian brothels and 23 elegant Italian and foreign sex workers, everyone admitted to masturbating, preferably by rubbing the clitoris. A majority of 113 of them said they preferred solitary or mutual masturbation over regular sex. Hammer states (Zehn Lebensläufe Berliner Kontrollmädchen in Ostwald's series of "Grosstadt Dokumente," 1905) that when in the hospital, almost all but three or four of sixty prostitutes masturbate, and those who don't are teased by the others.
Jahrbuch für Sexuelle Zwischenstufen, Jahrgang VII, 1905, p. 148; "Sexual Inversion," vol. ii of these Studies, Ch. IV. Hammer found that of twenty-five prostitutes in a reformatory as many as twenty-three were homosexual, or, on good grounds, suspected to be such. Hirschfeld (Berlins Drittes Geschlecht, p. 65) mentions that prostitutes sometimes accost better-class women who, from their man-like air, they take to be homosexual; from persons of their own sex prostitutes will accept a smaller remuneration, and sometimes refuse payment altogether.
Yearbook for Sexual Intermediate States, Volume VII, 1905, p. 148; "Sexual Inversion," vol. ii of these Studies, Ch. IV. Hammer discovered that out of twenty-five prostitutes in a reform school, as many as twenty-three were homosexual, or were reasonably suspected to be. Hirschfeld (Berlin's Third Gender, p. 65) notes that prostitutes sometimes approach women of higher social standing whom they assume to be homosexual based on their masculine appearance; from other women, prostitutes will accept a lower payment and sometimes refuse payment entirely.
With prostitution, as with criminality, it is of course difficult to disentangle the element of heredity from that of environment, even when we have good grounds for believing that the factor of heredity here, as throughout the whole of life, cannot fail to carry much weight. It is certain, in any case, that prostitution frequently runs in families. "It has often been my experience," writes a former prostitute (Hedwig Hard, Beichte einer Gefallenen, p. 156) "that when in a family a girl enters this path, her sister soon afterwards follows her: I have met with innumerable cases; sometimes three sisters will all be on the register, and I knew a case of four sisters, whose mother, a midwife, had been in prison, and the father drank. In this case, all four sisters, who were very beautiful, married, one at least very happily, to a rich doctor who took her out of the brothel at sixteen and educated her."
With prostitution, like with crime, it’s challenging to separate the role of genetics from that of surroundings, even when we have strong reasons to believe that genetics, as in all of life, plays a significant role. It's clear that prostitution often runs in families. "I've often seen," writes a former prostitute (Hedwig Hard, Beichte einer Gefallenen, p. 156), "that when a girl in a family goes down this path, her sister soon follows: I've encountered countless cases; sometimes three sisters will all be on the register, and I even knew a case of four sisters whose mother, a midwife, had been in prison, and whose father was an alcoholic. In this situation, all four sisters, who were very beautiful, got married, with at least one having a very happy marriage to a wealthy doctor who took her out of the brothel at sixteen and helped her get an education."
This fact is not contradicted by the undoubted fact that prostitutes are by no means always contented with the life they choose.
This fact is not contradicted by the undeniable truth that prostitutes are not always happy with the life they choose.
This point has been discussed by Bloch, Sexualleben unserer Zeit, Ch. XIII.
This point has been discussed by Bloch, Sexualleben unserer Zeit, Ch. XIII.
Various series of observations are summarized by Lombroso and Ferrero, La Donna Delinquente, 1893, Part III, cap. IV.
Various series of observations are summarized by Lombroso and Ferrero, La Donna Delinquente, 1893, Part III, cap. IV.
History of European Morals, vol. iii, p. 283.
History of European Morals, vol. iii, p. 283.
Similarly Lord Morley has written (Diderot, vol. ii, p. 20): "The purity of the family, so lovely and dear as it is, has still only been secured hitherto by retaining a vast and dolorous host of female outcasts ... upon whose heads, as upon the scapegoat of the Hebrew ordinance, we put all the iniquities of the children of the house, and all their transgressions in all their sins, and then banish them with maledictions into the foul outer wilderness and the land not inhabited."
Similarly, Lord Morley wrote (Diderot, vol. ii, p. 20): "The purity of the family, as beautiful and precious as it is, has only been maintained so far by pushing away a large and sorrowful group of female outcasts... onto whom we place, like the scapegoat in the Hebrew tradition, all the wrongs of the children of the household, and all their offenses in all their sins, and then cast them into the dirty outer wilderness and uninhabited land with curses."
Horace, Satires, lib. i, 2.
Horace, *Satires*, book 1, 2.
Augustine, De Ordine, Bk. II, Ch. IV.
Augustine, On Order, Book II, Chapter IV.
De Regimine Principum (Opuscula XX), lib. iv, cap. XIV. I am indebted to the Rev. H. Northcote for the reference to the precise place where this statement occurs; it is usually quoted more vaguely.
De Regimine Principum (Opuscula XX), lib. iv, cap. XIV. I'm grateful to Rev. H. Northcote for pointing out the exact location of this statement; it's often referenced in a more general way.
Lea, History of Auricular Confession, vol. ii, p. 69. There was even, it seems, an eccentric decision of the Salamanca theologians that a nun might so receive money, "licite et valide."
Lea, History of Auricular Confession, vol. ii, p. 69. There was even, it seems, a peculiar ruling by the Salamanca theologians that a nun could accept money, "legally and validly."
Lea, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 263, 399.
Lea, op. cit., vol. 2, pp. 263, 399.
Rabutaux, De la Prostitution en Europe, pp. 22 et seq.
Rabutaux, De la Prostitution en Europe, pp. 22 et seq.
Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, Part III, Sect. III, Mem. IV, Subs. II.
Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, Part III, Sect. III, Mem. IV, Subs. II.
B. Mandeville, Remarks to Fable of the Bees, 1714, pp. 93-9; cf. P. Sakmann, Bernard de Mandeville, pp. 101-4.
B. Mandeville, Remarks to Fable of the Bees, 1714, pp. 93-9; cf. P. Sakmann, Bernard de Mandeville, pp. 101-4.
These conditions favor temporary free unions, but they also favor prostitution. The reason is, according to Adolf Gerson (Sexual-Probleme, September, 1908), that the woman of good class will not have free unions. Partly moved by moral traditions, and partly by the feeling that a man should be legally her property, she will not give herself out of love to a man; and he therefore turns to the lower-class woman who gives herself for money.
These conditions promote temporary relationships without formal commitment, but they also lead to prostitution. According to Adolf Gerson (Sexual-Probleme, September 1908), the reason is that women of higher social classes will not engage in casual relationships. Driven partly by moral traditions and partly by the belief that a man should legally belong to her, she won’t enter into a relationship out of love; as a result, he seeks out lower-class women who offer themselves in exchange for money.
Many girls, said Ellice Hopkins, get into mischief merely because they have in them an element of the "black kitten," which must frolic and play, but has no desire to get into danger. "Do you not think it a little hard," she added, "that men should have dug by the side of her foolish dancing feet a bottomless pit, and that she cannot have her jump and fun in safety, and put on her fine feathers like the silly bird-witted thing she is, without a single false step dashing her over the brink, and leaving her with the very womanhood dashed out of her?"
Many girls, Ellice Hopkins said, get into trouble just because they have a bit of the "black kitten" in them, which wants to play and have fun but doesn’t want to face danger. "Don’t you think it’s a bit unfair," she continued, "that men have created a bottomless pit right next to her silly dancing feet, and that she can’t enjoy her jumps and fun safely, putting on her nice clothes like the clueless creature she is, without risking a single misstep that could send her over the edge and strip her of her womanhood?"
A. Sherwell, Life in West London, 1897, Ch. V.
A. Sherwell, Life in West London, 1897, Ch. V.
As quoted by Bloch, Sexualleben Unserer Zeit, p. 358. In Berlin during recent years the number of prostitutes has increased at nearly double the rate at which the general population has increased. It is no doubt probable that the supply tends to increase the demand.
As quoted by Bloch, Sexualleben Unserer Zeit, p. 358. In Berlin in recent years, the number of prostitutes has grown at nearly double the rate of the general population. It's likely that the supply is boosting the demand.
Goncourt, Journal, vol. iii, p. 49.
Goncourt, Journal, vol. 3, p. 49.
Vanderkiste, The Dens of London, 1854, p. 242.
Vanderkiste, The Dens of London, 1854, p. 242.
Bonger (Criminalité et Conditions Economiques, p. 406) refers to the prevalence of prostitution among dressmakers and milliners, as well as among servants, as showing the influence of contact with luxury, and adds that the rich women, who look down on prostitution, do not always realize that they are themselves an important factor of prostitution, both by their luxury and their idleness; while they do not seem to be aware that they would themselves act in the same way if placed under the same conditions.
Bonger (Criminalité et Conditions Economiques, p. 406) points out that the high rates of prostitution among dressmakers and milliners, as well as among servants, demonstrate the impact of exposure to luxury. He adds that wealthy women, who criticize prostitution, often fail to see that they play a significant role in it through their affluence and inactivity. They don't seem to recognize that they might behave similarly if they were in the same situation.
H. Lippert, in his book on prostitution in Hamburg, laid much stress on the craving for dress and adornment as a factor of prostitution, and Bloch (Das Sexualleben unsurer Zeit, p. 372) considers that this factor is usually underestimated, and that it exerts an especially powerful influence on servants.
H. Lippert, in his book about prostitution in Hamburg, emphasized the desire for clothing and decoration as a significant factor in prostitution, and Bloch (Das Sexualleben unserer Zeit, p. 372) believes that this factor is often underestimated and that it has a particularly strong impact on servants.
Since this was written the influence of several generations of town-life in immunizing a stock to the evils of that life (though without reference to prostitution) has been set forth by Reibmayr, Die Entwicklungsgeschichte des Talentes und Genies, 1908, vol. ii, pp. 73 et seq.
Since this was written, the impact of several generations of urban living in protecting a community from the downsides of that lifestyle (not including issues related to prostitution) has been explained by Reibmayr, Die Entwicklungsgeschichte des Talentes und Genies, 1908, vol. ii, pp. 73 et seq.
In France this intimacy is embodied in the delicious privilege of tutoiement. "The mystery of tutoiement!" exclaims Ernest La Jennesse in L'Holocauste: "Barriers broken down, veils drawn away, and the ease of existence! At a time when I was very lonely, and trying to grow accustomed to Paris and to misfortune, I would go miles—on foot, naturally—to see a girl cousin and an aunt, merely to have something to tutoyer. Sometimes they were not at home, and I had to come back with my tu, my thirst for confidence and familiarity and brotherliness."
In France, this closeness is expressed through the wonderful privilege of tutoiement. "The magic of tutoiement!" exclaims Ernest La Jennesse in L'Holocauste: "Barriers broken down, curtains pulled back, and life feels so much easier! During a time when I felt really lonely and was trying to adjust to Paris and my struggles, I would walk for miles—on foot, of course—to visit a girl cousin and an aunt, just to have someone to tutoyer. Sometimes they weren't home, and I had to return with my tu, my longing for trust and familiarity and connection."
For some facts and references to the extensive literature concerning this trade, see, e.g., Bloch, Das Sexualleben Unserer Zeit, pp. 374-376; also K. M. Baer, Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Sept., 1908; Paulucci de Calboli, Nuova Antologia, April, 1902.
For some facts and references to the extensive literature regarding this trade, see, e.g., Bloch, Das Sexualleben Unserer Zeit, pp. 374-376; also K. M. Baer, Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Sept., 1908; Paulucci de Calboli, Nuova Antologia, April, 1902.
These considerations do not, it is true, apply to many kinds of sexual perverts who form an important proportion of the clients of brothels. These can frequently find what they crave inside a brothel much more easily than outside.
These points don’t really apply to many types of sexual deviants who make up a significant portion of the customers at brothels. They can often find what they desire within a brothel much more easily than elsewhere.
Thus Charles Booth, in his great work on Life and Labor in London, final volume (p. 128), recommends that "houses of accommodation," instead of being hunted out, should be tolerated as a step towards the suppression of brothels.
Thus Charles Booth, in his comprehensive work on Life and Labor in London, final volume (p. 128), suggests that "houses of accommodation," rather than being sought out and eliminated, should be accepted as a means to help reduce the number of brothels.
"Towns like Woolwich, Aldershot, Portsmouth, Plymouth," it has been said, "abound with wretched, filthy monsters that bear no resemblance to women; but it is drink, scorn, brutality and disease which have reduced them to this state, not the mere fact of associating with men."
"Towns like Woolwich, Aldershot, Portsmouth, and Plymouth," it has been said, "are filled with miserable, dirty creatures that look nothing like women; but it’s not just being around men that has brought them to this point—it's alcohol, disdain, violence, and illness that have done this."
"The contract of prostitution in the opinion of prostitutes themselves," Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo remark (La Mala Vida en Madrid, p. 254), "cannot be assimilated to a sale, nor to a contract of work, nor to any other form of barter recognized by the civil law. They consider that in these pacts there always enters an element which makes it much more like a gift in a matter in which no payment could be adequate. 'A woman's body is without price' is an axiom of prostitution. The money placed in the hands of her who procures the satisfaction of sexual desire is not the price of the act, but an offering which the priestess of Venus applies to her maintenance." To the Spaniard, it is true, every transaction which resembles trade is repugnant, but the principle underlying this feeling holds good of prostitution generally.
"The contract of prostitution, according to the prostitutes themselves," Bernaldo de Quirós and Llanas Aguilaniedo note (La Mala Vida en Madrid, p. 254), "cannot be compared to a sale, a work contract, or any other type of exchange recognized by civil law. They believe that these agreements always include an aspect that makes them more like a gift in a situation where no payment could truly be sufficient. 'A woman's body is priceless' is a commonly accepted truth in prostitution. The money given to the one who fulfills sexual desires is not the cost of the act, but rather a gift that the priestess of Venus uses for her own support." For Spaniards, it's true that any transaction resembling commerce is off-putting, but the principle behind this sentiment applies to prostitution in general.
Journal des Goncourt, vol. iii; this was in 1866.
Journal des Goncourt, vol. iii; this was in 1866.
Rev. the Hon. C. Lyttelton, Training of the Young in Laws of Sex, p. 42.
Rev. the Hon. C. Lyttelton, Training of the Young in Laws of Sex, p. 42.
See, e.g., R. W. Taylor, Treatise on Sexual Disorders, 1897, pp. 74-5. Georg Hirth (Wege zur Heimat, 1909, p. 619) narrates the case of a young officer who, being excited by the caresses of his betrothed and having too much respect for her to go further than this, and too much respect for himself to resort to masturbation, knew nothing better than to go to a prostitute. Syphilis developed a few days after the wedding. Hirth adds, briefly, that the results were terrible.
See, e.g., R. W. Taylor, Treatise on Sexual Disorders, 1897, pp. 74-5. Georg Hirth (Wege zur Heimat, 1909, p. 619) tells the story of a young officer who, aroused by the affection of his fiancée and unwilling to take things further or to resort to masturbation, thought his only option was to visit a prostitute. Syphilis appeared a few days after the wedding. Hirth notes, briefly, that the consequences were dire.
It is an oft-quoted passage, but can scarcely be quoted too often: "You see that this wrought-iron plate is not quite flat: it sticks up a little, here towards the left—'cockles,' as we say. How shall we flatten it? Obviously, you reply, by hitting down on the part that is prominent. Well, here is a hammer, and I give the plate a blow as you advise. Harder, you say. Still no effect. Another stroke? Well, there is one, and another, and another. The prominence remains, you see: the evil is as great as ever—greater, indeed. But that is not all. Look at the warp which the plate has got near the opposite edge. Where it was flat before it is now curved. A pretty bungle we have made of it. Instead of curing the original defect we have produced a second. Had we asked an artisan practiced in 'planishing,' as it is called, he would have told us that no good was to be done, but only mischief, by hitting down on the projecting part. He would have taught us how to give variously-directed and specially-adjusted blows with a hammer elsewhere: so attacking the evil, not by direct, but by indirect actions. The required process is less simple than you thought. Even a sheet of metal is not to be successfully dealt with after those common-sense methods in which you have so much confidence. What, then, shall we say about a society?... Is humanity more readily straightened than an iron plate?" (The Study of Sociology, p. 270.)
It’s a frequently quoted passage, but it can hardly be quoted too often: "You see that this wrought-iron plate isn’t completely flat: it sticks up a bit, here on the left—'cockles,' as we say. How do we flatten it? Obviously, you’d say, by hitting down on the area that’s sticking up. Well, here’s a hammer, and I’ll take a swing at the plate as you suggested. Hit it harder, you say. Still no change. Another hit? Alright, here’s one, and another, and another. The bump is still there, see? The problem is just as big—actually, bigger. But that’s not all. Look at the warp that’s formed near the opposite edge. Where it used to be flat, it’s now curved. What a mess we’ve made. Instead of fixing the original flaw, we’ve created a new one. If we had consulted a skilled artisan practiced in 'planishing,' as it’s called, he would have told us that hitting down on the protruding part would only cause more trouble, not fix anything. He would have taught us how to strike with a hammer from different angles and with careful adjustments—attacking the problem indirectly. The process we need is more complex than you thought. Even a sheet of metal can’t be effectively handled with the straightforward methods you trust so much. So, what can we say about society?... Is humanity easier to straighten out than a piece of iron?" (The Study of Sociology, p. 270.)
CHAPTER VIII.
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES.
The Significance of the Venereal Diseases—The History of Syphilis—The Problem of Its Origin—The Social Gravity of Syphilis—The Social Dangers of Gonorrhœa—The Modern Change in the Methods of Combating Venereal Diseases—Causes of the Decay of the System of Police Regulation—Necessity of Facing the Facts—The Innocent Victims of Venereal Diseases—Diseases Not Crimes—The Principle of Notification—The Scandinavian System—Gratuitous Treatment—Punishment for Transmitting Venereal Diseases—Sexual Education in Relation to Venereal Diseases—Lectures, Etc.—Discussion in Novels and on the Stage—The "Disgusting" Not the "Immoral."
The Importance of Sexually Transmitted Diseases—The History of Syphilis—The Issue of Its Origin—The Social Impact of Syphilis—The Social Risks of Gonorrhea—The Modern Shift in Approaches to Fighting Sexually Transmitted Diseases—Reasons for the Decline of Police Regulation—The Need to Confront Reality—The Innocent Victims of Sexually Transmitted Diseases—Diseases Are Not Crimes—The Principle of Notification—The Scandinavian Approach—Free Treatment—Penalties for Transmitting Sexually Transmitted Diseases—Sex Education Regarding Sexually Transmitted Diseases—Lectures, Etc.—Conversations in Novels and on Stage—The "Disgusting" Not the "Immoral."
It may, perhaps, excite surprise that in the preceding discussion of prostitution scarcely a word has been said of venereal diseases. In the eyes of many people, the question of prostitution is simply the question of syphilis. But from the psychological point of view with which we are directly concerned, as from the moral point of view with which we cannot fail to be indirectly concerned, the question of the diseases which may be, and so frequently are, associated with prostitution cannot be placed in the first line of significance. The two questions, however intimately they may be mingled, are fundamentally distinct. Not only would venereal diseases still persist even though prostitution had absolutely ceased, but, on the other hand, when we have brought syphilis under the same control as we have brought the somewhat analogous disease of leprosy, the problem of prostitution would still remain.
It might be surprising that in the previous discussion of prostitution, hardly any mention was made of sexually transmitted diseases. For many people, the issue of prostitution boils down to the issue of syphilis. However, from the psychological perspective we are focusing on, as well as the moral perspective that indirectly affects us, the issue of the diseases often linked with prostitution isn't the most significant one. Although the two topics are closely related, they are fundamentally different. Not only would sexually transmitted diseases still exist even if prostitution stopped entirely, but even if we managed to control syphilis like we have with the similar disease of leprosy, the issue of prostitution would still be there.
Yet, even from the standpoint which we here occupy, it is scarcely possible to ignore the question of venereal disease, for the psychological and moral aspects of prostitution, and even the whole question of the sexual relationships, are, to some extent, affected by the existence of the serious diseases which are specially liable to be propagated by sexual intercourse.
Yet, even from the perspective we hold here, it's hard to overlook the issue of sexually transmitted diseases, as the psychological and moral aspects of prostitution, along with the overall topic of sexual relationships, are, to some extent, influenced by the presence of serious diseases that are particularly likely to be transmitted through sexual intercourse.
Fournier, one of the leading authorities on this subject, has well said that syphilis, alcoholism, and tuberculosis are the three modern plagues. At a much earlier period (1851) Schopenhauer in Parerga und Paralipomena had expressed the opinion that the two things which mark modern social life, in distinction from that of antiquity, and to the advantage of the latter, are the knightly principle of honor and venereal disease; together, he added, they have poisoned life, and introduced a hostile and even diabolical element into the relations of the sexes, which has indirectly affected all other social relationships.[220] It is like a merchandise, says Havelburg, of syphilis, which civilization has everywhere carried, so that only a very few remote districts of the globe (as in Central Africa and Central Brazil) are to-day free from it.[221]
Fournier, one of the top experts on this topic, has rightly pointed out that syphilis, alcoholism, and tuberculosis are the three modern plagues. Long before that, in 1851, Schopenhauer in Parerga und Paralipomena shared the view that the two main issues distinguishing modern social life from that of antiquity—and to the benefit of the latter—are the noble principle of honor and venereal disease; together, he noted, they have poisoned life and introduced a hostile, even diabolical, element into the relationships between the sexes, which has indirectly impacted all other social interactions.[220] Havelburg describes it as a kind of merchandise, syphilis, that civilization has spread everywhere, leaving only a few isolated areas of the world (like parts of Central Africa and Central Brazil) free from it today.[221]
It is undoubtedly true that in the older civilized countries the manifestations of syphilis, though still severe and a cause of physical deterioration in the individual and the race, are less severe than they were even a generation ago.[222] This is partly the result of earlier and better treatment, partly, it is possible, the result also of the syphilization of the race, some degree of immunity having now become an inherited possession, although it must be remembered that an attack of syphilis does not necessarily confer immunity from the actual attack of the disease even in the same individual. But it must be added that, even though it has become less severe, syphilis, in the opinion of many, is nevertheless still spreading, even in the chief centres of civilization; this has been noted alike in Paris and in London.[223]
It’s definitely true that in older, more developed countries, the effects of syphilis, while still serious and damaging to both individuals and society, are less intense than they were just a generation ago.[222] This is partly due to earlier and better treatment, and possibly also because the population has developed some level of immunity over time, which has now become a genetic trait. However, it’s important to note that having had syphilis doesn’t necessarily make a person immune to getting the disease again, even if it's the same person. Additionally, even though the severity has decreased, many believe that syphilis is still spreading, even in major cities. This has been observed in both Paris and London.[223]
According to the belief which is now tending to prevail, syphilis was brought to Europe at the end of the fifteenth century by the first discoverers of America. In Seville, the chief European port for America, it was known as the Indian disease, but when Charles VIII and his army first brought it to Italy in 1495, although this connection with the French was only accidental, it was called the Gallic disease, "a monstrous disease," said Cataneus, "never seen in previous centuries and altogether unknown in the world."
According to the current belief, syphilis was brought to Europe at the end of the 15th century by the first explorers of America. In Seville, the main European port for America, it was referred to as the Indian disease, but when Charles VIII and his army first brought it to Italy in 1495, even though this link to the French was purely coincidental, it was called the Gallic disease. "A monstrous disease," said Cataneus, "never seen in previous centuries and completely unknown in the world."
The synonyms of syphilis were at first almost innumerable. It was in his Latin poem Syphilis sive Morbus Gallicus, written before 1521 and published at Verona in 1530, that Fracastorus finally gave the disease its now universally accepted name, inventing a romantic myth to account for its origin.
The synonyms for syphilis were initially countless. It was in his Latin poem Syphilis sive Morbus Gallicus, written before 1521 and published in Verona in 1530, that Fracastoro gave the disease its now widely recognized name, creating a romantic myth to explain its origins.
Although the weight of authoritative opinion now seems to incline towards the belief that syphilis was brought to Europe from America, on the discovery of the New World, it is only within quite recent years that that belief has gained ground, and it scarcely even yet seems certain that what the Spaniards brought back from America was really a disease absolutely new to the Old World, and not a more virulent form of an old disease of which the manifestations had become benign. Buret, for instance (Le Syphilis Aujourd'hui et chez les Anciens, 1890), who some years ago reached "the deep conviction that syphilis dates from the creation of man," and believed, from a minute study of classic authors, that syphilis existed in Rome under the Cæsars, was of opinion that it has broken out at different places and at different times, in epidemic bursts exhibiting different combinations of its manifold symptoms, so that it passed unnoticed at ordinary times, and at the times of its more intense manifestation was looked upon as a hitherto unknown disease. It was thus regarded in classic times, he considers, as coming from Egypt, though he looked upon its real home as Asia. Leopold Glück has likewise quoted (Archiv für Dermatologie und Syphilis, January, 1899) passages from the medical epigrams of a sixteenth century physician, Gabriel Ayala, declaring that syphilis is not really a new disease, though popularly supposed to be so, but an old disease which has broken out with hitherto unknown violence. There is, however, no conclusive reason for believing that syphilis was known at all in classic antiquity. A. V. Notthaft ("Die Legende von der Althertums-syphilis," in the Rindfleisch Festschrift, 1907, pp. 377-592) has critically investigated the passages in classic authors which were supposed by Rosenbaum, Buret, Proksch and others to refer to syphilis. It is quite true, Notthaft admits, that many of these passages might possibly refer to syphilis, and one or two would even better fit syphilis than any other disease. But, on the whole, they furnish no proof at all, and no syphilologist, he concludes, has ever succeeded in demonstrating that syphilis was known in antiquity. That belief is a legend. The most damning argument against it, Notthaft points out, is the fact that, although in antiquity there were great physicians who were keen observers, not one of them gives any description of the primary, secondary, tertiary, and congenital forms of this disease. China is frequently mentioned as the original home of syphilis, but this belief is also quite without basis, and the Japanese physician, Okamura, has shown (Monatsschrift für praktische Dermatologie, vol. xxviii, pp. 296 et seq.) that Chinese records reveal nothing relating to syphilis earlier than the sixteenth century. At the Paris Academy of Medicine in 1900 photographs from Egypt were exhibited by Fouquet of human remains which date from B.C. 2400, showing bone lesions which seemed to be clearly syphilitic; Fournier, however, one of the greatest of authorities, considered that the diagnosis of syphilis could not be maintained until other conditions liable to produce somewhat similar bone lesions had been eliminated (British Medical Journal, September 29, 1900, p. 946). In Florida and various regions of Central America, in undoubtedly pre-Columbian burial places, diseased bones have been found which good authorities have declared could not be anything else than syphilitic (e.g., British Medical Journal, November 20, 1897, p. 1487), though it may be noted that so recently as 1899 the cautious Virchow stated that pre-Columbian syphilis in America was still for him an open question (Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, Heft 2 and 3, 1899, p. 216). From another side, Seler, the distinguished authority on Mexican antiquity, shows (Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1895, Heft 5, p. 449) that the ancient Mexicans were acquainted with a disease which, as they described it, might well have been syphilis. It is obvious, however, that while the difficulty of demonstrating syphilitic diseased bones in America is as great as in Europe, the demonstration, however complete, would not suffice to show that the disease had not already an existence also in the Old World. The plausible theory of Ayala that fifteenth century syphilis was a virulent recrudescence of an ancient disease has frequently been revived in more modern times. Thus J. Knott ("The Origin of Syphilis," New York Medical Journal, October 31, 1908) suggests that though not new in fifteenth century Europe, it was then imported afresh in a form rendered more aggravated by coming from an exotic race, as is believed often to be the case.
Although authoritative opinion now leans towards the belief that syphilis was brought to Europe from America when the New World was discovered, it’s only recently that this belief has gained traction. It still isn’t certain that what the Spaniards brought back from America was truly a new disease to the Old World, rather than a more aggressive strain of an existing disease that had previously been less harmful. For instance, Buret, in *Le Syphilis Aujourd'hui et chez les Anciens* (1890), firmly believed that syphilis has existed since the creation of man and, through careful study of classic literature, claimed that syphilis was present in Rome during the Cæsars. He thought it broke out in different locations and times with varying severity, often going unnoticed at regular times and being mistaken for an unknown disease when it surfaced intensely. He argued that in classic times, it was believed to come from Egypt, although he considered its true origin to be Asia. Leopold Glück also referenced passages from the medical writings of sixteenth-century physician Gabriel Ayala, suggesting that syphilis is not a new disease, as commonly thought, but rather an old disease that has emerged with unprecedented severity. However, there’s no definitive evidence to suggest that syphilis was recognized in ancient times. A. V. Notthaft critically examined the texts from ancient authors that researchers like Rosenbaum, Buret, and Proksch thought referred to syphilis. Notthaft acknowledged that while some passages might relate to syphilis—one or two even fitting better than any other disease—overall, they provide no proof. He concluded that no syphilologist has ever conclusively shown that syphilis was known in antiquity; that idea is merely a legend. Notthaft also argues that the strongest evidence against this belief is that, despite the presence of keen observers among ancient physicians, none described the primary, secondary, tertiary, or congenital forms of the disease. China is often mentioned as the original home of syphilis, but this idea lacks support. The Japanese physician Okamura demonstrated that Chinese records reveal nothing about syphilis prior to the sixteenth century. In 1900, at the Paris Academy of Medicine, photographs from Egypt showing skeletal remains dating back to 2400 B.C. with clear bone lesions suggesting syphilis were presented by Fouquet; however, Fournier, a leading authority, stated that the diagnosis of syphilis couldn't be confirmed until other conditions that might produce similar bone lesions were ruled out. In Florida and parts of Central America, in pre-Columbian burial sites, diseased bones have been discovered that experts assert could only be syphilitic, yet it’s worth noting that as late as 1899, the cautious Virchow stated that pre-Columbian syphilis in America was still an open question for him. On another front, Seler, an expert on Mexican antiquity, indicated that the ancient Mexicans were familiar with a disease that could very well have been syphilis. It’s clear, though, that while proving syphilitic bones in America is as challenging as it is in Europe, any complete demonstration wouldn’t prove that the disease didn’t also exist in the Old World. The theory proposed by Ayala that the syphilis epidemic of the fifteenth century was a severe resurgence of an ancient disease has been revived in more recent times. For example, J. Knott suggested that while syphilis wasn’t new in fifteenth-century Europe, it may have been reintroduced in a more severe form due to its origins from an exotic population.
It was in the eighteenth century that Jean Astruc began the rehabilitation of the belief that syphilis is really a comparatively modern disease of American origin, and since then various authorities of weight have given their adherence to this view. It is to the energy and learning of Dr. Iwan Bloch, of Berlin (the first volume of whose important work, Der Ursprung der Syphilis, was published in 1901) that we owe the fullest statement of the evidence in favor of the American origin of syphilis. Bloch regards Ruy Diaz de Isla, a distinguished Spanish physician, as the weightiest witness for the Indian origin of the disease, and concludes that it was brought to Europe by Columbus's men from Central America, more precisely from the Island of Haiti, to Spain in 1493 and 1494, and immediately afterwards was spread by the armies of Charles VIII in an epidemic fashion over Italy and the other countries of Europe.
It was in the eighteenth century that Jean Astruc started to revive the idea that syphilis is actually a relatively modern disease with roots in America, and since then, various respected authorities have supported this view. We owe the most comprehensive presentation of evidence for the American origin of syphilis to the dedication and knowledge of Dr. Iwan Bloch from Berlin, whose important work, Der Ursprung der Syphilis, was published in 1901. Bloch considers Ruy Diaz de Isla, a notable Spanish physician, to be the strongest evidence for the disease's Indian origin and concludes that it was brought to Europe by Columbus's crew from Central America, specifically from the Island of Haiti, to Spain in 1493 and 1494, and shortly thereafter spread rapidly through Italy and other European countries by the armies of Charles VIII.
It may be added that even if we have to accept the theory that the central regions of America constitute the place of origin of European syphilis, we still have to recognize that syphilis has spread in the North American continent very much more slowly and partially than it has in Europe, and even at the present day there are American Indian tribes among whom it is unknown. Holder, on the basis of his own experiences among Indian tribes, as well as of wide inquiries among agency physicians, prepared a table showing that among some thirty tribes and groups of tribes, eighteen were almost or entirely free from venereal disease, while among thirteen it was very prevalent. Almost without exception, the tribes where syphilis is rare or unknown refuse sexual intercourse with strangers, while those among whom such disease is prevalent are morally lax. It is the whites who are the source of infection among these tribes (A. B. Holder, "Gynecic Notes Among the American Indians," American Journal of Obstetrics, 1892, No. 1).
It should be noted that even if we have to accept the idea that the central regions of America are the origin of European syphilis, we still need to recognize that syphilis has spread much more slowly and unevenly across the North American continent than it has in Europe. Even today, there are American Indian tribes where the disease is unknown. Based on his personal experiences with Indian tribes and extensive inquiries among agency physicians, Holder created a table showing that out of about thirty tribes and groups of tribes, eighteen were almost or completely free of venereal disease, whereas it was very common in thirteen others. Almost without exception, the tribes where syphilis is rare or unknown tend to avoid sexual intercourse with strangers, while those where the disease is prevalent have more relaxed morals. The source of infection among these tribes is primarily the white population (A. B. Holder, "Gynecic Notes Among the American Indians," American Journal of Obstetrics, 1892, No. 1).
Syphilis is only one, certainly the most important, of a group of three entirely distinct "venereal diseases" which have only been distinguished in recent times, and so far as their precise nature and causation are concerned, are indeed only to-day beginning to be understood, although two of them were certainly known in antiquity. It is but seventy years ago since Ricord, the great French syphilologist, following Bassereau, first taught the complete independence of syphilis both from gonorrhœa and soft chancre, at the same time expounding clearly the three stages, primary, secondary and tertiary, through which syphilitic manifestations tend to pass, while the full extent of tertiary syphilitic symptoms is scarcely yet grasped, and it is only to-day beginning to be generally realized that two of the most prevalent and serious diseases of the brain and nervous system—general paralysis and tabes dorsalis or locomotor ataxia—have their predominant though not sole and exclusive cause in the invasion of the syphilitic poison many years before. In 1879 a new stage of more precise knowledge of the venereal diseases began with Neisser's discovery of the gonococcus which is the specific cause of gonorrhœa. This was followed a few years later by the discovery by Ducrey and Unna of the bacillus of soft chancre, the least important of the venereal diseases because exclusively local in its effects. Finally, in 1905—after Metchnikoff had prepared the way by succeeding in carrying syphilis from man to monkey, and Lassar, by inoculation, from monkey to monkey—Fritz Schaudinn made his great discovery of the protozoal Spirochœta pallida (since sometimes called Treponema pallidum), which is now generally regarded as the cause of syphilis, and thus revealed the final hiding place of one of the most dangerous and insidious foes of humanity.[224]
Syphilis is just one, definitely the most significant, of a group of three completely different "venereal diseases" that have only been identified separately in recent times. As for their exact nature and causes, we’re just starting to understand them today, even though two of these diseases were known in ancient times. It was only seventy years ago that Ricord, the prominent French syphilologist, following Bassereau, first explained that syphilis is completely independent from gonorrhea and soft chancre. He also clearly outlined the three stages—primary, secondary, and tertiary—that syphilitic manifestations typically go through. The full range of tertiary syphilitic symptoms is still not fully understood, and it's only becoming recognized today that two of the most common and serious diseases affecting the brain and nervous system—general paralysis and tabes dorsalis or locomotor ataxia—primarily, though not solely, result from syphilitic infection occurring many years earlier. In 1879, a new level of understanding of venereal diseases began with Neisser's discovery of the gonococcus, the specific cause of gonorrhea. A few years later, Ducrey and Unna discovered the bacillus responsible for soft chancre, which is the least significant of the venereal diseases due to its purely local effects. Finally, in 1905—after Metchnikoff paved the way by successfully transmitting syphilis from humans to monkeys and Lassar, through inoculation, from monkey to monkey—Fritz Schaudinn made his groundbreaking discovery of the protozoan Spirochœta pallida (now often called Treponema pallidum), which is now widely recognized as the cause of syphilis, unveiling the final hiding place of one of humanity's most dangerous and deceptive enemies.[224]
There is no more subtle poison than that of syphilis. It is not, like smallpox or typhoid, a disease which produces a brief and sudden storm, a violent struggle with the forces of life, in which it tends, even without treatment, provided the organism is healthy, to succumb, leaving little or no traces of its ravages behind. It penetrates ever deeper and deeper into the organism, with the passage of time leading to ever new manifestations, and no tissue is safe from its attack. And so subtle is this all-pervading poison that though its outward manifestations are amenable to prolonged treatment, it is often difficult to say that the poison has been finally killed out.[225]
There is no more insidious poison than syphilis. Unlike smallpox or typhoid, it doesn't cause a short, sudden outbreak or an intense struggle for survival, which tends to end in recovery with little to no lasting damage, assuming the person is healthy. Instead, it embeds itself deeper into the body over time, leading to new symptoms, and no tissue is immune to its assault. This poison is so subtle that while its visible symptoms can be treated for a long time, it's often hard to determine when the infection has been completely eradicated.[225]
The immense importance of syphilis, and the chief reason why it is necessary to consider it here, lies in the fact that its results are not confined to the individual himself, nor even to the persons to whom he may impart it by the contagion due to contact in or out of sexual relationships: it affects the offspring, and it affects the power to produce offspring. It attacks men and women at the centre of life, as the progenitors of the coming race, inflicting either sterility or the tendency to aborted and diseased products of conception. The father alone can perhaps transmit syphilis to his child, even though the mother escapes infection, and the child born of syphilitic parents may come into the world apparently healthy only to reveal its syphilitic origin after a period of months or even years. Thus syphilis is probably a main cause of the enfeeblement of the race.[226]
The huge importance of syphilis, and the main reason why it's necessary to discuss it here, is that its effects aren't just limited to the individual but also impact those he might spread it to through sexual or non-sexual contact. It affects children and the ability to have children. It targets both men and women at the core of life, affecting the future generation as the parents, leading to either infertility or the potential for miscarriages and unhealthy pregnancies. A father can transmit syphilis to his child, even if the mother is not infected, and a child born to syphilitic parents might seem healthy at birth but could show signs of the disease months or even years later. Therefore, syphilis is likely a major factor in the weakening of the population.[226]
Alike in the individual and in his offspring syphilis shows its deteriorating effects on all the structures of the body, but especially on the brain and nervous system. There are, as has been pointed out by Mott, a leading authority in this matter,[227] five ways in which syphilis affects the brain and nervous system: (1) by moral shock; (2) by the effects of the poison in producing anæmia and impaired general nutrition; (3) by causing inflammation of the membranes and tissues of the brain; (4) by producing arterial degeneration, leading on to brain-softening, paralysis, and dementia; (5) as a main cause of the para-syphilitic affections of general paralysis and tabes dorsalis.
Syphilis has damaging effects on both individuals and their offspring, impacting all body structures but particularly the brain and nervous system. According to Mott, a leading expert on this subject,[227] there are five ways that syphilis affects the brain and nervous system: (1) through moral shock; (2) by causing anemia and poor overall nutrition due to the toxic effects; (3) by inflaming the membranes and tissues of the brain; (4) by leading to arterial degeneration, which can result in brain softening, paralysis, and dementia; (5) as a significant factor in the para-syphilitic conditions of general paralysis and tabes dorsalis.
It is only within recent years that medical men have recognized the preponderant part played by acquired or inherited syphilis in producing general paralysis, which so largely helps to fill lunatic asylums, and tabes dorsalis which is the most important disease of the spinal cord. Even to-day it can scarcely be said that there is complete agreement as to the supreme importance of the factor of syphilis in these diseases. There can, however, be little doubt that in about ninety-five per cent. at least of cases of general paralysis syphilis is present.[228]
It’s only in recent years that medical professionals have acknowledged the significant role of acquired or inherited syphilis in causing general paralysis, which greatly contributes to filling mental hospitals, and tabes dorsalis, the most significant disease affecting the spinal cord. Even today, there’s hardly complete agreement on the critical importance of syphilis as a factor in these diseases. However, there is little doubt that syphilis is present in at least about ninety-five percent of cases of general paralysis.[228]
Syphilis is not indeed by itself an adequate cause of general paralysis for among many savage peoples syphilis is very common while general paralysis is very rare. It is, as Krafft-Ebing was accustomed to say, syphilization and civilization working together which produce general paralysis, perhaps in many cases, there is reason for thinking, on a nervous soil that is hereditarily degenerated to some extent; this is shown by the abnormal prevalence of congenital stigmata of degeneration found in general paralytics by Näcke and others. "Paralyticus nascitur atque fit," according to the dictum of Obersteiner. Once undermined by syphilis, the deteriorated brain is unable to resist the jars and strains of civilized life, and the result is general paralysis, truly described as "one of the most terrible scourges of modern times." In 1902 the Psychological Section of the British Medical Association, embodying the most competent English authority on this question, unanimously passed a resolution recommending that the attention of the Legislature and other public bodies should be called to the necessity for immediate action in view of the fact that "general paralysis, a very grave and frequent form of brain disease, together with other varieties of insanity, is largely due to syphilis, and is therefore preventable." Yet not a single step has yet been taken in this direction.
Syphilis isn't in itself a sufficient cause of general paralysis because, among many primitive societies, syphilis is very common while general paralysis is quite rare. As Krafft-Ebing would often say, it’s the combination of syphilization and civilization that leads to general paralysis. In many cases, there’s a belief that this occurs on a nervous system that is somewhat hereditary degenerated; this is evidenced by the unusual prevalence of birth defects linked to degeneration found in individuals with general paralysis, as noted by Näcke and others. “Paralyticus nascitur atque fit,” according to Obersteiner’s statement. Once affected by syphilis, the weakened brain can’t handle the shocks and stresses of modern life, leading to general paralysis, which is rightly called “one of the most terrible scourges of modern times.” In 1902, the Psychological Section of the British Medical Association, representing the foremost English experts on this topic, unanimously passed a resolution urging that the Legislature and other public bodies should be made aware of the need for immediate action because “general paralysis, a very serious and common type of brain disease, along with other forms of insanity, is largely caused by syphilis, and is therefore preventable.” Yet, no steps have been taken in this direction.
The dangers of syphilis lie not alone in its potency and its persistence but also in its prevalence. It is difficult to state the exact incidence of syphilis, but a great many partial investigations have been made in various countries, and it would appear that from five to twenty per cent. of the population in European countries is syphilitic, while about fifteen per cent. of the syphilitic cases die from causes directly or indirectly due to the disease.[229] In France generally, Fournier estimates that seventeen per cent. of the whole population have had syphilis, and at Toulouse, Audry considers that eighteen per cent. of all his patients are syphilitic. In Copenhagen, where notification is obligatory, over four per cent. of the population are said to be syphilitic. In America a committee of the Medical Society of New York, appointed to investigate the question, reported as the result of exhaustive inquiry that in the city of New York not less than a quarter of a million of cases of venereal disease occurred every year, and a leading New York dermatologist has stated that among the better class families he knows intimately at least one-third of the sons have had syphilis. In Germany eight hundred thousand cases of venereal disease are by one authority estimated to occur yearly, and in the larger universities twenty-five per cent. of the students are infected every term, venereal disease being, however, specially common among students. The yearly number of men invalided in the German army by venereal diseases equals a third of the total number wounded in the Franco-Prussian war. Yet the German army stands fairly high as regards freedom from venereal disease when compared with the British army which is more syphilized than any other European army.[230] The British army, however, being professional and not national, is less representative of the people than is the case in countries where some form of conscription prevails. At one London hospital it could be ascertained that ten per cent. of the patients had had syphilis; this probably means a real proportion of about fifteen per cent., a high though not extremely high ratio. Yet it is obvious that even if the ratio is really lower than this the national loss in life and health, in defective procreation and racial deterioration, must be enormous and practically incalculable. Even in cash the venereal budget is comparable in amount to the general budget of a great nation. Stritch estimates that the cost to the British nation of venereal diseases in the army, navy and Government departments alone, amounts annually to £3,000,000, and when allowance is made for superannuations and sick-leave indirectly occasioned through these diseases, though not appearing in the returns as such, the more accurate estimate of the cost to the nation is stated to be £7,000,000. The adoption of simple hygienic measures for the prevention and the speedy cure of venereal diseases will be not only indirectly but even directly a source of immense wealth to the nation.
The dangers of syphilis lie not just in its strength and persistence but also in how widespread it is. It's hard to pinpoint the exact number of syphilis cases, but many studies have been conducted in various countries, suggesting that between five and twenty percent of the population in European countries has syphilis, with about fifteen percent of syphilic cases resulting in death from causes directly or indirectly related to the disease.[229] In France, Fournier estimates that seventeen percent of the entire population has had syphilis, while in Toulouse, Audry estimates that eighteen percent of all his patients are syphilitic. In Copenhagen, where reporting is mandatory, over four percent of the population is reported to have syphilis. In America, a committee from the Medical Society of New York, tasked with investigating the issue, found that in New York City alone, at least a quarter of a million cases of venereal disease occur each year. A prominent dermatologist in New York has said that among the middle and upper-class families he knows, at least one-third of the sons have had syphilis. In Germany, one expert estimates that there are eight hundred thousand cases of venereal disease annually, and in larger universities, about twenty-five percent of students are infected each term, with venereal diseases being especially common among students. The annual number of men in the German army incapacitated by venereal diseases is equivalent to a third of the total number wounded in the Franco-Prussian war. Still, the German army has a relatively low incidence of venereal disease compared to the British army, which is more affected than any other European army.[230] The British army, however, being professional and not national, is less representative of the public compared to countries with some form of conscription. At one hospital in London, it was found that ten percent of the patients had had syphilis; this likely translates to a real estimate of around fifteen percent, which is a high but not extreme ratio. However, it's clear that even if the actual ratio is lower, the national loss in life and health, as well as issues like reduced reproductive success and racial decline, must be enormous and nearly impossible to quantify. Financially, the costs associated with venereal diseases are comparable to the overall budget of a large nation. Stritch estimates that venereal diseases cost the British nation £3,000,000 annually in the army, navy, and government departments alone, and when accounting for pensions and sick leave indirectly caused by these diseases, the more accurate estimate of the annual cost to the nation is said to be £7,000,000. Implementing straightforward hygiene practices for the prevention and quick treatment of venereal diseases could be a significant source of wealth for the nation, both directly and indirectly.
Syphilis is the most obviously and conspicuously appalling of the venereal diseases. Yet it is less frequent and in some respects less dangerously insidious than the other chief venereal disease, gonorrhœa.[231] At one time the serious nature of gonorrhœa, especially in women, was little realized. Men accepted it with a light heart as a trivial accident; women ignored it. This failure to realize the gravity of gonorrhœa, even sometimes on the part of the medical profession—so that it has been popularly looked upon, in Grandin's words, as of little more significance than a cold in the nose—has led to a reaction on the part of some towards an opposite extreme, and the risks and dangers of gonorrhœa have been even unduly magnified. This is notably the case as regards sterility. The inflammatory results of gonorrhœa are indubitably a potent cause of sterility in both sexes; some authorities have stated that not only eighty per cent. of the deaths from inflammatory diseases of the pelvic organs and the majority of the cases of chronic invalidism in women, but ninety per cent. of involuntary sterile marriages, are due to gonorrhœa. Neisser, a great authority, ascribes to this disease without doubt fifty per cent, of such marriages. Even this estimate is in the experience of some observers excessive. It is fully proved that the great majority of men who have had gonorrhœa, even if they marry within two years of being infected, fail to convey the disease to their wives, and even of the women infected by their husbands more than half have children. This is, for instance, the result of Erb's experience, and Kisch speaks still more strongly in the same sense. Bumm, again, although regarding gonorrhœa as one of the two chief causes of sterility in women, finds that it is not the most frequent cause, being only responsible for about one-third of the cases; the other two-thirds are due to developmental faults in the genital organs. Dunning in America has reached results which are fairly concordant with Bumm's.
Syphilis is the most obviously shocking of the sexually transmitted infections. However, it occurs less often and is in some ways less dangerously deceptive than the other main STI, gonorrhea.[231] At one time, people didn't take the serious nature of gonorrhea seriously, especially in women. Men treated it lightly, seeing it as a minor issue; women ignored it. This lack of acknowledgment regarding the seriousness of gonorrhea, even among some medical professionals—leading to it being viewed, in Grandin's words, as not much more serious than a common cold—has resulted in a reaction from some that has gone to the opposite extreme, with the risks and dangers of gonorrhea being significantly exaggerated. This is particularly true concerning infertility. The inflammatory effects of gonorrhea are undoubtedly a major cause of infertility in both men and women; some experts have claimed that eighty percent of deaths from inflammatory diseases of the pelvic organs and most cases of chronic illness in women, as well as ninety percent of involuntary childless marriages, are due to gonorrhea. Neisser, a prominent authority, attributes fifty percent of such marriages to this disease. Even this estimate is considered excessive by some observers. It is well established that the vast majority of men who have had gonorrhea, even if they marry within two years of infection, do not pass the disease to their wives, and even among the women infected by their husbands, more than half go on to have children. This is, for instance, in line with Erb's findings, and Kisch expresses even stronger sentiments in the same vein. Bumm, while viewing gonorrhea as one of the two primary causes of infertility in women, finds that it is not the most common cause, accounting for only about one-third of the cases; the remaining two-thirds stem from developmental issues in the reproductive organs. Dunning in America has found results that align fairly well with Bumm's conclusions.
With regard to another of the terrible results of gonorrhœa, the part it plays in producing life-long blindness from infection of the eyes at birth, there has long been no sort of doubt. The Committee of the Ophthalmological Society in 1884, reported that thirty to forty-one per cent. of the inmates of four asylums for the blind in England owed their blindness to this cause.[232] In German asylums Reinhard found that thirty per cent. lost their sight from the same cause. The total number of persons blind from gonorrhœal infection from their mothers at birth is enormous. The British Royal Commission on the Condition of the Blind estimated there were about seven thousand persons in the United Kingdom alone (or twenty-two per cent. of the blind persons in the country) who became blind as the result of this disease, and Mookerji stated in his address on Ophthalmalogy at the Indian Medical Congress of 1894 that in Bengal alone there were six hundred thousand totally blind beggars, forty per cent. of whom lost their sight at birth through maternal gonorrhœa; and this refers to the beggar class alone.
Regarding another horrific outcome of gonorrhea, its role in causing lifelong blindness from eye infections at birth has long been unquestionable. The Committee of the Ophthalmological Society reported in 1884 that thirty to forty-one percent of the residents in four asylums for the blind in England lost their sight due to this issue.[232] In German asylums, Reinhard found that thirty percent lost their sight from the same reason. The total number of individuals who are blind due to gonorrheal infections from their mothers at birth is astounding. The British Royal Commission on the Condition of the Blind estimated that around seven thousand people in the United Kingdom alone (or twenty-two percent of the blind population in the country) became blind because of this disease. Mookerji mentioned in his address on Ophthalmology at the Indian Medical Congress in 1894 that in Bengal alone, there were six hundred thousand totally blind beggars, forty percent of whom lost their sight at birth due to maternal gonorrhea; and this statistic pertains only to the beggar class.
Although gonorrhœa is liable to produce many and various calamities,[233] there can be no doubt that the majority of gonorrhœal persons escape either suffering or inflicting any very serious injury. The special reason why gonorrhœa has become so peculiarly serious a scourge is its extreme prevalence. It is difficult to estimate the proportion of men and women in the general population who have had gonorrhœa, and the estimates vary within wide limits. They are often set too high. Erb, of Heidelberg, anxious to disprove exaggerated estimates of the prevalence of gonorrhœa, went over the records of two thousand two hundred patients in his private practice (excluding all hospital patients) and found the proportion of those who had suffered from gonorrhœa was 48.5 per cent.
Although gonorrhea can lead to many and various issues,[233] there’s no doubt that most people with gonorrhea either don’t suffer much or don’t cause any serious harm. The main reason why gonorrhea has become such a major problem is its widespread occurrence. It’s hard to determine the exact percentage of men and women in the general population who have had gonorrhea, and estimates can vary widely. Many times, these estimates are too high. Erb, from Heidelberg, wanting to challenge exaggerated claims about the prevalence of gonorrhea, reviewed the records of two thousand two hundred patients in his private practice (excluding all hospital patients) and found that 48.5 percent had experienced gonorrhea.
Among the working classes the disease is much less prevalent than among higher-class people. In a Berlin Industrial Sick Club, 412 per 10,000 men and 69 per 10,000 women had gonorrhœa in a year; taking a series of years the Club showed a steady increase in the number of men, and decrease in the number of women, with venereal infection; this seems to indicate that the laboring classes are beginning to have intercourse more with prostitutes and less with respectable girls.[234] In America Wood Ruggles has given (as had Noggerath previously, for New York), the prevalence of gonorrhœa among adult males as from 75 to 80 per cent.; Tenney places it much lower, 20 per cent. for males and 5 per cent. for females. In England, a writer in the Lancet, some years ago,[235] found as the result of experience and inquiries that 75 per cent. adult males have had gonorrhœa once, 40 per cent. twice, 15 per cent. three or more times. According to Dulberg about twenty per cent. of new cases occur in married men of good social class, the disease being comparatively rare among married men of the working class in England.
Among the working class, the disease is much less common than among higher-class individuals. In a Berlin Industrial Sick Club, 412 out of 10,000 men and 69 out of 10,000 women had gonorrhea in a year. Over a series of years, the Club recorded a steady increase in the number of men and a decrease in the number of women with venereal infections; this suggests that the working class is starting to have intercourse more with prostitutes and less with respectable women.[234] In America, Wood Ruggles reported (as Noggerath had earlier for New York) that the prevalence of gonorrhea among adult males is between 75 to 80 percent; Tenney estimates it much lower, at 20 percent for males and 5 percent for females. In England, a contributor to the Lancet, several years ago,[235] found through experience and inquiries that 75 percent of adult males have had gonorrhea at least once, 40 percent have had it twice, and 15 percent three or more times. According to Dulberg, about twenty percent of new cases occur in married men of higher social classes, while the disease is relatively rare among married men of the working class in England.
Gonorrhœa in its prevalence is thus only second to measles and in the gravity of its results scarcely second to tuberculosis. "And yet," as Grandin remarks in comparing gonorrhœa to tuberculosis, "witness the activity of the crusade against the latter and the criminal apathy displayed when the former is concerned."[236] The public must learn to understand, another writer remarks, that "gonorrhœa is a pest that concerns its highest interests and most sacred relations as much as do smallpox, cholera, diphtheria, or tuberculosis."[237]
Gonorrhea is only second to measles in how common it is, and its serious consequences are nearly as severe as those of tuberculosis. "And yet," as Grandin points out in comparing gonorrhea to tuberculosis, "look at the active campaign against the latter and the shocking indifference shown when it comes to the former."[236] The public needs to realize, another writer states, that "gonorrhea is a problem that impacts its most important interests and most sacred relationships just as much as smallpox, cholera, diphtheria, or tuberculosis."[237]
It cannot fairly be said that no attempts have been made to beat back the flood of venereal disease. On the contrary, such attempts have been made from the first. But they have never been effectual;[238] they have never been modified to changed condition; at the present day they are hopelessly unscientific and entirely opposed alike to the social and the individual demands of modern peoples. At the various conferences on this question which have been held during recent years the only generally accepted conclusion which has emerged is that all the existing systems of interference or non-interference with prostitution are unsatisfactory.[239]
It can't be honestly said that no efforts have been made to combat the rise of STDs. In fact, such efforts have been made from the beginning. However, they have never been effective; they have never adapted to changing circumstances; nowadays they are completely unscientific and entirely at odds with both the social and individual needs of modern societies. At various conferences on this issue held in recent years, the only widely accepted conclusion that has come out is that all the existing systems of intervention or non-intervention with prostitution are inadequate.
The character of prostitution has changed and the methods of dealing with it must change. Brothels, and the systems of official regulation which grew up with special reference to brothels, are alike out of date; they have about them a mediæval atmosphere, an antiquated spirit, which now render them unattractive and suspected. The conspicuously distinctive brothel is falling into disrepute; the liveried prostitute absolutely under municipal control can scarcely be said to exist. Prostitution tends to become more diffused, more intimately mingled with social life generally, less easily distinguished as a definitely separable part of life. We can nowadays only influence it by methods of permeation which bear upon the whole of our social life.
The nature of prostitution has changed, and our approach to it needs to change as well. Brothels and the systems of official regulation that developed around them are outdated; they have a medieval vibe and an old-fashioned spirit that now make them unappealing and suspicious. Instead of being prominently distinct, brothels are losing their reputation, and the officially regulated prostitute is nearly nonexistent. Prostitution is becoming more widespread, more intertwined with everyday social life, and is less easily identified as a clearly separate aspect of life. Today, we can only address it through broader influences that affect our entire social environment.
The objection to the regulation of prostitution is still of slow growth, but it is steadily developing everywhere, and may be traced equally in scientific opinion and in popular feeling. In France the municipalities of some of the largest cities have either suppressed the system of regulation entirely or shown their disapproval of it, while an inquiry among several hundred medical men showed that less than one-third were in favor of maintaining regulation (Die Neue Generation, June, 1909, p. 244). In Germany, where there is in some respects more patient endurance of interference with the liberty of the individual than in France, England, or America, various elaborate systems for organizing prostitution and dealing with venereal disease continue to be maintained, but they cannot be completely carried out, and it is generally admitted that in any case they could not accomplish the objects sought. Thus in Saxony no brothels are officially tolerated, though as a matter of fact they nevertheless exist. Here, as in many other parts of Germany, most minute and extensive regulations are framed for the use of prostitutes. Thus at Leipzig they must not sit on the benches in public promenades, nor go to picture galleries, or theatres, or concerts, or restaurants, nor look out of their windows, nor stare about them in the street, nor smile, nor wink, etc., etc. In fact, a German prostitute who possesses the heroic self-control to carry out conscientiously all the self-denying ordinances officially decreed for her guidance would seem to be entitled to a Government pension for life.
The objection to regulating prostitution is still growing slowly, but it's steadily developing everywhere, and you can see it in both scientific perspectives and popular opinion. In France, the municipalities of some of the largest cities have either completely abolished the regulation system or expressed their disapproval of it. A survey of several hundred medical professionals showed that less than a third supported keeping the regulation (*Die Neue Generation*, June 1909, p. 244). In Germany, where there’s a bit more tolerance for interfering with individual freedom compared to France, England, or America, various complex systems for organizing prostitution and handling sexually transmitted diseases are still in place. However, they can’t be fully implemented, and it’s generally accepted that, in any case, they can’t achieve their intended goals. For example, in Saxony, no brothels are officially permitted, though they do exist in reality. Here, as in many other parts of Germany, there are very detailed regulations governing the behavior of prostitutes. In Leipzig, for instance, they’re not allowed to sit on benches in public parks, attend art galleries, theaters, concerts, or restaurants, look out their windows, stare around in the streets, smile, wink, and so on. In fact, a German prostitute who can heroically follow all the strict self-denying rules officially set for her would seem to deserve a lifetime government pension.
Two methods of dealing with prostitution prevail in Germany. In some cities public houses of prostitution are tolerated (though not licensed); in other cities prostitution is "free," though "secret." Hamburg is the most important city where houses of prostitution are tolerated and segregated. But, it is stated, "everywhere, by far the larger proportion of the prostitutes belong to the so-called 'secret' class." In Hamburg, alone, are suspected men, when accused of infecting women, officially examined; men of every social class must obey a summons of this kind, which is issued secretly, and if diseased, they are bound to go under treatment, if necessary under compulsory treatment in the city hospital, until no longer dangerous to the community.
Two ways of handling prostitution exist in Germany. In some cities, brothels are tolerated (though not officially licensed); in other cities, prostitution is "free," but kept "secret." Hamburg is the most significant city where brothels are tolerated and separated from other businesses. However, it's reported that "everywhere, the vast majority of prostitutes belong to the so-called 'secret' class." In Hamburg, alone, suspected men who are accused of infecting women are officially examined; men from all social classes must respond to such summonses, which are issued discreetly. If they are found to be infected, they are required to undergo treatment, and if necessary, they must be treated involuntarily at the city hospital until they are no longer a danger to the community.
In Germany it is only when a woman has been repeatedly observed to act suspiciously in the streets that she is quietly warned; if the warning is disregarded she is invited to give her name and address to the police, and interviewed. It is not until these methods fail that she is officially inscribed as a prostitute. The inscribed women, in some cities at all events, contribute to a sick benefit fund which pays their expenses when in hospital. The hesitation of the police to inscribe a woman on the official list is legitimate and inevitable, for no other course would be tolerated; yet the majority of prostitutes begin their careers very young, and as they tend to become infected very early after their careers begin, it is obvious that this delay contributes to render the system of regulation ineffective. In Berlin, where there are no officially recognized brothels, there are some six thousand inscribed prostitutes, but it is estimated that there are over sixty thousand prostitutes who are not inscribed. (The foregoing facts are taken from a series of papers describing personal investigations in Germany made by Dr. F. Bierhoff, of New York, "Police Methods for the Sanitary Control of Prostitution," New York Medical Journal, August, 1907.) The estimation of the amount of clandestine prostitution can indeed never be much more than guesswork; exactly the same figure of sixty thousand is commonly brought forward as the probable number of prostitutes not only in Berlin, but also in London and in New York. It is absolutely impossible to say whether it is under or over the real number, for secret prostitution is quite intangible. Even if the facts were miraculously revealed there would still remain the difficulty of deciding what is and what is not prostitution. The avowed and public prostitute is linked by various gradations on the one side to the respectable girl living at home who seeks some little relief from the oppression of her respectability, and on the other hand to the married woman who has married for the sake of a home. In any case, however, it is very certain that public prostitutes living entirely on the earnings of prostitution form but a small proportion of the vast army of women who may be said, in a wide sense of the word, to be prostitutes, i.e., who use their attractiveness to obtain from men not love alone, but money or goods.
In Germany, a woman is only quietly warned if she’s been seen acting suspiciously in the streets multiple times. If she ignores the warning, she’s asked to provide her name and address to the police for questioning. It’s not until these methods fail that she’s officially registered as a prostitute. In some cities, these registered women contribute to a sick benefit fund that covers their hospital expenses. The police are understandably hesitant to register a woman officially, as no other course of action would be accepted. However, most prostitutes start their careers very young, and since they tend to get infected early on, this delay makes the regulation system ineffective. In Berlin, where there are no officially recognized brothels, there are about six thousand registered prostitutes, but estimates suggest over sixty thousand unregistered prostitutes exist. (The previous facts are sourced from a series of papers based on personal investigations in Germany by Dr. F. Bierhoff from New York, titled "Police Methods for the Sanitary Control of Prostitution," New York Medical Journal, August 1907.) The estimation of clandestine prostitution can only ever be rough guesses; the same figure of sixty thousand is often suggested not only for Berlin but also for London and New York. It’s impossible to determine whether this figure is an underestimate or overestimate because secret prostitution is elusive. Even if the facts were somehow made clear, it would still be difficult to define what constitutes prostitution. The openly acknowledged and public prostitute exists on a spectrum, on one side connected to the respectable girl living at home who seeks a little escape from the constraints of her respectability, and on the other side to the married woman who married for a stable home. In any case, it's very clear that public prostitutes who rely solely on the income from prostitution represent only a small portion of the vast number of women who, in a broad sense, can be considered prostitutes—meaning those who use their attractiveness to get money or goods from men, rather than love alone.
"The struggle against syphilis is only possible if we agree to regard its victims as unfortunate and not as guilty.... We must give up the prejudice which has led to the creation of the term 'shameful diseases,' and which commands silence concerning this scourge of the family and of humanity." In these words of Duclaux, the distinguished successor of Pasteur at the Pasteur Institute, in his noble and admirable work L'Hygiène Sociale, we have indicated to us, I am convinced, the only road by which we can approach the rational and successful treatment of the great social problem of venereal disease.
"The fight against syphilis can only happen if we choose to see its victims as unfortunate rather than guilty. We need to let go of the prejudice that has given rise to the term 'shameful diseases,' which keeps us silent about this plague affecting families and humanity." In these words of Duclaux, the esteemed successor of Pasteur at the Pasteur Institute, in his noble and commendable work L'Hygiène Sociale, we find, I am sure, the only path toward a rational and effective approach to the major social issue of venereal disease.
The supreme importance of this key to the solution of a problem which has often seemed insoluble is to-day beginning to become recognized in all quarters, and in every country. Thus a distinguished German authority, Professor Finger (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. i, Heft 5) declares that venereal disease must not be regarded as the well-merited punishment for a debauched life, but as an unhappy accident. It seems to be in France, however, that this truth has been proclaimed with most courage and humanity, and not alone by the followers of science and medicine, but by many who might well be excused from interfering with so difficult and ungrateful a task. Thus the brothers, Paul and Victor Margueritte, who occupy a brilliant and honorable place in contemporary French letters, have distinguished themselves by advocating a more humane attitude towards prostitutes, and a more modern method of dealing with the question of venereal disease. "The true method of prevention is that which makes it clear to all that syphilis is not a mysterious and terrible thing, the penalty of the sin of the flesh, a sort of shameful evil branded by Catholic malediction, but an ordinary disease which may be treated and cured." It may be remarked that the aversion to acknowledge venereal disease is at least as marked in France as in any other country; "maladies honteuses" is a consecrated French term, just as "loathsome disease" is in English; "in the hospital," says Landret, "it requires much trouble to obtain an avowal of gonorrhœa, and we may esteem ourselves happy if the patient acknowledges the fact of having had syphilis."
The crucial importance of this key to solving a problem that has often seemed unsolvable is starting to be recognized everywhere today, in every country. A respected German expert, Professor Finger (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. i, Heft 5), states that venereal disease shouldn't be seen as a deserved punishment for a reckless life, but rather as an unfortunate accident. However, it seems that this truth has been boldly proclaimed in France, not only by those in science and medicine but also by many who could be excused for not engaging in such a difficult and thankless task. The brothers, Paul and Victor Margueritte, who hold a prominent and respected place in contemporary French literature, have particularly advocated for a more compassionate attitude towards prostitutes and a more progressive approach to the issue of venereal disease. "The true method of prevention is one that makes it clear to everyone that syphilis is not a mysterious and terrible thing, the punishment for the sin of the flesh, a sort of shameful evil marked by Catholic condemnation, but an ordinary disease that can be treated and cured." It should be noted that the reluctance to acknowledge venereal disease is at least as strong in France as in any other country; "maladies honteuses" is a well-established French term, just like "loathsome disease" is in English; "in the hospital," says Landret, "it takes a lot of effort to get a patient to admit to having gonorrhea, and we can consider ourselves lucky if the patient admits to having had syphilis."
No evils can be combated until they are recognized, simply and frankly, and honestly discussed. It is a significant and even symbolic fact that the bacteria of disease rarely flourish when they are open to the free currents of pure air. Obscurity, disguise, concealment furnish the best conditions for their vigor and diffusion, and these favoring conditions we have for centuries past accorded to venereal diseases. It was not always so, as indeed the survival of the word 'venereal' itself in this connection, with its reference to a goddess, alone suffices to show. Even the name "syphilis" itself, taken from a romantic poem in which Fracastorus sought a mythological origin for the disease, bears witness to the same fact. The romantic attitude is indeed as much out of date as that of hypocritical and shamefaced obscurantism. We need to face these diseases in the same simple, direct, and courageous way which has already been adopted successfully in the ease of smallpox, a disease which, of old, men thought analogous to syphilis and which was indeed once almost as terrible in its ravages.
No evils can be tackled until they are recognized, openly and honestly discussed. It's significant—and even symbolic—that disease-causing bacteria rarely thrive when exposed to fresh, clean air. Obscurity, disguise, and concealment create the best conditions for their strength and spread, and we've allowed these circumstances to persist for centuries concerning venereal diseases. It wasn't always this way; the survival of the term 'venereal,' with its connection to a goddess, is proof of that. Even the name "syphilis," derived from a romantic poem where Fracastorus sought a mythological origin for the disease, reflects this fact. The romantic approach is just as outdated as the hypocritical and shameful obscurantism surrounding it. We need to confront these diseases in the same straightforward, direct, and courageous manner that has already worked well in combating smallpox, a disease that was historically seen as similar to syphilis and was once nearly as devastating.
At this point, however, we encounter those who say that it is unnecessary to show any sort of recognition of venereal diseases, and immoral to do anything that might seem to involve indulgence to those who suffer from such diseases; they have got what they deserve and may well be left to perish. Those who take this attitude place themselves so far outside the pale of civilization—to say nothing of morality or religion—that they might well be disregarded. The progress of the race, the development of humanity, in fact and in feeling, has consisted in the elimination of an attitude which it is an insult to primitive peoples to term savage. Yet it is an attitude which should not be ignored for it still carries weight with many who are too weak to withstand those who juggle with fine moral phrases. I have even seen in a medical quarter the statement that venereal disease cannot be put on the same level with other infectious diseases because it is "the result of voluntary action." But all the diseases, indeed all the accidents and misfortunes of suffering human beings, are equally the involuntary results of voluntary actions. The man who is run over in crossing the street, the family poisoned by unwholesome food, the mother who catches the disease of the child she is nursing, all these suffer as the involuntary result of the voluntary act of gratifying some fundamental human instinct—the instinct of activity, the instinct of nutrition, the instinct of affection. The instinct of sex is as fundamental as any of these, and the involuntary evils which may follow the voluntary act of gratifying it stand on exactly the same level. This is the essential fact: a human being in following the human instincts implanted within him has stumbled and fallen. Any person who sees, not this essential fact but merely some subsidiary aspect of it, reveals a mind that is twisted and perverted; he has no claim to arrest our attention.
At this point, however, we encounter people who argue that it's unnecessary to acknowledge venereal diseases and that it's immoral to do anything that might appear to indulge those suffering from such diseases; they believe these individuals have gotten what they deserve and should be left to suffer. Those who hold this view place themselves far outside the realm of civilization—let alone morality or religion—making them largely inconsequential. The progress of humanity, both in reality and in emotion, has involved rejecting an attitude that it is disrespectful to primitive peoples to label as savage. Yet, this viewpoint still exists and influences many who are too weak to resist those who play with lofty moral language. I've even seen in a medical context that venereal diseases can't be compared to other infectious diseases because they are "the result of voluntary actions." However, all diseases, in fact, all the accidents and misfortunes that afflict suffering people, are equally the unintended consequences of voluntary actions. The man hit by a car while crossing the street, the family getting sick from bad food, the mother who contracts an illness from the child she's nursing, all suffer as a result of the unintended outcomes of acting on some basic human instinct—the instinct for activity, the instinct for nutrition, the instinct for affection. The instinct for sex is just as fundamental as any of these, and the unintended problems that may arise from acting on it are on the same level. This is the key point: a person, in following the inherent human instincts within them, has stumbled and fallen. Anyone who focuses not on this key point but rather on some minor aspect of it shows a twisted and distorted mindset; they don’t deserve our attention.
But even if we were to adopt the standpoint of the would-be moralist, and to agree that everyone must be left to suffer his deserts, it is far indeed from being the fact that all those who contract venereal diseases are in any sense receiving their deserts. In a large number of cases the disease has been inflicted on them in the most absolutely involuntary manner. This is, of course, true in the case of the vast number of infants who are infected at conception or at birth. But it is also true in a scarcely less absolute manner of a large proportion of persons infected in later life.
But even if we were to take the perspective of the would-be moralist and agree that everyone should face the consequences of their actions, it’s far from true that everyone who contracts venereal diseases is getting what they deserve. In many cases, the disease has been forced upon them completely involuntarily. This is obviously true for the large number of infants who are infected at conception or at birth. But it’s also true, to nearly the same extent, for many people who are infected later in life.
Syphilis insontium, or syphilis of the innocent, as it is commonly called, may be said to fall into five groups: (1) the vast army of congenitally syphilitic infants who inherit the disease from father or mother; (2) the constantly occurring cases of syphilis contracted, in the course of their professional duties, by doctors, midwives and wet-nurses; (3) infection as a result of affection, as in simple kissing; (4) accidental infection from casual contacts and from using in common the objects and utensils of daily life, such as cups, towels, razors, knives (as in ritual circumcision), etc; (5) the infection of wives by their husbands.[240]
Syphilis insontium, or syphilis of the innocent, as it is commonly known, can be divided into five groups: (1) the large number of congenitally syphilitic infants who inherit the disease from their parents; (2) the frequent cases of syphilis acquired by doctors, midwives, and wet-nurses in the course of their work; (3) infection resulting from affection, such as simple kissing; (4) accidental infection from casual contact and sharing everyday items and utensils, like cups, towels, razors, knives (as in ritual circumcision), etc.; (5) the infection of wives by their husbands.[240]
Hereditary congenital syphilis belongs to the ordinary pathology of the disease and is a chief element in its social danger since it is responsible for an enormous infantile mortality.[241] The risks of extragenital infection in the professional activity of doctors, midwives and wet-nurses is also universally recognized. In the case of wet-nurses infected by their employers' syphilitic infants at their breast, the penalty inflicted on the innocent is peculiarly harsh and unnecessary. The influence of infected low-class midwives is notably dangerous, for they may inflict widespread injury in ignorance; thus the case has been recorded of a midwife, whose finger became infected in the course of her duties, and directly or indirectly contaminated one hundred persons. Kissing is an extremely common source of syphilitic infection, and of all extragenital regions the mouth is by far the most frequent seat of primary syphilitic sores. In some cases, it is true, especially in prostitutes, this is the result of abnormal sexual contacts. But in the majority of cases it is the result of ordinary and slight kisses as between young children, between parents and children, between lovers and friends and acquaintances. Fairly typical examples, which have been reported, are those of a child, kissed by a prostitute, who became infected and subsequently infected its mother and grandmother; of a young French bride contaminated on her wedding-day by one of the guests who, according to French custom, kissed her on the cheek after the ceremony; of an American girl who, returning from a ball, kissed, at parting, the young man who had accompanied her home, thus acquiring the disease which she not long afterwards imparted in the same way to her mother and three sisters. The ignorant and unthinking are apt to ridicule those who point out the serious risks of miscellaneous kissing. But it remains nevertheless true that people who are not intimate enough to know the state of each other's health are not intimate enough to kiss each other. Infection by the use of domestic utensils, linen, etc., while comparatively rare among the better social classes, is extremely common among the lower classes and among the less civilized nations; in Russia, according to Tarnowsky, the chief authority, seventy per cent. of all cases of syphilis in the rural districts are due to this cause and to ordinary kissing, and a special conference in St. Petersburg in 1897, for the consideration of the methods of dealing with venereal disease, recorded its opinion to the same effect; much the same seems to be true regarding Bosnia and various parts of the Balkan peninsula where syphilis is extremely prevalent among the peasantry. As regards the last group, according to Bulkley in America, fifty per cent. of women generally contract syphilis innocently, chiefly from their husbands, while Fournier states that in France seventy-five per cent. of married women with syphilis have been infected by their husbands, most frequently (seventy per cent.) by husbands who were themselves infected before marriage and supposed that they were cured. Among men the proportion of syphilitics who have been accidentally infected, though less than among women, is still very considerable; it is stated to be at least ten per cent., and possibly it is a much larger proportion of cases. The scrupulous moralist who is anxious that all should have their deserts cannot fail to be still more anxious to prevent the innocent from suffering in place of the guilty. But it is absolutely impossible for him to combine these two aims; syphilis cannot be at the same time perpetuated for the guilty and abolished for the innocent.
Hereditary congenital syphilis is a common aspect of the disease and is a major concern for society due to its role in high infant mortality rates.[241] The dangers of extragenital infections among doctors, midwives, and wet nurses are widely acknowledged. For wet nurses who become infected by caring for syphilitic infants, the consequences for the innocent can be particularly severe and unjust. Infected lower-class midwives can cause significant harm unknowingly; there have been cases where a midwife infected during her work ended up contaminating a hundred people either directly or indirectly. Kissing is a very common way that syphilitic infection spreads, and among all extragenital areas, the mouth is by far the most frequent site for initial syphilitic sores. In some cases, particularly among prostitutes, this results from unusual sexual encounters. However, in most situations, it's due to everyday, innocent kisses exchanged between young children, parents and their kids, lovers, friends, and even acquaintances. Typical examples include a child who was kissed by a prostitute, subsequently infecting her mother and grandmother; a young French bride who was contaminated on her wedding day by a guest who followed French tradition and kissed her on the cheek after the ceremony; and an American girl who, after a ball, kissed the young man who had accompanied her home and later passed the disease to her mother and three sisters. Those who are unaware may mock warnings about the serious risks of casual kissing, but it remains true that people who aren't close enough to know each other's health status shouldn't be close enough to kiss. Infection through shared household items like utensils and linens, while relatively rare among the upper classes, is very common among lower classes and less developed nations; in Russia, as noted by Tarnowsky, a leading authority, about seventy percent of syphilis cases in rural areas arise from such causes and from ordinary kissing. A special conference in St. Petersburg in 1897, which aimed to address venereal diseases, supported this viewpoint; a similar situation appears to apply to Bosnia and other regions in the Balkan Peninsula where syphilis is highly prevalent among rural populations. Regarding this last group, Bulkley reports that in America, fifty percent of women typically contract syphilis innocently, mostly from their husbands, while Fournier indicates that in France, seventy-five percent of married women with syphilis were infected by their husbands, often (in seventy percent of cases) by husbands who believed they were cured before marriage. Among men, while the proportion of those who were accidentally infected is lower than for women, it is still significant; it's estimated to be at least ten percent, though the actual number may be higher. Those with strong moral views who believe everyone should face consequences should particularly strive to protect the innocent from bearing the burden of the guilty. However, it is impossible for them to achieve both objectives; syphilis cannot be maintained for the guilty while being eradicated for the innocent.
I have been taking only syphilis into account, but nearly all that is said of the accidental infection of syphilis applies with equal or greater force to gonorrhœa, for though gonorrhœa does not enter into the system by so many channels as syphilis, it is a more common as well as a more subtle and elusive disease.
I have been considering only syphilis, but almost everything said about the accidental infection of syphilis applies just as much, if not more, to gonorrhea. Although gonorrhea doesn't enter the body through as many pathways as syphilis, it is a more common as well as a more subtle and elusive disease.
The literature of Syphilis Insontium is extremely extensive. There is a bibliography at the end of Duncan Bulkley's Syphilis in the Innocent, and a comprehensive summary of the question in a Leipzig Inaugural Dissertation by F. Moses, Zur Kasuistik der Extragenitalen Syphilis-infektion, 1904.
The literature on Syphilis Insontium is very extensive. There’s a bibliography at the end of Duncan Bulkley’s Syphilis in the Innocent, and a detailed summary of the topic in a Leipzig Inaugural Dissertation by F. Moses, Zur Kasuistik der Extragenitalen Syphilis-infektion, 1904.
Even, however, when we have put aside the vast number of venereally infected people who may be said to be, in the narrowest and most conventionally moral sense, "innocent" victims of the diseases they have contracted, there is still much to be said on this question. It must be remembered that the majority of those who contract venereal diseases by illegitimate sexual intercourse are young. They are youths, ignorant of life, scarcely yet escaped from home, still undeveloped, incompletely educated, and easily duped by women; in many cases they have met, as they thought, a "nice" girl, not indeed strictly virtuous but, it seemed to them, above all suspicion of disease, though in reality she was a clandestine prostitute. Or they are young girls who have indeed ceased to be absolutely chaste, but have not yet lost all their innocence, and who do not consider themselves, and are not by others considered, prostitutes; that indeed, is one of the rocks on which the system of police regulation of prostitution comes to grief, for the police cannot catch the prostitute at a sufficiently early stage. Of women who become syphilitic, according to Fournier, twenty per cent. are infected before they are nineteen; in hospitals the proportion is as high as forty per cent.; and of men fifteen per cent. cases occur between eleven and twenty-one years of age. The age of maximum frequency of infection is for women twenty years (in the rural population eighteen), and for men twenty-three years. In Germany Erb finds that as many as eighty-five per cent men with gonorrhœa contracted the disease between the ages of sixteen and twenty-five, a very small percentage being infected after thirty. These young things for the most part fell into a trap which Nature had baited with her most fascinating lure; they were usually ignorant; not seldom they were deceived by an attractive personality; often they were overcome by passion; frequently all prudence and reserve had been lost in the fumes of wine. From a truly moral point of view they were scarcely less innocent than children.
Even when we set aside the large number of people who are sexually transmitted infections (STIs) who can be considered, in the strictest and most traditionally moral sense, "innocent" victims of the diseases they have caught, there's still a lot to discuss on this topic. It's important to remember that most people who catch STIs through illicit sexual encounters are young. They are young men, inexperienced in life, just starting to live independently, still growing, not fully educated, and easily misled by women; in many cases, they believe they’ve met a “nice” girl who isn’t strictly virtuous but seems to be above suspicion for disease, though she is actually a secret sex worker. Alternatively, there are young women who may have lost their complete virginity but haven’t completely lost their innocence, and who do not see themselves, nor are they viewed by others, as sex workers; that, in fact, is one of the pitfalls of the police regulation of prostitution, as authorities often can’t catch sex workers in time. According to Fournier, twenty percent of women who get syphilis are infected before they turn nineteen; in hospitals, the rate is as high as forty percent; and for men, fifteen percent of cases happen between the ages of eleven and twenty-one. The peak age for infections is twenty for women (eighteen in rural areas) and twenty-three for men. In Germany, Erb finds that as many as eighty-five percent of men with gonorrhea caught the infection between the ages of sixteen and twenty-five, with very few being infected after thirty. Most of these young individuals fell into a trap that Nature set with her most alluring bait; they were often naïve, sometimes misled by a charming personality, frequently overwhelmed by desire, and often lost all caution and restraint after drinking. From a genuinely moral perspective, they were hardly any less innocent than children.
"I ask," says Duclaux, "whether when a young man, or a young girl, abandon themselves to a dangerous caress society has done what it can to warn them. Perhaps its intentions were good, but when the need came for precise knowledge a silly prudery has held it back, and it has left its children without viaticum.... I will go further, and proclaim that in a large number of cases the husbands who contaminate their wives are innocent. No one is responsible for the evil which he commits without knowing it and without willing it." I may recall the suggestive fact, already referred to, that the majority of husbands who infect their wives contracted the disease before marriage. They entered on marriage believing that their disease was cured, and that they had broken with their past. Doctors have sometimes (and quacks frequently) contributed to this result by too sanguine an estimate of the period necessary to destroy the poison. So great an authority as Fournier formerly believed that the syphilitic could safely be allowed to marry three or four years after the date of infection, but now, with increased experience, he extends the period to four or five years. It is undoubtedly true that, especially when treatment has been thorough and prompt, the diseased constitution, in a majority of cases, can be brought under complete control in a shorter period than this, but there is always a certain proportion of cases in which the powers of infection persist for many years, and even when the syphilitic husband is no longer capable of infecting his wife he may still perhaps be in a condition to effect a disastrous influence on the offspring.
"I ask," says Duclaux, "whether when a young man or a young woman give in to a risky affection, society has done everything it can to warn them. Maybe its intentions were good, but when it came time for clear information, a ridiculous modesty held it back, leaving its children without viaticum.... I’ll go even further and say that in many cases, the husbands who infect their wives are blameless. No one is responsible for the harm they do unknowingly and unwillingly." I can mention the telling fact that most husbands who infect their wives contracted the disease before marriage. They entered marriage believing their illness was cured and that they had moved on from their past. Doctors have sometimes (and quacks often) contributed to this misunderstanding by being overly optimistic about how long it takes to eliminate the infection. A well-respected figure like Fournier once thought it was safe for those with syphilis to marry three or four years after the infection, but now, with more experience, he extends that timeline to four or five years. It is certainly true that, especially when treatment has been thorough and prompt, the infected condition can usually be fully managed in less time than this. However, there’s always a certain percentage of cases where the ability to infect remains for many years, and even if the syphilitic husband can no longer infect his wife, he may still be able to adversely affect their offspring.
In nearly all these cases there was more or less ignorance—which is but another word for innocence as we commonly understand innocence—and when at last, after the event, the facts are more or less bluntly explained to the victim he frequently exclaims: "Nobody told me!" It is this fact which condemns the pseudo-moralist. If he had seen to it that mothers began to explain the facts of sex to their little boys and girls from childhood, if he had (as Dr. Joseph Price urges) taught the risks of venereal disease in the Sunday-school, if he had plainly preached on the relations of the sexes from the pulpit, if he had seen to it that every youth at the beginning of adolescence received some simple technical instruction from his family doctor concerning sexual health and sexual disease—then, though there would still remain the need of pity for those who strayed from a path that must always be difficult to walk in, the would-be moralist at all events would in some measure be exculpated. But he has seldom indeed lifted a finger to do any of these things.
In almost all these cases, there was some level of ignorance—which is just another way to describe innocence as we usually think of it—and when, after the fact, the details are laid out in a blunt way for the victim, they often react with, "Nobody told me!" This reality is what condemns the pseudo-moralist. If he had ensured that mothers started to teach their little boys and girls about sex from an early age, if he had (as Dr. Joseph Price suggests) educated about the risks of sexually transmitted diseases in Sunday school, if he had openly addressed the relationships between the sexes from the pulpit, and if he had made sure that every young person at the onset of adolescence received some straightforward guidance from their family doctor about sexual health and diseases—then, while there would still be a need for compassion for those who strayed from a path that will always be difficult to navigate, the so-called moralist would at least be somewhat absolved. But he has rarely, if ever, made any effort to do any of these things.
Even those who may be unwilling to abandon an attitude of private moral intolerance towards the victims of venereal diseases may still do well to remember that since the public manifestation of their intolerance is mischievous, and at the best useless, it is necessary for them to restrain it in the interests of society. They would not be the less free to order their own personal conduct in the strictest accordance with their superior moral rigidity; and that after all is for them the main thing. But for the sake of society it is necessary for them to adopt what they may consider the convention of a purely hygienic attitude towards these diseases. The erring are inevitably frightened by an attitude of moral reprobation into methods of concealment, and these produce an endless chain of social evils which can only be dissipated by openness. As Duclaux has so earnestly insisted, it is impossible to grapple successfully with venereal disease unless we consent not to introduce our prejudices, or even our morals and religion, into the question, but treat it purely and simply as a sanitary question. And if the pseudo-moralist still has difficulty in coöperating towards the healing of this social sore he may be reminded that he himself—like every one of us little though we may know it—has certainly had a great army of syphilitic and gonorrhœal persons among his own ancestors during the past four centuries. We are all bound together, and it is absurd, even when it is not inhuman, to cast contempt on our own flesh and blood.
Even those who might not want to give up their private moral judgment against the victims of sexually transmitted diseases should keep in mind that publicly expressing this intolerance is harmful and, at best, pointless. It’s important for them to hold back their views for the sake of society. They can still conduct their personal lives according to their strict moral beliefs, which is what really matters to them. However, for the well-being of society, they need to adopt what they see as a purely hygienic perspective towards these diseases. Those who err are pushed into hiding by a judgmental attitude, which only creates a cycle of social problems that openness can resolve. As Duclaux has passionately pointed out, we can't effectively address venereal disease if we allow our biases, morals, or religion to interfere; we must treat it as a public health issue. And if the self-righteous have trouble contributing to the healing of this social wound, they should remember that they—like all of us, even if we don’t realize it—have likely had many relatives suffering from syphilis and gonorrhea over the past four centuries. We are all connected, and it’s ridiculous, if not inhumane, to look down on our own family.
I have discussed rather fully the attitude of those who plead morality as a reason for ignoring the social necessity of combating venereal disease, because although there may not be many who seriously and understandingly adopt so anti-social and inhuman an attitude there are certainly many who are glad at need of the existence of so fine an excuse for their moral indifference or their mental indolence.[242] When they are confronted by this great and difficult problem they find it easy to offer the remedy of conventional morality, although they are well aware that on a large scale that remedy has long been proved to be ineffectual. They ostentatiously affect to proffer the useless thick end of the wedge at a point where it is only possible with much skill and prudence to insinuate the thin working end.
I have thoroughly discussed the viewpoint of those who use morality as a reason to overlook the social need to fight venereal disease. While there might not be many who genuinely and knowingly hold such an anti-social and inhumane stance, there are certainly many who are pleased to have such a convenient excuse for their moral indifference or mental laziness.[242] When faced with this significant and challenging issue, they find it easy to suggest the solution of traditional morality, even though they know that, on a large scale, that solution has been proven ineffective for a long time. They dramatically pretend to present the useless thick end of the wedge at a point where it only makes sense, with skill and caution, to introduce the thin working end.
The general acceptance of the fact that syphilis and gonorrhœa are diseases, and not necessarily crimes or sins, is the condition for any practical attempt to deal with this question from the sanitary point of view which is now taking the place of the antiquated and ineffective police point of view. The Scandinavian countries of Europe have been the pioneers in practical modern hygienic methods of dealing with venereal disease. There are several reasons why this has come about. All the problems of sex—of sexual love as well as of sexual disease—have long been prominent in these countries, and an impatience with prudish hypocrisy seems here to have been more pronounced than elsewhere; we see this spirit, for instance, emphatically embodied in the plays of Ibsen, and to some extent in Björnson's works. The fearless and energetic temper of the people impels them to deal practically with sexual difficulties, while their strong instincts of independence render them averse to the bureaucratic police methods which have flourished in Germany and France. The Scandinavians have thus been the natural pioneers of the methods of combating venereal diseases which are now becoming generally recognized to be the methods of the future, and they have fully organized the system of putting venereal diseases under the ordinary law and dealing with them as with other contagious diseases.
The general acceptance that syphilis and gonorrhea are diseases, not necessarily crimes or sins, is essential for any practical effort to address this issue from a public health perspective, which is now replacing the outdated and ineffective legal viewpoint. The Scandinavian countries have led the way in modern hygienic methods for handling venereal diseases. Several factors have contributed to this. The issues surrounding sex—both sexual love and sexual diseases—have long been significant in these countries, and there seems to be a greater impatience with prudish hypocrisy here than elsewhere; this attitude is clearly reflected in the works of Ibsen and, to some extent, in Björnson's plays. The fearless and proactive spirit of the people drives them to address sexual challenges head-on, while their strong desire for independence makes them resistant to the bureaucratic policing methods that have thrived in Germany and France. As a result, Scandinavians have naturally become the pioneers of the approaches now widely accepted as the future methods for combating venereal diseases, fully organizing the system to treat these diseases under standard laws, just like other contagious diseases.
The first step in dealing with a contagious disease is to apply to it the recognized principles of notification. Every new application of the principle, it is true, meets with opposition. It is without practical result, it is an unwarranted inquisition into the affairs of the individual, it is a new tax on the busy medical practitioner, etc. Certainly notification by itself will not arrest the progress of any infectious disease. But it is an essential element in every attempt to deal with the prevention of disease. Unless we know precisely the exact incidence, local variations, and temporary fluctuations of a disease we are entirely in the dark and can only beat about at random. All progress in public hygiene has been accompanied by the increased notification of disease, and most authorities are agreed that such notification must be still further extended, any slight inconvenience thus caused to individuals being of trifling importance compared to the great public interests at stake. It is true that so great an authority as Neisser has expressed doubt concerning the extension of notification to gonorrhœa; the diagnosis cannot be infallible, and the patients often give false names. These objections, however, seem trivial; diagnosis can very seldom be infallible (though in this field no one has done so much for exact diagnosis as Neisser himself), and names are not necessary for notification, and are not indeed required in the form of compulsory notification of venereal disease which existed a few years ago in Norway.
The first step in handling a contagious disease is to apply the established principles of notification. Every new application of this principle, however, faces resistance. It’s seen as ineffective, an unjust invasion of personal privacy, an additional burden on busy medical professionals, and so on. While notification alone won't stop the spread of infectious diseases, it's a crucial part of any effort to prevent them. Without a clear understanding of how often and where a disease is occurring, we’re completely in the dark and can only guess at random. Advances in public health have always gone hand-in-hand with increased disease notification, and most experts agree that this notification needs to be expanded further, with any minor inconvenience to individuals being insignificant compared to the larger public health concerns. It’s true that a respected authority like Neisser has voiced concerns about extending notification to gonorrhea; the diagnosis isn’t always perfect, and patients often provide false names. However, these concerns seem minor; perfect diagnosis is rarely achievable (although no one has contributed more to accurate diagnosis in this area than Neisser himself), and names aren’t necessary for notification. In fact, they weren’t required in the compulsory notification of sexually transmitted diseases that was in place in Norway a few years ago.
The principle of the compulsory notification of venereal diseases seems to have been first established in Prussia, where it dates from 1835. The system here, however, is only partial, not being obligatory in all cases but only when in the doctor's opinion secrecy might be harmful to the patient himself or to the community; it is only obligatory when the patient is a soldier. This method of notification is indeed on a wrong basis, it is not part of a comprehensive sanitary system but merely an auxiliary to police methods of dealing with prostitution. According to the Scandinavian system, notification, though not an essential part of this system, rests on an entirely different basis.
The rule for mandatory reporting of sexually transmitted diseases appears to have first been established in Prussia, dating back to 1835. However, this system is only partial; it's not compulsory in every case but only when the doctor believes that keeping it confidential could harm the patient or the community. It's mandatory only when the patient is a soldier. This approach to reporting is fundamentally flawed; it is not integrated into a complete public health system but serves merely as a supplement to police efforts to manage prostitution. In contrast, according to the Scandinavian system, reporting is not a core element of this system but is based on a completely different foundation.
The Scandinavian plan in a modified form has lately been established in Denmark. This little country, so closely adjoining Germany, for some time followed in this matter the example of its great neighbor and adopted the police regulation of prostitution and venereal disease. The more fundamental Scandinavian affinities of Denmark were, however, eventually asserted, and in 1906, the system of regulation was entirely abandoned and Denmark resolved to rely on thorough and systematic application of the sanitary principle already accepted in the country, although something of German influence still persists in the strict regulation of the streets and the penalties imposed upon brothel-keepers, leaving prostitution itself free. The decisive feature of the present system is, however, that the sanitary authorities are now exclusively medical. Everyone, whatever his social or financial position, is entitled to the free treatment of venereal disease. Whether he avails himself of it or not, he is in any case bound to undergo treatment. Every diseased person is thus, so far as it can be achieved, in a doctor's hands. All doctors have their instructions in regard to such cases, they have not only to inform their patients that they cannot marry so long as risks of infection are estimated to be present, but that they are liable for the expenses of treatment, as well as the dangers suffered, by any persons whom they may infect. Although it has not been possible to make the system at every point thoroughly operative, its general success is indicated by the entire reliance now placed on it, and the abandonment of the police regulation of prostitution. A system very similar to that of Denmark was established some years previously in Norway. The principle of the treatment of venereal disease at the public expense exists also in Sweden as well as in Finland, where treatment is compulsory.[243]
The Scandinavian approach has recently been adapted in Denmark. This small country, which borders Germany, initially followed the example of its larger neighbor by adopting laws regulating prostitution and sexually transmitted infections. However, Denmark eventually asserted its unique Scandinavian roots, and in 1906, it completely abandoned this system of regulation. Instead, Denmark decided to focus on thoroughly applying the public health principles already recognized within the country, although some German influence remains in the strict regulation of public spaces and the penalties for brothel owners, while leaving prostitution itself unregulated. The key aspect of the current system is that the public health authorities are now entirely composed of medical professionals. Everyone, regardless of their social or financial status, is entitled to free treatment for sexually transmitted infections. Regardless of whether they choose to get treatment, everyone is still required to undergo it. Each infected person is, as much as possible, under a doctor's care. All doctors have specific guidelines for these cases; they must inform their patients that they cannot marry as long as there is any risk of infection and that they are responsible for covering the costs of treatment and the harm caused to anyone they may infect. While it hasn’t been feasible to make the system completely effective at every level, its overall success is evidenced by the complete trust now placed in it and the discontinuation of police regulations on prostitution. A system quite similar to Denmark's was set up a few years earlier in Norway. The principle of public funding for the treatment of sexually transmitted infections also exists in Sweden and Finland, where treatment is mandatory.[243]
It can scarcely be said that the principle of notification has yet been properly applied on a large scale to venereal diseases. But it is constantly becoming more widely advocated, more especially in England and the United States,[244] where national temperament and political traditions render the system of the police regulation of prostitution impossible—even if it were more effective than it practically is—and where the system of dealing with venereal disease on the basis of public health has to be recognized as not only the best but the only possible system.[245]
It can hardly be said that the principle of notification has been effectively implemented on a large scale for venereal diseases. However, it is increasingly being supported, especially in England and the United States,[244] where the national character and political traditions make regulating prostitution through police impossible—even if it were more effective than it currently is—and where addressing venereal disease through public health is not only recognized as the best approach but the only viable one.[245]
In association with this, it is necessary, as is also becoming ever more widely recognized, that there should be the most ample facilities for the gratuitous treatment of venereal diseases; the general establishment of free dispensaries, open in the evenings, is especially necessary, for many can only seek advice and help at this time. It is largely to the systematic introduction of facilities for gratuitous treatment that the enormous reduction in venereal disease in Sweden, Norway, and Bosnia is attributed. It is the absence of the facilities for treatment, the implied feeling that the victims of venereal disease are not sufferers but merely offenders not entitled to care, that has in the past operated so disastrously in artificially promoting the dissemination of preventable diseases which might be brought under control.
In connection with this, it's becoming increasingly recognized that there needs to be ample facilities for free treatment of sexually transmitted infections. The widespread establishment of free clinics that open in the evenings is especially crucial, as many can only seek advice and help during those hours. The significant decrease in venereal diseases in Sweden, Norway, and Bosnia is largely attributed to the systematic introduction of these free treatment options. The lack of treatment facilities and the underlying notion that those affected by venereal diseases are not patients but merely wrongdoers who don’t deserve care has historically contributed to the harmful spread of preventable diseases that could be controlled.
If we dispense with the paternal methods of police regulation, if we rely on the general principles of medical hygiene, and for the rest allow the responsibility for his own good or bad actions to rest on the individual himself, there is a further step, already fully recognized in principle, which we cannot neglect to take: We must look on every person as accountable for the venereal diseases he transmits. So long as we refuse to recognize venereal diseases as on the same level as other infectious diseases, and so long as we offer no full and fair facilities for their treatment, it is unjust to bring the individual to account for spreading them. But if we publicly recognize the danger of infectious venereal diseases, and if we leave freedom to the individual, we must inevitably declare, with Duclaux, that every man or woman must be held responsible for the diseases he or she communicates.
If we move away from the authoritarian methods of police regulation and base our approach on general principles of medical hygiene, while allowing individuals to be responsible for their own choices, there's an important step we must take that is already widely accepted in principle: We need to hold everyone accountable for the venereal diseases they transmit. As long as we refuse to see venereal diseases as equal to other infectious diseases and fail to provide adequate facilities for their treatment, it is unfair to hold individuals responsible for spreading them. However, if we publicly acknowledge the risks of infectious venereal diseases and grant individuals their freedom, we must inevitably assert, as Duclaux did, that every man or woman has to be accountable for the diseases they spread.
According to the Oldenburg Code of 1814 it was a punishable offence for a venereally diseased person to have sexual intercourse with a healthy person, whether or not infection resulted. In Germany to-day, however, there is no law of this kind, although eminent German legal authorities, notably Von Liszt, are of opinion that a paragraph should be added to the Code declaring that sexual intercourse on the part of a person who knows that he is diseased should be punishable by imprisonment for a period not exceeding two years, the law not to be applied as between married couples except on the application of one of the parties. At the present time in Germany the transmission of venereal disease is only punishable as a special case of the infliction of bodily injury.[246] In this matter Germany is behind most of the Scandinavian countries where individual responsibility for venereal infection is well recognized and actively enforced.
According to the Oldenburg Code of 1814, it was considered a crime for someone with a sexually transmitted disease to have sex with a healthy person, regardless of whether infection occurred. However, in Germany today, there is no such law. Yet, prominent German legal experts, particularly Von Liszt, believe a clause should be added to the Code stating that a person who knows they are infected should face up to two years in prison for having sex. This law would not apply to married couples unless one spouse requests it. Currently, in Germany, spreading a sexually transmitted disease is only punishable as a specific case of causing bodily harm.[246] In this respect, Germany lags behind most Scandinavian countries, where individual responsibility for sexually transmitted infections is well recognized and actively enforced.
In France, though the law is not definite and satisfactory, actions for the transmission of syphilis are successfully brought before the courts. Opinion seems to be more decisively in favor of punishment for this offense than it is in Germany. In 1883 Després discussed the matter and considered the objections. Few may avail themselves of the law, he remarks, but all would be rendered more cautious by the fear of infringing it; while the difficulties of tracing and proving infection are not greater, he points out, than those of tracing and proving paternity in the case of illegitimate children. Després would punish with imprisonment for not more than two years any person, knowing himself to be diseased, who transmitted a venereal disease, and would merely fine those who communicated the contagion by imprudence, not realizing that they were diseased.[247] The question has more recently been discussed by Aurientis in a Paris thesis. He states that the present French law as regards the transmission of sexual diseases is not clearly established and is difficult to act upon, but it is certainly just that those who have been contaminated and injured in this way should easily be able to obtain reparation. Although it is admitted in principle that the communication of syphilis is an offence even under common law he is in agreement with those who would treat it as a special offence, making a new and more practical law.[248] Heavy damages are even at the present time obtained in the French courts from men who have infected young women in sexual intercourse, and also from the doctors as well as the mothers of syphilitic infants who have infected the foster-mothers they were entrusted to. Although the French Penal Code forbids in general the disclosure of professional secrets, it is the duty of the medical practitioner to warn the foster-mother in such a case of the danger she is incurring, but without naming the disease; if he neglects to give this warning he may be held liable.
In France, even though the laws aren't clear or fully satisfactory, lawsuits for the spread of syphilis are successfully pursued in court. Public opinion seems to lean more toward punishing this offense than in Germany. In 1883, Després addressed this issue and considered the counterarguments. He notes that while few might use the law, everyone would be more careful out of fear of breaking it; he also emphasizes that the challenges of tracing and proving infection aren't any harder than proving paternity in cases of illegitimate children. Després suggested punishing anyone who knowingly transmits a venereal disease with up to two years in prison, while those who spread the infection unknowingly would just face fines. The issue has been revisited by Aurientis in a thesis in Paris. He argues that the current French law on sexual disease transmission is unclear and hard to enforce, but it is certainly fair that those harmed in this way should be able to seek compensation easily. While it's acknowledged that spreading syphilis is an offense even under common law, he supports those who would classify it as a distinct offense, advocating for a new and more practical law. Significant damages are still awarded in French courts against men who infect young women through sexual intercourse, as well as against doctors and the mothers of syphilitic infants who have passed the infection to their foster mothers. Although the French Penal Code generally prohibits disclosing professional secrets, doctors are obligated to warn the foster mother of the risks involved without naming the disease; if they fail to do so, they could be held liable.
In England, as well as in the United States, the law is more unsatisfactory and more helpless, in relation to this class of offences, than it is in France. The mischievous and barbarous notion, already dealt with, according to which venereal disease is the result of illicit intercourse and should be tolerated as a just visitation of God, seems still to flourish in these countries with fatal persistency. In England the communication of venereal disease by illicit intercourse is not an actionable wrong if the act of intercourse has been voluntary, even although there has been wilful and intentional concealment of the disease. Ex turpi causâ non oritur actio, it is sententiously said; for there is much dormitative virtue in a Latin maxim. No legal offence has still been committed if a husband contaminates his wife, or a wife her husband.[249] The "freedom" enjoyed in this matter by England and the United States is well illustrated by an American case quoted by Dr. Isidore Dyer, of New Orleans, in his report to the Brussels Conference on the Prevention of Venereal Diseases, in 1899: "A patient with primary syphilis refused even charitable treatment and carried a book wherein she kept the number of men she had inoculated. When I first saw her she declared the number had reached two hundred and nineteen and that she would not be treated until she had had revenge on five hundred men." In a community where the most elementary rules of justice prevailed facilities would exist to enable this woman to obtain damages from the man who had injured her or even to secure his conviction to a term of imprisonment. In obtaining some indemnity for the wrong done her, and securing the "revenge" she craved, she would at the same time have conferred a benefit on society. She is shut out from any action against the one person who injured her; but as a sort of compensation she is allowed to become a radiating focus of disease, to shorten many lives, to cause many deaths, to pile up incalculable damages; and in so doing she is to-day perfectly within her legal rights. A community which encourages this state of things is not only immoral but stupid.
In England and the United States, the law is more inadequate and ineffective regarding this type of crime than it is in France. The harmful and brutal idea, which has already been discussed, that venereal disease is a punishment for immoral behavior and should be accepted as a deserved consequence, seems to still thrive in these countries with alarming persistence. In England, transmitting a venereal disease through immoral sexual relations is not a legally actionable offense if the intercourse was consensual, even if there was willful and intentional concealment of the disease. Ex turpi causâ non oritur actio, it is said succinctly; there is a lot of dormant power in a Latin maxim. No legal offense has been committed if a husband infects his wife, or a wife her husband.[249] The "freedom" experienced in this matter in England and the United States is well illustrated by an American case mentioned by Dr. Isidore Dyer, from New Orleans, in his report to the Brussels Conference on the Prevention of Venereal Diseases in 1899: "A patient with primary syphilis refused even charitable treatment and carried a book where she kept track of the number of men she had infected. When I first saw her, she claimed the number had reached two hundred and nineteen and that she would not seek treatment until she had taken revenge on five hundred men." In a community where basic principles of justice were upheld, there would be avenues for this woman to obtain damages from the man who harmed her or even secure his conviction and imprisonment. By getting some compensation for the injury done to her and achieving the "revenge" she sought, she would simultaneously benefit society. Instead, she is barred from taking action against the one person who hurt her; but, as a sort of compensation, she is permitted to become a source of disease, to shorten many lives, to cause numerous deaths, to accumulate untold damages; and while doing this, she is currently completely within her legal rights. A community that fosters this situation is not only immoral but also foolish.
There seems, however, to be a growing body of influential opinion, both in England and in the United States, in favor of making the transmission of venereal disease an offence punishable by heavy fine or by imprisonment.[250] In any enactment no stress should be put on the infection being conveyed "knowingly." Any formal limitation of this kind is unnecessary, as in such a case the Court always takes into account the offender's ignorance or mere negligence, and it is mischievous because it tends to render an enactment ineffective and to put a premium on ignorance; the husbands who infect their wives with gonorrhœa immediately after marriage have usually done so from ignorance, and it should be at least necessary for them to prove that they have been fortified in their ignorance by medical advice. It is sometimes said that the existing law could be utilized for bringing actions of this kind, and that no greater facilities should be offered for fear of increasing attempts at blackmail. The inutility of the law at present for this purpose is shown by the fact that it seldom or never happens that any attempt is made to utilize it, while not only are there a number of existing punishable offences which form the subject of attempts at blackmail, but blackmail can still be demanded even in regard to disreputable actions that are not legally punishable at all. Moreover, the attempt to levy blackmail is itself an offence always sternly dealt with in the courts.
There seems to be a growing consensus, both in England and the United States, supporting the idea of making the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases a crime punishable by heavy fines or imprisonment.[250] In any legislation, it shouldn't be emphasized that the infection needs to be passed on "knowingly." Any formal restriction like that is unnecessary, as courts always consider the offender's ignorance or simple negligence in these cases. It's also harmful because it can make the law ineffective and reward ignorance; husbands who unknowingly infect their wives with gonorrhea right after getting married usually do so out of lack of knowledge, and they should have to show that they were misled by medical advice. Some argue that existing laws could be used for such cases and that we shouldn't provide more options for fear of increasing blackmail attempts. The ineffectiveness of the current law for this purpose is evident since it rarely, if ever, gets used, while there are plenty of punishable offenses that are actually targeted by blackmail. Additionally, blackmail can still be sought even for actions that are not legally punishable at all. Furthermore, attempting to extort money through blackmail is itself a serious crime that the courts deal with strictly.
It is possible to trace the beginning of a recognition that the transmission of a venereal disease is a matter of which legal cognizance may be taken in the English law courts. It is now well settled that the infection of a wife by her husband may be held to constitute the legal cruelty which, according to the present law, must be proved, in addition to adultery, before a wife can obtain divorce from her husband. In 1777 Restif de la Bretonne proposed in his Gynographes that the communication of a venereal disease should itself be an adequate ground for divorce; this, however, is not at present generally accepted.[251]
It’s possible to trace when people started recognizing that the spread of a sexually transmitted infection is something that can be legally addressed in English courts. It’s now well established that if a husband infects his wife, it can be considered legal cruelty, which, under current law, must be demonstrated along with adultery for a wife to get a divorce. In 1777, Restif de la Bretonne suggested in his Gynographes that transmitting a sexually transmitted infection should be a valid reason for divorce; however, this is not widely accepted today.[251]
It is sometimes said that it is very well to make the individual legally responsible for the venereal disease he communicates, but that the difficulties of bringing that responsibility home would still remain. And those who admit these difficulties frequently reply that at the worst we should have in our hands a means of educating responsibility; the man who deliberately ran the risk of transmitting such infection would be made to feel that he was no longer fairly within his legal rights but had done a bad action. We are thus led on finally to what is now becoming generally recognized as the chief and central method of combating venereal disease, if we are to accept the principle of individual responsibility as ruling in this sphere of life. Organized sanitary and medical precautions, and proper legal protection for those who have been injured, are inoperative without the educative influence of elementary hygienic instruction placed in the possession of every young man and woman. In a sphere that is necessarily so intimate medical organization and legal resort can never be all-sufficing; knowledge is needed at every step in every individual to guide and even to awaken that sense of personal moral responsibility which must here always rule. Wherever the importance of these questions is becoming acutely realized—and notably at the Congresses of the German Society for Combating Venereal Disease—the problem is resolving itself mainly into one of education.[252] And although opinion and practice in this matter are to-day more advanced in Germany than elsewhere the conviction of this necessity is becoming scarcely less pronounced in all other civilized countries, in England and America as much as in France and the Scandinavian lands.
It’s often said that while it’s good to hold individuals legally accountable for the sexually transmitted diseases they spread, there are still challenges in enforcing that accountability. Those who recognize these challenges typically respond that, at the very least, it would provide a way to foster a sense of responsibility. A man who knowingly risked transmitting an infection would understand that he’s no longer exercising his legal rights but has committed a wrong act. This brings us to what is increasingly recognized as the main approach to fighting sexually transmitted diseases, assuming we accept individual responsibility in this area of life. Organized health and medical measures, along with legal protection for those harmed, won’t be effective without educating every young man and woman about basic hygiene. In such an intimate area, medical and legal systems alone can’t cover everything; individuals need knowledge at every turn to guide them and awaken a personal sense of moral responsibility. As the importance of these issues becomes more apparent—especially at the Congresses of the German Society for Combating Venereal Disease—the focus is largely shifting toward education. And while Germany is currently ahead in opinion and practice, this necessity is becoming increasingly recognized in other civilized nations, including England and America, just as it is in France and the Scandinavian countries.
A knowledge of the risks of disease by sexual intercourse, both in and out of marriage,—and indeed, apart from sexual intercourse altogether,—is a further stage of that sexual education which, as we have already seen, must begin, so far as the elements are concerned, at a very early age. Youths and girls should be taught, as the distinguished Austrian economist, Anton von Menger wrote, shortly before his death, in his excellent little book, Neue Sittenlehre, that the production of children is a crime when the parents are syphilitic or otherwise incompetent through transmissible chronic diseases. Information about venereal disease should not indeed be given until after puberty is well established. It is unnecessary and undesirable to impart medical knowledge to young boys and girls and to warn them against risks they are yet little liable to be exposed to. It is when the age of strong sexual instinct, actual or potential, begins that the risks, under some circumstances, of yielding to it, need to be clearly present to the mind. No one who reflects on the actual facts of life ought to doubt that it is in the highest degree desirable that every adolescent youth and girl ought to receive some elementary instruction in the general facts of venereal disease, tuberculosis, and alcoholism. These three "plagues of civilization" are so widespread, so subtle and manifold in their operation, that everyone comes in contact with them during life, and that everyone is liable to suffer, even before he is aware, perhaps hopelessly and forever, from the results of that contact. Vague declamation about immorality and vaguer warnings against it have no effect and possess no meaning, while rhetorical exaggeration is unnecessary. A very simple and concise statement of the actual facts concerning the evils that beset life is quite sufficient and adequate, and quite essential. To ignore this need is only possible to those who take a dangerously frivolous view of life.
Understanding the risks of diseases from sexual intercourse, both within and outside of marriage, and even apart from sexual activity altogether, is an important part of sexual education that must start at a very young age, as we've already noted. Young people should be taught, as the notable Austrian economist Anton von Menger wrote shortly before he passed away in his excellent little book, Neue Sittenlehre, that having children is a mistake if the parents are infected with syphilis or other chronic diseases that can be passed on. Information about sexually transmitted diseases should really be provided only after puberty is well established. It's neither necessary nor helpful to give medical knowledge to young boys and girls or to warn them about risks they're not likely to encounter yet. It's when strong sexual urges, whether actual or potential, start to develop that the risks of acting on them need to be clearly understood. Anyone who thinks about the realities of life should agree that it’s extremely important for every adolescent, both boys and girls, to receive basic education about sexually transmitted diseases, tuberculosis, and alcoholism. These three "plagues of civilization" are so widespread and operate in such subtle and varied ways that everyone will encounter them during life and may suffer the consequences, often before they even realize it, potentially for a long time. General talk about immorality and unclear warnings against it are ineffective and meaningless, while over-the-top exaggeration isn’t necessary. A straightforward and concise explanation of the actual issues that life presents is entirely appropriate and crucial. Ignoring this necessity is only possible for those who have a dangerously careless attitude toward life.
It is the young woman as much as the youth who needs this enlightenment. There are still some persons so ill-informed as to believe that though it may be necessary to instruct the youth it is best to leave his sister unsullied, as they consider it, by a knowledge of the facts of life. This is the very reverse of the truth. It is desirable indeed that all should be acquainted with facts so vital to humanity, even although not themselves personally concerned. But the girl is even more concerned than the youth. A man has the matter more within his own grasp, and if he so chooses he may avoid all the grosser risks of contact with venereal disease. But it is not so with the woman. Whatever her own purity, she cannot be sure that she may not have to guard against the possibility of disease in her future husband as well as in those to whom she may entrust her child. It is a possibility which the educated woman, so far from being dispensed from, is more liable to encounter than is the working-class woman, for venereal disease is less prevalent among the poor than the rich.[253] The careful physician, even when his patient is a minister of religion, considers it his duty to inquire if he has had syphilis, and the clergyman of most severely correct life recognizes the need of such inquiry and may perhaps smile, but seldom feels himself insulted. The relationship between husband and wife is even much more intimate and important than that between doctor and patient, and a woman is not dispensed from the necessity of such inquiry concerning her future husband by the conviction that the reply must surely be satisfactory. Moreover, it may well be in some cases that, if she is adequately enlightened, she may be the means of saving him, before it is too late, from the guilt of premature marriage and its fateful consequences, so deserving to earn his everlasting gratitude. Even if she fails in winning that, she still has her duty to herself and to the future race which her children will help to form.
It’s not just the young men who need this awareness; young women do too. Some people are still misguided enough to think that while it’s important to educate boys, it’s better to keep girls “innocent” by not letting them know about life’s realities. This couldn’t be more misguided. It’s essential for everyone to understand facts that are crucial to humanity, even if they’re not directly affected. In fact, girls have an even greater stake than boys. A man has more control over his own circumstances and can choose to steer clear of the most serious risks of sexually transmitted diseases. But a woman doesn’t have the same luxury. No matter her own purity, she must remain vigilant about the possibility of disease in her future husband and those to whom she might entrust her child. This is a reality that an educated woman is even more likely to face than a working-class woman, as sexually transmitted diseases are less common among the poor than the rich.[253] A careful doctor, even if his patient is a religious leader, sees it as his duty to ask whether he has had syphilis. Most clergymen, regardless of how upright their lives may seem, understand the importance of such questions and may even chuckle about it, but they rarely take offense. The bond between husband and wife is far more personal and significant than that between doctor and patient; a woman should not skip asking these questions about her future husband just because she believes the answer will be good. In fact, if she is well-informed, she might even be able to save him from the consequences of a hasty marriage, which he would be eternally grateful for. Even if she doesn’t win that gratitude, she still has a responsibility to herself and to the future generations her children will help create.
In most countries there is a growing feeling in favor of the enlightenment of young women equally with young men as regards venereal diseases. Thus in Germany Max Flesch, in his Prostitution und Frauenkrankheiten, considers that at the end of their school days all girls should receive instruction concerning the grave physical and social dangers to which women are exposed in life. In France Duclaux (in his L'Hygiène Sociale) is emphatic that women must be taught. "Already," he states, "doctors who by custom have been made, in spite of themselves, the husband's accomplices, will tell you of the ironical gaze they sometimes encounter when they seek to lead a wife astray concerning the causes of her ills. The day is approaching of a revolt against the social lie which has made so many victims, and you will be obliged to teach women what they need to know in order to guard themselves against you." It is the same in America. Reform in this field, Isidore Dyer declares, must emblazon on its flag the motto, "Knowledge is Health," as well of mind as of body, for women as well as for men. In a discussion introduced by Denslow Lewis at the annual meeting of the American Medical Association in 1901 on the limitation of venereal diseases (Medico-Legal Journal, June and September, 1903), there was a fairly general agreement among all the speakers that almost or quite the chief method of prevention lay in education, the education of women as much as of men. "Education lies at the bottom of the whole thing," declared one speaker (Seneca Egbert, of Philadelphia), "and we will never gain much headway until every young man, and every young woman, even before she falls in love and becomes engaged, knows what these diseases are, and what it will mean if she marries a man who has contracted them." "Educate father and mother, and they will educate their sons and daughters," exclaims Egbert Grandin, more especially in regard to gonorrhœa (Medical Record, May 26, 1906); "I lay stress on the daughter because she becomes the chief sufferer from inoculation, and it is her right to know that she should protect herself against the gonorrhœic as well as against the alcoholic."
In most countries, there’s a growing belief that young women should be educated about sexually transmitted diseases just like young men. In Germany, Max Flesch, in his Prostitution und Frauenkrankheiten, argues that by the end of their schooling, all girls should learn about the serious physical and social risks that women face in life. In France, Duclaux (in his L'Hygiène Sociale) strongly insists that women need to be educated. "Already," he says, "doctors, who have unwittingly become complicit in supporting their husbands, will tell you about the ironic looks they sometimes get when they try to mislead a wife about the causes of her problems. The day is coming when there will be a rebellion against the social lies that have hurt so many, and you will have to teach women what they need to know to protect themselves from you." The same is happening in America. In this area of reform, Isidore Dyer asserts that the motto "Knowledge is Health" must be front and center, applying to mental and physical well-being for both women and men. During a discussion led by Denslow Lewis at the annual meeting of the American Medical Association in 1901 about controlling sexually transmitted diseases (Medico-Legal Journal, June and September, 1903), there was broad agreement among the speakers that education—especially for women—was key to prevention. "Education is at the heart of this issue," stated one speaker (Seneca Egbert, of Philadelphia), "and we won’t make much progress until every young man and young woman, even before falling in love or getting engaged, understands what these diseases are and the implications of marrying someone who has them." "Educate parents, and they will educate their sons and daughters," exclaimed Egbert Grandin, particularly regarding gonorrhea (Medical Record, May 26, 1906); "I emphasize the daughter because she is the primary victim of infection, and it is her right to know how to protect herself from gonorrhea as well as from alcohol."
We must fully face the fact that it is the woman herself who must be accounted responsible, as much as a man, for securing the right conditions of a marriage she proposes to enter into. In practice, at the outset, that responsibility may no doubt be in part delegated to parents or guardians. It is unreasonable that any false delicacy should be felt about this matter on either side. Questions of money and of income are discussed before marriage, and as public opinion grows sounder none will question the necessity of discussing the still more serious question of health, alike that of the prospective bridegroom and of the bride. An incalculable amount of disease and marital unhappiness would be prevented if before an engagement was finally concluded each party placed himself or herself in the hands of a physician and authorized him to report to the other party. Such a report would extend far beyond venereal disease. If its necessity became generally recognized it would put an end to much fraud which now takes place when entering the marriage bond. It constantly happens at present that one party or the other conceals the existence of some serious disease or disability which is speedily discovered after marriage, sometimes with a painful and alarming shock—as when a man discovers his wife in an epileptic fit on the wedding night—and always with the bitter and abiding sense of having been duped. There can be no reasonable doubt that such concealment is an adequate cause of divorce. Sir Thomas More doubtless sought to guard against such frauds when he ordained in his Utopia that each party should before marriage be shown naked to the other. The quaint ceremony he describes was based on a reasonable idea, for it is ludicrous, if it were not often tragic in its results, that any person should be asked to undertake to embrace for life a person whom he or she has not so much as seen.
We need to confront the reality that the woman herself must be held just as accountable as a man for ensuring the right conditions of a marriage she wants to enter. Initially, that responsibility can be partially passed on to parents or guardians. It's unreasonable for either side to feel any false sense of delicacy about this issue. Discussions about money and income happen before marriage, and as public opinion improves, no one will dispute the need to address the even more serious topic of health, both for the prospective groom and the bride. A tremendous amount of disease and marital misery could be avoided if, before finalizing an engagement, both parties consulted a doctor and authorized them to report back to each other. This report would cover far more than just sexually transmitted diseases. If its importance were widely accepted, it would put an end to much of the deception that occurs when entering into marriage. Right now, it often happens that one partner hides the existence of a serious illness or disability, which is quickly revealed after the wedding, sometimes with a distressing and shocking impact—as when a man finds his wife having an epileptic seizure on the wedding night—and always with the painful and lasting feeling of having been deceived. There's no reasonable doubt that such concealment is a sufficient reason for divorce. Sir Thomas More likely aimed to prevent such frauds when he declared in his Utopia that each party should be shown naked to the other before marriage. The unusual ceremony he described was grounded in a sensible idea, as it is absurd, if not often tragic in its consequences, that anyone should agree to commit to a lifetime with someone they have never seen.
It may be necessary to point out that every movement in this direction must be the spontaneous action of individuals directing their own lives according to the rules of an enlightened conscience, and cannot be initiated by the dictation of the community as a whole enforcing its commands by law. In these matters law can only come in at the end, not at the beginning. In the essential matters of marriage and procreation laws are primarily made in the brains and consciences of individuals for their own guidance. Unless such laws are already embodied in the actual practice of the great majority of the community it is useless for parliaments to enact them by statute. They will be ineffective or else they will be worse than ineffective by producing undesigned mischiefs. We can only go to the root of the matter by insisting on education in moral responsibility and instruction, in matters of fact.
It’s important to emphasize that every movement in this direction must come from individuals acting on their own, guiding their lives based on an enlightened conscience, and cannot be imposed by the community as a whole enforcing its rules through law. In these issues, law should only come into play at the end, not at the start. When it comes to the fundamental aspects of marriage and procreation, laws are primarily created in the minds and consciences of individuals for their own guidance. If such laws are not already reflected in the actual behavior of the vast majority of the community, it’s pointless for parliaments to pass them into law. They will either be ineffective or even cause unintended harm. We can truly address the issue by focusing on education about moral responsibility and factual instruction.
The question arises as to the best person to impart this instruction. As we have seen there can be little doubt that before puberty the parents, and especially the mother, are the proper instructors of their children in esoteric knowledge. But after puberty the case is altered. The boy and the girl are becoming less amenable to parental influence, there is greater shyness on both sides, and the parents rarely possess the more technical knowledge that is now required. At this stage it seems that the assistance of the physician, of the family doctor if he has the proper qualities for the task, should be called in. The plan usually adopted, and now widely carried out, is that of lectures setting forth the main facts concerning venereal diseases, their dangers, and allied topics.[254] This method is quite excellent. Such lectures should be delivered at intervals by medical lecturers at all urban, educational, manufacturing, military, and naval centres, wherever indeed a large number of young persons are gathered together. It should be the business of the central educational authority either to carry them out or to enforce on those controlling or employing young persons the duty of providing such lectures. The lectures should be free to all who have attained the age of sixteen.
The question comes up about who is the best person to provide this instruction. As we've seen, it's clear that before puberty, parents, and especially mothers, are the right teachers for their children in complex knowledge. However, once puberty hits, things change. Boys and girls become less open to parental guidance, there's increased awkwardness between them, and parents often lack the technical knowledge required at this stage. It seems that at this point, the help of a physician, especially the family doctor if they have the right qualities for the job, should be sought. The strategy that's typically adopted and widely implemented involves lectures that cover the essential facts about sexually transmitted diseases, their risks, and related topics.[254] This approach is quite effective. These lectures should be held periodically by medical speakers at all urban, educational, manufacturing, military, and naval locations, wherever large groups of young people gather. It should be the responsibility of the central educational authority to either conduct these lectures or mandate that those who oversee or employ young individuals provide them. The lectures should be free for anyone who is sixteen or older.
In Germany the principle of instruction by lectures concerning venereal diseases seems to have become established, at all events so far as young men are concerned, and such lectures are constantly becoming more usual. In 1907 the Minister of Education established courses of lectures by doctors on sexual hygiene and venereal diseases for higher schools and educational institutions, though attendance was not made compulsory. The courses now frequently given by medical men to the higher classes in German secondary schools on the general principles of sexual anatomy and physiology nearly always include sexual hygiene with special reference to venereal diseases (see, e.g., Sexualpädagogik, pp. 131-153). In Austria, also, lectures on personal hygiene and the dangers of venereal disease are delivered to students about to leave the gymnasium for the university; and the working men's clubs have instituted regular courses of lectures on the same subjects delivered by physicians. In France many distinguished men, both inside and outside the medical profession, are working for the cause of the instruction of the young in sexual hygiene, though they have to contend against a more obstinate degree of prejudice and prudery on the part of the middle class than is to be found in the Germanic lands. The Commission Extraparlementaire du Régime des Mœurs, with the conjunction of Augagneur, Alfred Fournier, Yves Guyot, Gide, and other distinguished professors, teachers, etc., has lately pronounced in favor of the official establishment of instruction in sexual hygiene, to be given in the highest classes at the lycées, or in the earliest class at higher educational colleges; such instruction, it is argued, would not only furnish needed enlightenment, but also educate the sense of moral responsibility. There is in France, also, an active and distinguished though unofficial Société Française de Prophylaxie Sanitaire et Morale, which delivers public lectures on sexual hygiene. Fournier, Pinard, Burlureaux and other eminent physicians have written pamphlets on this subject for popular distribution (see, e.g., Le Progrès Médical of September, 1907). In England and the United States very little has yet been done in this direction, but in the United States, at all events, opinion in favor of action is rapidly growing (see, e.g., W. A. Funk, "The Venereal Peril," Medical Record, April 13, 1907). The American Society of Sanitary and Moral Prophylaxis (based on the parent society founded in Paris in 1900 by Fournier) was established in New York in 1905. There are similar societies in Chicago and Philadelphia. The main object is to study venereal diseases and to work toward their social control. Doctors, laymen, and women are members. Lectures and short talks are now given under the auspices of these societies to small groups of young women in social settlements, and in other ways, with encouraging success; it is found to be an excellent method of reaching the young women of the working classes. Both men and women physicians take part in the lectures (Clement Cleveland, Presidential Address on "Prophylaxis of Venereal Diseases," Transactions American Gynecological Society, Philadelphia, vol. xxxii, 1907).
In Germany, the practice of teaching about sexually transmitted diseases through lectures has become well established, especially for young men, and these lectures are becoming increasingly common. In 1907, the Minister of Education set up courses by doctors on sexual health and venereal diseases for high schools and educational institutions, though attendance was not mandatory. The courses that are often conducted by medical professionals for the upper classes in German secondary schools on the basics of sexual anatomy and physiology almost always cover sexual health with a focus on venereal diseases (see, e.g., Sexualpädagogik, pp. 131-153). In Austria, lectures on personal hygiene and the dangers of venereal diseases are offered to students transitioning from gymnasiums to universities; working men's clubs have also established regular lecture series on these topics led by physicians. In France, many renowned individuals, both in and out of the medical field, are advocating for education on sexual health for the youth, even though they face more entrenched prejudice and conservativeness from the middle class than in Germanic countries. The Extraparliamentary Commission on Morality, alongside figures like Augagneur, Alfred Fournier, Yves Guyot, Gide, and other prominent professors and educators, recently endorsed the official establishment of sexual health education to be provided in the senior classes at lycées or in the earliest classes at higher education colleges. They argue that this education would not only provide necessary knowledge but also foster a sense of moral responsibility. In France, there is also an active and notable, though unofficial, Société Française de Prophylaxie Sanitaire et Morale that offers public talks on sexual health. Fournier, Pinard, Burlureaux, and other prominent physicians have published pamphlets on this topic for public distribution (see, e.g., Le Progrès Médical of September, 1907). In England and the United States, not much has been done in this area yet, but in the United States, support for action is rapidly increasing (see, e.g., W. A. Funk, "The Venereal Peril," Medical Record, April 13, 1907). The American Society of Sanitary and Moral Prophylaxis (founded in New York in 1905 based on the original society established in Paris in 1900 by Fournier) aims to study venereal diseases and promote their social management. Members include doctors, laypeople, and women. Lectures and discussions are now being held by these societies for small groups of young women in social settlements and other venues, with encouraging success; this method is proving to be an effective way to reach young women in the working class. Both male and female physicians participate in these lectures (Clement Cleveland, Presidential Address on "Prophylaxis of Venereal Diseases," Transactions American Gynecological Society, Philadelphia, vol. xxxii, 1907).
An important auxiliary method of carrying out the task of sexual hygiene, and at the same time of spreading useful enlightenment, is furnished by the method of giving to every syphilitic patient in clinics where such cases are treated a card of instruction for his guidance in hygienic matters, together with a warning of the risks of marriage within four or five years after infection, and in no case without medical advice. Such printed instruction, in clear, simple, and incisive language, should be put into the hands of every syphilitic patient as a matter of routine, and it might be as well to have a corresponding card for gonorrhœal patients. This plan has already been introduced at some hospitals, and it is so simple and unobjectionable a precaution that it will, no doubt, be generally adopted. In some countries this measure is carried out on a wider scale. Thus in Austria, as the result of a movement in which several university professors have taken an active part, leaflets and circulars, explaining briefly the chief symptoms of venereal diseases and warning against quacks and secret remedies, are circulated among young laborers and factory hands, matriculating students, and scholars who are leaving trade schools.
An important additional method for promoting sexual health and spreading valuable awareness is providing every syphilis patient in clinics with an information card to guide them in hygiene practices. This card also warns about the risks of marriage within four to five years after infection and advises against it without medical consultation. This printed information, written in clear and straightforward language, should routinely be given to every syphilis patient, and it would be helpful to have a similar card for gonorrhea patients. Some hospitals have already started using this approach, and it's such a simple and acceptable precaution that it will likely be widely adopted. In some countries, this initiative is being implemented more comprehensively. For example, in Austria, as a result of efforts from several university professors, leaflets and circulars explaining the main symptoms of sexually transmitted diseases and cautioning against scammers and secret cures are distributed among young laborers, factory workers, university students, and graduates leaving trade schools.
In France, where great social questions are sometimes faced with a more chivalrous daring than elsewhere, the dangers of syphilis, and the social position of the prostitute, have alike been dealt with by distinguished novelists and dramatists. Huysmans inaugurated this movement with his first novel, Marthe, which was immediately suppressed by the police. Shortly afterwards Edmond de Goncourt published La Fille Elisa, the first notable novel of the kind by a distinguished author. It was written with much reticence, and was not indeed a work of high artistic value, but it boldly faced a great social problem and clearly set forth the evils of the common attitude towards prostitution. It was dramatized and played by Antoine at the Théâtre Libre, but when, in 1891, Antoine wished to produce it at the Porte-Saint-Martin Theatre, the censor interfered and prohibited the play on account of its "contexture générale." The Minister of Education defended this decision on the ground that there was much in the play that might arouse repugnance and disgust. "Repugnance here is more moral than attraction," exclaimed M. Paul Déroulède, and the newspapers criticized a censure which permitted on the stage all the trivial indecencies which favor prostitution, but cannot tolerate any attack on prostitution. In more recent years the brothers Margueritte, both in novels and in journalism, have largely devoted their distinguished abilities and high literary skill to the courageous and enlightened advocacy of many social reforms. Victor Margueritte, in his Prostituée (1907)—a novel which has attracted wide attention and been translated into various languages—has sought to represent the condition of women in our actual society, and more especially the condition of the prostitute under what he regards as the odious and iniquitous system still prevailing. The book is a faithful picture of the real facts, thanks to the assistance the author received from the Paris Préfecture of Police, and largely for that reason is not altogether a satisfactory work of art, but it vividly and poignantly represents the cruelty, indifference, and hypocrisy so often shown by men towards women, and is a book which, on that account, cannot be too widely read. One of the most notable of modern plays is Brieux's Les Avariés (1902). This distinguished dramatist, himself a medical man, dedicates his play to Fournier, the greatest of syphilographers. "I think with you," he writes here, "that syphilis will lose much of its danger when it is possible to speak openly of an evil which is neither a shame nor a punishment, and when those who suffer from it, knowing what evils they may propagate, will better understand their duties towards others and towards themselves." The story developed in the drama is the old and typical story of the young man who has spent his bachelor days in what he considers a discrete and regular manner, having only had two mistresses, neither of them prostitutes, but at the end of this period, at a gay supper at which he bids farewell to his bachelor life, he commits a fatal indiscretion and becomes infected by syphilis; his marriage is approaching and he goes to a distinguished specialist who warns him that treatment takes time, and that marriage is impossible for several years; he finds a quack, however, who undertakes to cure him in six months; at the end of the time he marries; a syphilitic child is born; the wife discovers the state of things and forsakes her home to return to her parents; her indignant father, a deputy in Parliament, arrives in Paris; the last word is with the great specialist who brings finally some degree of peace and hope into the family. The chief morals Brieux points out are that it is the duty of the bride's parents before marriage to ascertain the bridegroom's health; that the bridegroom should have a doctor's certificate; that at every marriage the part of the doctors is at least as important as that of the lawyers. Even if it were a less accomplished work of art than it is, Les Avariés is a play which, from the social and educative point of view alone, all who have reached the age of adolescence should be compelled to see.
In France, where serious social issues are sometimes approached with more boldness than elsewhere, the risks of syphilis and the societal status of prostitutes have been addressed by notable novelists and playwrights. Huysmans kicked off this movement with his first novel, Marthe, which was quickly banned by the police. Soon after, Edmond de Goncourt published La Fille Elisa, the first significant novel of this type by a well-known author. It was written with restraint, and while it wasn’t a masterpiece, it courageously tackled a major social issue and clearly illustrated the problems with the common perspective on prostitution. It was adapted into a play and performed by Antoine at the Théâtre Libre, but when Antoine tried to stage it at the Porte-Saint-Martin Theatre in 1891, the censor stepped in and banned the production due to its “overall content.” The Minister of Education supported this decision, claiming that parts of the play could provoke disgust and repulsion. “Repulsion here is more moral than attraction,” exclaimed M. Paul Déroulède, while newspapers criticized the censorship that allowed all the trivial indecencies that support prostitution but would not tolerate any criticism of it. In more recent years, the Margueritte brothers have devoted their impressive skills in both novels and journalism to the brave and informed support of various social reforms. Victor Margueritte, in his novel Prostituée (1907)—which has gained significant attention and has been translated into several languages—sought to portray the status of women in our current society, focusing particularly on the plight of prostitutes under what he sees as a cruel and unjust system still in place. Thanks to the help from the Paris Police Prefecture, the book provides an accurate depiction of reality, which is one reason it may not be entirely a satisfactory piece of art, but it powerfully illustrates the cruelty, indifference, and hypocrisy that men often show towards women, making it a book that deserves to be widely read. One of the most significant modern plays is Brieux's Les Avariés (1902). This notable playwright, who is also a doctor, dedicates his play to Fournier, the leading expert on syphilis. “I agree with you,” he writes, “that syphilis will lose much of its danger when we can talk openly about a problem that isn’t shameful or punitive, and when those affected, understanding the potential harm they might spread, can better grasp their responsibilities towards others and themselves.” The plot of the play follows the familiar story of a young man who spends his single years in what he considers an acceptable manner, having only two mistresses, neither of whom are prostitutes. However, at a lively dinner party where he says goodbye to his single life, he makes a fatal mistake and contracts syphilis. As his wedding approaches, he visits a prominent specialist who cautions him that treatment takes time and that marriage is off the table for several years. Nevertheless, he finds a quack who promises to cure him in six months; by that time, he gets married, but a syphilitic child is born. His wife discovers the truth and leaves to return to her parents; her outraged father, a parliament deputy, arrives in Paris. The final word comes from the leading specialist who eventually brings some peace and hope back to the family. The main messages Brieux highlights are that the bride's parents must check the groom's health before marriage; the groom should have a doctor's certificate; and the role of doctors is at least as crucial as that of lawyers in every marriage. Even if it were a less accomplished piece of art, Les Avariés is a play that, from a social and educational perspective alone, should be required viewing for anyone who has reached adolescence.
Another aspect of the same problem has been presented in Plus Fort que le Mal, a book written in dramatic form (though not as a properly constituted play intended for the stage) by a distinguished French medical author who here adopts the name of Espy de Metz. The author (who is not, however, pleading pro domo) calls for a more sympathetic attitude towards those who suffer from syphilis, and though he writes with much less dramatic skill than Brieux, and scarcely presents his moral in so unequivocal a form, his work is a notable contribution to the dramatic literature of syphilis.
Another aspect of the same problem is presented in Plus Fort que le Mal, a book written in a dramatic style (though not as a traditional play meant for the stage) by a renowned French medical author who goes by the name Espy de Metz. The author (who isn't making a personal plea) calls for a more compassionate attitude towards those suffering from syphilis, and while he lacks the dramatic skill of Brieux and doesn't present his moral as clearly, his work is a significant addition to the dramatic literature on syphilis.
It will probably be some time before these questions, poignant as they are from the dramatic point of view, and vitally important from the social point of view, are introduced on the English or the American stage. It is a remarkable fact that, notwithstanding the Puritanic elements which still exist in Anglo-Saxon thought and feeling generally, the Puritanic aspect of life has never received embodiment in the English or American drama. On the English stage it is never permitted to hint at the tragic side of wantonness; vice must always be made seductive, even though a deus ex machina causes it to collapse at the end of the performance. As Mr. Bernard Shaw has said, the English theatrical method by no means banishes vice; it merely consents that it shall be made attractive; its charms are advertised and its penalties suppressed. "Now, it is futile to plead that the stage is not the proper place for the representation and discussion of illegal operations, incest, and venereal disease. If the stage is the proper place for the exhibition and discussion of seduction, adultery, promiscuity, and prostitution, it must be thrown open to all the consequences of these things, or it will demoralize the nation."
It will likely take a while before these questions, which are as impactful from a dramatic perspective as they are crucial from a social standpoint, are addressed on stage in England or America. It’s striking that, despite the Puritan influences still present in Anglo-Saxon thought and feelings, the Puritan side of life has never been portrayed in English or American theater. On the English stage, it’s never acceptable to suggest the tragic consequences of indulgence; vice must always be depicted as appealing, even if a deus ex machina makes it crumble at the end of the show. As Mr. Bernard Shaw pointed out, the English theatrical approach doesn’t eliminate vice; it simply agrees to present it attractively, promoting its allure while hiding its consequences. "Now, it is pointless to argue that the stage isn't the right place to portray and discuss illegal acts, incest, and sexually transmitted diseases. If the stage is suitable for showcasing and discussing seduction, adultery, promiscuity, and prostitution, it must also be open to all the repercussions of these actions, or it risks corrupting the nation."
The impulse to insist that vice shall always be made attractive is not really, notwithstanding appearances, a vicious impulse. It arises from a mental confusion, a common psychic tendency, which is by no means confined to Anglo-Saxon lands, and is even more well marked among the better educated in the merely literary sense, than among the worse educated people. The æsthetic is confused with the moral, and what arouses disgust is thus regarded as immoral. In France the novels of Zola, the most pedestrianally moralistic of writers, were for a long time supposed to be immoral because they were often disgusting. The same feeling is still more widespread in England. If a prostitute is brought on the stage, and she is pretty, well-dressed, seductive, she may gaily sail through the play and every one is satisfied. But if she were not particularly pretty, well-dressed, or seductive, if it were made plain that she was diseased and was reckless in infecting others with that disease, if it were hinted that she could on occasion be foul-mouthed, if, in short, a picture were shown from life—then we should hear that the unfortunate dramatist had committed something that was "disgusting" and "immoral." Disgusting it might be, but, on that very account, it would be moral. There is a distinction here that the psychologist cannot too often point out or the moralist too often emphasize.
The urge to insist that bad behavior should always be portrayed as appealing isn't, despite appearances, a bad impulse. It comes from a mental confusion, a common psychological tendency that isn’t limited to Anglo-Saxon countries and is even more pronounced among those who are more literarily educated than those who are less so. The aesthetic gets confused with the moral, and things that provoke disgust are seen as immoral. In France, Zola's novels, which are the most straightforwardly moralistic of writers, were long thought to be immoral because they often included disgusting content. The same feeling is even more common in England. If a prostitute is presented on stage, and she’s attractive, well-dressed, and seductive, she can easily get through the play, and everyone is fine with it. But if she’s not particularly attractive, well-dressed, or seductive, if it’s made clear that she is sick and reckless in infecting others, if it’s suggested that she can sometimes use foul language, that is, if a real-life picture were shown—then we’d hear that the unfortunate playwright had committed something "disgusting" and "immoral." It might be disgusting, but for that very reason, it would be moral. This is a distinction that psychologists should emphasize and moralists should highlight.
It is not for the physician to complicate and confuse his own task as teacher by mixing it up with considerations which belong to the spiritual sphere. But in carrying out impartially his own special work of enlightenment he will always do well to remember that there is in the adolescent mind, as it has been necessary to point out in a previous chapter, a spontaneous force working on the side of sexual hygiene. Those who believe that the adolescent mind is merely bent on sensual indulgence are not less false and mischievous in their influence than are those who think it possible and desirable for adolescents to be preserved in sheer sexual ignorance. However concealed, suppressed, or deformed—usually by the misplaced and premature zeal of foolish parents and teachers—there arise at puberty ideal impulses which, even though they may be rooted in sex, yet in their scope transcend sex. These are capable of becoming far more potent guides of the physical sex impulse than are merely material or even hygienic considerations.
It’s not the doctor’s role to complicate and confuse their job as an educator by mixing it with issues that belong to the spiritual realm. However, while impartially doing their job of educating, they should always keep in mind that within the adolescent mind, as pointed out in a previous chapter, there’s a natural force supporting sexual health. Those who think that the adolescent mind is solely focused on sexual pleasure are just as misguided and harmful as those who believe it's possible and beneficial for adolescents to remain completely unaware of sexual matters. Regardless of how hidden, suppressed, or distorted this might be—often due to the misguided and overly eager actions of naive parents and teachers—ideal impulses emerge at puberty that, although they may have roots in sexuality, extend beyond it. These impulses can serve as much stronger guides for the physical sexual drive than just material or even hygienic factors.
It is time to summarize and conclude this discussion of the prevention of venereal disease, which, though it may seem to the superficial observer to be merely a medical and sanitary question outside the psychologist's sphere, is yet seen on closer view to be intimately related even to the most spiritual conception of the sexual relationships. Not only are venereal diseases the foes to the finer development of the race, but we cannot attain to any wholesome and beautiful vision of the relationships of sex so long as such relationships are liable at every moment to be corrupted and undermined at their source. We cannot yet precisely measure the interval which must elapse before, so far as Europe at least is concerned, syphilis and gonorrhœa are sent to that limbo of monstrous old dead diseases to which plague and leprosy have gone and smallpox is already drawing near. But society is beginning to realize that into this field also must be brought the weapons of light and air, the sword and the breastplate with which all diseases can alone be attacked. As we have seen, there are four methods by which in the more enlightened countries venereal disease is now beginning to be combated.[255] (1) By proclaiming openly that the venereal diseases are diseases like any other disease, although more subtle and terrible than most, which may attack anyone from the unborn baby to its grandmother, and that they are not, more than other diseases, the shameful penalties of sin, from which relief is only to be sought, if at all, by stealth, but human calamities; (2) by adopting methods of securing official information concerning the extent, distribution, and variation of venereal disease, through the already recognized plan of notification and otherwise, and by providing such facilities for treatment, especially for free treatment, as may be found necessary; (3) by training the individual sense of moral responsibility, so that every member of the community may realize that to inflict a serious disease on another person, even only as a result of reckless negligence, is a more serious offence than if he or she had used the knife or the gun or poison as the method of attack, and that it is necessary to introduce special legal provision in every country to assist the recovery of damages for such injuries and to inflict penalties by loss of liberty or otherwise; (4) by the spread of hygienic knowledge, so that all adolescents, youths and girls alike, may be furnished at the outset of adult life with an equipment of information which will assist them to avoid the grosser risks of contamination and enable them to recognize and avoid danger at the earliest stages.
It’s time to wrap up and conclude this discussion about preventing venereal disease, which, while it might seem to the casual observer to be just a medical and sanitary issue outside the psychologist's realm, is in fact closely linked to even the most spiritual ideas about sexual relationships. Not only do venereal diseases hinder the more refined development of our species, but we can’t achieve any healthy and beautiful understanding of sexual relationships as long as those relationships are constantly at risk of being tainted and undermined from the very start. We can’t yet accurately measure how long it will take before, at least in Europe, syphilis and gonorrhea are relegated to the category of monstrous old diseases like plague and leprosy, which have already disappeared, and smallpox, which is getting close. However, society is starting to recognize that this field also needs to be addressed with tools of enlightenment and awareness, the armor and weapons necessary to fight all diseases. As we have seen, there are four methods that more progressive countries are beginning to use to combat venereal disease. (1) By openly stating that venereal diseases are illnesses like any others, though more insidious and severe than most, affecting everyone from unborn babies to grandmothers, and that they are not, like other diseases, shameful punishments for sin that can only be relieved—if at all—through secrecy, but are human tragedies; (2) by implementing official reporting methods to understand the extent, spread, and changes in venereal disease, using the already established notification system and other means, and ensuring that treatment facilities, especially free ones, are available as needed; (3) by fostering a sense of moral responsibility in individuals, so that everyone in the community understands that transmitting a serious disease to someone else, even out of reckless negligence, is a more serious offense than if they had attacked with a knife, gun, or poison, and that special legal measures need to be established in every country to help recover damages for such injuries and impose penalties, like loss of freedom; (4) by promoting hygienic knowledge so that all young people, both boys and girls, are equipped with information right at the start of adulthood that helps them avoid the greater risks of exposure and enables them to identify and steer clear of danger as early as possible.
A few years ago, when no method of combating venereal disease was known except that system of police regulation which is now in its decadence, it would have been impossible to bring forward such considerations as these; they would have seemed Utopian. To-day they are not only recognizable as practical, but they are being actually put into practice, although, it is true, with very varying energy and insight in different countries. Yet it is certain that in the competition of nationalities, as Max von Niessen has well said, "that country will best take a leading place in the march of civilization which has the foresight and courage to introduce and carry through those practical movements of sexual hygiene which have so wide and significant a bearing on its own future, and that of the human race generally."[256]
A few years ago, when there was no known way to fight venereal disease other than the outdated system of police regulation, it would have been impossible to bring up ideas like these; they would have seemed idealistic. Today, they are not only seen as practical but are actually being implemented, though, it's true, with varying degrees of energy and understanding in different countries. Still, it's clear that in the competition among nations, as Max von Niessen has pointed out, "the country that will best take a leading role in the advancement of civilization is the one that has the foresight and boldness to introduce and carry out those practical movements of sexual hygiene that have such wide and significant implications for its own future and that of humanity as a whole."[256]
It is probable that Schopenhauer felt a more than merely speculative interest in this matter. Bloch has shown good reason for believing that Schopenhauer himself contracted syphilis in 1813, and that this was a factor in constituting his conception of the world and in confirming his constitutional pessimism (Medizinische Klinik, Nos. 25 and 26, 1906).
It’s likely that Schopenhauer had a deeper interest in this issue than just intellectual curiosity. Bloch has provided strong evidence suggesting that Schopenhauer contracted syphilis in 1813, and that this played a role in shaping his view of the world and reinforcing his inherent pessimism (Medizinische Klinik, Nos. 25 and 26, 1906).
Havelburg, in Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, pp. 186-189.
Havelburg, in Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, pp. 186-189.
This is the very definite opinion of Lowndes after an experience of fifty-four years in the treatment of venereal diseases in Liverpool (British Medical Journal, Feb. 9, 1907, p. 334). It is further indicated by the fact (if it is a real fact) that since 1876 there has been a decline of both the infantile and general mortality from syphilis in England.
This is the clear opinion of Lowndes after fifty-four years of treating venereal diseases in Liverpool (British Medical Journal, Feb. 9, 1907, p. 334). It is also suggested by the fact (if it is indeed a fact) that since 1876, there has been a decrease in both infant and overall mortality rates from syphilis in England.
"There is no doubt whatever that syphilis is on the increase in London, judging from hospital work alone," says Pernet (British Medical Journal, March 30, 1907). Syphilis was evidently very prevalent, however, a century or two ago, and there is no ground for asserting positively that it is more prevalent to-day.
"There is no doubt that syphilis is increasing in London, based on hospital cases alone," says Pernet (British Medical Journal, March 30, 1907). Syphilis was clearly quite common a century or two ago, and there is no solid evidence to claim that it is more widespread today.
See, e.g., A. Neisser, Die experimentelle Syphilisforschung, 1906, and E. Hoffmann (who was associated with Schaudinn's discovery), Die Aetiologie der Syphilis, 1906; D'Arcy Power, A System of Syphilis, 1908, etc.; F. W. Mott, "Pathology of Syphilis in the Light of Modern Research," British Medical Journal, February 20, 1909; also, Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, vol. iv, 1909.
See, e.g., A. Neisser, Die experimentelle Syphilisforschung, 1906, and E. Hoffmann (who was involved with Schaudinn's discovery), Die Aetiologie der Syphilis, 1906; D'Arcy Power, A System of Syphilis, 1908, etc.; F. W. Mott, "Pathology of Syphilis in the Light of Modern Research," British Medical Journal, February 20, 1909; also, Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, vol. iv, 1909.
There is some difference of opinion on this point, and though it seems probable that early and thorough treatment usually cures the disease in a few years and renders further complications highly improbable, it is not possible, even under the most favorable circumstances, to speak with absolute certainty as to the future.
There are differing opinions on this matter, and while it seems likely that prompt and comprehensive treatment typically cures the illness within a few years and significantly reduces the chances of complications, it's impossible to predict the future with complete certainty, even in the best situations.
"That syphilis has been, and is, one of the chief causes of physical degeneration in England cannot be denied, and it is a fact that is acknowledged on all sides," writes Lieutenant-Colonel Lambkin, the medical officer in command of the London Military Hospital for Venereal Diseases. "To grapple with the treatment of syphilis among the civil population of England ought to be the chief object of those interested in that most burning question, the physical degeneration of our race" (British Medical Journal, August 19, 1905).
"That syphilis has been and continues to be one of the main causes of physical decline in England is undeniable, and this fact is recognized by everyone," writes Lieutenant-Colonel Lambkin, the medical officer in charge of the London Military Hospital for Venereal Diseases. "Addressing the treatment of syphilis among the civilian population in England should be the primary focus for those concerned about the urgent issue of our race's physical decline" (British Medical Journal, August 19, 1905).
F. W. Mott, "Syphilis as a Cause of Insanity," British Medical Journal, October 18, 1902.
F. W. Mott, "Syphilis as a Cause of Insanity," British Medical Journal, October 18, 1902.
It can seldom be proved in more than eighty per cent. of cases, but in twenty per cent. of old syphilitic cases it is commonly impossible to find traces of the disease or to obtain a history of it. Crocker found that it was only in eighty per cent. of cases of absolutely certain syphilitic skin diseases that he could obtain a history of syphilitic infection, and Mott found exactly the same percentage in absolutely certain syphilitic lesions of the brain; Mott believes (e.g., "Syphilis in Relation to the Nervous System," British Medical Journal, January 4, 1908) that syphilis is the essential cause of general paralysis and tabes.
It can rarely be proven in more than eighty percent of cases, but in twenty percent of old syphilitic cases, it's often impossible to find signs of the disease or get a history of it. Crocker discovered that he could only get a history of syphilitic infection in eighty percent of cases involving clearly diagnosed syphilitic skin diseases, and Mott found the same percentage in clearly identified syphilitic lesions of the brain. Mott believes (e.g., "Syphilis in Relation to the Nervous System," British Medical Journal, January 4, 1908) that syphilis is the main cause of general paralysis and tabes.
Audry. La Semaine Médicale, June 26, 1907. When Europeans carry syphilis to lands inhabited by people of lower race, the results are often very much worse than this. Thus Lambkin, as a result of a special mission to investigate syphilis in Uganda, found that in some districts as many as ninety per cent, of the people suffer from syphilis, and fifty to sixty per cent, of the infant mortality is due to this cause. These people are Baganda, a highly intelligent, powerful, and well-organized tribe before they received, in the gift of syphilis, the full benefit of civilization and Christianity, which (Lambkin points out) has been largely the cause of the spread of the disease by breaking down social customs and emancipating the women. Christianity is powerful enough to break down the old morality, but not powerful enough to build up a new morality (British Medical Journal, October 3, 1908, p. 1037).
Audry. La Semaine Médicale, June 26, 1907. When Europeans bring syphilis to countries inhabited by people of lower racial status, the outcomes are often significantly worse than this. For instance, Lambkin, during a special mission to investigate syphilis in Uganda, found that in some areas, up to ninety percent of the population is affected by syphilis, and fifty to sixty percent of infant deaths are attributed to this. These individuals belong to the Baganda, a highly intelligent, powerful, and well-organized tribe before they received, through the spread of syphilis, the complete impact of civilization and Christianity, which (Lambkin notes) has significantly contributed to the disease's spread by undermining social customs and granting freedom to women. Christianity is strong enough to dismantle the old moral standards but not capable of establishing a new moral framework (British Medical Journal, October 3, 1908, p. 1037).
Even within the limits of the English army it is found In India (H. C. French, Syphilis in the Army, 1907) that venereal disease is ten times more frequent among British troops than among Native troops. Outside of national armies it is found, by admission to hospital and death rates, that the United States stands far away at the head for frequency of venereal disease, being followed by Great Britain, then France and Austria-Hungary, Russia, and Germany.
Even within the ranks of the English army in India (H. C. French, Syphilis in the Army, 1907), it's noted that venereal disease is ten times more common among British troops than among native soldiers. In comparison to national armies, data from hospital admissions and death rates show that the United States has the highest rate of venereal disease, followed by Great Britain, France, Austria-Hungary, Russia, and Germany.
There is no dispute concerning the antiquity of gonorrhœa in the Old World as there is regarding syphilis. The disease was certainly known at a very remote period. Even Esarhaddon, the famous King of Assyria, referred to in the Old Testament, was treated by the priests for a disorder which, as described in the cuneiform documents of the time, could only have been gonorrhœa. The disease was also well known to the ancient Egyptians, and evidently common, for they recorded many prescriptions for its treatment (Oefele, "Gonorrhoe 1350 vor Christi Geburt," Monatshefte für Praktische Dermatologie, 1899, p. 260).
There is no argument about how long gonorrhea has been around in the Old World compared to syphilis. The disease was definitely known a very long time ago. Even Esarhaddon, the famous King of Assyria mentioned in the Old Testament, was treated by priests for a condition that, based on the descriptions in cuneiform documents from that time, could only have been gonorrhea. The disease was also well-known to the ancient Egyptians, and it was apparently quite common, as they documented many treatments for it (Oefele, "Gonorrhoe 1350 vor Christi Geburt," Monatshefte für Praktische Dermatologie, 1899, p. 260).
Cf. Memorandum by Sydney Stephenson, Report of Ophthalmia Neonatorum Committee, British Medical Journal, May 8, 1909.
Cf. Memorandum by Sydney Stephenson, Report of Ophthalmia Neonatorum Committee, British Medical Journal, May 8, 1909.
The extent of these evils is set forth, e.g., in a comprehensive essay by Taylor, American Journal Obstetrics, January, 1908.
The extent of these issues is outlined, e.g., in a detailed essay by Taylor, American Journal Obstetrics, January, 1908.
Neisser brings together figures bearing on the prevalence of gonorrhœa in Germany, Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. ii, pp. 486-492.
Neisser gathers data on the prevalence of gonorrhea in Germany, Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. ii, pp. 486-492.
Lancet, September 23, 1882. As regards women, Dr. Frances Ivens (British Medical Journal, June 19, 1909) has found at Liverpool that 14 per cent. of gynæcological cases revealed the presence of gonorrhœa. They were mostly poor respectable married women. This is probably a high proportion, as Liverpool is a busy seaport, but it is less than Sänger's estimate of 18 per cent.
Lancet, September 23, 1882. Regarding women, Dr. Frances Ivens (British Medical Journal, June 19, 1909) discovered in Liverpool that 14 percent of gynecological cases showed the presence of gonorrhea. Most of these were poor, respectable married women. This percentage is likely high, as Liverpool is a bustling seaport, but it is lower than Sänger's estimate of 18 percent.
E. H. Grandin, Medical Record, May 26, 1906.
E. H. Grandin, Medical Record, May 26, 1906.
E. W. Cushing, "Sociological Aspects of Gonorrhœa," Transactions American Gynecological Society, vol. xxii, 1897.
E. W. Cushing, "Sociological Aspects of Gonorrhea," Transactions American Gynecological Society, vol. xxii, 1897.
It is only in very small communities ruled by an autocratic power with absolute authority to control conditions and to examine persons of both sexes that reglementation becomes in any degree effectual. This is well shown by Dr. W. E. Harwood, who describes the system he organized in the mines of the Minnesota Iron Company (Journal American Medical Association, December 22, 1906). The women in the brothels on the company's estate were of the lowest class, and disease was very prevalent. Careful examination of the women was established, and control of the men, who, immediately on becoming diseased, were bound to declare by what woman they had been infected. The woman was responsible for the medical bill of the man she infected, and even for his board, if incapacitated, and the women were compelled to maintain a fund for their own hospital expenses when required. In this way venereal disease, though not entirely uprooted, was very greatly diminished.
It’s only in very small communities governed by an autocratic authority with total control over conditions and the ability to monitor both men and women that regulation becomes somewhat effective. Dr. W. E. Harwood illustrates this with the system he set up in the mines of the Minnesota Iron Company (Journal American Medical Association, December 22, 1906). The women in the brothels on the company’s property were from the lowest class, and disease was widespread. A thorough examination of the women was implemented, and the men were required to disclose which woman had infected them as soon as they became ill. The woman was held responsible for the man’s medical expenses and even for his living costs if he was unable to work, and the women had to contribute to a fund for their hospital expenses when needed. Through this approach, venereal disease, while not completely eliminated, was significantly reduced.
A clear and comprehensive statement of the present position of the question is given by Iwan Bloch, Das Sexualleben Unserer Zeit, Chs. XIII-XV. How ineffectual the system of police regulation is, even in Germany, where police interference is tolerated to so marked a degree, may be illustrated by the case of Mannheim. Here the regulation of prostitution is very severe and thorough, yet a careful inquiry in 1905 among the doctors of Mannheim (ninety-two of whom sent in detailed returns) showed that of six hundred cases of venereal disease in men, nearly half had been contracted from prostitutes. About half the remaining cases (nearly a quarter of the whole) were due to waitresses and bar-maids; then followed servant-girls (Lion and Loeb, in Sexualpädagogik, the Proceedings of the Third German Congress for Combating Venereal Diseases, 1907, p. 295).
A clear and detailed overview of the current state of the issue is provided by Iwan Bloch in Das Sexualleben Unserer Zeit, Chs. XIII-XV. The ineffectiveness of police regulations, even in Germany, where such interference is accepted to a significant extent, can be demonstrated through the case of Mannheim. Here, the regulation of prostitution is very strict and thorough, yet a careful investigation in 1905 among the doctors of Mannheim (ninety-two of whom submitted detailed reports) revealed that out of six hundred cases of venereal disease in men, nearly half had been contracted from prostitutes. About half of the remaining cases (close to a quarter of the total) were attributed to waitresses and barmaids, followed by servant girls (Lion and Loeb, in Sexualpädagogik, the Proceedings of the Third German Congress for Combating Venereal Diseases, 1907, p. 295).
A sixth less numerous class might be added of the young girls, often no more than children, who have been practically raped by men who believe that intercourse with a virgin is a cure for obstinate venereal disease. In America this belief is frequently held by Italians, Chinese, negroes, etc. W. Travis Gibb, Examining Physician of the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, has examined over 900 raped children (only a small proportion, he states, of the cases actually occurring), and finds that thirteen per cent have venereal diseases. A fairly large proportion of these cases, among girls from twelve to sixteen, are, he states, willing victims. Dr. Flora Pollack, also, of the Johns Hopkins Hospital Dispensary, estimates that in Baltimore alone from 800 to 1,000 children between the ages of one and fifteen are venereally infected every year. The largest number, she finds, is at the age of six, and the chief cause appears to be, not lust, but superstition.
A sixth, less numerous group could be added of young girls, often still just children, who have been practically raped by men who think that having sex with a virgin can cure stubborn venereal disease. In America, this belief is commonly held by Italians, Chinese, Black people, etc. W. Travis Gibb, the Examining Physician of the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, has examined over 900 raped children (which he notes is only a small fraction of the actual cases) and finds that thirteen percent have venereal diseases. A fairly large number of these cases, among girls aged twelve to sixteen, are, according to him, willing victims. Dr. Flora Pollack, from the Johns Hopkins Hospital Dispensary, also estimates that in Baltimore alone, between 800 and 1,000 children aged one to fifteen are infected with venereal diseases every year. She finds that the largest number are six years old, and the main cause seems to be, not lust, but superstition.
For a discussion of inherited syphilis, see, e.g., Clement Lucas, Lancet, February 1, 1908.
For a discussion of inherited syphilis, see, e.g., Clement Lucas, Lancet, February 1, 1908.
Much harm has been done in some countries by the foolish and mischievous practice of friendly societies and sick clubs of ignoring venereal diseases, and not according free medical aid or sick pay to those members who suffer from them. This practice prevailed, for instance, in Vienna until 1907, when a more humane and enlightened policy was inaugurated, venereal diseases being placed on the same level as other diseases.
Much harm has been caused in some countries by the misguided and harmful practice of friendly societies and sick clubs ignoring sexually transmitted infections and not providing free medical care or sick pay to members who are affected by them. This practice continued, for example, in Vienna until 1907, when a more compassionate and informed policy was introduced, putting sexually transmitted infections on the same level as other illnesses.
Active measures against venereal disease were introduced in Sweden early in the last century, and compulsory and gratuitous treatment established. Compulsory notification was introduced many years ago in Norway, and by 1907 there was a great diminution in the prevalence of venereal diseases; there is compulsory treatment.
Active measures against sexually transmitted diseases were implemented in Sweden early in the last century, along with free and mandatory treatment. Norway introduced mandatory reporting many years ago, and by 1907, there was a significant decrease in the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases; treatment is mandatory.
See, e.g., Morrow, Social Diseases and Marriage, Ch. XXXVII.
See, e.g. Morrow, Social Diseases and Marriage, Ch. XXXVII.
A committee of the Medical Society of New York, appointed in 1902 to consider this question, reported in favor of notification without giving names and addresses, and Dr. C. R. Drysdale, who took an active part in the Brussels International Conference of 1899, advocated a similar plan in England, British Medical Journal, February 3, 1900.
A committee from the Medical Society of New York, formed in 1902 to look into this issue, recommended notifying without revealing names and addresses. Dr. C. R. Drysdale, who played a significant role in the Brussels International Conference of 1899, supported a similar approach in England, British Medical Journal, February 3, 1900.
Thus in Munich, in 1908, a man who had given gonorrhœa to a servant-girl was sent to prison for ten months on this ground. The state of German opinion to-day on this subject is summarized by Bloch, Sexualleben unserer Zeit, p. 424.
Thus in Munich, in 1908, a man who had given gonorrhea to a servant girl was sentenced to ten months in prison for this reason. The current state of German opinion on this topic is summarized by Bloch, Sexualleben unserer Zeit, p. 424.
A. Després, La Prostitution à Paris, p. 191.
A. Then, Prostitution in Paris, p. 191.
F. Aurientis, Etude Medico-légale sur la jurisprudence actuelle à propos de la Transmission des Maladies Venériennes, Thèse de Paris, 1906.
F. Aurientis, Medical-Legal Study on Current Jurisprudence Regarding the Transmission of Venereal Diseases, Thesis of Paris, 1906.
In England at present "a husband knowingly and wilfully infecting his wife with the venereal disease, cannot be convicted criminally, either under a charge of assault or of inflicting grievous bodily harm" (N. Geary, The Law of Marriage, p. 479). This was decided in 1888 in the case of R. v. Clarence by nine judges to four judges in the Court for the Consideration of Crown Cases Reserved.
In England today, "a husband who knowingly and intentionally infects his wife with a sexually transmitted disease cannot be convicted criminally, whether under a charge of assault or of causing serious bodily harm" (N. Geary, The Law of Marriage, p. 479). This was determined in 1888 in the case of R. v. Clarence by a vote of nine judges to four in the Court for the Consideration of Crown Cases Reserved.
Modern democratic sentiment is opposed to the sequestration of a prostitute merely because she is diseased. But there can be no reasonable doubt whatever that if a diseased prostitute infects another person, and is unable to pay the very heavy damages which should be demanded in such a case, she ought to be secluded and subjected to treatment. That is necessary in the interests of the community. But it is also necessary, to avoid placing a premium on the commission of an offence which would ensure gratuitous treatment and provision for a prostitute without means, that she should be furnished with facilities for treatment in any case.
Modern democratic views oppose isolating a prostitute just because she has a disease. However, there is little doubt that if a diseased prostitute infects someone else and can't pay the substantial damages required in such a situation, she should be isolated and given treatment. This is important for the well-being of the community. Additionally, to prevent encouraging the commission of an offense that would guarantee free treatment and support for a prostitute without resources, she should be provided with treatment options in any case.
It has, however, been decided by the Paris Court of Appeal that for a husband to marry when knowingly suffering from a venereal disease and to communicate that disease to his wife is a sufficient cause for divorce (Semaine Médicale, May, 1896).
It has, however, been decided by the Paris Court of Appeal that for a husband to marry while knowingly having a venereal disease and to pass that disease on to his wife is a valid reason for divorce (Semaine Médicale, May, 1896).
The large volume, entitled Sexualpädagogik, containing the Proceedings of the Third of these Congresses, almost ignores the special subject of venereal disease, and is devoted to the questions involved by the general sexual education of the young, which, as many of the speakers maintained, must begin with the child at his mother's knee.
The large volume, titled Sexualpädagogik, which includes the Proceedings of the Third Congress, mostly overlooks the specific topic of venereal disease and focuses on the issues related to the overall sexual education of young people. Many of the speakers argued that this education should start with the child at their mother's knee.
"Workmen, soldiers, and so on," Neisser remarks (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. ii, p. 485), "can more easily find non-prostitute girls of their own class willing to enter into amorous relations with them which result in sexual intercourse, and they are therefore less exposed to the danger of infection than those men who have recourse almost exclusively to prostitutes" (see also Bloch, Sexualleben unserer Zeit, p. 437).
"Workers, soldiers, and others," Neisser states (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. ii, p. 485), "can more easily find non-prostitute women from their own social group who are willing to engage in romantic relationships that lead to sexual intercourse, and because of this, they are less at risk of infection than those men who primarily rely on prostitutes" (see also Bloch, Sexualleben unserer Zeit, p. 437).
The character and extent of such lectures are fully discussed in the Proceedings of the Third Congress of the German Society for Combating Venereal Diseases, Sexualpädagogik, 1907.
The nature and scope of these lectures are thoroughly examined in the Proceedings of the Third Congress of the German Society for Combating Venereal Diseases, Sexualpädagogik, 1907.
I leave out of account, as beyond the scope of the present work, the auxiliary aids to the suppression of venereal diseases furnished by the promising new methods, only now beginning to be understood, of treating or even aborting such diseases (see, e.g., Metchnikoff, The New Hygiene, 1906).
I won't consider, as it's outside the focus of this work, the additional tools for tackling venereal diseases provided by the promising new methods that are just beginning to be understood for treating or even terminating these diseases (see, e.g., Metchnikoff, The New Hygiene, 1906).
Max von Niessen, "Herr Doktor, darf ich heiraten?" Mutterschutz, 1906, p. 352.
Max von Niessen, "Mr. Doctor, may I get married?" Maternal Protection, 1906, p. 352.
CHAPTER IX.
SEXUAL MORALITY.
Prostitution in Relation to Our Marriage System—Marriage and Morality—The Definition of the Term "Morality"—Theoretical Morality—Its Division Into Traditional Morality and Ideal Morality—Practical Morality—Practical Morality Based on Custom—The Only Subject of Scientific Ethics—The Reaction Between Theoretical and Practical Morality—Sexual Morality in the Past an Application of Economic Morality—The Combined Rigidity and Laxity of This Morality—The Growth of a Specific Sexual Morality and the Evolution of Moral Ideals—Manifestations of Sexual Morality—Disregard of the Forms of Marriage—Trial Marriage—Marriage After Conception of Child—Phenomena in Germany, Anglo-Saxon Countries, Russia, etc.—The Status of Woman—The Historical Tendency Favoring Moral Equality of Women with Men—The Theory of the Matriarchate—Mother-Descent—Women in Babylonia—Egypt—Rome—The Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries—The Historical Tendency Favoring Moral Inequality of Woman—The Ambiguous Influence of Christianity—Influence of Teutonic Custom and Feudalism—Chivalry—Woman in England—The Sale of Wives—The Vanishing Subjection of Woman—Inaptitude of the Modern Man to Domineer—The Growth of Moral Responsibility in Women—The Concomitant Development of Economic Independence—The Increase of Women Who Work—Invasion of the Modern Industrial Field by Women—In How Far This Is Socially Justifiable—The Sexual Responsibility of Women and Its Consequences—The Alleged Moral Inferiority of Women—The "Self-Sacrifice" of Women—Society Not Concerned with Sexual Relationships—Procreation the Sole Sexual Concern of the State—The Supreme Importance of Maternity.
Prostitution and Our Marriage System—Marriage and Morality—What "Morality" Means—Theoretical Morality—Divided into Traditional Morality and Ideal Morality—Practical Morality—Practical Morality Based on Custom—The Only Focus of Scientific Ethics—The Interaction Between Theoretical and Practical Morality—Sexual Morality in the Past as a Reflection of Economic Morality—The Mixed Rigidity and Flexibility of This Morality—The Development of Specific Sexual Morality and the Progress of Moral Ideals—Expressions of Sexual Morality—Disregard for Marriage Structures—Trial Marriage—Marriage After a Child is Conceived—Trends in Germany, Anglo-Saxon Countries, Russia, etc.—The Status of Women—The Historical Shift Toward Moral Equality Between Women and Men—The Matriarchate Theory—Mother-Descent—Women in Babylon, Egypt, Rome—The Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries—The Historical Shift Toward Moral Inequality of Women—The Mixed Impact of Christianity—Effects of Teutonic Customs and Feudalism—Chivalry—Women in England—The Sale of Wives—The Diminishing Subjugation of Women—The Modern Man's Inability to Dominate—The Rise of Women's Moral Responsibility—The Concurrent Rise of Economic Independence—The Growing Number of Working Women—Women's Entry into the Modern Industrial Workforce—Whether This Is Socially Justifiable—Women's Sexual Responsibility and Its Outcomes—The Claims of Women's Moral Inferiority—The "Self-Sacrifice" of Women—Society's Indifference to Sexual Relationships—Procreation as the Only Sexual Concern of the State—The Critical Importance of Motherhood.
It has been necessary to deal fully with the phenomena of prostitution because, however aloof we may personally choose to hold ourselves from those phenomena, they really bring us to the heart of the sexual question in so far as it constitutes a social problem. If we look at prostitution from the outside, as an objective phenomenon, as a question of social dynamics, it is seen to be not a merely accidental and eliminable incident of our present marriage system but an integral part of it, without which it would fall to pieces. This will probably be fairly clear to all who have followed the preceding exposition of prostitutional phenomena. There is, however, more than this to be said. Not only is prostitution to-day, as it has been for more than two thousand years, the buttress of our marriage system, but if we look at marriage, not from the outside as a formal institution, but from the inside with relation to the motives that constitute it, we find that marriage in a large proportion of cases is itself in certain respects a form of prostitution. This has been emphasized so often and from so many widely different standpoints that it may seem hardly necessary to labor the point here. But the point is one of extreme importance in relation to the question of sexual morality. Our social conditions are unfavorable to the development of a high moral feeling in woman. The difference between the woman who sells herself in prostitution and the woman who sells herself in marriage, according to the saying of Marro already quoted, "is only a difference in price and duration of the contract." Or, as Forel puts it, marriage is "a more fashionable form of prostitution," that is to say, a mode of obtaining, or disposing of, for monetary considerations, a sexual commodity. Marriage is, indeed, not merely a more fashionable form of prostitution, it is a form sanctified by law and religion, and the question of morality is not allowed to intrude. Morality may be outraged with impunity provided that law and religion have been invoked. The essential principle of prostitution is thus legalized and sanctified among us. That is why it is so difficult to arouse any serious indignation, or to maintain any reasoned objections, against our prostitution considered by itself. The most plausible ground is that of those[257] who, bringing marriage down to the level of prostitution, maintain that the prostitute is a "blackleg" who is accepting less than the "market rate of wages," i.e., marriage, for the sexual services she renders. But even this low ground is quite unsafe. The prostitute is really paid extremely well considering how little she gives in return; the wife is really paid extremely badly considering how much she often gives, and how much she necessarily gives up. For the sake of the advantage of economic dependence on her husband, she must give up, as Ellen Key observes, those rights over her children, her property, her work, and her own person which she enjoys as an unmarried woman, even, it may be added, as a prostitute. The prostitute never signs away the right over her own person, as the wife is compelled to do; the prostitute, unlike the wife, retains her freedom and her personal rights, although these may not often be of much worth. It is the wife rather than the prostitute who is the "blackleg."
It has been necessary to address the phenomenon of prostitution because, no matter how detached we might choose to be from it, it really gets to the core of the sexual question as a social issue. When we observe prostitution objectively, as a matter of social dynamics, it becomes clear that it is not just an accidental or avoidable aspect of our current marriage system, but rather a crucial component of it; without it, the entire system would crumble. This should be evident to anyone who has followed the earlier discussion on prostitution. However, there’s more to consider. Prostitution today, just as it has been for over two thousand years, supports our marriage system. But if we examine marriage not as a formal institution from the outside, but from within concerning its underlying motives, we find that, in many cases, marriage itself is in some ways a type of prostitution. This point has been emphasized so frequently from various perspectives that it may seem unnecessary to stress it further here. However, it’s extremely important in relation to the question of sexual morality. Our social conditions are not conducive to developing a strong moral sense in women. The difference between a woman who sells herself through prostitution and one who sells herself through marriage, as previously stated by Marro, "is only a difference in price and duration of the contract." Or, as Forel puts it, marriage is "a more fashionable form of prostitution," meaning it’s a way to obtain or exchange sexual services for monetary compensation. Marriage is not only a more fashionable form of prostitution; it is a form that is legitimized by law and religion, and the question of morality is not permitted to interfere. Morality can be disregarded as long as both law and religion have been invoked. The fundamental principle of prostitution is thus institutionalized and sanctioned in our society. This is why it’s so hard to spark any serious outrage or maintain any well-reasoned objections against prostitution on its own. The strongest argument comes from those who, by equating marriage with prostitution, claim that the prostitute is a "blackleg" for accepting less than the "market rate," which is marriage, for her sexual services. But even this argument is quite shaky. The prostitute is actually compensated very well for the minimal she provides; the wife, on the other hand, is compensated poorly for what she often gives and what she has to sacrifice. For the sake of the economic dependence on her husband, she must forfeit, as Ellen Key points out, her rights over her children, her property, her work, and her own body, which she retains as an unmarried woman or even as a prostitute. The prostitute never relinquishes her rights over her own body as the wife is forced to; the prostitute retains her freedom and personal rights, although they may not always hold much value. It is the wife, rather than the prostitute, who can be considered the "blackleg."
It is by no means only during recent years that our marriage system has been arraigned before the bar of morals. Forty years ago James Hinton exhausted the vocabulary of denunciation in describing the immorality and selfish licentiousness which our marriage system covers with the cloak of legality and sanctity. "There is an unsoundness in our marriage relations," Hinton wrote. "Not only practically are they dreadful, but they do not answer to feelings and convictions far too widespread to be wisely ignored. Take the case of women of marked eminence consenting to be a married man's mistress; of pure and simple girls saying they cannot see why they should have a marriage by law; of a lady saying that if she were in love she would not have any legal tie; of its being necessary—or thought so by good and wise men—to keep one sex in bitter and often fatal ignorance. These things (and how many more) show some deep unsoundness in the marriage relations. This must be probed and searched to the bottom."
It’s not just in recent years that our marriage system has been put under moral scrutiny. Forty years ago, James Hinton used strong language to describe the immorality and selfishness that our marriage system hides behind the facade of legality and respectability. "There is something fundamentally wrong with our marriage relationships," Hinton wrote. "Not only are they practically terrible, but they also fail to align with feelings and beliefs that are too widespread to ignore. Consider the cases of accomplished women who agree to be a married man's mistress; of innocent girls who say they don’t see the point in having a legal marriage; of a woman asserting that if she were in love, she wouldn’t want any legal commitment; and of the necessity—or the belief among good and wise people—that one gender should remain in painful and often deadly ignorance. These issues (and many more) reveal a profound flaw in marriage relations. This needs to be thoroughly examined."
At an earlier date, in 1847, Gross-Hoffinger, in his Die Schicksale der Frauen und die Prostitution—a remarkable book which Bloch, with little exaggeration, describes as possessing an epoch-marking significance—vigorously showed that the problem of prostitution is in reality the problem of marriage, and that we can only reform away prostitution by reforming marriage, regarded as a compulsory institution resting on an antiquated economic basis. Gross-Hoffinger was a pioneering precursor of Ellen Key.
At an earlier time, in 1847, Gross-Hoffinger, in his Die Schicksale der Frauen und die Prostitution—a remarkable book that Bloch, with little exaggeration, describes as having significant historical importance—vigorously demonstrated that the issue of prostitution is actually the issue of marriage, and that we can only eliminate prostitution by reforming marriage, which is viewed as a compulsory institution built on an outdated economic foundation. Gross-Hoffinger was a pioneering predecessor of Ellen Key.
More than a century and a half earlier a man of very different type scathingly analyzed the morality of his time, with a brutal frankness, indeed, that seemed to his contemporaries a revoltingly cynical attitude towards their sacred institutions, and they felt that nothing was left to them save to burn his books. Describing modern marriage in his Fable of the Bees (1714, p. 64), and what that marriage might legally cover, Mandeville wrote: "The fine gentleman I spoke of need not practice any greater self-denial than the savage, and the latter acted more according to the laws of nature and sincerity than the first. The man that gratifies his appetite after the manner the custom of the country allows of, has no censure to fear. If he is hotter than goats or bulls, as soon as the ceremony is over, let him sate and fatigue himself with joy and ecstasies of pleasure, raise and indulge his appetite by turns, as extravagantly as his strength and manhood will give him leave. He may, with safety, laugh at the wise men that should reprove him: all the women and above nine in ten of the men are of his side; nay, he has the liberty of valuing himself upon the fury of his unbridled passions, and the more he wallows in lust and strains every faculty to be abandonedly voluptuous, the sooner he shall have the good-will and gain the affection of the women, not the young, vain, and lascivious only, but the prudent, grave, and most sober matrons."
More than a century and a half ago, a man of a very different kind sharply critiqued the morality of his time with such brutal honesty that it seemed to his contemporaries like a disgustingly cynical view of their cherished institutions, leading them to feel that their only option was to burn his books. In his Fable of the Bees (1714, p. 64), while describing modern marriage and what that marriage could legally encompass, Mandeville wrote: "The fine gentleman I mentioned doesn’t need to practice any more self-denial than a savage, and the latter acts more in accordance with the laws of nature and honesty than the former. A man who satisfies his desires in the way that local customs allow has nothing to fear from criticism. If he’s more passionate than goats or bulls, as soon as the ceremony is over, let him indulge and exhaust himself with joy and pleasure, alternating between raising and satisfying his desires as extravagantly as his strength and masculinity will permit. He can safely laugh at the wise people who would scold him: all the women and more than nine out of ten men are on his side; in fact, he has the freedom to take pride in the intensity of his uncontrolled passions, and the more he indulges in lust and pushes every limit to be recklessly sensual, the quicker he will win the favor and affection of women, not just the young, vain, and lustful, but also the wise, serious, and most respectable matrons."
Thus the charge brought against our marriage system from the point of view of morality is that it subordinates the sexual relationship to considerations of money and of lust. That is precisely the essence of prostitution.
Thus, the criticism of our marriage system from a moral standpoint is that it prioritizes the sexual relationship based on financial issues and desire. That is exactly what defines prostitution.
The only legitimately moral end of marriage—whether we regard it from the wider biological standpoint or from the narrower standpoint of human society—is as a sexual selection, effected in accordance with the laws of sexual selection, and having as its direct object a united life of complete mutual love and as its indirect object the procreation of the race. Unless procreation forms part of the object of marriage, society has nothing whatever to do with it and has no right to make its voice heard. But if procreation is one of the ends of marriage, then it is imperative from the biological and social points of view that no influences outside the proper natural influence of sexual selection should be permitted to affect the choice of conjugal partners, for in so far as wholesome sexual selection is interfered with the offspring is likely to be injured and the interests of the race affected.
The only truly moral purpose of marriage—whether we look at it from a broader biological perspective or a more focused view of human society—is as a means of sexual selection, guided by the rules of sexual selection, with the primary aim of living a life of complete mutual love and the secondary aim of procreating. If procreation isn't part of the purpose of marriage, then society has no stake in it and shouldn't have a say. However, if procreation is one of marriage's objectives, it's crucial from both biological and social viewpoints that no influences outside the natural process of sexual selection interfere with the choice of partners. Interfering with healthy sexual selection can harm the offspring and affect the future of the race.
It must, of course, be clearly understood that the idea of marriage as a form of sexual union based not on biological but on economic considerations, is very ancient, and is sometimes found in societies that are almost primitive. Whenever, however, marriage on a purely property basis, and without due regard to sexual selection, has occurred among comparatively primitive and vigorous peoples, it has been largely deprived of its evil results by the recognition of its merely economic character, and by the absence of any desire to suppress, even nominally, other sexual relationships on a more natural basis which were outside this artificial form of marriage. Polygamy especially tended to conciliate unions on an economic basis with unions on a natural sexual basis. Our modern marriage system has, however, acquired an artificial rigidity which excludes the possibility of this natural safeguard and compensation. Whatever its real moral content may be, a modern marriage is always "legal" and "sacred." We are indeed so accustomed to economic forms of marriage that, as Sidgwick truly observed (Method of Ethics, Bk. ii, Ch. XI), when they are spoken of as "legalized prostitution" it constantly happens that "the phrase is felt to be extravagant and paradoxical."
It must be clearly understood that the concept of marriage as a form of sexual union based not on biological factors but on economic considerations is very old and can sometimes be found in societies that are almost primitive. Whenever marriage has occurred purely for property reasons, without proper consideration of sexual attraction, among relatively primitive and vigorous people, it has largely avoided negative repercussions due to the acknowledgment of its merely economic nature and the lack of desire to suppress, even nominally, other natural sexual relationships that were outside this artificial type of marriage. Polygamy, in particular, tended to balance economic unions with natural sexual unions. However, our modern marriage system has become artificially rigid, eliminating the possibility of this natural safeguard and compensation. Regardless of its actual moral implications, modern marriage is always seen as "legal" and "sacred." We are so accustomed to economic forms of marriage that, as Sidgwick rightly noted (Method of Ethics, Bk. ii, Ch. XI), when they are referred to as "legalized prostitution," it often seems "extravagant and paradoxical."
A man who marries for money or for ambition is departing from the biological and moral ends of marriage. A woman who sells herself for life is morally on the same level as one who sells herself for a night. The fact that the payment seems larger, that in return for rendering certain domestic services and certain personal complacencies—services and complacencies in which she may be quite inexpert—she will secure an almshouse in which she will be fed and clothed and sheltered for life makes no difference in the moral aspect of her case. The moral responsibility is, it need scarcely be said, at least as much the man's as the woman's. It is largely due to the ignorance and even the indifference of men, who often know little or nothing of the nature of women and the art of love. The unintelligence with which even men who might, one thinks, be not without experience, select as a mate, a woman who, however fine and charming she may be, possesses none of the qualities which her wooer really craves, is a perpetual marvel. To refrain from testing and proving the temper and quality of the woman he desires for a mate is no doubt an amiable trait of humility on a man's part. But it is certain that a man should never be content with less than the best of what a woman's soul and body have to give, however unworthy he may feel himself of such a possession. This demand, it must be remarked, is in the highest interests of the woman herself. A woman can offer to a man what is a part at all events of the secret of the universe. The woman degrades herself who sinks to the level of a candidate for an asylum for the destitute.
A man who marries for money or ambition is straying from the true biological and moral purposes of marriage. A woman who sells herself for life is morally on the same level as one who sells herself for a night. The fact that the payment seems greater, and that in exchange for providing certain domestic services and some forms of personal satisfaction—services and satisfaction in which she may not have much skill—she will secure a place where she will be fed, clothed, and sheltered for life doesn’t change the moral implications of her situation. It’s important to note that the moral responsibility lies as much with the man as with the woman. This is largely due to the ignorance and indifference of men, who often know very little about women and the art of love. It's astonishing how even men who might be somewhat experienced choose a mate who, no matter how lovely and charming she is, lacks the qualities that the man truly desires. Waiting to assess the temperament and nature of the woman he wants as a partner might be seen as a humble trait, but it's certain that a man should never settle for anything less than the best that a woman's soul and body can offer, regardless of how unworthy he feels of such a gift. This expectation, it’s worth noting, ultimately serves the best interests of the woman herself. A woman can provide a man with a glimpse of the secrets of the universe. A woman devalues herself when she lowers her standards to become someone seeking help in a shelter for the destitute.
Our discussion of the psychic facts of sex has thus, it will be seen, brought us up to the question of morality. Over and over again, in setting forth the phenomena of prostitution, it has been necessary to use the word "moral." That word, however, is vague and even, it may be, misleading because it has several senses. So far, it has been left to the intelligent reader, as he will not fail to perceive, to decide from the context in what sense the word was used. But at the present point, before we proceed to discuss sexual psychology in relation to marriage, it is necessary, in order to avoid ambiguity, to remind the reader what precisely are the chief main senses in which the word "morality" is commonly used.
Our discussion of the psychological aspects of sex has now led us to the topic of morality. Repeatedly, while explaining the phenomena of prostitution, we've had to use the word "moral." However, that word is vague and can even be misleading because it has multiple meanings. Until now, it's been up to the intelligent reader to determine from the context the meaning intended. But at this point, before we dive into sexual psychology in relation to marriage, it's important, to avoid confusion, to clarify the main meanings of the word "morality" as it is commonly used.
The morality with which ethical treatises are concerned is theoretical morality. It is concerned with what people "ought"—or what is "right" for them—to do. Socrates in the Platonic dialogues was concerned with such theoretical morality: what "ought" people to seek in their actions? The great bulk of ethical literature, until recent times one may say the whole of it, is concerned with that question. Such theoretical morality is, as Sidgwick said, a study rather than a science, for science can only be based on what is, not on what ought to be.
The morality that ethical discussions focus on is theoretical morality. It’s about what people "ought" to do or what is "right" for them. Socrates, in the Platonic dialogues, examined this theoretical morality: what "ought" people to aim for in their actions? Most ethical literature, until recent times arguably all of it, addresses that question. This theoretical morality is, as Sidgwick pointed out, more of a study than a science, because science can only be grounded in what exists, not in what should be.
Even within the sphere of theoretical morality there are two very different kinds of morality, so different indeed that sometimes each regards the other as even inimical or at best only by courtesy, with yet a shade of contempt, "moral." These two kinds of theoretical morality are traditional morality and ideal morality. Traditional morality is founded on the long established practices of a community and possesses the stability of all theoretical ideas based in the past social life and surrounding every individual born into the community from his earliest years. It becomes the voice of conscience which speaks automatically in favor of all the rules that are thus firmly fixed, even when the individual himself no longer accepts them. Many persons, for example, who were brought up in childhood to the Puritanical observance of Sunday, will recall how, long after they had ceased to believe that such observances were "right," they yet in the violation of them heard the protest of the automatically aroused voice of "conscience," that is to say the expression within the individual of customary rules which have indeed now ceased to be his own but were those of the community in which he was brought up.
Even in the realm of theoretical morality, there are two very distinct types of morality, so different that sometimes each views the other as hostile or, at best, only morally acceptable out of politeness, with a hint of contempt. These two types of theoretical morality are traditional morality and ideal morality. Traditional morality is built on the long-standing practices of a community and has the consistency of all theoretical concepts rooted in past social life, surrounding every individual from early childhood. It becomes the voice of conscience that automatically advocates for all the rules that are firmly established, even when the individual no longer adheres to them. For instance, many people raised with strict Puritanical Sunday observances will remember that long after they stopped believing those practices were "right," they still felt the internal protest of that automatically triggered voice of "conscience." This represents the expression of customary rules that have indeed now ceased to be their own but were those of the community in which they were raised.
Ideal morality, on the other hand, refers not to the past of the community but to its future. It is based not on the old social actions that are becoming antiquated, and perhaps even anti-social in their tendency, but on new social actions that are as yet only practiced by a small though growing minority of the community. Nietzsche in modern times has been a conspicuous champion of ideal morality, the heroic morality of the pioneer, of the individual of the coming community, against traditional morality, or, as he called it, herd-morality, the morality of the crowd. These two moralities are necessarily opposed to each other, but, we have to remember, they are both equally sound and equally indispensable, not only to those who accept them but to the community which they both contribute to hold in vital theoretical balance. We have seen them both, for instance, applied to the question of prostitution; traditional morality defends prostitution, not for its own sake, but for the sake of the marriage system which it regards as sufficiently precious to be worth a sacrifice, while ideal morality refuses to accept the necessity of prostitution, and looks forward to progressive changes in the marriage system which will modify and diminish prostitution.
Ideal morality, on the other hand, focuses on the community's future rather than its past. It's grounded not in outdated social practices that are becoming obsolete and possibly even harmful, but in new social actions that are currently only embraced by a small, yet growing, segment of the community. In modern times, Nietzsche has been a prominent advocate for ideal morality—the bold morality of the pioneer and the individual of the future community—against traditional morality, which he referred to as herd morality, the morality of the crowd. These two moralities naturally oppose each other, but we must remember that both are equally valid and essential, not only for those who embrace them but also for the community that relies on them to maintain a vital theoretical balance. For example, we've seen both applied to the issue of prostitution; traditional morality supports prostitution, not for its own sake, but to uphold the marriage system, which it considers valuable enough to warrant a sacrifice. In contrast, ideal morality rejects the necessity of prostitution and anticipates progressive changes in the marriage system that will reduce and transform prostitution.
But altogether outside theoretical morality, or the question of what people "ought" to do, there remains practical morality, or the question of what, as a matter of fact, people actually do. This is the really fundamental and essential morality. Latin mores and Greek ἠθος both refer to custom, to the things that are, and not to the things that "ought" to be, except in the indirect and secondary sense that whatever the members of the community, in the mass, actually do, is the thing that they feel they ought to do. In the first place, however, a moral act was not done because it was felt that it ought to be done, but for reasons of a much deeper and more instinctive character.[258] It was not first done because it was felt it ought to be done, but it was felt it "ought" to be done because it had actually become the custom to do it.
But completely apart from theoretical morality, or the question of what people "should" do, there exists practical morality, or the question of what people actually do, in reality. This represents the truly fundamental and essential morality. The Latin term mores and the Greek ἠθος both refer to custom—to what is, rather than what "should" be—except in the indirect and secondary sense that whatever the members of the community actually do is what they believe they should do. Initially, however, a moral act isn’t done because it’s thought to be the right thing; it’s done for reasons that are much deeper and more instinctual in nature.[258] It was not done first because it was felt it should be done, but rather it was felt it "should" be done because it had actually become the custom to do so.
The actions of a community are determined by the vital needs of a community under the special circumstances of its culture, time, and land. When it is the general custom for children to kill their aged parents that custom is always found to be the best not only for the community but even for the old people themselves, who desire it; the action is both practically moral and theoretically moral.[259] And when, as among ourselves, the aged are kept alive, that action is also both practically and theoretically moral; it is in no wise dependent on any law or rule opposed to the taking of life, for we glory in the taking of life under the patriotic name of "war," and are fairly indifferent to it when involved by the demands of our industrial system; but the killing of the aged no longer subserves any social need and their preservation ministers to our civilized emotional needs. The killing of a man is indeed notoriously an act which differs widely in its moral value at different periods and in different countries. It was quite moral in England two centuries ago and less, to kill a man for trifling offences against property, for such punishment commended itself as desirable to the general sense of the educated community. To-day it would be regarded as highly immoral. We are even yet only beginning to doubt the morality of condemning to death and imprisoning for life an unmarried girl who destroyed her infant at birth, solely actuated, against all her natural impulses, by the primitive instinct of self-defense. It cannot be said that we have yet begun to doubt the morality of killing men in war, though we no longer approve of killing women and children, or even non-combatants generally. Every age or land has its own morality.
The actions of a community are shaped by its essential needs considering the unique aspects of its culture, time, and place. When it becomes a common practice for children to kill their elderly parents, that practice is seen as beneficial not just for the community but also for the elderly themselves, who often want it; this action is both practically and theoretically moral.[259] Similarly, when, as in our society, older people are allowed to live, that action is also both practically and theoretically moral; it's not reliant on any laws or rules against taking life. We take pride in taking life under the patriotic label of "war," and we are quite indifferent to it when it comes to the demands of our industrial system. However, the killing of the elderly no longer meets any social need, while keeping them alive caters to our civilized emotional needs. Taking a life is famously an act that varies greatly in its moral implications across different eras and countries. In England, two centuries ago and less, it was quite acceptable to kill a person for minor property offenses, as such punishment was regarded as fitting by the educated community. Today, it would be seen as very immoral. We are just starting to question the morality of sentencing an unmarried girl to death or life imprisonment for killing her infant at birth, driven by her basic instinct for self-defense against all her natural feelings. We cannot say that we have yet begun to question the morality of killing men in war, although we no longer justify killing women and children or even non-combatants in general. Each age or place has its own morality.
"Custom, in the strict sense of the word," well says Westermarck, "involves a moral rule.... Society is the school in which men learn to distinguish between right and wrong. The headmaster is custom."[260] Custom is not only the basis of morality but also of law. "Custom is law."[261] The field of theoretical morality has been found so fascinating a playground for clever philosophers that there has sometimes been a danger of forgetting that, after all, it is not theoretical morality but practical morality, the question of what men in the mass of a community actually do, which constitutes the real stuff of morals.[262] If we define more precisely what we mean by morals, on the practical side, we may say that it is constituted by those customs which the great majority of the members of a community regard as conducive to the welfare of the community at some particular time and place. It is for this reason—i.e., because it is a question of what is and not of merely what some think ought to be—that practical morals form the proper subject of science. "If the word 'ethics' is to be used as the name for a science," Westermarck says, "the object of that science can only be to study the moral consciousness as a fact."[263]
"Custom, in the strict sense of the term," as Westermarck insightfully points out, "involves a moral rule.... Society is the place where people learn to differentiate between right and wrong. The headmaster is custom."[260] Custom is not only the foundation of morality but also of law. "Custom is law."[261] The realm of theoretical morality has been such an intriguing playground for clever philosophers that there’s sometimes a risk of overlooking the fact that, ultimately, it’s not theoretical morality but practical morality—the question of what people in a community actually do—that truly represents the essence of morals.[262] If we define more clearly what we mean by morals in a practical sense, we can say they consist of those customs that the vast majority of community members believe contribute to the well-being of the community at a specific time and place. This is why—i.e., because it concerns what is rather than what some think should be—practical morals are the appropriate subject for scientific study. "If the term 'ethics' is to be used as the name for a science," Westermarck states, "the goal of that science must be to study moral consciousness as a fact."[263]
Lecky's History of European Morals is a study in practical rather than in theoretical morals. Dr. Westermarck's great work, The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, is a more modern example of the objectively scientific discussion of morals, although this is not perhaps clearly brought out by the title. It is essentially a description of the actual historical facts of what has been, and not of what "ought" to be. Mr. L. T. Hobhouse's Morals in Evolution, published almost at the same time, is similarly a work which, while professedly dealing with ideas, i.e., with rules and regulations, and indeed disclaiming the task of being "the history of conduct," yet limits itself to those rules which are "in fact, the normal conduct of the average man" (vol. i, p. 26). In other words, it is essentially a history of practical morality, and not of theoretical morality. One of the most subtle and suggestive of living thinkers, M. Jules de Gaultier, in several of his books, and notably in La Dépendance de la Morale et l'Indépendance des Mœurs (1907), has analyzed the conception of morals in a somewhat similar sense. "Phenomena relative to conduct," as he puts it (op. cit., p. 58), "are given in experience like other phenomena, so that morality, or the totality of the laws which at any given moment of historic evolution are applied to human practice, is dependent on customs." I may also refer to the masterly exposition of this aspect of morality in Lévy-Bruhl's La Morale et la Science des Mœurs (there is an English translation).
Lecky's History of European Morals is a study of practical rather than theoretical morals. Dr. Westermarck's significant work, The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, serves as a more contemporary example of an objective scientific discussion about morals, although this might not be immediately obvious from the title. It essentially describes the actual historical facts of what has been, rather than what "ought" to be. Mr. L. T. Hobhouse's Morals in Evolution, published around the same time, similarly addresses ideas—i.e., rules and regulations—and explicitly states that it is not "the history of conduct," yet focuses on those rules that represent "the normal conduct of the average man" (vol. i, p. 26). In other words, it's fundamentally a history of practical morality, not theoretical morality. One of the most insightful contemporary thinkers, M. Jules de Gaultier, has examined the concept of morals in a somewhat similar way in several of his books, particularly in La Dépendance de la Morale et l'Indépendance des Mœurs (1907). He states, "Phenomena related to conduct," as he phrases it (op. cit., p. 58), "are presented in experience like other phenomena, so that morality, or the totality of the laws applied to human practice at any point in historical evolution, depends on customs." I should also mention the masterful exploration of this aspect of morality in Lévy-Bruhl's La Morale et la Science des Mœurs (there is an English translation).
Practical morality is thus the solid natural fact which forms the biological basis of theoretical morality, whether traditional or ideal. The excessive fear, so widespread among us, lest we should injure morality is misplaced. We cannot hurt morals though we can hurt ourselves. Morals is based on nature and can at the most only be modified. As Crawley rightly insists,[264] even the categorical imperatives of our moral traditions, so far from being, as is often popularly supposed, attempts to suppress Nature, arise in the desire to assist Nature; they are simply an attempt at the rigid formulation of natural impulses. The evil of them only lies in the fact that, like all things that become rigid and dead, they tend to persist beyond the period when they were a beneficial vital reaction to the environment. They thus provoke new forms of ideal morality; and practical morals develops new structures, in accordance with new vital relationships, to replace older and desiccated traditions.
Practical morality is, therefore, the solid natural fact that underpins the biological basis of theoretical morality, whether it's traditional or ideal. The widespread fear among us of damaging morality is unfounded. We can’t harm morals, but we can harm ourselves. Morals are grounded in nature and can only be adjusted at most. As Crawley rightly points out,[264] even the absolute rules of our moral traditions, contrary to popular belief, are not attempts to suppress Nature; instead, they arise from the desire to support Nature. They are merely an effort to clearly define natural impulses. The problem with them is that, like anything that becomes rigid and lifeless, they tend to stick around longer than when they were a helpful response to the environment. This, in turn, sparks new forms of ideal morality; and practical morals evolve new structures in line with new vital relationships to replace older, stagnant traditions.
There is clearly an intimate relationship between theoretical morals and practical morals or morality proper. For not only is theoretical morality the outcome in consciousness of realized practices embodied in the general life of the community, but, having thus become conscious, it reacts on those practices and tends to support them or, by its own spontaneous growth, to modify them. This action is diverse, according as we are dealing with one or the other of the strongly marked divisions of theoretical morality: traditional and posterior morality, retarding the vital growth of moral practice, or ideal and anterior morality, stimulating the vital growth of moral practice. Practical morality, or morals proper, may be said to stand between these two divisions of theoretical morality. Practice is perpetually following after anterior theoretical morality, in so far of course as ideal morality really is anterior and not, as so often happens, astray up a blind alley. Posterior or traditional morality always follows after practice. The result is that while the actual morality, in practice at any time or place, is always closely related to theoretical morality, it can never exactly correspond to either of its forms. It always fails to catch up with ideal morality; it is always outgrowing traditional morality.
There is clearly a close relationship between theoretical morals and practical morals, or morality in general. Theoretical morality is not just the result of conscious awareness of practices that are rooted in the community's way of life; once it becomes conscious, it influences those practices, either reinforcing them or, through its natural evolution, changing them. This relationship varies depending on whether we’re looking at one of the distinct branches of theoretical morality: traditional and posterior morality, which can hinder the growth of moral practice, or ideal and anterior morality, which encourages that growth. Practical morality, or real-world morals, can be seen as being situated between these two branches of theoretical morality. Practice constantly tries to catch up with anterior theoretical morality, as long as that ideal morality is indeed prior and not often misguided. In contrast, posterior or traditional morality always trails behind practice. As a result, actual morality in practice at any given time or place is always closely tied to theoretical morality, but it can never perfectly match either of its forms. It consistently struggles to reach ideal morality while continually outgrowing traditional morality.
It has been necessary at this point to formulate definitely the three chief forms in which the word "moral" is used, although under one shape or another they cannot but be familiar to the reader. In the discussion of prostitution it has indeed been easily possible to follow the usual custom of allowing the special sense in which the word was used to be determined by the context. But now, when we are, for the moment, directly concerned with the specific question of the evolution of sexual morality, it is necessary to be more precise in formulating the terms we use. In this chapter, except when it is otherwise stated, we are concerned primarily with morals proper, with actual conduct as it develops among the masses of a community, and only secondarily with anterior morality or with posterior morality.
It’s important at this stage to clearly define the three main ways the word "moral" is used, even though they are likely familiar to the reader in one form or another. In discussing prostitution, it has been easy to follow the usual practice of letting the specific meaning of the word be shaped by the context. However, now that we are directly focused on the specific question of the evolution of sexual morality, we need to be more precise in how we define our terms. In this chapter, unless stated otherwise, we are primarily focused on actual morals, on the behavior that develops among the members of a community, and only secondarily on earlier or later morality.
Sexual morality, like all other kinds of morality, is necessarily constituted by inherited traditions modified by new adaptations to the changing social environment. If the influence of tradition becomes unduly pronounced the moral life tends to decay and lose its vital adaptability. If adaptability becomes too facile the moral life tends to become unstable and to lose authority. It is only by a reasonable synthesis of structure and function—of what is called the traditional with what is called the ideal—that the moral life can retain its authority without losing its reality. Many, even among those who call themselves moralists, have found this hard to understand. In a vain desire for an impossible logicality they have over-emphasized either the ideal influence on practical morals or, still more frequently, the traditional influence, which has appealed to them because of the impressive authority its dicta seem to convey. The results in the sphere we are here concerned with have often been unfortunate, for no social impulse is so rebellious to decayed traditions, so volcanically eruptive, as that of sex.
Sexual morality, like all types of morality, is shaped by inherited traditions that are adjusted to fit the changing social environment. When tradition becomes too dominant, moral life tends to decline and lose its vital flexibility. Conversely, if adaptability is too simplistic, moral life can become unstable and lose its authority. The only way for moral life to maintain its authority while staying grounded in reality is through a balanced combination of structure and function—what is traditionally established alongside what is considered ideal. Many people, even those who identify as moralists, struggle to grasp this concept. In a misguided attempt to find an impossible logic, they overly emphasize either the influence of ideals on practical morals or, more often, the influence of tradition, which appeals to them because of the authoritative weight of its principles. The outcomes in the area we’re discussing have frequently been negative, as no social force is as resistant to outdated traditions or as explosively transformative as that of sex.
We are accustomed to identify our present marriage system with "morality" in the abstract, and for many people, perhaps for most, it is difficult to realize that the slow and insensible movement which is always affecting social life at the present time, as at every other time, is profoundly affecting our sexual morality. A transference of values is constantly taking place; what was once the very standard of morality becomes immoral, what was once without question immoral becomes a new standard. Such a process is almost as bewildering as for the European world two thousand years ago was the great struggle between the Roman city and the Christian Church, when it became necessary to realize that what Marcus Aurelius, the great pattern of morality, had sought to crush as without question immoral,[265] was becoming regarded as the supreme standard of morality. The classic world considered love and pity and self-sacrifice as little better than weakness and sometimes worse; the Christian world not only regarded them as moralities but incarnated them in a god. Our sexual morality has likewise disregarded natural human emotions, and is incapable of understanding those who declare that to retain unduly traditional laws that are opposed to the vital needs of human societies is not a morality but an immorality.
We tend to associate our current marriage system with "morality" in a general sense, and for many people, perhaps most, it's hard to recognize that the slow and subtle changes constantly impacting social life today, just as in the past, are deeply influencing our sexual morality. There's a continual shift in values; what was once seen as the standard of morality can become immoral, and what was once clearly immoral can become the new norm. This process can be as confusing as the significant conflict two thousand years ago between the Roman city and the Christian Church, when it became necessary to understand that what Marcus Aurelius, a model of morality, had tried to suppress as undoubtedly immoral,[265] was starting to be viewed as the highest moral standard. The classical world viewed love, compassion, and self-sacrifice as not much better than weakness, and sometimes even worse; the Christian world not only recognized them as moral principles but also embodied them in a god. Similarly, our sexual morality has ignored natural human emotions and fails to grasp that insisting on outdated laws that conflict with the crucial needs of human societies isn't a form of morality, but rather an immorality.
The reason why the gradual evolution of moral ideals, which is always taking place, tends in the sexual sphere, at all events among ourselves, to reach a stage in which there seems to be an opposition between different standards lies in the fact that as yet we really have no specific sexual morality at all.[266] That may seem surprising at first to one who reflects on the immense weight which is usually attached to "sexual morality." And it is undoubtedly true that we have a morality which we apply to the sphere of sex. But that morality is one which belongs mainly to the sphere of property and was very largely developed on a property basis. All the historians of morals in general, and of marriage in particular, have set forth this fact, and illustrated it with a wealth of historical material. We have as yet no generally recognized sexual morality which has been based on the specific sexual facts of life. That becomes clear at once when we realize the central fact that the sexual relationship is based on love, at the very least on sexual desire, and that that basis is so deep as to be even physiological, for in the absence of such sexual desire it is physiologically impossible for a man to effect intercourse with a woman. Any specific sexual morality must be based on that fact. But our so-called "sexual morality," so far from being based on that fact, attempts to ignore it altogether. It makes contracts, it arranges sexual relationships beforehand, it offers to guarantee permanency of sexual inclinations. It introduces, that is, considerations of a kind that is perfectly sound in the economic sphere to which such considerations rightly belong, but ridiculously incongruous in the sphere of sex to which they have solemnly been applied. The economic relationships of life, in the large sense, are, as we shall see, extremely important in the evolution of any sound sexual morality, but they belong to the conditions of its development and do not constitute its basis.[267]
The reason why the gradual evolution of moral ideals, which is always happening, tends to create a conflict between different standards in the area of sexuality, at least among us, is that we really don't have a clear sexual morality yet.[266] This might be surprising at first to someone who thinks about the huge importance often placed on "sexual morality." It's true that we have a moral framework that we apply to sex. However, that framework mostly comes from the realm of property and was largely developed based on property rights. Historians of morality in general, and marriage in particular, have pointed this out and backed it up with a wealth of historical evidence. We still lack a widely accepted sexual morality grounded in the actual sexual realities of life. This becomes clear when we acknowledge the key fact that sexual relationships are based on love, or at the very least, on sexual desire, and this foundation is so profound that it can even be physiological; without that sexual desire, it is physiologically impossible for a man to engage in intercourse with a woman. Any specific sexual morality must be based on this fact. However, our so-called "sexual morality" does the opposite by trying to ignore it entirely. It sets up contracts, arranges sexual relationships in advance, and promises to ensure the permanence of sexual inclinations. It introduces considerations that are completely reasonable in the economic realm, but which seem absurd when applied to the realm of sex. The economic relationships of life, in a broad sense, are indeed crucial in the development of any solid sexual morality, but they are conditions of its evolution, not its foundation.[267]
The fact that, from the legal point of view, marriage is primarily an arrangement for securing the rights of property and inheritance is well illustrated by the English divorce law to-day. According to this law, if a woman has sexual intercourse with any man beside her husband, he is entitled to divorce her; if, however, the husband has intercourse with another woman beside his wife, she is not entitled to a divorce; that is only accorded if, in addition, he has also been cruel to her, or deserted her, and from any standpoint of ideal morality such a law is obviously unjust, and it has now been discarded in nearly all civilized lands except England.
The fact that marriage is primarily a legal arrangement for securing property and inheritance rights is clearly shown by today's English divorce law. Under this law, if a woman sleeps with any man other than her husband, he can divorce her. However, if the husband sleeps with another woman, the wife cannot divorce him unless he has also been cruel or abandoned her. From any ideal moral standpoint, such a law is obviously unfair, and it has now been rejected in almost all civilized countries except England.
But from the standpoint of property and inheritance it is quite intelligible, and on that ground it is still supported by the majority of Englishmen. If the wife has intercourse with other men there is a risk that the husband's property will be inherited by a child who is not his own. But the sexual intercourse of the husband with other women is followed by no such risk. The infidelity of the wife is a serious offence against property; the infidelity of the husband is no offence against property, and cannot possibly, therefore, be regarded as a ground for divorce from our legal point of view. The fact that his adultery complicated by cruelty is such a ground, is simply a concession to modern feeling. Yet, as Helena Stöcker truly points out ("Verschiedenheit im Liebesleben des Weibes und des Mannes," Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Dec., 1908), a married man who has an unacknowledged child with a woman outside of marriage, has committed an act as seriously anti-social as a married woman who has a child without acknowledging that the father is not her husband. In the first case, the husband, and in the second case, the wife, have placed an undue amount of responsibility on another person. (The same point is brought forward by the author of The Question of English Divorce, p. 56.)
But from the perspective of property and inheritance, it makes sense, and for that reason, it's still supported by most English people. If the wife sleeps with other men, there's a risk that the husband's property could be inherited by a child who isn't actually his. However, if the husband sleeps with other women, there's no such risk. The wife's infidelity is seen as a serious violation of property rights; the husband's infidelity isn't viewed the same way and, therefore, can't be considered a valid reason for divorce from a legal standpoint. The fact that his adultery, when combined with cruelty, is considered a valid reason for divorce is simply a concession to modern attitudes. Yet, as Helena Stöcker rightly points out ("Verschiedenheit im Liebesleben des Weibes und des Mannes," Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Dec., 1908), a married man who has an unacknowledged child with a woman outside of marriage has committed an act that is just as anti-social as a married woman who has a child without acknowledging that the father isn't her husband. In the first scenario, the husband has placed an unfair burden on someone else, and in the second, the wife has done the same. (The same argument is made by the author of The Question of English Divorce, p. 56.)
I insist here on the economic element in our sexual morality, because that is the element which has given it a kind of stability and become established in law. But if we take a wider view of our sexual morality, we cannot ignore the ancient element of asceticism, which has given religious passion and sanction to it. Our sexual morality is thus, in reality, a bastard born of the union of property-morality with primitive ascetic morality, neither in true relationship to the vital facts of the sexual life. It is, indeed, the property element which, with a few inconsistencies, has become finally the main concern of our law, but the ascetic element (with, in the past, a wavering relationship to law) has had an important part in moulding popular sentiment and in creating an attitude of reprobation towards sexual intercourse per se, although such intercourse is regarded as an essential part of the property-based and religiously sanctified institution of legal marriage.
I want to emphasize the economic aspect of our sexual morality because it’s what has given it some stability and has been formalized in law. However, if we look at our sexual morality from a broader perspective, we can't overlook the ancient aspect of asceticism, which has infused it with religious fervor and authority. Our sexual morality is really a mixed offspring of property-based morals and primitive ascetic morals, neither of which truly relate to the real facts of sexual life. In fact, it’s the property aspect that, despite a few contradictions, has ultimately become the main focus of our laws, while the ascetic aspect (which has had a fluctuating relationship with the law in the past) has played a significant role in shaping public opinion and creating a negative attitude toward sexual intercourse per se, even though such intercourse is seen as a necessary part of the property-oriented and religiously endorsed institution of legal marriage.
The glorification of virginity led by imperceptible stages to the formulation of "fornication" as a deadly sin, and finally as an actual secular "crime." It is sometimes stated that it was not until the Council of Trent that the Church formally anathematized those who held that the state of marriage was higher than that of virginity, but the opinion had been more or less formally held from almost the earliest ages of Christianity, and is clear in the epistles of Paul. All the theologians agree that fornication is a mortal sin. Caramuel, indeed, the distinguished Spanish theologian, who made unusual concessions to the demands of reason and nature, held that fornication is only evil because it is forbidden, but Innocent XI formally condemned that proposition. Fornication as a mortal sin became gradually secularized into fornication as a crime. Fornication was a crime in France even as late as the eighteenth century, as Tarde found in his historical investigations of criminal procedure in Périgord; adultery was also a crime and severely punished quite independently of any complaint from either of the parties (Tarde, "Archéologie Criminelle en Périgord," Archives de l'Anthropologie Criminelle, Nov. 15, 1898).
The glorification of virginity gradually led to the idea of "fornication" being seen as a deadly sin and ultimately as a real secular "crime." It's often said that it wasn't until the Council of Trent that the Church officially condemned those who believed that marriage was a higher state than virginity, but this belief had been held more or less formally since the early days of Christianity, as seen in Paul's letters. All theologians agree that fornication is a mortal sin. Caramuel, a notable Spanish theologian who made some concessions to reason and nature, argued that fornication is wrong only because it’s prohibited, but Innocent XI formally rejected that idea. Over time, fornication as a mortal sin became secularized into fornication as a crime. Fornication was considered a crime in France as late as the eighteenth century, as Tarde discovered in his historical research on criminal procedures in Périgord; adultery was also a crime and was punished harshly regardless of whether either party complained (Tarde, "Archéologie Criminelle en Périgord," Archives de l'Anthropologie Criminelle, Nov. 15, 1898).
The Puritans of the Commonwealth days in England (like the Puritans of Geneva) followed the Catholic example and adopted ecclesiastical offences against chastity into the secular law. By an Act passed in 1653 fornication became punishable by three months' imprisonment inflicted on both parties. By the same Act the adultery of a wife (nothing is said of a husband) was made felony, both for her and her partner in guilt, and therefore punishable by death (Scobell, Acts and Ordinances, p. 121).
The Puritans of the Commonwealth era in England (similar to the Puritans of Geneva) followed the Catholic model and incorporated ecclesiastical offenses related to chastity into secular law. Through an Act passed in 1653, fornication became punishable by three months in jail for both parties involved. By the same Act, a wife's adultery (with no mention of the husband's) was deemed a felony, making both her and her partner in crime subject to the death penalty (Scobell, Acts and Ordinances, p. 121).
The action of a pseudo-morality, such as our sexual morality has been, is double-edged. On the one side it induces a secret and shamefaced laxity, on the other it upholds a rigid and uninspiring theoretical code which so few can consistently follow that theoretical morality is thereby degraded into a more or less empty form. "The human race would gain much," said the wise Sénancour, "if virtue were made less laborious. The merit would not be so great, but what is the use of an elevation which can rarely be sustained?"[268] At present, as a more recent moralist, Ellen Key, puts it, we only have an immorality which favors vice and makes virtue irrealizable, and, as she exclaims with pardonable extravagance, to preach a sounder morality to the young, without at the same time condemning the society which encourages the prevailing immorality, is "worse than folly, it is crime."
The action of a false sense of morality, like our sexual morality, is double-edged. On one hand, it leads to a secret and shameful loosening of standards, while on the other, it enforces a strict and uninspiring theoretical code that very few can consistently adhere to, reducing theoretical morality to a nearly empty form. "Humanity would benefit greatly," said the wise Sénancour, "if virtue were less burdensome. The merit wouldn't be as great, but what’s the point of a high standard that can rarely be maintained?"[268] Currently, as a more recent moralist, Ellen Key, points out, we only have an immorality that encourages vice and makes virtue unattainable, and, as she passionately states, to preach a better morality to the young, without simultaneously condemning the society that promotes the current immorality, is "worse than foolishness, it's a crime."
It is on the lines along which Sénancour a century ago and Ellen Key to-day are great pioneers that the new forms of anterior or ideal theoretical morality are now moving, in advance, according to the general tendency in morals, of traditional morality and even of practice.
It is along the lines that Sénancour a century ago and Ellen Key today are great pioneers that the new types of earlier or ideal theoretical morality are currently progressing, reflecting the general trend in morals, ahead of traditional morality and even practice.
There is one great modern movement of a definite kind which will serve to show how clearly sexual morality is to-day moving towards a new standpoint. This is the changing attitude of the bulk of the community towards both State marriage and religious marriage, and the growing tendency to disallow State interference with sexual relationships, apart from the production of children.
There is a significant modern movement of a specific nature that illustrates how sexual morality is currently shifting towards a new perspective. This is the changing attitude of most of the community toward both state marriage and religious marriage, along with the increasing tendency to reject state interference in sexual relationships, except when it comes to having children.
There has no doubt always been a tendency among the masses of the population in Europe to dispense with the official sanction of sexual relationships until such relationships have been well established and the hope of offspring has become justifiable. This tendency has been crystallized into recognized customs among numberless rural communities little touched either by the disturbing influences of the outside world or the controlling influences of theological Christian conceptions. But at the present day this tendency is not confined to the more primitive and isolated communities of Europe among whom, on the contrary, it has tended to die out. It is an unquestionable fact, says Professor Bruno Meyer, that far more than the half of sexual intercourse now takes place outside legal marriage.[269] It is among the intelligent classes and in prosperous and progressive communities that this movement is chiefly marked. We see throughout the world the practical common sense of the people shaping itself in the direction which has been pioneered by the ideal moralists who invariably precede the new growth of practical morality.
There has always been a tendency among the general population in Europe to engage in sexual relationships without official recognition until those relationships are well established and the chance of having children becomes reasonable. This tendency has become established in recognized customs among countless rural communities that have been minimally affected by outside influences or the controlling ideas of Christian theology. However, today, this tendency isn't limited to the more primitive and isolated communities in Europe; in fact, it has mostly faded there. It is a clear fact, according to Professor Bruno Meyer, that more than half of sexual intercourse now occurs outside of legal marriages.[269] It is particularly among educated classes and in prosperous, progressive communities that this trend is most evident. We can see around the world how the practical common sense of people is evolving in the direction set by ideal moralists who always lead the growth of practical morality.
The voluntary childless marriages of to-day have served to show the possibility of such unions outside legal marriage, and such free unions are becoming, as Mrs. Parsons points out, "a progressive substitute for marriage."[270] The gradual but steady rise in the age for entering on legal marriage also points in the same direction, though it indicates not merely an increase of free unions but an increase of all forms of normal and abnormal sexuality outside marriage. Thus in England and Wales, in 1906, only 43 per 1,000 husbands and 146 per 1,000 wives were under age, while the average age for husbands was 28.6 years and for wives 26.4 years. For men the age has gone up some eight months during the past forty years, for women more than this. In the large cities, like London, where the possibilities of extra-matrimonial relationships are greater, the age for legal marriage is higher than in the country.
The voluntary childless marriages of today have demonstrated that such unions can exist outside of legal marriage, and these free unions are becoming, as Mrs. Parsons points out, "a progressive substitute for marriage."[270] The gradual but steady rise in the age for entering legal marriage also supports this idea, indicating not only an increase in free unions but also a rise in all types of normal and abnormal sexuality outside of marriage. For example, in England and Wales in 1906, only 43 per 1,000 husbands and 146 per 1,000 wives were underage, with the average age for husbands being 28.6 years and for wives 26.4 years. Over the past forty years, the age for men has increased by about eight months, while for women it has risen even more. In large cities like London, where extra-marital relationship opportunities are greater, the age for legal marriage is higher than in rural areas.
If we are to regard the age of legal marriage as, on the whole, the age at which the population enters into sexual unions, it is undoubtedly too late. Beyer, a leading German neurologist, finds that there are evils alike in early and in late marriage, and comes to the conclusion that in temperate zones the best age for women to marry is the twenty-first year, and for men the twenty-fifth year.
If we consider the age of legal marriage as the general age when people start engaging in sexual relationships, it's definitely too late. Beyer, a prominent German neurologist, believes there are disadvantages to both early and late marriages. He concludes that in temperate climates, the ideal age for women to marry is twenty-one, and for men, it's twenty-five.
Yet, under bad economic conditions and with a rigid marriage law, early marriages are in every respect disastrous. They are among the poor a sign of destitution. The very poorest marry first, and they do so through the feeling that their condition cannot be worse. (Dr. Michael Ryan brought together much interesting evidence concerning the causes of early marriage in Ireland in his Philosophy of Marriage, 1837, pp. 58-72). Among the poor, therefore, early marriage is always a misfortune. "Many good people," says Mr. Thomas Holmes, Secretary of the Howard Association and missionary at police courts (in an interview, Daily Chronicle, Sept. 8, 1906), "advise boys and girls to get married in order to prevent what they call a 'disgrace.' This I consider to be absolutely wicked, and it leads to far greater evils than it can possibly avert."
Yet, in tough economic times and with strict marriage laws, early marriages are a disaster in every way. For the poor, they are a sign of extreme hardship. The very poorest tend to marry young, thinking their situation can’t get any worse. (Dr. Michael Ryan compiled a lot of interesting evidence about the reasons for early marriage in Ireland in his Philosophy of Marriage, 1837, pp. 58-72). So, among the poor, early marriage is always a misfortune. "Many good people," says Mr. Thomas Holmes, Secretary of the Howard Association and missionary at police courts (in an interview, Daily Chronicle, Sept. 8, 1906), "advise boys and girls to get married to avoid what they call a 'disgrace.' I think this is absolutely wrong, and it creates much greater problems than it can possibly prevent."
Early marriages are one of the commonest causes both of prostitution and divorce. They lead to prostitution in innumerable cases, even when no outward separation takes place. The fact that they lead to divorce is shown by the significant circumstance that in England, although only 146 per 1,000 women are under twenty-one at marriage, of the wives concerned in divorce cases, 280 per 1,000 were under twenty-one at marriage, and this discrepancy is even greater than it appears, for in the well-to-do class, which can alone afford the luxury of divorce, the normal age at marriage is much higher than for the population generally. Inexperience, as was long ago pointed out by Milton (who had learnt this lesson to his cost), leads to shipwreck in marriage. "They who have lived most loosely," he wrote, "prove most successful in their matches, because their wild affections, unsettling at will, have been so many divorces to teach them experience."
Early marriages are one of the most common causes of both prostitution and divorce. They often lead to prostitution in countless cases, even when there is no visible separation. The connection to divorce is highlighted by the notable fact that in England, while only 146 out of every 1,000 women marry before the age of twenty-one, of the wives involved in divorce cases—280 out of 1,000—were under twenty-one at the time of marriage. This difference is even more pronounced than it seems because, in wealthier classes, who can afford the luxury of divorce, the average age for marriage is much higher than in the general population. As Milton pointed out long ago, having less experience often leads to failure in marriage. "Those who have lived most freely," he wrote, "tend to be most successful in their marriages because their wild emotions, shifting at will, have provided them with countless divorces to gain experience."
Miss Clapperton, referring to the educated classes, advocates very early marriage, even during student life, which might then be to some extent carried on side by side (Scientific Meliorism, Ch. XVII). Ellen Key, also, advocates early marriage. But she wisely adds that it involves the necessity for easy divorce. That, indeed, is the only condition which can render early marriage generally desirable. Young people—unless they possess very simple and inert natures—can neither foretell the course of their own development and their own strongest needs, nor estimate accurately the nature and quality of another personality. A marriage formed at an early age very speedily ceases to be a marriage in anything but name. Sometimes a young girl applies for a separation from her husband even on the very day after marriage.
Miss Clapperton, when talking about educated people, supports marrying young, even while studying, which could be managed alongside their education (Scientific Meliorism, Ch. XVII). Ellen Key also supports early marriage, but she wisely points out that easy divorce is essential. In fact, that’s the only condition that could make early marriage generally a good idea. Young people—unless they have very simple and unchanging personalities—can’t predict their own growth and needs, nor can they accurately understand someone else’s personality. A marriage that starts at a young age quickly stops being a real marriage. Sometimes, a young girl asks for a separation from her husband even the very day after the wedding.
The more or less permanent free unions formed among us in Europe are usually to be regarded merely as trial-marriages. That is to say they are a precaution rendered desirable both by uncertainty as to either the harmony or the fruitfulness of union until actual experiment has been made, and by the practical impossibility of otherwise rectifying any mistake in consequence of the antiquated rigidity of most European divorce laws. Such trial marriages are therefore demanded by prudence and caution, and as foresight increases with the development of civilization, and constantly grows among us, we may expect that there will be a parallel development in the frequency of trial marriage and in the social attitude towards such unions. The only alternative—that a radical reform in European marriage laws should render the divorce of a legal marriage as economical and as convenient as the divorce of a free marriage—cannot yet be expected, for law always lags behind public opinion and public practice.
The more or less permanent free unions formed among us in Europe are usually seen as trial marriages. This means they serve as a safeguard due to the uncertainty about either the compatibility or the effectiveness of the union until actual experience has been gained, and because it’s practically impossible to correct any mistakes because of the outdated rigidity of most European divorce laws. These trial marriages are therefore driven by caution and prudence, and as our foresight improves with civilization's advancement, we can expect a parallel increase in the occurrence of trial marriages and in the societal views towards such unions. The only other option—that a major reform in European marriage laws would make the divorce of a legal marriage as affordable and convenient as the divorce of a free marriage—can’t be anticipated yet, as laws always lag behind public opinion and practice.
If, however, we take a wider historical view, we find that we are in presence of a phenomenon which, though favored by modern conditions, is very ancient and widespread, dating, so far as Europe is concerned, from the time when the Church first sought to impose ecclesiastical marriage, so that it is practically a continuation of the ancient European custom of private marriage.
If we take a broader historical perspective, we see that we are facing a phenomenon that, although supported by modern conditions, is very old and widespread. In terms of Europe, it dates back to when the Church first tried to enforce ecclesiastical marriage, making it essentially a continuation of the ancient European practice of private marriage.
Trial-marriages pass by imperceptible gradations into the group of courtship customs which, while allowing the young couple to spend the night together, in a position of more or less intimacy, exclude, as a rule, actual sexual intercourse. Night-courtship flourishes in stable and well-knit European communities not liable to disorganization by contact with strangers. It seems to be specially common in Teutonic and Celtic lands, and is known by various names, as Probenächte, fensterln, Kiltgang, hand-fasting, bundling, sitting-up, courting on the bed, etc. It is well known in Wales; it is found in various English counties as in Cheshire; it existed in eighteenth century Ireland (according to Richard Twiss's Travels); in New England it was known as tarrying; in Holland it is called questing. In Norway, where it is called night-running, on account of the long distance between the homesteads, I am told that it is generally practiced, though the clergy preach against it; the young girl puts on several extra skirts and goes to bed, and the young man enters by door or window and goes to bed with her; they talk all night, and are not bound to marry unless it should happen that the girl becomes pregnant.
Trial marriages gradually blend into courtship customs that, while allowing the young couple to spend the night together in varying degrees of intimacy, generally do not include actual sexual intercourse. Night courtship thrives in stable and closely-knit European communities that are not disrupted by outside influences. It seems to be especially common in Teutonic and Celtic regions and goes by various names, such as Probenächte, fensterln, Kiltgang, hand-fasting, bundling, sitting-up, courting on the bed, etc. It is well-known in Wales, appears in various English counties like Cheshire, existed in eighteenth-century Ireland (according to Richard Twiss's Travels), and in New England, it was referred to as tarrying; in Holland, it’s called questing. In Norway, where it’s known as night-running due to the long distances between homes, I’ve been told that it is widely practiced, despite clergy preaching against it. The young girl puts on several extra skirts and goes to bed, and the young man enters through the door or window and joins her; they talk all night and aren’t obligated to marry unless the girl becomes pregnant.
Rhys and Brynmor-Jones (Welsh People, pp. 582-4) have an interesting passage on this night-courtship with numerous references. As regards Germany see, e.g., Rudeck, Geschichte der öffentlichen Sittlichkeit, pp. 146-154. With reference to trial-marriage generally many facts and references are given by M. A. Potter (Sohrab and Rustem, pp. 129-137).
Rhys and Brynmor-Jones (Welsh People, pp. 582-4) discuss this night-courtship in an intriguing way, with many references. For information on Germany, see, e.g., Rudeck, Geschichte der öffentlichen Sittlichkeit, pp. 146-154. Regarding trial-marriage in general, M. A. Potter provides many facts and references in (Sohrab and Rustem, pp. 129-137).
The custom of free marriage unions, usually rendered legal before or after the birth of children, seems to be fairly common in many, or perhaps all, rural parts of England. The union is made legal, if found satisfactory, even when there is no prospect of children. In some counties it is said to be almost a universal practice for the women to have sexual relationships before legal marriage; sometimes she marries the first man whom she tries; sometimes she tries several before finding the man who suits her. Such marriages necessarily, on the whole, turn out better than marriages in which the woman, knowing nothing of what awaits her and having no other experiences for comparison, is liable to be disillusioned or to feel that she "might have done better." Even when legal recognition is not sought until after the birth of children, it by no means follows that any moral deterioration is involved. Thus in some parts of Staffordshire where it is the custom of the women to have a child before marriage, notwithstanding this "corruption," we are told (Burton, City of the Saints, Appendix IV), the women are "very good neighbors, excellent, hard-working, and affectionate wives and mothers."
The practice of informal marriage unions, often formalized before or after having children, seems to be quite common in many, or perhaps all, rural areas of England. The union can be made legal if both partners find it satisfactory, even if there’s no expectation of children. In some counties, it is reported to be nearly universal for women to engage in sexual relationships before legally marrying; sometimes, she ends up marrying the first guy she dates, while other times, she tries a few before finding the right one for her. Generally, these marriages tend to turn out better than those where the woman has no idea of what to expect and no other experiences to draw from, which can leave her feeling disillusioned or thinking she "could’ve done better." Even when legal recognition is pursued only after children are born, it doesn’t necessarily indicate any moral decline. For example, in some areas of Staffordshire, where it’s customary for women to have a child before getting married, despite this "corruption," it’s reported (Burton, City of the Saints, Appendix IV) that the women are "very good neighbors, excellent, hard-working, and loving wives and mothers."
"The lower social classes, especially peasants," remarks Dr. Ehrhard ("Auch Ein Wort zur Ehereform," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang I, Heft 10), "know better than we that the marriage bed is the foundation of marriage. On that account they have retained the primitive custom of trial-marriage which, in the Middle Ages, was still practiced even in the best circles. It has the further advantage that the marriage is not concluded until it has shown itself to be fruitful. Trial-marriage assumes, of course, that virginity is not valued beyond its true worth." With regard to this point it may be mentioned that in many parts of the world a woman is more highly esteemed if she has had intercourse before marriage (see, e.g., Potter, op. cit., pp. 163 et seq.). While virginity is one of the sexual attractions a woman may possess, an attraction that is based on a natural instinct (see "The Evolution of Modesty," in vol. i of these Studies), yet an exaggerated attention to virginity can only be regarded as a sexual perversion, allied to paidophilia, the sexual attraction to children.
"The lower social classes, especially peasants," notes Dr. Ehrhard ("Also A Word on Marriage Reform," Gender and Society, Volume I, Issue 10), "understand better than we do that the marriage bed is the foundation of marriage. Because of this, they have kept the ancient practice of trial marriage, which, in the Middle Ages, was still common even among the upper classes. It also has the benefit that the marriage isn’t finalized until it’s proven to be fruitful. Trial marriage assumes, of course, that virginity isn’t valued more than it truly is." Regarding this point, it’s worth mentioning that in many parts of the world, a woman is held in higher regard if she has had sex before marriage (see, for example, Potter, op. cit., pp. 163 et seq.). While virginity is one of the sexual qualities a woman may have, a quality based on natural instinct (see "The Evolution of Modesty," in volume one of these Studies), an excessive focus on virginity can only be viewed as a sexual perversion, akin to paidophilia, the sexual attraction to children.
In very small coördinated communities the primitive custom of trial-marriage tends to decay when there is a great invasion of strangers who have not been brought up to the custom (which seems to them indistinguishable from the license of prostitution), and who fail to undertake the obligations which trial-marriage involves. This is what happened in the case of the so-called "island custom" of Portland, which lasted well on into the nineteenth century; according to this custom a woman before marriage lived with her lover until pregnant and then married him; she was always strictly faithful to him while living with him, but if no pregnancy occurred the couple might decide that they were not meant for each other, and break off relations. The result was that for a long period of years no illegitimate children were born, and few marriages were childless. But when the Portland stone trade was developed, the workmen imported from London took advantage of the "island custom," but refused to fulfil the obligation of marriage when pregnancy occurred. The custom consequently fell into disuse (see, e.g., translator's note to Bloch's Sexual Life of Our Time, p. 237, and the quotation there given from Hutchins, History and Antiquities of Dorset, vol. ii, p. 820).
In very small coordinated communities, the old practice of trial-marriage tends to decline when there’s a large influx of outsiders who weren’t raised with that tradition (which they see as no different from the freedom of prostitution) and who don’t take on the responsibilities trial-marriage entails. This occurred with the so-called "island custom" of Portland, which persisted well into the nineteenth century; under this arrangement, a woman would live with her partner until she became pregnant and then marry him. She remained completely faithful to him during that time, but if she didn’t get pregnant, the couple could decide they weren’t right for each other and end the relationship. As a result, for many years, no illegitimate children were born, and few marriages were without children. However, when the stone trade in Portland grew, workers brought in from London took advantage of the "island custom" but didn’t follow through with marriage when pregnancy happened. Consequently, the custom fell out of use (see, e.g., translator's note to Bloch's Sexual Life of Our Time, p. 237, and the quotation there given from Hutchins, History and Antiquities of Dorset, vol. ii, p. 820).
It is, however, by no means only in rural districts, but in great cities also that marriages are at the outset free unions. Thus in Paris Després stated more than thirty years ago (La Prostitution à Paris, p. 137) that in an average arrondissement nine out of ten legal marriages are the consolidation of a free union; though, while that was an average, in a few arrondissements it was only three out of ten. Much the same conditions prevail in Paris to-day; at least half the marriages, it is stated, are of this kind.
It’s not just in rural areas; in big cities, too, marriages often start as free unions. For instance, over thirty years ago, Després noted in Paris (La Prostitution à Paris, p. 137) that in an average district, nine out of ten legal marriages were just formalizing a free union. However, in some districts, it was only three out of ten. Similar conditions exist in Paris today; it’s said that at least half of the marriages fall into this category.
In Teutonic lands the custom of free unions is very ancient and well-established. Thus in Sweden, Ellen Key states (Liebe und Ehe, p. 123), the majority of the population begin married life in this way. The arrangement is found to be beneficial, and "marital fidelity is as great as pre-marital freedom is unbounded." In Denmark, also, a large number of children are conceived before the unions of the parents are legalized (Rubin and Westergaard, quoted by Gaedeken, Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Feb. 15, 1909).
In Germanic countries, the practice of free relationships has a long history and is well-established. For example, in Sweden, Ellen Key mentions (Liebe und Ehe, p. 123) that most people start their married life this way. This arrangement is considered beneficial, and "marital loyalty is just as strong as the pre-marital freedom is limitless." In Denmark too, many children are conceived before their parents' relationships are officially recognized (Rubin and Westergaard, cited by Gaedeken, Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Feb. 15, 1909).
In Germany not only is the proportion of illegitimate births very high, since in Berlin it is 17 per cent., and in some towns very much higher, but ante-nuptial conceptions take place in nearly half the marriages, and sometimes in the majority. Thus in Berlin more than 40 per cent, of all legitimate firstborn children are conceived before marriage, while in some rural provinces (where the proportion of illegitimate births is lower) the percentage of marriages following ante-nuptial conceptions is much higher than in Berlin. The conditions in rural Germany have been especially investigated by a committee of Lutheran pastors, and were set forth a few years ago in two volumes, Die Geschlecht-sittlich Verhältnisse im Deutschen Reiche, which are full of instruction concerning German sexual morality. In Hanover, it is said in this work, the majority of authorities state that intercourse before marriage is the rule. At the very least, a probe, or trial, is regarded as a matter-of-course preliminary to a marriage, since no one wishes "to buy a pig in a poke." In Saxony, likewise, we are told, it is seldom that a girl fails to have intercourse before marriage, or that her first child is not born, or at all events conceived, outside marriage. This is justified as a proper proving of a bride before taking her for good. "One does not buy even a penny pipe without trying it," a German pastor was informed. Around Stettin, in twelve districts (nearly half the whole), sexual intercourse before marriage is a recognized custom, and in the remainder, if not exactly a custom, it is very common, and is not severely or even at all condemned by public opinion. In some districts marriage immediately follows pregnancy. In the Dantzig neighborhood, again, according to the Lutheran Committee, intercourse before marriage occurs in more than half the cases, but marriage by no means always follows pregnancy. Nearly all the girls who go as servants have lovers, and country people in engaging servants sometimes tell them that at evening and night they may do as they like. This state of things is found to be favorable to conjugal fidelity. The German peasant girl, as another authority remarks (E. H. Meyer, Deutsche Volkskunde, 1898, pp. 154, 164), has her own room; she may receive her lover; it is no great shame if she gives herself to him. The number of women who enter legal marriage still virgins is not large (this refers more especially to Baden), but public opinion protects them, and such opinion is unfavorable to the disregard of the responsibilities involved by sexual relationships. The German woman is less chaste before marriage than her French or Italian sister. But, Meyer adds, she is probably more faithful after marriage than they are.
In Germany, the rate of illegitimate births is quite high; in Berlin, it's 17%, with even higher rates in some towns. Additionally, nearly half of all marriages begin with ante-nuptial conceptions, and in some cases, it's the majority. For instance, in Berlin, over 40% of all legitimate firstborns are conceived before marriage, while in certain rural areas (where the rate of illegitimate births is lower), the number of marriages that follow ante-nuptial conceptions is considerably higher than in Berlin. A committee of Lutheran pastors has conducted an in-depth investigation into the situation in rural Germany, published a few years ago in two volumes titled Die Geschlecht-sittlich Verhältnisse im Deutschen Reiche, which offer valuable insights into German sexual morality. According to this work, in Hanover, most authorities claim that premarital intercourse is common. At the very least, a probe, or trial, is seen as a standard step before marriage, because no one wants to "buy a pig in a poke." Similarly, in Saxony, it's reported that it's rare for a girl not to have premarital intercourse or for her first child to be conceived within marriage. This is seen as a proper way to test a bride before permanently committing. "One does not buy even a penny pipe without trying it," a German pastor has been told. Around Stettin, in twelve districts (almost half of the region), premarital sexual intercourse is an accepted practice, and in the remaining areas, while it may not be considered a custom, it is very common and not strongly condemned by societal norms. In some areas, marriage follows pregnancy almost immediately. In the Danzig region, according to the Lutheran Committee, premarital intercourse occurs in more than half of the cases, but marriage does not always follow pregnancy. Most girls who work as servants have boyfriends, and rural employers sometimes inform servants that they can do as they wish during evenings and nights. This situation is found to be conducive to marital fidelity. As another authority notes (E. H. Meyer, Deutsche Volkskunde, 1898, pp. 154, 164), the German peasant girl has her own room; she can receive her boyfriend without shame if she gives herself to him. The number of women who marry as virgins remains low (especially in Baden), but public opinion supports them and tends to oppose neglecting the responsibilities that come with sexual relationships. German women are less chaste before marriage compared to their French or Italian counterparts. However, Meyer adds that they are likely more loyal after marriage than those women.
It is assumed by many that this state of German morality as it exists to-day is a new phenomenon, and the sign of a rapid national degeneration. That is by no means the case. In this connection we may accept the evidence of Catholic priests, who, by the experience of the confessional, are enabled to speak with authority. An old Bavarian priest thus writes (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, 1907, Bd. ii, Heft I): "At Moral Congresses we hear laudation of 'the good old times' when, faith and morality prevailed among the people. Whether that is correct is another question. As a young priest I heard of as many and as serious sins as I now hear of as an old man. The morality of the people is not greater nor is it less. The error is the belief that immorality goes out of the towns and poisons the country. People talk as though the country were a pure Paradise of innocence. I will by no means call our country people immoral, but from an experience of many years I can say that in sexual respects there is no difference between town and country. I have learnt to know more than a hundred different parishes, and in the most various localities, in the mountain and in the plain, on poor land and on rich land. But everywhere I find the same morals and lack of morals. There are everywhere the same men, though in the country there are often better Christians than in the towns."
Many people think that the current state of German morality is a new issue and a sign of quick national decline. That’s not true at all. In this regard, we can trust the insights of Catholic priests, who, through their experience in confession, can speak with authority. An old Bavarian priest writes this (Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, 1907, Bd. ii, Heft I): "At Moral Congresses, we hear praise for 'the good old days' when faith and morality were strong among the people. Whether that's accurate is another question. As a young priest, I encountered just as many serious sins as I do now as an older man. The morality of the people hasn't increased or decreased. The mistake is in believing that immorality stems from cities and taints the countryside. People act like the countryside is a pure paradise of innocence. I wouldn’t label our rural folks as immoral, but after many years of experience, I can say that when it comes to sexual matters, there's no difference between town and country. I've come to know over a hundred different parishes, in various locations, from the mountains to the plains, on poor land and rich land. Everywhere, I find the same morals and immorality. The same kinds of people exist everywhere, though in rural areas, there are often better Christians than in the cities."
If, however, we go much farther back than the memories of a living man it seems highly probable that the sexual customs of the German people of the present day are not substantially different—though it may well be that at different periods different circumstances have accentuated them—from what they were in the dawn of Teutonic history. This is the opinion of one of the profoundest students of Indo-Germanic origins. In his Reallexicon (art. "Keuschheit") O. Schrader points out that the oft-quoted Tacitus, strictly considered, can only be taken to prove that women were chaste after marriage, and that no prostitution existed. There can be no doubt, he adds, and the earliest historical evidence shows, that women in ancient Germany were not chaste before marriage. This fact has been disguised by the tendency of the old classic writers to idealize the Northern peoples.
If we look back further than the memories of any living person, it's likely that the sexual customs of today's German people are not very different—though at various times different factors may have highlighted them—from what they were at the beginning of Teutonic history. This is the view of one of the leading scholars on Indo-Germanic origins. In his Reallexicon (article "Keuschheit"), O. Schrader notes that the often-cited Tacitus, when closely examined, can only be interpreted to support the idea that women remained chaste after marriage and that prostitution did not exist. He asserts, and the earliest historical records demonstrate, that women in ancient Germany were not chaste before marriage. This reality has been obscured by the old classic writers' tendency to romanticize the Northern peoples.
Thus we have to realize that the conception of "German virtue," which has been rendered so familiar to the world by a long succession of German writers, by no means involves any special devotion to the virtue of chastity. Tacitus, indeed, in the passage more often quoted in Germany than any other passage in classic literature, while correctly emphasizing the late puberty of the Germans and their brutal punishment of conjugal infidelity on the part of the wife, seemed to imply that they were also chaste. But we have always to remark that Tacitus wrote as a satirizing moralist as well as a historian, and that, as he declaimed concerning the virtues of the German barbarians, he had one eye on the Roman gallery whose vices he desired to lash. Much the same perplexing confusion has been created by Gildas, who, in describing the results of the Saxon Conquest of Britain, wrote as a preacher as well as a historian, and the same moral purpose (as Dill has pointed out) distorts Salvian's picture of the vices of fifth century Gaul. (I may add that some of the evidence in favor of the sexual freedom involved by early Teutonic faiths and customs is brought together in the study of "Sexual Periodicity" in the first volume of these Studies; cf. also, Rudeck, Geschichte der öffentlichen Sittlichkeit in Deutschland, 1897, pp. 146 et seq.).
We need to understand that the idea of "German virtue," which has been widely presented by many German writers, does not specifically indicate a strong commitment to the virtue of chastity. Tacitus, in fact, in the most frequently quoted passage in Germany from classic literature, while accurately highlighting the late onset of puberty among Germans and their harsh punishment of a wife's infidelity, also seemed to suggest that they were chaste. However, it’s important to note that Tacitus wrote both as a satirizing moralist and a historian, and while he praised the virtues of the German tribes, he was also intent on criticizing the vices of Rome. A similar confusing portrayal comes from Gildas, who, when discussing the outcomes of the Saxon Conquest in Britain, wrote as both a preacher and historian. The same moral intention (as Dill has pointed out) also skews Salvian's depiction of the vices in fifth-century Gaul. (Additionally, some evidence supporting the sexual freedoms associated with early Teutonic beliefs and customs is compiled in the study "Sexual Periodicity" in the first volume of these Studies; cf. also, Rudeck, Geschichte der öffentlichen Sittlichkeit in Deutschland, 1897, pp. 146 et seq.).
The freedom and tolerance of Russian sexual customs is fairly well-known. As a Russian correspondent writes to me, "the liberalism of Russian manners enables youths and girls to enjoy complete independence. They visit each other alone, they walk out alone, and they return home at any hour they please. They have a liberty of movement as complete as that of grown-up persons; some avail themselves of it to discuss politics and others to make love. They are able also to procure any books they please; thus on the table of a college girl I knew I saw the Elements of Social Science, then prohibited in Russia; this girl lived with her aunt, but she had her own room, which only her friends were allowed to enter: her aunt or other relations never entered it. Naturally, she went out and came back at what hours she pleased. Many other college girls enjoy the same freedom in their families. It is very different in Italy, where girls have no freedom of movement, and can neither go out alone nor receive gentlemen alone, and where, unlike Russia, a girl who has sexual intercourse outside marriage is really 'lost' and 'dishonored'" (cf. Sexual-Probleme, Aug., 1908, p. 506).
The freedom and tolerance of Russian sexual customs is quite well-known. A Russian correspondent wrote to me, "the liberal attitude of Russian society allows young men and women to enjoy complete independence. They visit each other alone, go out by themselves, and come home whenever they want. They have the same freedom of movement as adults; some use it to discuss politics while others use it to date. They can also get any books they want; for instance, I once saw the Elements of Social Science on the table of a college girl I knew, even though it was banned in Russia. This girl lived with her aunt, but she had her own room that only her friends were allowed to enter; her aunt or other relatives never went in there. Naturally, she went out and returned at whatever hours suited her. Many other college girls enjoy the same level of freedom in their families. It’s very different in Italy, where girls have no freedom to move about, can’t go out alone or have male visitors alone, and where, unlike Russia, a girl who has sex outside of marriage is considered truly 'lost' and 'dishonored'" (cf. Sexual-Probleme, Aug., 1908, p. 506).
It would appear that freedom of sexual relationships in Russia—apart from the influence of ancient custom—has largely been rendered necessary by the difficulty of divorce. Married couples, who were unable to secure divorce, separated and found new partners without legal marriage. In 1907, however, an attempt was made to remedy this defect in the law; a liberal divorce law has been introduced, mutual consent with separation for a period of over a year being recognized as adequate ground for divorce (Beiblatt to Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. ii, Heft 5, p. 145).
It seems that the freedom to have sexual relationships in Russia—aside from the influence of ancient customs—has mostly become necessary due to the challenges of getting a divorce. Married couples who couldn’t obtain a divorce often separated and started new relationships without legally marrying. However, in 1907, there was an attempt to fix this issue in the law; a more liberal divorce law was introduced, recognizing mutual consent with a separation of over a year as valid grounds for divorce (Beiblatt to Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. ii, Heft 5, p. 145).
During recent years there has developed among educated young men and women in Russia a movement of sexual license, which, though it is doubtless supported by the old traditions of sexual freedom, must by no means be confused with that freedom, since it is directly due to causes of an entirely different order. The strenuous revolutionary efforts made during the last years of the past century to attain political freedom absorbed the younger and more energetic section of the educated classes, involved a high degree of mental tension, and were accompanied by a tendency to asceticism. The prospect of death was constantly before their eyes, and any pre-occupation with sexual matters would have been felt as out of harmony with the spirit of revolution. But during the present century revolutionary activity has largely ceased. It has been, to a considerable extent, replaced by a movement of interest in sexual problems and of indulgence in sexual unrestraint, often taking on a somewhat licentious and sensual character. "Free love" unions have been formed by the students of both sexes for the cultivation of these tendencies. A novel, Artzibascheff's Ssanin, has had great influence in promoting these tendencies. It is not likely that this movement, in its more extravagant forms, will be of long duration. (For some account of this movement, see, e.g., Werner Daya, "Die Sexuelle Bewegung in Russland," Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Aug., 1908; also, "Les Associations Erotiques en Russe," Journal du Droit International Privé, Jan., 1909, fully summarized in Revue des Idées, Feb., 1909.)
In recent years, a movement for sexual freedom has emerged among educated young men and women in Russia. While it is undoubtedly influenced by old traditions of sexual liberty, it shouldn't be confused with true freedom, as it stems from entirely different factors. The intense revolutionary efforts during the late 19th century aimed at gaining political freedom absorbed the younger, more energetic segment of the educated population. This involvement created a high level of mental tension and was often accompanied by a tendency toward asceticism. The constant prospect of death made any focus on sexual matters feel out of sync with the revolutionary spirit. However, in the current century, revolutionary activity has largely diminished. It has been significantly replaced by a growing interest in sexual issues and a rise in sexual indulgence, often taking on a somewhat risqué and sensual nature. Students of both genders have formed "free love" unions to explore these inclinations. A novel, Artzibascheff's Ssanin, has played a significant role in promoting these ideas. It’s unlikely that this movement, especially in its more extreme forms, will last long. (For more on this movement, see, e.g., Werner Daya, "Die Sexuelle Bewegung in Russland," Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Aug., 1908; also, "Les Associations Erotiques en Russe," Journal du Droit International Privé, Jan., 1909, fully summarized in Revue des Idées, Feb., 1909.)
The movement of sexual freedom in Russia lies much deeper, however, than this fashion of sensual license; it is found in remote and uncontaminated parts of the country, and is connected with very ancient customs.
The movement for sexual freedom in Russia goes much deeper than just this trend of sensual indulgence; it exists in isolated and unspoiled areas of the country and is linked to very old traditions.
There is considerable interest in realizing the existence of long-continued sexual freedom—by some incorrectly termed "immorality," for what is in accordance with the customs or mores of a people cannot be immoral—among peoples so virile and robust, so eminently capable of splendid achievements, as the Germans and the Russians. There is, however, a perhaps even greater interest in tracing the development of the same tendency among new prosperous and highly progressive communities who have either not inherited the custom of sexual freedom or are now only reviving it. We may, for instance, take the case of Australia and New Zealand. This development may not, indeed, be altogether recent. The frankness of sexual freedom in Australia and the tolerance in regard to it were conspicuous thirty years ago to those who came from England to live in the Southern continent, and were doubtless equally visible at an earlier date. It seems, however, to have developed with the increase of self-conscious civilization. "After careful inquiry," says the Rev. H. Northcote, who has lived for many years in the Southern hemisphere (Christianity and Sex Problems, Ch. VIII), "the writer finds sufficient evidence that of recent years intercourse out of wedlock has tended towards an actual increase in parts of Australia." Coghlan, the chief authority on Australian statistics, states more precisely in his Childbirth in New South Wales, published a few years ago: "The prevalence of births of ante-nuptial conception—a matter hitherto little understood—has now been completely investigated. In New South Wales, during six years, there were 13,366 marriages, in respect of which there was ante-nuptial conception, and, as the total number of marriages was 49,641, at least twenty-seven marriages in a hundred followed conception. During the same period the illegitimate births numbered 14,779; there were, therefore, 28,145 cases of conception amongst unmarried women; in 13,366 instances marriage preceded the birth of the child, so that the children were legitimatized in rather more than forty-seven cases out of one hundred. A study of the figures of births of ante-nuptial conception makes it obvious that in a very large number of instances pre-marital intercourse is not an anticipation of marriage already arranged, but that the marriages are forced upon the parties, and would not be entered into were it not for the condition of the woman" (cf. Powys, Biometrika, vol. i, 1901-2, p. 30). That marriage should be, as Coghlan puts it, "forced upon the parties," is not, of course, desirable in the general moral interests, and it is also a sign of imperfect moral responsibility in the parties themselves.
There is a significant interest in acknowledging the existence of long-standing sexual freedom—sometimes mistakenly labeled as "immorality," because what aligns with the customs or mores of a society can't really be immoral—among people as strong and capable of great accomplishments as the Germans and the Russians. However, there’s probably an even greater interest in exploring the development of this same trend in new, prosperous, and highly progressive communities that either haven't inherited the tradition of sexual freedom or are just starting to revive it. For example, look at Australia and New Zealand. This shift may not be entirely recent. The openness regarding sexual freedom in Australia and the surrounding acceptance of it were clear thirty years ago to those who moved there from England, and likely visible even earlier. It seems to have grown alongside the advancement of self-aware civilization. "After careful inquiry," says Rev. H. Northcote, who has lived for many years in the Southern hemisphere (Christianity and Sex Problems, Ch. VIII), "the writer finds sufficient evidence that in recent years, out-of-wedlock intercourse has tended to actually increase in parts of Australia." Coghlan, the main authority on Australian statistics, states more specifically in his Childbirth in New South Wales, published a few years ago: "The prevalence of births from ante-nuptial conception—a subject previously little understood—has now been thoroughly investigated. In New South Wales, during six years, there were 13,366 marriages that had ante-nuptial conception, and with a total number of marriages being 49,641, at least twenty-seven marriages in one hundred were preceded by conception. During the same period, there were 14,779 illegitimate births; therefore, there were 28,145 instances of conception among unmarried women; in 13,366 cases, marriage occurred before the child was born, so the children were legitimized in just over forty-seven out of one hundred cases. An examination of the figures regarding births from ante-nuptial conception clearly shows that in many cases, pre-marital intercourse isn't an indication of a planned marriage, but rather that the marriages are a result of pressure on the parties involved and likely wouldn't occur if it weren't for the woman's condition" (cf. Powys, Biometrika, vol. i, 1901-2, p. 30). That marriage should be, as Coghlan puts it, "forced upon the parties," is not ideally in line with broader moral interests and also indicates a lack of mature moral responsibility on the part of those involved.
The existence of such a state of things, in a young country belonging to a part of the world where the general level of prosperity, intelligence, morality and social responsibility may perhaps be said to be higher than in any other region inhabited by people of white race, is a fact of the very first significance when we are attempting to forecast the direction in which civilized morality is moving.
The existence of this situation in a young country, part of a region where the overall levels of prosperity, intelligence, morality, and social responsibility are probably higher than in any other area populated by white people, is extremely significant when we try to predict the direction of civilized morality.
It is sometimes said, or at least implied, that in this movement women are taking only a passive part, and that the initiative lies with men who are probably animated by a desire to escape the responsibilities of marriage. This is very far from being the case.
It’s sometimes said, or at least suggested, that in this movement women are playing only a passive role, and that the initiative comes from men who are likely trying to avoid the responsibilities of marriage. This is far from the truth.
The active part taken by German girls in sexual matters is referred to again and again by the Lutheran pastors in their elaborate and detailed report. Of the Dantzig district it is said "the young girls give themselves to the youths, or even seduce them." The military manœuvres are frequently a source of unchastity in rural districts. "The fault is not merely with the soldiers, but chiefly with the girls, who become half mad as soon as they see a soldier," it is reported from the Dresden district. And in summarizing conditions in East Germany the report states: "In sexual wantonness girls are not behind the young men; they allow themselves to be seduced only too willingly; even grown-up girls often go with half-grown youths, and girls frequently give themselves to several men, one after the other. It is by no means always the youth who effects the seduction, it is very frequently the girls who entice the youth to sexual intercourse; they do not always wait till the men come to their rooms, but will go to the men's rooms and await them in their beds. With this inclination to sexual intercourse, it is not surprising that many believe that after sixteen no girl is a virgin. Unchastity among the rural laboring classes is universal, and equally pronounced in both sexes" (op. cit., vol. i, 218).
The active role of German girls in sexual matters is mentioned repeatedly by Lutheran pastors in their detailed reports. In the Dantzig area, it’s noted that "the young girls give themselves to the boys, or even seduce them." Military maneuvers often lead to promiscuity in rural areas. "The fault isn't just with the soldiers, but mainly with the girls, who go a bit crazy as soon as they see a soldier," is reported from the Dresden area. Summarizing conditions in East Germany, the report states: "In sexual promiscuity, girls are not behind the young men; they allow themselves to be seduced far too easily; even adult girls often go with younger boys, and girls frequently give themselves to several men, one after another. It’s not always the boys who do the seducing; it’s often the girls who entice the boys into sexual encounters; they don't always wait for the guys to come to their rooms but will go to the men's rooms and wait for them in their beds. With this eagerness for sexual encounters, it’s no surprise that many believe no girl remains a virgin after sixteen. Promiscuity among the rural working class is widespread and equally evident in both sexes" (op. cit., vol. i, 218).
Among women of the educated classes the conditions are somewhat different. Restraints, both internal and external, are very much greater. Virginity, at all events in its physical fact, is retained, for the most part, till long past girlhood, and when it is lost that loss is concealed with a scrupulous care and prudence unknown to the working-classes. Yet the fundamental tendencies remain the same. So far as England is concerned, Geoffrey Mortimer quite truly writes (Chapters on Human Love, 1898, p. 117) that the two groups of (1) women who live in constant secret association with a single lover, and (2) women who give themselves to men, without fear, from the force of their passions, are "much larger than is generally supposed. In all classes of society there are women who are only virgins by repute. Many have borne children without being even suspected of cohabitation; but the majority adopt methods of preventing conception. A doctor in a small provincial town declared to me that such irregular intimacies were the rule, and not by any means the exception in his district." As regards Germany, a lady doctor, Frau Adams-Lehmann, states in a volume of the Transactions of the German Society for Combating Venereal Disease (Sexualpädagogik, p. 271): "I can say that during consultation hours I see very few virgins over thirty. These women," she adds, "are sensible, courageous and natural, often the best of their sex; and we ought to give them our moral support. They are working towards a new age."
Among educated women, the situation is quite different. There are significantly greater internal and external restrictions. Virginity, at least in a physical sense, is typically preserved well into adulthood, and when it is lost, that loss is meticulously hidden, with a level of care and caution not seen in working-class women. Nevertheless, the underlying tendencies remain the same. In relation to England, Geoffrey Mortimer accurately states in his book (Chapters on Human Love, 1898, p. 117) that the two groups of (1) women who engage in secret relationships with a single partner and (2) women who freely give themselves to men driven by their passions are "much larger than is generally assumed. Across all social classes, there are women who are only virgins in name. Many have had children without anyone suspecting they lived with a man; most, however, take steps to prevent pregnancy. A doctor in a small town told me that such irregular relationships are the norm, not the exception, in his area." Regarding Germany, a female doctor, Frau Adams-Lehmann, mentions in a publication by the German Society for Combating Venereal Disease (Sexualpädagogik, p. 271): "I can say that during consultation hours, I see very few virgins over thirty. These women," she notes, "are sensible, brave, and genuine, often the best of their kind; and we should offer them our moral support. They are paving the way for a new era."
It is frequently stated that the pronounced tendency witnessed at the present time to dispense as long as possible with the formal ceremony of binding marriage is unfortunate because it places women in a disadvantageous position. In so far as the social environment in which she lives views with disapproval sexual relationship without formal marriage, the statement is obviously to that extent true, though it must be remarked, on the other hand, that when social opinion strongly favors legal marriage it acts as a compelling force in the direction of legitimating free unions. But if the absence of the formal marriage bond constituted a real and intrinsic disadvantage to women in sexual relations they would not show themselves so increasingly ready to dispense with it. And, as a matter of fact, those who are intimately acquainted with the facts declare that the absence of formal marriage tends to give increased consideration to women and is even favorable to fidelity and to the prolongation of the union. This seems to be true as regards people of the most different social classes and even of different races. It is probably based on fundamental psychological facts, for the sense of compulsion always tends to produce a movement of exasperation and revolt. We are not here concerned with the question as to how far formal marriage also is based on natural facts; that is a question which will come up for discussion at a later stage.
It’s often said that the current trend to avoid the formal ceremony of marriage is unfortunate because it puts women at a disadvantage. This is true to some extent, especially when society frowns upon sexual relationships without formal marriage. However, it should also be noted that when social opinion strongly supports legal marriage, it encourages the legitimization of free unions. If not having a formal marriage really put women at a disadvantage in sexual relationships, they wouldn’t be so willing to forgo it. In fact, those who know the facts well say that the absence of formal marriage tends to give women greater consideration and can even be beneficial for fidelity and the longevity of the relationship. This appears to hold true across different social classes and races. It likely stems from fundamental psychological factors, as the feeling of obligation often leads to frustration and rebellion. We won’t delve into whether formal marriage is based on natural facts right now; that’s a topic for later discussion.
The advantage for women of free sexual unions over compulsory marriage is well recognized in the case of the working classes of London, among whom sexual relationships before marriage are not unusual, and are indulgently regarded. It is, for instance, clearly asserted in the monumental work of C. Booth, Life and Labour of the People. "It is even said of rough laborers," we read, for instance, in the final volume of this work (p. 41), "that they behave best if not married to the woman with whom they live." The evidence on this point is often the more impressive because brought forward by people who are very far indeed from being anxious to base any general conclusions on it. Thus in the same volume a clergyman is quoted as saying: "These people manage to live together fairly peaceably so long as they are not married, but if they marry it always seems to lead to blows and rows."
The benefits for women of casual relationships over forced marriage are well acknowledged among the working-class communities in London, where premarital sexual relationships are common and generally accepted. For example, it’s clearly stated in the significant work of C. Booth, Life and Labour of the People. "It’s even said of rough laborers," we read, for instance, in the final volume of this work (p. 41), "that they behave best when they aren't married to the woman they live with." The evidence on this matter is often more convincing because it comes from individuals who are not at all eager to draw broad conclusions from it. In the same volume, a clergyman is quoted saying: "These people manage to live together fairly peacefully as long as they aren't married, but if they marry, it always seems to lead to fights and arguments."
It may be said that in such a case we witness not so much the operation of a natural law as the influences of a great centre of civilization exerting its moralizing effects even on those who stand outside the legally recognized institution of marriage. That contention may, however, be thrust aside. We find exactly the same tendency in Jamaica where the population is largely colored, and the stress of a high civilization can scarcely be said to exist. Legal marriage is here discarded to an even greater extent than in London, for little care is taken to legitimate children by marriage. It was found by a committee appointed to inquire into the marriage laws of Jamaica, that three out of every five births are illegitimate, that is to say that legal illegitimacy has ceased to be immoral, having become the recognized custom of the majority of the inhabitants. There is no social feeling against illegitimacy. The men approve of the decay of legal marriage, because they say the women work better in the house when they are not married; the women approve of it, because they say that men are more faithful when not bound by legal marriage. This has been well brought out by W. P. Livingstone in his interesting book, Black Jamaica (1899). The people recognize, he tells us (p. 210), that "faithful living together constitutes marriage;" they say that they are "married but not parsoned." One reason against legal marriage is that they are disinclined to incur the expense of the official sanction. (In Venezuela, it may be added, where also the majority of births take place outside official marriage, the chief reason is stated to be, not moral laxity, but the same disinclination to pay the expenses of legal weddings.) Frequently in later life, sometimes when they have grown up sons and daughters, couples go through the official ceremony. (In Abyssinia, also, it is stated by Hugues Le Roux, where the people are Christian and marriage is indissoluble and the ceremony expensive, it is not usual for married couples to make their unions legal until old age is coming on, Sexual-Probleme, April, 1908, p. 217.) It is significant that this condition of things in Jamaica, as elsewhere, is associated with the superiority of women. "The women of the peasant class," remarks Livingstone (p. 212), "are still practically independent of the men, and are frequently their superiors, both in physical and mental capacity." They refuse to bind themselves to a man who may turn out to be good for nothing, a burden instead of a help and protection. So long as the unions are free they are likely to be permanent. If made legal, the risk is that they will become intolerable, and cease by one of the parties leaving the other. "The necessity for mutual kindness and forbearance establishes a condition that is the best guarantee of permanency" (p. 214). It is said, however, that under the influence of religious and social pressure the people are becoming more anxious to adopt "respectable" ideas of sexual relationships, though it seems evident, in view of Livingstone's statement, that such respectability is likely to involve a decrease of real morality. Livingstone points out, however, one serious defect in the present conditions which makes it easy for immoral men to escape paternal responsibilities, and this is the absence of legal provision for the registration of the father's name on birth certificates (p. 256). In every country where the majority of births are illegitimate it is an obvious social necessity that the names of both parents should be duly registered on all birth certificates. It has been an unpardonable failure on the part of the Jamaican Government to neglect the simple measure needed to give "each child born in the country a legal father" (p. 258).
It can be said that in this situation we don't just see a natural law at work, but rather the impact of a major center of civilization influencing even those who aren't part of the legally recognized institution of marriage. However, that argument can be set aside. We observe the same tendency in Jamaica, where the population is predominantly Black and the pressures of a high civilization are barely noticeable. Legal marriage is rejected even more here than in London, as there is little concern for legitimizing children through marriage. A committee that looked into Jamaica's marriage laws found that three out of every five births are illegitimate, meaning that legal illegitimacy has lost its stigma and has become the accepted norm for most of the population. There’s no social stigma against illegitimacy. Men support the decline of legal marriage because they believe women perform better at home when they aren’t married; women support it because they believe men are more loyal when they aren’t tied down by legal marriage. This is highlighted by W. P. Livingstone in his engaging book, Black Jamaica (1899). According to him (p. 210), people recognize that "living together faithfully constitutes marriage;" they say they are "married but not parsoned." One reason against legal marriage is their reluctance to incur the costs of official recognition. (In Venezuela, where most births also happen outside of legal marriage, the main reason cited is not moral laxity, but reluctance to pay for legal weddings.) Often, later in life, sometimes when they have grown children, couples will go through the official ceremony. (In Abyssinia, as noted by Hugues Le Roux, where the people are Christian and marriage is unbreakable and costly, it is uncommon for married couples to legalize their unions until they are older, Sexual-Probleme, April 1908, p. 217.) It's notable that this situation in Jamaica, like elsewhere, is linked to the empowerment of women. "The women of the peasant class," Livingstone notes (p. 212), "are still practically independent of men and often superior to them in both physical and mental abilities." They refuse to tie themselves to a man who might turn out to be useless, a burden rather than a support. As long as the unions remain informal, they are likely to last. If made legal, there's a risk they could become unbearable, leading one partner to leave the other. "The need for mutual kindness and patience creates a situation that's the best guarantee of permanence" (p. 214). However, under the weight of religious and social pressure, people are becoming more eager to adopt "respectable" views of sexual relationships, though it seems clear, based on Livingstone's remarks, that such respectability may reduce true morality. Livingstone, however, points out a serious flaw in the current conditions that makes it easy for irresponsible men to avoid fatherly duties: the lack of legal requirements for the father's name to be registered on birth certificates (p. 256). In every country where most births are illegitimate, it is a clear social necessity to have both parents' names properly registered on all birth certificates. The Jamaican Government has made an unforgivable oversight by neglecting a simple measure necessary to give "every child born in the country a legal father" (p. 258).
We thus see that we have to-day reached a position in which—partly owing to economic causes and partly to causes which are more deeply rooted in the tendencies involved by civilization—women are more often detached than of old from legal sexual relationship with men and both sexes are less inclined than in earlier stages of civilization to sacrifice their own independence even when they form such relationships. "I never heard of a woman over sixteen years of age who, prior to the breakdown of aboriginal customs after the coming of the whites, had not a husband," wrote Curr of the Australian Blacks.[271] Even as regards some parts of Europe, it is still possible to-day to make almost the same statement. But in all the richer, more energetic, and progressive countries very different conditions prevail. Marriage is late and a certain proportion of men, and a still larger proportion of women (who exceed the men in the general population) never marry at all.[272]
We can see that today we've reached a point where—partly due to economic reasons and partly because of deeper issues linked to the trends driven by civilization—women are more often disconnected from legal sexual relationships with men, and both genders are less willing than in earlier times to give up their independence, even when they are in such relationships. "I never heard of a woman over sixteen years of age who, before the collapse of native customs after the arrival of white people, did not have a husband," wrote Curr about the Australian Blacks. Even in some parts of Europe, it's still possible to make almost the same claim today. However, in all the wealthier, more dynamic, and progressive countries, very different conditions exist. Marriage happens later, and a certain percentage of men and an even larger percentage of women (who outnumber men in the general population) never get married at all.
Before we consider the fateful significance of this fact of the growing proportion of adult unmarried women whose sexual relationships are unrecognized by the state and largely unrecognized altogether, it may be well to glance summarily at the two historical streams of tendency, both still in action among us, which affect the status of women, the one favoring the social equality of the sexes, the other favoring the social subjection of women. It is not difficult to trace these two streams both in conduct and opinion, in practical morality and in theoretical morality.
Before we look at the important implications of the increasing number of adult unmarried women whose sexual relationships the state doesn’t recognize and that are mostly unacknowledged altogether, it’s helpful to briefly review the two historical forces that are still influencing us today regarding the status of women. One promotes social equality between the sexes, while the other supports the social subordination of women. It’s not hard to see these two forces in our actions and beliefs, in both practical and theoretical morality.
At one time it was widely held that in early states of society, before the establishment of the patriarchal stage which places women under the protection of men, a matriarchal stage prevailed in which women possessed supreme power.[273] Bachofen, half a century ago, was the great champion of this view. He found a typical example of a matriarchal state among the ancient Lycians of Asia Minor with whom, Herodotus stated, the child takes the name of the mother, and follows her status, not that of the father.[274] Such peoples, Bachofen believed, were gynæcocratic; power was in the hands of women. It can no longer be said that this opinion, in the form held by Bachofen, meets with any considerable support. As to the widespread prevalence of descent through the mother, there is no doubt whatever that it has prevailed very widely. But such descent through the mother, it has become recognized, by no means necessarily involves the power of the mother, and mother-descent may even be combined with a patriarchal system.[275] There has even been a tendency to run to the opposite extreme from Bachofen and to deny that mother-descent conferred any special claim for consideration on women. That, however, seems scarcely in accordance with the evidence and even in the absence of evidence could scarcely be regarded as probable. It would seem that we may fairly take as a type of the matriarchal family that based on the ambil anak marriage of Sumatra, in which the husband lives in the wife's family, paying nothing and occupying a subordinate position. The example of the Lycians is here in point, for although, as reported by Herodotus, there is nothing to show that there was anything of the nature of a gynæcocracy in Lycia, we know that women in all these regions of Asia Minor enjoyed high consideration and influence, traces of which may be detected in the early literature and history of Christianity. A decisive and better known example of the favorable influence of mother-descent on the status of woman is afforded by the beena marriage of early Arabia. Under such a system the wife is not only preserved from the subjection involved by purchase, which always casts upon her some shadow of the inferiority belonging to property, but she herself is the owner of the tent and the household property, and enjoys the dignity always involved by the possession of property and the ability to free herself from her husband.[276]
At one point, it was commonly believed that in the early stages of societies, before the patriarchal stage arose that placed women under the protection of men, a matriarchal stage existed where women held supreme power.[273] Bachofen, a prominent figure from half a century ago, strongly supported this idea. He found a classic example of a matriarchal society among the ancient Lycians of Asia Minor, where Herodotus noted that children took their mother’s name and followed her social status, not their father's.[274] Bachofen believed these societies were gynæcocratic, meaning power was in the hands of women. However, it can no longer be claimed that Bachofen's view receives significant support. While it's clear that matrilineal descent has been widespread, it does not automatically imply that women had power, and matrilineality can coexist with a patriarchal system.[275] There has even been a tendency to swing to the opposite extreme of Bachofen, denying that matrilineal descent gives women any special status. However, this stance doesn't align with the evidence and seems unlikely, even in the absence of strong proof. A representative example of a matriarchal family might be the ambil anak marriage from Sumatra, where the husband lives with the wife's family, pays nothing, and holds a subordinate role. The situation among the Lycians is relevant here; although Herodotus noted there wasn’t a true gynecocracy in Lycia, it’s shown that women in this region of Asia Minor held significant respect and influence, traces of which can be found in early Christian literature and history. A clear and well-known example of how matrilineal descent positively influenced women's status is found in the beena marriage in early Arabia. In this system, the wife is not subjected to the implications of being bought, which carries a shadow of inferiority associated with being property; instead, she owns the tent and household belongings, enjoying the dignity that comes with ownership and the ability to free herself from her husband.[276]
It is also impossible to avoid connecting the primitive tendency to mother-descent, and the emphasis it involved on maternal rather than paternal generative energy, with the tendency to place the goddess rather than the god in the forefront of primitive pantheons, a tendency which cannot possibly fail to reflect honor on the sex to which the supreme deity belongs, and which may be connected with the large part which primitive women often play in the functions of religion. Thus, according to traditions common to all the central tribes of Australia, the woman formerly took a much greater share in the performance of sacred ceremonies which are now regarded as coming almost exclusively within the masculine province, and in at least one tribe which seems to retain ancient practices the women still actually take part in these ceremonies.[277] It seems to have been much the same in Europe. We observe, too, both in the Celtic pantheon and among Mediterranean peoples, that while all the ancient divinities have receded into the dim background yet the goddesses loom larger than the gods.[278] In Ireland, where ancient custom and tradition have always been very tenaciously preserved, women retained a very high position, and much freedom both before and after marriage. "Every woman," it was said, "is to go the way she willeth freely," and after marriage she enjoyed a better position and greater freedom of divorce than was afforded either by the Christian Church or the English common law.[279] There is less difficulty in recognizing that mother-descent was peculiarly favorable to the high status of women when we realize that even under very unfavorable conditions women have been able to exert great pressure on the men and to resist successfully the attempts to tyrannize over them.[280]
It’s also impossible to ignore the connection between the early inclination towards mother-descent, which emphasized maternal over paternal generative energy, and the tendency to prioritize goddesses over gods in early pantheons. This trend undoubtedly reflects positively on the gender of the supreme deity and may relate to the significant role primitive women often played in religious functions. For instance, traditions common to all the central tribes of Australia indicate that women used to participate much more actively in sacred ceremonies, which today are mainly seen as a male domain. In at least one tribe that appears to maintain ancient customs, women still participate in these ceremonies. It seems to have been similar in Europe. We also notice, both in the Celtic pantheon and among Mediterranean cultures, that while all the ancient deities have faded into the background, goddesses stand out more than gods. In Ireland, where ancient customs and traditions have been carefully preserved, women maintained a high status and enjoyed considerable freedom both before and after marriage. It was said, “Every woman is to go the way she willeth freely,” and after marriage, women had a better standing and greater divorce rights compared to those afforded by the Christian Church or English common law. It’s easier to recognize that mother-descent particularly favored the high status of women when we acknowledge that even in very unfavorable circumstances, women have been able to exert considerable influence over men and successfully resist attempts to dominate them.
If we consider the status of woman in the great empires of antiquity we find on the whole that in their early stage, the stage of growth, as well as in their final stage, the stage of fruition, women tend to occupy a favorable position, while in their middle stage, usually the stage of predominating military organization on a patriarchal basis, women occupy a less favorable position. This cyclic movement seems to be almost a natural law of the development of great social groups. It was apparently well marked in the very stable and orderly growth of Babylonia. In the earliest times a Babylonian woman had complete independence and equal rights with her brothers and her husband; later (as shown by the code of Hamurabi) a woman's rights, though not her duties, were more circumscribed; in the still later Neo-Babylonian periods, she again acquired equal rights with her husband.[281]
If we look at the status of women in the great empires of ancient times, we generally find that in both their early stages, when they were growing, and in their final stages, when they were thriving, women tended to have a favorable position. However, during their middle stage, which was often dominated by military organization on a patriarchal basis, women's status became less favorable. This cyclical pattern seems to be almost a natural law in the development of large social groups. It was clearly evident in the stable and orderly growth of Babylonia. In the earliest days, a Babylonian woman had complete independence and equal rights with her brothers and husband. Later, as indicated by the Code of Hammurabi, a woman's rights—though not her responsibilities—became more limited; but in the later Neo-Babylonian periods, she regained equal rights with her husband.[281]
In Egypt the position of women stood highest at the end, but it seems to have been high throughout the whole of the long course of Egyptian history, and continuously improving, while the fact that little regard was paid to prenuptial chastity and that marriage contracts placed no stress on virginity indicate the absence of the conception of women as property. More than three thousand five hundred years ago men and women were recognized as equal in Egypt. The high position of the Egyptian woman is significantly indicated by the fact that her child was never illegitimate; illegitimacy was not recognized even in the case of a slave woman's child.[282] "It is the glory of Egyptian morality," says Amélineau, "to have been the first to express the Dignity of Woman."[283] The idea of marital authority was altogether unknown in Egypt. There can be no doubt that the high status of woman in two civilizations so stable, so vital, so long-lived, and so influential on human culture as Babylonia and Egypt, is a fact of much significance.
In Egypt, the status of women was at its peak towards the end, but it appears to have been strong throughout much of Egyptian history and continually improving. The lack of emphasis on premarital chastity and the fact that marriage contracts didn’t prioritize virginity suggest that women weren’t viewed as property. Over three thousand five hundred years ago, men and women were recognized as equals in Egypt. The elevated status of Egyptian women is highlighted by the fact that their children were never considered illegitimate; even a slave woman’s child was not regarded as illegitimate. “It is the glory of Egyptian morality,” says Amélineau, “to have been the first to express the Dignity of Woman.” The concept of marital authority was completely absent in Egypt. It’s clear that the high status of women in two stable, vibrant, long-lasting, and influential cultures like Babylonia and Egypt is a significant fact.
Among the Jews there seems to have been no intermediate stage of subordination of women, but instead a gradual progress throughout from complete subjection of the woman as wife to ever greater freedom. At first the husband could repudiate his wife at will without cause. (This was not an extension of patriarchal authority, but a purely marital authority.) The restrictions on this authority gradually increased, and begin to be observable already in the Book of Deuteronomy. The Mishnah went further and forbade divorce whenever the wife's condition inspired pity (as in insanity, captivity, etc.). By A.D. 1025, divorce was no longer possible except for legitimate reasons or by the wife's consent. At the same time, the wife also began to acquire the right of divorce in the form of compelling the husband to repudiate her on penalty of punishment in case of refusal. On divorce the wife became an independent woman in her own right, and was permitted to carry off the dowry which her husband gave her on marriage. Thus, notwithstanding Jewish respect for the letter of the law, the flexible jurisprudence of the Rabbis, in harmony with the growth of culture, accorded an ever-growing measure of sexual justice and equality to women (D. W. Amram, The Jewish Law of Divorce).
Among the Jews, there doesn't seem to have been any middle ground regarding the subordination of women. Instead, there was a gradual shift from complete subservience of wives to increasing freedom. Initially, husbands could dismiss their wives without any reason. (This wasn't a matter of extending patriarchal power, but rather a marital authority.) Over time, the limitations on this authority became more evident, starting in the Book of Deuteronomy. The Mishnah took it further by prohibiting divorce when a wife's situation evoked compassion (like insanity, captivity, etc.). By A.D. 1025, divorce was only permitted for valid reasons or if the wife consented. At the same time, wives began to gain the right to initiate divorce by forcing their husbands to reject them, with penalties for refusal. When divorced, a wife became an independent individual and could take her dowry with her, which her husband had given her upon marriage. Thus, despite Jewish respect for the letter of the law, the adaptable legal interpretations by the Rabbis, in line with cultural advancements, allowed for growing sexual justice and equality for women (D. W. Amram, The Jewish Law of Divorce).
Among the Arabs the tendency of progress has also been favorable to women in many respects, especially as regards inheritance. Before Mahommed, in accordance with the system prevailing at Medina, women had little or no right of inheritance. The legislation of the Koran modified this rule, without entirely abolishing it, and placed women in a much better position. This is attributed largely to the fact that Mahommed belonged not to Medina, but to Mecca, where traces of matriarchal custom still survived (W. Marçais, Des Parents et des Alliés Successibles en Droit Musulman).
Among the Arabs, the trend of progress has also positively impacted women in many ways, particularly regarding inheritance. Before Muhammad, according to the rules in Medina, women had little to no rights to inherit. The legislation of the Quran changed this rule, without completely eliminating it, and improved women's positions significantly. This is largely attributed to the fact that Muhammad came from Mecca, where remnants of matriarchal customs still existed (W. Marçais, Des Parents et des Alliés Successibles en Droit Musulman).
It may be pointed out—for it is not always realized—that even that stage of civilization—when it occurs—which involves the subordination and subjection of woman and her rights really has its origin in the need for the protection of women, and is sometimes even a sign of the acquirement of new privileges by women. They are, as it were, locked up, not in order to deprive them of their rights, but in order to guard those rights. In the later more stable phase of civilization, when women are no longer exposed to the same dangers, this motive is forgotten and the guardianship of woman and her rights seems, and indeed has really become, a hardship rather than an advantage.
It should be noted—though it's not always understood—that even that phase of civilization—when it happens—which involves the subordination and restrictions on women and their rights actually comes from the need to protect women, and can even be a sign of women gaining new privileges. They are, in a sense, confined not to take away their rights, but to safeguard those rights. In the later, more stable phase of civilization, when women are no longer facing the same dangers, this reasoning is forgotten and the protection of women and their rights appears, and truly has become, a burden rather than a benefit.
Of the status of women at Rome in the earliest periods we know little or nothing; the patriarchal system was already firmly established when Roman history begins to become clear and it involved unusually strict subordination of the woman to her father first and then to her husband. But nothing is more certain than that the status of women in Rome rose with the rise of civilization, exactly in the same way as in Babylonia and in Egypt. In the case of Rome, however, the growing refinement of civilization, and the expansion of the Empire, were associated with the magnificent development of the system of Roman law, which in its final forms consecrated the position of women. In the last days of the Republic women already began to attain the same legal level as men, and later the great Antonine jurisconsults, guided by their theory of natural law, reached the conception of the equality of the sexes as a principle of the code of equity. The patriarchal subordination of women fell into complete discredit, and this continued until, in the days of Justinian, under the influence of Christianity, the position of women began to suffer.[284] In the best days the older forms of Roman marriage gave place to a form (apparently old but not hitherto considered reputable) which amounted in law to a temporary deposit of the woman by her family. She was independent of her husband (more especially as she came to him with her own dowry) and only nominally dependent on her family. Marriage was a private contract, accompanied by a religious ceremony if desired, and being a contract it could be dissolved, for any reason, in the presence of competent witnesses and with due legal forms, after the advice of the family council had been taken. Consent was the essence of this marriage and no shame, therefore, attached to its dissolution. Nor had it any evil effect either on the happiness or the morals of Roman women.[285] Such a system is obviously more in harmony with modern civilized feeling than any system that has ever been set up in Christendom.
Of the status of women in early Rome, we know very little. The patriarchal system was already well-established when Roman history becomes clearer, which meant women were strictly subordinate to their fathers first and then to their husbands. However, it's clear that the status of women in Rome improved as civilization progressed, just like in Babylonia and Egypt. In Rome's case, the advancing refinement of civilization and the expansion of the Empire coincided with the impressive development of Roman law, which ultimately defined women's roles more formally. By the late Republic, women started to achieve legal equality with men, and later, influential Antonine lawyers, following their understanding of natural law, acknowledged the equality of the sexes as a principle within the legal system. The patriarchal dominance of women fell out of favor, and this persisted until Justinian's era when, under the influence of Christianity, women's positions began to decline. In the more favorable times, earlier forms of Roman marriage were replaced by a form that, while seemingly old, was not previously regarded as respectable and amounted to a temporary arrangement in which a woman was essentially entrusted to her husband’s care by her family. Women were independent of their husbands (especially since they brought their own dowries) and only nominally dependent on their families. Marriage was a private agreement, which could include a religious ceremony if desired, and being a contract, it could be ended for any reason in front of witnesses and following proper legal procedures after consulting the family council. Consent was essential to this marriage, so there was no shame associated with its dissolution. It also didn't negatively impact the happiness or morals of Roman women. Such a system aligns more closely with modern civilized views than any system that has been established in Christendom.
In Rome, also, it is clear that this system was not a mere legal invention but the natural outgrowth of an enlightened public feeling in favor of the equality of men and women, often even in the field of sexual morality. Plautus, who makes the old slave Syra ask why there is not the same law in this respect for the husband as for the wife,[286] had preceded the legist Ulpian who wrote: "It seems to be very unjust that a man demands chastity of his wife while he himself shows no example of it."[287] Such demands lie deeper than social legislation, but the fact that these questions presented themselves to typical Roman men indicates the general attitude towards women. In the final stage of Roman society the bond of the patriarchal system so far as women were concerned dwindled to a mere thread binding them to their fathers and leaving them quite free face to face with their husbands. "The Roman matron of the Empire," says Hobhouse, "was more fully her own mistress than the married woman of any earlier civilization, with the possible exception of a certain period of Egyptian history, and, it must be added, than the wife of any later civilization down to our own generation."[288]
In Rome, it’s clear that this system wasn’t just a legal concept but a natural result of an enlightened public attitude favoring equality between men and women, often even regarding sexual morality. Plautus, who has the old slave Syra ask why the same law doesn’t apply to husbands as it does to wives,[286] was ahead of the jurist Ulpian, who stated: "It seems very unfair that a man demands chastity from his wife while he sets no such example himself."[287] Such demands go deeper than social laws, but the fact that these issues were raised by typical Roman men shows the general attitude toward women. In the later stage of Roman society, the patriarchal bond concerning women became a mere thread, leaving them quite independent in relation to their husbands. "The Roman matron of the Empire," says Hobhouse, "was more fully her own mistress than the married woman of any earlier civilization, with the possible exception of a certain period of Egyptian history, and, it should be noted, more so than the wife of any later civilization up to our own time."[288]
On the strength of the statements of two satirical writers, Juvenal and Tacitus, it has been supposed by many that Roman women of the late period were given up to license. It is, however, idle to seek in satirists any balanced picture of a great civilization. Hobhouse (loc. cit., p. 216) concludes that on the whole, Roman women worthily retained the position of their husbands' companions, counsellors and friends which they had held when an austere system placed them legally in his power. Most authorities seem now to be of this opinion, though at an earlier period Friedländer expressed himself more dubiously. Thus Dill, in his judicious Roman Society (p. 163), states that the Roman woman's position, both in law and in fact, rose during the Empire; without being less virtuous or respected, she became far more accomplished and attractive; with fewer restraints she had greater charm and influence, even in public affairs, and was more and more the equal of her husband. "In the last age of the Western Empire there is no deterioration in the position and influence of women." Principal Donaldson, also, in his valuable historical sketch, Woman, considers (p. 113) that there was no degradation of morals in the Roman Empire; "the licentiousness of Pagan Rome is nothing to the licentiousness of Christian Africa, Rome, and Gaul, if we can put any reliance on the description of Salvian." Salvian's description of Christendom is probably exaggerated and one-sided, but exactly the same may be said in an even greater degree of the descriptions of ancient Rome left by clever Pagan satirists and ascetic Christian preachers.
Based on the statements of two satirical writers, Juvenal and Tacitus, many people believe that Roman women in the late period indulged in excess. However, it's pointless to look to satirists for a balanced view of a great civilization. Hobhouse (loc. cit., p. 216) concludes that, overall, Roman women maintained their roles as companions, advisors, and friends to their husbands, a position they held when a strict system put them legally under his authority. Most scholars seem to agree with this view now, although earlier, Friedländer expressed more uncertainty. Dill, in his well-reasoned work Roman Society (p. 163), states that the status of Roman women, both legally and in practice, improved during the Empire; without being less virtuous or respected, they became more accomplished and attractive. With fewer restrictions, they had more charm and influence, even in public matters, and increasingly stood as equals to their husbands. "In the last age of the Western Empire, there is no decline in the position and influence of women." Principal Donaldson, in his insightful historical overview, Woman, also argues (p. 113) that there was no moral decline in the Roman Empire; "the moral looseness of Pagan Rome pales in comparison to that of Christian Africa, Rome, and Gaul, if we can trust Salvian's account." Salvian's portrayal of Christendom is likely exaggerated and one-sided, but the same is true, to an even greater extent, of the portrayals of ancient Rome produced by witty Pagan satirists and ascetic Christian preachers.
It thus becomes necessary to leap over considerably more than a thousand years before we reach a stage of civilization in any degree approaching in height the final stage of Roman society. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, at first in France, then in England, we find once more the moral and legal movement tending towards the equalization of women with men. We find also a long series of pioneers of that movement foreshadowing its developments: Mary Astor, "Sophia, a Lady of Quality," Ségur, Mrs. Wheeler, and very notably Mary Wollstonecraft in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, and John Stuart Mill in The Subjection of Women.[289]
It becomes necessary to jump over well over a thousand years before we reach a level of civilization that comes anywhere close to the peak of Roman society. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, initially in France and later in England, we see a renewed moral and legal movement aimed at equalizing women with men. We also find a long list of pioneers of that movement hinting at its future developments: Mary Astor, "Sophia, a Lady of Quality," Ségur, Mrs. Wheeler, and especially Mary Wollstonecraft in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, and John Stuart Mill in The Subjection of Women.[289]
The main European stream of influences in this matter within historical times has involved, we can scarcely doubt when we take into consideration its complex phenomena as a whole, the maintenance of an inequality to the disadvantage of women. The fine legacy of Roman law to Europe was indeed favorable to women, but that legacy was dispersed and for the most part lost in the more predominating influence of tenacious Teutonic custom associated with the vigorously organized Christian Church. Notwithstanding that the facts do not all point in the same direction, and that there is consequently some difference of opinion, it seems evident that on the whole both Teutonic custom and Christian religion were unfavorable to the equality of women with men. Teutonic custom in this matter was determined by two decisive factors: (1) the existence of marriage by purchase which although, as Crawley has pointed out, it by no means necessarily involves the degradation of women, certainly tends to place them in an inferior position, and (2) pre-occupation with war which is always accompanied by a depreciation of peaceful and feminine occupations and an indifference to love. Christianity was at its origin favorable to women because it liberated and glorified the most essentially feminine emotions, but when it became an established and organized religion with definitely ascetic ideals, its whole emotional tone grew unfavorable to women. It had from the first excluded them from any priestly function. It now regarded them as the special representatives of the despised element of sex in life.[290] The eccentric Tertullian had once declared that woman was janua Diaboli; nearly seven hundred years later, even the gentle and philosophic Anselm wrote: Femina fax est Satanæ.[291]
The main European influences in this matter throughout history clearly show, when we consider the complex phenomena as a whole, the persistence of inequality to the disadvantage of women. The valuable legacy of Roman law was indeed beneficial to women, but that legacy was scattered and mostly lost amidst the stronger influence of stubborn Teutonic custom tied to the well-organized Christian Church. Even though not all the facts support the same view, and there's some disagreement, it seems clear that overall both Teutonic custom and Christian religion were against the equality of women with men. Teutonic custom in this area was shaped by two key factors: (1) the existence of marriage by purchase, which, as Crawley pointed out, doesn’t necessarily mean the degradation of women but does tend to place them in a lower position, and (2) a focus on war, which always diminishes peaceful and feminine roles and shows indifference to love. Christianity initially supported women because it freed and celebrated the most inherently feminine emotions, but when it became an established and organized religion with strict ascetic ideals, its overall emotional tone became unfavorable to women. It had excluded them from any priestly roles from the beginning. It now viewed them as the special representatives of the despised element of sex in life.[290] The eccentric Tertullian once declared that woman was janua Diaboli; nearly seven hundred years later, even the gentle and philosophical Anselm wrote: Femina fax est Satanæ.[291]
Thus among the Franks, with whom the practice of monogamy prevailed, a woman was never free; she could not buy or sell or inherit without the permission of those to whom she belonged. She passed into the possession of her husband by acquisition, and when he fixed the wedding day he gave her parents coins of small money as arrha, and the day after the wedding she received from him a present, the morgengabe. A widow belonged to her parents again (Bedollière, Histoire de Mœurs des Français, vol. i, p. 180). It is true that the Salic law ordained a pecuniary fine for touching a woman, even for squeezing her finger, but it is clear that the offence thus committed was an offence against property, and by no means against the sanctity of a woman's personality. The primitive German husband could sell his children, and sometimes his wife, even into slavery. In the eleventh century cases of wife-selling are still heard of, though no longer recognized by law.
Thus among the Franks, where monogamy was the norm, a woman was never truly free; she couldn’t buy or sell or inherit anything without the permission of those to whom she was connected. She became her husband’s possession through marriage, and when he set the wedding date, he gave her parents a small amount of money as an arrha. The day after the wedding, she received a gift from him, known as the morgengabe. A widow returned to her parents’ control (Bedollière, Histoire de Mœurs des Français, vol. i, p. 180). It’s true that the Salic law imposed a fine for touching a woman, even just squeezing her finger, but it’s clear that this offense was seen as a violation of property rights, not as an affront to a woman’s individuality. The primitive German husband could sell his children and sometimes even his wife into slavery. In the eleventh century, cases of wife-selling were still reported, although they were no longer legally recognized.
The traditions of Christianity were more favorable to sexual equality than were Teutonic customs, but in becoming amalgamated with those customs they added their own special contribution as to woman's impurity. This spiritual inferiority of woman was significantly shown by the restrictions sometimes placed on women in church, and even in the right to enter a church; in some places they were compelled to remain in the narthex, even in non-monastic churches (see for these rules, Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, art. "Sexes, Separation of").
The traditions of Christianity were generally more supportive of sexual equality than Teutonic customs. However, as they merged with those customs, they also contributed to the idea of women's impurity. This belief in women's spiritual inferiority was clearly demonstrated by the restrictions that were sometimes placed on women in churches, including the right to enter the church itself. In some places, women had to stay in the narthex, even in non-monastic churches (see for these rules, Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, art. "Sexes, Separation of").
By attempting to desexualize the idea of man and to oversexualize the idea of woman, Christianity necessarily degraded the position of woman and the conception of womanhood. As Donaldson well remarks, in pointing this out (op. cit., p. 182), "I may define man as a male human being and woman as a female human being.... What the early Christians did was to strike the 'male' out of the definition of man, and 'human being' out of the definition of woman." Religion generally appears to be a powerfully depressing influence on the position of woman notwithstanding the appeal which it makes to woman. Westermarck considers, indeed (Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. i, p. 669), that religion "has probably been the most persistent cause of the wife's subjection to her husband's rule."
By trying to make the concept of man less sexual and overly sexualizing the concept of woman, Christianity inevitably lowered the status of women and the idea of womanhood. As Donaldson points out (op. cit., p. 182), "I can define man as a male human being and woman as a female human being.... What the early Christians did was remove 'male' from the definition of man and 'human being' from the definition of woman." Overall, religion seems to be a strongly negative influence on the status of women, despite its appeal to them. Westermarck argues that religion "has probably been the most persistent cause of the wife's subjection to her husband's rule" (Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. i, p. 669).
It is sometimes said that the Christian tendency to place women in an inferior spiritual position went so far that a church council formally denied that women have souls. This foolish story has indeed been repeated in a parrot-like fashion by a number of writers. The source of the story is probably to be found in the fact, recorded by Gregory of Tours, in his history (lib. viii, cap. XX), that at the Council of Mâcon, in 585, a bishop was in doubt as to whether the term "man" included woman, but was convinced by the other members of the Council that it did. The same difficulty has presented itself to lawyers in more modern times, and has not always been resolved so favorably to woman as by the Christian Council of Mâcon.
It’s often said that the Christian practice of placing women in a lower spiritual status went as far as a church council officially stating that women don’t have souls. This ridiculous claim has indeed been repeated mindlessly by several writers. The origin of this story likely comes from a fact noted by Gregory of Tours in his history (lib. viii, cap. XX), that at the Council of Mâcon in 585, a bishop questioned whether the term "man" included women but was persuaded by the other council members that it did. A similar issue has come up for lawyers in more recent times, and it hasn’t always been resolved as favorably for women as it was by the Christian Council of Mâcon.
The low estimate of women that prevailed even in the early Church is admitted by Christian scholars. "We cannot but notice," writes Meyrick (art. "Marriage," Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities), "even in the greatest of the Christian fathers a lamentably low estimate of woman, and consequently of the marriage relationship. Even St. Augustine can see no justification for marriage, except in a grave desire deliberately adopted of having children; and in accordance with this view, all married intercourse, except for this single purpose, is harshly condemned. If marriage is sought after for the sake of children, it is justifiable; if entered into as a remedium to avoid worse evils, it is pardonable; the idea of the mutual society, help, and comfort that the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity, hardly existed, and could hardly yet exist."
The low opinion of women that existed even in the early Church is acknowledged by Christian scholars. "We can't help but notice," writes Meyrick (art. "Marriage," Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities), "even among the greatest of the Christian fathers, a sadly low view of women, and by extension, of the marriage relationship. Even St. Augustine sees no justification for marriage except for a serious desire to have children; according to this perspective, all married intimacy, except for this single purpose, is harshly condemned. If marriage is pursued for the sake of having children, it is considered justifiable; if entered into as a remedium to avoid greater evils, it is acceptable; the idea of mutual companionship, support, and comfort that each person should provide to the other, both in good times and bad, barely existed, and could hardly exist even now."
From the woman's point of view, Lily Braun, in her important work on the woman question (Die Frauenfrage, 1901, pp. 28 et seq.) concludes that, in so far as Christianity was favorable to women, we must see that favorable influence in the placing of women on the same moral level as men, as illustrated in the saying of Jesus, "Let him who is without sin amongst you cast the first stone," implying that each sex owes the same fidelity. It reached, she adds, no further than this. "Christianity, which women accepted as a deliverance with so much enthusiasm, and died for as martyrs, has not fulfilled their hopes."
From the woman's perspective, Lily Braun, in her significant work on the woman question (Die Frauenfrage, 1901, pp. 28 et seq.), concludes that while Christianity has been somewhat beneficial to women, this benefit is mainly seen in placing women on the same moral level as men. This is illustrated by Jesus’ saying, "Let him who is without sin among you cast the first stone," suggesting that both genders are equally accountable. She further notes that it did not go beyond this. "Christianity, which women embraced as a salvation with great enthusiasm and for which they sacrificed their lives as martyrs, has not lived up to their expectations."
Even as regards the moral equality of the sexes in marriage, the position of Christian authorities was sometimes equivocal. One of the greatest of the Fathers, St. Basil, in the latter half of the fourth century, distinguished between adultery and fornication as committed by a married man; if with a married woman, it was adultery; if with an unmarried woman, it was merely fornication. In the former case, a wife should not receive her husband back; in the latter case, she should (art. "Adultery," Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities). Such a decision, by attaching supreme importance to a distinction which could make no difference to the wife, involved a failure to recognize her moral personality. Many of the Fathers in the Western Church, however, like Jerome, Augustine, and Ambrose, could see no reason why the moral law should not be the same for the husband as for the wife, but as late Roman feeling both on the legal and popular side was already approximating to that view, the influence of Christianity was scarcely required to attain it. It ultimately received formal sanction in the Roman Canon Law, which decreed that adultery is equally committed by either conjugal party in two degrees: (1) simplex, of the married with the unmarried, and (2) duplex, of the married with the married.
Even regarding the moral equality of genders in marriage, the stance of Christian authorities was sometimes ambiguous. One of the greatest church Fathers, St. Basil, in the latter half of the fourth century, made a distinction between adultery and fornication when committed by a married man; if it was with a married woman, it was considered adultery; if it was with an unmarried woman, it was merely fornication. In the first case, a wife should not take her husband back; in the second case, she should (art. "Adultery," Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities). This ruling, by placing utmost importance on a distinction that made no difference to the wife, failed to acknowledge her moral individuality. However, many of the Fathers in the Western Church, like Jerome, Augustine, and Ambrose, saw no reason why the moral law shouldn’t apply equally to both the husband and the wife. By the time Roman attitudes—both legal and societal—were beginning to align with that view, the influence of Christianity was hardly needed to achieve it. It ultimately received formal approval in Roman Canon Law, which stated that adultery is equally committed by either spouse in two forms: (1) simplex, involving a married person with an unmarried person, and (2) duplex, involving a married person with another married person.
It can scarcely be said, however, that Christianity succeeded in attaining the inclusion of this view of the moral equality of the sexes into actual practical morality. It was accepted in theory; it was not followed in practice. W. G. Sumner, discussing this question (Folkways, pp. 359-361), concludes: "Why are these views not in the mores? Undoubtedly it is because they are dogmatic in form, invented or imposed by theological authority or philosophical speculation. They do not grow out of the experience of life, and cannot be verified by it. The reasons are in ultimate physiological facts, by virtue of which one is a woman and the other is a man." There is, however, more to be said on this point later.
It can hardly be said, though, that Christianity managed to incorporate this idea of moral equality between the sexes into real-life morality. It was accepted in theory; it just wasn't practiced. W. G. Sumner, addressing this issue (Folkways, pp. 359-361), concludes: "Why aren't these views part of the mores? Clearly, it’s because they are dogmatic in nature, created or imposed by religious authority or philosophical reasoning. They don't stem from life experience and can't be validated by it. The reasons lie in fundamental physiological facts, by which one is a woman and the other is a man." However, there’s more to discuss on this topic later.
It was probably, however, not so much the Church as Teutonic customs and the development of the feudal system, with the masculine and military ideals it fostered, that was chiefly decisive in fixing the inferior position of women in the mediæval world. Even the ideas of chivalry, which have often been supposed to be peculiarly favorable to women, so far as they affected women seem to have been of little practical significance.
It was likely not just the Church but also German customs and the rise of the feudal system, along with the masculine and military ideals it promoted, that primarily determined the subordinate status of women in the medieval world. Even the concepts of chivalry, often thought to be particularly beneficial for women, seemed to have had little real impact on their situation.
In his great work on chivalry Gautier brings forward much evidence to show that the feudal spirit, like the military spirit always and everywhere, on the whole involved at bottom a disdain for women, even though it occasionally idealized them. "Go into your painted and gilded rooms," we read in Renaus de Montauban, "sit in the shade, make yourselves comfortable, drink, eat, work tapestry, dye silk, but remember that you must not occupy yourselves with our affairs. Our business is to strike with the steel sword. Silence!" And if the woman insists she is struck on the face till the blood comes. The husband had a legal right to beat his wife, not only for adultery, but even for contradicting him. Women were not, however, entirely without power, and in a thirteenth century collection of Coutumes, it is set down that a husband must only beat his wife reasonably, resnablement. (As regards the husband's right to chastise his wife, see also Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. i, p. 234. In England it was not until the reign of Charles II, from which so many modern movements date, that the husband was deprived of this legal right.)
In his major work on chivalry, Gautier presents a lot of evidence showing that the feudal spirit, much like the military spirit seen everywhere, fundamentally involved a disregard for women, even if it occasionally idealized them. "Go into your decorated and golden rooms," we read in Renaus de Montauban, "sit in the shade, make yourselves comfortable, drink, eat, work on tapestries, dye silk, but remember that you must not concern yourselves with our matters. Our job is to fight with the steel sword. Silence!" And if a woman insists on speaking, she is struck in the face until she bleeds. A husband had the legal right to hit his wife, not just for adultery, but even for disagreeing with him. However, women weren't completely powerless, as a 13th-century collection of Coutumes states that a husband must only beat his wife reasonably, resnablement. (For more on the husband's right to discipline his wife, see also Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. i, p. 234. In England, it wasn't until the reign of Charles II, which is the starting point for many modern movements, that the husband lost this legal right.)
In the eyes of a feudal knight, it may be added, the beauty of a horse competed, often successfully, with the beauty of a woman. In Girbers de Metz, two knights, Garin and his cousin Girbert, ride by a window at which sits a beautiful girl with the face of a rose and the white flesh of a lily. "Look, cousin Girbert, look! By Saint Mary, a beautiful woman!" "Ah," Girbert replies, "a beautiful beast is my horse!" "I have never seen anything so charming as that young girl with her fresh color and her dark eyes," says Garin. "I know no steed to compare with mine," retorts Girbert. When the men were thus absorbed in the things that pertain to war, it is not surprising that amorous advances were left to young girls to make. "In all the chansons de geste," Gautier remarks, "it is the young girls who make the advances, often with effrontery," though, he adds, wives are represented as more virtuous (L. Gautier, La Chevalerie, pp. 236-8, 348-50).
In the eyes of a feudal knight, it's worth noting that the beauty of a horse often rivaled, and sometimes surpassed, the beauty of a woman. In Girbers de Metz, two knights, Garin and his cousin Girbert, ride past a window where a beautiful girl is sitting, her face like a rose and her skin as white as a lily. "Look, cousin Girbert, look! By Saint Mary, what a beautiful woman!" "Ah," Girbert replies, "my horse is a beautiful creature!" "I've never seen anyone as charming as that young girl with her fresh complexion and dark eyes," says Garin. "There's no horse that can compare to mine," retorts Girbert. While the men were preoccupied with matters of war, it's no surprise that it was up to young girls to make the romantic advances. "In all the chansons de geste," Gautier points out, "it's the young girls who take the initiative, often quite boldly," though he notes that wives are depicted as more virtuous (L. Gautier, La Chevalerie, pp. 236-8, 348-50).
In England Pollock and Maitland (History of English Law, vol. ii, p. 437) do not believe that a life-long tutela of women ever existed as among other Teutonic peoples. "From the Conquest onwards," Hobhouse states (op. cit., vol. i, p. 224), "the unmarried English woman, on attaining her majority, becomes fully equipped with all legal and civil rights, as much a legal personality as the Babylonian woman had been three thousand years before." But the developed English law more than made up for any privileges thus accorded to the unmarried by the inconsistent manner in which it swathed up the wife in endless folds of irresponsibility, except when she committed the supreme offence of injuring her lord and master. The English wife, as Hobhouse continues (loc. cit.) was, if not her husband's slave, at any rate his liege subject; if she killed him it was "petty treason," the revolt of a subject against a sovereign in a miniature kingdom, and a more serious offence than murder. Murder she could not commit in his presence, for her personality was merged in him; he was responsible for most of her crimes and offences (it was that fact which gave him the right to chastise her), and he could not even enter into a contract with her, for that would be entering into a contract with himself. "The very being and legal existence of a woman is suspended during marriage," said Blackstone, "or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of her husband, under whose wing, protection and cover she performs everything. So great a favorite," he added, "is the female sex of the laws of England." "The strength of woman," says Hobhouse, interpreting the sense of the English law, "was her weakness. She conquered by yielding. Her gentleness had to be guarded from the turmoil of the world, her fragrance to be kept sweet and fresh, away from the dust and the smoke of battle. Hence her need of a champion and guardian."
In England, Pollock and Maitland (History of English Law, vol. ii, p. 437) don't think that a lifelong guardianship over women ever existed like it did among other Teutonic peoples. "From the Conquest onwards," Hobhouse states (op. cit., vol. i, p. 224), "the unmarried English woman, once she reaches her majority, gains all legal and civil rights, becoming as much a legal person as the Babylonian woman had been three thousand years earlier." However, the developed English law more than compensated for the privileges given to unmarried women by wrapping wives in layers of irresponsibility, except when they committed the serious offense of harming their husbands. As Hobhouse continues (loc. cit.), the English wife was, if not her husband's slave, at least his loyal subject; if she killed him, it was "petty treason," a rebellion of a subject against a sovereign in a small kingdom, and considered a more serious crime than murder. She couldn’t commit murder in his presence, because her identity was absorbed into his; he was held responsible for most of her crimes and misdeeds (this fact gave him the right to discipline her), and he couldn't even enter into a contract with her, since that would be like making a contract with himself. "A woman’s very being and legal existence is suspended during marriage," said Blackstone, "or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of her husband, under whose protection she carries out everything. So great a favorite," he added, "is the female sex in the laws of England." "The strength of woman," says Hobhouse, interpreting the essence of English law, "was her weakness. She triumphed by yielding. Her gentleness needed protection from the chaos of the world, her sweetness kept safe from the dust and smoke of battle. Thus, she needed a champion and protector."
In France the wife of the mediæval and Renaissance periods occupied much the same position in her husband's house. He was her absolute master and lord, the head and soul of "the feminine and feeble creature" who owed to him "perfect love and obedience." She was his chief servant, the eldest of his children, his wife and subject; she signed herself "your humble obedient daughter and friend," when she wrote to him. The historian, De Maulde la Clavière, who has brought together evidence on this point in his Femmes de la Renaissance, remarks that even though the husband enjoyed this lofty and superior position in marriage, it was still generally he, and not the wife, who complained of the hardships of marriage.
In France during the medieval and Renaissance periods, the wife held a similar role in her husband's home. He was her complete master and lord, the head and heart of "the delicate and weak creature" who owed him "perfect love and obedience." She was his primary servant, the oldest of his children, his wife, and his subject; she signed her letters to him with "your humble obedient daughter and friend." The historian De Maulde la Clavière, who compiled evidence on this topic in his Femmes de la Renaissance, notes that even though the husband held this elevated and dominant position in marriage, it was usually he, not the wife, who complained about the difficulties of marriage.
Law and custom assumed that a woman should be more or less under the protection of a man, and even the ideals of fine womanhood which arose in this society, during feudal and later times, were necessarily tinged by the same conception. It involved the inequality of women as compared with men, but under the social conditions of a feudal society such inequality was to woman's advantage. Masculine force was the determining factor in life and it was necessary that every woman should have a portion of this force on her side. This sound and reasonable idea naturally tended to persist even after the growth of civilization rendered force a much less decisive factor in social life. In England in Queen Elizabeth's time no woman must be masterless, although the feminine subjects of Queen Elizabeth had in their sovereign the object lesson of a woman who could play a very brilliant and effective part in life and yet remain absolutely masterless. Still later, in the eighteenth century, even so fine a moralist as Shaftesbury, in his Characteristics, refers to lovers of married women as invaders of property. If such conceptions still ruled even in the best minds, it is not surprising that in the same century, even in the following century, they were carried out into practice by less educated people who frankly bought and sold women.
Law and custom assumed that a woman should be more or less under the protection of a man, and even the ideals of being a fine woman that developed during feudal times and afterwards were influenced by this same idea. It meant that women were unequal compared to men, but in a feudal society, this inequality actually worked to a woman's advantage. Male power was the key factor in life, and it was necessary for every woman to have some of that power on her side. This logical idea naturally continued even after civilization progressed and physical power became a much less significant factor in social life. In England during Queen Elizabeth's reign, no woman was allowed to be without a male protector, even though her subjects had the example of a queen who could successfully play a significant role in life while remaining completely independent. Later, in the eighteenth century, a notable moralist like Shaftesbury, in his Characteristics, even referred to lovers of married women as trespassers on property. If such ideas still dominated even the best minds, it's not surprising that in the same century, and even more so in the following one, they were put into practice by less educated people who openly bought and sold women.
Schrader, in his Reallexicon (art. "Brautkauf"), points out that, originally, the purchase of a wife was the purchase of her person, and not merely of the right of protecting her. The original conception probably persisted long in Great Britain on account of its remoteness from the centres of civilization. In the eleventh century Gregory VII desired Lanfranc to stop the sale of wives in Scotland and elsewhere in the island of the English (Pike, History of Crime in England, vol. i, p. 99). The practice never quite died out, however, in remote country districts.
Schrader, in his Reallexicon (art. "Brautkauf"), points out that, originally, buying a wife meant buying her as a person, not just the right to protect her. This original idea probably lasted for a long time in Great Britain because of its distance from the centers of civilization. In the eleventh century, Gregory VII wanted Lanfranc to put an end to the sale of wives in Scotland and other parts of England (Pike, History of Crime in England, vol. i, p. 99). However, the practice never fully disappeared in remote rural areas.
Such transactions have taken place even in London. Thus in the Annual Register for 1767 (p. 99) we read: "About three weeks ago a bricklayer's laborer at Marylebone sold a woman, whom he had cohabited with for several years, to a fellow-workman for a quarter guinea and a gallon of beer. The workman went off with the purchase, and she has since had the good fortune to have a legacy of £200, and some plate, left her by a deceased uncle in Devonshire. The parties were married last Friday."
Such transactions have happened even in London. In the Annual Register for 1767 (p. 99), we read: "About three weeks ago, a bricklayer's laborer in Marylebone sold a woman he had lived with for several years to a co-worker for a quarter guinea and a gallon of beer. The co-worker took her away, and she has since been fortunate enough to inherit £200 and some silverware from a deceased uncle in Devonshire. The couple got married last Friday."
The Rev. J. Edward Vaux (Church Folk-lore, second edition, p. 146) narrates two authentic cases in which women had been bought by their husbands in open market in the nineteenth century. In one case the wife, with her own full consent, was brought to market with a halter round her neck, sold for half a crown, and led to her new home, twelve miles off by the new husband who had purchased her; in the other case a publican bought another man's wife for a two-gallon jar of gin.
The Rev. J. Edward Vaux (Church Folk-lore, second edition, p. 146) recounts two real instances where women were bought by their husbands in the open market during the nineteenth century. In one case, the wife, fully consenting, was brought to market with a halter around her neck, sold for half a crown, and taken to her new home, twelve miles away, by the husband who had purchased her. In the other case, a pub owner bought another man's wife for a two-gallon jar of gin.
It is the same conception of woman as property which, even to the present, has caused the retention in many legal codes of clauses rendering a man liable to pay pecuniary damages to a woman, previously a virgin, whom he has intercourse with and subsequently forsakes (Natalie Fuchs, "Die Jungfernschaft im Recht und Sitte," Sexual-Probleme, Feb., 1908). The woman is "dishonored" by sexual intercourse, depreciated in her market value, exactly as a new garment becomes "second-hand," even if it has but once been worn. A man, on the other hand, would disdain the idea that his personal value could be diminished by any number of acts of sexual intercourse.
It’s the same idea of women as property that has led to many legal systems still having clauses making a man responsible for paying damages to a woman, who was a virgin before, if he has sex with her and then abandons her (Natalie Fuchs, "Die Jungfernschaft im Recht und Sitte," Sexual-Probleme, Feb., 1908). The woman is considered "dishonored" by having sex and loses her value, just like a new piece of clothing is deemed "second-hand" after even one wear. In contrast, a man would scoff at the notion that his worth could be reduced by any number of sexual encounters.
This fact has even led some to advocate the "abolition of physical virginity." Thus the German authoress of Una Poenitentium (1907), considering that the protection of a woman is by no means so well secured by a little piece of membrane as by the presence of a true and watchful soul inside, advocates the operation of removal of the hymen in childhood. It is undoubtedly true that the undue importance attached to the hymen has led to a false conception of feminine "honor," and to an unwholesome conception of feminine purity.
This fact has even led some to push for the "abolition of physical virginity." The German author of Una Poenitentium (1907) argues that a woman's safety is better ensured by having a caring and vigilant person nearby rather than by a small piece of membrane. She advocates for the removal of the hymen during childhood. It's true that the excessive importance placed on the hymen has created a distorted view of female "honor" and an unhealthy understanding of female purity.
Custom and law are slowly changing in harmony with changed social conditions which no longer demand the subjection of women either in their own interests or in the interests of the community. Concomitantly with these changes a different ideal of womanly personality is developing. It is true that the ancient ideal of the lordship of the husband over the wife is still more or less consciously affirmed around us. The husband frequently dictates to the wife what avocations she may not pursue, what places she may not visit, what people she may not know, what books she may not read. He assumes to control her, even in personal matters having no direct concern with himself, by virtue of the old masculine prerogative of force which placed a woman under the hand, as the ancient patriarchal legists termed it, of a man. It is, however, becoming more and more widely recognized that such a part is not suited to the modern man. The modern man, as Rosa Mayreder has pointed out in a thoughtful essay,[292] is no longer equipped to play this domineering part in relation to his wife. The "noble savage," leading a wild life on mountain and in forest, hunting dangerous beasts and scalping enemies when necessary, may occasionally bring his club gently and effectively on to the head of his wife, even, it may be, with grateful appreciation on her part.[293] But the modern man, who for the most part spends his days tamely at a desk, who has been trained to endure silently the insults and humiliations which superior officials or patronizing clients may inflict upon him, this typical modern man is no longer able to assume effectually the part of the "noble savage" when he returns to his home. He is indeed so unfitted for the part that his wife resents his attempts to play it. He is gradually recognizing this, even apart from any consciousness of the general trend of civilization. The modern man of ideas recognizes that, as a matter of principle, his wife is entitled to equality with himself; the modern man of the world feels that it would be both ridiculous and inconvenient not to accord his wife much the same kind of freedom which he himself possesses. And, moreover, while the modern man has to some extent acquired feminine qualities, the modern woman has to a corresponding extent acquired masculine qualities.
Custom and law are slowly adapting to new social conditions that no longer require the subjugation of women, either for their own sake or for the community's benefit. Alongside these changes, a new ideal of womanhood is emerging. It's true that the outdated notion of the husband dominating the wife is still somewhat acknowledged around us. Husbands often decide for their wives what careers they can't pursue, what places they can't visit, what people they can't associate with, and what books they can't read. They try to control their wives even in personal matters that don't directly involve them, relying on the old masculine privilege of force that placed a woman under the authority of a man, as the ancient patriarchal legalists described. However, it's becoming increasingly clear that such a role doesn't fit the modern man. The modern man, as Rosa Mayreder noted in a thoughtful essay,[292] is no longer suited to take on this controlling role with his wife. The "noble savage," living a wild life in the mountains and forests, hunting dangerous animals and fighting enemies if necessary, might sometimes strike his wife with his club, possibly even with her grateful acceptance.[293] But the modern man, who generally spends his days calmly at a desk and has learned to quietly withstand the insults and humiliations from superiors or condescending clients, can no longer effectively play the role of the "noble savage" when he returns home. He is so ill-suited for this role that his wife resents his attempts to take it on. He is gradually becoming aware of this, even without recognizing the broader trends in society. The modern man who thinks deeply understands that, in principle, his wife deserves equality with him; the modern man who interacts with society realizes that it would be both ridiculous and inconvenient not to grant his wife similar freedoms to those he enjoys. Moreover, while the modern man has acquired some feminine traits, the modern woman has similarly gained masculine traits.
Brief and summary as the preceding discussion has necessarily been, it will have served to bring us face to face with the central fact in the sexual morality which the growth of civilization has at the present day rendered inevitable: personal responsibility. "The responsible human being, man or woman, is the centre of modern ethics as of modern law;" that is the conclusion reached by Hobhouse in his discussion of the evolution of human morality.[294] The movement which is taking place among us to liberate sexual relationships from an excessive bondage to fixed and arbitrary regulations would have been impossible and mischievous but for the concomitant growth of a sense of personal responsibility in the members of the community. It could not indeed have subsisted for a single year without degenerating into license and disorder. Freedom in sexual relations involves mutual trust and that can only rest on a basis of personal responsibility. Where there can be no reliance on personal responsibility there can be no freedom. In most fields of moral action this sense of personal responsibility is acquired at a fairly early stage of social progress. Sexual morality is the last field of morality to be brought within the sphere of personal responsibility. The community imposes the most varied, complicated, and artificial codes of sexual morality on its members, especially its feminine members, and, naturally enough, it is always very suspicious of their ability to observe these codes, and is careful to allow them, so far as possible, no personal responsibility in the matter. But a training in restraint, when carried through a long series of generations, is the best preparation for freedom. The law laid on the earlier generations, as old theology stated the matter, has been the schoolmaster to bring the later generations to Christ; or, as new science expresses exactly the same idea, the later generations have become immunized and have finally acquired a certain degree of protection against the virus which would have destroyed the earlier generations.
Brief and summary as the previous discussion has been, it has served to confront us with the central fact in sexual morality that the progress of civilization has made unavoidable: personal responsibility. "The responsible individual, whether man or woman, is the focus of modern ethics as well as modern law;" that’s the conclusion reached by Hobhouse in his exploration of the evolution of human morality.[294] The movement happening around us to free sexual relationships from strict and arbitrary regulations would have been impossible and harmful without the accompanying increase in a sense of personal responsibility among community members. It couldn't have lasted even a year without sliding into chaos and disorder. Freedom in sexual relationships relies on mutual trust, which can only be built on a foundation of personal responsibility. Where there is no trust in personal responsibility, there can be no freedom. In most areas of moral action, this sense of personal responsibility is developed fairly early in social progress. Sexual morality is the last area to be integrated into the realm of personal responsibility. The community imposes a wide range of varied, complicated, and artificial codes of sexual morality on its members, especially on women, and understandably, it tends to be very skeptical of their ability to follow these codes, often denying them any personal responsibility in the matter. However, training in self-restraint, when passed down through generations, is the best preparation for freedom. The regulations imposed on earlier generations, as old theology put it, have been the teachers leading later generations to enlightenment; or, as modern science articulates the same idea, later generations have become immune and have ultimately gained a certain degree of protection against the forces that could have harmed the earlier generations.
The process by which a people acquires the sense of personal responsibility is slow, and perhaps it cannot be adequately acquired at all by races lacking a high grade of nervous organization. This is especially the case as regards sexual morality, and has often been illustrated on the contact of a higher with a lower civilization. It has constantly happened that missionaries—entirely against their own wishes, it need not be said—by overthrowing the strict moral system they have found established, and by substituting the freedom of European customs among people entirely unprepared for such freedom, have exerted the most disastrous effects on morality. This has been the case among the formerly well-organized and highly moral Baganda of Central Africa, as recorded in an official report by Colonel Lambkin (British Medical Journal, Oct. 3, 1908).
The way a group of people develops a sense of personal responsibility is gradual, and it may not even be fully achievable for groups that don't have a well-developed nervous system. This is especially true regarding sexual ethics and has often been shown through interactions between more advanced and less developed civilizations. It frequently happens that missionaries—often against their own intentions—by disrupting the strict moral systems already in place and introducing the freedom of European customs to communities that aren't ready for such changes, have caused severe damage to moral standards. This occurred with the once well-structured and highly moral Baganda people of Central Africa, as noted in an official report by Colonel Lambkin (British Medical Journal, Oct. 3, 1908).
As regards Polynesia, also, R. L. Stevenson, in his interesting book, In the South Seas (Ch. V), pointed out that, while before the coming of the whites the Polynesians were, on the whole, chaste, and the young carefully watched, now it is far otherwise.
As for Polynesia, R. L. Stevenson, in his captivating book, In the South Seas (Ch. V), noted that, while the Polynesians were generally modest and the youth closely monitored before the arrival of white settlers, the situation is now quite different.
Even in Fiji, where, according to Lord Stanmore—who was High Commissioner of the Pacific, and an independent critic—missionary effort has been "wonderfully successful," where all own at least nominal allegiance to Christianity, which has much modified life and character, yet chastity has suffered. This was shown by a Royal Commission on the condition of the native races in Fiji. Mr. Fitchett, commenting on this report (Australasian Review of Reviews, Oct., 1897) remarks: "Not a few witnesses examined by the commission declare that the moral advance in Fiji is of a curiously patchy type. The abolition of polygamy, for example, they say, has not told at every point in favor of women. The woman is the toiler in Fiji; and when the support of the husband was distributed over four wives, the burden on each wife was less than it is now, when it has to be carried by one. In heathen times female chastity was guarded by the club; a faithless wife, an unmarried mother, was summarily put to death. Christianity has abolished club-law, and purely moral restraints, or the terror of the penalties of the next world, do not, to the limited imagination of the Fijian, quite take its place. So the standard of Fijian chastity is distressingly low."
Even in Fiji, where, according to Lord Stanmore—who was the High Commissioner of the Pacific and an independent critic—missionary efforts have been "wonderfully successful," and where everyone at least nominally identifies with Christianity, which has significantly changed life and character, chastity has still declined. This was highlighted by a Royal Commission on the condition of the native races in Fiji. Mr. Fitchett, commenting on this report (Australasian Review of Reviews, Oct. 1897), notes: "Not a few witnesses examined by the commission state that the moral progress in Fiji is quite inconsistent. For example, they say that the abolition of polygamy hasn’t necessarily benefited women everywhere. Women are the primary workers in Fiji, and when a husband's support was shared among four wives, the burden on each wife was lighter than it is now, when it all falls on one. In pre-Christian times, female chastity was enforced by violence; a disloyal wife or an unmarried mother was executed. Christianity has removed that kind of punishment, and purely moral constraints, or the fear of penalties in the afterlife, don't quite replace it in the limited perspective of the Fijian. As a result, the standard of chastity in Fiji is sadly low."
It must always be remembered that when the highly organized primitive system of mixed spiritual and physical restraints is removed, chastity becomes more delicately and unstably poised. The controlling power of personal responsibility, valuable and essential as it is, cannot permanently and unremittingly restrain the volcanic forces of the passion of love even in high civilizations. "No perfection of moral constitution in a woman," Hinlon has well said, "no power of will, no wish and resolution to be 'good,' no force of religion or control of custom, can secure what is called the virtue of woman. The emotion of absolute devotion with which some man may inspire her will sweep them all away. Society, in choosing to erect itself on that basis, chooses inevitable disorder, and so long as it continues to choose it will continue to have that result."
It’s important to remember that when the tightly organized system of mixed spiritual and physical limits is taken away, chastity becomes more fragile and unstable. The influence of personal responsibility, though valuable and necessary, can't consistently hold back the intense forces of love, even in advanced societies. "No degree of moral integrity in a woman," Hinlon wisely remarked, "no amount of willpower, desire, or determination to be 'good,' nor any religious or societal customs can guarantee what is known as a woman's virtue. The deep devotion that some man might inspire in her can override all of that. By choosing to build society on that foundation, we invite inevitable chaos, and as long as we keep making that choice, we will keep seeing those consequences."
It is necessary to insist for a while on this personal responsibility in matters of sexual morality, in the form in which it is making itself felt among us, and to search out its implications. The most important of these is undoubtedly economic independence. That is indeed so important that moral responsibility in any fine sense can scarcely be said to have any existence in its absence. Moral responsibility and economic independence are indeed really identical; they are but two sides of the same social fact. The responsible person is the person who is able to answer for his actions and, if need be, to pay for them. The economically dependent person can accept a criminal responsibility; he can, with an empty purse, go to prison or to death. But in the ordinary sphere of everyday morality that large penalty is not required of him; if he goes against the wishes of his family or his friends or his parish, they may turn their backs on him but they cannot usually demand against him the last penalties of the law. He can exert his own personal responsibility, he can freely choose to go his own way and to maintain himself in it before his fellowmen on one condition, that he is able to pay for it. His personal responsibility has little or no meaning except in so far as it is also economic independence.
It’s important to focus for a bit on personal responsibility in sexual morality and how it’s showing up in our lives, and to explore what that means. The most crucial aspect is definitely economic independence. It’s so significant that moral responsibility, in any true sense, can hardly exist without it. Moral responsibility and economic independence are essentially the same thing; they are just two sides of the same social reality. A responsible person is someone who can answer for their actions and, if necessary, face the consequences. An economically dependent person can take on criminal responsibility; they can end up in prison or face death even with no money. However, in the usual realm of everyday morality, such severe penalties aren’t typically expected of them; if they go against their family, friends, or community, those people might abandon them, but they usually can’t impose the harshest legal penalties. They can exercise their own personal responsibility, they can choose to forge their own path and stand by it before others, but only if they can afford to do so. Personal responsibility holds little to no value unless it’s also tied to economic independence.
In civilized societies as they attain maturity, the women tend to acquire a greater and greater degree alike of moral responsibility and economic independence. Any freedom and seeming equality of women, even when it actually assumes the air of superiority, which is not so based, is unreal. It is only on sufferance; it is the freedom accorded to the child, because it asks for it so prettily or may scream if it is refused. This is merely parasitism.[295] The basis of economic independence ensures a more real freedom. Even in societies which by law and custom hold women in strict subordination, the woman who happens to be placed in possession of property enjoys a high degree alike of independence and of responsibility.[296] The growth of a high civilization seems indeed to be so closely identified with the economic freedom and independence of women that it is difficult to say which is cause and which effect. Herodotus, in his fascinating account of Egypt, a land which he regarded as admirable beyond all other lands, noted with surprise that, totally unlike the fashion of Greece, women left the men at home to the management of the loom and went to market to transact the business of commerce.[297] It is the economic factor in social life which secures the moral responsibility of women and which chiefly determines the position of the wife in relation to her husband.[298] In this respect in its late stages civilization returns to the same point it had occupied at the beginning, when, as has already been noted, we find greater equality with men and at the same time greater economic independence.[299]
In mature societies, women generally gain more moral responsibility and economic independence. Any freedom or apparent equality that women have, even if it seems like superiority, isn’t genuine. It’s only given as a concession; it’s the kind of freedom that a child gets simply because they ask sweetly or might throw a tantrum if turned down. This is just being dependent on others. The foundation of economic independence provides true freedom. Even in societies where women are legally and culturally kept submissive, a woman who owns property enjoys a significant level of independence and responsibility. The advancement of a high civilization appears to be closely tied to the economic freedom and independence of women, making it hard to tell which one causes the other. Herodotus, in his fascinating account of Egypt, a place he considered superior to all others, noted with surprise that, unlike in Greece, women left the men at home to handle the loom and went to the market to conduct business. The economic aspect of social life secures the moral responsibility of women and mainly shapes the wife’s position relative to her husband. In this respect, at its later stages, civilization returns to a similar state as when it began, where there is greater equality with men along with increased economic independence.
In all the leading modern civilized countries, for a century past, custom and law have combined to give an ever greater economic independence to women. In some respects England took the lead by inaugurating the great industrial movement which slowly swept women into its ranks,[300] and made inevitable the legal changes which, by 1882, insured to a married woman the possession of her own earnings. The same movement, with its same consequences, is going on elsewhere. In the United States, just as in England, there is a vast army of five million women, rapidly increasing, who earn their own living, and their position in relation to men workers is even better than in England. In France from twenty-five to seventy-five per cent. of the workers in most of the chief industries—the liberal professions, commerce, agriculture, factory industries—are women, and in some of the very largest, such as home industries and textile industries, more women are employed than men. In Japan, it is said, three-fifths of the factory workers are women, and all the textile industries are in the hands of women.[301] This movement is the outward expression of the modern conception of personal rights, personal moral worth, and personal responsibility, which, as Hobhouse has remarked, has compelled women to take their lives into their own hands, and has at the same time rendered the ancient marriage laws an anachronism, and the ancient ideals of feminine innocence shrouded from the world a mere piece of false sentiment.[302]
In all the leading modern civilized countries, for the past century, customs and laws have come together to give women greater economic independence. In some ways, England led the way by starting the major industrial movement that gradually brought women into the workforce and made the legal changes necessary to ensure that married women could keep their own earnings by 1882. The same movement, with similar outcomes, is happening elsewhere. In the United States, just like in England, there is a large and growing group of five million women who earn their own living, and their situation compared to male workers is even better than in England. In France, between twenty-five to seventy-five percent of workers in many key industries—like the liberal professions, commerce, agriculture, and manufacturing—are women, and in some of the largest sectors, such as home industries and textiles, more women are employed than men. In Japan, it's reported that three-fifths of factory workers are women, and women control all the textile industries. This movement is a clear reflection of the modern idea of personal rights, moral worth, and responsibility, which, as Hobhouse pointed out, has compelled women to take charge of their own lives and has made the old marriage laws outdated, revealing former ideals of feminine innocence as nothing more than false sentiment.
There can be no doubt that the entrance of women into the field of industrial work, in rivalry with men and under somewhat the same conditions as men, raises serious questions of another order. The general tendency of civilization towards the economic independence and the moral responsibility of women is unquestionable. But it is by no means absolutely clear that it is best for women, and, therefore, for the community, that women should exercise all the ordinary avocations and professions of men on the same level as men. Not only have the conditions of the avocations and professions developed in accordance with the special aptitudes of men, but the fact that the sexual processes by which the race is propagated demand an incomparably greater expenditure of time and energy on the part of women than of men, precludes women in the mass from devoting themselves so exclusively as men to industrial work. For some biologists, indeed, it seems clear that outside the home and the school women should not work at all. "Any nation that works its women is damned," says Woods Hutchinson (The Gospel According to Darwin, p. 199). That view is extreme. Yet from the economic side, also, Hobson, in summing up this question, regards the tendency of machine-industry to drive women away from the home as "a tendency antagonistic to civilization." The neglect of the home, he states, is, "on the whole, the worst injury modern industry has inflicted on our lives, and it is difficult to see how it can be compensated by any increase of material products. Factory life for women, save in extremely rare cases, saps the physical and moral health of the family. The exigencies of factory life are inconsistent with the position of a good mother, a good wife, or the maker of a home. Save in extreme circumstances, no increase of the family wage can balance these losses, whose values stand upon a higher qualitative level" (J. A. Hobson, Evolution of Modern Capitalism, Ch. XII; cf. what has been said in Ch. I of the present volume). It is now beginning to be recognized that the early pioneers of the "woman's movement" in working to remove the "subjection of woman" were still dominated by the old ideals of that subjection, according to which the masculine is in all main respects the superior sex. Whatever was good for man, they thought, must be equally good for woman. That has been the source of all that was unbalanced and unstable, sometimes both a little pathetic and a little absurd, in the old "woman's movement." There was a failure to perceive that, first of all, women must claim their right to their own womanhood as mothers of the race, and thereby the supreme law-givers in the sphere of sex and the large part of life dependent on sex. This special position of woman seems likely to require a readjustment of economic conditions to their needs, though it is not likely that such readjustment would be permitted to affect their independence or their responsibility. We have had, as Madame Juliette Adam has put it, the rights of men sacrificing women, followed by the rights of women sacrificing the child; that must be followed by the rights of the child reconstituting the family. It has already been necessary to touch on this point in the first chapter of this volume, and it will again be necessary in the last chapter.
There’s no doubt that when women enter industrial jobs, competing with men under similar conditions, it raises serious questions. The general trend in society towards women’s economic independence and moral responsibility is clear. However, it’s not entirely obvious that it’s best for women—and, therefore, for society—as a whole for them to take on all the typical jobs and professions that men do at the same level. Not only have these jobs and professions evolved based on men’s specific strengths, but the biological realities of reproduction require far more time and energy from women than from men. This limits women’s ability, as a group, to focus solely on industrial work. Some biologists even argue that women shouldn’t work outside the home and school at all. “Any nation that works its women is damned,” says Woods Hutchinson (The Gospel According to Darwin, p. 199). That perspective is extreme, but on the economic side, Hobson summarizes this issue by saying that the trend of machine industry pushing women away from home is “a tendency antagonistic to civilization.” He suggests that neglecting the home is “overall, the worst injury modern industry has done to our lives,” and it’s hard to see how any increase in material goods can make up for it. Factory life for women, except in very rare cases, drains the physical and moral health of the family. The demands of factory work clash with being a good mother, a good wife, or the creator of a home. Unless in dire situations, no increase in family income can make up for these losses, which are of a higher qualitative value (J. A. Hobson, Evolution of Modern Capitalism, Ch. XII; cf. what has been mentioned in Ch. I of this book). It’s starting to be acknowledged that the early figures in the “woman’s movement,” who aimed to eliminate the “subjection of women,” were still influenced by the old ideals of that subjection, which regarded men as the superior sex in most respects. They assumed that what was good for men must also be good for women. This led to many imbalances and instabilities, sometimes appearing a bit pathetic and absurd, in the earlier “woman’s movement.” There was a lack of understanding that women must first claim their right to their own womanhood as the bearers of the race, making them the ultimate authorities in matters of sex and the significant parts of life tied to it. This unique position of women seems likely to require adjustments in economic conditions to meet their needs, although it’s unlikely that such adjustments will undermine their independence or responsibility. As Madame Juliette Adam has expressed, the rights of men have sacrificed women, followed by the rights of women sacrificing the child; now, we must ensure that the rights of the child reconstitute the family. This point has already been addressed in the first chapter of this volume, and it will be necessary to revisit it in the last chapter.
The question as to the method by which the economic independence of women will be completely insured, and the part which the community may be expected to take in insuring it, on the ground of woman's special child-bearing functions, is from the present point of view subsidiary. There can be no doubt, however, as to the reality of the movement in that direction, whatever doubt there may be as to the final adjustment of the details. It is only necessary in this place to touch on some of the general and more obvious respects in which the growth of woman's responsibility is affecting sexual morality.
The question of how to ensure women's economic independence and what role the community should play in supporting this—given women’s unique ability to bear children—is secondary from our current perspective. However, there’s no doubt about the genuine movement toward this goal, even if there are uncertainties regarding the final details. Here, it’s sufficient to highlight a few general and clear ways in which the increase in women's responsibility is impacting sexual morality.
The first and most obvious way in which the sense of moral responsibility works is in an insistence on reality in the relationships of sex. Moral irresponsibility has too often combined with economic dependence to induce a woman to treat the sexual event in her life which is biologically of most fateful gravity as a merely gay and trivial event, at the most an event which has given her a triumph over her rivals and over the superior male, who, on his part, willingly condescends, for the moment, to assume the part of the vanquished. "Gallantry to the ladies," we are told of the hero of the greatest and most typical of English novels, "was among his principles of honor, and he held it as much incumbent on him to accept a challenge to love as if it had been a challenge to fight;" he heroically goes home for the night with a lady of title he meets at a masquerade, though at the time very much in love with the girl whom he eventually marries.[303] The woman whose power lies only in her charms, and who is free to allow the burden of responsibility to fall on a man's shoulder,[304] could lightly play the seducing part, and thereby exert independence and authority in the only shapes open to her. The man on his part, introducing the misplaced idea of "honor" into the field from which the natural idea of responsibility has been banished, is prepared to descend at the lady's bidding into the arena, according to the old legend, and rescue the glove, even though he afterwards flings it contemptuously in her face. The ancient conception of gallantry, which Tom Jones so well embodies, is the direct outcome of a system involving the moral irresponsibility and economic dependence of women, and is as opposed to the conceptions, prevailing in the earlier and later civilized stages, of approximate sexual equality as it is to the biological traditions of natural courtship in the world generally.
The first and most obvious way that the sense of moral responsibility operates is by demanding honesty in sexual relationships. Moral irresponsibility often combines with financial dependence, leading a woman to view the most significant biological event in her life as something light and trivial, often just a chance to outshine her rivals and the superior male, who, in turn, temporarily agrees to act like the defeated one. We're told about the hero of the greatest and most typical English novel that "gallantry to the ladies" was among his principles of honor, and he felt just as obligated to accept a challenge to love as he would to a challenge to fight; he nobly goes home for the night with a titled woman he meets at a masquerade, even though he is deeply in love with the girl he eventually marries. The woman who relies solely on her looks can easily choose to let a man take on the burden of responsibility, allowing her to play the seductress, thus asserting her independence and authority in the few ways available to her. On the other hand, the man, introducing the misplaced concept of "honor" where natural responsibility should prevail, is willing to enter the ring at the lady's request and retrieve the glove, even if he later throws it back in her face with disdain. The traditional notion of gallantry, so well represented by Tom Jones, directly arises from a system that includes the moral irresponsibility and financial dependence of women and stands in contrast to the ideas of near sexual equality found in earlier and later civilized societies, as well as to the biological norms of natural courtship globally.
In controlling her own sexual life, and in realizing that her responsibility for such control can no longer be shifted on to the shoulders of the other sex, women will also indirectly affect the sexual lives of men, much as men already affect the sexual lives of women. In what ways that influence will in the main be exerted it is still premature to say. According to some, just as formerly men bought their wives and demanded prenuptial virginity in the article thus purchased, so nowadays, among the better classes, women are able to buy their husbands, and in their turn are disposed to demand continence.[305] That, however, is too simple-minded a way of viewing the question. It is enough to refer to the fact that women are not attracted to virginal innocence in men and that they frequently have good ground for viewing such innocence with suspicion.[306] Yet it may well be believed that women will more and more prefer to exert a certain discrimination in the approval of their husbands' past lives. However instinctively a woman may desire that her husband shall be initiated in the art of making love to her, she may often well doubt whether the finest initiation is to be secured from the average prostitute. Prostitution, as we have seen, is ultimately as incompatible with complete sexual responsibility as is the patriarchal marriage system with which it has been so closely associated. It is an arrangement mainly determined by the demands of men, to whatever extent it may have incidentally subserved various needs of women. Men arranged that one group of women should be set apart to minister exclusively to their sexual necessities, while another group should be brought up in asceticism as candidates for the privilege of ministering to their household and family necessities. That this has been in many respects a most excellent arrangement is sufficiently proved by the fact that it has nourished for so long a period, notwithstanding the influences that are antagonistic to it. But it is obviously only possible during a certain stage of civilization and in association with a certain social organization. It is not completely congruous with a democratic stage of civilization involving the economic independence and the sexual responsibility of both sexes alike in all social classes. It is possible that women may begin to realize this fact earlier than men.
In taking charge of their own sexual lives and understanding that they can no longer push the responsibility for that control onto men, women will also indirectly influence men's sexual lives, just as men have traditionally influenced women's. It's still too early to say exactly how this influence will mainly manifest. Some believe that, similar to how men used to "buy" their wives and expect premarital virginity, nowadays, among more progressive groups, women are starting to "buy" their husbands and are inclined to demand fidelity in return. However, that view is overly simplistic. It's important to note that women are not typically attracted to innocence in men and often have valid reasons for being skeptical of such innocence. Yet, it’s likely that women will increasingly prefer to be selective about their husbands' pasts. Despite a woman's instinctive desire for her husband to be skilled in the art of lovemaking, she may question whether the best education in that regard comes from the average sex worker. As we've observed, prostitution is ultimately incompatible with full sexual responsibility, just as the patriarchal marriage system, which is closely linked with it, is. This system was primarily organized around men's desires, even though it may have incidentally met some of women's needs. Men decided that one group of women should cater solely to their sexual demands while another group was raised in restraint to fulfill family and household needs. That this arrangement has endured for so long, despite various opposing influences, indicates its effectiveness. However, it can only exist during a certain phase of civilization and with a particular social structure. It doesn't fully align with a democratic stage of civilization where both sexes in all social classes have economic independence and sexual responsibility. Women may start to recognize this reality sooner than men.
It is also believed by many that women will realize that a high degree of moral responsibility is not easily compatible with the practice of dissimulation and that economic independence will deprive deceit—which is always the resort of the weak—of whatever moral justification it may possess. Here, however, it is necessary to speak with caution or we may be unjust to women. It must be remarked that in the sphere of sex men also are often the weak, and are therefore apt to resort to the refuge of the weak. With the recognition of that fact we may also recognize that deception in women has been the cause of much of the age-long blunders of the masculine mind in the contemplation of feminine ways. Men have constantly committed the double error of overlooking the dissimulation of women and of over-estimating it. This fact has always served to render more difficult still the inevitably difficult course of women through the devious path of sexual behavior. Pepys, who represents so vividly and so frankly the vices and virtues of the ordinary masculine mind, tells how one day when he called to see Mrs. Martin her sister Doll went out for a bottle of wine and came back indignant because a Dutchman had pulled her into a stable and tumbled and tossed her. Pepys having been himself often permitted to take liberties with her, it seemed to him that her indignation with the Dutchman was "the best instance of woman's falseness in the world."[307] He assumes without question that a woman who has accorded the privilege of familiarity to a man she knows and, one hopes, respects, would be prepared to accept complacently the brutal attentions of the first drunken stranger she meets in the street.
Many believe that women will come to understand that a strong sense of moral responsibility doesn't really fit with the act of deceiving others, and that economic independence will strip away the deceit—which is always a fallback for the weak—of any moral justification it might have. However, we need to be careful when discussing this or we might be unfair to women. It's important to point out that in the realm of sexuality, men can also be weak and, therefore, may resort to the same refuge. Recognizing this fact, we can see that women's deception has caused many long-standing misunderstandings by men when it comes to women’s behavior. Men have consistently made the mistake of either ignoring or overestimating women’s deceit. This misunderstanding has only made the already challenging journey of women through the complex landscape of sexual behavior even harder. Pepys, who candidly captures the strengths and weaknesses of the typical masculine mindset, recounts an incident when he visited Mrs. Martin. Her sister Doll went out to get a bottle of wine and returned upset because a Dutchman had dragged her into a stable and assaulted her. Since Pepys had often taken liberties with her, he thought her anger toward the Dutchman was "the best example of a woman's falseness in the world." He assumes without any doubt that a woman who allows a man she knows and, hopefully, respects to be intimate with her would just accept the aggressive advances of a random drunken stranger on the street.
It was the assumption of woman's falseness which led the ultra-masculine Pepys into a sufficiently absurd error. At this point, indeed, we encounter what has seemed to some a serious obstacle to the full moral responsibility of women. Dissimulation, Lombroso and Ferrero argue, is in woman "almost physiological," and they give various grounds for this conclusion.[308] The theologians, on their side, have reached a similar conclusion. "A confessor must not immediately believe a woman's words," says Father Gury, "for women are habitually inclined to lie."[309] This tendency, which seems to be commonly believed to affect women as a sex, however free from it a vast number of individual women are, may be said, and with truth, to be largely the result of the subjection of women and therefore likely to disappear as that subjection disappears. In so far, however, as it is "almost physiological," and based on radical feminine characters, such as modesty, affectability, and sympathy, which have an organic basis in the feminine constitution and can therefore never altogether be changed, feminine dissimulation seems scarcely likely to disappear. The utmost that can be expected is that it should be held in check by the developed sense of moral responsibility, and, being reduced to its simply natural proportions, become recognizably intelligible.
It was the belief in women's dishonesty that led the extremely masculine Pepys into a pretty ridiculous mistake. At this point, we encounter what some see as a significant barrier to women's full moral responsibility. Lombroso and Ferrero argue that dissimulation in women is "almost physiological," providing various reasons for this belief.[308] The theologians have come to a similar conclusion. "A confessor must not immediately believe a woman's words," says Father Gury, "for women are habitually inclined to lie."[309] This tendency, which seems widely accepted as something that affects women as a group, despite many individual women being unaffected, can be said, and rightly so, to result largely from the oppression of women and is likely to fade as that oppression diminishes. However, to the extent that it is "almost physiological" and based on inherent feminine traits like modesty, emotional sensitivity, and empathy, which have a biological foundation and can never be completely changed, feminine dissimulation is unlikely to disappear entirely. The best that can be hoped for is that it will be restrained by an evolved sense of moral responsibility and, when reduced to its natural proportions, become clearly understandable.
It is unnecessary to remark that there can be no question here as to any inherent moral superiority of one sex over the other. The answer to that question was well stated many years ago by one of the most subtle moralists of love. "Taken altogether," concluded Sénancour (De l'Amour, vol. ii, p. 85), "we have no reason to assert the moral superiority of either sex. Both sexes, with their errors and their good intentions, very equally fulfil the ends of nature. We may well believe that in either of the two divisions of the human species the sum of evil and that of good are about equal. If, for instance, as regards love, we oppose the visibly licentious conduct of men to the apparent reserve of women, it would be a vain valuation, for the number of faults committed by women with men is necessarily the same as that of men with women. There exist among us fewer scrupulous men than perfectly honest women, but it is easy to see how the balance is restored. If this question of the moral preëminence of one sex over the other were not insoluble it would still remain very complicated with reference to the whole of the species, or even the whole of a nation, and any dispute here seems idle."
It’s unnecessary to point out that there’s no inherent moral superiority of one sex over the other. The answer to that question was clearly stated many years ago by one of the most insightful moral thinkers on love. “Taken altogether,” concluded Sénancour (De l'Amour, vol. ii, p. 85), “we have no reason to claim the moral superiority of either sex. Both sexes, with their flaws and good intentions, equally fulfill the aims of nature. We can believe that in either group of humanity, the total amount of good and evil is roughly equal. For example, if we compare the obviously reckless behavior of men to the perceived modesty of women, that would be an empty assessment, since the number of wrongs committed by women with men is necessarily the same as those committed by men with women. There are fewer scrupulous men than completely honest women, but it’s easy to see how the balance is restored. Even if the question of one sex’s moral superiority over the other weren’t complex, it would still be very complicated when considering the entire species or even an entire nation, and any argument over it seems pointless.”
This conclusion is in accordance with the general compensatory and complementary relationship of women to men (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, fourth edition, especially pp. 448 et seq.).
This conclusion aligns with the overall compensatory and complementary relationship between women and men (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, fourth edition, especially pp. 448 et seq.).
In a recent symposium on the question whether women are morally inferior to men, with special reference to aptitude for loyalty (La Revue, Jan. 1, 1909), to which various distinguished French men and women contributed their opinions, some declared that women are usually superior; others regarded it as a question of difference rather than of superiority or inferiority; all were agreed that when they enjoy the same independence as men, women are quite as loyal as men.
In a recent symposium discussing whether women are morally inferior to men, particularly regarding loyalty (i>La Revue, Jan. 1, 1909), various notable French men and women shared their views. Some argued that women are often superior, while others felt it was more about difference than superiority or inferiority. Everyone agreed that when women have the same independence as men, they are just as loyal as men.
It is undoubtedly true that—partly as a result of ancient traditions and education, partly of genuine feminine characteristics—many women are diffident as to their right to moral responsibility and unwilling to assume it. And an attempt is made to justify their attitude by asserting that woman's part in life is naturally that of self-sacrifice, or, to put the statement in a somewhat more technical form, that women are naturally masochistic; and that there is, as Krafft-Ebing argues, a natural "sexual subjection" of woman. It is by no means clear that this statement is absolutely true, and if it were true it would not serve to abolish the moral responsibility of women.
It’s definitely true that—partly due to old traditions and education, and partly because of authentic feminine traits—many women feel uncertain about their right to moral responsibility and are hesitant to take it on. Some try to justify this mindset by claiming that a woman’s role in life is naturally one of self-sacrifice, or to phrase it more technically, that women are inherently masochistic; and that, as Krafft-Ebing suggests, there is a natural "sexual subjection" of women. However, it's not clear that this claim is absolutely correct, and even if it were, it wouldn’t eliminate the moral responsibility of women.
Bloch (Beiträge zur Ætiologie der Psychopathia Sexualis, Part II, p. 178), in agreement with Eulenburg, energetically denies that there is any such natural "sexual subjection" of women, regarding it as artificially produced, the result of the socially inferior position of women, and arguing that such subjection is in much higher degree a physiological characteristic of men than of women. (It has been necessary to discuss this question in dealing with "Love and Pain" in the third volume of these Studies.) It seems certainly clear that the notion that women are especially prone to self-sacrifice has little biological validity. Self-sacrifice by compulsion, whether physical or moral compulsion, is not worthy of the name; when it is deliberate it is simply the sacrifice of a lesser good for the sake of a greater good. Doubtless a man who eats a good dinner may be said to "sacrifice" his hunger. Even within the sphere of traditional morality a woman who sacrifices her "honor" for the sake of her love to a man has, by her "sacrifice," gained something that she values more. "What a triumph it is to a woman," a woman has said, "to give pleasure to a man she loves!" And in a morality on a sound biological basis no "sacrifice" is here called for. It may rather be said that the biological laws of courtship fundamentally demand self-sacrifice of the male rather than of the female. Thus the lioness, according to Gérard the lion-hunter, gives herself to the most vigorous of her lion wooers; she encourages them to fight among themselves for superiority, lying on her belly to gaze at the combat and lashing her tail with delight. Every female is wooed by many males, but she only accepts one; it is not the female who is called upon for erotic self-sacrifice, but the male. That is indeed part of the divine compensation of Nature, for since the heavier part of the burden of sex rests on the female, it is fitting that she should be less called upon for renunciation.
Bloch (Contributions to the Etiology of Sexual Psychopathy, Part II, p. 178), agreeing with Eulenburg, firmly denies the existence of any natural "sexual subjection" of women, viewing it as something artificially created, stemming from the socially inferior status of women. He argues that this subjection is much more of a physiological trait of men than of women. (This issue has been necessary to address in discussing "Love and Pain" in the third volume of these Studies.) It seems clear that the idea that women are particularly inclined towards self-sacrifice has minimal biological basis. Self-sacrifice forced by either physical or moral pressure doesn't truly qualify as such; when it's intentional, it's merely the choice to give up a lesser good for a greater one. Certainly, a man who enjoys a nice dinner might be said to "sacrifice" his hunger. Even in the realm of traditional morality, when a woman sacrifices her "honor" for the love of a man, she has, through her "sacrifice," gained something of greater value to her. "What a triumph it is for a woman," one woman remarked, "to bring pleasure to a man she loves!" In a moral framework grounded in sound biological principles, no "sacrifice" is necessary here. It might even be said that the biological rules of courtship fundamentally require self-sacrifice from males rather than females. For instance, the lioness, according to Gérard the lion-hunter, chooses the strongest of her lion suitors; she encourages them to battle for dominance, lying down to watch the fight and wagging her tail in delight. Each female is courted by many males, but she only accepts one; it is not the female who is expected to engage in erotic self-sacrifice, but the male. This is, in fact, part of Nature's divine balance, as the greater burden of reproduction lies with the female, making it appropriate that she is less often called upon to make sacrifices.
It thus seems probable that the increase of moral responsibility may tend to make a woman's conduct more intelligible to others;[310] it will in any case certainly tend to make it less the concern of others. This is emphatically the case as regards the relations of sex. In the past men have been invited to excel in many forms of virtue; only one virtue has been open to women. That is no longer possible. To place upon a woman the main responsibility for her own sexual conduct is to deprive that conduct of its conspicuously public character as a virtue or a vice. Sexual union, for a woman as much as for a man, is a physiological fact; it may also be a spiritual fact; but it is not a social act. It is, on the contrary, an act which, beyond all other acts, demands retirement and mystery for its accomplishment. That indeed is a general human, almost zoölogical, fact. Moreover, this demand of mystery is more especially made by woman in virtue of her greater modesty which, we have found reason to believe, has a biological basis. It is not until a child is born or conceived that the community has any right to interest itself in the sexual acts of its members. The sexual act is of no more concern to the community than any other private physiological act. It is an impertinence, if not an outrage, to seek to inquire into it. But the birth of a child is a social act. Not what goes into the womb but what comes out of it concerns society. The community is invited to receive a new citizen. It is entitled to demand that that citizen shall be worthy of a place in its midst and that he shall be properly introduced by a responsible father and a responsible mother. The whole of sexual morality, as Ellen Key has said, revolves round the child.
It seems likely that increased moral responsibility may make a woman's behavior clearer to others; [310] it will definitely make it less the concern of others. This is especially true regarding sexual relationships. In the past, men have been encouraged to excel in many virtues, but only one virtue has been expected of women. That's no longer the case. Holding a woman primarily accountable for her own sexual behavior removes the overtly public nature of that behavior as either a virtue or a vice. For both men and women, sexual union is a biological reality; it can also hold spiritual significance, but it's not a social act. In fact, it is an act that, more than any other, requires privacy and intimacy for its execution. This is a general human, almost biological, truth. Additionally, this need for privacy is particularly emphasized by women due to their greater modesty, which we believe may have a biological basis. The community has no right to involve itself in the sexual actions of its members until a child is born or conceived. The sexual act matters to the community no more than any other private physical act. It's inappropriate, if not offensive, to inquire about it. However, the birth of a child is a social matter. It's not about what goes into the womb but what comes out that concerns society. The community is invited to welcome a new citizen. It has the right to expect that this citizen will be deserving of a place among them and that they will be properly introduced by a responsible father and mother. As Ellen Key noted, the entirety of sexual morality centers around the child.
At this final point in our discussion of sexual morality we may perhaps be able to realize the immensity of the change which has been involved by the development in women of moral responsibility. So long as responsibility was denied to women, so long as a father or a husband, backed up by the community, held himself responsible for a woman's sexual behavior, for her "virtue," it was necessary that the whole of sexual morality should revolve around the entrance to the vagina. It became absolutely essential to the maintenance of morality that all eyes in the community should be constantly directed on to that point, and the whole marriage law had to be adjusted accordingly. That is no longer possible. When a woman assumes her own moral responsibility, in sexual as in other matters, it becomes not only intolerable but meaningless for the community to pry into her most intimate physiological or spiritual acts. She is herself directly responsible to society as soon as she performs a social act, and not before.
At this final point in our discussion of sexual morality, we may finally grasp the immense change brought about by women's development of moral responsibility. As long as women were denied that responsibility, and a father or husband, supported by the community, held himself accountable for a woman's sexual behavior, for her "virtue," the entire framework of sexual morality had to center around the vagina. It was crucial for maintaining morality that the entire community's attention remained fixed on that point, which required adjustments to marriage laws. That is no longer the case. When a woman takes on her own moral responsibility, in sexual matters as well as others, it becomes not only unacceptable but also pointless for the community to intrude into her most private physiological or spiritual choices. She is directly responsible to society the moment she engages in a social act, and not before.
In relation to the fact of maternity the realization of all that is involved in the new moral responsibility of women is especially significant. Under a system of morality by which a man is left free to accept the responsibility for his sexual acts while a woman is not equally free to do the like, a premium is placed on sexual acts which have no end in procreation, and a penalty is placed on the acts which lead to procreation. The reason is that it is the former class of acts in which men find chief gratification; it is the latter class in which women find chief gratification. For the tragic part of the old sexual morality in its bearing on women was that while it made men alone morally responsible for sexual acts in which both a man and a woman took part, women were rendered both socially and legally incapable of availing themselves of the fact of masculine responsibility unless they had fulfilled conditions which men had laid down for them, and yet refrained from imposing upon themselves. The act of sexual intercourse, being the sexual act in which men found chief pleasure, was under all circumstances an act of little social gravity; the act of bringing a child into the world, which is for women the most massively gratifying of all sexual acts, was counted a crime unless the mother had before fulfilled the conditions demanded by man. That was perhaps the most unfortunate and certainly the most unnatural of the results of the patriarchal regulation of society. It has never existed in any great State where women have possessed some degree of regulative power.
In terms of motherhood, it's especially important to recognize the new moral responsibilities that women face. When a moral system allows men to choose whether to take responsibility for their sexual actions while not granting the same freedom to women, it creates a situation where non-procreative sexual acts are encouraged, while acts that lead to procreation are discouraged. This is because men typically find the first type of acts more rewarding, whereas women find the latter more fulfilling. The tragic aspect of the old sexual morality regarding women was that, although men were solely held morally accountable for sexual acts involving both parties, women were made socially and legally unable to claim the man's responsibility unless they met conditions that men set for them but never made for themselves. Sexual intercourse, which was the act men enjoyed most, was viewed as socially insignificant, whereas bringing a child into the world, which is the most fulfilling sexual act for women, was considered a crime unless the mother had previously met the conditions imposed by men. This was perhaps the most unfortunate and undeniably unnatural outcome of patriarchal regulation in society. Such a situation has never existed in any major state where women held some level of regulatory power.
It has, of course, been said by abstract theorists that women have the matter in their own hands. They must never love a man until they have safely locked him up in the legal bonds of matrimony. Such an argument is absolutely futile, for it ignores the fact that, while love and even monogamy are natural, legal marriage is merely an external form, with a very feeble power of subjugating natural impulses, except when those impulses are weak, and no power at all of subjugating them permanently. Civilization involves the growth of foresight, and of self-control in both sexes; but it is foolish to attempt to place on these fine and ultimate outgrowths of civilization a strain which they could never bear. How foolish it is has been shown, once and for all, by Lea in his admirable History of Sacerdotal Celibacy.
It has, of course, been said by abstract theorists that women have the power in their own hands. They must never love a man until they have securely tied him down with the legal bonds of marriage. Such an argument is completely pointless, as it ignores the fact that, while love and even monogamy are natural, legal marriage is just an external form, with very weak power to suppress natural impulses, except when those impulses are weak, and no power at all to suppress them permanently. Civilization involves the development of foresight and self-control in both genders; but it is foolish to try to place on these refined and ultimate results of civilization a burden that they could never handle. How foolish it is has been demonstrated, once and for all, by Lea in his excellent History of Sacerdotal Celibacy.
Moreover, when we compare the respective aptitudes of men and women in this particular region, it must be remembered that men possess a greater power of forethought and self-control than women, notwithstanding the modesty and reserve of women. The sexual sphere is immensely larger in women, so that when its activity is once aroused it is much more difficult to master or control. (The reasons were set out in detail in the discussion of "The Sexual Impulse in Women" in volume iii of these Studies.) It is, therefore, unfair to women, and unduly favors men, when too heavy a premium is placed on forethought and self-restraint in sexual matters. Since women play the predominant part in the sexual field their natural demands, rather than those of men, must furnish the standard.
Moreover, when we compare the abilities of men and women in this specific area, we should remember that men generally have a greater capacity for planning ahead and self-control than women, despite women's modesty and restraint. Women have a much larger sexual sphere, making it significantly harder to manage or control once it is activated. (The reasons were detailed in the discussion of "The Sexual Impulse in Women" in volume iii of these Studies.) Therefore, it is unfair to women and overly favors men when too much importance is placed on planning and self-restraint in sexual matters. Since women play a leading role in the sexual arena, their natural needs, rather than those of men, should set the standard.
With the realization of the moral responsibility of women the natural relations of life spring back to their due biological adjustment. Motherhood is restored to its natural sacredness. It becomes the concern of the woman herself, and not of society nor of any individual, to determine the conditions under which the child shall be conceived. Society is entitled to require that the father shall in every case acknowledge the fact of his paternity, but it must leave the chief responsibility for all the circumstances of child-production to the mother. That is the point of view which is now gaining ground in all civilized lands both in theory and in practice.[311]
With the acknowledgment of women's moral responsibility, the natural relationships of life return to their proper biological balance. Motherhood is revitalized with its inherent sacredness. It now falls on the woman herself, rather than society or anyone else, to decide the conditions under which a child will be conceived. Society has the right to require that the father acknowledges his paternity in every case, but it must prioritize the mother's responsibility for all aspects of childbearing. This perspective is increasingly being accepted in all civilized nations, both in theory and practice.[311]
E.g., E. Belfort Bax, Outspoken Essays, p. 6.
E.g., E. Belfort Bax, Outspoken Essays, p. 6.
Such reasons are connected with communal welfare. "All immoral acts result in communal unhappiness, all moral acts in communal happiness," as Prof. A. Mathews remarks, "Science and Morality," Popular Science Monthly, March, 1909.
Such reasons are linked to the well-being of the community. "All immoral actions lead to community unhappiness, while all moral actions lead to community happiness," as Prof. A. Mathews notes in "Science and Morality," Popular Science Monthly, March, 1909.
See Westermarck, Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. i, pp. 386-390, 522.
See Westermarck, Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. i, pp. 386-390, 522.
Westermarck, Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, pp. 9, 159; also the whole of Ch. VII. Actions that are in accordance with custom call forth public approval, actions that are opposed to custom call forth public resentment, and Westermarck powerfully argues that such approval and such resentment are the foundation of moral judgments.
Westermarck, Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, pp. 9, 159; also the whole of Ch. VII. Actions that align with custom receive public approval, while actions that go against custom face public disapproval. Westermarck strongly argues that this approval and disapproval form the basis of moral judgments.
This is well recognized by legal writers (e.g., E. A. Schroeder, Das Recht in der Geschlechtlichen Ordnung, p. 5).
This is well recognized by legal writers (e.g., E. A. Schroeder, Das Recht in der Geschlechtlichen Ordnung, p. 5).
W. G. Sumner (Folkways, p. 418) even considers it desirable to change the form of the word in order to emphasize the real and fundamental meaning of morals, and proposes the word mores to indicate "popular usages and traditions conducive to societal reform." "'Immoral,'" he points out, "never means anything but contrary to the mores of the time and place." There is, however, no need whatever to abolish or to supplement the good old ancient word "morality," so long as we clearly realize that, on the practical side, it means essentially custom.
W. G. Sumner (Folkways, p. 418) even thinks it's a good idea to change the form of the word to highlight the true and fundamental meaning of morals, and suggests using the word mores to represent "popular customs and traditions that support societal reform." He points out that "'Immoral'" only ever means something that goes against the mores of that time and place." However, there's really no need to get rid of or replace the classic word "morality," as long as we understand that, in practical terms, it essentially means custom.
Westermarck, op. cit., vol. i, p. 19.
Westermarck, op. cit., vol. i, p. 19.
See, e.g., "Exogamy and the Mating of Cousins," in Essays Presented to E. B. Tylor, 1907, p. 53. "In many departments of primitive life we find a naïve desire to, as it were, assist Nature, to affirm what is normal, and later to confirm it by the categorical imperative of custom and law. This tendency still flourishes in our civilized communities, and, as the worship of the normal, is often a deadly foe to the abnormal and eccentric, and too often paralyzes originality."
See, e.g., "Exogamy and the Mating of Cousins," in Essays Presented to E. B. Tylor, 1907, p. 53. "In many areas of early life, we see a simple desire to help Nature, to affirm what is normal, and later to back it up with the strict requirements of custom and law. This tendency is still strong in our modern communities and, as the worship of normalcy, often acts as a serious enemy to the abnormal and eccentric, frequently stifling originality."
The spirit of Christianity, as illustrated by Paulinus, in his Epistle XXV, was from the Roman point of view, as Dill remarks (Roman Society, p. 11), "a renunciation, not only of citizenship, but of all the hard-won fruits of civilization and social life."
The essence of Christianity, as shown by Paulinus in his Epistle XXV, was seen from the Roman perspective, as Dill notes in Roman Society, p. 11, "a rejection not just of citizenship, but of all the hard-earned benefits of civilization and social living."
It thus happens that, as Lecky said in his History of European Morals, "of all the departments of ethics the questions concerning the relations of the sexes and the proper position of woman are those upon the future of which there rests the greatest uncertainty." Some progress has perhaps been made since these words were written, but they still hold true for the majority of people.
It turns out that, as Lecky noted in his History of European Morals, "out of all areas of ethics, the issues surrounding the relationships between the sexes and the rightful status of women are the ones with the most uncertainty about the future." Some progress may have been made since these words were written, but they still resonate with most people today.
Concerning economic marriage as a vestigial survival, see, e.g., Bloch, The Sexual Life of Our Time, p. 212.
Concerning economic marriage as a leftover practice, see, e.g., Bloch, The Sexual Life of Our Time, p. 212.
Sénancour, De l'Amour, vol. ii, p. 233. The author of The Question of English Divorce attributes the absence of any widespread feeling against sexual license to the absurd rigidity of the law.
Sénancour, De l'Amour, vol. ii, p. 233. The author of The Question of English Divorce blames the lack of a strong sentiment against sexual freedom on the ridiculous strictness of the law.
Bruno Meyer, "Etwas von Positiver Sexualreform," Sexual-Probleme, Nov., 1908.
Bruno Meyer, "Something About Positive Sexual Reform," Sexual Problems, Nov., 1908.
Elsie Clews Parsons, The Family, p. 351. Dr. Parsons rightly thinks such unions a social evil when they check the development of personality.
Elsie Clews Parsons, The Family, p. 351. Dr. Parsons rightly believes that such unions are a social problem when they hinder the growth of individual personality.
For evidence regarding the general absence of celibacy among both savage and barbarous peoples, see, e.g., Westermarck, History of Human Marriage, Ch. VII.
For evidence about the general lack of celibacy among both primitive and uncivilized peoples, see, e.g., Westermarck, History of Human Marriage, Ch. VII.
There are, for instance, two millions of unmarried women in France, while in Belgium 30 per cent, of the women, and in Germany sometimes even 50 per cent, are unmarried.
There are, for example, two million unmarried women in France, while in Belgium, 30 percent of women are unmarried, and in Germany, sometimes even 50 percent are single.
Such a position would not be biologically unreasonable, in view of the greatly preponderant part played by the female in the sexual process which insures the conservation of the race. "If the sexual instinct is regarded solely from the physical side," says D. W. H. Busch (Das Geschlechtsleben des Weibes, 1839, vol. i, p. 201), "the woman cannot be regarded as the property of the man, but with equal and greater reason the man may be regarded as the property of the woman."
Such a viewpoint wouldn’t be biologically unreasonable, considering the significant role that females play in the sexual process that ensures the survival of the species. "If we look at the sexual instinct only from a physical perspective," says D. W. H. Busch (Das Geschlechtsleben des Weibes, 1839, vol. i, p. 201), "then we can’t see women as the property of men, but even more so, men can be viewed as the property of women."
Herodotus, Bk. i, Ch. CLXXIII.
Herodotus, Book 1, Chapter 173.
That power and relationship are entirely distinct was pointed out many years ago by L. von Dargun, Mutterrecht und Vaterrecht, 1892. Westermarck (Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. i, p. 655), who is inclined to think that Steinmetz has not proved conclusively that mother-descent involves less authority of husband over wife, makes the important qualification that the husband's authority is impaired when he lives among his wife's kinsfolk.
That power and relationships are completely different was noted many years ago by L. von Dargun, Mutterrecht und Vaterrecht, 1892. Westermarck (Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. i, p. 655), who tends to believe that Steinmetz hasn't definitively shown that mother-descent means less authority of the husband over the wife, makes the significant point that the husband's authority is weakened when he lives among his wife's relatives.
Robertson Smith, Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia; J. G. Frazer has pointed out (Academy, March 27, 1886) that the partially Semitic peoples on the North frontier of Abyssinia, not subjected to the revolutionary processes of Islam, preserve a system closely resembling beena marriage, as well as some traces of the opposite system, by Robertson Smith called ba'al marriage, in which the wife is acquired by purchase and becomes a piece of property.
Robertson Smith, Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia; J. G. Frazer noted (Academy, March 27, 1886) that the partially Semitic communities on the northern border of Abyssinia, which were not affected by the transformative changes of Islam, maintain a marriage system that closely resembles beena marriage, along with some remnants of the opposite system, referred to by Robertson Smith as ba'al marriage, where the wife is obtained through purchase and treated as property.
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 358.
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 358.
Rhys and Brynmor-Jones, The Welsh People, pp. 55-6; cf. Rhys, Celtic Heathendom, p. 93.
Rhys and Brynmor-Jones, The Welsh People, pp. 55-6; cf. Rhys, Celtic Heathendom, p. 93.
Rhys and Brynmor-Jones, op. cit., p. 214.
Rhys and Brynmor-Jones, op. cit., p. 214.
Crawley (The Mystic Rose, p. 41 et seq.) gives numerous instances.
Crawley (The Mystic Rose, p. 41 et seq.) provides many examples.
Revillout, "La Femme dans l'Antiquité," Journal Asiatique, 1906, vol. vii, p. 57. See, also, Victor Marx, Beiträge zur Assyriologie, 1899, Bd. iv, Heft 1.
Revillout, "Women in Antiquity," Journal Asiatique, 1906, vol. vii, p. 57. See also, Victor Marx, Contributions to Assyriology, 1899, vol. iv, issue 1.
Donaldson, Woman, pp. 196, 241 et seq. Nietzold, (Die Ehe in "Agypten," p. 17), thinks the statement of Diodorus that no children were illegitimate, needs qualification, but that certainly the illegitimate child in Egypt was at no social disadvantage.
Donaldson, Woman, pp. 196, 241 et seq. Nietzold, (Die Ehe in "Agypten," p. 17), believes that Diodorus's claim that there were no illegitimate children requires some clarification, but it's clear that illegitimate children in Egypt faced no social disadvantages.
Amélineau, La Morale Egyptienne, p. 194; Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. i, p. 187; Flinders Petrie, Religion and Conscience in Ancient Egypt, pp. 131 et seq.
Amélineau, La Morale Egyptienne, p. 194; Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. i, p. 187; Flinders Petrie, Religion and Conscience in Ancient Egypt, pp. 131 et seq.
Maine, Ancient Law, Ch. V.
Maine, *Ancient Law*, Ch. V.
Donaldson, Woman, pp. 109, 120.
Donaldson, *Woman*, pp. 109, 120.
Mercator, iv, 5.
Mercator, vol. 4, p. 5.
Digest XLVIII, 13, 5.
Digest 48, 13, 5.
Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. i, p. 213.
Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. i, p. 213.
For an account of the work of some of the less known of these pioneers, see a series of articles by Harriet McIlquham in the Westminster Review, especially Nov., 1898, and Nov., 1903.
For a look at the work of some of the lesser-known pioneers, check out a series of articles by Harriet McIlquham in the Westminster Review, particularly the issues from November 1898 and November 1903.
The influence of Christianity on the position of women has been well discussed by Lecky, History of European Morals, vol. ii, pp. 316 et seq., and more recently by Donaldson, Woman, Bk. iii.
The impact of Christianity on women's roles has been thoroughly explored by Lecky in History of European Morals, vol. ii, pp. 316 et seq., and more recently by Donaldson in Woman, Bk. iii.
Migne, Patrologia, vol. clviii, p. 680.
Migne, Patrologia, vol. 158, p. 680.
Rosa Mayreder, "Einiges über die Starke Faust," Zur Kritik der Weiblichkeit, 1905.
Rosa Mayreder, "A Few Things About Strong Women," On the Critique of Femininity, 1905.
Rasmussen (People of the Polar North, p. 56), describes a ferocious quarrel between husband and wife, who each in turn knocked the other down. "Somewhat later, when I peeped in, they were lying affectionately asleep, with their arms around each other."
Rasmussen (People of the Polar North, p. 56) describes a fierce argument between a husband and wife, each taking turns knocking the other down. "A little later, when I looked in, they were lying together peacefully asleep, with their arms around each other."
Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. ii, p. 367. Dr. Stöcker, in Die Liebe und die Frauen, also insists on the significance of this factor of personal responsibility.
Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. ii, p. 367. Dr. Stöcker, in Die Liebe und die Frauen, also emphasizes the importance of this aspect of personal responsibility.
Olive Schreiner has especially emphasized the evils of parasitism for women. "The increased wealth of the male," she remarks ("The Woman's Movement of Our Day," Harper's Bazaar, Jan., 1902), "no more of necessity benefits and raises the female upon whom he expends it, than the increased wealth of his mistress necessarily benefits, mentally or physically, a poodle, because she can then give him a down cushion in place of one of feathers, and chicken in place of beef." Olive Schreiner believes that feminine parasitism is a danger which really threatens society at the present time, and that if not averted "the whole body of females in civilized societies must sink into a state of more or less absolute dependence."
Olive Schreiner has particularly highlighted the negative impact of parasitism on women. "The growing wealth of men," she observes ("The Woman's Movement of Our Day," Harper's Bazaar, Jan., 1902), "doesn't necessarily benefit or elevate the woman he spends it on, just like the increased wealth of his mistress doesn't help a poodle, just because she can provide him with a down cushion instead of one filled with feathers, and chicken instead of beef." Olive Schreiner believes that female parasitism poses a real threat to society today, and if it's not addressed, "the entire population of women in civilized societies will fall into a state of more or less complete dependence."
In Rome and in Japan, Hobhouse notes (op. cit., vol. i, pp. 169, 176), the patriarchal system reached its fullest extension, yet the laws of both these countries placed the husband in a position of practical subjugation to a rich wife.
In Rome and Japan, Hobhouse observes (op. cit., vol. i, pp. 169, 176), the patriarchal system was at its peak, yet the laws in both countries put the husband in a position of effective subordination to a wealthy wife.
Herodotus, Bk. ii, Ch. XXXV. Herodotus noted that it was the woman and not the man on whom the responsibility for supporting aged parents rested. That alone involved a very high economic position of women. It is not surprising that to some observers, as to Diodorus Siculus, it seemed that the Egyptian woman was mistress over her husband.
Herodotus, Bk. ii, Ch. XXXV. Herodotus pointed out that the responsibility for supporting elderly parents fell on the woman rather than the man. This alone indicated a significant economic status for women. It's not surprising that to some observers, like Diodorus Siculus, it appeared that the Egyptian woman had control over her husband.
Hobhouse (loc. cit.), Hale, and also Grosse, believe that good economic position of a people involves high position of women. Westermarck (Moral Ideas, vol. i, p. 661), here in agreement with Olive Schreiner, thinks this statement cannot be accepted without modification, though agreeing that agricultural life has a good effect on woman's position, because they themselves become actively engaged in it. A good economic position has no real effect in raising woman's position, unless women themselves take a real and not merely parasitic part in it.
Hobhouse (loc. cit.), Hale, and Grosse argue that a strong economy for a community is linked to a high status for women. Westermarck (Moral Ideas, vol. i, p. 661), aligning with Olive Schreiner, believes this claim needs some adjustments, but agrees that agricultural life positively influences women’s status because they participate actively in it. A strong economic position doesn’t genuinely elevate women’s status unless women themselves play a meaningful role in it, rather than just being passive beneficiaries.
Westermarck (Moral Ideas, vol. i, Ch. XXVI, vol. ii, p. 29) gives numerous references with regard to the considerable proprietary and other privileges of women among savages which tend to be lost at a somewhat higher stage of culture.
Westermarck (Moral Ideas, vol. i, Ch. XXVI, vol. ii, p. 29) provides many references about the significant property and other rights of women among primitive societies, which tend to diminish at a somewhat more advanced level of culture.
The steady rise in the proportion of women among English workers in machine industries began in 1851. There are now, it is estimated, three and a half million women employed in industrial occupations, beside a million and a half domestic servants. (See for details, James Haslam, in a series of papers in the Englishwoman 1909.)
The consistent increase in the number of women working in English machine industries started in 1851. It’s now estimated that there are about three and a half million women employed in industrial jobs, along with a million and a half domestic workers. (See for details, James Haslam, in a series of papers in the Englishwoman 1909.)
See, e.g., J. A. Hobson, The Evolution of Modern Capitalism, second edition, 1907, Ch. XII, "Women in Modern Industry."
See, e.g., J. A. Hobson, The Evolution of Modern Capitalism, second edition, 1907, Ch. XII, "Women in Modern Industry."
Hobhouse, op. cit., vol. i, p. 228.
Hobhouse, op. cit., vol. i, p. 228.
Fielding, Tom Jones, Bk. iii, Ch. VII.
Fielding, Tom Jones, Bk. iii, Ch. VII.
Even the Church to some extent adopted this allotment of the responsibility, and "solicitation," i.e., the sin of a confessor in seducing his female penitent, is constantly treated as exclusively the confessor's sin.
Even the Church somewhat embraced this distribution of responsibility, and "solicitation," i.e., the sin of a confessor seducing his female penitent, is consistently regarded as solely the confessor's fault.
Adolf Gerson, Sexual-Probleme, Sept., 1908, p. 547.
Adolf Gerson, Sexual-Problems, Sept. 1908, p. 547.
It has already been necessary to refer to the unfortunate results which may follow the ignorance of husbands (see, e.g., "The Sexual Impulse in Women," vol. iii of these Studies), and will be necessary again in Ch. XI of the present volume.
It has already been important to mention the unfortunate outcomes that can arise from the ignorance of husbands (see, e.g., "The Sexual Impulse in Women," vol. iii of these Studies), and it will be important to discuss this again in Ch. XI of the present volume.
Pepys, Diary, ed. Wheatley, vol. vii, p. 10.
Pepys, Diary, ed. Wheatley, vol. vii, p. 10.
Lombroso and Ferrero, La Donna Delinquente; cf. Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, fourth edition, p. 196.
Lombroso and Ferrero, La Donna Delinquente; cf. Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, fourth edition, p. 196.
Gury, Théologie Morale, art. 381.
Gury, *Moral Theology*, art. 381.
"Men will not learn what women are," remarks Rosa Mayreder (Zur Kritik der Weiblichkeit, p. 199), "until they have left off prescribing what they ought to be."
"Men won't understand what women are," says Rosa Mayreder (Zur Kritik der Weiblichkeit, p. 199), "until they stop telling them what they should be."
It has been set out, for instance, by Professor Wahrmund in Ehe und Eherecht, 1908. I need scarcely refer again to the writings of Ellen Key, which may be said to be almost epoch-making in their significance, especially (in German translation) Ueber Liebe und Ehe (also French translation), and (in English translation, Putnam, 1909), the valuable, though less important work, The Century of the Child. See also Edward Carpenter, Love's Coming of Age; Forel, Die Sexuelle Frage (English translation, abridged, The Sexual Question, Rebman, 1908); Bloch, Sexualleben unsere Zeit (English translation, The Sexual Life of Our Time, Rebman, 1908); Helene Stöcker, Die Liebe und die Frauen, 1906; and Paul Lapie, La Femme dans la Famille, 1908.
It has been stated, for example, by Professor Wahrmund in Ehe und Eherecht, 1908. I hardly need to mention again the writings of Ellen Key, which are considered almost groundbreaking in their importance, especially (in German translation) Ueber Liebe und Ehe (also available in French), and (in English translation, Putnam, 1909), the valuable, though less significant work, The Century of the Child. See also Edward Carpenter, Love's Coming of Age; Forel, Die Sexuelle Frage (English translation, abridged, The Sexual Question, Rebman, 1908); Bloch, Sexualleben unsere Zeit (English translation, The Sexual Life of Our Time, Rebman, 1908); Helene Stöcker, Die Liebe und die Frauen, 1906; and Paul Lapie, La Femme dans la Famille, 1908.
CHAPTER X.
MARRIAGE.
The Definition of Marriage—Marriage Among Animals—The Predominance of Monogamy—The Question of Group Marriage—Monogamy a Natural Fact, Not Based on Human Law—The Tendency to Place the Form of Marriage Above the Fact of Marriage—The History of Marriage—Marriage in Ancient Rome—Germanic Influence on Marriage—Bride-Sale—The Ring—The Influence of Christianity on Marriage—The Great Extent of This Influence—The Sacrament of Matrimony—Origin and Growth of the Sacramental Conception—The Church Made Marriage a Public Act—Canon Law—Its Sound Core—Its Development—Its Confusions and Absurdities—Peculiarities of English Marriage Law—Influence of the Reformation on Marriage—The Protestant Conception of Marriage as a Secular Contract—The Puritan Reform of Marriage—Milton as the Pioneer of Marriage Reform—His Views on Divorce—The Backward Position of England in Marriage Reform—Criticism of the English Divorce Law—Traditions of the Canon Law Still Persistent—The Question of Damages for Adultery—Collusion as a Bar to Divorce—Divorce in France, Germany, Austria, Russia, etc.—The United States—Impossibility of Deciding by Statute the Causes for Divorce—Divorce by Mutual Consent—Its Origin and Development—Impeded by the Traditions of Canon Law—Wilhelm von Humboldt—Modern Pioneer Advocates of Divorce by Mutual Consent—The Arguments Against Facility of Divorce—The Interests of the Children—The Protection of Women—The Present Tendency of the Divorce Movement—Marriage Not a Contract—The Proposal of Marriage for a Term of Years—Legal Disabilities and Disadvantages in the Position of the Husband and the Wife—Marriage Not a Contract But a Fact—Only the Non-Essentials of Marriage, Not the Essentials, a Proper Matter for Contract—The Legal Recognition of Marriage as a Fact Without Any Ceremony—Contracts of the Person Opposed to Modern Tendencies—The Factor of Moral Responsibility—Marriage as an Ethical Sacrament—Personal Responsibility Involves Freedom—Freedom the Best Guarantee of Stability—False Ideas of Individualism—Modern Tendency of Marriage—With the Birth of a Child Marriage Ceases to be a Private Concern—Every Child Must Have a Legal Father and Mother—How This Can be Effected—The Firm Basis of Monogamy—The Question of Marriage Variations—Such Variations Not Inimical to Monogamy—The Most Common Variations—The Flexibility of Marriage Holds Variations in Check—Marriage Variations versus Prostitution—Marriage on a Reasonable and Humane Basis—Summary and Conclusion.
The Definition of Marriage—Marriage Among Animals—The Predominance of Monogamy—The Question of Group Marriage—Monogamy a Natural Fact, Not Based on Human Law—The Tendency to Place the Form of Marriage Above the Fact of Marriage—The History of Marriage—Marriage in Ancient Rome—Germanic Influence on Marriage—Bride-Sale—The Ring—The Influence of Christianity on Marriage—The Great Extent of This Influence—The Sacrament of Matrimony—Origin and Growth of the Sacramental Conception—The Church Made Marriage a Public Act—Canon Law—Its Sound Core—Its Development—Its Confusions and Absurdities—Peculiarities of English Marriage Law—Influence of the Reformation on Marriage—The Protestant View of Marriage as a Secular Contract—The Puritan Reforms of Marriage—Milton as the Pioneer of Marriage Reform—His Views on Divorce—The Backward Position of England in Marriage Reform—Criticism of the English Divorce Law—Traditions of Canon Law Still Persisting—The Question of Damages for Adultery—Collusion as a Barrier to Divorce—Divorce in France, Germany, Austria, Russia, etc.—The United States—Inability to Decide Causes for Divorce by Statute—Divorce by Mutual Consent—Its Origin and Development—Hindered by the Traditions of Canon Law—Wilhelm von Humboldt—Modern Advocates for Divorce by Mutual Consent—The Arguments Against Easy Access to Divorce—The Interests of Children—The Protection of Women—The Current Trend in the Divorce Movement—Marriage Not a Contract—The Idea of Marriage for a Set Number of Years—Legal Disadvantages for Both Husband and Wife—Marriage Not a Contract But a Reality—Only Non-Essentials of Marriage Should Be Subject to Contract—Legal Recognition of Marriage as a Reality Without Any Ceremony—Contracts of the Person Opposed to Modern Trends—The Element of Moral Responsibility—Marriage as an Ethical Sacrament—Personal Responsibility Comes with Freedom—Freedom as the Best Assurance of Stability—Misguided Ideas of Individualism—Current Trends in Marriage—Once a Child is Born, Marriage Becomes a Public Matter—Every Child Needs a Legal Father and Mother—How This Can Be Achieved—The Strong Foundation of Monogamy—The Question of Variations in Marriage—Such Variations Not Inimical to Monogamy—The Most Common Variations—The Flexibility of Marriage Helps Manage Variations—Marriage Variations versus Prostitution—Marriage on a Reasonable and Compassionate Basis—Summary and Conclusion.
The discussion in the previous chapter of the nature of sexual morality, with the brief sketch it involved of the direction in which that morality is moving, has necessarily left many points vague. It may still be asked what definite and precise forms sexual unions are tending to take among us, and what relation these unions bear to the religious, social, and legal traditions we have inherited. These are matters about which a very considerable amount of uncertainty seems to prevail, for it is not unusual to hear revolutionary or eccentric opinions concerning them.
The discussion in the previous chapter about sexual morality, along with the brief overview of its current direction, has inevitably left many aspects unclear. One might still wonder what specific forms sexual unions are taking today and how these unions relate to the religious, social, and legal traditions we've inherited. There appears to be a significant amount of uncertainty surrounding these issues, as it's common to encounter revolutionary or unconventional views on them.
Sexual union, involving the cohabitation, temporary or permanent, of two or more persons, and having for one of its chief ends the production and care of offspring, is commonly termed marriage. The group so constituted forms a family. This is the sense in which the words "marriage" and the "family" are most properly used, whether we speak of animals or of Man. There is thus seen to be room for variation as regards both the time during which the union lasts, and the number of individuals who form it, the chief factor in the determination of these points being the interests of the offspring. In actual practice, however, sexual unions, not only in Man but among the higher animals, tend to last beyond the needs of the offspring of a single season, while the fact that in most species the numbers of males and females are approximately equal makes it inevitable that both among animals and in Man the family is produced by a single sexual couple, that is to say that monogamy is, with however many exceptions, necessarily the fundamental rule.
Sexual union, which involves the living together, whether temporarily or permanently, of two or more people and aims primarily at producing and caring for children, is commonly called marriage. The group formed in this way is referred to as a family. This is the way the terms "marriage" and "family" are most accurately used, whether discussing animals or humans. There is clearly room for variation in both the duration of the union and the number of individuals involved, with the main factor influencing these aspects being the needs of the children. In practice, however, sexual unions, not just in humans but also among higher animals, tend to last longer than what is needed for the offspring of a single season, while the fact that in most species, the numbers of males and females are roughly equal means that both in animals and in humans, families are typically formed by a single sexual couple, which implies that monogamy is, despite some exceptions, the basic norm.
It will thus be seen that marriage centres in the child, and has at the outset no reason for existence apart from the welfare of the offspring. Among those animals of lowly organization which are able to provide for themselves from the beginning of existence there is no family and no need for marriage. Among human races, when sexual unions are not followed by offspring, there may be other reasons for the continuance of the union but they are not reasons in which either Nature or society is in the slightest degree directly concerned. The marriage which grew up among animals by heredity on the basis of natural selection, and which has been continued by the lower human races through custom and tradition, by the more civilized races through the superimposed regulative influence of legal institutions, has been marriage for the sake of the offspring.[312] Even in civilized races among whom the proportion of sterile marriages is large, marriage tends to be so constituted as always to assume the procreation of children and to involve the permanence required by such procreation.
It’s clear that marriage revolves around the child and, from the beginning, exists only for the well-being of the offspring. Among simpler animals that can take care of themselves right from birth, there’s no concept of family and no need for marriage. In human societies, when sexual relationships don't result in children, there may be other reasons to maintain the relationship, but those aren’t concerns that directly involve either Nature or society in any significant way. The concept of marriage that evolved among animals through heredity and natural selection, and has been carried on by lower human races through tradition, and by more advanced races through the influence of legal systems, has always been about the offspring.[312] Even in civilized societies where many marriages are childless, marriage is still structured with the expectation of having children and the permanence needed for that purpose.
Among birds, which from the point of view of erotic development stand at the head of the animal world, monogamy frequently prevails (according to some estimates among 90 per cent.), and unions tend to be permanent; there is an approximation to the same condition among some of the higher mammals, especially the anthropoid apes; thus among gorillas and oran-utans permanent monogamic marriages take place, the young sometimes remaining with the parents to the age of six, while any approach to loose behavior on the part of the wife is severely punished by the husband. The variations that occur are often simply matters of adaptation to circumstances; thus, according to J. G. Millais (Natural History of British Ducks, pp. 8, 63), the Shoveler duck, though normally monogamic, will become polyandric when males are in excess, the two males being in constant and amicable attendance on the female without signs of jealousy; among the monogamic mallards, similarly, polygyny and polyandry may also occur. See also R. W. Shufeldt, "Mating Among Birds," American Naturalist, March, 1907; for mammal marriages, a valuable paper by Robert Müller, "Säugethierehen," Sexual-Probleme, Jan., 1909, and as regards the general prevalence of monogamy, Woods Hutchinson, "Animal Marriage," Contemporary Review, Oct., 1904, and Sept., 1905.
Among birds, which lead the animal world in terms of romantic behavior, monogamy is commonly observed (with estimates suggesting around 90%), and these partnerships tend to be long-lasting. A similar pattern can be seen in some higher mammals, especially the great apes. For example, in gorillas and orangutans, long-term monogamous relationships occur, and young may stay with their parents until they are six years old. Any signs of infidelity from the female are strictly punished by the male. The variations that exist are often just adaptations to specific situations. For instance, according to J. G. Millais in Natural History of British Ducks (pp. 8, 63), the Shoveler duck usually practices monogamy but can switch to polyandry when there are more males than females, with the two males happily supporting the female without any jealousy. Among monogamous mallards, similar occurrences of polygyny and polyandry can also happen. See also R. W. Shufeldt's article “Mating Among Birds” in American Naturalist, March 1907; for information on mammal marriages, refer to Robert Müller’s valuable paper “Säugethierehen” in Sexual-Probleme, January 1909, and for more on the general prevalence of monogamy, check Woods Hutchinson's “Animal Marriage” in Contemporary Review, October 1904 and September 1905.
There has long been a dispute among the historians of marriage as to the first form of human marriage. Some assume a primitive promiscuity gradually modified in the direction of monogamy; others argue that man began where the anthropoid apes left off, and that monogamy has prevailed, on the whole, throughout. Both these opposed views, in an extreme form, seem untenable, and the truth appears to lie midway. It has been shown by various writers, and notably Westermarck (History of Human Marriage, Chs. IV-VI), that there is no sound evidence in favor of primitive promiscuity, and that at the present day there are few, if any, savage peoples living in genuine unrestricted sexual promiscuity. This theory of a primitive promiscuity seems to have been suggested, as J. A. Godfrey has pointed out (Science of Sex, p. 112), by the existence in civilized societies of promiscuous prostitution, though this kind of promiscuity was really the result, rather than the origin, of marriage. On the other hand, it can scarcely be said that there is any convincing evidence of primitive strict monogamy beyond the assumption that early man continued the sexual habits of the anthropoid apes. It would seem probable, however, that the great forward step involved in passing from ape to man was associated with a change in sexual habits involving the temporary adoption of a more complex system than monogamy. It is difficult to see in what other social field than that of sex primitive man could find exercise for the developing intellectual and moral aptitudes, the subtle distinctions and moral restraints, which the strict monogamy practiced by animals could afford no scope for. It is also equally difficult to see on what basis other than that of a more closely associated sexual system the combined and harmonious efforts needed for social progress could have developed. It is probable that at least one of the motives for exogamy, or marriage outside the group, is (as was probably first pointed out by St. Augustine in his De Civitate Dei) the need of creating a larger social circle, and so facilitating social activities and progress. Exactly the same end is effected by a complex marriage system binding a large number of people together by common interests. The strictly small and confined monogamic family, however excellently it subserved the interests of the offspring, contained no promise of a wider social progress. We see this among both ants and bees, who of all animals, have attained the highest social organization; their progress was only possible through a profound modification of the systems of sexual relationship. As Espinas said many years ago (in his suggestive work, Des Sociétés Animales): "The cohesion of the family and the probabilities for the birth of societies are inverse." Or, as Schurtz more recently pointed out, although individual marriage has prevailed more or less from the first, early social institutions, early ideas and early religion involved sexual customs which modified a strict monogamy.
There has long been a debate among marriage historians about the earliest form of human marriage. Some believe that primitive promiscuity gradually changed towards monogamy, while others argue that humans started where anthropoid apes left off, and that monogamy has generally been the dominant form. Both of these extreme views, in , seem questionable, and the truth likely lies somewhere in between. Various writers, particularly Westermarck (History of Human Marriage, Chs. IV-VI), have shown that there is no solid evidence for primitive promiscuity, and that today, there are few, if any, societies living in true unrestricted sexual promiscuity. This idea of primitive promiscuity seems to have been suggested, as J. A. Godfrey pointed out (Science of Sex, p. 112), by the existence of promiscuous prostitution in civilized societies, although this type of promiscuity is more a result of marriage rather than its origin. On the flip side, it can hardly be claimed that there is convincing evidence of strict primitive monogamy, aside from the assumption that early humans continued the sexual habits of anthropoid apes. However, it seems likely that the significant leap from ape to human was connected to a change in sexual habits that temporarily adopted a more complex system than monogamy. It’s hard to see where else but in the realm of sex could primitive humans exercise their developing intellectual and moral abilities, the subtle distinctions and moral constraints that strict monogamy among animals did not allow. It’s equally difficult to recognize another foundation, other than a closer sexual system, from which combined and harmonious efforts for social progress could have emerged. It’s likely that at least one reason for exogamy, or marrying outside the group, is (as St. Augustine first suggested in his De Civitate Dei) the need to create a larger social circle to enable social activities and progress. The same goal is achieved by a complex marriage system that connects many people through shared interests. The strictly small and isolated monogamous family, while effectively serving the needs of the offspring, offered no promise of wider social advancement. We see this in ants and bees, who have achieved the highest social organization; their progress was possible only through a profound change in their sexual relationship systems. As Espinas remarked many years ago in his insightful work, Des Sociétés Animales: "The cohesion of the family and the chances for the emergence of societies are inversely related." Or, as Schurtz more recently noted, although individual marriage has been prevalent to some degree from the start, early social institutions, ideas, and religions included sexual customs that modified strict monogamy.
The most primitive form of complex human marriage which has yet been demonstrated as still in existence is what is called group-marriage, in which all the women of one class are regarded as the actual, or at all events potential, wives of all the men in another class. This has been observed among some central Australian tribes, a people as primitive and as secluded from external influence as could well be found, and there is evidence to show that it was formerly more widespread among them. "In the Urabunna tribe, for example," say Spencer and Gillen, "a group of men actually do have, continually and as a normal condition, marital relations with a group of women. This state of affairs has nothing whatever to do with polygamy any more than it has with polyandry. It is simply a question of a group of men and a group of women who may lawfully have what we call marital relations. There is nothing whatever abnormal about it, and, in all probability, this system of what has been called group marriage, serving as it does to bind more or less closely together groups of individuals who are mutually interested in one another's welfare, has been one of the most powerful agents in the early stages of the upward development of the human race" (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 74; cf. A. W. Howitt, The Native Tribes of South-East Australia). Group-marriage, with female descent, as found in Australia, tends to become transformed by various stages of progress into individual marriage with descent in the male line, a survival of group-marriage perhaps persisting in the much-discussed jus primæ noctis. (It should be added that Mr. N. W. Thomas, in his book on Kinship and Marriage in Australia, 1908, concludes that group-marriage in Australia has not been demonstrated, and that Professor Westermarck, in his Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, as in his previous History of Human Marriage, maintains a skeptical opinion in regard to group-marriage generally; he thinks the Urabunna custom may have developed out of ordinary individual marriage, and regards the group-marriage theory as "the residuary legatee of the old theory of promiscuity." Durkheim also believes that the Australian marriage system is not primitive, "Organisation Matrimoniale Australienne," L'Année Sociologique, eighth year, 1905). With the attainment of a certain level of social progress it is easy to see that a wide and complicated system of sexual relationships ceases to have its value, and a more or less qualified monogamy tends to prevail as more in harmony with the claims of social stability and executive masculine energy.
The most basic form of complex human marriage still observed today is known as group-marriage, where all the women in one group are considered the actual or potential wives of all the men in another group. This has been noted among some central Australian tribes, a people as primitive and as cut off from outside influence as you can find, and there is evidence that it was once more common among them. "In the Urabunna tribe, for example," say Spencer and Gillen, "a group of men actually have, consistently and as a normal condition, marital relations with a group of women. This situation is not related to polygamy any more than it is to polyandry. It is simply a matter of a group of men and a group of women who can legally have what we call marital relations. There's nothing strange about it, and, likely, this system of group marriage, which connects individuals who care about each other's well-being, has been a significant factor in the early development of humanity" (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 74; cf. A. W. Howitt, The Native Tribes of South-East Australia). Group-marriage, with female descent, as found in Australia, tends to evolve through different stages into individual marriage with male descent, with remnants of group-marriage possibly lingering in the much-debated jus primæ noctis. (It's worth noting that Mr. N. W. Thomas, in his book on Kinship and Marriage in Australia, 1908, argues that group-marriage in Australia hasn't been proven, and that Professor Westermarck, in his Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, as well as his earlier History of Human Marriage, holds a skeptical view regarding group-marriage overall; he believes the Urabunna custom may have evolved from standard individual marriage and considers the group-marriage theory as "the leftover of the old theory of promiscuity." Durkheim also thinks that the Australian marriage system isn't primitive, "Organisation Matrimoniale Australienne," L'Année Sociologique, eighth year, 1905). With the achievement of a certain level of social progress, it's clear that a broad and complex system of sexual relationships loses its value, and a more or less qualified monogamy starts to dominate, aligning better with the needs for social stability and effective masculine energy.
The best historical discussion of marriage is still probably Westermarck's History of Human Marriage, though at some points it now needs to be corrected or supplemented; among more recent books dealing with primitive sexual conceptions may be specially mentioned Crawley's Mystic Rose, while the facts concerning the transformation of marriage among the higher human races are set forth in G. E. Howard's History of Matrimonial Institutions (3 vols.), which contains copious bibliographical references. There is an admirably compact, but clear and comprehensive, sketch of the development of modern marriage in Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law, vol. ii.
The best historical discussion of marriage is still probably Westermarck's History of Human Marriage, though certain parts now need to be updated or added to; among more recent books addressing primitive sexual ideas, Crawley's Mystic Rose is particularly notable. The facts about the changes in marriage among higher human societies are detailed in G. E. Howard's History of Matrimonial Institutions (3 vols.), which includes extensive bibliographical references. There’s an impressively concise yet clear and thorough overview of the evolution of modern marriage in Pollock and Maitland's History of English Law, vol. ii.
It is necessary to make allowance for variations, thereby shunning the extreme theorists who insist on moulding all facts to their theories, but we may conclude that—as the approximately equal number of the sexes indicates—in the human species, as among many of the higher animals, a more or less permanent monogamy has on the whole tended to prevail. That is a fact of great significance in its implications. For we have to realize that we are here in the presence of a natural fact. Sexual relationships, in human as in animal societies, follow a natural law, oscillating on each side of the norm, and there is no place for the theory that that law was imposed artificially. If all artificial "laws" could be abolished the natural order of the sexual relationships would continue to subsist substantially as at present. Virtue, said Cicero, is but Nature carried out to the utmost. Or, as Holbach put it, arguing that our institutions tend whither Nature tends, "art is only Nature acting by the help of the instruments she has herself made." Shakespeare had already seen much the same truth when he said that the art which adds to Nature "is an art that Nature makes." Law and religion have buttressed monogamy; it is not based on them but on the needs and customs of mankind, and these constitute its completely adequate sanctions.[313] Or, as Cope put it, marriage is not the creation of law but the law is its creation.[314] Crawley, again, throughout his study of primitive sex relationships, emphasizes the fact that our formal marriage system is not, as so many religious and moral writers once supposed, a forcible repression of natural impulses, but merely the rigid crystallization of those natural impulses, which in a more fluid form have been in human nature from the first. Our conventional forms, we must believe, have not introduced any elements of value, while in some respects they have been mischievous.
It's important to account for variations, avoiding extreme theorists who try to fit all facts into their theories. However, we can conclude that, as indicated by the roughly equal number of sexes, a fairly consistent monogamy has generally been the norm in humans, just as in many higher animals. This is a significant fact with deep implications. We need to recognize that we are dealing with a natural fact here. Sexual relationships in both human and animal societies follow a natural law, fluctuating around a norm, and the idea that this law was artificially imposed has no basis. If all artificial "laws" were eliminated, the natural order of sexual relationships would largely remain the same as it is today. Virtue, as Cicero stated, is simply Nature taken to its fullest extent. Similarly, Holbach argued that our institutions align with Nature, asserting that "art is just Nature working with the tools she has created." Shakespeare expressed a similar idea when he said that the art which enhances Nature "is an art that Nature makes." Law and religion have supported monogamy; it isn't based on them but rather on the needs and customs of people, which provide its adequate justifications. Or, as Cope expressed, marriage isn't created by law; instead, law is created by marriage. Crawley, in his study of primitive sexual relationships, points out that our formal marriage system is not, as many religious and ethical writers once believed, a forceful suppression of natural impulses, but rather a strict crystallization of those natural impulses, which have existed in human nature from the beginning. We must conclude that our conventional forms haven't added any value and, in some ways, have been harmful.
It is necessary to bear in mind that the conclusion that monogamic marriage is natural, and represents an order which is in harmony with the instincts of the majority of people, by no means involves agreement with the details of any particular legal system of monogamy. Monogamic marriage is a natural biological fact, alike in many animals and in man. But no system of legal regulation is a natural biological fact. When a highly esteemed alienist, Dr. Clouston, writes (The Hygiene of Mind, p. 245) "there is only one natural mode of gratifying sexual nisus and reproductive instinct, that of marriage," the statement requires considerable exegesis before it can be accepted, or even receive an intelligible meaning, and if we are to understand by "marriage" the particular form and implications of the English marriage law, or even of the somewhat more enlightened Scotch law, the statement is absolutely false. There is a world of difference, as J. A. Godfrey remarks (The Science of Sex, 1901, p. 278), between natural monogamous marriage and our legal system; "the former is the outward expression of the best that lies in the sexuality of man; the latter is a creation in which religious and moral superstitions have played a most important part, not always to the benefit of individual and social health."
It's important to remember that the idea that monogamous marriage is natural and aligns with the instincts of most people doesn’t imply agreement with the specific details of any legal system of monogamy. Monogamous marriage is a natural biological reality, seen in many animals and humans alike. However, no legal system is a natural biological fact. When a respected psychiatrist, Dr. Clouston, states in The Hygiene of Mind (p. 245) that "there is only one natural way to satisfy sexual desire and reproductive instinct, that of marriage," this claim needs a lot of interpretation before it can be accepted or even understood. If we interpret "marriage" as the specific form and implications of English marriage law, or even the somewhat more progressive Scottish law, then the statement is completely inaccurate. There’s a significant difference, as J. A. Godfrey points out in The Science of Sex (1901, p. 278), between natural monogamous marriage and our legal system; "the former is the outward expression of the best that exists in human sexuality; the latter is a construct in which religious and moral beliefs have played a crucial role, not always benefiting individual and social well-being."
We must, therefore, guard against the tendency to think that there is anything rigid or formal in the natural order of monogamy. Some sociologists would even limit the naturalness of monogamy still further. Thus Tarde ("La Morale Sexuelle," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Jan., 1907), while accepting as natural under present conditions the tendency for monogamy, mitigated by more or less clandestine concubinage, to prevail over all other forms of marriage, considers that this is not due to any irresistible influence, but merely to the fact that this kind of marriage is practiced by the majority of people, including the most civilized.
We need to be careful not to assume that there’s anything fixed or formal about the natural state of monogamy. Some sociologists would even argue that monogamy is less natural than we think. For instance, Tarde ("La Morale Sexuelle," Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Jan., 1907) accepts that, given the current circumstances, the tendency for monogamy—along with more or less secretive concubinage—to dominate over all other types of marriage is natural, but he believes this isn't due to any unavoidable force. Instead, it’s simply that this type of marriage is practiced by the majority of people, including those who are most civilized.
With the acceptance of the tendency to monogamy we are not at the end of sexual morality, but only at the beginning. It is not monogamy that is the main thing, but the kind of lives that people lead in monogamy. The mere acceptance of a monogamic rule carries us but a little way. That is a fact which cannot fail to impress itself on those who approach the questions of sex from the psychological side.
With the acceptance of the trend toward monogamy, we’re not at the end of sexual morality; we’re just getting started. It’s not monogamy itself that matters most, but the kinds of lives people live within monogamy. Simply accepting a monogamous rule only takes us so far. This fact is bound to resonate with anyone examining sexual questions from a psychological perspective.
If monogamy is thus firmly based it is unreasonable to fear, or to hope for, any radical modification in the institution of marriage, regarded, not under its temporary religious and legal aspects but as an order which appeared on the earth even earlier than man. Monogamy is the most natural expression of an impulse which cannot, as a rule, be so adequately realized in full fruition under conditions involving a less prolonged period of mutual communion and intimacy. Variations, regarded as inevitable oscillations around the norm, are also natural, but union in couples must always be the rule because the numbers of the sexes are always approximately equal, while the needs of the emotional life, even apart from the needs of offspring, demand that such unions based on mutual attraction should be so far as possible permanent.
If monogamy is so firmly established, it’s unreasonable to fear or hope for any significant changes in the institution of marriage, viewed not just through its temporary religious and legal lenses but as a system that existed on Earth even before humans. Monogamy is the most natural expression of an impulse that generally can't be fully realized under circumstances that involve a shorter period of shared connection and intimacy. Variations, seen as unavoidable fluctuations around the standard, are also natural, but partnerships must always be the norm because the numbers of the sexes are always roughly equal. Meanwhile, the needs of emotional life, even outside of the needs for raising children, require that these unions formed on mutual attraction be as permanent as possible.
It must here again be repeated that it is the reality, and not the form or the permanence of the marriage union, which is its essential and valuable part. It is not the legal or religious formality which sanctifies marriage, it is the reality of the marriage which sanctifies the form. Fielding has satirized in Nightingale, Tom Jones's friend, the shallow-brained view of connubial society which degrades the reality of marriage to exalt the form. Nightingale has the greatest difficulty in marrying a girl with whom he has already had sexual relations, although he is the only man who has had relations with her. To Jones's arguments he replies: "Common-sense warrants all you say, but yet you well know that the opinion of the world is so contrary to it, that were I to marry a whore, though my own, I should be ashamed of ever showing my face again." It cannot be said that Fielding's satire is even yet out of date. Thus in Prussia, according to Adele Schreiber ("Heirathsbeschränkungen," Die Neue Generation, Feb., 1909), it seems to be still practically impossible for a military officer to marry the mother of his own illegitimate child.
It should be emphasized again that it's the reality of a marriage, not the form or permanence, that is its most essential and valuable aspect. It's not the legal or religious formalities that give marriage its sanctity; rather, it's the actual relationship that gives value to those formalities. Fielding pokes fun at this superficial view of marital society through Nightingale, Tom Jones's friend, who struggles to marry a girl he has already had a sexual relationship with, even though he is the only one who has been intimate with her. In response to Jones's arguments, he says, "Common sense supports everything you're saying, but you know that society's opinion is so opposed to it that if I were to marry a whore, even if she was mine, I'd be too ashamed to ever show my face again." It's safe to say that Fielding's satire is still relevant today. For instance, in Prussia, as noted by Adele Schreiber ("Heirathsbeschränkungen," Die Neue Generation, Feb., 1909), it still seems nearly impossible for a military officer to marry the mother of his illegitimate child.
The glorification of the form at the expense of the reality of marriage has even been attempted in poetry by Tennyson in the least inspired of his works, The Idylls of the King. In "Lancelot and Elaine" and "Guinevere" (as Julia Magruder points out, North American Review, April, 1905) Guinevere is married to King Arthur, whom she has never seen, when already in love with Lancelot, so that the "marriage" was merely a ceremony, and not a real marriage (cf., May Child, "The Weird of Sir Lancelot," North American Review, Dec., 1908).
The glorification of the form over the actual reality of marriage has even been attempted in poetry by Tennyson in the least inspired of his works, The Idylls of the King. In "Lancelot and Elaine" and "Guinevere" (as Julia Magruder points out, North American Review, April, 1905), Guinevere is married to King Arthur, whom she has never met, while already in love with Lancelot, making the "marriage" just a ceremony and not a true marriage (cf., May Child, "The Weird of Sir Lancelot," North American Review, Dec., 1908).
It may seem to some that so conservative an estimate of the tendencies of civilization in matters of sexual love is due to a timid adherence to mere tradition. That is not the case. We have to recognize that marriage is firmly held in position by the pressure of two opposing forces. There are two currents in the stream of our civilization: one that moves towards an ever greater social order and cohesion, the other that moves towards an ever greater individual freedom. There is real harmony underlying the apparent opposition of these two tendencies, and each is indeed the indispensable complement of the other. There can be no real freedom for the individual in the things that concern that individual alone unless there is a coherent order in the things that concern him as a social unit. Marriage in one of its aspects only concerns the two individuals involved; in another of its aspects it chiefly concerns society. The two forces cannot combine to act destructively on marriage, for the one counteracts the other. They combine to support monogamy, in all essentials, on its immemorial basis.
It might seem to some that such a conservative view on the trends of civilization regarding sexual love comes from a fearful cling to tradition. That's not the case. We need to acknowledge that marriage is firmly upheld by the push of two opposing forces. There are two currents in our civilization: one that moves toward greater social order and cohesion, and the other that moves toward greater individual freedom. There is real harmony beneath the apparent conflict of these two trends, and each is actually a necessary complement to the other. There can be no true freedom for an individual in matters that only concern them unless there is a cohesive order in the things that affect them as part of society. Marriage, in one aspect, only concerns the two individuals involved; in another aspect, it primarily concerns society. The two forces cannot work together to harm marriage because one counters the other. They work in tandem to uphold monogamy, fundamentally, on its age-old foundation.
It must be added that in the circumstances of monogamy that are not essential there always has been, and always must be, perpetual transformation. All traditional institutions, however firmly founded on natural impulses, are always growing dead and rigid at some points and putting forth vitally new growths at other points. It is the effort to maintain their vitality, and to preserve their elastic adjustment to the environment, which involves this process of transformation in non-essentials.
It should be noted that in situations of monogamy that aren't essential, there has always been, and will always be, ongoing change. All traditional institutions, no matter how strongly they're based on natural instincts, tend to become stagnant and inflexible in some areas while also developing new and vital aspects in others. Efforts to keep them alive and ensure they adapt flexibly to their surroundings drive this process of change in non-essential elements.
The only way in which we can fruitfully approach the question of the value of the transformations now taking place in our marriage-system is by considering the history of that system in the past. In that way we learn the real significance of the marriage-system, and we understand what transformations are, or are not, associated with a fine civilization. When we are acquainted with the changes of the past we are enabled to face more confidently the changes of the present.
The only way we can effectively tackle the question of the value of the changes happening in our marriage system is by looking at its history. This helps us understand the true significance of the marriage system and what changes are, or aren't, linked to a great civilization. When we know the changes of the past, we can more confidently handle the changes of the present.
The history of the marriage-system of modern civilized peoples begins in the later days of the Roman Empire at the time when the foundations were being laid of that Roman law which has exerted so large an influence in Christendom. Reference has already been made[315] to the significant fact that in late Rome women had acquired a position of nearly complete independence in relation to their husbands, while the patriarchal authority still exerted over them by their fathers had become, for the most part, almost nominal. This high status of women was associated, as it naturally tends to be, with a high degree of freedom in the marriage system. Roman law had no power of intervening in the formation of marriages and there were no legal forms of marriage. The Romans recognized that marriage is a fact and not a mere legal form; in marriage by usus there was no ceremony at all; it was constituted by the mere fact of living together for a whole year; yet such marriage was regarded as just as legal and complete as if it had been inaugurated by the sacred rite of confarreatio. Marriage was a matter of simple private agreement in which the man and the woman approached each other on a footing of equality. The wife retained full control of her own property; the barbarity of admitting an action for restitution of conjugal rights was impossible, divorce was a private transaction to which the wife was as fully entitled as the husband, and it required no inquisitorial intervention of magistrate or court; Augustus ordained, indeed, that a public declaration was necessary, but the divorce itself was a private legal act of the two persons concerned.[316] It is interesting to note this enlightened conception of marriage prevailing in the greatest and most masterful Empire which has ever dominated the world, at the period not indeed of its greatest force,—for the maximum of force and the maximum of expansion, the bud and the full flower, are necessarily incompatible,—but at the period of its fullest development. In the chaos that followed the dissolution of the Empire Roman law remained as a precious legacy to the new developing nations, but its influence was inextricably mingled with that of Christianity, which, though not at the first anxious to set up marriage laws of its own, gradually revealed a growing ascetic feeling hostile alike to the dignity of the married woman and the freedom of marriage and divorce.[317] With that influence was combined the influence, introduced through the Bible, of the barbaric Jewish marriage-system conferring on the husband rights in marriage and divorce which were totally denied to the wife; this was an influence which gained still greater force at the Reformation when the authority once accorded to the Church was largely transformed to the Bible. Finally, there was in a great part of Europe, including the most energetic and expansive parts, the influence of the Germans, an influence still more primitive than that of the Jews, involving the conception of the wife as almost her husband's chattel, and marriage as a purchase. All these influences clashed and often appeared side by side, though they could not be harmonized. The result was that the fifteen hundred years that followed the complete conquest of Christianity represent on the whole the most degraded condition to which the marriage system has ever been known to fall for so long a period during the whole course of human history.
The history of the marriage system among modern civilized societies begins in the later days of the Roman Empire when the foundations of Roman law were being established, which would significantly influence Christianity. It's important to note that in late Rome, women had attained a nearly independent status in relation to their husbands, while the patriarchal authority their fathers held had mostly become almost symbolic. This elevated status of women was linked, as it usually is, to a greater degree of freedom in the marriage system. Roman law did not interfere in how marriages were formed, and there were no official legal forms of marriage. The Romans understood that marriage is a reality, not just a legal form; in marriage by usus, there was no ceremony; it was simply based on living together for a full year. Such a marriage was considered just as legal and complete as if it had been initiated with the sacred rite of confarreatio. Marriage was a straightforward private agreement where the man and woman interacted as equals. The wife maintained total control over her own property; the idea of a legal claim for conjugal rights was unthinkable, divorce was a private matter accessible to both the husband and wife, and it required no intrusive involvement from magistrates or courts. Augustus did mandate that a public declaration was required, but the divorce itself was a private legal action between the two involved.[316] It’s interesting to observe this progressive view of marriage existing in the greatest Empire that ever ruled the world, not during its peak strength—since maximum strength and immense expansion cannot coexist—but at its period of fullest development. In the chaos that ensued after the Empire's fall, Roman law remained a valuable legacy to the emerging nations, but its influence became intertwined with that of Christianity, which, although initially reluctant to establish its own marriage laws, gradually developed an ascetic attitude that was hostile to both the dignity of married women and the freedom of marriage and divorce.[317] This influence combined with the barbaric Jewish marriage system introduced through the Bible, which granted the husband rights in marriage and divorce completely denied to the wife. This perspective gained even more momentum during the Reformation when authority was largely shifted from the Church to the Bible. Lastly, in many parts of Europe, particularly the most vigorous and expansive areas, there was the influence of the Germans, which was even more primitive than that of the Jews, viewing the wife almost as her husband's property and marriage as a purchase. All these influences collided and often coexisted, although they could not be harmonized. The result was that the fifteen hundred years after the full triumph of Christianity represented, overall, the most degraded state to which the marriage system has ever been known to fall for such an extended period in the entire history of humanity.
At first indeed the beneficent influence of Rome continued in some degree to prevail and even exhibited new developments. In the time of the Christian Emperors freedom of divorce by mutual consent was alternately maintained, and abolished.[318] We even find the wise and far-seeing provision of the law enacting that a contract of the two parties never to separate could have no legal validity. Justinian's prohibition of divorce by consent led to much domestic unhappiness, and even crime, which appears to be the reason why it was immediately abrogated by his successor, Theodosius, still maintaining the late Roman tradition of the moral equality of the sexes, allowed the wife equally with the husband to obtain a divorce for adultery; that is a point we have not yet attained in England to-day.
At first, the positive influence of Rome still somewhat persisted and even showed new developments. During the time of the Christian Emperors, divorce by mutual consent was sometimes allowed and sometimes banned.[318] There was even a smart and forward-thinking law stating that a contract between two parties to never separate had no legal power. Justinian's ban on divorce by consent led to a lot of unhappiness and even crime in families, which seems to be why his successor, Theodosius, quickly overturned it. He maintained the late Roman tradition of moral equality between the sexes, allowing both husbands and wives to get a divorce for adultery; which is something we still haven’t achieved in England today.
It seems to be admitted on all sides that it was largely the fatal influence of the irruption of the barbarous Germans which degraded, when it failed to sweep away, the noble conception of the equality of women with men, and the dignity and freedom of marriage, slowly moulded by the organizing genius of the Roman into a great tradition which still retains a supreme value. The influence of Christianity had at the first no degrading influence of this kind; for the ascetic ideal was not yet predominant, priests married as a matter of course, and there was no difficulty in accepting the marriage order established in the secular world; it was even possible to add to it a new vitality and freedom. But the Germans, with all the primitively acquisitive and combative instincts of untamed savages, went far beyond even the early Romans in the subjection of their wives; they allowed indeed to their unmarried girls a large measure of indulgence and even sexual freedom,—just as the Christians also reverenced their virgins,[319]—but the German marriage system placed the wife, as compared to the wife of the Roman Empire, in a condition little better than that of a domestic slave. In one form or another, under one disguise or another, the system of wife-purchase prevailed among the Germans, and, whenever that system is influential, even when the wife is honored her privileges are diminished.[320] Among the Teutonic peoples generally, as among the early English, marriage was indeed a private transaction but it took the form of a sale of the bride by the father, or other legal guardian, to the bridegroom. The beweddung was a real contract of sale.[321] "Sale-marriage" was the most usual form of marriage. The ring, indeed, probably was not in origin, as some have supposed, a mark of servitude, but rather a form of bride-price, or arrha, that is to say, earnest money on the contract of marriage and so the symbol of it.[322] At first a sign of the bride's purchase, it was not till later that the ring acquired the significance of subjection to the bridegroom, and that significance, later in the Middle Ages, was further emphasized by other ceremonies. Thus in England the York and Sarum manuals in some of their forms direct the bride, after the delivery of the ring, to fall at her husband's feet, and sometimes to kiss his right foot. In Russia, also, the bride kissed her husband's feet. At a later period, in France, this custom was attenuated, and it became customary for the bride to let the ring fall in front of the altar and then stoop at her husband's feet to pick it up.[323] Feudalism carried on, and by its military character exaggerated, these Teutonic influences. A fief was land held on condition of military service, and the nature of its influence on marriage is implied in that fact. The woman was given with the fief and her own will counted for nothing.[324]
It’s pretty much agreed that the destructive influence of the invading barbaric Germans greatly diminished, if not completely destroyed, the noble idea of gender equality and the dignity and freedom of marriage. This concept had taken shape thanks to the organizational skills of the Romans, forming a valuable tradition that still matters today. Initially, Christianity didn't have such a damaging effect; the ascetic ideal wasn't dominant yet, priests got married as a norm, and the marriage customs established in society were accepted without issue. In fact, it was possible to bring new energy and freedom to these customs. However, the Germans, with their primitive instincts of greed and aggression, treated their wives even worse than the early Romans did. They allowed their unmarried daughters a degree of freedom and even sexual independence—similar to how Christians respected their virgins—but the German marriage system put wives in a position barely above that of domestic slaves compared to Roman wives. In various forms, under different guises, the practice of wife-purchasing was common among the Germans. Whenever this system was in play, even if the wife was treated with respect, her rights were diminished. Among the Germanic peoples, as well as early English society, marriage was indeed a private affair, but it often took the shape of a sale, where the father or legal guardian sold the bride to the groom. The beweddung was essentially a real sales contract. "Sale-marriage" was the most common type of marriage. The ring likely didn’t originally symbolize servitude, as some have claimed, but rather served as a form of bride-price, or arrha, meaning it was earnest money in the marriage contract, thus representing it. Initially, it was a sign of the bride’s purchase, but later the ring took on the meaning of submission to the groom, a significance that was further highlighted by other rituals in the Middle Ages. For example, in England, some York and Sarum manuals instructed the bride, after receiving the ring, to kneel at her husband's feet and sometimes even kiss his right foot. In Russia, the bride also kissed her husband’s feet. Later in France, this custom was softened, leading to the bride letting the ring drop in front of the altar and then bending down at her husband’s feet to pick it up. Feudalism continued on and intensified these Germanic influences with its military aspect. A fief was land held in exchange for military service, and this connects to how marriage was influenced, as women were transferred along with the land, with their own wishes being disregarded.
The Christian Church in the beginning accepted the forms of marriage already existing in those countries in which it found itself, the Roman forms in the lands of Latin tradition and the German forms in Teutonic lands. It merely demanded (as it also demanded for other civil contracts, such as an ordinary sale) that they should be hallowed by priestly benediction. But the marriage was recognized by the Church even in the absence of such benediction. There was no special religious marriage service, either in the East or the West, earlier than the sixth century. It was simply the custom for the married couple, after the secular ceremonies were completed, to attend the church, listen to the ordinary service and take the sacrament. A special marriage service was developed slowly, and it was no part of the real marriage. During the tenth century (at all events in Italy and France) it was beginning to become customary to celebrate the first part of the real nuptials, still a purely temporal act, outside the church door. Soon this was followed by the regular bride-mass, directly applicable to the occasion, inside the church. By the twelfth century the priest directed the ceremony, now involving an imposing ritual, which began outside the church and ended with the bridal mass inside. By the thirteenth century, the priest, superseding the guardians of the young couple, himself officiated through the whole ceremony. Up to that time marriage had been a purely private business transaction. Thus, after more than a millennium of Christianity, not by law but by the slow growth of custom, ecclesiastical marriage was established.[325]
The Christian Church initially accepted the existing forms of marriage in the places where it spread, using the Roman traditions in Latin regions and the German traditions in Teutonic areas. It only required, similar to other civil contracts like a standard sale, that they be blessed by a priest. However, the Church recognized marriages even without such blessings. There wasn't a specific religious marriage service in either the East or West before the sixth century. It was customary for the married couple to attend church after the civil ceremonies, listen to the regular service, and take communion. A distinct marriage service developed gradually and was not considered part of the actual marriage. By the tenth century, particularly in Italy and France, it became common to celebrate the initial part of the marriage, still a purely civil act, outside the church door. This was soon followed by the appropriate bride mass within the church. By the twelfth century, a priest led the ceremony, which now included an elaborate ritual beginning outside the church and concluding with the bridal mass inside. By the thirteenth century, the priest took over the entire ceremony, replacing the guardians of the couple. Until that time, marriage had remained a private business deal. Thus, after over a thousand years of Christianity, ecclesiastical marriage was established, not by law but through the gradual evolution of custom.
It was undoubtedly an event of very great importance not merely for the Church but for the whole history of European marriage even down to to-day. The whole of our public method of celebrating marriage to-day is based on that of the Catholic Church as established in the twelfth century and formulated in the Canon law. Even the publication of banns has its origin here, and the fact that in our modern civil marriage the public ceremony takes place in an office and not in a Church may disguise but cannot alter the fact that it is the direct and unquestionable descendant of the public ecclesiastical ceremony which embodied the slow and subtle triumph—so slow and subtle that its history is difficult to trace—of Christian priests over the private affairs of men and women. Before they set themselves to this task marriage everywhere was the private business of the persons concerned; when they had completed their task,—and it was not absolutely complete until the Council of Trent,—a private marriage had become a sin and almost a crime.[326]
It was definitely a major event not just for the Church but for the entire history of marriage in Europe, even today. Our current way of celebrating marriage is based on that of the Catholic Church established in the twelfth century and outlined in Canon law. Even the tradition of announcing banns comes from this, and although modern civil ceremonies often take place in an office rather than a church, this change doesn't alter the fact that they are direct and undeniable descendants of the public church ceremony that represented the gradual and subtle victory—so gradual and subtle that tracing its history is challenging—of Christian priests over the personal affairs of individuals. Before they took on this role, marriage was a private matter between those involved; by the time they finished their work—and it wasn’t fully complete until the Council of Trent—a private marriage had become seen as a sin and nearly a crime.[326]
It may seem a matter for surprise that the Church which, as we know, had shown an ever greater tendency to reverence virginity and to cast contumely on the sexual relationship, should yet, parallel with that movement and with the growing influence of asceticism, have shown so great an anxiety to capture marriage and to confer on it a public, dignified, and religious character. There was, however, no contradiction. The factors that were constituting European marriage, taken as a whole, were indeed of very diverse characters and often involved unreconciled contradictions. But so far as the central efforts of the ecclesiastical legislators were concerned, there was a definite and intelligible point of view. The very depreciation of the sexual instinct involved the necessity, since the instinct could not be uprooted, of constituting for it a legitimate channel, so that ecclesiastical matrimony was, it has been said, "analogous to a license to sell intoxicating liquors."[327] Moreover, matrimony exhibited the power of the Church to confer on the license a dignity and distinction which would clearly separate it from the general stream of lust. Sexual enjoyment is impure, the faithful cannot partake of it until it has been purified by the ministrations of the Church. The solemnization of marriage was the necessary result of the sanctification of virginity. It became necessary to sanctify marriage also, and hence was developed the indissoluble sacrament of matrimony. The conception of marriage as a religious sacrament, a conception of far-reaching influence, is the great contribution of the Catholic Church to the history of marriage.
It might seem surprising that the Church, which has increasingly valued virginity while looking down on sexual relationships, has also shown a strong desire to embrace marriage and give it a public, dignified, and religious nature. However, there’s no contradiction here. The factors shaping European marriage were quite diverse and often conflicted with each other. But regarding the main efforts of church lawmakers, there was a clear and understandable perspective. The very devaluation of sexual desire meant that, since this instinct couldn't be eliminated, there was a need to create a legitimate outlet for it, leading to the idea that church matrimony was, as some have said, "like a license to sell intoxicating liquors." Moreover, matrimony showed the Church's ability to infuse this license with dignity and significance, clearly distinguishing it from mere lust. Sexual pleasure is viewed as impure, and the faithful can only engage in it once it has been purified through the Church's rituals. The formalization of marriage was a direct outcome of the validation of virginity. It became essential to sanctify marriage too, giving rise to the unbreakable sacrament of matrimony. The idea of marriage as a sacred sacrament, a concept with far-reaching effects, is the Catholic Church's major contribution to the history of marriage.
It is important to remember that, while Christianity brought the idea of marriage as a sacrament into the main stream of the institutional history of Europe, that idea was merely developed, not invented, by the Church. It is an ancient and even primitive idea. The Jews believed that marriage is a magico-religious bond, having in it something mystical resembling a sacrament, and that idea, says Durkheim (L'Année Sociologique, eighth year, 1905, p. 419), is perhaps very archaic, and hangs on to the generally magic character of sex relations. "The mere act of union," Crawley remarks (The Mystic Rose, p. 318) concerning savages, "is potentially a marriage ceremony of the sacramental kind.... One may even credit the earliest animistic men with some such vague conception before any ceremony became crystallized." The essence of a marriage ceremony, the same writer continues, "is the 'joining together' of a man and a woman; in the words of our English service, 'for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall be joined unto his wife; and they two shall be one flesh.' At the other side of the world, amongst the Orang Benuas, these words are pronounced by an elder, when a marriage is solemnized: 'Listen all ye that are present; those that were distant are now brought together; those that were separated are now united.' Marriage ceremonies in all stages of culture may be called religious with as much propriety as any ceremony whatever. Those who were separated are now joined together, those who were mutually taboo now break the taboo." Thus marriage ceremonies prevent sin and neutralize danger.
It’s important to remember that while Christianity brought the concept of marriage as a sacrament into mainstream European history, this idea was developed by the Church rather than invented by it. It’s actually an ancient and even primitive concept. The Jews believed that marriage is a magical-religious bond, containing something mystical that resembles a sacrament. Durkheim (L'Année Sociologique, eighth year, 1905, p. 419) suggests that this idea may be very archaic and is linked to the magical nature of sexual relationships. "The mere act of union," Crawley notes (The Mystic Rose, p. 318) in relation to primitive peoples, "can potentially be seen as a marriage ceremony of a sacramental kind... One might even credit the earliest animistic humans with some vague notion of this before any formal ceremony was established." The essential element of a marriage ceremony, the same author continues, "is the 'joining together' of a man and a woman; in the words of our English service, 'for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall be joined unto his wife; and they two shall be one flesh.' On the other side of the world, among the Orang Benuas, these words are spoken by an elder when a marriage is celebrated: 'Listen all you who are present; those who were distant are now brought together; those who were separated are now united.' Marriage ceremonies at all cultural levels can be considered religious just as much as any other ceremony. Those who were separated are now brought together, and those who were mutually taboo now break the taboo." Thus, marriage ceremonies prevent sin and neutralize danger.
The Catholic conception of marriage was, it is clear, in essentials precisely the primitive conception. Christianity drew the sacramental idea from the archaic traditions in popular consciousness, and its own ecclesiastical contribution lay in slowly giving that idea a formal and rigid shape, and in declaring it indissoluble. As among savages, it was in the act of consent that the essence of the sacrament lay; the intervention of the priest was not, in principle, necessary to give marriage its religiously binding character. The essence of the sacrament was mutual acceptance of each other by the man and the woman, as husband and wife, and technically the priest who presided at the ceremony was simply a witness of the sacrament. The essential fact being thus the mental act of consent, the sacrament of matrimony had the peculiar character of being without any outward and visible sign. Perhaps it was this fact, instinctively felt as a weakness, which led to the immense emphasis on the indissolubility of the sacrament of matrimony, already established by St. Augustine. The Canonists brought forward various arguments to account for that indissolubility, and a frequent argument has always been the Scriptural application of the term "one flesh" to married couples; but the favorite argument of the Canonists was that matrimony represents the union of Christ with the Church; that is indissoluble, and therefore its image must be indissoluble (Esmein, op. cit., vol. i, p. 64). In part, also, one may well believe, the idea of the indissolubility of marriage suggested itself to the ecclesiastical mind by a natural association of ideas: the vow of virginity in monasticism was indissoluble; ought not the vow of sexual relationship in matrimony to be similarly indissoluble? It appears that it was not until 1164, in Peter Lombard's Sentences, that clear and formal recognition is found of matrimony as one of the seven sacraments (Howard, op. cit., vol. i, p. 333).
The Catholic view of marriage was essentially the same as the original concept. Christianity took the idea of marriage as a sacrament from ancient traditions in public awareness, and its ecclesiastical role was to gradually formalize that idea and state that marriage is unbreakable. Just like in primitive societies, the key element of the sacrament was the consent of the couple; the priest's involvement wasn't necessary to make marriage religiously binding. The essence of the sacrament was the mutual acceptance between the man and the woman as husband and wife, and the priest officiating the ceremony was simply a witness to the sacrament. Since the core aspect was the mental act of consent, the sacrament of marriage lacked any outward and visible sign. Perhaps it was this perceived weakness that led to the strong emphasis on the indissolubility of marriage, which was already established by St. Augustine. Canon lawyers presented various reasons to justify that indissolubility, and one common argument has been the Scriptural reference to the term "one flesh" for married couples; however, the preferred argument among Canon lawyers was that marriage symbolizes the union of Christ with the Church; that bond is unbreakable, so its reflection must be unbreakable as well (Esmein, op. cit., vol. i, p. 64). Additionally, it seems that the idea of the unbreakable nature of marriage naturally arose in the ecclesiastical perspective due to a connection of ideas: the vow of celibacy in monasticism is unbreakable; shouldn't the vow of sexual commitment in marriage also be unbreakable? It appears that it wasn't until 1164, in Peter Lombard's Sentences, that clear formal acknowledgment of marriage as one of the seven sacraments was made (Howard, op. cit., vol. i, p. 333).
The Church, however, had not only made marriage a religious act; it had also made it a public act. The officiating priest, who had now become the arbiter of marriage, was bound by all the injunctions and prohibitions of the Church, and he could not allow himself to bend to the inclinations and interests of individual couples or their guardians. It was inevitable that in this matter, as in other similar matters, a code of ecclesiastical regulations should be gradually developed for his guidance. This need of the Church, due to its growing control of the world's affairs, was the origin of Canon law. With the development of Canon law the whole field of the regulation of the sexual relationships, and the control of its aberrations, became an exclusively ecclesiastical matter. The secular law could take no more direct cognizance of adultery than of fornication or masturbation; bigamy, incest, and sodomy were not temporal crimes; the Church was supreme in the whole sphere of sex.
The Church, however, had not only turned marriage into a religious act; it had also converted it into a public act. The officiating priest, who had now become the authority on marriage, was bound by all the rules and restrictions of the Church, and he couldn't allow himself to give in to the desires and interests of individual couples or their guardians. It was inevitable that, in this matter, as in other similar situations, a set of ecclesiastical regulations would gradually be developed for his guidance. This need of the Church, because of its increasing control over worldly affairs, led to the creation of Canon law. With the establishment of Canon law, the entire area of regulating sexual relationships and managing their issues became entirely an ecclesiastical concern. Secular law could no longer directly address adultery any more than it could fornication or masturbation; bigamy, incest, and sodomy weren't considered temporal crimes; the Church held supreme authority over all matters related to sex.
It was during the twelfth century that Canon law developed, and Gratian was the master mind who first moulded it. He belonged to the Bolognese school of jurisprudence which had inherited the sane traditions of Roman law. The Canons which Gratian compiled were, however, no more the mere result of legal traditions than they were the outcome of cloistered theological speculation. They were the result of a response to the practical needs of the day before those needs had had time to form a foundation for fine-spun subtleties. At a somewhat later period, before the close of the century, the Italian jurists were vanquished by the Gallic theologians of Paris as represented by Peter Lombard. The result was the introduction of mischievous complexities which went far to rob Canon law alike of its certainty and its adaptation to human necessities.
It was during the twelfth century that Canon law developed, and Gratian was the mastermind who first shaped it. He was part of the Bolognese school of law that had inherited the same traditions of Roman law. The Canons that Gratian compiled were, however, not just a result of legal traditions or isolated theological speculation. They were a response to the practical needs of the time, before those needs could evolve into intricate details. Later, before the end of the century, Italian jurists were overpowered by the Gallic theologians in Paris, represented by Peter Lombard. This led to the introduction of confusing complexities that significantly undermined Canon law’s clarity and its relevance to human needs.
Notwithstanding, however, all the parasitic accretions which swiftly began to form around the Canon law and to entangle its practical activity, that legislation embodied—predominantly at the outset and more obscurely throughout its whole period of vital activity—a sound core of real value. The Canon law recognized at the outset that the essential fact of marriage is the actual sexual union, accomplished with the intention of inaugurating a permanent relationship. The copula carnalis, the making of two "one flesh," according to the Scriptural phrase, a mystic symbol of the union of the Church to Christ, was the essence of marriage, and the mutual consent of the couple alone sufficed to constitute marriage, even without any religious benediction, or without any ceremony at all. The formless and unblessed union was still a real and binding marriage if the two parties had willed it so to be.[328]
Despite all the additional layers that quickly began to form around Canon law and complicate its practical application, that legislation contained—mainly at the beginning and more subtly throughout its entire active period—a solid core of genuine value. The Canon law initially recognized that the key aspect of marriage is the actual sexual union, done with the intent of starting a permanent relationship. The copula carnalis, the joining of two into "one flesh," as the Scripture puts it, serves as a mystic symbol of the union between the Church and Christ, and this was the essence of marriage. The mutual consent of the couple alone was enough to constitute marriage, regardless of any religious blessing or ceremony. Even an informal and unblessed union was still a valid and binding marriage if both parties intended it to be so.[328]
Whatever hard things may be said about the Canon law, it must never be forgotten that it carried through the Middle Ages until the middle of the sixteenth century the great truth that the essence of marriage lies not in rites and forms, but in the mutual consent of the two persons who marry each other. When the Catholic Church, in its growing rigidity, lost that conception, it was taken up by the Protestants and Puritans in their first stage of ardent vital activity, though it was more or less dropped as they fell back into a state of subservience to forms. It continued to be maintained by moralists and poets. Thus George Chapman, the dramatist, who was both moralist and poet, in The Gentleman Usher (1606), represents the riteless marriage of his hero and heroine, which the latter thus introduces:—
Whatever negative things might be said about Canon law, it should never be forgotten that it upheld, throughout the Middle Ages and until the mid-sixteenth century, the important truth that the core of marriage is not in rituals and formalities, but in the mutual consent of the two people getting married. When the Catholic Church, in its increasing rigidity, lost this understanding, it was embraced by the Protestants and Puritans during their initial phase of passionate activity, although it was largely abandoned as they became more reliant on formalities. It continued to be upheld by moralists and poets. For instance, George Chapman, the playwright who was both a moralist and a poet, in The Gentleman Usher (1606), depicts the marriage of his hero and heroine without rituals, introduced by the heroine in the following manner:—
And to-day, Ellen Key, the distinguished prophet of marriage reform, declares at the end of her Liebe und Ehe that the true marriage law contains only the paragraph: "They who love each other are husband and wife."
And today, Ellen Key, the renowned advocate for marriage reform, states at the end of her Liebe und Ehe that the true law of marriage consists of just one principle: "Those who love each other are husband and wife."
The establishment of marriage on this sound and naturalistic basis had the further excellent result that it placed the man and the woman, who could thus constitute marriage by their consent in entire disregard of the wishes of their parents or families, on the same moral level. Here the Church was following alike the later Romans and the early Christians like Lactantius and Jerome who had declared that what was licit for a man was licit for a woman. The Penitentials also attempted to set up this same moral law for both sexes. The Canonists finally allowed a certain supremacy to the husband, though, on the other hand, they sometimes seemed to assign even the chief part in marriage to the wife, and the attempt was made to derive the word matrimonium from matris munium, thereby declaring the maternal function to be the essential fact of marriage.[329]
The establishment of marriage on a solid and natural basis had the added benefit of putting both the man and the woman, who could form a marriage by their mutual consent without regard for their parents' or families' wishes, on the same moral level. In this respect, the Church mirrored the later Romans and early Christians like Lactantius and Jerome, who stated that what was acceptable for a man was also acceptable for a woman. The Penitentials also tried to establish this same moral law for both genders. Eventually, the Canonists granted the husband a certain level of dominance, but at times they also appeared to assign the wife a significant role in marriage, attempting to derive the word matrimonium from matris munium, thus emphasizing the maternal role as the core aspect of marriage.[329]
The sound elements in the Canon law conception of marriage were, however, from a very early period largely if not altogether neutralized by the verbal subtleties by which they were overlaid, and even by its own fundamental original defects. Even in the thirteenth century it began to be possible to attach a superior force to marriage verbally formed per verba de præsenti than to one constituted by sexual union, while so many impediments to marriage were set up that it became difficult to know what marriages were valid, an important point since a marriage even innocently contracted within the prohibited degrees was only a putative marriage. The most serious and the most profoundly unnatural feature of this ecclesiastical conception of marriage was the flagrant contradiction between the extreme facility with which the gate of marriage was flung open to the young couple, even if they were little more than children, and the extreme rigor with which it was locked and bolted when they were inside. That is still the defect of the marriage system we have inherited from the Church, but in the hands of the Canonists it was emphasized both on the side of its facility for entrance and of its difficulty for exit.[330] Alike from the standpoint of reason and of humanity the gate that is easy of ingress must be easy of egress; or if the exit is necessarily difficult then extreme care must be taken in admission. But neither of these necessary precautions was possible to the Canonists. Matrimony was a sacrament and all must be welcome to a sacrament, the more so since otherwise they may be thrust into the mortal sin of fornication. On the other side, since matrimony was a sacrament, when once truly formed, beyond the permissible power of verbal quibbles to invalidate, it could never be abrogated. The very institution that, in the view of the Church, had been set up as a bulwark against license became itself an instrument for artificially creating license. So that the net result of the Canon law in the long run was the production of a state of things which—in the eyes of a large part of Christendom—more than neutralized the soundness of its original conception.[331]
The sound elements of Canon law's view on marriage were, from very early on, largely if not completely overshadowed by the complex language that surrounded them, as well as by the law's own inherent flaws. Even in the thirteenth century, it became possible to give more weight to a marriage formed verbally per verba de præsenti than to one established through sexual union, while numerous obstacles to marriage were created that made it hard to determine which marriages were valid. This was significant since a marriage entered into innocently within prohibited degrees was only considered a putative marriage. The most serious and unnatural aspect of this ecclesiastical view of marriage was the glaring contradiction between how easily a marriage could be initiated by a young couple, even if they were barely more than children, and how hard it became to exit that marriage once it was established. This remains a flaw in the marriage system we have inherited from the Church, but under the Canonists, it was highlighted in both how easily one could enter and how difficult it was to leave. From both a rational and a humane perspective, an entrance that is easy should also allow for an easy exit; if the exit must be difficult, then great care must be taken in allowing entry. However, neither of these precautions was achievable by the Canonists. Matrimony was a sacrament, and everyone must be welcomed to a sacrament, especially since otherwise they risked falling into the sin of fornication. Conversely, since matrimony was a sacrament, once truly established, it could not be undone by verbal arguments, effectively making it permanent. The very institution that the Church viewed as a safeguard against promiscuity became a means of artificially creating it. As a result, the overall effect of Canon law, in the long run, led to a situation that, in the eyes of many in Christendom, more than countered the validity of its original conception.
In England, where from the ninth century, marriage was generally accepted by the ecclesiastical and temporal powers as indissoluble, Canon law was, in the main, established as in the rest of Christendom. There were, however, certain points in which Canon law was not accepted by the law of England. By English law a ceremony before a priest was necessary to the validity of a marriage, though in Scotland the Canon law doctrine was accepted that simple consent of the parties, even exchanged secretly, sufficed to constitute marriage. Again, the issue of a void marriage contracted in innocence, and the issue of persons who subsequently marry each other, are legitimate by Canon law, but not by the common law of England (Geary, Marriage and Family Relations, p. 3; Pollock and Maitland, loc. cit.). The Canonists regarded the disabilities attaching to bastardy as a punishment inflicted on the offending parents, and considered, therefore, that no burden should fall on the children when there had been a ceremony in good faith on the part of one at least of the parents. In this respect the English law is less reasonable and humane. It was at the Council of Merton, in 1236, that the barons of England rejected the proposal to make the laws of England harmonize with the Canon law, that is, with the ecclesiastical law of Christendom generally, in allowing children born before wedlock to be legitimated by subsequent marriage. Grosseteste poured forth his eloquence and his arguments in favor of the change, but in vain, and the law of England has ever since stood alone in this respect (Freeman, "Merton Priory," English Towns and Districts). The proposal was rejected in the famous formula, "Nolumus leges Angliæ mutare," a formula which merely stood for an unreasonable and inhumane obstinacy.
In England, from the ninth century onward, marriage was generally recognized by both religious and secular authorities as unbreakable, and Canon law was mostly established like in the rest of Christendom. However, there were certain aspects where Canon law was not accepted by English law. Under English law, a ceremony in front of a priest was required for a marriage to be valid, whereas in Scotland, the Canon law belief was accepted that simple verbal consent between the parties, even if shared privately, was enough to create a marriage. Additionally, according to Canon law, the children born from a void marriage entered into innocently, as well as the children of those who marry each other afterward, are considered legitimate. However, this is not the case under common law in England. The Canonists viewed the disabilities associated with illegitimacy as a punishment for the parents and therefore believed that no burden should be placed on the children when there had been a ceremony in good faith by at least one of the parents. In this regard, English law is less reasonable and compassionate. It was during the Council of Merton in 1236 that the English barons rejected the proposal to align English laws with Canon law, which would have allowed children born out of wedlock to be legitimized by subsequent marriage. Grosseteste passionately argued for this change, but it was all in vain, and English law has remained unique in this aspect ever since. The proposal was dismissed with the now-famous phrase, "Nolumus leges Angliæ mutare," a phrase that simply represented an unreasonable and inhumane stubbornness.
In the United States, while by common law subsequent marriage fails to legitimate children born before marriage, in many of the States the subsequent marriage of the parents effects by statute the legitimacy of the child, sometimes (as in Maine) automatically, more usually (as in Massachusetts) through special acknowledgment by the father.
In the United States, although common law states that subsequent marriages do not legitimize children born before the marriage, in many states, a subsequent marriage of the parents legally recognizes the child's legitimacy, sometimes automatically (like in Maine) and more often through a special acknowledgment by the father (as seen in Massachusetts).
The appearance of Luther and the Reformation involved the decay of the Canon law system so far as Europe as a whole was concerned. It was for many reasons impossible for the Protestant reformers to retain formally either the Catholic conception of matrimony or the precariously elaborate legal structure which the Church had built up on that conception. It can scarcely be said, indeed, that the Protestant attitude towards the Catholic idea of matrimony was altogether a clear, logical, or consistent attitude. It was a revolt, an emotional impulse, rather than a matter of reasoned principle. In its inevitable necessity, under the circumstances of the rise of Protestantism, lies its justification, and, on the whole, its wholesome soundness. It took the form, which may seem strange in a religious movement, of proclaiming that marriage is not a religious but a secular matter. Marriage is, said Luther, "a worldly thing," and Calvin put it on the same level as house-building, farming, or shoe-making. But while this secularization of marriage represents the general and final drift of Protestantism, the leaders of Protestantism were themselves not altogether confident and clear-sighted in the matter. Even Luther was a little confused on this point; sometimes he seems to call marriage "a sacrament," sometimes "a temporal business," to be left to the state.[332] It was the latter view which tended to prevail. But at first there was a period of confusion, if not of chaos, in the minds of the Reformers; not only were they not always convinced in their own minds; they were at variance with each other, especially on the very practical question of divorce. Luther on the whole belonged to the more rigid party, including Calvin and Beza, which would grant divorce only for adultery and malicious desertion; some, including many of the early English Protestants, were in favor of allowing the husband to divorce for adultery but not the wife. Another party, including Zwingli, were influenced by Erasmus in a more liberal direction, and—moving towards the standpoint of Roman Imperial legislation—admitted various causes of divorce. Some, like Bucer, anticipating Milton, would even allow divorce when the husband was unable to love his wife. At the beginning some of the Reformers adopted the principle of self-divorce, as it prevailed among the Jews and was accepted by some early Church Councils. In this way Luther held that the cause for the divorce itself effected the divorce without any judicial decree, though a magisterial permission was needed for remarriage. This question of remarriage, and the treatment of the adulterer, were also matters of dispute. The remarriage of the innocent party was generally accepted; in England it began in the middle of the sixteenth century, was pronounced valid by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and confirmed by Parliament. Many Reformers were opposed, however, to the remarriage of the adulterous party. Beust, Beza, and Melancthon would have him hanged and so settle the question of remarriage; Luther and Calvin would like to kill him, but since the civil rulers were slack in adopting that measure they allowed him to remarry, if possible in some other part of the country.[333]
The rise of Luther and the Reformation led to the decline of the Canon law system across Europe. For various reasons, it was impossible for the Protestant reformers to formally keep either the Catholic view of marriage or the complex legal framework the Church had established around that view. In fact, the Protestant response to the Catholic idea of marriage was not entirely clear, logical, or consistent. It was more of a rebellion, an emotional response, rather than a well-structured principle. Its justification lies in its necessity given the rise of Protestantism, and overall, it's considered sound. It took a somewhat odd form for a religious movement by asserting that marriage is not a religious but a secular matter. Luther stated that marriage is "a worldly thing," and Calvin equated it to house-building, farming, or shoemaking. However, while this secular approach to marriage reflects the broader trend of Protestantism, the leaders themselves were not fully confident or clear on the subject. Even Luther wavered on this issue; at times, he referred to marriage as "a sacrament," while at other times he viewed it as "a temporal business" that should be managed by the state. The latter view tended to be more dominant. Initially, though, there was confusion, if not chaos, among the Reformers; they often lacked conviction in their own beliefs and frequently disagreed with one another, especially regarding the practical issue of divorce. Luther generally aligned with the stricter faction, which included Calvin and Beza, advocating for divorce only in cases of adultery and willful abandonment; however, some early English Protestants supported allowing husbands to divorce for adultery but not wives. Another group, led by Zwingli and influenced by Erasmus, took a more liberal approach, resembling Roman Imperial laws, allowing for more grounds for divorce. Some, like Bucer, foreshadowing Milton, believed in allowing divorce if the husband was unable to love his wife. At the outset, some Reformers adopted the principle of self-divorce, similar to its practice among the Jews and as acknowledged by early Church Councils. In this view, Luther argued that the grounds for divorce themselves constituted the divorce, without needing a judicial decree, although permission from authorities was required for remarriage. Disputes also arose regarding remarriage and the treatment of the adulterer. Generally, the remarriage of the innocent party was accepted; in England, this began to be recognized in the mid-sixteenth century, validated by the Archbishop of Canterbury and confirmed by Parliament. Many Reformers, however, opposed the remarriage of the adulterous party. Beust, Beza, and Melancthon suggested executing the adulterer to resolve the remarriage question; Luther and Calvin preferred a death penalty as well, but since civil authorities were slow to adopt such measures, they permitted the adulterer to remarry, ideally in a different region.
The final outcome was that Protestantism framed a conception of marriage mainly on the legal and economic factor—a factor not ignored but strictly subordinated by the Canonists—and regarded it as essentially a contract. In so doing they were on the negative side effecting a real progress, for they broke the power of an antiquated and artificial system, but on the positive side they were merely returning to a conception which prevails in barbarous societies, and is most pronounced when marriage is most assimilable to purchase. The steps taken by Protestantism involved a considerable change in the nature of marriage, but not necessarily any great changes in its form. Marriage was no longer a sacrament, but it was still a public and not a private function and was still, however inconsistently, solemnized in Church. And as Protestantism had no rival code to set up, both in Germany and England it fell back on the general principles of Canon law, modifying them to suit its own special attitude and needs.[334] It was the later Puritanic movement, first in the Netherlands (1580), then in England (1653), and afterwards in New England, which introduced a serious and coherent conception of Protestant marriage, and began to establish it on a civil base.
The final outcome was that Protestantism shaped a view of marriage primarily based on legal and economic factors—elements that were not ignored but were strictly subordinated by the Canonists—and saw it as essentially a contract. In doing so, they made real progress on the negative side by breaking the power of an outdated and artificial system, but on the positive side, they were simply reverting to a view that is common in primitive societies, which is especially evident when marriage is closely linked to purchase. The steps taken by Protestantism brought about a significant change in the nature of marriage, but not necessarily in its form. Marriage was no longer a sacrament, but it remained a public function rather than a private one and was still, albeit inconsistently, solemnized in Church. Since Protestantism did not establish a rival code, both in Germany and England it fell back on the general principles of Canon law, modifying them to fit its specific attitudes and needs.[334] It was the later Puritan movement, first in the Netherlands (1580), then in England (1653), and later in New England, that introduced a serious and coherent understanding of Protestant marriage and began to establish it on a civil foundation.
The English Reformers under Edward VI and his enlightened advisers, including Archbishop Cranmer, took liberal views of marriage, and were prepared to carry through many admirable reforms. The early death of that King exerted a profound influence on the legal history of English marriage. The Catholic reaction under Queen Mary killed off the more radical Reformers, while the subsequent accession of Queen Elizabeth, whose attitude towards marriage was grudging, illiberal, and old-fashioned, approximating to that of her father, Henry VIII (as witnessed, for instance, in her decided opposition to the marriage of the clergy), permanently affected English marriage law. It became less liberal than that of other Protestant countries, and closer to that of Catholic countries.
The English Reformers during Edward VI's reign and his progressive advisers, including Archbishop Cranmer, held liberal views on marriage and were ready to implement many positive changes. The early death of the King had a significant impact on the legal history of marriage in England. The Catholic backlash under Queen Mary eliminated many of the more radical Reformers, while the later rise of Queen Elizabeth, who had a begrudging, conservative, and outdated view on marriage similar to that of her father, Henry VIII (as seen in her strong opposition to clergy marriage), permanently shaped English marriage law. It became less liberal than the marriage laws of other Protestant nations and more aligned with those of Catholic countries.
The reform of marriage attempted by the Puritans began in England in 1644, when an Act was passed asserting "marriage to be no sacrament, nor peculiar to the Church of God, but common to mankind and of public interest to every Commonwealth." The Act added, notwithstanding, that it was expedient marriage should be solemnized by "a lawful minister of the Word." The more radical Act of 1653 swept away this provision, and made marriage purely secular. The banns were to be published (by registrars specially appointed) in the Church, or (if the parties desired) the market-place. The marriage was to be performed by a Justice of the Peace; the age of consent to marriage for a man was made sixteen, for a woman fourteen (Scobell's Acts and Ordinances, pp. 86, 236). The Restoration abolished this sensible Act, and reintroduced Canon-law traditions, but the Puritan conception of marriage was carried over to America, where it took root and flourished.
The Puritans' attempt to reform marriage started in England in 1644, when an Act was passed stating that "marriage is not a sacrament, nor exclusive to the Church of God, but is a common matter for all mankind and of public interest to every Commonwealth." However, the Act also noted that it was advisable for marriage to be officiated by "a lawful minister of the Word." The more radical Act of 1653 removed this requirement, making marriage purely secular. The banns were to be announced (by specially appointed registrars) in the Church, or in the marketplace if the parties preferred. The marriage was to be conducted by a Justice of the Peace; the age of consent for a man was set at sixteen, and for a woman, it was fourteen (Scobell's Acts and Ordinances, pp. 86, 236). The Restoration ended this reasonable Act and reintroduced Canon-law traditions, but the Puritan view of marriage was brought to America, where it took hold and flourished.
It was out of Puritanism, moreover, as represented by Milton, that the first genuinely modern though as yet still imperfect conception of the marriage relationship was destined to emerge. The early Reformers in this matter acted mainly from an obscure instinct of natural revolt in an environment of plebeian materialism. The Puritans were moved by their feeling for simplicity and civil order as the conditions for religious freedom. Milton, in his Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, published in 1643, when he was thirty-five years of age, proclaimed the supremacy of the substance of marriage over the form of it, and the spiritual autonomy of the individual in the regulation of that form. He had grasped the meaning of that conception of personal responsibility which is the foundation of sexual relationships as they are beginning to appear to men to-day. If Milton had left behind him only his writings on marriage and divorce they would have sufficed to stamp him with the seal of genius. Christendom had to wait a century and a half before another man of genius of the first rank, Wilhelm von Humboldt, spoke out with equal authority and clearness in favor of free marriage and free divorce.
It was from Puritanism, particularly as represented by Milton, that the first genuinely modern, though still imperfect, understanding of marriage was set to develop. The early Reformers were mainly driven by a vague sense of natural rebellion against a backdrop of common materialism. The Puritans were guided by their desire for simplicity and social order as essential conditions for religious freedom. In his Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, published in 1643 when he was thirty-five, Milton asserted that the essence of marriage is more important than its structure, and emphasized the individual's spiritual autonomy in defining that structure. He understood the significance of personal responsibility, which now underpins sexual relationships as they are starting to be recognized today. If Milton had only left behind his writings on marriage and divorce, they would still be enough to establish him as a genius. Christendom had to wait a hundred and fifty years for another extraordinary thinker, Wilhelm von Humboldt, to speak with equal authority and clarity in support of free marriage and divorce.
It is to the honor of Milton, and one of his chief claims on our gratitude, that he is the first great protagonist in Christendom of the doctrine that marriage is a private matter, and that, therefore, it should be freely dissoluble by mutual consent, or even at the desire of one of the parties. We owe to him, says Howard, "the boldest defence of the liberty of divorce which had yet appeared. If taken in the abstract, and applied to both sexes alike, it is perhaps the strongest defence which can be made through an appeal to mere authority;" though his arguments, being based on reason and experience, are often ill sustained by his authority; he is really speaking the language of the modern social reformer, and Milton's writings on this subject are now sometimes ranked in importance above all his other work (Masson, Life of Milton, vol. iii; Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 86, vol. iii, p. 251; C. B. Wheeler, "Milton's Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce," Nineteenth Century, Jan., 1907).
It is a testament to Milton's honor and one of his main contributions to our appreciation that he is the first major advocate in Christendom for the idea that marriage is a private issue, and therefore, it should be easily dissolvable by mutual agreement or even at the request of one party. According to Howard, we owe him "the boldest defense of the freedom of divorce that had appeared so far. If considered in theory and applied equally to both genders, it might be the strongest argument made simply through an appeal to authority;" however, his arguments, based on reason and experience, are often not well supported by his authority. He truly embodies the voice of the modern social reformer, and Milton's writings on this topic are sometimes considered more significant than all his other work (Masson, Life of Milton, vol. iii; Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 86, vol. iii, p. 251; C. B. Wheeler, "Milton's Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce," Nineteenth Century, Jan., 1907).
Marriage, said Milton, "is not a mere carnal coition, but a human society; where that cannot be had there can be no true marriage" (Doctrine of Divorce, Bk. i, Ch. XIII); it is "a covenant, the very being whereof consists not in a forced cohabitation, and counterfeit performance of duties, but in unfeigned love and peace" (Ib., Ch. VI). Any marriage that is less than this is "an idol, nothing in the world." The weak point in Milton's presentation of the matter is that he never explicitly accords to the wife the same power of initiative in marriage and divorce as to the husband. There is, however, nothing in his argument to prevent its equal application to the wife, an application which, while never asserting he never denies; and it has been pointed out that he assumes that women are the equals of men and demands from them intellectual and spiritual companionship; however ready Milton may have been to grant complete equality of divorce to the wife, it would have been impossible for a seventeenth century Puritan to have obtained any hearing for such a doctrine; his arguments would have been received with, if that were possible, even more neglect than they actually met. (Milton's scornful sonnet concerning the reception of his book is well known.)
Marriage, as Milton said, "is not just a physical relationship, but a human community; where that can't be found, there can be no real marriage" (Doctrine of Divorce, Bk. i, Ch. XIII); it is "a promise, the essence of which lies not in forced living together and pretending to fulfill duties, but in genuine love and peace" (Ib., Ch. VI). Any marriage that falls short of this is "an idol, nothing in the world." The weak point in Milton's argument is that he never clearly gives the wife the same ability to initiate marriage and divorce as the husband. However, his argument doesn't prevent equal application to the wife, an application he never explicitly denies. It's noted that he assumes women are the equals of men and calls for their intellectual and spiritual companionship. While Milton might have been ready to grant complete divorce equality to wives, it would have been impossible for a seventeenth-century Puritan to gain any support for such an idea; his arguments would likely have faced even more disregard than they did. (Milton's scornful sonnet about the reception of his book is well-known.)
Milton insists that in the conventional Christian marriage exclusive importance is attached to carnal connection. So long as that connection is possible, no matter what antipathy may exist between the couple, no matter how mistaken they may have been "through any error, concealment, or misadventure," no matter if it is impossible for them to "live in any union or contentment all their days," yet the marriage still holds good, the two must "fadge together" (op. cit., Bk. i). It is the Canon law, he says, which is at fault, "doubtless by the policy of the devil," for the Canon law leads to licentiousness (op. cit.). It is, he argues, the absence of reasonable liberty which causes license, and it is the men who desire to retain the privileges of license who oppose the introduction of reasonable liberty.
Milton argues that in traditional Christian marriage, a primary focus is put on physical connection. As long as that connection can be maintained, it doesn't matter how much dislike exists between the couple, how wrong they may have been "due to any mistake, deception, or unfortunate circumstance," or whether they can "live together in harmony or happiness for the rest of their lives." The marriage remains valid, and they must "fadge together" (op. cit., Bk. i). He claims that the problem lies with Canon law, "certainly by the devil's influence," because Canon law leads to promiscuity (op. cit.). He contends that it's the lack of reasonable freedom that leads to promiscuity, and it is those men who want to keep the benefits of promiscuity who resist the push for reasonable freedom.
The just ground for divorce is "indisposition, unfitness, or contrariety of mind, arising from a cause in nature unchangeable, hindering, and ever likely to hinder, the main benefits of conjugal society, which are solace and peace." Without the "deep and serious verity" of mutual love, wedlock is "nothing but the empty husks of a mere outside matrimony," a mere hypocrisy, and must be dissolved (op. cit.).
The valid reasons for divorce are "inability, unfitness, or conflict of mind, stemming from an unchangeable, inherent cause, which obstructs, and is likely to always obstruct, the primary benefits of marriage, which are comfort and peace." Without the "deep and serious truth" of mutual love, marriage is "nothing but the empty shells of a superficial union," mere pretense, and should be dissolved (op. cit.).
Milton goes beyond the usual Puritan standpoint, and not only rejects courts and magistrates, but approves of self-divorce; for divorce cannot rightly belong to any civil or earthly power, since "ofttimes the causes of seeking divorce reside so deeply in the radical and innocent affections of nature, as is not within the diocese of law to tamper with." He adds that, for the prevention of injustice, special points may be referred to the magistrate, who should not, however, in any case, be able to forbid divorce (op. cit., Bk. ii, Ch. XXI). Speaking from a standpoint which we have not even yet attained, he protests against the absurdity of "authorizing a judicial court to toss about and divulge the unaccountable and secret reason of disaffection between man and wife."
Milton goes beyond the typical Puritan view; he not only rejects courts and judges but also supports self-divorce. He argues that divorce shouldn't fall under any civil or earthly authority since "often the reasons for seeking a divorce are rooted deeply in the fundamental and innocent feelings of human nature, which are beyond the reach of law." He also mentions that, to prevent injustice, specific issues can be brought to a magistrate, who should never be able to prohibit divorce (op. cit., Bk. ii, Ch. XXI). Speaking from a perspective that we have yet to reach, he criticizes the ridiculousness of "giving a judicial court the power to shuffle around and expose the unexplainable and private reasons for discord between husband and wife."
In modern times Hinton was accustomed to compare the marriage law to the law of the Sabbath as broken by Jesus. We find exactly the same comparison in Milton. The Sabbath, he believes, was made for God. "Yet when the good of man comes into the scales, we have that voice of infinite goodness and benignity, that 'Sabbath was made for man and not man for Sabbath.' What thing ever was made more for man alone, and less for God, than marriage?" (op. cit., Bk. i, Ch. XI). "If man be lord of the Sabbath, can he be less than lord of marriage?"
In modern times, Hinton often compared marriage laws to the Sabbath laws that Jesus broke. We see the same comparison in Milton. He believes the Sabbath was created for God. "Yet when the well-being of humanity is on the scales, we hear that voice of infinite goodness and kindness, that 'the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.' What was ever designed more for humanity and less for God than marriage?" (op. cit., Bk. i, Ch. XI). "If man is the master of the Sabbath, can he be any less than the master of marriage?"
Milton, in this matter as in others, stood outside the currents of his age. His conception of marriage made no more impression on contemporary life than his Paradise Lost. Even his own Puritan party who had passed the Act of 1653 had strangely failed to transfer divorce and nullity cases to the temporal courts, which would at least have been a step on the right road. The Puritan influence was transferred to America and constituted the leaven which still works in producing the liberal though too minutely detailed divorce laws of many States. The American secular marriage procedure followed that set up by the English Commonwealth, and the dictum of the great Quaker, George Fox, "We marry none, but are witnesses of it,"[335] (which was really the sound kernel in the Canon law) is regarded as the spirit of the marriage law of the conservative but liberal State of Pennsylvania, where, as recently as 1885, a statute was passed expressly authorizing a man and woman to solemnize their own marriage.[336]
Milton, like in many other ways, remained separate from the trends of his time. His views on marriage had no more impact on the society around him than his Paradise Lost. Even his own Puritan faction, which had enacted the Act of 1653, strangely didn’t move divorce and nullity cases to civil courts, which would have at least been progress. The Puritan influence carried over to America and became the foundation that still contributes to the complex but often liberal divorce laws in many states. The American secular marriage process was based on what was established by the English Commonwealth, and the statement from the great Quaker, George Fox, "We marry none, but are witnesses of it,"[335] (which truly reflects the core principle in Canon law) is seen as the essence of marriage law in the conservative yet liberal State of Pennsylvania, where, as recently as 1885, a law was passed explicitly allowing a man and woman to officiate their own marriage.[336]
In England itself the reforms in marriage law effected by the Puritans were at the Restoration largely submerged. For two and a half centuries longer the English spiritual courts administered what was substantially the old Canon law. Divorce had, indeed, become more difficult than before the Reformation, and the married woman's lot was in consequence harder. From the sixteenth century to the second half of the nineteenth, English marriage law was peculiarly harsh and rigid, much less liberal than that of any other Protestant country. Divorce was unknown to the ordinary English law, and a special act of Parliament, at enormous expense, was necessary to procure it in individual cases.[337] There was even an attitude of self-righteousness in the maintenance of this system. It was regarded as moral. There was complete failure to realize that nothing is more immoral than the existence of unreal sexual unions, not only from the point of view of theoretical but also of practical morality, for no community could tolerate a majority of such unions.[338] In 1857 an act for reforming the system was at last passed with great difficulty. It was a somewhat incoherent and make-shift measure, and was avowedly put forward only as a step towards further reform; but it still substantially governs English procedure, and in the eyes of many has set a permanent standard of morality. The spirit of blind conservatism,—Nolumus leges Angliæ mutare,—which in this sphere had reasserted itself after the vital movement of Reform and Puritanism, still persists. In questions of marriage and divorce English legislation and English public feeling are behind alike both the Latin land of France and the Puritanically moulded land of the United States.
In England, the marriage law reforms brought about by the Puritans were mostly ignored after the Restoration. For another two and a half centuries, the English spiritual courts continued to enforce what was basically the old Canon law. Divorce had actually become more difficult than it was before the Reformation, which made life harder for married women. From the sixteenth century until the second half of the nineteenth century, English marriage law was particularly strict and rigid, far less progressive than that of any other Protestant nation. Divorce was not recognized under regular English law, and obtaining one required a special act of Parliament at a huge cost in individual cases.[337] There was even a sense of self-righteousness in keeping this system in place. It was seen as moral. There was a complete failure to understand that nothing is more immoral than the existence of fake sexual unions, both from a theoretical and a practical moral standpoint, as no society could sustain a majority of such unions.[338] Finally, in 1857, a law aimed at reforming the system was passed, albeit with great difficulty. It was somewhat disorganized and a temporary solution, and it was clearly presented only as a step toward further reform; however, it continues to significantly influence English legal procedures and, in the eyes of many, has established a lasting moral standard. The spirit of blind conservatism—Nolumus leges Angliæ mutare—which had re-emerged in this area after the important movements of Reform and Puritanism, still remains. In matters of marriage and divorce, English laws and public sentiment lag behind both the Latin nation of France and the Puritan-influenced United States.
The author of an able and temperate essay on The Question of English Divorce, summing up the characteristics of the English divorce law, concludes that it is: (1) unequal, (2) immoral, (3) contradictory, (4) illogical, (5) uncertain, and (6) unsuited to present requirements. It was only grudgingly introduced in a bill, presented to Parliament in 1857, which was stubbornly resisted during a whole session, not only on religious grounds by the opponents of divorce, but also by the friends of divorce, who desired a more liberal measure. It dealt with the sexes unequally, granting the husband but not the wife divorce for adultery alone. In introducing the bill the Attorney-General apologized for this defect, stating that the measure was not intended to be final, but merely as a step towards further legislation. That was more than half a century ago, but the further step has not yet been taken. Incomplete and unsatisfactory as the measure was, it seems to have been regarded by many as revolutionary and dangerous in the highest degree. The author of an article on "Modern Divorce" in the Universal Review for July, 1859, while approving in principle of the establishment of a special Divorce Court, yet declared that the new court was "tending to destroy marriage as a social institution and to sap female chastity," and that "everyone now is a husband and wife at will." "No one," he adds, "can now justly quibble at a deficiency of matrimonial vomitories."
The author of a skilled and balanced essay on The Question of English Divorce, summarizing the features of English divorce law, concludes that it is: (1) unequal, (2) immoral, (3) contradictory, (4) illogical, (5) uncertain, and (6) not suited to current needs. It was only reluctantly introduced in a bill presented to Parliament in 1857, which faced strong opposition throughout the entire session, not just from those against divorce on religious grounds, but also from supporters of divorce who wanted a more progressive law. The bill treated men and women unequally, allowing husbands to seek divorce for adultery alone, but not wives. When introducing the bill, the Attorney-General apologized for this issue, stating that the measure was not meant to be final but simply a step towards further legislation. That was more than fifty years ago, but that next step still hasn’t happened. Although the measure was incomplete and unsatisfactory, many viewed it as highly revolutionary and dangerous. The author of an article titled "Modern Divorce" in the Universal Review for July 1859, while generally supporting the idea of a dedicated Divorce Court, claimed that the new court was "tending to destroy marriage as a social institution and to undermine female chastity," adding that "now, anyone can be a husband or wife at will." "No one," he added, "can justly complain about a lack of matrimonial escape routes."
Yet, according to this law, it is not even possible for a wife to obtain a divorce for her husband's adultery, unless he is also cruel or deserts her. At first "cruelty" meant physical cruelty and of a serious kind. But in course of time the meaning of the word was extended to pain inflicted on the mind, and now coldness and neglect may almost of themselves constitute cruelty, though the English court has sometimes had the greatest hesitation in accepting the most atrocious forms of refined cruelty, because it involved no "physical" element. "The time may very reasonably be looked forward to, however," a legal writer has stated (Montmorency, "The Changing Status of a Married Woman," Law Quarterly Review, April, 1897), "when almost any act of misconduct will, in itself, be considered to convey such mental agony to the innocent party as to constitute the cruelty requisite under the Act of 1857." (The question of cruelty is fully discussed in J. R. Bishop's Commentaries on Marriage, Divorce and Separation, 1891, vol. i, Ch. XLIX; cf. Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 111).
Yet, according to this law, a wife can't even get a divorce for her husband's cheating unless he is also abusive or leaves her. Initially, "cruelty" referred to serious physical abuse. However, over time, its meaning has expanded to include emotional suffering, so now indifference and neglect can almost alone be seen as cruelty, although English courts have often been very hesitant to recognize the more extreme forms of subtle cruelty because they lack a "physical" component. "However, it’s reasonable to expect," a legal writer stated (Montmorency, "The Changing Status of a Married Woman," Law Quarterly Review, April, 1897), "that almost any act of wrongdoing will be viewed as inflicting enough mental pain on the innocent party to qualify as the cruelty required under the Act of 1857." (The topic of cruelty is thoroughly examined in J. R. Bishop's Commentaries on Marriage, Divorce and Separation, 1891, vol. i, Ch. XLIX; cf. Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 111).
There can be little doubt, however, that cruelty alone is a reasonable cause for divorce. In many American States, where the facilities for divorce are much greater than in England, cruelty is recognized as itself sufficient cause, whether the wife or the husband is the complainant. The acts of cruelty alleged have sometimes been seemingly very trivial. Thus divorces have been pronounced in America on the ground of the "cruel and inhuman conduct" of a wife who failed to sew her husband's buttons on, or because a wife "struck plaintiff a violent blow with her bustle," or because a husband does not cut his toe-nails, or because "during our whole married life my husband has never offered to take me out riding. This has been a source of great mental suffering and injury." In many other cases, it must be added, the cruelty inflicted by the husband, even by the wife—for though usually, it is not always, the husband who is the brute—is of an atrocious and heart-rending character (Report on Marriage and Divorce in the United States, issued by Hon. Carroll D. Wright, Commissioner of Labor, 1889). But even in many of the apparently trivial cases—as of a husband who will not wash, and a wife who is constantly evincing a hasty temper—it must be admitted that circumstances which, in the more ordinary relationships of life may be tolerated, become intolerable in the intimate relationship of sexual union. As a matter of fact, it has been found by careful investigation that the American courts weigh well the cases that come before them, and are not careless in the granting of decrees of divorce.
There’s no doubt that cruelty is a valid reason for divorce. In many American states, where getting a divorce is easier than in England, cruelty is seen as a sufficient reason, whether the wife or the husband is the one filing. The examples of cruelty reported can often seem trivial. For instance, divorces in America have been granted for reasons like a wife not sewing her husband’s buttons, or a wife who “struck the plaintiff a violent blow with her bustle,” or a husband not cutting his toenails, or because “throughout our entire marriage my husband has never offered to take me out riding. This has caused me great mental suffering and distress.” In many other cases, it should be noted that the cruelty inflicted by either the husband or the wife—though usually it’s the husband—can be shocking and deeply upsetting. (Report on Marriage and Divorce in the United States, issued by Hon. Carroll D. Wright, Commissioner of Labor, 1889). However, even in many of the seemingly trivial cases—like a husband who won't wash and a wife who consistently shows a short temper—it must be acknowledged that situations which might be bearable in other types of relationships become unbearable in the close bond of marriage. In reality, careful investigations have shown that American courts critically evaluate the cases they receive and are not careless about granting divorce decrees.
In 1859 an exaggerated importance was attached to the gross reasons for divorce, to the neglect of subtle but equally fatal impediments to the continuance of marriage. This was pointed out by Gladstone, who was opposed to making adultery a cause of divorce at all. "We have many causes," he said, "more fatal to the great obligation of marriage, as disease, idiocy, crime involving punishment for life." Nowadays we are beginning to recognize not only such causes as these, but others of a far more intimate character which, as Milton long ago realized, cannot be embodied in statutes, or pleaded in law courts. The matrimonial bond is not merely a physical union, and we have to learn that, as the author of The Question of English Divorce (p. 49) remarks, "other than physical divergencies are, in fact, by far the most important of the originating causes of matrimonial disaster."
In 1859, people placed too much emphasis on obvious reasons for divorce, overlooking subtle yet equally damaging obstacles to maintaining a marriage. Gladstone highlighted this issue and was against making adultery a reason for divorce at all. "We have many causes," he argued, "that are more damaging to the essential duty of marriage, like disease, mental incapacity, and crimes that result in life sentences." Today, we’re starting to recognize not only these causes but also many more intimate issues that, as Milton realized long ago, can’t be captured in laws or brought up in courts. The marriage bond is more than just a physical connection, and we need to understand that, as the author of The Question of English Divorce (p. 49) points out, "non-physical differences are, in fact, by far the most significant sources of marital problems."
In England and Wales more husbands than wives petition for divorce, the wives who petition being about 40 per cent, of the whole. Divorces are increasing, though the number is not large, in 1907 about 1,300, of whom less than half remarried. The inadequacy of the divorce law is shown by the fact that during the same year about 7,000 orders for judicial separation were issued by magistrates. These separation orders not only do not give the right to remarry, but they make it impossible to obtain divorce. They are, in effect, an official permission to form relationships outside State marriage.
In England and Wales, more husbands than wives file for divorce, with wives accounting for about 40 percent of all petitions. Although the number of divorces is increasing, it's still relatively small; in 1907, there were around 1,300 divorces, with less than half of those individuals remarrying. The inadequacy of the divorce law is highlighted by the fact that in the same year, about 7,000 judicial separation orders were issued by magistrates. These separation orders not only prevent the right to remarry but also make it impossible to obtain a divorce. Essentially, they serve as official permission to engage in relationships outside of State marriage.
In the United States during the years 1887-1906 nearly 40 per cent, of the divorces granted were for "desertion," which is variously interpreted in different States, and must often mean a separation by mutual consent. Of the remainder, 19 per cent, were for unfaithfulness, and the same proportion for cruelty; but while the divorces granted to husbands for the infidelity of their wives are nearly three times as great proportionately as those granted to wives for their husband's adultery, with regard to cruelty it is the reverse, wives obtaining 27 per cent, of their divorces on that ground and husbands only 10 per cent.
In the United States between 1887 and 1906, nearly 40 percent of the divorces granted were for "desertion," which is interpreted differently in various states and often means a separation by mutual consent. Of the rest, 19 percent were for unfaithfulness, and the same percentage for cruelty. However, divorces granted to husbands for their wives' infidelity are nearly three times more common proportionately than those granted to wives for their husbands' adultery. In terms of cruelty, it’s the opposite: wives received 27 percent of their divorces on that basis, while husbands received only 10 percent.
In Prussia divorce is increasing. In 1907 there were eight thousand divorces, the cause in half the cases being adultery, and in about a thousand cases malicious desertion. In cases of desertion the husbands were the guilty parties nearly twice as often as the wives, in cases of adultery only a fifth to an eighth part.
In Prussia, divorce rates are on the rise. In 1907, there were eight thousand divorces, with adultery being the reason in about half of the cases, and around a thousand cases due to malicious desertion. In desertion cases, husbands were the guilty party nearly twice as often as wives; in cases of adultery, it was only about one-fifth to one-eighth of the time.
There cannot be the slightest doubt that the difficulty, the confusion, the inconsistency, and the flagrant indecency which surround divorce and the methods of securing it are due solely and entirely to the subtle persistence of traditions based, on the one hand, on the Canon law doctrines of the indissolubility of marriage and the sin of sexual intercourse outside marriage, and, on the other hand, on the primitive idea of marriage as a contract which economically subordinates the wife to the husband and renders her person, or at all events her guardianship, his property. It is only when we realize how deeply these traditions have become embedded in the religious, legal, social and sentimental life of Europe that we can understand how it is that barbaric notions of marriage and divorce can to-day subsist in a stage of civilization which has, in many respects, advanced beyond such notions.
There can be no doubt that the difficulty, confusion, inconsistency, and blatant indecency surrounding divorce and the ways to obtain it stem entirely from the persistent traditions rooted in, on one hand, the Canon law beliefs regarding the unbreakable nature of marriage and the sin of sexual relations outside of it, and, on the other hand, the outdated idea of marriage as a contract that economically places the wife under the husband's control, making her person, or at least her caretaking, his property. Only when we recognize how deeply these traditions have become ingrained in the religious, legal, social, and emotional fabric of Europe can we understand why primitive ideas of marriage and divorce continue to exist in a society that has, in many ways, progressed beyond such ideas.
The Canon law conception of the abstract religious sanctity of matrimony, when transferred to the moral sphere, makes a breach of the marriage relationship seem a public wrong; the conception of the contractive subordination of the wife makes such a breach on her part, and even, by transference of ideas, on his part, seem a private wrong. These two ideas of wrong incoherently flourish side by side in the vulgar mind, even to-day.
The Canon law view of the abstract religious sanctity of marriage, when applied to ethics, makes the violation of the marriage relationship appear as a public offense; the idea of the wife's contractual subordination makes any breach on her part, and even, by extension, on his part, seem like a personal offense. These two concepts of wrongdoing confusingly coexist in the common mindset, even today.
The economic subordination of the wife as a species of property significantly comes into view when we find that a husband can claim, and often secure, large sums of money from the man who sexually approaches his property, by such trespass damaging it in its master's eyes.[339] To a psychologist it would be obvious that a husband who has lacked the skill so to gain and to hold his wife's love and respect that it is not perfectly easy and natural to her to reject the advances of any other man owes at least as much damages to her as she or her partner owes to him; while if the failure is really on her side, if she is so incapable of responding to love and trust and so easy a prey to an outsider, then surely the husband, far from wishing for any money compensation, should consider himself more than fully compensated by being delivered from the necessity of supporting such a woman. In the absence of any false traditions that would be obvious. It might not, indeed, be unreasonable that a husband should pay heavily in order to free himself from a wife whom, evidently, he has made a serious mistake in choosing. But to ordain that a man should actually be indemnified because he has shown himself incapable of winning a woman's love is an idea that could not occur in a civilized society that was not twisted by inherited prejudice.[340] Yet as matters are to-day there are civilized countries in which it is legally possible for a husband to enter a prayer for damages against his wife's paramour in combination with either a petition for judicial separation or for dissolution of wedlock. In this way adultery is not a crime but a private injury.[341]
The economic subordination of a wife as a form of property becomes clear when we see that a husband can demand, and often receive, significant amounts of money from the man who tries to pursue his property, as this intrusion damages its value in the husband’s eyes.[339] To a psychologist, it’s evident that a husband who hasn’t been able to earn and keep his wife’s love and respect to the point where it's easy for her to refuse the advances of any other man should be held accountable for at least as much damage to her as she or her partner owes him; conversely, if the failure lies with her, if she can’t respond to love and trust and is easily tempted by an outsider, then the husband, instead of wanting any financial compensation, should feel more than compensated by being freed from the obligation of supporting such a woman. This would be obvious without any misguided traditions. It might even be reasonable for a husband to pay a hefty price to release himself from a wife he clearly misjudged in choosing. However, the notion that a man should receive compensation because he’s shown himself unable to win a woman's love is an idea that wouldn’t arise in a civilized society that’s not distorted by inherited bias.[340] Yet, as things stand today, there are civilized countries where it is legally possible for a husband to file for damages against his wife’s lover along with either a request for legal separation or divorce. In this way, adultery isn’t treated as a crime but as a personal injury.[341]
At the same time, however, the influence of Canon law comes inconsistently to the surface and asserts that a breach of matrimony is a public wrong, a sin transformed by the State into something almost or quite like a crime. This is clearly indicated by the fact that in some countries the adulterer is liable to imprisonment, a liability scarcely nowadays carried into practice. But exactly the same idea is beautifully illustrated by the doctrine of "collusion," which, in theory, is still strictly observed in many countries. According to the doctrine of "collusion" the conditions necessary to make the divorce possible must on no account be secured by mutual agreement. In practice it is impossible to prevent more or less collusion, but if proved in court it constitutes an absolute impediment to the granting of a divorce, however just and imperative the demand for divorce may be.
At the same time, the influence of Canon law inconsistently emerges, asserting that breaking a marriage is a public wrong, a sin that the State has turned into something akin to a crime. This is clearly shown by the fact that in some countries, an adulterer can face imprisonment, although this is rarely enforced today. The same concept is effectively illustrated by the doctrine of "collusion," which, in theory, is still strictly maintained in many countries. According to the doctrine of "collusion," the conditions necessary to make a divorce possible cannot be secured through mutual agreement. In practice, it's impossible to completely prevent some form of collusion, but if it's proven in court, it serves as an absolute barrier to granting a divorce, no matter how justified and urgent the request for divorce may be.
The English Divorce Act of 1857 refused divorce when there was collusion, as well as when there was any countercharge against the petitioner, and the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1860 provided the machinery for guaranteeing these bars to divorce. This question of collusion is discussed by G. P. Bishop (op. cit., vol. ii, Ch. IX). "However just a cause may be," Bishop remarks, "if parties collude in its management, so that in real fact both parties are plaintiffs, while by the record the one appears as plaintiff and the other as defendant, it cannot go forward. All conduct of this sort, disturbing to the course of justice, falls within the general idea of fraud on the court. Such is the doctrine in principle everywhere."
The English Divorce Act of 1857 rejected divorce in cases of collusion, as well as when there were any countercharges against the person seeking the divorce. The Matrimonial Causes Act of 1860 established the framework to enforce these restrictions on divorce. This issue of collusion is discussed by G. P. Bishop (op. cit., vol. ii, Ch. IX). "No matter how valid the reason may be," Bishop notes, "if the parties work together to manage it, so that in reality both are acting as plaintiffs, while the record shows one as the plaintiff and the other as the defendant, it cannot proceed. Any actions like this that disrupt the legal process fall under the broader concept of fraud on the court. This is the principle embraced everywhere."
It is quite evident that from the social or the moral point of view, it is best that when a husband and wife can no longer live together, they should part amicably, and in harmonious agreement effect all the arrangements rendered necessary by their separation. The law ridiculously forbids them to do so, and declares that they must not part at all unless they are willing to part as enemies. In order to reach a still lower depth of absurdity and immorality the law goes on to say that if as a matter of fact they have succeeded in becoming enemies to each other to such an extent that each has wrongs to plead against the other party they cannot be divorced at all![342] That is to say that when a married couple have reached a degree of separation which makes it imperatively necessary, not merely in their own interests but in the moral interests of society, that they should be separated and their relations to other parties concerned regularized, then they must on no account be separated.
It’s clear that from both a social and moral perspective, it’s best for a husband and wife who can no longer live together to part on good terms and agree on all the necessary arrangements for their separation. However, the law absurdly prevents this and states that they must not separate unless they are willing to do so as enemies. To add to the absurdity and immorality, the law claims that if they have become such enemies that each has grievances against the other, they cannot be divorced at all! In other words, when a married couple has reached a level of separation that makes it crucial—both for their own well-being and for the moral fabric of society—that they part ways and sort out their relations with others involved, they must not be allowed to separate at all.
It is clear how these provisions of the law are totally opposed to the demands of reason and morality. Yet at the same time it is equally clear how no efforts of the lawyers, however skilful or humane those efforts may be, can bring the present law into harmony with the demands of modern civilization. It is not the lawyers who are at fault; they have done their best, and, in England, it is entirely owing to the skilful and cautious way in which the judges have so far as possible pressed the law into harmony with modern needs, that our antiquated divorce laws have survived at all. It is the system which is wrong. That system is the illegitimate outgrowth of the Canon law which grew up around conceptions long since dead. It involves the placing of the person who imperils the theoretical indissolubility of the matrimonial bond in the position of a criminal, now that he can no longer be publicly condemned as a sinner. To aid and abet that criminal is itself an offence, and the aider and abettor of the criminal must, therefore, be inconsequently punished by the curious method of refraining from punishing the criminal. We do not openly assert that the defendant in a divorce case is a criminal; that would be to render the absurdity of it too obvious, and, moreover, would be hardly consistent with the permission to claim damages which is based on a different idea. We hover uncertainly between two conceptions of divorce, both of them bad, each inconsistent with the other, and neither of them capable of being pushed to its logical conclusions.
It’s clear that these legal provisions completely clash with what makes sense and what’s morally right. At the same time, it's also clear that no matter how skilled or compassionate the lawyers are, they can’t make the current laws match the needs of modern society. It’s not the lawyers’ fault; they’ve done their best. In England, it’s mainly due to the careful and skillful efforts of the judges to align the law with contemporary needs that our outdated divorce laws have even survived. The problem lies with the system. That system is an illegitimate byproduct of Canon law that developed around ideas that are long gone. It treats the person who threatens the supposed unbreakability of marriage like a criminal, especially since they can no longer be publicly labeled as a sinner. Helping that person is considered a crime, and the person who helps them is punished in a strange way by not punishing the actual criminal. We don’t openly claim that the defendant in a divorce case is criminal; that would make the absurdity too obvious and isn’t consistent with the option of claiming damages that comes from a different perspective. We find ourselves caught between two flawed ideas of divorce, neither of which make sense together, and neither can be taken to their logical end.
The result is that if a perfectly virtuous married couple comes forward to claim divorce, they are told that it is out of the question, for in such a case there must be a "defendant." They are to be punished for their virtue. If each commits adultery and they again come forward to claim divorce, they are told that it is still out of the question, for there must be a "plaintiff." Before they were punished for their virtue; now they are to be punished in exactly the same way for their lack of it. The couple must humor the law by adopting a course of action which may be utterly repugnant to both. If only the wife alone will commit adultery, if only the husband will commit adultery and also inflict some act of cruelty upon his wife, if the innocent party will descend to the degradation of employing detectives and hunting up witnesses, the law is at their feet and hastens to accord to both parties the permission to remarry. Provided, of course, that the parties have arranged this without "collusion." That is to say that our law, with its ecclesiastical traditions behind it, says to the wife: Be a sinner, or to the husband: Be a sinner and a criminal—then we will do all you wish. The law puts a premium on sin and on crime. In order to pile absurdity on absurdity it claims that this is done in the cause of "public morality." To those who accept this point of view it seems that the sweeping away of divorce laws would undermine the bases of morality. Yet there can be little doubt that the sooner such "morality" is undermined, and indeed utterly destroyed, the better it will be for true morality.
The outcome is that if a perfectly virtuous married couple tries to get a divorce, they’re told it’s not possible because there must be a "defendant." They are punished for being virtuous. If each partner cheats and they come back to seek a divorce, they are told it’s still not possible because there must be a "plaintiff." Initially, they were punished for their virtue; now they are punished the same way for their lack of it. The couple has to play along with the law, even if the required actions are completely against their principles. If only the wife commits adultery, or if only the husband does and also acts cruelly toward his wife, and if the innocent spouse has to lower themselves to hiring detectives and finding witnesses, then the law is eager to give both parties permission to remarry. As long as this is done without "collusion." In other words, our law, with its outdated ecclesiastical traditions behind it, tells the wife: Be a sinner, or tells the husband: Be a sinner and a criminal—then we’ll grant you everything you want. The law rewards sin and crime. To add to this absurdity, it claims this is for "public morality." To those who believe this, it seems like removing divorce laws would weaken the foundations of morality. Yet, there’s little doubt that the sooner such "morality" is undermined and completely dismantled, the better it will be for true morality.
There is an influential movement in England for the reform of divorce, on the grounds that the present law is unjust, illogical, and immoral, represented by the Divorce Law Reform Union. Even the former president of the Divorce Court, Lord Gorell, declared from the bench in 1906 that the English law produces deplorable results, and is "full of inconsistencies, anomalies and inequalities, amounting almost to absurdities." The points in the law which have aroused most protest, as being most behind the law of other nations, are the great expense of divorce, the inequality of the sexes, the failure to grant divorces for desertion and in cases of hopeless insanity, and the failure of separation orders to enable the separated parties to marry again. Separation orders are granted by magistrates for cruelty, adultery, and desertion. This "separation" is really the direct descendant of the Canon law divorce a mensa et thoro, and the inability to marry which it involves is merely a survival of the Canon law tradition. At the present time magistrates—exercising their discretion, it is admitted, in a careful and prudent manner—issue some 7,000 separation orders annually, so that every year the population is increased by 14,000 individuals mostly in the age of sexual vigor, and some little more than children, who are forbidden by law to form legal marriages. They contribute powerfully to the great forward movement which, as was shown in the previous chapter, marks the morality of our age. But it is highly undesirable that free marriages should be formed, helplessly, by couples who have no choice in the matter, for it is unlikely that under such circumstances any high level of personal responsibility can be reached. The matter could be easily remedied by dropping altogether a Canon law tradition which no longer has any vitality or meaning, and giving to the magistrate's separation order the force of a decree of divorce.
There’s a significant movement in England advocating for divorce reform, arguing that the current law is unfair, irrational, and immoral, represented by the Divorce Law Reform Union. Even the former president of the Divorce Court, Lord Gorell, stated from the bench in 1906 that the English law leads to terrible outcomes and is “full of inconsistencies, anomalies, and inequalities, amounting almost to absurdities.” The legal points that have sparked the most outrage, as being outdated compared to other countries, include the high cost of divorce, gender inequality, the refusal to grant divorces for desertion, and in cases of severe mental illness, as well as the incapacity of separation orders to allow separated individuals to remarry. Magistrates grant separation orders for reasons like cruelty, adultery, and desertion. This “separation” is essentially a direct descendant of the Canon law divorce *a mensa et thoro*, and the inability to remarry that it entails is simply a leftover from the Canon law tradition. Currently, magistrates—using their discretion in a careful and responsible way—issue about 7,000 separation orders each year, leading to an annual increase of 14,000 individuals, mostly in their prime reproductive years, and some merely children, who are legally prohibited from entering into marriage. They significantly contribute to the ongoing progress that, as shown in the previous chapter, characterizes the morality of our time. However, it is highly undesirable for couples to be forced into informal arrangements, as it’s unlikely that such circumstances would foster a sense of personal responsibility. This issue could be easily fixed by completely abandoning a Canon law tradition that is no longer relevant or meaningful and giving the magistrate’s separation order the same effect as a divorce decree.
New Zealand and the Australian colonies, led by Victoria in 1889, have passed divorce laws which, while more or less framed on the English model, represent a distinct advance. Thus in New Zealand the grounds for divorce are adultery on either side, wilful desertion, habitual drunkenness, and conviction to imprisonment for a term of years.
New Zealand and the Australian colonies, led by Victoria in 1889, have enacted divorce laws that, while somewhat based on the English model, mark a significant improvement. In New Zealand, the grounds for divorce include adultery by either partner, willful abandonment, habitual drunkenness, and being sentenced to prison for several years.
It is natural that an Englishman should feel acutely sensitive to this blot in the law of England and desire the speedy disappearance of a system so open to scathing sarcasm. It is natural that every humane person should grow impatient of the spectacle of so many blighted lives, of so much misery inflicted on innocent persons—and on persons who even when technically guilty are often the victims of unnatural circumstances—by the persistence of a mediæval system of ecclesiastical tyranny and inquisitorial insolence into an age when sexual relationships are becoming regarded as the sacred secret of the persons intimately concerned, and when more and more we rely on the responsibility of the individual in making and maintaining such relationships.
It's only natural that an Englishman would feel deeply bothered by this flaw in England's law and want to see a quick end to a system so open to sharp criticism. It's only natural that every compassionate person would get frustrated by the sight of so many ruined lives, so much suffering inflicted on innocent people—and on those who, even if technically guilty, are often victims of unfair circumstances—due to the persistence of a medieval system of church-based tyranny and intrusive arrogance in a time when sexual relationships are increasingly seen as a private matter for those directly involved, and when we are more reliant on individual responsibility in forming and sustaining such relationships.
When, however, we refrain from concentrating our attention on particular countries and embrace the general movement of civilization in the matter of divorce during recent times, there cannot be the slightest doubt as to the direction of that movement. England was a pioneer in the movement half a century ago, and to-day every civilized country is moving in the same direction. France broke with the old ecclesiastical tradition of the indissolubility of matrimony in 1885 by a divorce law in some respects very reasonable. The wife may obtain a divorce on an equality with the husband (though she is liable to imprisonment for adultery), the co-respondent occupies a very subordinate position in adultery charges, and facility is offered for divorce on the ground of simple injures graves (excluding as far as possible mere incompatibility of temper), while the judge has the power, which he often successfully exerts, to effect a reconciliation in private or to grant a decree without public trial. The influence of France has doubtless been influential in moulding the divorce laws of the other Latin countries.
When we step back from focusing on specific countries and instead look at the overall trend of divorce in recent times, it’s clear which way things are headed. England started this movement about fifty years ago, and today, every civilized country is following suit. France moved away from the old church-based idea that marriage is unbreakable in 1885 with a divorce law that is quite reasonable in several ways. A wife can get a divorce on equal terms with her husband (although she could face jail time for adultery), the co-respondent has a very minor role in adultery cases, and it’s relatively easy to divorce for serious harm (while trying to avoid cases of simple incompatibility). Additionally, the judge has the authority, which he often uses effectively, to help parties reconcile privately or grant a decree without a public trial. France's influence has certainly played a significant role in shaping the divorce laws of other Latin countries.
In Prussia an enlightened divorce law formerly prevailed by which it was possible for a couple to separate without scandal when it was clearly shown that they could not live together in agreement. But the German Code of 1900 introduced provisions as regards divorce which—while in some respects more liberal than those of the English law, especially by permitting divorce for desertion and insanity—are, on the whole, retrograde as compared with the earlier Prussian law and place the matter on a cruder and more brutal basis. For two years after the Code came into operations the number of divorces sank; after that the public and the courts adapted themselves to the new provisions (more especially one which allowed divorce for serious neglect of conjugal duties) and the number of divorces began to increase with great rapidity. "But," remarks Hirschfeld, "how painful it has now become to read divorce cases! One side abuses the other, makes accusations of the grossest character, employs detectives to obtain the necessary proofs of 'dishonorable and immoral conduct,' whereas, before, both parties realized that they had been deceived in each other, that they failed to suit each other, and that they could no longer live together. Thus we see that the narrowing of individual responsibility in sexual matters has not only had no practical effect, but leads to injurious results of a serious kind."[343] In England a similar state of things has prevailed ever since divorce was established, but it seems to have become too familiar to excite either pain or disgust. Yet, as Adner has pointed out,[344] it has moved in a direction contrary to the general tendency of civilization, not only by increasing the inquisitorial authority of public courts but by emphasizing merely external causes of divorce and abolishing the more subtle internal causes which constantly grow in importance with the refinement of civilization.
In Prussia, there used to be an enlightened divorce law that allowed couples to separate without scandal when it was clearly shown they could not live together peacefully. However, the German Code of 1900 introduced divorce provisions that—while being more liberal in some ways than English law, especially by allowing divorce for desertion and insanity—are overall a step backward compared to the earlier Prussian law and place the issue on a rougher and harsher footing. For two years after the Code was enacted, the number of divorces decreased; after that, the public and the courts adjusted to the new rules (particularly one that permitted divorce for serious neglect of marital duties), and the number of divorces began to rise rapidly. "But," notes Hirschfeld, "it has become quite painful to read divorce cases now! One side insults the other, throws around the most shocking accusations, and hires detectives to gather so-called proof of 'dishonorable and immoral conduct,' whereas previously, both parties understood that they had misled each other, that they were incompatible, and that they could no longer live together. Thus, we see that the reduction of individual responsibility in sexual matters has not only had no practical effect but has resulted in serious negative consequences."[343] In England, a similar situation has existed since divorce was established, but it seems to have become too commonplace to provoke either pain or disgust. However, as Adner has pointed out,[344] it has progressed in a way that goes against the general trend of civilization, not only by increasing the invasive authority of public courts but also by focusing on superficial reasons for divorce while neglecting the deeper internal causes that continue to gain importance as civilization refines.
In Austria until recent years, Canon law ruled absolutely, and matrimony was indissoluble, as it still remains for the Catholic population. The results as regards matrimonial happiness were in the highest degree deplorable. Half a century ago Gross-Hoffinger investigated the marital happiness of 100 Viennese couples of all social classes, without choice of cases, and presented the results in detail. He found that 48 couples were positively unhappy, only 16 were undoubtedly happy, and even among these there was only one case in which happiness resulted from mutual faithfulness, happiness in the other cases being only attained by setting aside the question of fidelity.[345] This picture, it is to be hoped, no longer remains true. There is an influential Austrian Marriage Reform Association, publishing a journal called Die Fessel, or The Fetter. "One was chained to another," we are told. "In certain circumstances this must have been the worst and most torturing penalty of all. The most bizarre and repulsive couplings took place. There were, it is true, many affectionate companionships of the chain. But there were many more which inflicted an eternity of suffering upon one of the pair." This quotation, it must be added, has nothing to do with what the Canonists, borrowing the technical term for a prisoner's shackles, suggestively termed the vinculum matrimonii; it was written many years ago concerning the galleys of the old French convict system. It is, however, recalled to one's mind by the title which the Austrian Marriage Reform Association has given to its official organ.
In Austria until recently, Canon law had complete authority, and marriage was unbreakable, just as it still is for the Catholic community. The outcomes regarding marital happiness were extremely unfortunate. Half a century ago, Gross-Hoffinger studied the marital happiness of 100 Viennese couples from all social classes, without selective bias, and presented the findings in detail. He discovered that 48 couples were genuinely unhappy, only 16 were clearly happy, and even among those, happiness in only one case stemmed from mutual fidelity, while in the others, happiness was achieved by ignoring the issue of fidelity. [345] It is hoped that this situation is no longer accurate. There is now a significant Austrian Marriage Reform Association that publishes a journal called Die Fessel, or The Fetter. "One was chained to another," they say. "In some cases, this must have been the worst and most torturous punishment of all. The most strange and repulsive pairings occurred. Admittedly, many affectionate friendships existed within this chain. But there were many more that caused eternal suffering for one partner." It should be noted that this quote is not related to what the Canonists, who borrowed the term for a prisoner's shackles, enticingly referred to as the vinculum matrimonii; it was written many years ago about the galleys of the old French prison system. However, it is brought to mind by the title that the Austrian Marriage Reform Association has chosen for its official publication.
Russia, where the marriage laws are arranged by the Holy Synod aided by jurists, stands almost alone among the great countries in the reasonable simplicity of its divorce provisions. Before 1907 divorce was very difficult to obtain in Russia, but in that year it became possible for a married couple to separate by mutual consent and after living apart for a year to become thereby entitled to a divorce enabling them to remarry. This provision is in accordance with the humane conception of the sexual relationship which has always tended to prevail in Russia, whither, it must be remembered, the stern and unnatural ideals of compulsory celibacy cherished by the Western Church never completely penetrated; the clergy of the Eastern Church are married, though the marriage must take place before they enter the priesthood, and they could not sympathize with the anti-sexual tone of the marriage regulations laid down by the celibate clergy of the west.
Russia, where the marriage laws are set up by the Holy Synod with the help of legal experts, is almost unique among major countries because of the straightforwardness of its divorce rules. Before 1907, getting a divorce in Russia was very challenging, but in that year, it became possible for a married couple to separate by mutual agreement. After living apart for a year, they could then obtain a divorce that allowed them to remarry. This rule aligns with the more compassionate understanding of sexual relationships that has generally been present in Russia, where the strict and unnatural ideals of mandatory celibacy promoted by the Western Church never fully took hold; in the Eastern Church, clergy are allowed to marry, although the marriage must occur before they enter the priesthood, and they don’t share the anti-sexual attitudes of the marriage laws put forth by the celibate clergy of the West.
Switzerland, again, which has been regarded as the political laboratory of Europe, also stands apart in the liberality of its divorce legislation. A renewable divorce for two years may be obtained in Switzerland when there are "circumstances which seriously affect the maintenance of the conjugal tie." To the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, finally, belongs the honor of having firmly maintained throughout the great principle of divorce by mutual consent under legal conditions, as established by Napoleon in his Code of 1803. The smaller countries generally are in advance of the large in matters of divorce law. The Norwegian law is liberal. The new Roumanian Code permits divorce by mutual consent, provided both parents grant equal shares of their property to the children. The little principality of Monaco has recently introduced the reasonable provision of granting divorce for, among other causes, alcoholism, syphilis, and epilepsy, so protecting the future race.
Switzerland, once again, is seen as the political laboratory of Europe and stands out for its liberal divorce laws. A renewable divorce can be granted for two years in Switzerland when there are "circumstances that seriously affect the maintenance of the marital bond." The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, finally, has the distinction of consistently upholding the important principle of divorce by mutual consent under legal conditions, as established by Napoleon in his Code of 1803. Smaller countries are generally ahead of the larger ones when it comes to divorce law. Norway has liberal laws. The new Romanian Code allows for divorce by mutual consent, as long as both parents give equal shares of their property to the children. The small principality of Monaco has recently added the reasonable provision of allowing divorce for reasons such as alcoholism, syphilis, and epilepsy, thereby protecting future generations.
Outside Europe the most instructive example of the tendency of divorce is undoubtedly furnished by the United States of America. The divorce laws of the States are mainly on a Puritanic basis, and they retain not only the Puritanic love of individual freedom but the Puritanic precisianism.[346] In some States, notably Iowa, the statute-makers have been constantly engaged in adopting, changing, abrogating and re-enacting the provisions of their divorce laws, and Howard has shown how much confusion and awkwardness arise by such perpetual legislative fiddling over small details.
Outside of Europe, the most telling example of divorce trends is definitely the United States. The divorce laws in the States are primarily based on Puritan principles, retaining not just the Puritan emphasis on individual freedom but also their strict moral standards.[346] In some States, especially Iowa, lawmakers have been constantly busy adopting, changing, repealing, and reenacting their divorce laws. Howard has demonstrated how much confusion and awkwardness arise from such constant legislative tinkering over minor details.
This restless precisianism has somewhat disguised the generally broad and liberal tendency of marriage law in America, and has encouraged foreign criticism of American social institutions. As a matter of fact the prevalence of divorce in America is enormously exaggerated. The proportion of divorced persons in the population appears to be less than one per cent., and, contrary to a frequent assertion, it is by no means the rule for divorced persons to remarry immediately. Taking into account the special conditions of life in the United States the prevalence of divorce is small and its character by no means reveals a low grade morality. An impartial and competent critic of the American people, Professor Münsterberg, remarks that the real ground which mainly leads to divorce in the United States—not the mere legal pretexts made compulsory by the precisianism of the law—is the highly ethical objection to continuing externally in a marriage which has ceased to be spiritually congenial. "It is the women especially," he says, "and generally the very best women, who prefer to take the step, with all the hardships which it involves, to prolonging a marriage which is spiritually hypocritical and immoral."[347]
This constant focus on details has somewhat hidden the generally broad and open-minded nature of marriage law in America and has fueled foreign criticism of American social institutions. In reality, the high rate of divorce in America is greatly exaggerated. The percentage of divorced individuals in the population seems to be less than one percent, and contrary to popular belief, it’s not common for divorced people to remarry right away. Considering the unique conditions of life in the United States, the rate of divorce is low, and its nature does not indicate a lack of morality. An unbiased and knowledgeable observer of American society, Professor Münsterberg, notes that the primary reason for divorce in the United States—not the legal excuses enforced by the obsession with detail in the law—is a strong ethical objection to remaining in a marriage that has lost its spiritual connection. "It is especially women," he states, "and typically the best women, who choose to take this step, with all the challenges it brings, rather than stay in a marriage that is spiritually hypocritical and immoral."[347]
The people of the United States, above all others, cherish ideals of individualism; they are also the people among whom, above all others, there is the greatest amount of what Reibmayr calls "blood-chaos." Under such circumstances the difficulties of conjugal life are necessarily at a maximum, and marriage union is liable to subtle impediments which must forever elude the statute-book.[348] There can be little doubt that the practical sagacity of the American people will enable them sooner or later to recognize this fact, and that finally fulfilling the Puritanic drift of their divorce legislation—as foreshadowed in its outcome by Milton—they will agree to trust their own citizens with the responsibility of deciding so private a matter as their conjugal relationships, with, of course, authority in the courts to see that no injustice is committed. It is, indeed, surprising that the American people, usually intolerant of State interference, should in this matter so long have tolerated such interference in so private a matter.
The people of the United States, more than anyone else, value the ideals of individualism; they are also the group among whom, more than anyone else, there is the highest level of what Reibmayr refers to as "blood-chaos." Given these circumstances, the challenges of married life are necessarily maximized, and marriage is subject to subtle obstacles that will always escape legal definitions.[348] There’s little doubt that the common sense of the American people will eventually lead them to recognize this reality, and that by ultimately embracing the Puritanical intent of their divorce laws—as hinted at by Milton—they will come to trust their own citizens with the responsibility of making such a personal decision as their marriage relationships, while also granting the courts the authority to ensure that no injustice occurs. It is quite surprising that the American people, who are typically resistant to State interference, have for so long accepted such interference in such a personal matter.
The movement of divorce is not confined to Christendom; it is a mark of modern civilization. In Japan the proportion of divorces is higher than in any other country, not excluding the United States.[349] The most vigorous and progressive countries are those that insist most firmly on the purity of sexual unions. In the United States it was pointed out many years ago that divorce is most prevalent where the standard of education and morality is highest. It was the New England States, with strong Puritanic traditions of moral freedom, which took the lead in granting facility to divorce. The divorce movement is not, as some have foolishly supposed, a movement making for immorality.[350] Immorality is the inevitable accompaniment of indissoluble marriage; the emphasis on the sanctity of a merely formal union discourages the growth of moral responsibility as regards the hypothetically unholy unions which grow up beneath its shadow. To insist, on the other hand, by establishing facility of divorce, that sexual unions shall be real, is to work in the cause of morality. The lands in which divorce by mutual consent has prevailed longest are probably among the most, and not the least, moral of lands.
Divorce isn't just a thing in Christian communities; it's a sign of modern society. In Japan, the divorce rate is higher than in any other country, including the United States.[349] The most dynamic and forward-thinking countries are those that strongly uphold the integrity of sexual relationships. Many years ago, it was noted in the United States that divorce is most common where education and morality standards are highest. New England, with its deep Puritan roots of moral freedom, was the first to make divorce easier to obtain. The divorce movement is not, as some have mistakenly believed, a push towards immorality.[350] Immorality often comes with unbreakable marriages; emphasizing the sanctity of just a formal union hinders moral responsibility concerning the potentially unhealthy relationships that emerge in its shadow. Conversely, by allowing easier divorce, we assert that sexual unions should be genuine, which actually supports morality. The places where mutual consent divorce has been accepted the longest are likely among the most, not the least, moral societies.
Surprise has been expressed that although divorce by mutual consent commended itself as an obviously just and reasonable measure two thousand years ago to the legally-minded Romans that solution has even yet been so rarely attained by modern states.[351] Wherever society is established on a solidly organized basis and the claims of reason and humanity receive due consideration—even when the general level of civilization is not in every respect high—there we find a tendency to divorce by mutual consent.
It's surprising that even though divorce by mutual consent seemed like a fair and reasonable idea to the legal-minded Romans two thousand years ago, it’s still so rarely achieved by modern states.[351] In societies that are well-organized and where reason and compassion are taken into account—even if the overall level of civilization isn’t perfect—we see a trend toward divorce by mutual consent.
In Japan, according to the new Civil Code, much as in ancient Rome, marriage is effected by giving notice of the fact to the registrar in the presence of two witnesses, and with the consent (in the case of young couples) of the heads of their families. There may be a ceremony, but it is not demanded by the law. Divorce is effected in exactly the same way, by simply having the registration cancelled, provided both husband and wife are over twenty-five years of age. For younger couples unhappily married, and for cases in which mutual consent cannot be obtained, judicial divorce exists. This is granted for various specific causes, of which the most important is "grave insult, such as to render living together unbearable" (Ernest W. Clement, "The New Woman in Japan," American Journal Sociology, March, 1903). Such a system, like so much else achieved by Japanese organization, seems reasonable, guarded, and effective.
In Japan, according to the new Civil Code, just like in ancient Rome, marriage is established by notifying the registrar in front of two witnesses, and with the approval (for younger couples) of their family heads. There can be a ceremony, but it’s not required by law. Divorce is handled in the same way, by simply canceling the registration, as long as both husband and wife are over twenty-five years old. For younger couples facing unhappy marriages, or in cases where mutual consent can’t be reached, judicial divorce is available. This can be granted for various specific reasons, with the most significant being "grave insult, such as to make living together unbearable" (Ernest W. Clement, "The New Woman in Japan," American Journal Sociology, March, 1903). This system, much like many other aspects achieved through Japanese organization, seems reasonable, careful, and effective.
In the very different and far more ancient marriage system of China, divorce by mutual consent is equally well-established. Such divorce by mutual consent takes place for incompatibility of temperament, or when both husband and wife desire it. There are, however, various antiquated and peculiar provisions in the Chinese marriage laws, and divorce is compulsory for the wife's adultery or serious physical injuries inflicted by either party on the other. (The marriage laws of China are fully set forth by Paul d'Enjoy, La Revue, Sept. 1, 1905.)
In the very different and much older marriage system of China, divorce by mutual agreement is also well-established. This type of divorce happens when both the husband and wife feel they are incompatible, or when they both want to end the marriage. However, there are several outdated and unusual stipulations in Chinese marriage laws, and divorce is mandatory in cases of the wife's adultery or if either spouse inflicts serious physical harm on the other. (The marriage laws of China are fully detailed by Paul d'Enjoy, La Revue, Sept. 1, 1905.)
Among the Eskimo (who, as readers of Nansen's fascinating books on their morals will know, are in some respects a highly socialized people) the sexes are absolutely equal, marriages are perfectly free, and separation is equally free. The result is that there are no uncongenial unions, and that no unpleasant word is heard between man and wife (Stefánsson, Harper's Magazine, Nov., 1908).
Among the Eskimo (who, as readers of Nansen's fascinating books on their morals will know, are in some ways a highly social people), the sexes are completely equal, marriages are fully voluntary, and separation is just as easy. This means there are no unhappy unions, and no negative words are spoken between husband and wife (Stefánsson, Harper's Magazine, Nov., 1908).
Among the ancient Welsh, women, both before and after marriage, enjoyed great freedom, far more than was afforded either by Christianity or the English Common law. "Practically either husband or wife could separate when either one or both chose" (Rhys and Brynmor-Jones, The Welsh People, p. 214). It was so also in ancient Ireland. Women held a very high position, and the marriage tie was very free, so as to be practically, it would appear, dissoluble by mutual consent. So far as the Brehon laws show, says Ginnell (The Brehon Laws, p. 212), "the marriage relation was extremely loose, and divorce was as easy, and could be obtained on as slight ground, as is now the case in some of the States of the American Union. It appears to have been obtained more easily by the wife than by the husband. When obtained on her petition, she took away with her all the property she had brought her husband, all her husband had settled upon her on their marriage, and in addition so much of her husband's property as her industry appeared to have entitled her to."
Among the ancient Welsh, women, both before and after marriage, enjoyed a lot of freedom, much more than what was provided by Christianity or English Common Law. "Practically either husband or wife could separate whenever either one or both wanted" (Rhys and Brynmor-Jones, The Welsh People, p. 214). The same was true in ancient Ireland. Women held a very high status, and the marriage bond was quite flexible, seeming to be essentially dissoluble by mutual consent. According to Ginnell (The Brehon Laws, p. 212), "the marriage relationship was extremely loose, and divorce was as easy and could be obtained on as thin a basis as it is now in some of the States of the American Union. It seems to have been easier for the wife to obtain divorce than for the husband. When granted at her request, she took with her all the property she had brought to her husband, all her husband had settled upon her at their wedding, plus whatever part of her husband's property her work had earned her."
Even in early French history we find that divorce by mutual consent was very common. It was sufficient to prepare in duplicate a formal document to this effect: "Since between N. and his wife there is discord instead of charity according to God, and that in consequence it is impossible for them to live together, it has pleased both to separate, and they have accordingly done so." Each of the parties was thus free either to retire into a cloister or to contract another union (E. de la Bedollière, Histoire des Mœurs des Français, vol. i, p. 317). Such a practice, however it might accord with the germinal principle of consent embodied in the Canon law, was far too opposed to the ecclesiastical doctrine of the sacramental indissolubility of matrimony to be permanently allowed, and it was completely crushed out.
Even in early French history, divorce by mutual consent was quite common. It was enough to prepare a formal document in duplicate stating: "Since there is discord instead of charity between N. and his wife according to God, and because it is impossible for them to live together, both have agreed to separate, and they have done so." Each party was then free to either join a monastery or enter into another marriage (E. de la Bedollière, Histoire des Mœurs des Français, vol. i, p. 317). However, while this practice aligned with the foundational principle of consent in Canon law, it was too contrary to the Church’s doctrine of the sacramental permanence of marriage to be allowed for long, and it was completely eradicated.
The fact that we so rarely find divorce by mutual consent in Christendom until the beginning of the nineteenth century, that then it required a man of stupendous and revolutionary genius like Napoleon to reintroduce it, and that even he was unable to do so effectually, is clearly due to the immense victory which the ascetic spirit of Christianity, as firmly embodied in the Canon law, had gained over the souls and bodies of men. So subjugated were European traditions and institutions by this spirit that even the volcanic emotional uprising of the Reformation, as we have seen, could not shake it off. When Protestant States naturally resumed the control of secular affairs which had been absorbed by the Church, and rescued from ecclesiastical hands those things which belonged to the sphere of the individual conscience, it might have seemed that marriage and divorce would have been among the first concerns to be thus transferred. Yet, as we know, England was about as much enslaved to the spirit and even the letter of Canon law in the nineteenth as in the fourteenth century, and even to-day English law, though no longer supported by the feeling of the masses, clings to the same traditions.
The fact that we rarely see divorce by mutual consent in Christianity until the early nineteenth century, and that it took an extraordinary and groundbreaking figure like Napoleon to bring it back, only for him to struggle with it, clearly shows how deeply the ascetic spirit of Christianity, as established in Canon law, had influenced the lives of people. European traditions and institutions were so dominated by this spirit that even the powerful emotional upheaval of the Reformation couldn't shake it off. When Protestant states naturally reclaimed control over secular matters that the Church had taken over, and took back those aspects that belonged to individual conscience, it might have seemed that marriage and divorce would be among the first issues addressed. Yet, as we know, England remained just as bound by the spirit and even the letter of Canon law in the nineteenth century as it had been in the fourteenth century, and even today, English law, though no longer backed by popular sentiment, still holds on to the same traditions.
There seems to be little doubt, however, that the modern movement for divorce must inevitably tend to reach the goal of separation by the will of both parties, or, under proper conditions and restrictions, by the will of one party. It now requires the will of two persons to form a marriage; law insists on that condition.[352] It is logical as well as just that law should take the next step involved by the historical evolution of marriage, and equally insist that it requires the will of two persons to maintain a marriage. This solution is, without doubt, the only way of deliverance from the crudities, the indecencies, the inextricable complexities which are introduced into law by the vain attempt to foresee in detail all the possibilities of conjugal disharmony which may arise under the conditions of modern civilization. It is, moreover, we may rest assured, the only solution which the growing modern sense of personal responsibility in sexual matters traced in the previous chapter—the responsibility of women as well as of men—will be content to accept.
There’s definitely no doubt that the modern movement for divorce will eventually lead to separation by the agreement of both parties, or, under the right conditions and restrictions, by the choice of just one party. It currently takes the consent of two people to form a marriage; the law requires that. It makes sense and is fair that the law should logically take the next step in line with the historical development of marriage and also require that it takes the agreement of both parties to continue a marriage. This approach is, without question, the only way to escape the rough edges, the inappropriate issues, and the complicated mess that the law faces from trying to predict all the possible conflicts that might come up in marriage in today’s society. Furthermore, we can be confident that this is the only solution that the increasing modern sense of personal responsibility in sexual matters—discussed in the previous chapter—will accept, a responsibility that applies to both women and men.
The subtle and complex character of the sexual relationships in a high civilization and the unhappy results of their State regulation were well expressed by Wilhelm von Humboldt in his Ideen zu einen Versuch die Grenzen der Wirksamkeit des Staates zu bestimmen, so long ago as 1792. "A union so closely allied with the very nature of the respective individuals must be attended with the most hurtful consequences when the State attempts to regulate it by law, or, through the force of its institutions, to make it repose on anything save simple inclination. When we remember, moreover, that the State can only contemplate the final results of such regulations on the race, we shall be still more ready to admit the justice of this conclusion. It may reasonably be argued that a solicitude for the race only conducts to the same results as the highest solicitude for the most beautiful development of the inner man. For, after careful observation, it has been found that the uninterrupted union of one man with one woman is most beneficial to the race, and it is likewise undeniable that no other union springs from true, natural, harmonious love. And further, it may be observed, that such love leads to the same results as those very relations which law and custom tend to establish. The radical error seems to be that the law commands; whereas such a relation cannot mould itself according to external arrangements, but depends wholly on inclination; and wherever coercion or guidance comes into collision with inclination, they divert it still farther from the proper path. Wherefore it appears to me that the State should not only loosen the bonds in this instance and leave ampler freedom to the citizen, but that it should entirely withdraw its active solicitude from the institution of marriage, and, both generally and in its particular modifications, should rather leave it wholly to the free choice of the individuals, and the various contracts they may enter into with respect to it. I should not be deterred from the adoption of this principle by the fear that all family relations might be disturbed, for, although such a fear might be justified by considerations of particular circumstances and localities, it could not fairly be entertained in an inquiry into the nature of men and States in general. For experience frequently convinces us that just where law has imposed no fetters, morality most surely binds; the idea of external coercion is one entirely foreign to an institution which, like marriage, reposes only on inclination and an inward sense of duty; and the results of such coercive institutions do not at all correspond to the intentions in which they originate."
The subtle and complex nature of sexual relationships in a developed society and the negative outcomes of government regulation were well articulated by Wilhelm von Humboldt in his Ideen zu einen Versuch die Grenzen der Wirksamkeit des Staates zu bestimmen, back in 1792. "A connection so deeply intertwined with the very essence of the individuals involved can lead to harmful consequences when the government tries to regulate it by law, or through the power of its institutions, to base it on anything other than simple desire. Furthermore, when we consider that the government can only assess the ultimate impact of such regulations on society, we are even more inclined to accept the validity of this conclusion. It can be reasonably argued that concern for society ultimately yields the same results as a strong desire for the healthiest development of the individual spirit. For, after careful observation, it has been found that the continuous union of one man with one woman is most beneficial for society, and it’s undeniable that no other type of union arises from genuine, natural, harmonious love. Additionally, it can be noted that such love leads to outcomes similar to those very relationships that laws and customs tend to promote. The fundamental mistake seems to be that the law mandates; whereas such a relationship cannot be shaped by external factors, but relies entirely on desire; and wherever coercion or guidance conflicts with desire, it drives it even further off course. Therefore, I believe the government should not only relax its control in this area and allow more freedom to citizens, but should completely withdraw its active involvement from the institution of marriage, and, both generally and in its specific variations, should rather leave it entirely to the free choice of individuals and the various agreements they may enter into regarding it. I would not be deterred from embracing this principle by the fear that all family structures might be disrupted, for, while such a fear might be reasonable based on specific circumstances and places, it could not fairly be considered in a study of human and governmental nature in general. For experience often shows us that where the law has imposed no restrictions, morality binds the most strongly; the notion of external coercion is entirely alien to an institution like marriage, which relies solely on desire and an inner sense of duty; and the outcomes of such coercive systems do not at all align with the intentions from which they arise."
A long succession of distinguished thinkers—moralists, sociologists, political reformers—have maintained the social advantages of divorce by mutual consent, or, under guarded circumstances, at the wish of one party. Mutual consent was the corner-stone of Milton's conception of marriage. Montesquieu said that true divorce must be the result of mutual consent and based on the impossibility of living together. Sénancour seems to agree with Montesquieu. Lord Morley (Diderot, vol. ii, Ch. I), echoing and approving the conclusions of Diderot's Supplément au Voyage de Bougainville (1772), adds that the separation of husband and wife is "a transaction in itself perfectly natural and blameless, and often not only laudable, but a duty." Bloch (Sexual Life of Our Time, p. 240), with many other writers, emphasizes the truth of Shelley's saying, that the freedom of marriage is the guarantee of its durability. (That the facts of life point in the same direction has been shown in the previous chapter.) The learned Caspari (Die Soziale Frage über die Freiheit der Ehe), while disclaiming any prevision of the future, declares that if sexual relationships are to remain or to become moral, there must be an easier dissolution of marriage. Howard, at the conclusion of his exhaustive history of matrimonial institutions (vol. iii p. 220), though he himself believes that marriage is peculiarly in need of regulation by law, is yet constrained to admit that it is perfectly clear to the student of history that the modern divorce movement is "but a part of the mighty movement for social liberation which has been gaining in volume and strength since the Reformation." Similarly the cautious and judicial Westermarck concludes the chapter on marriage of his Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas (vol. ii, p. 398) with the statement that "when both husband and wife desire to separate, it seems to many enlightened minds that the State has no right to prevent them from dissolving the marriage contract, provided the children are properly cared for; and that, for the children, also, it is better to have the supervision of one parent only than of two who cannot agree."
A long line of respected thinkers—moralists, sociologists, political reformers—have argued for the social benefits of divorce by mutual consent or, under certain conditions, at the request of one party. Mutual consent was the foundation of Milton's view of marriage. Montesquieu stated that true divorce must come from mutual agreement and be based on the inability to live together. Sénancour appears to support Montesquieu's view. Lord Morley (Diderot, vol. ii, Ch. I), reaffirming and endorsing the conclusions of Diderot's Supplément au Voyage de Bougainville (1772), adds that the separation of husband and wife is "a process that is perfectly natural and acceptable, and often not only commendable but a responsibility." Bloch (Sexual Life of Our Time, p. 240), along with many other writers, highlights the truth in Shelley's statement that the freedom to marry is what ensures its lasting nature. (The previous chapter has demonstrated that real-life situations support this view.) The learned Caspari (Die Soziale Frage über die Freiheit der Ehe), while not predicting the future, states that for sexual relationships to remain or become ethical, marriage must be easier to dissolve. Howard, at the end of his comprehensive history of marriage institutions (vol. iii p. 220), though he personally believes that marriage needs legal regulation, is still compelled to recognize that it is clear to anyone studying history that the modern divorce movement is "just a part of the significant movement for social liberation that has been increasing in momentum and strength since the Reformation." Similarly, the careful and analytical Westermarck concludes the marriage chapter of his Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas (vol. ii, p. 398) with the statement that "when both husband and wife wish to part, many enlightened people believe that the State has no right to stop them from ending the marriage contract, as long as the children are well cared for; and that, for the children, it is also better to have one parent's oversight than two who cannot get along."
In France the leaders of the movement of social reform seem to be almost, or quite, unanimous in believing that the next step in regard to divorce is the establishment of divorce by mutual consent. This was, for instance, the result reached in a symposium to which thirty-one distinguished men and women contributed. All were in favor of divorce by mutual consent; the only exception was Madame Adam, who said she had reached a state of skepticism with regard to political and social forms, but admitted that for nearly half a century she had been a strong advocate of divorce. A large number of the contributors were in favor of divorce at the desire of one party only (La Revue, March 1, 1901). In other countries, also, there is a growing recognition that this solution of the question, with due precautions to avoid any abuses to which it might otherwise be liable, is the proper and inevitable solution.
In France, the leaders of the social reform movement seem to be almost, or completely, in agreement that the next step regarding divorce is to establish divorce by mutual consent. This was the conclusion reached in a symposium that included contributions from thirty-one distinguished men and women. Everyone supported divorce by mutual consent; the only exception was Madame Adam, who expressed her skepticism toward political and social systems but acknowledged that she had been a strong advocate for divorce for nearly fifty years. Many contributors supported divorce initiated by just one party only (La Revue, March 1, 1901). In other countries, there is also growing recognition that this approach, with appropriate precautions to prevent potential abuses, is the right and inevitable solution.
As to the exact method by which divorce by mutual consent should be effected, opinions differ, and the matter is likely to be differently arranged in different countries. The Japanese plan seems simple and judicious (see ante, p. 461). Paul and Victor Margueritte (Quelques Idées, pp. 3 et seq.), while realizing that the conflict of feeling in the matter of personal associations involves decisions which are entirely outside the competence of legal tribunals, recognize that such tribunals are necessary in order to deal with the property of divorced persons, and also, in the last resort, with the question of the care of the children. They should not act in public. These writers propose that each party should choose a representative, and that these two should choose a third; and that this tribunal should privately investigate, and if they agreed should register the divorce, which should take place six or twelve months later, or three years later, if only desired by one of the parties. Dr. Shufeldt ("Psychopathia Sexualis and Divorce") proposes that a divorce-court judge should conduct, alone, the hearing of any cases of marital discord, the husband and wife appearing directly before him, without counsel, though with their witnesses, if necessary; should medical experts be required the judge alone would be empowered to call them.
As for the exact way divorce by mutual consent should be carried out, opinions vary, and the approach is likely to be different in different countries. The Japanese method appears straightforward and sensible (see ante, p. 461). Paul and Victor Margueritte (Quelques Idées, pp. 3 et seq.), while acknowledging that the emotional conflicts surrounding personal relationships involve decisions that are completely beyond the capacity of legal courts, agree that such courts are essential for managing the property of divorced individuals and ultimately determining child custody. They believe these matters should be handled privately. These authors suggest that each party appoint a representative, who would then choose a third representative together; this group would privately investigate the situation and, if they reached an agreement, would register the divorce, which could take effect six or twelve months later, or even three years later if only one party wishes it. Dr. Shufeldt ("Psychopathia Sexualis and Divorce") suggests that a divorce court judge should independently conduct the hearing for any cases of marital conflict, with the husband and wife appearing directly before him, without lawyers, although they could bring witnesses if needed; if medical experts are necessary, the judge would have the sole authority to summon them.
When we realize that the long delay in the acceptance of so just and natural a basis of divorce is due to an artificial tension created by the pressure of the dead hand of Canon law—a tension confined exclusively to Christendom—we may also realize that with the final disappearance of that tension the just and natural order in this relationship will spring back the more swiftly because that relief has been so long delayed. "Nature abhors a vacuum nowhere more than in a marriage," Ellen Key remarks in the language of antiquated physical metaphor; the vacuum will somehow be filled, and if it cannot be filled in a natural and orderly manner it will be filled in an unnatural and disorderly manner. It is the business of society to see that no laws stand in the way of the establishment of natural order.
When we understand that the long delay in accepting such a fair and natural basis for divorce is due to an artificial tension created by the constraints of Canon law—tension that exists only within Christianity—we may also see that once that tension finally disappears, the just and natural order in this relationship will quickly return because that relief has taken so long to come. "Nature hates a vacuum, especially in marriage," Ellen Key says using old-fashioned metaphors; that vacuum will inevitably be filled, and if it can't be filled in a natural and orderly way, it will be filled in an unnatural and chaotic way. It's society's job to ensure that no laws obstruct the establishment of natural order.
Reform upon a reasonable basis has been made difficult by the unfortunate retention of the idea of delinquency. With the traditions of the Canonists at the back of our heads we have somehow persuaded ourselves that there cannot be a divorce unless there is a delinquent, a real serious delinquent who, if he had his deserts, would be imprisoned and consigned to infamy. But in the marriage relationship, as in all other relationships, it is only in a very small number of cases that one party stands towards the other as a criminal, even a defendant. This is often obvious in the early stages of conjugal alienation. But it remains true in the end. The wife commits adultery and the husband as a matter of course assumes the position of plaintiff. But we do not inquire how it is that he has not so won her love that her adultery is out of the question; such inquiry might lead to the conclusion that the real defendant is the husband. And similarly when the husband is accused of brutal cruelty the law takes no heed to inquire whether in the infliction of less brutal but not less poignant wounds, the wife also should not be made defendant. There are a few cases, but only a few, in which the relationship of plaintiff and defendant is not a totally false and artificial relationship, an immoral legal fiction. In most cases, if the truth were fully known, husband and wife should come side by side to the divorce court and declare: "We are both in the wrong: we have not been able to fulfil our engagements to each other; we have erred in choosing each other." The long reports of the case in open court, the mutual recriminations, the detectives, the servant girls and other witnesses, the infamous inquisition into intimate secrets—all these things, which no necessity could ever justify, are altogether unnecessary.
Reforming the system on a reasonable basis has become difficult due to the persistent idea of wrongdoing. With the traditions of the Canonists influencing our thinking, we’ve convinced ourselves that a divorce can only happen if there’s a guilty party, someone truly at fault who, if we were to follow justice, would be punished and shamed. However, in marriage, just like in any other relationship, it’s rare for one person to act as a criminal toward the other. This is often evident early on when couples begin to drift apart, and it remains true over time. For example, when a wife commits adultery, the husband typically takes on the role of the accuser. Yet we don’t ask why he hasn’t managed to keep her love to the point where cheating is unthinkable; such questions might lead to the realization that he might actually be the one at fault. Likewise, when a husband is accused of domestic abuse, the law doesn’t consider whether the wife might also be to blame for inflicting less severe but equally painful emotional wounds. There are only a few situations where the roles of accuser and accused don’t represent a completely misleading and artificial legal setup. In most cases, if the truth were laid bare, husbands and wives would approach the divorce court together and admit: "We’re both at fault: we haven’t upheld our promises to each other; we made a mistake in choosing one another." The lengthy court hearings filled with mutual blame, detectives, house staff, and other witnesses, along with the invasive scrutiny of private matters—none of it is justified and all of it is unnecessary.
It is said by some that if there were no impediments to divorce a man might be married in succession to half a dozen women. These simple-minded or ignorant persons do not seem to be aware that even when marriage is absolutely indissoluble a man can, and frequently does, carry on sexual relationships not merely successively, but, if he chooses, even simultaneously, with half a dozen women. There is, however, this important difference that, in the one case, the man is encouraged by the law to believe that he need only treat at most one of the six women with anything approaching to justice and humanity; in the other case the law insists that he shall fairly and openly fulfil his obligations towards all the six women. It is a very important difference, and there ought to be no question as to which state of things is moral and which immoral. It is no concern of the State to inquire into the number of persons with whom a man or a woman chooses to have sexual relationships; it is a private matter which may indeed affect their own finer spiritual development but which it is impertinent for the State to pry into. It is, however, the concern of the State, in its own collective interest and that of its members, to see that no injustice is done.
Some people say that if there were no hurdles to divorce, a man could end up marrying a number of women one after the other. These naive or uninformed individuals don’t seem to realize that even when marriage is completely unbreakable, a man can and often does have sexual relationships not just in sequence, but, if he wants to, even at the same time with multiple women. However, there’s a significant difference: in the first case, the law encourages the man to believe he only needs to treat at most one of the six women with any form of justice and humanity; in the second case, the law requires him to fairly and openly fulfill his obligations toward all six women. This is a crucial distinction, and there should be no doubt about which scenario is moral and which is immoral. It’s not the State’s business to question how many people a man or woman chooses to have sexual relationships with; that’s a private matter that might affect their own personal growth but is none of the State’s business. However, it is the State's responsibility, for the sake of its own collective interest and that of its citizens, to ensure that no injustice occurs.
But what about the children? That is necessarily a very important question. The question of the arrangements made for the children in cases of divorce is always one to which the State must give its regulative attention, for it is only when there are children that the State has any real concern in the matter.
But what about the kids? That’s definitely a really important question. The issue of how children are taken care of in divorce cases is something the State must pay close attention to because it’s only when there are kids involved that the State has a genuine interest in the situation.
At one time it was even supposed by some that the existence of children was a serious argument against facility of divorce. A more reasonable view is now generally taken. It is, in the first place, recognized that a very large proportion of couples seeking divorce have no children. In England the proportion is about forty per cent.; in some other countries it is doubtless larger still. But even when there are children no one who realizes what the conditions are in families where the parents ought to be but are not divorced can have any doubt that usually those conditions are extremely bad for the children. The tension between the parents absorbs energy which should be devoted to the children. The spectacle of the grievances or quarrels of their parents is demoralizing for the children, and usually fatal to any respect towards them. At the best it is injuriously distressing to the children. One effective parent, there cannot be the slightest doubt, is far better for a child than two ineffective parents. There is a further point, often overlooked, for consideration here. Two people when living together at variance—one of them perhaps, it is not rarely the case, nervously abnormal or diseased—are not fitted to become parents, nor in the best condition for procreation. It is, therefore, not merely an act of justice to the individual, but a measure called for in the interests of the State, that new citizens should not be brought into the community through such defective channels.[353] From this point of view all the interests of the State are on the side of facility of divorce.
At one time, some people believed that having children was a strong argument against easy divorce. Today, a more reasonable perspective is generally accepted. First, it's recognized that a significant number of couples seeking divorce have no children. In England, this figure is about forty percent; in some other countries, it's likely even higher. Even when there are children, anyone who understands the situation in families where the parents should be divorced but aren’t can clearly see that those conditions are usually very harmful to the children. The tension between the parents drains energy that should be focused on the children. Witnessing their parents' grievances or fights is demoralizing for the kids and often undermines any respect they might have for them. At best, it is distressing and damaging for the children. There's no doubt that one effective parent is far better for a child than two ineffective ones. There's also another point that's often overlooked. When two people who are at odds live together—one of them may be emotionally unstable or unwell—they aren't suited to be parents, nor are they in the best condition to have children. Thus, it’s not just a matter of fairness to individuals, but also an issue of public interest that new citizens shouldn't be brought into the world through such flawed circumstances. From this perspective, the interests of the State support the idea of easier divorce.
There is a final argument which is often brought forward against facility of divorce. Marriage, it is said, is for the protection of women; facilitate divorce and women are robbed of that protection. It is obvious that this argument has little application as against divorce by mutual consent. Certainly it is necessary that divorce should only be arranged under conditions which in each individual case have received the approval of the law as just. But it must always be remembered that the essential fact of marriage is not naturally, and should never artificially be made, an economic question. It is possible—that is a question which society will have to consider—that a woman should be paid for being a mother on the ground that she is rearing new citizens for the State. But neither the State nor her husband nor anyone else ought to pay her for exercising conjugal rights. The fact that such an argument can be brought forward shows how far we are from the sound biological attitude towards sexual relationships. Equally unsound is the notion that the virgin bride brings her husband at marriage an important capital which is consumed in the first act of intercourse and can never be recovered. That is a notion which has survived into civilization, but it belongs to barbarism and not to civilization. So far as it has any validity it lies within a sphere of erotic perversity which cannot be taken into consideration in an estimation of moral values. For most men, however, in any case, whether they realize it or not, the woman who has been initiated into the mysteries of love has a higher erotic value than the virgin, and there need be no anxiety on this ground concerning the wife who has lost her virginity. It is probably a significant fact that this anxiety for the protection of women by the limitation of divorce is chiefly brought forward by men and not by women themselves. A woman at marriage is deprived by society and the law of her own name. She has been deprived until recently of the right to her own earnings. She is deprived of the most intimate rights in her own person. She is deprived under some circumstances of her own child, against whom she may have committed no offence whatever. It is perhaps scarcely surprising that she is not greatly appreciative of the protection afforded her by the withholding of the right to divorce her husband. "Ah, no, no protection!" a brilliant French woman has written. "We have been protected long enough. The only protection to grant women is to cease protecting them."[354] As a matter of fact the divorce movement appears to develop, on the whole, with that development of woman's moral responsibility traced in the previous chapter, and where divorce is freest women occupy the highest position.
There’s a final argument often made against easy divorce. People say that marriage is meant to protect women; if divorce is easy, women lose that protection. However, this argument doesn’t really apply to divorce by mutual consent. It’s definitely important that divorce is handled according to laws deemed fair in each specific case. But we must always remember that the core aspect of marriage should never be seen as an economic matter. It’s possible—though that’s something society needs to think about—that women could be compensated for motherhood since they are raising future citizens for the State. Still, neither the State, their husbands, nor anyone else should pay them for exercising marital rights. The fact that this argument exists highlights how far we are from a healthy biological perspective on sexual relationships. Equally misguided is the idea that a virgin bride brings her husband something valuable to the marriage that is lost after their first sexual encounter and can never be regained. That belief has persisted into civilized society, but it belongs to a more primitive mindset. If it has any merit, it exists within a realm of erotic distortion that shouldn’t factor into our moral assessments. For most men, whether they realize it or not, a woman who has experienced love is seen as having greater erotic value than a virgin, so there shouldn’t be concern about a wife losing her virginity. It’s noteworthy that the call for protection of women through strict divorce laws mainly comes from men rather than women themselves. When a woman marries, society and the law strip her of her own name. Until recently, she was also denied the right to her own income. She loses vital rights over her own body and, in some cases, may even be stripped of her own child without having done anything wrong. Considering all this, it's not surprising that women don’t appreciate the protection that comes from being denied the right to divorce their husbands. “Ah, no, no protection!” a brilliant French woman has said. “We’ve been protected long enough. The only protection we should grant women is to stop protecting them.” In reality, the divorce movement seems to grow alongside the progress in women's moral responsibility discussed in the previous chapter, and in places where divorce is most accessible, women tend to hold the highest positions.
We cannot fail to realize as we grasp the nature and direction of the modern movement of divorce that the final tendency of that movement is to efface itself. Necessary as the Divorce Court has been as the inevitable corollary of an impossible ecclesiastical conception of marriage, no institution is now more hideous, more alien to the instinctive feelings generated by a fine civilization, and more opposed to the dignity of womanhood.[355] Its disappearance and its substitution by private arrangements, effected on their contractive sides, especially if there are children to provide for, under legal and if necessary judicial supervision, is, and always has been, the natural result of the attainment of a reasonably high stage of civilization. The Divorce Court has merely been a phase in the history of modern marriage, and a phase that has really been repugnant to all concerned in it. There is no need to view the project of its ultimate disappearance with anything but satisfaction. It was merely the outcome of an artificial conception of marriage. It is time to return to the consideration of that conception.
We can't ignore the fact that as we understand the nature and direction of the modern divorce movement, its ultimate tendency is to fade away. The Divorce Court has been necessary as a direct result of an unrealistic religious view of marriage, but no institution is currently more unpleasant, more disconnected from the instinctive feelings fostered by a healthy society, and more in opposition to the dignity of women. Its disappearance and replacement by private agreements, handled on their contractual sides—especially when there are children to care for—under legal and, if needed, judicial oversight is and always has been the natural outcome of achieving a reasonably advanced level of civilization. The Divorce Court has only been a chapter in the story of modern marriage, and one that has been truly distasteful for everyone involved. There’s no reason to view the idea of its eventual disappearance with anything other than satisfaction. It was simply the result of an artificial understanding of marriage. It’s time to revisit that understanding.
We have seen that when the Catholic development of the archaic conception of marriage as a sacrament, slowly elaborated and fossilized by the ingenuity of the Canonists, was at last nominally dethroned, though not destroyed, by the movement associated with the Reformation, it was replaced by the conception of marriage as a contract. This conception of marriage as a contract still enjoys a considerable amount of credit amongst us.
We have seen that when the Catholic understanding of marriage as a sacrament, gradually developed and solidified by the creativity of the Canonists, was ultimately nominally overthrown, though not destroyed, by the movement connected to the Reformation, it was replaced by the idea of marriage as a contract. This idea of marriage as a contract still holds a significant amount of respect among us.
There must always be contractive elements, implicit or explicit, in a marriage; that was well recognized even by the Canonists. But when we treat marriage as all contract, and nothing but contract, we have to realize that we have set up a very peculiar form of contract, not voidable, like other contracts, by the agreement of the parties to it, but dissoluble as a sort of punishment of delinquency rather than by the voluntary annulment of a bond.[356] When the Protestant Reformers seized on the idea of marriage as a contract they were not influenced by any reasoned analysis of the special characteristics of a contract; they were merely anxious to secure a plausible ground, already admitted even by the Canonists to cover certain aspects of the matrimonial union, on which they could declare that marriage is a secular and not an ecclesiastical matter, a civil bond and not a sacramental process.[357]
There will always be binding elements, whether obvious or subtle, in a marriage; this was known even by the Canon Law experts. However, when we view marriage solely as a contract, we must understand that we have created a very unusual type of contract, which can't be undone like other agreements simply by mutual consent, but can be dissolved as a consequence of wrongdoing rather than through a voluntary cancellation of the commitment.[356] When the Protestant Reformers embraced the concept of marriage as a contract, they weren’t operating based on a detailed examination of the unique features of a contract; they were just eager to find a convincing basis, which had already been recognized by the Canonists to address certain aspects of marriage, allowing them to assert that marriage is a secular issue rather than a church matter, a civil agreement instead of a sacramental event.[357]
Like so much else in the Protestant revolt, the strength of this attitude lay in the fact that it was a protest, based on its negative side on reasonable and natural grounds. But while Protestantism was right in its attempt—for it was only an attempt—to deny the authority of Canon law, that attempt was altogether unsatisfactory on the positive side. As a matter of fact marriage is not a true contract and no attempt has ever been made to convert it into a true contract.
Like many aspects of the Protestant movement, the strength of this attitude was rooted in the fact that it was a protest, based on reasonable and natural grounds. However, while Protestantism was correct in its effort—though it was only an effort—to reject the authority of Canon law, that effort was completely inadequate on the positive side. In reality, marriage is not a true contract and no effort has ever been made to transform it into one.
Various writers have treated marriage as an actual contract or argued that it ought to be converted into a true contract. Mrs. Mona Caird, for instance ("The Morality of Marriage," Fortnightly Review, 1890), believes that when marriage becomes really a contract "a couple would draw up their agreement, or depute the task to their friends, as is now generally done as regards marriage settlements. They agree to live together on such and such terms, making certain stipulations within the limits of the code." The State, she holds, should, however, demand an interval of time between notice of divorce and the divorce itself, if still desired when that interval has passed. Similarly, in the United States Dr. Shufeldt ("Needed Revision of the Laws of Marriage and Divorce," Medico-Legal Journal, Dec., 1897) insists that marriage must be entirely put into the hands of the legal profession and "made a civil contract, explicit in detail, and defining terms of divorce, in the event that a dissolution of the contract is subsequently desired." He adds that medical certificates of freedom from hereditary and acquired disease should be required, and properly regulated probationary marriages also be instituted.
Various writers have approached marriage as a genuine contract or have argued that it should be turned into a real contract. Mrs. Mona Caird, for example ("The Morality of Marriage," Fortnightly Review, 1890), believes that when marriage actually becomes a contract, "a couple would draft their agreement, or delegate the task to their friends, much like what is currently done with marriage settlements. They would agree to live together under specified terms, making certain stipulations within the framework of the law." She argues that the State should require a waiting period between the announcement of divorce and the actual divorce, should the couple still wish to proceed after that time has elapsed. Similarly, in the United States, Dr. Shufeldt ("Needed Revision of the Laws of Marriage and Divorce," Medico-Legal Journal, Dec., 1897) emphasizes that marriage must be completely governed by the legal profession and "established as a civil contract, clearly detailing the terms of divorce in case the dissolution of the contract is later desired." He also suggests that medical proof of freedom from genetic and transmissible diseases should be mandatory, and that properly regulated trial marriages should be established as well.
In France, a deputy of the Chamber was, in 1891, so convinced that marriage is a contract, like any other contract, that he declared that "to perform music at the celebration of a marriage is as ridiculous as it would be to send for a tenor to a notary's to celebrate a sale of timber." He was of quite different mind from Pepys, who, a couple of centuries earlier, had been equally indignant at the absence of music from a wedding, which, he said, made it like a coupling of dog and bitch.
In France, a member of the Chamber in 1891 was so convinced that marriage is just a contract like any other that he said, "Playing music at a wedding is as silly as calling in a tenor to a notary's office to finalize a timber sale." He had a completely different perspective than Pepys, who, a couple of centuries earlier, was just as outraged by the lack of music at a wedding, claiming it resembled the mating of a dog and a bitch.
A frequent demand of those who insist that marriage must be regarded as a contract is marriage contracted for a term of years. Marriages could be contracted for a term of five years or less in old Japan, and it is said that they were rarely or never dissolved at the end of the term. Goethe, in his Wahlverwandtschaften (Part I, Ch. X) incidentally introduced a proposal for marriages for a term of five years and attached much moral significance to the prolongation of the marriage beyond that term without external compulsion. (Bloch considers that Goethe had probably heard of the Japanese custom, Sexual Life of Our Time, p. 241.) Professor E. D. Cope ("The Marriage Problem," Open Court, Nov. 15 and 22, 1888), likewise, in order to remove matrimony from the domain of caprice and to permit full and fair trial, advocated "a system of civil marriage contracts which shall run for a definite time. These contracts should be of the same value and effect as the existing marriage contract. The time limits should be increased rapidly, so as to prevent women of mature years being deprived of support. The first contract ought not to run for less than five years, so as to give ample opportunity for acquaintance, and for the recovery from temporary disagreements." This first contract, Cope held, should be terminable at the wish of either party; the second contract, for ten or fifteen years, should only be terminable at the wish of both parties, and the third should be permanent and indissoluble. George Meredith, the distinguished novelist, also, more recently, threw out the suggestion that marriages should be contracted for a term of years.
A common argument from those who believe that marriage should be viewed as a contract is the idea of marriage for a fixed term. In old Japan, marriages could be agreed upon for a period of five years or less, and it’s said they were rarely, if ever, ended at the term's conclusion. Goethe, in his Wahlverwandtschaften (Part I, Ch. X), mentioned the idea of five-year marriage contracts and emphasized the moral weight of extending the marriage beyond that period without outside pressure. (Bloch suggests that Goethe likely learned about the Japanese custom, Sexual Life of Our Time, p. 241.) Professor E. D. Cope ("The Marriage Problem," Open Court, Nov. 15 and 22, 1888) also proposed a way to take marriage out of the realm of whim and allow for a fair assessment by advocating for "a system of civil marriage contracts that would last for a specific duration. These contracts should hold the same legal value and impact as current marriage contracts. The duration should increase quickly to ensure that mature women aren’t left without support. The first contract should last no less than five years to allow enough time for getting to know each other and for recovering from temporary conflicts." Cope argued that this first contract could be ended at the discretion of either party; the second, lasting ten or fifteen years, should only be ended by mutual agreement, and the third should be permanent and unbreakable. George Meredith, the well-known novelist, also recently suggested that marriages should be formed for a set number of years.
It can scarcely be said that marriages for a term of years constitute a very satisfactory solution of the difficulties at present encountered. They would not commend themselves to young lovers, who believe that their love is eternal, nor, so long as the union proves satisfactory, is there any need to introduce the disturbing idea of a legal termination of the contract. On the other hand, if the union proves unhappy, it is not reasonable to insist on the continuation for ten or even five years of an empty form which corresponds to no real marriage union. Even if marriage is placed on the most prosaic contractive basis it is a mistake, and indeed an impossibility, to pre-ordain the length of its duration. The system of fixing the duration of marriage beforehand for a term of years involves exactly the same principle as the system of fixing it beforehand for life. It is open to the same objection that it is incompatible with any vital relationship. As the demand for vital reality and effectiveness in social relationships grows, this fact is increasingly felt. We see exactly the same change among us in regard to the system of inflicting fixed sentences of imprisonment on criminals. To send a man to prison for five years or for life, without any regard to the unknown problem of the vital reaction of imprisonment on the man—a reaction which will be different in every individual case—is slowly coming to be regarded as an absurdity.
It’s hard to say that marriages for a set number of years provide a good solution to the current challenges. Young couples, who believe their love will last forever, wouldn’t find this appealing, and as long as the marriage is going well, there’s no need to bring up the unsettling idea of a legal end to the relationship. On the flip side, if the marriage is unhappy, it’s unreasonable to force a continuation for ten or even five years of a hollow arrangement that doesn’t resemble a real marriage. Even if we try to treat marriage like a straightforward contract, it’s a mistake—actually impossible—to predetermine how long it will last. Setting a fixed duration for marriage is really just the same as making it last for life. It faces the same criticism of being incompatible with any genuine relationship. As the demand for authenticity and effectiveness in social connections grows, this reality is becoming more apparent. We’re witnessing a similar shift regarding the practice of assigning fixed prison sentences to criminals. Imprisoning someone for five years or life, without considering how imprisonment will affect them—something that varies for each individual—is gradually being seen as absurd.
If marriage were really placed on the basis of a contract, not only would that contract be voidable at the will of the two parties concerned, without any question of delinquency coming into the question, but those parties would at the outset themselves determine the conditions regulating the contract. But nothing could be more unlike our actual marriage. The two parties are bidden to accept each other as husband and wife; they are not invited to make a contract; they are not even told that, little as they may know it, they have in fact made a very complicated and elaborate contract that was framed on lines laid down, for a large part, thousands of years before they were born. Unless they have studied law they are totally ignorant, also, that this contract contains clauses which under some circumstances may be fatal to either of them. All that happens is that a young couple, perhaps little more than children, momentarily dazed by emotion, are hurried before the clergyman or the civil registrar of marriages, to bind themselves together for life, knowing nothing of the world and scarcely more of each other, knowing nothing also of the marriage laws, not even perhaps so much as that there are any marriage laws, never realizing that—as has been truly said—from the place they are entering beneath a garland of flowers there is, on this side of death, no exit except through the trapdoor of a sewer.[358]
If marriage were really based on a contract, not only would that contract be voidable at the will of both parties involved, without any issue of wrongdoing coming into play, but those parties would also get to set the terms of the contract from the start. But that’s nothing like how actual marriage works. The two people are told to accept each other as husband and wife; they aren’t asked to create a contract; they aren’t even made aware that, whether they realize it or not, they have actually entered into a complex and detailed contract that was designed based on principles established long before they were born. Unless they’ve studied law, they are completely unaware that this contract includes clauses that could, under certain circumstances, be detrimental to either of them. All that happens is that a young couple, perhaps little more than kids, momentarily overwhelmed by emotions, are rushed before the clergyman or civil registrar, committing themselves to each other for life, knowing very little about the world and not much more about each other, unaware of marriage laws, perhaps not even realizing those laws exist, and never grasping that—as has been accurately stated—from the place they are entering beneath a garland of flowers, there is, aside from death, no way to exit except through the trapdoor of a sewer.[358]
When a woman marries she gives up the right to her own person. Thus, according to the law of England, a man "cannot be guilty of a rape upon his lawful wife." Stephen, who, in the first edition of his Digest of Criminal Law, thought that under some circumstances a man might be indicted for rape upon his wife, in the last edition withdrew that opinion. A man may rape a prostitute, but he cannot rape his wife. Having once given her consent to sexual intercourse by the act of marrying a man, she has given it forever, whatever new circumstances may arise, and he has no need to ask her consent to sexual intercourse, not even if he is knowingly suffering at the time from a venereal disease (see, e.g., an article on "Sex Bias," Westminster Review, March, 1888).
When a woman gets married, she gives up the right to her own self. So, under English law, a man "cannot be guilty of rape against his lawful wife." Stephen, who in the first edition of his Digest of Criminal Law believed that in some situations a man could be charged with raping his wife, retracted that view in the latest edition. A man can rape a prostitute, but not his wife. Once she agrees to have sex through the act of marrying him, she has agreed to it forever, regardless of any new circumstances, and he doesn’t need to seek her consent for sexual intercourse, not even if he knows he has a sexually transmitted disease (see, e.g., an article on "Sex Bias," Westminster Review, March, 1888).
The duty of the wife to allow "conjugal rights" to her husband is another aspect of her legal subjection to him. Even in the nineteenth century a Suffolk lady of good family was imprisoned in Ipswich Goal for many years and fed on bread and water, though suffering from various diseases, till she died, simply because she continued to disregard the decree requiring her to render conjugal rights to her husband. This state of things was partly reformed by the Matrimonial Causes Bill of 1884, and that bill was passed, not to protect women, but men, against punishment for refusal to restore conjugal rights. Undoubtedly, the modern tendency, although it has progressed very slowly, is against applying compulsion to either husband or wife to yield "conjugal rights;" and since the Jackson case it is not possible in England for a husband to use force in attempting to compel his wife to live with him. This tendency is still more marked in the United States; thus the Iowa Supreme Court, a few years ago, decided that excessive demands for coitus constituted cruelty of a degree justifying divorce (J. G. Kiernan, Alienist and Neurologist, Nov. 1906, p. 466).
The obligation of a wife to provide "conjugal rights" to her husband is another example of her legal submission to him. Even in the nineteenth century, a well-born woman from Suffolk was imprisoned in Ipswich Jail for many years and was fed only bread and water, despite suffering from various illnesses, until she died, simply because she ignored the order requiring her to grant her husband conjugal rights. This situation was partially improved by the Matrimonial Causes Bill of 1884, which was enacted not to protect women but to protect men from punishment for refusing to restore conjugal rights. Undoubtedly, the modern trend, although it has progressed very slowly, is moving away from forcing either spouse to grant "conjugal rights;" and since the Jackson case, it is no longer possible in England for a husband to use force to try to compel his wife to live with him. This trend is even more pronounced in the United States; for instance, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled a few years ago that excessive demands for sex amounted to cruelty that justified divorce (J. G. Kiernan, Alienist and Neurologist, Nov. 1906, p. 466).
The slender tenure of the wife over her person is not confined to the sexual sphere, but even extends to her right to life. In England, if a wife kills her husband, it was formerly the very serious offence of "petit treason," and it is still murder. But, if a husband kills his wife and is able to plead her adultery and his jealousy, it is only manslaughter. (In France, where jealousy is regarded with extreme indulgence, even a wife who kills her husband is often acquitted.)
The limited control a wife has over her own life isn't just about sex; it also impacts her right to live. In England, if a wife kills her husband, it used to be considered a serious crime called "petit treason," and it’s still seen as murder today. However, if a husband kills his wife and can argue that she's been unfaithful and that he's jealous, it might only be classified as manslaughter. (In France, where jealousy is often excused, a wife who kills her husband is frequently let off the hook.)
It must not, however, be supposed that all the legal inequalities involved by marriage are in favor of the husband. A large number of injustices are also inflicted on the husband. The husband, for instance, is legally responsible for the libels uttered by his wife, and he is equally responsible civilly for the frauds she commits, even if she is living apart from him. (This was, for instance, held by an English judge in 1908; "he could only say he regretted it, for it seems a hard case. But it was the law.") Belfort Bax has, in recent years, especially insisted on the hardships inflicted by English law in such ways as these. There can be no doubt that marriage, as at present constituted, inflicts serious wrongs on the husband as well as on the wife.
It shouldn't be assumed that all the legal inequalities in marriage favor the husband. Many injustices also affect him. For example, a husband is legally responsible for any libel his wife commits and is also liable for any frauds she carries out, even if they are living separately. (An English judge noted this in 1908, saying, "he could only say he regretted it, for it seems a hard case. But it was the law.") In recent years, Belfort Bax has emphasized the difficulties imposed by English law in these ways. There’s no doubt that marriage, as it currently exists, causes serious wrongs to both husbands and wives.
Marriage is, therefore, not only not a contract in the true sense,[359] but in the only sense in which it is a contract it is a contract of an exceedingly bad kind. When the Canonists superseded the old conception of marriage as a contract of purchase by their sacramental marriage, they were in many respects effecting a real progress, and the return to the idea of a contract, as soon as its temporary value as a protest has ceased, proves altogether out of harmony with any advanced stage of civilization. It was revived in days before the revolt against slavery had been inaugurated. Personal contracts are out of harmony with our modern civilization and our ideas of individual liberty. A man can no longer contract himself as a slave nor sell his wife. Yet marriage, regarded as a contract, is of precisely the same class as those transactions.[360] In every high stage of civilization this fact is clearly recognized, and young couples are not even allowed to contract themselves out in marriage unconditionally. We see this, for instance, in the wise legislation of the Romans. Even under the Christian Emperors that sound principle was maintained and the lawyer Paulus wrote:[361] "Marriage was so free, according to ancient opinion, that even agreements between the parties not to separate from one another could have no validity." In so far as the essence and not any accidental circumstance of the marital relationships is made a contract, it is a contract of a nature which the two parties concerned are not competent to make. Biologically and psychologically it cannot be valid, and with the growth of a humane civilization it is explicitly declared to be legally invalid.
Marriage is not a contract in the true sense,[359] and when it is considered a contract, it’s an extremely flawed one. When the Canonists moved away from the old idea of marriage as a purchase agreement to a sacramental view, they made significant progress. However, reverting to the idea of marriage as a contract, once it served its temporary purpose as a protest, definitely conflicts with any advanced society. This idea came back at a time before the fight against slavery began. Personal contracts conflict with our modern understanding of individual freedom. A person can no longer contract themselves into slavery or sell their spouse. Yet, marriage, when viewed as a contract, falls into the same category as those types of transactions.[360] In every advanced civilization, this reality is clearly acknowledged, and young couples are not even allowed to unconditionally bind themselves to marriage. A good example of this is found in the wise laws of the Romans. Even under Christian Emperors, this sound principle was upheld, and the lawyer Paulus noted:[361] "Marriage was so free, according to ancient views, that agreements between the parties to not separate had no validity." As long as the essence of marital relationships is treated as a contract, it is of a nature that neither party is truly able to enter into. Biologically and psychologically, it doesn’t hold up, and with the growth of a compassionate civilization, it is expressly declared legally invalid.
For, there can be no doubt about it, the intimate and essential fact of marriage—the relationship of sexual intercourse—is not and cannot be a contract. It is not a contract but a fact; it cannot be effected by any mere act of will on the part of the parties concerned; it cannot be maintained by any mere act of will. To will such a contract is merely to perform a worse than indecorous farce. Certainly many of the circumstances of marriage are properly the subject of contract, to be voluntarily and deliberately made by the parties to the contract. But the essential fact of marriage—a love strong enough to render the most intimate of relationships possible and desirable through an indefinite number of years—cannot be made a matter for contract. Alike from the physical point of view, and the psychical point of view, no binding contract—and a contract is worthless if it is not binding—can possibly be made. And the making of such pseudo-contracts concerning the future of a marriage, before it has even been ascertained that the marriage can ever become a fact at all, is not only impossible but absurd.
There’s no doubt about it, the intimate and essential aspect of marriage—the sexual relationship—is not and cannot be a contract. It’s not a contract but a fact; it can’t be created by a mere act of will from those involved, nor can it be sustained by such an act. Wanting to create such a contract is nothing more than a ridiculous farce. Sure, many aspects of marriage can and should be contracts that the parties involved agree to willingly and deliberately. But the core of marriage—a love strong enough to make the most intimate relationship possible and desirable over many years—can’t be reduced to a contract. From both a physical and emotional standpoint, no binding contract—and a contract is worthless if it isn’t binding—can actually be made. Furthermore, trying to establish such fake contracts about the future of a marriage before it’s even clear if the marriage can become a reality is not only impossible but also ridiculous.
It is of course true that this impossibility, this absurdity, are never visible to the contracting parties. They have applied to the question all the very restricted tests that are conventionally permitted to them, and the satisfactory results of these tests, together with the consciousness of possessing an immense and apparently inexhaustible fund of loving emotion, seem to them adequate to the fulfilment of the contract throughout life, if not indeed eternity.
It is true that this impossibility and absurdity are never obvious to the parties involved. They have used all the limited criteria that are typically allowed, and the positive outcomes of these criteria, along with the feeling of having a huge and seemingly endless supply of love, make them believe that these are enough to uphold the commitment for their entire lives, if not forever.
As a child of seven I chanced to be in a semi-tropical island of the Pacific supplied with fruit, especially grapes, from the mainland, and a dusky market woman always presented a large bunch of grapes to the little English stranger. But a day came when the proffered bunch was firmly refused; the superabundance of grapes had produced a reaction of disgust. A space of nearly forty years was needed to overcome the repugnance to grapes thus acquired. Yet there can be no doubt that if at the age of six that little boy had been asked to sign a contract binding him to accept grapes every day, to keep them always near him, to eat them and to enjoy them every day, he would have signed that contract as joyously as any radiant bridegroom or demure bride signs the register in the vestry. But is a complex man or woman, with unknown capacities for changing or deteriorating, and with incalculable aptitudes for inflicting torture and arousing loathing, is such a creature more easy to be bound to than an exquisite fruit? All the countries of the world in which the subtle influence of the Canon law of Christendom still makes itself felt, have not yet grasped a general truth which is well within the practical experience of a child of seven.[362]
As a seven-year-old, I happened to be on a semi-tropical island in the Pacific that had an abundance of fruit, especially grapes, brought in from the mainland. A local market woman would always offer a large bunch of grapes to the little English newcomer. But one day, I firmly turned down her offer; my overindulgence in grapes had led to a sense of disgust. It took me nearly forty years to get past that aversion to grapes. Yet, there’s no doubt that if, at the age of six, that little boy had been asked to sign a contract agreeing to take grapes every day, keep them close, eat them, and enjoy them daily, he would have signed it as happily as any radiant bridegroom or modest bride signing the register in the church. But can a complex person, with unpredictable potential to change or decline, and with countless abilities to cause pain and evoke disgust, really be more easily bound than a delicious piece of fruit? All the countries in the world where the subtle influence of Christian Canon law still holds sway have yet to understand a basic truth that is well within the practical experience of a seven-year-old.[362]
The notion that such a relationship as that of marriage can rest on so fragile a basis as a pre-ordained contract has naturally never prevailed widely in its extreme form, and has been unknown altogether in many parts of the world. The Romans, as we know, explicitly rejected it, and even at a comparatively early period recognized the legality of marriage by usus, thus declaring in effect that marriage must be a fact, and not a mere undertaking. There has been a widespread legal tendency, especially where the traditions of Roman law have retained any influence, to regard the cohabitation of marriage as the essential fact of the relationship. It was an old rule even under the Catholic Church that marriage may be presumed from cohabitation (see, e.g., Zacchia, Questionum Medico-legalium Opus, edition of 1688, vol. iii, p. 234). Even in England cohabitation is already one of the presumptions in favor of the existence of marriage (though not necessarily by itself regarded as sufficient), provided the woman is of unblemished character, and does not appear to be a common prostitute (Nevill Geary, The Law of Marriage, Ch. III). If, however, according to Lord Watson's judicial statement in the Dysart Peerage case, a man takes his mistress to a hotel or goes with her to a baby-linen shop and speaks of her as his wife, it is to be presumed that he is acting for the sake of decency, and this furnishes no evidence of marriage. In Scotland the presumption of marriage arises on much slighter grounds than in England. This may be connected with the ancient and deep-rooted custom in Scotland of marriage by exchange of consent (Geary, op. cit. Ch. XVIII; cf., Howard, Matrimonial Institutions, vol. i, p. 316).
The idea that marriage can be based on something as weak as a predetermined contract has never been widely accepted in its most extreme form and has been completely unknown in many parts of the world. The Romans clearly rejected this notion and even at an early stage acknowledged the legitimacy of marriage by usus, effectively stating that marriage must be a reality, not just a promise. There has been a common legal trend, especially in places influenced by Roman law, to see cohabitation as the key fact of the relationship. It was an old rule within the Catholic Church that marriage could be presumed from cohabitation (see, e.g., Zacchia, Questionum Medico-legalium Opus, edition of 1688, vol. iii, p. 234). Even in England, cohabitation is already one of the presumptions supporting the existence of marriage (although not necessarily viewed as sufficient on its own), as long as the woman has a good reputation and doesn’t seem to be a common prostitute (Nevill Geary, The Law of Marriage, Ch. III). However, according to Lord Watson's judicial statement in the Dysart Peerage case, if a man takes his mistress to a hotel or visits a baby-linen shop with her and refers to her as his wife, it is assumed that he is acting out of decency, which provides no proof of marriage. In Scotland, the presumption of marriage arises on much weaker grounds than in England. This may relate to the longstanding and deep-rooted tradition in Scotland of marriage through mutual consent (Geary, op. cit. Ch. XVIII; cf., Howard, Matrimonial Institutions, vol. i, p. 316).
In the Bredalbane case (Campbell v. Campbell, 1867), which was of great importance because it involved the succession to the vast estates of the Marquis of Bredalbane, the House of Lords decided than even an adulterous connection may, on ceasing to be adulterous, become matrimonial by the simple consent of the parties, as evidenced by habit and repute, without any need for the matrimonial character of the connection to be indicated by any public act, nor any necessity to prove the specific period when the consent was interchanged. This decision has been confirmed in the Dysart case (Geary, loc. cit.; cf. C. G. Garrison, "Limits of Divorce," Contemporary Review, Feb., 1894). Similarly, as decided by Justice Kekewich in the Wagstaff case in 1907, if a man leaves money to his "widow," on condition that she never marries again, although he has never been married to her, and though she has been legally married to another man, the testator's intentions must be upheld. Garrison, in his valuable discussion of this aspect of legal marriage (loc. cit.), forcibly insists that by English law marriage is a fact and not a contract, and that where "conduct characterized by connubial purpose and constancy" exists, there marriage legally exists, marriage being simply "a name for an existing fact."
In the Bredalbane case (Campbell v. Campbell, 1867), which was significant because it dealt with the inheritance of the vast estates of the Marquis of Bredalbane, the House of Lords ruled that even an adulterous relationship can, once it stops being adulterous, become a matrimonial relationship simply through the mutual consent of the parties, as shown by their habits and reputation, without needing any public act to indicate the matrimonial nature of the relationship or requiring proof of the specific time when consent was given. This ruling has been supported in the Dysart case (Geary, loc. cit.; cf. C. G. Garrison, "Limits of Divorce," Contemporary Review, Feb., 1894). Likewise, as Justice Kekewich ruled in the Wagstaff case in 1907, if a man leaves money to his "widow" on the condition that she never remarry, even though he was never actually married to her and she has been legally wed to another man, the wishes of the testator must be honored. Garrison, in his insightful discussion on this matter of legal marriage (loc. cit.), strongly argues that under English law, marriage is a fact, not a contract, and that where "conduct characterized by marital intent and consistency" is present, there exists a legal marriage, with marriage being simply "a name for an existing fact."
In the United States, marriage "by habit and repute" similarly exists, and in some States has even been confirmed and extended by statute (J. P. Bishop, Commentaries, vol. i, Ch. XV). "Whatever the form of the ceremony, and even if all ceremony was dispensed with," said Judge Cooley, of Michigan, in 1875 (in an opinion accepted as authoritative by the Federal courts), "if the parties agreed presently to take each other for husband and wife, and from that time lived together professedly in that relation, proof of these facts would be sufficient.... This has been the settled doctrine of the American courts." (Howard, op. cit., vol. iii, pp. 177 et seq. Twenty-three States sanction common-law marriage, while eighteen repudiate, or are inclined to repudiate, any informal agreement.)
In the United States, marriage "by habit and reputation" also exists, and in some states, it has even been confirmed and expanded through legislation (J. P. Bishop, Commentaries, vol. i, Ch. XV). "Regardless of the ceremony's form, and even if there's no ceremony at all," said Judge Cooley of Michigan in 1875 (in an opinion recognized as authoritative by federal courts), "if the parties agree to take each other as husband and wife and start living together as such, evidence of these facts would be enough.... This has been the established principle of American courts." (Howard, op. cit., vol. iii, pp. 177 et seq. Twenty-three states recognize common-law marriage, while eighteen reject or are likely to reject any informal agreement.)
This legal recognition by the highest judicial authorities, alike in Great Britain and the United States, that marriage is essentially a fact, and that no evidence of any form or ceremony of marriage is required for the most complete legal recognition of marriage, undoubtedly carries with it highly important implications. It became clear that the reform of marriage is possible even without change in the law, and that honorable sexual relationships, even when entered into without any legal forms, are already entitled to full legal recognition and protection. There are, however, it need scarcely be added here, other considerations which render reform along these lines incomplete.
This acknowledgment by the highest legal authorities in both Great Britain and the United States that marriage is fundamentally a reality, and that no specific evidence or ceremony is needed for complete legal acknowledgment of marriage, definitely has significant implications. It became evident that marriage reform can happen even without changes in the law, and that respectful sexual relationships, even if established without any formal legal processes, deserve full legal recognition and protection. However, there are, as should be noted, other factors that make reform in this area insufficient.
It thus tends to come about that with the growth of civilization the conception of marriage as a contract falls more and more into discredit. It is realized, on the one hand, that personal contracts are out of harmony with our general and social attitude, for if we reject the idea of a human being contracting himself as a slave, how much more we should reject the idea of entering by contract into the still more intimate relationship of a husband or a wife; on the other hand it is felt that the idea of pre-ordained contracts on a matter over which the individual himself has no control is quite unreal and when any strict rules of equity prevail, necessarily invalid. It is true that we still constantly find writers sententiously asserting their notions of the duties or the privileges involved by the "contract" of marriage, with no more attempt to analyze the meaning of the term "contract" in this connection than the Protestant Reformers made, but it can scarcely be said that these writers have yet reached the alphabet of the subject they dogmatize about.
It tends to happen that as civilization grows, the idea of marriage as a contract becomes less and less respected. On one hand, it's understood that personal contracts don’t fit with our overall social perspective; if we reject the concept of a person agreeing to become a slave, then we should definitely reject the notion of entering into a contract for the even more personal relationship of being a husband or wife. On the other hand, people sense that the idea of pre-determined contracts about matters an individual can’t control is unrealistic and, when strict rules of fairness apply, inherently invalid. It’s true that we still often find writers confidently stating their views on the responsibilities or rights that come with the "contract" of marriage, without delving into the meaning of the term "contract" in this context any more than the Protestant Reformers did. However, it can hardly be said that these writers have even begun to grasp the basics of the topic they argue about.
The transference of marriage from the Church to the State which, in the lands where it first occurred, we owe to Protestantism and, in the English-speaking lands, especially to Puritanism, while a necessary stage, had the unfortunate result of secularizing the sexual relationships. That is to say, it ignored the transcendent element in love which is really the essential part of such relationships, and it concentrated attention on those formal and accidental parts of marriage which can alone be dealt with in a rigid and precise manner, and can alone properly form the subject of contracts. The Canon law, fantastic and impossible as it became in many of its developments, at least insisted on the natural and actual fact of marriage as, above all, a bodily union, while, at the same time, it regarded that union as no mere secular business contract but a sacred and exalted function, a divine fact, and the symbol of the most divine fact in the world. We are returning to-day to the Canonist's conception of marriage on a higher and freer plane, bringing back the exalted conception of the Canon law, yet retaining the individualism which the Puritan wrongly thought he could secure on the basis of mere secularization, while, further, we recognize that the whole process belongs to the private sphere of moral responsibility. As Hobhouse has well said, in tracing the evolutionary history of the modern conception of marriage, the sacramental idea of marriage has again emerged but on a higher plane; "from being a sacrament in the magical, it has become one in the ethical, sense." We are thus tending towards, though we have not yet legally achieved, marriage made and maintained by consent, "a union between two free and responsible persons in which the equal rights of both are maintained."[363]
The transfer of marriage from the Church to the State, which we owe to Protestantism in the regions where it first happened and, particularly in English-speaking areas, to Puritanism, was a necessary step. However, it had the unfortunate consequence of secularizing sexual relationships. This means it overlooked the deeper, transcendent aspect of love, which is truly the core of such relationships, and instead focused on the formal and incidental aspects of marriage that can only be addressed in a rigid, precise way. These are the parts that can properly be the subject of contracts. Canon law, as fantastical and improbable as it became in many of its interpretations, at least emphasized the natural and actual fact of marriage as fundamentally a physical union. At the same time, it viewed that union not merely as a secular business deal but as a sacred and elevated function, a divine reality, and a symbol of the most divine truth in existence. Today, we are returning to the Canonist view of marriage on a higher and more liberated level, reinstating the elevated perspective of Canon law while still embracing the individualism that Puritanism mistakenly thought it could achieve through simple secularization. Furthermore, we recognize that the entire process belongs to the private domain of moral responsibility. As Hobhouse aptly noted while outlining the evolutionary journey of the modern understanding of marriage, the sacramental idea of marriage has resurfaced but on a higher plane; "from being a sacrament in the magical, it has become one in the ethical sense." We are thus tending towards, although we have not yet legally realized, a marriage formed and sustained by consent, "a union between two free and responsible individuals in which both parties' equal rights are upheld."
It is supposed by some that to look upon sexual union as a sacrament is necessarily to accept the ancient Catholic view, embodied in the Canon law, that matrimony is indissoluble. That is, however, a mistake. Even the Canonists themselves were never able to put forward any coherent and consistent ground for the indissolubility of matrimony which could commend itself rationally, while Luther and Milton and Wilhelm von Humboldt, who maintained the religious and sacred nature of sexual union—though they were cautious about using the term sacrament on account of its ecclesiastical implications—so far from believing that its sanctity involved indissolubility, argued in the reverse sense. This point of view may be defended even from a strictly Protestant standpoint. "I take it," Mr. G. C. Maberly says, "that the Prayer Book definition of a sacrament, 'the outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace,' is generally accepted. In marriage the legal and physical unions are the outward and visible signs, while the inward and spiritual grace is the God-given love that makes the union of heart and soul: and it is precisely because I take this view of marriage that I consider the legal and physical union should be dissolved whenever the spiritual union of unselfish, divine love and affection has ceased. It seems to me that the sacramental view of marriage compels us to say that those who continue the legal or physical union when the spiritual union has ceased, are—to quote again from the Prayer Book words applied to those who take the outward sign of another sacrament when the inward and spiritual grace is not present—'eating and drinking their own damnation.'"
Some people believe that viewing sexual union as a sacrament means accepting the traditional Catholic perspective, as outlined in Canon law, that marriage is unbreakable. However, that’s a misunderstanding. Even the Canonists themselves couldn’t provide a solid and consistent reason for the unbreakability of marriage that makes rational sense. Meanwhile, Luther, Milton, and Wilhelm von Humboldt, who recognized the religious and sacred nature of sexual union—though they were careful about calling it a sacrament due to its church-related implications—argued the opposite. This viewpoint can even be supported from a strictly Protestant perspective. “I understand,” Mr. G. C. Maberly says, “that the Prayer Book definition of a sacrament, ‘the outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace,’ is widely accepted. In marriage, the legal and physical unions are the outward and visible signs, while the inward and spiritual grace is the God-given love that unites hearts and souls. Because I see marriage this way, I believe the legal and physical union should end whenever the spiritual union of selfless, divine love and affection no longer exists. It seems to me that the sacramental view of marriage requires us to say that those who maintain the legal or physical union after the spiritual bond has ceased are—quoting again from the Prayer Book's description of those who partake in another sacrament without the inward and spiritual grace present—‘eating and drinking their own damnation.’”
If from the point we have now reached we look back at the question of divorce we see that, as the modern aspects of the marriage relationship becomes more clearly realized by the community, that question will be immensely simplified. Since marriage is not a mere contract but a fact of conduct, and even a sacred fact, the free participation of both parties is needed to maintain it. To introduce the idea of delinquency and punishment into divorce, to foster mutual recrimination, to publish to the world the secrets of the heart or the senses, is not only immoral, it is altogether out of place. In the question as to when a marriage has ceased to be a marriage the two parties concerned can alone be the supreme judges; the State, if the State is called in, can but register the sentence they pronounce, merely seeing to it that no injustice is involved in the carrying out of that sentence.[364]
If we look back at the issue of divorce from where we are now, we see that as society understands the modern aspects of marriage better, this issue becomes much simpler. Since marriage is not just a contract but a reality of behavior—and even a sacred one—both partners need to actively engage to keep it going. Bringing in ideas of wrongdoing and punishment in divorce, encouraging blame between each other, and exposing private feelings or experiences is not just wrong; it is completely inappropriate. When deciding when a marriage has ended, only the two people involved can truly be the ultimate judges; if the State is involved, its role is simply to document their decision, ensuring that no injustice occurs in enforcing that decision.
In discussing in the previous chapter the direction in which sexual morality tends to develop with the development of civilization we came to the conclusion that in its main lines it involved, above all, personal responsibility. A relationship fixed among savage peoples by social custom which none dare break, and in a higher stage of culture by formal laws which must be observed in the letter even if broken in the spirit, becomes gradually transferred to the sphere of individual moral responsibility. Such a transference is necessarily meaningless, and indeed impossible, unless the increasing stringency of the moral bond is accompanied by the decreasing stringency of the formal bond. It is only by the process of loosening the artificial restraints that the natural restraints can exert their full control. That process takes place in two ways, in part on the basis of the indifference to formal marriage which has marked the masses of the population everywhere and doubtless stretches back to the tenth century before the domination of ecclesiastical matrimony began, and partly by the progressive modification of marriage laws which were made necessary by the needs of the propertied classes anxious to secure the State recognition of their unions. The whole process is necessarily a gradual and indeed imperceptible process. It is impossible to fix definitely the dates of the stages by which the Church effected the immense revolution by which it grasped, and eventually transferred to the State, the complete control of marriage, for that revolution was effected without the intervention of any law. It will be equally difficult to perceive the transference of the control of marriage from the State to the individuals concerned, and the more difficult because, as we shall see, although the essential and intimately personal fact of marriage is not a proper matter for State control, there are certain aspects of marriage which touch the interests of the community so closely that the State is bound to insist on their registration and to take an interest in their settlement.
In the previous chapter, we talked about how sexual morality tends to evolve alongside civilization, and we concluded that, at its core, it primarily involves personal responsibility. A relationship that is established among primitive societies through social customs that no one dares to violate, and in more advanced cultures through formal laws that must be followed literally even if not in spirit, gradually shifts to the realm of individual moral accountability. This shift is essentially meaningless and indeed impossible unless the increasing strictness of moral obligations accompanies a decreasing strictness of formal laws. Only by loosening artificial restrictions can natural ones exert their full influence. This process happens in two ways: partly due to the indifference towards formal marriage that has characterized much of the population and likely goes back to the tenth century, before the dominance of church marriage began; and partly due to the ongoing changes in marriage laws driven by the interests of the propertied classes who want state recognition of their unions. This entire process is naturally gradual and often imperceptible. It’s challenging to pinpoint the exact dates of the stages through which the Church carried out the significant change in its complete control over marriage, which was eventually transferred to the State, since this transformation occurred without any legal intervention. It will also be difficult to notice the shift of marriage control from the State to the individuals involved, even more so because, as we will see, while the essential and deeply personal aspect of marriage isn’t a proper matter for State oversight, there are certain parts of marriage that are so closely tied to community interests that the State is obliged to require their registration and take an interest in their resolution.
The result of dissolving the formal stringency of the marriage relationship, it is sometimes said, would be a tendency to an immoral laxity. Those who make this statement overlook the fact that laxity tends to reach a maximum as a result of stringency, and that where the merely external authority of a rigid marriage law prevails, there the extreme excesses of license most flourish. It is also undoubtedly true, and for the same reason, that any sudden removal of restraints necessarily involves a reaction to the opposite extreme of license; a slave is not changed at a stroke into an autonomous freeman. Yet we have to remember that the marriage order existed for millenniums before any attempt was made to mould it into arbitrary shapes by human legislation. Such legislation, we have seen, was indeed the effort of the human spirit to affirm more emphatically the demands of its own instincts.[365] But its final result is to choke and impede rather than to further the instincts which inspired it. Its gradual disappearance allows the natural order free and proper scope.
The idea that loosening the strict rules of marriage would lead to moral laxity is often stated. However, those who say this ignore the fact that laxity usually peaks when there are strict rules, and that where rigid marriage laws are enforced, extreme behaviors often thrive. It's also true, for the same reasons, that any sudden lifting of restrictions can lead to an opposite extreme of freedom; a slave doesn’t instantly become an independent person. Still, we must remember that the concept of marriage existed for thousands of years before anyone tried to impose arbitrary rules through laws. These laws were an attempt by humanity to more strongly affirm its own instincts. But in the end, they tend to restrict and hinder those instincts instead of supporting them. The gradual decline of such legislation allows for a more natural and appropriate expression of the order of marriage.
The great truth that compulsion is not really a force on the side of virtue, but on the side of vice, had been clearly realized by the genius of Rabelais, when he said of his ideal social state, the Abbey of Thelema, that there was but one clause in its rule: Fay ce que vouldras. "Because," said Rabelais (Bk. i, Ch. VII), "men that are free, well-born, well-bred, and conversant in honest companies, have naturally an instinct and spur that prompts them unto virtuous actions and withdraws them from vice. These same men, when by base subjection and constraint they are brought under and kept down, turn aside from that noble disposition by which they freely were inclined to virtue, to shake off and break that bond of servitude." So that when a man and a woman who had lived under the rule of Thelema married each other, Rabelais tells us, their mutual love lasted undiminished to the day of their death.
The big truth that compulsion isn’t really about virtue but rather about vice was clearly understood by the genius of Rabelais when he described his ideal society, the Abbey of Thelema, which had only one rule: "Do what you want." "Because," Rabelais said (Bk. i, Ch. VII), "free men, who are well-born, well-bred, and used to good company, have a natural instinct and drive that leads them to do good and steer clear of bad. When these same men are forced into submission and held down, they lose that noble inclination towards virtue and instead fight against and break free from that bondage." So, when a man and a woman who had lived under the rule of Thelema married each other, Rabelais tells us, their love for each other remained strong until the day they died.
When the loss of autonomous freedom fails to lead to licentious rebellion it incurs the opposite risk and tends to become a flabby reliance on an external support. The artificial support of marriage by State regulation then resembles the artificial support of the body furnished by corset-wearing. The reasons for and against adopting artificial support are the same in one case as the other. Corsets really give a feeling of support; they really furnish without trouble a fairly satisfactory appearance of decorum; they are a real protection against various accidents. But the price at which they furnish these advantages is serious, and the advantages themselves only exist under unnatural conditions. The corset cramps the form and the healthy development of the organs; it enfeebles the voluntary muscular system; it is incompatible with perfect grace and beauty; it diminishes the sum of active energy. It exerts, in short, the same kind of influence on physical responsibility as formal marriage on moral responsibility.
When the loss of personal freedom doesn't result in reckless rebellion, it risks turning into a weak dependence on external support. The artificial support of marriage regulated by the State is similar to the artificial support of a body provided by wearing a corset. The reasons for and against using artificial support are the same in both cases. Corsets do provide a feeling of support; they make it easier to achieve a somewhat decent appearance; they genuinely protect against various mishaps. However, the cost of these benefits is significant, and those advantages only exist under unnatural conditions. The corset restricts the body's shape and healthy organ development; it weakens the voluntary muscle system; it clashes with true grace and beauty; it reduces overall energy. In short, it has the same kind of effect on physical responsibility as formal marriage does on moral responsibility.
It is too often forgotten, and must therefore be repeated, that married people do not remain together because of any religious or legal tie; that tie is merely the historical outcome of their natural tendency to remain together, a tendency which is itself far older than history. "Love would exist in the world to-day, just as pure and just as enduring," says Shufeldt (Medico-Legal Journal, Dec., 1897), "had man never invented 'marriage.' Truly affined mates would have remained faithful to each other as long as life lasted. It is only when men attempt to improve upon nature that crime, disease, and unhappiness step in." "The abolition of marriage in the form now practiced," wrote Godwin more than a century ago (Political Justice, second edition, 1796, vol. i, p. 248), "will be attended with no evils. We are apt to represent it to ourselves as the harbinger of brutal lust and depravity. But it really happens in this, as in other cases, that the positive laws which are made to restrain our vices irritate and multiply them." And Professor Lester Ward, in insisting on the strength of the monogamic sentiment in modern society, truly remarks (International Journal of Ethics, Oct., 1896) that the rebellion against rigid marriage bonds "is, in reality, due to the very strengthening of the true bonds of conjugal affection, coupled with a rational and altogether proper determination on the part of individuals to accept, in so important a matter, nothing less than the genuine article." "If by a single stroke," says Professor Woods Hutchinson (Contemporary Review, Sept., 1905), "all marriage ties now in existence were struck off or declared illegal, eight-tenths of all couples would be remarried within forty eight hours, and seven-tenths could not be kept asunder with bayonets." An experiment of this kind on a small scale was witnessed in 1909 in an English village in Buckinghamshire. It was found that the parish church had never been licensed for marriages, and that in consequence all the people who had gone through the ceremony of marriage in that church during the previous half century had never been legally married. Yet, so far as could be ascertained, not a single couple thus released from the legal compulsion of marriage took advantage of the freedom bestowed. In the face of such a fact it is obviously impossible to attach any moral value to the form of marriage.
It is often overlooked, so it needs to be said again, that married people don’t stay together because of any religious or legal obligation; that obligation is just a historical result of their natural inclination to be together, which is itself much older than recorded history. "Love would exist in the world today, just as pure and just as enduring," says Shufeldt (Medico-Legal Journal, Dec., 1897), "even if humans had never created 'marriage.' Truly bonded partners would remain loyal to each other for life. It’s only when people try to improve on nature that crime, illness, and unhappiness arise." "Abolishing marriage as it currently exists," wrote Godwin over a century ago (Political Justice, second edition, 1796, vol. i, p. 248), "won't lead to any negative outcomes. We often imagine it as a sign of brutal desire and moral decay. But, just like in other situations, the laws meant to curb our vices only serve to exacerbate and multiply them." And Professor Lester Ward, in emphasizing the strength of monogamous sentiment in modern society, rightly points out (International Journal of Ethics, Oct., 1896) that the push against strict marriage bonds "is actually a reflection of the very strengthening of true marital affection, along with a rational and perfectly reasonable determination by individuals to accept nothing less than the real deal in such an important matter." "If, with a single action," says Professor Woods Hutchinson (Contemporary Review, Sept., 1905), "all existing marriage ties were suddenly dissolved or deemed illegal, eight out of ten couples would get remarried within forty-eight hours, and seven out of ten wouldn't be able to be kept apart, even with bayonets." A small-scale experiment of this kind occurred in 1909 in a village in Buckinghamshire. It was discovered that the parish church had never been authorized for marriages, meaning that everyone who had gone through the marriage ceremony there in the past fifty years was never legally married. Yet, as far as could be determined, not a single couple that was freed from the legal obligation of marriage took advantage of that freedom. In light of this fact, it is clearly impossible to assign any moral worth to the institution of marriage.
It is certainly inevitable that during a period of transition the natural order is to some extent disturbed by the persistence, even though in a weakened form, of external bonds which are beginning to be consciously realized as inimical to the authoritative control of individual moral responsibility. We can clearly trace this at the present time. A sensitive anxiety to escape from external constraint induces an under-valuation of the significance of personal constraint in the relationship of marriage. Everyone is probably familiar with cases in which a couple will live together through long years without entering the legal bond of marriage, notwithstanding difficulties in their mutual relationship which would have long since caused a separation or a divorce had they been legally married. When the inherent difficulties of the marital relationship are complicated by the difficulties due to external constraint, the development of individual moral responsibility cuts two ways, and leads to results that are not entirely satisfactory. This has been seen in the United States of America and attention has often been called to it by thoughtful American observers. It is, naturally, noted especially in women because it is in women that the new growth of personal freedom and moral responsibility has chiefly made itself felt. The first stirring of these new impulses, especially when associated, as it often is, with inexperience and ignorance, leads to impatience with the natural order, to a demand for impossible conditions of existence, and to an inaptitude not only for the arbitrary bondage of law but even for the wholesome and necessary bonds of human social life. It is always a hard lesson for the young and idealistic that in order to command Nature we must obey her; it can only be learnt through contact with life and by the attainment of full human growth.
It’s definitely unavoidable that during a time of change, the natural order is somewhat disrupted by the lingering, albeit weakened, external connections that people are starting to recognize as harmful to personal moral responsibility. We can clearly see this happening right now. A heightened desire to break free from external restrictions leads to an undervaluing of the importance of personal responsibilities within marriage. Many people are probably aware of situations where a couple lives together for many years without formally getting married, even when issues in their relationship would have caused them to separate or divorce if they were legally married. When the inherent challenges of marriage are made worse by external pressures, the development of individual moral responsibility has mixed results and isn’t completely satisfying. This has been observed in the United States, and many thoughtful American observers have pointed it out. It’s especially noted in women because it’s among women that the new emergence of personal freedom and moral responsibility has mainly been felt. The initial stirrings of these new impulses, particularly when linked to inexperience and ignorance, result in impatience with the natural order, a demand for unrealistic living conditions, and a difficulty not only with the strict constraints of the law but even with the essential bonds of social life. It’s always a tough lesson for the young and idealistic that in order to master nature, we must first obey it; this can only be learned through real-life experiences and the achievement of full personal development.
Dr. Felix Adler (in an address before the Society of Ethical Culture of New York, Nov. 17, 1889) called attention to what he regarded as the most deep-rooted cause of an undue prevalence of divorce in America. "The false idea of individual liberty is largely held in America," and when applied to family life it often leads to an impatience with these duties which the individual is either born into or has voluntarily accepted. "I am constrained to think that the prevalence of divorce is to be ascribed in no small degree to the influence of democratic ideas—that is, of false democratic ideas—and our hope lies in advancing towards a higher and truer democracy." A more recent American writer, this time a woman, Anna A. Rogers ("Why American Marriages Fail," Atlantic Monthly, Sept., 1907) speaks in the same sense, though perhaps in too unqualified a manner. She states that the frequency of divorce in America is due to three causes: (1) woman's failure to realize that marriage is her work in the world; (2) her growing individualism; (3) her lost art of giving, replaced by a highly developed receptive faculty. The American woman, this writer states, in discovering her own individuality has not yet learnt how to manage it; it is still "largely a useless, uneasy factor, vouchsafing her very little more peace than it does those in her immediate surcharged vicinity." Her circumstances tend to make of her "a curious anomalous hybrid; a cross between a magnificent, rather unmannerly boy, and a spoiled, exacting demi-mondaine, who sincerely loves in this world herself alone." She has not yet learnt that woman's supreme work in the world can only be attained through the voluntary acceptance of the restraints of marriage. The same writer points out that the fault is not alone with American women, but also with American men. Their idolatry of their women is largely responsible for that intolerance and selfishness which causes so many divorces; "American women are, as a whole, pampered and worshipped out of all reason." But the men, who lend themselves to this, do not feel that they can treat their wives with the same comradeship as the French treat their wives, nor seek their advice with the same reliance; the American woman is placed on an unreal pedestal. Yet another American writer, Rafford Pyke ("Husbands and Wives," Cosmopolitan, 1902), points out that only a small proportion of American marriages are really unhappy, these being chiefly among the more cultured classes, in which the movement of expansion in women's interests and lives is taking place; it is more often the wife than the husband who is disappointed in marriage, and this is largely due to her inability to merge, not necessarily subordinate, her individuality in an equal union with his. "Marriage to-day is becoming more and more dependent for its success upon the adjustment of conditions that are psychical. Whereas in former generations it was sufficient that the union should involve physical reciprocity, in this age of ours the union must involve a psychic reciprocity as well. And whereas, heretofore, the community of interest was attained with ease, it is now becoming far more difficult because of the tendency to discourage a woman who marries from merging her separate individuality in her husband's. Yet, unless she does this, how can she have a complete and perfect interest in the life together, and, for that matter, how can he have such an interest either?"
Dr. Felix Adler, speaking in an address to the Society of Ethical Culture of New York on November 17, 1889, highlighted what he believed to be a fundamental reason for the high rate of divorce in America. "The misguided notion of individual liberty is widely accepted in America," and when this idea is applied to family life, it often results in a lack of patience with the responsibilities that individuals either inherit or willingly take on. "I believe that the widespread nature of divorce can be attributed, to a significant extent, to the influence of democratic ideals—that is, misguided democratic ideals—and our hope lies in moving toward a higher and truer form of democracy." A more recent American writer, Anna A. Rogers, in her piece "Why American Marriages Fail" published in the Atlantic Monthly in September 1907, expresses a similar view, though perhaps in an overly blunt way. She argues that the high divorce rate in America stems from three main factors: (1) women's failure to understand that marriage is their role in the world; (2) their increasing individualism; and (3) their loss of the ability to give, which has been replaced by a strong tendency to receive. According to this writer, American women, in discovering their individuality, have not yet learned how to manage it; it remains "largely a useless, uncomfortable factor, providing her with very little more peace than it does those in her immediate, overwhelmed environment." Her circumstances make her into "a strange, contradictory blend; something between a remarkable, somewhat rude boy, and a spoiled, demanding demi-mondaine, who genuinely loves only herself in this world." She has yet to grasp that a woman's true purpose can only be fulfilled through willingly embracing the limitations of marriage. This writer also notes that the issue is not solely with American women; American men share some of the blame. Their idolization of women largely contributes to the intolerance and selfishness that leads to so many divorces; "American women are, overall, spoiled and idolized to an unreasonable degree." However, the men who participate in this do not feel they can treat their wives with the same camaraderie that French men treat theirs, nor do they seek their advice with the same trust; the American woman is placed on an unrealistic pedestal. Another American writer, Rafford Pyke, in his article "Husbands and Wives" published in Cosmopolitan in 1902, observes that only a small percentage of American marriages are genuinely unhappy, and these tend to be more common among the cultured classes, where women's rights and roles are expanding; often, it is the wife who feels disappointed in marriage, primarily due to her struggle to integrate, not necessarily subordinate, her individuality in an equal partnership with her husband. "Marriage today increasingly relies on the adjustment of psychological conditions for its success. While in past generations it was enough for the union to involve physical reciprocity, in our current age, the union must also involve a psychological reciprocity. And while previously, the sharing of interests was easily achieved, it is now becoming much harder because of the trend to discourage a woman who marries from merging her individual identity with her husband's. Yet, unless she does this, how can she fully engage and invest in their life together, and, for that matter, how can he also maintain such interest?"
Professor Münsterberg, the distinguished psychologist, in his frank but appreciative study of American institutions, The Americans, taking a broader outlook, points out that the influence of women on morals in America has not been in every respect satisfactory, in so far as it has tended to encourage shallowness and superficiality. "The American woman who has scarcely a shred of education," he remarks (p. 587), "looks in vain for any subject on which she has not firm convictions already at hand.... The arrogance of this feminine lack of knowledge is the symptom of a profound trait in the feminine soul, and points to dangers springing from the domination of women in the intellectual life.... And in no other civilized land are ethical conceptions so worm-eaten by superstitions."
Professor Münsterberg, the renowned psychologist, in his honest yet appreciative examination of American society, The Americans, takes a broader perspective and highlights that the influence of women on morals in America hasn’t always been positive, as it often promotes shallowness and superficiality. "The American woman who has hardly any education," he notes (p. 587), "searches in vain for any topic on which she doesn’t already have strong opinions.... The arrogance stemming from this lack of knowledge in women reflects a deep-seated aspect of the female spirit and signals risks arising from women's dominance in intellectual life.... And in no other civilized country are ethical beliefs so riddled with superstitions."
We have seen that the modern tendency as regards marriage is towards its recognition as a voluntary union entered into by two free, equal, and morally responsible persons, and that that union is rather of the nature of an ethical sacrament than of a contract, so that in its essence as a physical and spiritual bond it is outside the sphere of the State's action. It has been necessary to labor that point before we approach what may seem to many not only a different but even a totally opposed aspect of marriage. If the marriage union itself cannot be a matter for contract, it naturally leads to a fact which must necessarily be a matter for implicit or explicit contract, a matter, moreover, in which the community at large has a real and proper interest: that is the fact of procreation.[366]
We’ve observed that the modern view of marriage is that it’s a voluntary union between two free, equal, and morally responsible individuals. This union is more of an ethical sacrament than a contract, meaning that, at its core, as a physical and spiritual connection, it exists outside the realm of government involvement. It’s important to clarify this before we address what may seem to some like a completely different and even opposing perspective on marriage. If the marriage union itself isn’t a contractual matter, it leads to something that must be a matter of either implicit or explicit agreement, and it’s something the community as a whole has a genuine interest in: that is, the act of procreation.[366]
The ancient Egyptians—among whom matrimonial institutions were so elastic and the position of woman so high—recognized a provisional and slight marriage bond for the purpose of testing fecundity.[367] Among ourselves the law makes no such paternal provision, leaving to young couples themselves the responsibility of making any tests, a permission, we know, they largely avail themselves of, usually entering the legal bonds of marriage, however, before the birth of their child. That legal bond is a recognition that the introduction of a new individual into the community is not, like sexual union, a mere personal fact, but a social fact, a fact in which the State cannot fail to be concerned. And the more we investigate the tendency of the modern marriage movement the more we shall realize that its attitude of freedom, of individual moral responsibility, in the formation of sexual relationships, is compensated by an attitude of stringency, of strict social oversight, in the matter of procreation. Two people who form an erotic relationship are bound, when they reach the conviction that their relationship is a real marriage, having its natural end in procreation, to subscribe to a contract which, though it may leave themselves personally free, must yet bind them both to their duties towards their children.[368]
The ancient Egyptians—where marriage rules were pretty flexible and women held a high status—had a temporary and informal marriage bond to test fertility. This is different from our system, where the law doesn't provide for this, leaving young couples to take it upon themselves to conduct any tests, which we know they often do, usually getting legally married before their child is born. That legal marriage recognizes that bringing a new person into the community isn’t just a private matter like a sexual relationship, but a public issue that the State is concerned about. The more we look into the modern marriage movement, the clearer it becomes that while there’s a push for freedom and personal responsibility in sexual relationships, there’s also a strong emphasis on strict social regulation regarding parenthood. When two people enter a romantic relationship and come to believe it’s a genuine marriage with the goal of having children, they’re expected to agree to a contract that, while allowing them personal freedom, also commits them to their responsibilities toward their children.
The necessity for such an undertaking is double, even apart from the fact that it is in the highest interests of the parents themselves. It is required in the interests of the child. It is required in the interests of the State. A child can be bred, and well-bred, by one effective parent. But to equip a child adequately for its entrance into life both parents are usually needed. The State on its side—that is to say, the community of which parents and child alike form part—is bound to know who these persons are who have become sponsors for a new individual now introduced into its midst. The most Individualistic State, the most Socialistic State, are alike bound, if faithful to the interests, both biological and economic, of their constituent members generally, to insist on the full legal and recognized parentage of the father and mother of every child. That is clearly demanded in the interests of the child; it is clearly demanded also in the interests of the State.
The need for this kind of effort is twofold, apart from the fact that it greatly benefits the parents themselves. It's necessary for the child's well-being and for the good of the State. A child can be raised well by one capable parent. However, to prepare a child properly for life, both parents are generally needed. The State, meaning the community that includes both parents and the child, must know who these individuals are that have taken on the responsibility of raising a new person introduced into society. Whether in a highly individualistic or a strongly socialistic State, both must, if they are to honor the biological and economic interests of their members, require full legal acknowledgment of both the father and mother of every child. This is evidently essential for the child's welfare and also necessary for the State's interests.
The barrier which in Christendom has opposed itself to the natural recognition of this fact, so injuring alike the child and the State, has clearly been the rigidity of the marriage system, more especially as moulded by the Canon law. The Canonists attributed a truly immense importance to the copula carnalis, as they technically termed it. They centred marriage strictly in the vagina; they were not greatly concerned about either the presence or the absence of the child. The vagina, as we know, has not always proved a very firm centre for the support of marriage, and that centre is now being gradually transferred to the child. If we turn from the Canonists to the writings of a modern like Ellen Key, who so accurately represents much that is most characteristic and essential in the late tendencies of marriage development, we seem to have entered a new world, even a newly illuminated world. For "in the new sexual morality, as in Corregio's Notte, the light emanates from the child."[369]
The barrier that has stood in Christendom against the natural acknowledgment of this truth, harming both the child and the State, has clearly been the inflexibility of the marriage system, especially as shaped by Canon law. The Canonists placed immense importance on the copula carnalis, as they called it. They focused marriage strictly on the vagina and weren't particularly concerned about whether a child was present or not. The vagina, as we now know, hasn’t proven to be a very solid foundation for marriage, and that focus is gradually shifting to the child. When we look at the writings of a modern thinker like Ellen Key, who accurately captures much of what is essential in the recent trends of marriage development, it feels like we’ve entered a new, almost enlightened world. As she observes, “in the new sexual morality, as in Corregio's Notte, the light comes from the child.”[369]
No doubt this change is largely a matter of sentiment, of, as we sometimes say, mere sentiment, although there is nothing so powerful in human affairs as sentiment, and the revolution effected by Jesus, the later revolution effected by Rousseau, were mainly revolutions in sentiment. But the change is also a matter of the growing recognition of interests and rights, and as such it manifests itself in law. We can scarcely doubt that we are approaching a time when it will be generally understood that the entrance into the world of every child, without exception, should be preceded by the formation of a marriage contract which, while in no way binding the father and mother to any duties, or any privileges, towards each other, binds them both towards their child and at the same time ensures their responsibility towards the State. It is impossible for the State to obtain more than this, but it should be impossible for it to demand less. A contract of such a kind "marries" the father and mother so far as the parentage of the individual child is concerned, and in no other respect; it is a contract which leaves entirely unaffected their past, present, or future relations towards other persons, otherwise it would be impossible to enforce it. In all parts of the world this elementary demand of social morality is slowly beginning to be recognized, and as it affects hundreds of thousands of infants[370] who are yearly branded as "illegitimate" through no act of their own, no one can say that the recognition has come too soon. As yet, indeed, it seems nowhere to be complete.
No doubt this change is mostly about feelings, or, as we sometimes say, just feelings, even though sentiment is one of the most powerful forces in human matters. The revolution brought about by Jesus and the later shift initiated by Rousseau were primarily revolutions of sentiment. However, this change also reflects an increasing awareness of interests and rights, which is evident in the law. We can hardly doubt that we're moving toward a time when it will be commonly accepted that the entry into the world of every child, without exception, should be preceded by the creation of a marriage contract that, while not requiring the father and mother to have any obligations or privileges toward each other, does bind them both to their child and ensures their responsibility to the State. The State cannot demand more than this, but it should not be allowed to require less. A contract of this nature "marries" the father and mother only in terms of the parentage of the individual child, and in no other way; it is a contract that does not affect their past, present, or future relationships with other people, or else it would be impossible to enforce. Globally, this fundamental demand of social morality is slowly starting to be recognized, and since it impacts hundreds of thousands of infants who are labeled as "illegitimate" without any input from themselves, no one can argue that this recognition has come too soon. As of now, it doesn't seem to be fully recognized anywhere.
Most attempts or proposals for the avoidance of illegitimate births are concerned with the legalizing of unions of a less binding degree than the present legal marriage. Such unions would serve to counteract other evils. Thus an English writer, who has devoted much study to sex questions, writes in a private letter: "The best remedy for the licentiousness of celibate men and the mental and physical troubles of continence in woman would be found in a recognized honorable system of free unions and trial-marriages, in which preventive intercourse is practiced until the lovers were old enough to become parents, and possessed of sufficient means to support a family. The prospect of a loveless existence for young men and women of ardent natures is intolerable and as terrible as the prospect of painful illness and death. But I think the old order must change ere long."
Most attempts or proposals to prevent unwanted pregnancies focus on creating less binding unions than traditional marriage. Such arrangements would help address other issues. An English writer, who has extensively studied sexual topics, mentioned in a private letter: "The best solution for the promiscuity of single men and the mental and physical struggles of women practicing abstinence could be a recognized and respected system of consensual partnerships and trial marriages, where couples can be intimate until they're ready to have children and can financially support a family. The idea of a loveless life for passionate young men and women is unbearable, just as much as the thought of suffering from illness or death. But I believe the old ways will need to change soon."
In Teutonic countries there is a strongly marked current of feeling in the direction of establishing legal unions of a lower degree than marriage. They exist in Sweden, as also in Norway where by a recent law the illegitimate child is entitled to the same rights in relation to both parents as the legitimate child, bearing the father's name and inheriting his property (Die Neue Generation, July, 1909, p. 303). In France the well-known judge, Magnard, so honorably distinguished for his attitude towards cases of infanticide by young mothers, has said: "I heartily wish that alongside the institution of marriage as it now exists we had a free union constituted by simple declaration before a magistrate and conferring almost the same family rights as ordinary marriage." This wish has been widely echoed.
In Germanic countries, there’s a strong movement towards creating legal unions that are less formal than marriage. These types of unions exist in Sweden and Norway, where a recent law now gives illegitimate children the same rights as legitimate ones concerning both parents, allowing them to take the father's name and inherit his property (Die Neue Generation, July, 1909, p. 303). In France, the well-known judge Magnard, who is highly respected for his approach to cases of infanticide involving young mothers, stated: "I sincerely wish that along with the current institution of marriage we had a free union formed by a simple declaration before a magistrate that grants nearly the same family rights as regular marriage." This sentiment has been widely shared.
In China, although polygamy in the strict sense cannot properly be said to exist, the interests of the child, the woman, and the State are alike safeguarded by enabling a man to enter into a kind of secondary marriage with the mother of his child. "Thanks to this system," Paul d'Enjoy states (La Revue, Sept., 1905), "which allows the husband to marry the woman he desires, without being prevented by previous and undissolved unions, it is only right to remark that there are no seduced and abandoned girls, except such as no law could save from what is really innate depravity; and that there are no illegitimate children except those whose mothers are unhappily nearer to animals by their senses than to human beings by their reason and dignity."
In China, while polygamy in the traditional sense isn't really present, the interests of the child, the woman, and the State are all protected by allowing a man to enter into a kind of secondary marriage with the mother of his child. "Thanks to this system," Paul d'Enjoy states (La Revue, Sept., 1905), "which lets the husband marry the woman he desires without being held back by previous and unresolved unions, it’s fair to say that there are no seduced and abandoned girls, except for those whom no law could save from innate depravity; and that there are no illegitimate children except those whose mothers are unfortunately closer to animals by their senses than to human beings by their reason and dignity."
The new civil code of Japan, which is in many respects so advanced, allows an illegitimate child to be "recognized" by giving notice to the registrar; when a married man so recognizes a child, it appears, the child may be adopted by the wife as her own, though not actually rendered legitimate. This state of things represents a transition stage; it can scarcely be said to recognize the rights of the "recognized" child's mother. Japan, it may be added, has adopted the principle of the automatic legitimation by marriage of the children born to the couple before marriage.
The new civil code of Japan, which is quite progressive in many ways, allows an illegitimate child to be officially "recognized" by notifying the registrar. When a married man recognizes a child this way, the child can be adopted by the wife as her own, although this doesn’t actually make the child legitimate. This situation represents a transitional phase and hardly acknowledges the rights of the recognized child's mother. Additionally, Japan has accepted the principle that children born to a couple before marriage are automatically legitimized upon their marriage.
In Australia, where women possess a larger share than elsewhere in making and administering the laws, some attention is beginning to be given to the rights of illegitimate children. Thus in South Australia, paternity may be proved before birth, and the father (by magistrate's order) provides lodging for one month before and after birth, as well as nurse, doctor, and clothing, furnishing security that he will do so; after birth, at the magistrate's decision, he pays a weekly sum for the child's maintenance. An "illegitimate" mother may also be kept in a public institution at the public expense for six months to enable her to become attached to her child.
In Australia, where women have more influence than in other places when it comes to making and enforcing laws, there is a growing focus on the rights of children born out of wedlock. For example, in South Australia, paternity can be established before the child is born, and the father is required by a magistrate's order to provide housing for one month before and after the birth, as well as cover the costs for a nurse, doctor, and clothing, ensuring he has the means to do so. After the child is born, based on the magistrate's ruling, he must pay a weekly amount for the child's support. Additionally, a mother of an "illegitimate" child may be housed in a public facility at the government's expense for six months to help her bond with her child.
Such provisions are developed from the widely recognized right of the unmarried woman to claim support for her child from its father. In France, indeed, and in the legal codes which follow the French example, it is not legally permitted to inquire into the paternity of an illegitimate child. Such a law is, needless to say, alike unjust to the mother, to the child, and to the State. In Austria, the law goes to the opposite, though certainly more reasonable, extreme, and permits even the mother who has had several lovers to select for herself which she chooses to make responsible for her child. The German code adopts an intermediate course, and comes only to the aid of the unmarried mother who has one lover. In all such cases, however, the aid given is pecuniary only; it insures the mother no recognition or respect, and (as Wahrmund has truly said in his Ehe und Eherecht) it is still necessary to insist on "the unconditional sanctity of motherhood, which is entitled, under whatever circumstances it arises, to the respect and protection of society."
Such provisions come from the widely accepted right of an unmarried woman to seek support for her child from the father. In France, and in legal codes that follow its lead, it's not legally allowed to question the paternity of an illegitimate child. This law is, needless to say, unfair to the mother, the child, and the State. In Austria, the law goes to the opposite but more reasonable extreme, allowing even a mother with multiple partners to choose who she wants to hold responsible for her child. The German code takes a middle ground and only assists an unmarried mother who has one partner. In all these cases, however, the help provided is solely financial; it offers the mother no acknowledgment or respect, and (as Wahrmund accurately stated in his Ehe und Eherecht) it remains essential to emphasize "the unconditional sanctity of motherhood, which deserves, regardless of how it comes about, the respect and protection of society."
It must be added that, from the social point of view, it is not the sexual union which requires legal recognition, but the child which is the product of that union. It would, moreover, be hopeless to attempt to legalize all sexual connection, but it is comparatively easy to legalize all children.
It should be noted that, from a social perspective, it's not the sexual relationship that needs legal acknowledgment, but rather the child that results from that relationship. Additionally, trying to legally recognize every sexual encounter would be futile, but it is relatively simple to provide legal status to all children.
There has been much discussion in the past concerning the particular form which marriage ought to take. Many theorists have exercised their ingenuity in inventing and preaching new and unusual marriage-arrangements as panaceas for social ills; while others have exerted even greater energy in denouncing all such proposals as subversive of the foundations of human society. We may regard all such discussions, on the one side or the other, as idle.
There has been a lot of debate in the past about what marriage should look like. Many theorists have used their creativity to propose and promote new and unconventional marriage arrangements as solutions for social problems, while others have worked even harder to criticize these ideas as threats to the foundations of human society. We can consider all these discussions, whether in favor or against, as pointless.
In the first place marriage customs are far too fundamental, far too intimately blended with the primary substance of human and indeed animal society, to be in the slightest degree shaken by the theories or the practices of mere individuals, or even groups of individuals. Monogamy—the more or less prolonged cohabitation of two individuals of opposite sex—has been the prevailing type of sexual relationship among the higher vertebrates and through the greater part of human history. This is admitted even by those who believe (without any sound evidence) that man has passed through a stage of sexual promiscuity. There have been tendencies to variation in one direction or another, but at the lowest stages and the highest stages, so far as can be seen, monogamy represents the prevailing rule.
First of all, marriage customs are too essential, too deeply intertwined with the core nature of human, and even animal, society to be significantly impacted by the theories or practices of individuals or even groups of people. Monogamy—the more or less extended cohabitation of two individuals of the opposite sex—has been the dominant form of sexual relationship among higher vertebrates and throughout much of human history. This is acknowledged even by those who believe (without any solid evidence) that humans went through a phase of sexual promiscuity. There have been tendencies to shift in one direction or another, but at both the lowest and highest levels, monogamy seems to be the prevailing norm.
It must be said also, in the second place, that the natural prevalence of monogamy as the normal type of sexual relationship by no means excludes variations. Indeed it assumes them. "There is nothing precise in Nature," according to Diderot's saying. The line of Nature is a curve that oscillates from side to side of the norm. Such oscillations inevitably occur in harmony with changes in environmental conditions, and, no doubt, with peculiarities of personal disposition. So long as no arbitrary and merely external attempt is made to force Nature, the vital order is harmoniously maintained. Among certain species of ducks when males are in excess polyandric families are constituted, the two males attending their female partner without jealousy, but when the sexes again become equal in number the monogamic order is restored. The natural human deviations from the monogamic order seem to be generally of this character, and largely conditioned by the social and economic environment. The most common variation, and that which most clearly possesses a biological foundation, is the tendency to polygyny, which is found at all stages of culture, even, in an unrecognized and more or less promiscuous shape, in the highest civilization.[371] It must be remembered, however, that recognized polygyny is not the rule even where it prevails; it is merely permissive; there is never a sufficient excess of women to allow more than a few of the richer and more influential persons to have more than one wife.[372]
It should also be noted that the natural dominance of monogamy as the typical form of sexual relationship doesn’t exclude variations. In fact, it assumes them. “Nature isn’t precise,” as Diderot said. The course of Nature is like a curve that swings back and forth around the norm. These swings inevitably happen in response to changes in environmental conditions, and, of course, to individual personality traits. As long as there's no arbitrary or purely external pressure to force Nature, the natural order remains in balance. For instance, in some species of ducks, when there are more males than females, polyandrous families form, with the two males caring for their female partner without jealousy. However, when the sexes are again in equal numbers, monogamous relationships are restored. The deviations from monogamy observed in humans generally seem to follow this pattern and are largely influenced by the social and economic environment. The most frequent variation, which has a clear biological basis, is the tendency toward polygyny, which appears at all cultural levels, even in an unrecognized and somewhat promiscuous form, in advanced civilizations. It’s important to remember, though, that recognized polygyny isn’t the norm, even where it exists; it’s just allowed. There’s never an adequate surplus of women for more than a few wealthy and influential individuals to have more than one wife.
It has further to be borne in mind that a certain elasticity of the formal side of marriage while, on the one side, it permits variations from the general monogamic order, where such are healthful or needed to restore a balance in natural conditions, on the other hand restrains such variations in so far as they are due to the disturbing influence of artificial constraint. Much of the polygyny, and polyandry also, which prevails among us to-day is an altogether artificial and unnatural form of polygamy. Marriages which on a more natural basis would be dissolved cannot legally be dissolved, and consequently the parties to them, instead of changing their partners and so preserving the natural monogamic order, take on other additional partners and so introduce an unnatural polygamy. There will always be variations from the monogamic order and civilization is certainly not hostile to sexual variation. Whether we reckon these variations as legitimate or illegitimate, they will still take place; of that we may be certain. The path of social wisdom seems to lie on the one hand in making the marriage relationship flexible enough to reduce to a minimum these deviations—not because such deviations are intrinsically bad but because they ought not to be forced into existence—and on the other hand in according to these deviations when they occur such a measure of recognition as will deprive them of injurious influence and enable justice to be done to all the parties concerned. We too often forget that our failure to recognize such variations merely means that we accord in such cases an illegitimate permission to perpetrate injustice. In those parts of the world in which polygyny is recognized as a permissible variation a man is legally held to his natural obligations towards all his sexual mates and towards the children he has by those mates. In no part of the world is polygyny so prevalent as in Christendom; in no part of the world is it so easy for a man to escape the obligations incurred by polygyny. We imagine that if we refuse to recognize the fact of polygyny, we may refuse to recognize any obligations incurred by polygyny. By enabling a man to escape so easily from the obligations of his polygamous relationships we encourage him, if he is unscrupulous, to enter into them; we place a premium on the immorality we loftily condemn.[373] Our polygyny has no legal existence, and therefore its obligations can have no legal existence. The ostrich, it was once imagined, hides its head in the sand and attempts to annihilate facts by refusing to look at them; but there is only one known animal which adopts this course of action, and it is called Man.
It’s important to remember that there is some flexibility in the formal aspects of marriage. While it allows for variations from the typical monogamous structure, particularly when those variations are healthy or necessary to restore balance in natural conditions, it also limits these variations when they arise from the negative effects of artificial constraints. Much of the polygyny and polyandry present in our society today is an entirely artificial and unnatural form of polygamy. Marriages that would more naturally be dissolved cannot be legally ended. As a result, the individuals involved, instead of changing partners and maintaining a natural monogamous order, take on additional partners, creating an unnatural form of polygamy. There will always be deviations from the monogamous norm, and society is certainly not against sexual variation. Whether we view these variations as legitimate or illegitimate, they will still occur—of that we can be sure. The smart approach in society seems to involve making the marriage relationship flexible enough to minimize these deviations—not because such deviations are inherently wrong, but because they shouldn’t be forced into existence—and on the other hand, when these deviations do occur, we should recognize them sufficiently to remove their harmful effects and ensure fairness for everyone involved. We too often forget that failing to acknowledge these variations simply gives an illegal allowance for injustice to happen. In parts of the world where polygyny is accepted as a valid variation, a man is legally responsible for his natural obligations to all his sexual partners and the children he has with them. No region exhibits as much polygyny as Christendom; no place makes it easier for a man to escape his responsibilities that arise from polygyny. We think that by refusing to acknowledge polygyny, we can also deny the obligations that come with it. By allowing a man to easily sidestep the responsibilities of his polygamous relationships, we encourage him—if he lacks morals—to enter into these relationships, thereby rewarding the immorality we publicly condemn. Our polygyny has no legal standing, and therefore its obligations have no legal status. It was once thought that the ostrich hides its head in the sand and tries to eliminate facts by ignoring them, but there is only one known creature that behaves this way, and it’s called Man.
Monogamy, in the fundamental biological sense, represents the natural order into which the majority of sexual facts will always naturally fall because it is the relationship which most adequately corresponds to all the physical and spiritual facts involved. But if we realize that sexual relationships primarily concern only the persons who enter into those relationships, and if we further realize that the interest of society in such relationships is confined to the children which they produce, we shall also realize that to fix by law the number of women with whom a man shall have sexual relationships, and the number of men with whom a woman shall unite herself, is more unreasonable than it would be to fix by law the number of children they shall produce. The State has a right to declare whether it needs few citizens or many; but in attempting to regulate the sexual relationships of its members the State attempts an impossible task and is at the same time guilty of an impertinence.
Monogamy, in a basic biological sense, represents the natural order where most sexual relationships will naturally fit because it aligns with all the physical and emotional factors involved. However, if we understand that sexual relationships primarily involve only the people in those relationships, and that society's interest in these relationships is mainly about the children they produce, we’ll also see that it’s more unreasonable to legally limit the number of women a man can have sexual relationships with or the number of men a woman can be involved with than it is to set a legal limit on how many children they should have. The State has the right to decide whether it needs more or fewer citizens; but when it tries to regulate the sexual relationships of its members, it takes on an impossible task and shows a lack of respect.
There is always a tendency, at certain stages of civilization, to insist on a merely formal and external uniformity, and a corresponding failure to see not only that such uniformity is unreal, but also that it has an injurious effect, in so far as it checks beneficial variations. The tendency is by no means confined to the sexual sphere. In England there is, for instance, a tendency to make building laws which enjoin, in regard to places of human habitation, all sorts of provisions that on the whole are fairly beneficial, but which in practice act injuriously, because they render many simple and excellent human habitations absolutely illegal, merely because such habitations fail to conform to regulations which, under some circumstances, are not only unnecessary, but mischievous.
There’s often a tendency, at certain points in civilization, to push for a purely formal and superficial uniformity, and a corresponding failure to realize not only that this uniformity is fake, but also that it can have harmful effects by stifling beneficial variations. This tendency isn't limited to just the sexual realm. In England, for example, there's a trend to create building laws that require, regarding places where people live, all sorts of rules that are generally quite beneficial, but in reality, these rules can be damaging because they make many simple and great homes completely illegal, simply because they don’t meet standards that, in some cases, are not only unnecessary but also harmful.
Variation is a fact that will exist whether we will or no; it can only become healthful if we recognize and allow for it. We may even have to recognize that it is a more marked tendency in civilization than in more primitive social stages. Thus Gerson argues (Sexual-Probleme, Sept., 1908, p. 538) that just as the civilized man cannot be content with the coarse and monotonous food which satisfies the peasant, so it is in sexual matters; the peasant youth and girl in their sexual relationships are nearly always monogamous, but civilized people, with their more versatile and sensitive tastes, are apt to crave for variety. Sénancour (De l'Amour, vol. ii, "Du Partage," p. 127) seems to admit the possibility of marriage variations, as of sharing a wife, provided nothing is done to cause rivalry, or to impair the soul's candor. Lecky, near the end of his History of European Morals, declared his belief that, while the permanent union of two persons is the normal and prevailing type of marriage, it by no means follows that, in the interests of society, it should be the only form. Remy de Gourmont similarly (Physique de l'Amour, p. 186), while stating that the couple is the natural form of marriage and its prolonged continuance a condition of human superiority, adds that the permanence of the union can only be achieved with difficulty. So, also, Professor W. Thomas (Sex and Society, 1907, p. 193), while regarding monogamy as subserving social needs, adds: "Speaking from the biological standpoint monogamy does not, as a rule, answer to the conditions of highest stimulation, since here the problematical and elusive elements disappear to some extent, and the object of attention has grown so familiar in consciousness that the emotional reactions are qualified. This is the fundamental explanation of the fact that married men and women frequently become interested in others than their partners in matrimony."
Variation is a reality that will exist whether we like it or not; it can only become beneficial if we acknowledge and accept it. We may even need to recognize that it's more pronounced in civilization than in more primitive societies. Gerson argues (Sexual-Probleme, Sept., 1908, p. 538) that just as a civilized person cannot be satisfied with the plain and repetitive food that suffices for a peasant, the same applies to sexual matters; peasant youth and girls in their sexual relationships are almost always monogamous, while civilized individuals, with their more varied and sensitive tastes, tend to crave variety. Sénancour (De l'Amour, vol. ii, "Du Partage," p. 127) acknowledges the possibility of variations in marriage, such as sharing a wife, as long as it doesn't create rivalry or compromise the purity of the soul. Near the end of his History of European Morals, Lecky expresses his belief that, while the permanent union of two people is the typical and prevailing form of marriage, it shouldn't necessarily be the only type for the sake of society. Similarly, Remy de Gourmont (Physique de l'Amour, p. 186) notes that while the couple is the natural structure of marriage and its long-term continuation is essential for human advancement, achieving lasting unions can be challenging. Additionally, Professor W. Thomas (Sex and Society, 1907, p. 193) sees monogamy as serving social needs but adds: "From a biological perspective, monogamy generally doesn't meet the conditions for the highest stimulation, as the mysterious and elusive aspects diminish somewhat, and the focus of attention becomes so familiar in our minds that the emotional responses become muted. This fundamentally explains why married men and women often become interested in others besides their spouses."
Pepys, whose unconscious self-dissection admirably illustrates so many psychological tendencies, clearly shows how—by a logic of feeling deeper than any intellectual logic—the devotion to monogamy subsists side by side with an irresistible passion for sexual variety. With his constantly recurring wayward attraction to a long series of women he retains throughout a deep and unchanging affection for his charming young wife. In the privacy of his Diary he frequently refers to her in terms of endearment which cannot be feigned; he enjoys her society; he is very particular about her dress; he delights in her progress in music, and spends much money on her training; he is absurdly jealous when he finds her in the society of a man. His subsidiary relationships with other women recur irresistibly, but he has no wish either to make them very permanent or to allow them to engross him unduly. Pepys represents a common type of civilized "monogamist" who is perfectly sincere and extremely convinced in his advocacy of monogamy, as he understands it, but at the same time believes and acts on the belief that monogamy by no means excludes the need for sexual variation. Lord Morley's statement (Diderot, vol. ii, p. 20) that "man is instinctively polygamous," can by no means be accepted, but if we interpret it as meaning that man is an instinctively monogamous animal with a concomitant desire for sexual variation, there is much evidence in its favor.
Pepys, whose self-analysis reveals many psychological tendencies, clearly shows how—with emotions that run deeper than any logic—the commitment to monogamy coexists with a strong desire for sexual variety. Despite his ongoing attraction to a long line of women, he maintains a deep and constant love for his charming young wife. In the privacy of his Diary, he often uses genuine endearments for her; he enjoys spending time with her, pays close attention to her outfits, takes pleasure in her musical progress, and invests a lot of money in her training. He becomes absurdly jealous when he sees her with another man. Although he can't resist pursuing relationships with other women, he doesn't want these connections to be long-lasting or to take over his life. Pepys exemplifies a typical civilized "monogamist" who is completely sincere and firmly believes in monogamy as he sees it, yet also believes and acts on the idea that monogamy doesn't rule out the need for sexual variety. While Lord Morley's claim (Diderot, vol. ii, p. 20) that "man is instinctively polygamous" isn't entirely accurate, if we interpret it to mean that man is an inherently monogamous being with a natural desire for sexual variety, there’s a lot of evidence to support that view.
Women must be as free as men to mould their own amatory life. Many consider, however, that such freedom on the part of women will be, and ought to be, exercised within narrower limits (see, e.g., Bloch, Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. X). In part this limitation is considered due to the greater absorption of a woman in the task of breeding and rearing her child, and in part to a less range of psychic activities. A man, as G. Hirth puts it, expressing this view of the matter (Wege zur Liebe, p. 342), "has not only room in his intellectual horizon for very various interests, but his power of erotic expansion is much greater and more differentiated than that of women, although he may lack the intimacy and depth of a woman's devotion."
Women should have the same freedom as men to shape their own romantic lives. However, many believe that this freedom for women will, and should, be exercised within more limited boundaries (see, e.g., Bloch, Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. X). Part of this limitation is attributed to a woman's deeper investment in the responsibilities of bearing and raising children, and part is due to a narrower range of emotional experiences. As G. Hirth states, reflecting this perspective (Wege zur Liebe, p. 342), "a man has the capacity to pursue a broad array of interests, and his ability for romantic exploration is much wider and more varied than that of women, although he might lack the closeness and intensity of a woman's commitment."
It may be argued that, since variations in the sexual order will inevitably take place, whether or not they are recognized or authorized, no harm is likely to be done by using the weight of social and legal authority on the side of that form which is generally regarded as the best, and, so far as possible, covering the other forms with infamy. There are many obvious defects in such an attitude, apart from the supremely important fact that to cast infamy on sexual relationships is to exert a despicable cruelty on women, who are inevitably the chief sufferers. Not the least is the injustice and the hampering of vital energy which it inflicts on the better and more scrupulous people to the advantage of the worse and less scrupulous. This always happens when authority exerts its power in favor of a form. When, in the thirteenth century, Alexander III—one of the greatest and most effective potentates who ever ruled Christendom—was consulted by the Bishop of Exeter concerning subdeacons who persisted in marrying, the Pope directed him to inquire into the lives and characters of the offenders; if they were of regular habits and staid morality, they were to be forcibly separated and the wives driven out; if they were men of notoriously disorderly character, they were to be permitted to retain their wives, if they so desired (Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, third edition, vol. i, p. 396). It was an astute policy, and was carried out by the same Pope elsewhere, but it is easy to see that it was altogether opposed to morality in every sense of the term. It destroyed the happiness and the efficiency of the best men; it left the worst men absolutely free. To-day we are quite willing to recognize the evil result of this policy; it was dictated by a Pope and carried out seven hundred years ago. Yet in England we carry out exactly the same policy to-day by means of our separation orders, which are scattered broadcast among the population. None of the couples thus separated—and never disciplined to celibacy as are the Catholic clergy of to-day—may marry again; we, in effect, bid the more scrupulous among them to become celibates, and to the less scrupulous we grant permission to do as they like. This process is carried on by virtue of the collective inertia of the community, and when it is supported by arguments, if that ever happens, they are of an antiquarian character which can only call forth a pitying smile.
It can be argued that, since changes in sexual norms will inevitably happen, whether they are acknowledged or accepted, there's no real harm in using social and legal authority to support the form that is generally seen as the best, while demonizing other forms as much as possible. There are many clear flaws in this approach, aside from the crucial fact that stigmatizing sexual relationships is a cruel injustice to women, who are the primary victims. Another significant issue is the unfairness and restriction of potential that it places on the more virtuous and ethical individuals to benefit those who are less principled. This always occurs when authority uses its influence to favor a certain form. For example, in the thirteenth century, Alexander III—one of the most significant and effective rulers in Christendom—was consulted by the Bishop of Exeter about subdeacons who continued to marry. The Pope instructed him to investigate the lives and characters of these men; if they were of decent behavior and morals, they were to be forcibly separated from their wives; but if they were known to be disorderly, they could keep their wives if they wanted to (Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, third edition, vol. i, p. 396). It was a clever policy, executed by the same Pope elsewhere, but it’s clear that it fundamentally contradicted morality in any sense. It undermined the happiness and effectiveness of the best individuals while leaving the worst completely unpunished. Today, we readily recognize the negative consequences of this policy, which was directed by a Pope seven hundred years ago. Yet in England, we implement the exact same policy today through our separation orders, which are widespread among the population. None of the couples separated in this way—who are not disciplined to celibacy in the same manner as modern Catholic clergy—are allowed to remarry; effectively, we force the more ethical among them into a celibate lifestyle while granting the less careful the freedom to do as they wish. This process continues because of the collective inertia of the community, and when it is justified, if it ever is, the arguments used are so outdated they can only elicit a pitying smile.
It may be added that there is a further reason why the custom of branding sexual variations from the norm as "immoral" is not so harmless as some affect to believe: such variations appear to be not uncommon among men and women of superlative ability whose powers are needed unimpeded in the service of mankind. To attempt to fit such persons into the narrow moulds which suit the majority is not only an injustice to them as individuals, but it is an offence against society, which may fairly claim that its best members shall not be hampered in its service. The notion that the person whose sexual needs differ from those of the average is necessarily a socially bad person, is a notion unsupported by facts. Every case must be judged on its own merits.
It can also be said that there's another reason why labeling sexual variations from the norm as "immoral" isn't as harmless as some like to believe: these variations seem to be quite common among highly capable men and women whose talents are essential for the betterment of society. Trying to force these individuals into the narrow molds that fit the majority is not only unfair to them but also a disservice to society, which has the right to expect that its best members are not held back from contributing. The idea that someone whose sexual needs differ from the average is automatically a bad person is a belief that facts do not support. Each case should be evaluated on its own merits.
Undoubtedly the most common variation from normal monogamy has in all stages of human culture been polygyny or the sexual union of one man with more than one woman. It has sometimes been socially and legally recognized, and sometimes unrecognized, but in either case it has not failed to occur. Polyandry, or the union of a woman with more than one man, has been comparatively rare and for intelligible reasons: men have most usually been in a better position, economically and legally, to organize a household with themselves as the centre; a woman is, unlike a man, by nature and often by custom unfitted for intercourse for considerable periods at a time; a woman, moreover, has her thoughts and affections more concentrated on her children. Apart from this the biological masculine traditions point to polygyny much more than the feminine traditions point to polyandry. Although it is true that a woman can undergo a much greater amount of sexual intercourse than a man, it also remains true that the phenomena of courtship in nature have made it the duty of the male to be alert in offering his sexual attention to the female, whose part it has been to suspend her choice coyly until she is sure of her preference. Polygynic conditions have also proved advantageous, as they have permitted the most vigorous and successful members of a community to have the largest number of mates and so to transmit their own superior qualities.
Undoubtedly, the most common deviation from typical monogamy throughout human history has been polygyny, which is when one man has sexual relations with multiple women. This arrangement has sometimes been socially and legally accepted, and other times not recognized at all, but it has consistently been practiced. Polyandry, where a woman partners with several men, has been relatively uncommon for understandable reasons: men have often had the economic and legal advantage to organize a household centered around themselves; a woman, unlike a man, is naturally and often socially less able to engage in sexual relations for extended periods; furthermore, a woman tends to focus more on her children. Additionally, biological norms have historically favored polygyny much more than female-centric traditions have favored polyandry. While it's true that a woman can engage in sexual activity far more than a man, it's also true that in nature, the male is generally expected to be proactive in displaying his sexual interest, while the female typically holds off on making a choice until she is confident in her preference. Polygynous arrangements have also shown benefits, as they allow the most vigorous and successful individuals in a community to have the most partners, thus enabling them to pass on their superior traits.
"Polygamy," writes Woods Hutchinson (Contemporary Review, Oct., 1904), though he recognizes the advantages of monogamy, "as a racial institution, among animals as among men, has many solid and weighty considerations in its favor, and has resulted in both human and pre-human times, in the production of a very high type of both individual and social development." He points out that it promotes intelligence, coöperation, and division of labor, while the keen competition for women weeds out the weaker and less attractive males.
"Polygamy," writes Woods Hutchinson (Contemporary Review, Oct., 1904), although he acknowledges the benefits of monogamy, "as a social construct, among animals as well as humans, has many strong and significant reasons supporting it, and has led to, in both human and pre-human eras, the emergence of a very advanced form of both individual and social development." He notes that it encourages intelligence, cooperation, and division of labor, while the intense competition for women eliminates the weaker and less appealing males.
Among our European ancestors, alike among Germans and Celts, polygyny and other sexual forms existed as occasional variations. Tacitus noted polygyny in Germany, and Cæsar found in Britain that brothers would hold their wives in common, the children being reckoned to the man to whom the woman had been first given in marriage (see, e.g., Traill's Social England, vol. i, p. 103, for a discussion of this point). The husband's assistant, also, who might be called in to impregnate the wife when the husband was impotent, existed in Germany, and was indeed a general Indo-Germanic institution (Schrader, Reallexicon, art. "Zeugungshelfer"). The corresponding institution of the concubine has been still more deeply rooted and widespread. Up to comparatively modern times, indeed, in accordance with the traditions of Roman law, the concubine held a recognized and honorable position, below that of a wife but with definite legal rights, though it was not always, or indeed usually, legal for a married man to have a concubine. In ancient Wales, as well as in Rome, the concubine was accepted and never despised (R. B. Holt, "Marriage Laws of the Cymri," Journal Anthropological Institute, Aug. and Nov., 1898, p. 155). The fact that when a concubine entered the house of a married man her dignity and legal position were less than those of the wife preserved domestic peace and safeguarded the wife's interests. (A Korean husband cannot take a concubine under his roof without his wife's permission, but she rarely objects, and seems to enjoy the companionship, says Louise Jordan Miln, Quaint Korea, 1895, p. 92.) In old Europe, we must remember, as Dufour points out in speaking of the time of Charlemagne (Histoire de la Prostitution, vol. iii, p. 226), "concubine" was an honorable term; the concubine was by no means a mistress, and she could be accused of adultery just the same as a wife. In England, late in the thirteenth century, Bracton speaks of the concubina legitima as entitled to certain rights and considerations, and it was the same in other parts of Europe, sometimes for several centuries later (see Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, vol. i, p. 230). The early Christian Church was frequently inclined to recognize the concubine, at all events if attached to an unmarried man, for we may trace in the Church "the wish to look upon every permanent union of man or woman as possessing the character of a marriage in the eyes of God, and, therefore, in the judgment of the Church" (art. "Concubinage," Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities). This was the feeling of St. Augustine (who had himself, before his conversion, had a concubine who was apparently a Christian), and the Council of Toledo admitted an unmarried man who was faithful to a concubine. As the law of the Catholic Church grew more and more rigid, it necessarily lost touch with human needs. It was not so in the early Church during the great ages of its vital growth. In those ages even the strenuous general rule of monogamy was relaxed when such relaxation seemed reasonable. This was so, for instance, in the case of sexual impotency. Thus early in the eighth century Gregory II, writing to Boniface, the apostle of Germany, in answer to a question by the latter, replies that when a wife is incapable from physical infirmity from fulfilling her marital duties it is permissible for the husband to take a second wife, though he must not withdraw maintenance from the first. A little later Archbishop Egbert of York, in his Dialogus de Institutione Ecclesiastica, though more cautiously, admits that when one of two married persons is infirm the other, with the permission of the infirm one, may marry again, but the infirm one is not allowed to marry again during the other's life. Impotency at the time of marriage, of course, made the marriage void without the intervention of any ecclesiastical law. But Aquinas, and later theologians, allow that an excessive disgust for a wife justifies a man in regarding himself as impotent in relation to her. These rules are, of course, quite distinct from the permissions to break the marriage laws granted to kings and princes; such permissions do not count as evidence of the Church's rules, for, as the Council of Constantinople prudently decided in 809, "Divine law can do nothing against Kings" (art. "Bigamy," Dictionary of Christian Antiquities). The law of monogamy was also relaxed in cases of enforced or voluntary desertion. Thus the Council of Vermerie (752) enacted that if a wife will not accompany her husband when he is compelled to follow his lord into another land, he may marry again, provided he sees no hope of returning. Theodore of Canterbury (688), again, pronounces that if a wife is carried away by the enemy and her husband cannot redeem her, he may marry again after an interval of a year, or, if there is a chance of redeeming her, after an interval of five years; the wife may do the same. Such rules, though not general, show, as Meyrick points out (art. "Marriage," Dictionary of Christian Antiquities), a willingness "to meet particular cases as they arise."
Among our European ancestors, including Germans and Celts, polygyny and other sexual arrangements were sometimes practiced. Tacitus noted polygyny in Germany, and Cæsar observed in Britain that brothers shared their wives, with children attributed to the man to whom the woman was first married (see, e.g., Traill's Social England, vol. i, p. 103, for a discussion of this point). The husband's assistant, who might step in to impregnate the wife when the husband was impotent, also existed in Germany and was actually a widespread Indo-Germanic practice (Schrader, Reallexicon, art. "Zeugungshelfer"). The concept of concubinage was even more widespread and deeply established. Until relatively modern times, in line with Roman law traditions, concubines held a recognized and respected position, under that of a wife but with specific legal rights, although it wasn't usually legal for a married man to have a concubine. In ancient Wales and Rome, the concubine was accepted and respected (R. B. Holt, "Marriage Laws of the Cymri," Journal Anthropological Institute, Aug. and Nov., 1898, p. 155). The fact that when a concubine entered the home of a married man her status and legal standing were less than that of the wife helped maintain domestic harmony and protect the wife's interests. (A Korean husband cannot take a concubine into his home without his wife's permission, but she rarely opposes it and seems to appreciate the companionship, says Louise Jordan Miln, Quaint Korea, 1895, p. 92.) In old Europe, it is essential to remember, as Dufour mentions in referring to the time of Charlemagne (Histoire de la Prostitution, vol. iii, p. 226), "concubine" was an honorable term; the concubine was not considered a mistress and could be accused of adultery just like a wife. In England, in the late thirteenth century, Bracton referred to the concubina legitima as entitled to certain rights and consideration, which was similar in other parts of Europe, sometimes for centuries afterward (see Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, vol. i, p. 230). The early Christian Church often recognized concubines, especially if attached to unmarried men, as there was a tendency to view any long-term union of a man and woman as having the character of marriage in God's eyes, and thus in the judgment of the Church (art. "Concubinage," Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities). This view was held by St. Augustine (who himself had a concubine before his conversion, apparently a Christian), and the Council of Toledo accepted an unmarried man who remained faithful to his concubine. However, as Catholic Church law became more rigid, it increasingly detached from human needs. This was different in the early Church during its period of significant growth. In those times, even the strict general rule of monogamy was relaxed when appropriate. For example, in the early eighth century, Gregory II responded to Boniface, the missionary to Germany, by saying that if a wife was physically unable to fulfill her marital duties, it was acceptable for the husband to take a second wife, although he could not stop supporting the first. Later, Archbishop Egbert of York, in his Dialogus de Institutione Ecclesiastica, cautiously acknowledged that if one of two married individuals was infirm, the other, with the infirm person's permission, might marry again, but the infirm person could not remarry while the other was alive. Impotence at the time of marriage, of course, invalidated the marriage without needing ecclesiastical intervention. However, Aquinas and later theologians allowed that a man could consider himself impotent toward his wife due to excessive disgust for her. These rules are, of course, distinct from exceptions granted to kings and princes; such permissions do not reflect the Church's regulations, as the Council of Constantinople wisely stated in 809, "Divine law can do nothing against Kings" (art. "Bigamy," Dictionary of Christian Antiquities). The monogamy law was also relaxed in cases of forced or voluntary desertion. Thus, the Council of Vermerie (752) decreed that if a wife refused to accompany her husband when he was obligated to follow his lord to another land, he could marry again if he saw no hope of returning. Theodore of Canterbury (688) also declared that if a wife's husband cannot redeem her after she is captured by an enemy, he could remarry after one year, or after five years if there was a chance of redeeming her; the wife could similarly remarry. Although such rules were not widespread, they illustrate, as Meyrick points out (art. "Marriage," Dictionary of Christian Antiquities), a willingness "to meet particular cases as they arise."
As the Canon law grew rigid and the Catholic Church lost its vital adaptibility, sexual variations ceased to be recognized within its sphere. We have to wait for the Reformation for any further movement. Many of the early Protestant Reformers, especially in Germany, were prepared to admit a considerable degree of vital flexibility in sexual relationships. Thus Luther advised married women with impotent husbands, in cases where there was no wish or opportunity for divorce, to have sexual relations with another man, by preference the husband's brother; the children were to be reckoned to the husband ("Die Sexuelle Frage bei Luther," Mutterschutz, Sept., 1908).
As Canon law became more rigid and the Catholic Church lost its essential adaptability, sexual variations were no longer recognized within its framework. We had to wait for the Reformation for any further progress. Many of the early Protestant Reformers, particularly in Germany, were open to embracing a significant degree of flexibility in sexual relationships. For example, Luther advised married women with impotent husbands, in situations where divorce was not desired or possible, to have sexual relations with another man, preferably the husband’s brother; the children were to be considered as belonging to the husband ("Die Sexuelle Frage bei Luther," Mutterschutz, Sept., 1908).
In England the Puritan spirit, which so largely occupied itself with the reform of marriage, could not fail to be concerned with the question of sexual variations, and from time to time we find the proposal to legalize polygyny. Thus, in 1658, "A Person of Quality" published in London a small pamphlet dedicated to the Lord Protector, entitled A Remedy for Uncleanness. It was in the form of a number of queries, asking why we should not admit polygamy for the avoidance of adultery and infanticide. The writer inquires whether it may not "stand with a gracious spirit, and be every way consistent with the principles of a man fearing God and loving holiness, to have more women than one to his proper use.... He that takes another man's ox or ass is doubtless a transgressor; but he that puts himself out of the occasion of that temptation by keeping of his own seems to be a right honest and well-meaning man."
In England, the Puritan spirit, which was heavily focused on marriage reform, was naturally concerned with issues of sexual variations, and occasionally, there were proposals to legalize polygyny. For instance, in 1658, "A Person of Quality" published a small pamphlet in London dedicated to the Lord Protector, titled A Remedy for Uncleanness. It took the form of a series of questions, asking why we shouldn't allow polygamy to prevent adultery and infanticide. The writer asks whether it might not "align with a gracious spirit, and be fully consistent with the principles of a God-fearing man who loves holiness, to have more than one wife for his proper use.... He who takes another man's ox or donkey is undoubtedly a wrongdoer; but he who avoids that temptation by keeping his own seems to be a genuinely honest and well-meaning man."
More than a century later (1780), an able, learned, and distinguished London clergyman of high character (who had been a lawyer before entering the Church), the Rev. Martin Madan, also advocated polygamy in a book called Thelyphthora; or, a Treatise on Female Ruin. Madan had been brought into close contact with prostitution through a chaplaincy at the Lock Hospital, and, like the Puritan advocate of polygamy, he came to the conclusion that only by the reform of marriage is it possible to work against prostitution and the evils of sexual intercourse outside marriage. His remarkable book aroused much controversy and strong feeling against the author, so that he found it desirable to leave London and settle in the country. Projects of marriage reform have never since come from the Church, but from philosophers and moralists, though not rarely from writers of definitely religious character. Sénancour, who was so delicate and sensitive a moralist in the sexual sphere, introduced a temperate discussion of polygamy into his De l'Amour (vol. ii, pp. 117-126). It seemed to him to be neither positively contrary nor positively conformed to the general tendency of our present conventions, and he concluded that "the method of conciliation, in part, would be no longer to require that the union of a man and a woman should only cease with the death of one of them." Cope, the biologist, expressed a somewhat more decided opinion. Under some circumstances, if all three parties agreed, he saw no objection to polygyny or polyandry. "There are some cases of hardship," he said, "which such permission would remedy. Such, for instance, would be the case where the man or woman had become the victim of a chronic disease; or, when either party should be childless, and in other contingencies that could be imagined." There would be no compulsion in any direction, and full responsibility as at present. Such cases could only arise exceptionally, and would not call for social antagonism. For the most part, Cope remarks, "the best way to deal with polygamy is to let it alone" (E. D. Cope, "The Marriage Problem," Open Court, Nov. 15 and 22, 1888). In England, Dr. John Chapman, the editor of the Westminster Review, and a close associate of the leaders of the Radical movement in the Victorian period, was opposed to State dictation as regards the form of marriage, and believed that a certain amount of sexual variation would be socially beneficial. Thus he wrote in 1884 (in a private letter): "I think that as human beings become less selfish polygamy [i.e., polygyny], and even polyandry, in an ennobled form, will become increasingly frequent."
More than a century later (1780), a skilled, knowledgeable, and respected London clergyman of high character (who had been a lawyer before joining the Church), the Rev. Martin Madan, also supported polygamy in a book called Thelyphthora; or, a Treatise on Female Ruin. Madan had been closely involved with prostitution through a chaplaincy at the Lock Hospital, and, similar to the Puritan who advocated for polygamy, he concluded that reforming marriage was essential to combat prostitution and the problems of sexual relations outside of marriage. His notable book sparked a lot of controversy and strong opposition toward the author, leading him to realize it was best to leave London and move to the countryside. Since then, proposals for marriage reform have mainly come from philosophers and moralists rather than the Church, although some have emerged from writers with a clearly religious perspective. Sénancour, who was a sensitive moralist on sexual matters, included a balanced discussion of polygamy in his De l'Amour (vol. ii, pp. 117-126). He believed it was neither entirely against nor entirely in line with our current social conventions, concluding that "the method of conciliation, in part, would be no longer to require that the union of a man and a woman should only cease with the death of one of them." Cope, the biologist, expressed a somewhat stronger opinion. Under certain conditions, if all three parties agreed, he saw no reason to oppose polygyny or polyandry. "There are some cases of hardship," he noted, "which such permission would address. For instance, when a man or woman was suffering from a chronic illness, or when either party was childless, among other scenarios that could be imagined." There wouldn't be any compulsion in any direction, and full responsibility would remain as it is now. Such cases would only happen rarely and wouldn’t require social opposition. Most of the time, Cope remarked, "the best way to deal with polygamy is to let it alone" (E. D. Cope, "The Marriage Problem," Open Court, Nov. 15 and 22, 1888). In England, Dr. John Chapman, the editor of the Westminster Review, and a close ally of the Radical movement leaders during the Victorian era, opposed State regulation regarding the form of marriage and believed that some degree of sexual variety would be beneficial for society. Thus, he wrote in 1884 (in a private letter): "I think that as humans become less selfish, polygamy [i.e., polygyny], and even polyandry, in an improved form, will become increasingly common."
James Hinton, who, a few years earlier, had devoted much thought and attention to the sexual question, and regarded it as indeed the greatest of moral problems, was strongly in favor of a more vital flexibility of marriage regulations, an adaptation to human needs such as the early Christian Church admitted. Marriage, he declared, must be "subordinated to service," since marriage, like the Sabbath, is made for man and not man for marriage. Thus in case of one partner becoming insane he would permit the other partner to marry again, the claim of the insane partner, in case of recovery, still remaining valid. That would be a form of polygamy, but Hinton was careful to point out that by "polygamy" he meant "less a particular marriage-order than such an order as best serves good, and which therefore must be essentially variable. Monogamy may be good, even the only good order, if of free choice; but a law for it is another thing. The sexual relationship must be a natural thing. The true social life will not be any fixed and definite relationship, as of monogamy, polygamy, or anything else, but a perfect subordination of every sexual relationship whatever to reason and human good."
James Hinton, who had spent a lot of time thinking about sexual matters a few years earlier and considered it one of the biggest moral challenges, strongly supported a more flexible approach to marriage rules—an adjustment to human needs similar to what the early Christian Church accepted. He stated that marriage should be "subordinated to service," emphasizing that marriage, like the Sabbath, is meant to benefit people, not the other way around. Therefore, if one partner became mentally ill, he would allow the other partner to remarry, with the insane partner's claim still valid in case they recovered. This would be a form of polygamy, but Hinton carefully clarified that by "polygamy," he meant "less a specific marriage system than one that best serves the greater good, and which must therefore be inherently flexible. Monogamy can be good, possibly the only ideal choice, if it’s chosen freely; however, imposing a law about it is a different matter. The sexual relationship should be a natural thing. The true social life will not conform to any fixed relationship, whether monogamy, polygamy, or anything else, but rather a complete subordination of every sexual relationship to reason and human well-being."
Ellen Key, who is an enthusiastic advocate of monogamy, and who believes that the civilized development of personal love removes all danger of the growth of polygamy, still admits the existence of variations. She has in mind such solutions of difficult problems as Goethe had before him when he proposed at first in his Stella to represent the force of affection and tender memories as too strong to admit of the rupture of an old bond in the presence of a new bond. The problem of sexual variation, she remarks, however (Liebe und Ethik, p. 12), has changed its form under modern conditions; it is no longer a struggle between the demand of society for a rigid marriage-order and the demand of the individual for sexual satisfaction, but it has become the problem of harmonizing the ennoblement of the race with heightened requirements of erotic happiness. She also points out that the existence of a partner who requires the other partner's care as a nurse or as an intellectual companion by no means deprives that other partner of the right to fatherhood or motherhood, and that such rights must be safeguarded (Ellen Key, Ueber Liebe und Ehe, pp. 166-168).
Ellen Key, a strong supporter of monogamy, believes that the civilized growth of personal love eliminates any risk of polygamy emerging, yet she acknowledges that variations exist. She refers to the kind of solutions to complex problems that Goethe explored when he initially proposed in his Stella that the power of affection and cherished memories is too strong to allow for breaking an old bond in the face of a new one. However, she notes that the issue of sexual variation has evolved under modern circumstances; it’s no longer a conflict between society's demand for a strict marriage structure and the individual's need for sexual fulfillment, but rather the challenge of balancing the improvement of the human race with the increased desire for sexual happiness. She also highlights that having a partner who needs care, whether as a caregiver or intellectual companion, does not take away the other partner's right to be a parent, and that these rights must be protected (Ellen Key, Ueber Liebe und Ehe, pp. 166-168).
A prominent and extreme advocate of polygyny, not as a simple rare variation, but as a marriage order superior to monogamy, is to be found at the present day in Professor Christian von Ehrenfels of Prague (see, e.g., his Sexualethik, 1908; "Die Postulate des Lebens," Sexual-Probleme, Oct., 1908; and letter to Ellen Key in her Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 466). Ehrenfels believes that the number of men inapt for satisfactory reproduction is much larger than that of women, and that therefore when these are left out of account, a polygynic marriage order becomes necessary. He calls this "reproduction-marriage" (Zeugungsehe), and considers that it will entirely replace the present marriage order, to which it is morally superior. It would be based on private contracts. Ehrenfels holds that women would offer no objection, as a woman, he believes, attaches less importance to a man as a wooer than as the father of her child. Ehrenfels's doctrine has been seriously attacked from many sides, and his proposals are not in the line of our progress. Any radical modification of the existing monogamic order is not to be expected, even if it were generally recognized, which cannot be said to be the case, that it is desirable. The question of sexual variations, it must be remembered, is not a question of introducing an entirely new form of marriage, but only of recognizing the rights of individuals, in exceptional cases, to adopt such aberrant forms, and of recognizing the corresponding duties of such individuals to accept the responsibilities of any aberrant marriage forms they may find it best to adopt. So far as the question of sexual variations is more than this, it is, as Hinton argued, a dynamical method of working towards the abolition of the perilous and dangerous promiscuity of prostitution. A rigid marriage order involves prostitution; a flexible marriage order largely—though not, it may be, entirely—renders prostitution unnecessary. The democratic morality of the present day, so far as the indications at present go, is opposed to the encouragement of a quasi-slave class, with diminished social rights, such as prostitutes always constitute in a more or less marked degree. It is fairly evident, also, that the rapidly growing influence of medical hygiene is on the same side. We may, therefore, reasonably expect in the future a slow though steady increase in the recognition, and even the extension, of those variations of the monogamic order which have, in reality, never ceased to exist.
A prominent and extreme advocate of polygyny—not just a rare variation but as a marriage system superior to monogamy—is currently found in Professor Christian von Ehrenfels of Prague (see, e.g., his Sexualethik, 1908; "Die Postulate des Lebens," Sexual-Probleme, Oct., 1908; and a letter to Ellen Key in her Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 466). Ehrenfels believes that the number of men who are unsuited for satisfactory reproduction is much larger than that of women, and therefore, when excluding these men, a polygynic marriage system becomes necessary. He refers to this as "reproduction-marriage" (Zeugungsehe) and believes it will completely replace the current marriage system, which he sees as morally inferior. It would be based on private contracts. Ehrenfels argues that women wouldn’t object because, he believes, a woman cares more about a man as the father of her child than as a suitor. Ehrenfels's views have been seriously criticized from many angles, and his proposals don’t align with our progress. It’s unlikely we’ll see any radical changes to the existing monogamous system, even if it were widely recognized as desirable, which it cannot be said to be at this time. It’s important to remember that the issue of sexual variations isn’t about introducing a completely new form of marriage, but rather about acknowledging the rights of individuals to adopt such alternative forms in exceptional cases, as well as recognizing their corresponding responsibilities in accepting any obligations of these alternative marriage forms they may choose. As far as the question of sexual variations goes beyond this, it is, as Hinton argued, a dynamic method aimed at reducing the dangerous and risky promiscuity associated with prostitution. A rigid marriage system leads to prostitution; a flexible marriage system makes it largely—though perhaps not entirely—unnecessary. The democratic morality of today, based on current trends, opposes the encouragement of a quasi-slave class, with reduced social rights, such as prostitutes tend to represent to varying degrees. It’s also quite clear that the increasing influence of medical hygiene is aligned with this viewpoint. Therefore, we can reasonably expect a gradual but steady acceptance and even expansion of those variations of the monogamous system that have, in reality, never wholly disappeared.
It is lamentable that at this period of the world's history, nearly two thousand years after the wise legislators of Rome had completed their work, it should still be necessary to conclude that we are to-day only beginning to place marriage on a reasonable and humane basis. I have repeatedly pointed out how largely the Canon law has been responsible for this arrest of development. One may say, indeed, that the whole attitude of the Church, after it had once acquired complete worldly dominance, must be held responsible. In the earlier centuries the attitude of Christianity was, on the whole, admirable. It held aloft great ideals but it refrained from enforcing those ideals at all costs; thus its ideals remained genuine and could not degenerate into mere hypocritical empty forms; much flexibility was allowed when it seemed to be for human good and made for the avoidance of evil and injustice. But when the Church attained temporal power, and when that power was concentrated in the hands of Popes who subordinated moral and religious interests to political interests, all the claims of reason and humanity were flung to the winds. The ideal was no more a fact than it was before, but it was now treated as a fact. Human relationships remained what they were before, as complicated and as various, but henceforth one rigid pattern, admirable as an ideal but worse than empty as a form, was arbitrarily set up, and all deviations from it treated either as non-existent or damnable. The vitality was crushed out of the most central human institutions, and they are only to-day beginning to lift their heads afresh.
It’s unfortunate that at this point in history, nearly two thousand years after the wise lawmakers of Rome finished their work, we are just beginning to put marriage on a rational and humane foundation. I have repeatedly pointed out how much the Canon law has contributed to this halt in progress. One could argue that the entire stance of the Church, after it gained total worldly power, is to blame. In the earlier centuries, Christianity's attitude was generally commendable. It held up great ideals but didn’t insist on enforcing them at all costs; as a result, these ideals remained authentic and didn’t devolve into mere hypocritical rituals. There was much flexibility allowed when it seemed to benefit humanity and prevent evil and injustice. But once the Church gained temporal power, and that power was concentrated in the hands of Popes who prioritized political interests over moral and religious ones, all claims to reason and humanity were disregarded. The ideal was no more a reality than it had been before, but now it was treated as if it were. Human relationships remained complex and varied, but from then on, one rigid model—laudable as an ideal but utterly lacking as a practice—was arbitrarily imposed, and all variations from it were regarded as either non-existent or sinful. The essence was drained from the most fundamental human institutions, and they are only now starting to rise again.
If—to sum up—we consider the course which the regulation of marriage has run during the Christian era, the only period which immediately concerns us, it is not difficult to trace the main outlines. Marriage began as a private arrangement, which the Church, without being able to control, was willing to bless, as it also blessed many other secular affairs of men, making no undue attempt to limit its natural flexibility to human needs. Gradually and imperceptibly, however, without the medium of any law, Christianity gained the complete control of marriage, coördinated it with its already evolved conceptions of the evil of lust, of the virtue of chastity, of the mortal sin of fornication, and, having through the influence of these dominating conceptions limited the flexibility of marriage in every possible direction, it placed it on a lofty but narrow pedestal as the sacrament of matrimony. For reasons which by no means lay in the nature of the sexual relationships, but which probably seemed cogent to sacerdotal legislators who assimilated it to ordination, matrimony was declared indissoluble. Nothing was so easy to enter as the gate of matrimony, but, after the manner of a mouse-trap, it opened inwards and not outwards; once in there was no way out alive. The Church's regulation of marriage while, like the celibacy of the clergy, it was a success from the point of view of ecclesiastical politics, and even at first from the point of view of civilization, for it at least introduced order into a chaotic society, was in the long run a failure from the point of view of society and morals. On the one hand it drifted into absurd subtleties and quibbles; on the other, not being based on either reason or humanity, it had none of that vital adaptability to the needs of life, which early Christianity, while holding aloft austere ideals, still largely retained. On the side of tradition this code of marriage law became awkward and impracticable; on the biological side it was hopelessly false. The way was thus prepared for the Protestant reintroduction of the conception of marriage as a contract, that conception being, however, brought forward less on its merits than as a protest against the difficulties and absurdities of the Catholic Canon law. The contractive view, which still largely persists even to-day, speedily took over much of the Canon law doctrines of marriage, becoming in practice a kind of reformed and secularized Canon law. It was somewhat more adapted to modern needs, but it retained much of the rigidity of the Catholic marriage without its sacramental character, and it never made any attempt to become more than nominally contractive. It has been of the nature of an incongruous compromise and has represented a transitional phase towards free private marriage. We can recognize that phase in the tendency, well marked in all civilized lands, to an ever increasing flexibility of marriage. The idea, and even the fact, of marriage by consent and divorce by failure of that consent, which we are now approaching, has never indeed been quite extinct. In the Latin countries it has survived with the tradition of Roman law; in the English-speaking countries it is bound up with the spirit of Puritanism which insists that in the things that concern the individual alone the individual himself shall be the supreme judge. That doctrine as applied to marriage was in England magnificently asserted by the genius of Milton, and in America it has been a leaven which is still working in marriage legislation towards an inevitable goal which is scarcely yet in sight. The marriage system of the future, as it moves along its present course, will resemble the old Christian system in that it will recognize the sacred and sacramental character of the sexual relationship, and it will resemble the civil conception in that it will insist that marriage, so far as it involves procreation, shall be publicly registered by the State. But in opposition to the Church it will recognize that marriage, in so far as it is purely a sexual relationship, is a private matter the conditions of which must be left to the persons who alone are concerned in it; and in opposition to the civil theory it will recognize that marriage is in its essence a fact and not a contract, though it may give rise to contracts, so long as such contracts do not touch that essential fact. And in one respect it will go beyond either the ecclesiastical conception or the civil conception. Man has in recent times gained control of his own procreative powers, and that control involves a shifting of the centre of gravity of marriage, in so far as marriage is an affair of the State, from the vagina to the child which is the fruit of the womb. Marriage as a state institution will centre, not around the sexual relationship, but around the child which is the outcome of that relationship. In so far as marriage is an inviolable public contract it will be of such a nature that it will be capable of automatically covering with its protection every child that is born into the world, so that every child may possess a legal mother and a legal father. On the one side, therefore, marriage is tending to become less stringent; on the other side it is tending to become more stringent. On the personal side it is a sacred and intimate relationship with which the State has no concern; on the social side it is the assumption of the responsible public sponsorship of a new member of the State. Some among us are working to further one of these aspects of marriage, some to further the other aspect. Both are indispensable to establish a perfect harmony. It is necessary to hold the two aspects of marriage apart, in order to do equal justice to the individual and to society, but in so far as marriage approaches its ideal state those two aspects become one.
If we sum up the way marriage has been regulated during the Christian era, which is the only period that directly matters to us, it's not hard to outline the main points. Marriage started as a private agreement that the Church was willing to bless, even though it couldn't control it, similar to how it blessed many other worldly matters, without excessively trying to restrict its natural flexibility to human needs. Gradually and subtly, without any laws, Christianity gained complete control over marriage, aligning it with its developing views on lust's evil, chastity's virtue, and fornication's mortal sin. As it imposed these dominating ideas, it restricted marriage's flexibility in every direction, placing it on a lofty but narrow pedestal as the sacrament of matrimony. For reasons that didn't stem from the nature of sexual relationships but likely seemed compelling to the clerical lawmakers who aligned it with ordination, matrimony was declared indissoluble. It was incredibly easy to enter the gate of matrimony, but like a mouse-trap, it opened inward and not outward; once you were in, there was no way out alive. The Church's regulation of marriage, while it was politically successful for the Church and, initially, helped bring order to a chaotic society, ultimately failed from a societal and moral standpoint. On one hand, it fell into ridiculous subtleties and quibbles; on the other, because it wasn't based on reason or humanity, it lacked the vital adaptability to life's needs that early Christianity, despite its strict ideals, still largely maintained. From a traditional perspective, this marriage law code became awkward and impractical; from a biological standpoint, it was completely false. This situation paved the way for the Protestant revival of the idea of marriage as a contract, a viewpoint that was advanced less on its own merits than as a reaction against the complexities and absurdities of Catholic Canon law. The contractual view, which still prevails today, quickly adopted much of Canon law's marriage doctrines, effectively creating a kind of reformed and secularized Canon law. This was somewhat more suited to modern requirements, but it retained much of the rigidity of Catholic marriage without its sacramental nature, and it never tried to transcend being merely nominally contractual. It has represented a contradictory compromise and served as a transitional phase toward free private marriage. We can identify this phase in the strong trend toward increased flexibility in marriage seen across all civilized societies. The idea, and even the reality, of marriage by consent and divorce through the failure of that consent, which we are now approaching, has never truly disappeared. In Latin countries, it has survived through Roman law traditions; in English-speaking countries, it is tied to the Puritan spirit that insists individuals should be the ultimate judges in matters that solely concern them. This doctrine as applied to marriage was brilliantly articulated in England by Milton, and in America it has influenced marriage legislation towards an inevitable goal that is hardly yet visible. The future marriage system, as it continues along its current path, will recognize the sacred and sacramental nature of the sexual relationship, while also acknowledging that marriage involving procreation must be publicly registered by the State. However, contrary to the Church, it will assert that marriage, in its essence as a sexual relationship, is a private matter best left to the individuals involved; and contrary to the civil viewpoint, it will acknowledge that marriage is fundamentally a fact and not a contract, although it may give rise to contracts that do not interfere with that essential fact. In one respect, it will advance beyond both ecclesiastical and civil concepts. Recently, people have gained control over their procreative abilities, which shifts the focus of marriage, as a state affair, from the sexual act to the child that results from it. Marriage as a public institution will center not on the sexual relationship but on the child that comes from that relationship. Where marriage is an inviolable public contract, it will automatically provide legal protection for every child born, ensuring that every child has a legal mother and father. Thus, marriage is becoming less stringent on one hand, while becoming more stringent on the other. Personally, it is a sacred and intimate bond with no involvement from the State; socially, it involves a responsible public commitment to a new member of society. Some of us advocate for one aspect of marriage, while others promote the other. Both are essential for achieving perfect harmony. We must separate the two aspects of marriage to equally serve both the individual and society, but as marriage approaches its ideal state, those two aspects will merge.
We have now completed the discussion of marriage as it presents itself to the modern man born in what in mediæval days was called Christendom. It is not an easy subject to discuss. It is indeed a very difficult subject, and only after many years is it possible to detect the main drift of its apparently opposing and confused currents when one is oneself in the midst of them. To an Englishman it is, perhaps, peculiarly difficult, for the Englishman is nothing if not insular; in that fact lie whatever virtues he possesses, as well as their reverse sides.[374]
We have now wrapped up the conversation about marriage as it appears to the modern individual born in what used to be called Christendom during medieval times. It's not an easy topic to tackle. In fact, it's a very challenging issue, and only after many years can one start to grasp the main direction of its seemingly conflicting and complicated dynamics when you're right in the thick of it. For an Englishman, it’s especially tough, because the Englishman is nothing if not insular; in that fact lie both his virtues and their drawbacks.[374]
Yet it is worth while to attempt to climb to a height from which we can view the stream of social tendency in its true proportions and estimate its direction. It is necessary to do so if we value our mental peace in an age when men's minds are agitated by many petty movements which have nothing to do with their great temporal interests, to say nothing of their eternal interests. When we have attained a wide vision of the solid biological facts of life, when we have grasped the great historical streams of tradition,—which together make up the map of human affairs,—we can face serenely the little social transitions which take place in our own age, as they have taken place in every age.
Yet it's worth trying to reach a vantage point from which we can see the flow of social trends in their true proportions and assess their direction. It's essential to do this if we value our mental peace in a time when people's minds are stirred up by many minor movements that have nothing to do with their major temporal interests, not to mention their eternal interests. When we have gained a broad perspective on the solid biological facts of life and understood the significant historical currents of tradition—which together form the map of human affairs—we can calmly face the small social changes happening in our own time, just as they have in every era.
Rosenthal, of Breslau, from the legal side, goes so far as to argue ("Grundfragen des Eheproblems," Die Neue Generation, Dec., 1908), that the intention of procreation is essential to the conception of legal marriage.
Rosenthal, from Breslau, argues from a legal perspective ("Fundamental Issues of the Marriage Problem," The New Generation, Dec., 1908) that the intention to procreate is essential to the understanding of legal marriage.
J. A. Godfrey, Science of Sex, p. 119.
J. A. Godfrey, Science of Sex, p. 119.
E. D. Cope, "The Marriage Problem," Open Court, Nov., 1888.
E. D. Cope, "The Marriage Problem," Open Court, Nov., 1888.
See ante, p. 395.
See above, p. 395.
Wächter, Eheschiedungen, pp. 95 et seq.; Esmein, Marriage en Droit Canonique, vol. i, p. 6; Howard, History of Matrimonial Institutions, vol. ii, p. 15. Howard (in agreement with Lecky) considers that the freedom of divorce was only abused by a small section of the Roman population, and that such abuse, so far as it existed, was not the cause of any decline of Roman morals.
Wächter, Eheschiedungen, pp. 95 et seq.; Esmein, Marriage en Droit Canonique, vol. i, p. 6; Howard, History of Matrimonial Institutions, vol. ii, p. 15. Howard (agreeing with Lecky) believes that the freedom to divorce was mainly misused by a small part of the Roman population, and that any misuse that did happen was not responsible for any decrease in Roman morals.
The opinions of the Christian Fathers were very varied, and they were sometimes doubtful about them; see, e.g., the opinions collected by Cranmer and enumerated by Burnet, History of Reformation (ed. Nares), vol. ii, p. 91.
The views of the Christian Fathers were quite diverse, and they sometimes had doubts about them; see, e.g., the views gathered by Cranmer and listed by Burnet, History of Reformation (ed. Nares), vol. ii, p. 91.
Constantine, the first Christian Emperor, enacted a strict and peculiar divorce law (allowing a wife to divorce her husband only when he was a homicide, a poisoner, or a violator of sepulchres), which could not be maintained. In 497, therefore, Anastasius decreed divorce by mutual consent. This was abolished by Justinian, who only allowed divorce for various specified causes, among them, however, including the husband's adultery. These restrictions proved unworkable, and Justinian's successor and nephew, Justin, restored divorce by mutual consent. Finally, in 870, Leo the Philosopher returned to Justinian's enactment (see, e.g., Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, arts. "Adultery" and "Marriage").
Constantine, the first Christian Emperor, established a strict and unique divorce law that only allowed a wife to divorce her husband if he was a murderer, a poisoner, or a grave violator, a law that was hard to enforce. In 497, Anastasius introduced divorce by mutual consent. This was later eliminated by Justinian, who allowed divorce only for specific reasons, including the husband’s adultery. However, these limitations proved impractical, and Justinian's successor and nephew, Justin, brought back divorce by mutual consent. Finally, in 870, Leo the Philosopher reverted to Justinian's regulations (see, e.g., Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, arts. "Adultery" and "Marriage").
The element of reverence in the early German attitude towards women and the privileges which even the married woman enjoyed, so far as Tacitus can be considered a reliable guide, seem to have been the surviving vestiges of an earlier social state on a more matriarchal basis. They are most distinct at the dawn of German history. From the first, however, though divorce by mutual consent seems to have been possible, German custom was pitiless to the married woman who was unfaithful, sterile, or otherwise offended, though for some time after the introduction of Christianity it was no offence for the German husband to commit adultery (Westermarck, Origin of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, p. 453).
The respect that early Germans had towards women, along with the privileges that married women enjoyed, as far as Tacitus can be seen as a trustworthy source, appeared to be remnants of an earlier social structure that was more matriarchal. This was particularly clear at the beginning of German history. However, even from the start, while divorce by mutual consent seemed possible, German customs were harsh on married women who were unfaithful, infertile, or otherwise at fault, although for some time after Christianity arrived, it was not considered wrong for German husbands to commit adultery (Westermarck, Origin of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, p. 453).
"This form of marriage," says Hobhouse (op. cit., vol. i, p. 156), "is intimately associated with the extension of marital power." Cf. Howard, op. cit., vol. i, p. 231. The very subordinate position of the mediæval German woman is set forth by Hagelstange, Süddeutsches Bauernleben in Mittelalter, 1898, pp. 70 et seq.
"This type of marriage," says Hobhouse (op. cit., vol. i, p. 156), "is closely linked to the expansion of marital authority." See Howard, op. cit., vol. i, p. 231. The deeply subordinate role of the medieval German woman is illustrated by Hagelstange, Süddeutsches Bauernleben in Mittelalter, 1898, pp. 70 and following.
Howard, op. cit., vol. i, p. 259; Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, art. Arrhæ. It would appear, however, that the "bride-sale," of which Tacitus speaks, was not strictly the sale of a chattel nor of a slave-girl, but the sale of the mund or protectorship over the girl. It is true the distinction may not always have been clear to those who took part in the transaction. Similarly the Anglo-Saxon betrothal was not so much a payment of the bride's price to her kinsmen, although as a matter of fact, they might make a profit out of the transaction, as a covenant stipulating for the bride's honorable treatment as wife and widow. Reminiscences of this, remark Pollock and Maitland (op. cit., vol. ii, p. 364), may be found in "that curious cabinet of antiquities, the marriage ritual of the English Church."
Howard, op. cit., vol. i, p. 259; Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, art. Arrhæ. It seems, however, that the "bride-sale" mentioned by Tacitus wasn’t exactly the sale of a piece of property or a slave-girl, but rather the sale of the mund or protection over the girl. It's true that this distinction may not have always been clear to those involved in the transaction. Likewise, the Anglo-Saxon betrothal wasn’t so much paying the bride's price to her relatives, although they might actually profit from the deal, but rather a commitment ensuring the bride’s respectful treatment as a wife and a widow. Pollock and Maitland note (op. cit., vol. ii, p. 364) that remnants of this can be seen in "that curious cabinet of antiquities, the marriage ritual of the English Church."
Howard, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 278-281, 386. The Arrha crept into Roman and Byzantine law during the sixth century.
Howard, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 278-281, 386. The Arrha entered Roman and Byzantine law in the sixth century.
J. Wickham Legg, Ecclesiological Essays, p. 189. It may be added that the idea of the subordination of the wife to the husband appeared in the Christian Church at a somewhat early period, and no doubt independently of Germanic influences; St. Augustine said (Sermo XXXVII, cap. vi) that a good materfamilias must not be ashamed to call herself her husband's servant (ancilla).
J. Wickham Legg, Ecclesiological Essays, p. 189. It’s worth noting that the concept of a wife being subordinate to her husband emerged in the Christian Church fairly early on, likely without any Germanic influence. St. Augustine stated (Sermo XXXVII, cap. vi) that a good materfamilias should not be embarrassed to refer to herself as her husband's servant (ancilla).
See, e.g., L. Gautier, La Chevalerie, Ch. IX.
See, e.g., L. Gautier, The Chivalry, Ch. IX.
Howard, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 293 et seq.; Esmein, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 25 et seq.; Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities art. "Contract of Marriage."
Howard, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 293 et seq.; Esmein, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 25 et seq.; Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities art. "Contract of Marriage."
Any later changes in Catholic Canon law have merely been in the direction of making matrimony still narrower and still more remote from the practice of the world. By a papal decree of 1907, civil marriages and marriages in non-Catholic places of worship are declared to be not only sinful and unlawful (which they were before), but actually null and void.
Any later changes in Catholic Canon law have simply made marriage even more restrictive and disconnected from the realities of the world. By a papal decree in 1907, civil marriages and marriages in non-Catholic places of worship are declared to be not just sinful and unlawful (which they were before), but actually null and void.
E. S. P. Haynes, Our Divorce Law, p. 3.
E. S. P. Haynes, Our Divorce Law, p. 3.
It was the Council of Trent, in the sixteenth century, which made ecclesiastical rites essential to binding marriage; but even then fifty-six prelates voted against that decision.
It was the Council of Trent, in the sixteenth century, that made church rituals essential for a valid marriage; however, even then, fifty-six bishops voted against that decision.
Esmein, op. cit., vol. i, p. 91.
Esmein, op. cit., vol. i, p. 91.
It is sometimes said that the Catholic Church is able to diminish the evils of its doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage by the number of impediments to marriage it admits, thus affording free scope for dispensations from marriage. This scarcely seems to be the case. Dr. P. J. Hayes, who speaks with authority as Chancellor of the Catholic Archdiocese of New York, states ("Impediments to Marriage in the Catholic Church," North American Review, May, 1905) that even in so modern and so mixed a community as this there are few applications for dispensations on account of impediments; there are 15,000 Catholic marriages per annum in New York City, but scarcely five per annum are questioned as to validity, and these chiefly on the ground of bigamy.
It’s often said that the Catholic Church can lessen the strictness of its doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage by allowing various impediments to marriage, which offers a way to grant dispensations. This doesn't seem to be the case. Dr. P. J. Hayes, who is the Chancellor of the Catholic Archdiocese of New York, mentions ("Impediments to Marriage in the Catholic Church," North American Review, May, 1905) that even in such a modern and diverse community, there are very few requests for dispensations due to impediments. There are 15,000 Catholic marriages each year in New York City, but only about five a year are questioned regarding their validity, primarily on the grounds of bigamy.
The Canonists, say Pollock and Maitland (loc. cit.), "made a capricious mess of the marriage law." "Seldom," says Howard (op. cit., vol i, p. 340), "have mere theory and subtle quibbling had more disastrous consequences in practical life than in the case of the distinction between sponsalia de præsenti and de futuro."
The Canonists, according to Pollock and Maitland (loc. cit.), "created a confusing mess of the marriage law." "Rarely," states Howard (op. cit., vol i, p. 340), "has pure theory and clever argumentation led to more disastrous effects in real life than in the distinction between sponsalia de præsenti and de futuro."
Howard, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 386 et seq. On the whole, however, Luther's opinion was that marriage, though a sacred and mysterious thing, is not a sacrament; his various statements on the matter are brought together by Strampff, Luther über die Ehe, pp. 204-214.
Howard, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 386 et seq. Overall, Luther believed that marriage, while being a sacred and mysterious institution, is not a sacrament; his various statements on this topic are compiled by Strampff, Luther über die Ehe, pp. 204-214.
Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 61 et seq.
Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 61 et seq.
Probably as a result of the somewhat confused and incoherent attitude of the Reformers, the Canon law of marriage, in a modified form, really persisted in Protestant countries to a greater extent than in Catholic countries; in France, especially, it has been much more profoundly modified (Esmein, op. cit., vol. i, p. 33).
Probably because of the somewhat unclear and inconsistent stance of the Reformers, the Canon law of marriage, in a modified form, actually continued to exist in Protestant countries to a greater degree than in Catholic countries; in France, especially, it has been significantly altered (Esmein, op. cit., vol. i, p. 33).
The Quaker conception of marriage is still vitally influential. "Why," says Mrs. Besant (Marriage, p. 19), "should not we take a leaf out of the Quaker's book, and substitute for the present legal forms of marriage a simple declaration publicly made?"
The Quaker idea of marriage is still very influential. "Why," says Mrs. Besant (Marriage, p. 19), "shouldn't we take a page from the Quaker's book and replace the current legal forms of marriage with a simple declaration made publicly?"
Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 456. The actual practice in Pennsylvania appears, however, to differ little from that usual in the other States.
Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 456. However, the actual practice in Pennsylvania seems to differ only slightly from what is typical in the other states.
Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 109. "It is, indeed, wonderful," Howard remarks, "that a great nation, priding herself on a love of equity and social liberty, should thus for five generations tolerate an invidious indulgence, rather than frankly and courageously to free herself from the shackles of an ecclesiastical tradition."
Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 109. "It is truly amazing," Howard comments, "that a great nation, proud of its commitment to fairness and social freedom, would allow an unjust privilege to continue for five generations instead of bravely breaking free from the constraints of an old religious tradition."
"The enforced continuance of an unsuccessful union is perhaps the most immoral thing which a civilized society ever countenanced, far less encouraged," says Godfrey (Science of Sex, p. 123). "The morality of a union is dependent upon mutual desire, and a union dictated by any other cause is outside the moral pale, however custom may sanction it, or religion and law condone it."
"The forced continuation of a failing relationship is probably the most immoral thing that a civilized society has ever tolerated, let alone promoted," says Godfrey (Science of Sex, p. 123). "The morality of a relationship relies on mutual desire, and any relationship governed by other reasons is beyond moral boundaries, no matter how much tradition, religion, or law might accept it."
Adultery in most savage and barbarous societies is regarded, in the words of Westermarck, as "an illegitimate appropriation of the exclusive claims which the husband has acquired by the purchase of his wife, as an offence against property;" the seducer is, therefore, punished as a thief, by fine, mutilation, even death (Origin of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, pp. 447 et seq.; id., History of Human Marriage, p. 121). Among some peoples it is the seducer who alone suffers, and not the wife.
Adultery in most primitive and uncivilized societies is seen, as Westermarck puts it, as "an illegitimate taking of the exclusive rights that the husband has gained by purchasing his wife, viewed as a violation of property;" thus, the seducer is punished like a thief, facing fines, mutilation, or even death (Origin of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, pp. 447 et seq.; id., History of Human Marriage, p. 121). In some cultures, it is only the seducer who is punished, not the wife.
It is sometimes said in defence of the claim for damages for seducing a wife that women are often weak and unable to resist masculine advances, so that the law ought to press heavily on the man who takes advantage of that weakness. This argument seems a little antiquated. The law is beginning to accept the responsibility even of married women in other respects, and can scarcely refuse to accept it for the control of her own person. Moreover, if it is so natural for the woman to yield, it is scarcely legitimate to punish the man with whom she has performed that natural act. It must further be said that if a wife's adultery is only an irresponsible feminine weakness, a most undue brutality is inflicted on her by publicly demanding her pecuniary price from her lover. If, indeed, we accept this argument, we ought to reintroduce the mediæval girdle of chastity.
It’s sometimes argued that claims for damages due to seducing a wife are justified because women are often seen as weak and unable to resist male advances, suggesting that the law should hold men accountable for exploiting this weakness. However, this idea feels a bit outdated. The law is starting to recognize the responsibilities of married women in other areas and can hardly deny them the right to control their own bodies. Furthermore, if it's considered natural for a woman to give in, it doesn't seem fair to punish the man involved in that natural act. Additionally, if a wife's infidelity is viewed merely as a flaw of femininity, it inflicts an unfair cruelty on her to publicly seek financial compensation from her lover. If we accept this reasoning, we might as well bring back the medieval chastity belt.
Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 114.
Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 114.
This rule is, in England, by no means a dead letter. Thus, in 1907, a wife who had left her home, leaving a letter stating that her husband was not the father of her child, subsequently brought an action for divorce, which, as the husband made no defence, she obtained. But, the King's Proctor having learnt the facts, the decree was rescinded. Then the husband brought an action for divorce, but could not obtain it, having already admitted his own adultery by leaving the previous case undefended. He took the matter up to the Court of Appeal, but his petition was dismissed, the Court being of opinion that "to grant relief in such a case was not in the interest of public morality." The safest way in England to render what is legally termed marriage absolutely indissoluble is for both parties to commit adultery.
This rule is still very much active in England. In 1907, a wife who had left her home and left a letter claiming her husband wasn't the father of her child later filed for divorce. Since the husband didn't defend himself, she was granted the divorce. However, once the King's Proctor found out the details, the decree was overturned. The husband then tried to file for divorce, but he couldn't get it because he had already admitted to his own adultery by not defending himself in the earlier case. He took it to the Court of Appeal, but his appeal was rejected, as the Court believed that "granting relief in such a case was not in the interest of public morality." The safest way in England to make what is legally called marriage completely unbreakable is for both parties to commit adultery.
Magnus Hirschfeld, Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Oct., 1908.
Magnus Hirschfeld, Journal of Sexual Science, Oct. 1908.
H. Adner, "Die Richterliche Beurteilung der 'Zerrütteten' Ehe," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. ii, Teil 8.
H. Adner, "The Judicial Assessment of the 'Disrupted' Marriage," Gender and Society, Vol. ii, Part 8.
Gross-Hoffinger, Die Schichsale der Frauen und die Prostitution, 1847; Bloch presents a full summary of the results of this inquiry in an Appendix to Ch. X of his Sexual Life of Our Times.
Gross-Hoffinger, The Fates of Women and Prostitution, 1847; Bloch provides a complete summary of the findings from this investigation in an Appendix to Ch. X of his Sexual Life of Our Times.
Divorce in the United States is fully discussed by Howard, op. cit., vol. iii.
Divorce in the United States is thoroughly covered by Howard, op. cit., vol. iii.
H. Münsterberg, The Americans, p. 575. Similarly, Dr. Felix Adler, in a study of "The Ethics of Divorce" (The Ethical Record, 1890, p. 200), although not himself an admirer of divorce, believes that the first cause of the frequency of divorce in the United States is the high position of women.
H. Münsterberg, The Americans, p. 575. Similarly, Dr. Felix Adler, in a study of "The Ethics of Divorce" (The Ethical Record, 1890, p. 200), although not a supporter of divorce himself, argues that the main reason for the high rate of divorce in the United States is the elevated status of women.
In an important article, with illustrative cases, on "The Neuro-psychical Element in Conjugal Aversion" (Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, Sept., 1892) Smith Baker refers to the cases in which "a man may find himself progressively becoming antipathetic, through recognition of the comparatively less developed personality of the one to whom he happens to be married. Marrying, perhaps, before he has learned to accurately judge of character and its tendencies, he awakens to the fact that he is honorably bound to live all his physiological life with, not a real companion, but a mere counterfeit." The cases are still more numerous, the same writer observes, in which the sexual appetite of the wife fails to reveal itself except as the result of education and practice. "This sort of natural-unnatural condition is the source of much disappointment, and of intense suffering on the part of the woman as well as of family dissatisfaction." Yet such causes for divorce are far too complex to be stated in statute-books, and far too intimate to be pleaded in courts of justice.
In an important article, with illustrative cases, on "The Neuro-psychical Element in Conjugal Aversion" (Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, Sept., 1892), Smith Baker mentions situations where "a man may progressively develop a dislike because he realizes that his spouse has a less developed personality. Marrying, perhaps, before he has learned to accurately judge character and its tendencies, he comes to understand that he is honorably obligated to spend his entire life with not a true companion, but a mere imitation." The author notes that there are even more cases where a wife's sexual desire only emerges as a result of education and practice. "This kind of natural-unnatural situation leads to disappointment and significant suffering for both the woman and the family." However, the reasons for divorce are much too complex to be detailed in legal statutes and too personal to be argued in courts.
Ten years ago, if not still, the United States came fourth in order of frequency of divorce, after Japan, Denmark, and Switzerland.
Ten years ago, if not still, the United States ranked fourth in terms of divorce rates, following Japan, Denmark, and Switzerland.
Lecky, the historian of European morals, has pointed out (Democracy and Liberty, vol. ii, p. 172) the close connection generally between facility of divorce and a high standard of sexual morality.
Lecky, the historian of European morals, has pointed out (Democracy and Liberty, vol. ii, p. 172) the strong connection usually between easy access to divorce and a high standard of sexual morality.
So, e.g., Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. i, p. 237.
So, e.g., Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, vol. i, p. 237.
In England this step was taken in the reign of Henry VII, when the forcible marriage of women against their will was forbidden by statute (3 Henry VII, c. 2). Even in the middle of the seventeenth century, however, the question of forcible marriage had again to be dealt with (Inderwick, Interregnum, pp. 40 et seq.).
In England, this action was taken during the rule of Henry VII, when a law was enacted that prohibited the forced marriage of women against their will (3 Henry VII, c. 2). However, even in the mid-seventeenth century, the issue of forced marriage had to be addressed again (Inderwick, Interregnum, pp. 40 et seq.).
Woods Hutchinson (Contemporary Review, Sept., 1905) argues that when there is epilepsy, insanity, moral perversion, habitual drunkenness, or criminal conduct of any kind, divorce, for the sake of the next generation, should be not permissive but compulsory. Mere divorce, however, would not suffice to attain the ends desired.
Woods Hutchinson (Contemporary Review, Sept., 1905) argues that in cases of epilepsy, mental illness, moral corruption, chronic drunkenness, or any form of criminal behavior, divorce shouldn't just be allowed but should be mandatory for the sake of future generations. However, simply getting a divorce wouldn't be enough to achieve the desired outcomes.
Similarly in Germany, Wanda von Sacher-Masoch, who had suffered much from marriage, whatever her own defects of character may have been, writes at the end of Meine Lebensbeichte that "as long as women have not the courage to regulate, without State-interference or Church-interference, relationships which concern themselves alone, they will not be free." In place of this old decayed system of marriage so opposed to our modern thoughts and feelings, she would have private contracts made by a lawyer. In England, at a much earlier period, Charles Kingsley, who was an ardent friend to women's movements, and whose feeling for womanhood amounted almost to worship, wrote to J. S. Mill: "There will never be a good world for women until the last remnant of the Canon law is civilized off the earth."
Similarly in Germany, Wanda von Sacher-Masoch, who endured a lot from her marriage, regardless of her own character flaws, writes at the end of Meine Lebensbeichte that "as long as women lack the courage to manage, without interference from the State or the Church, relationships that only concern them, they will not be free." Instead of this outdated and broken system of marriage that conflicts with our modern thoughts and feelings, she advocates for private contracts created by a lawyer. In England, much earlier, Charles Kingsley, a passionate supporter of women's movements, and whose appreciation for womanhood was nearly reverential, wrote to J. S. Mill: "There will never be a good world for women until the last remnant of Canon law is civilized away."
"No fouler institution was ever invented," declared Auberon Herbert many years ago, expressing, before its time, a feeling which has since become more common; "and its existence drags on, to our deep shame, because we have not the courage frankly to say that the sexual relations of husband and wife, or those who live together, concern their own selves, and do not concern the prying, gloating, self-righteous, and intensely untruthful world outside."
"No more disgusting institution has ever been created," said Auberon Herbert many years ago, voicing a sentiment that has become more widespread since then; "and its continued existence is a source of deep shame for us because we lack the courage to openly acknowledge that the sexual relationships of husbands and wives, or those who cohabitate, are their own business, and don't involve the nosy, judgmental, self-righteous, and overwhelmingly dishonest world outside."
Hobhouse, op. cit. vol. i, p. 237.
Hobhouse, op. cit. vol. 1, p. 237.
The same conception of marriage as a contract still persists to some extent also in the United States, whither it was carried by the early Protestants and Puritans. No definition of marriage is indeed usually laid down by the States, but, Howard says (op. cit., vol. ii, p. 395), "in effect matrimony is treated as a relation partaking of the nature of both status and contract."
The idea of marriage as a contract still exists to some degree in the United States, where it was brought by early Protestants and Puritans. While states typically don’t define marriage, Howard points out (op. cit., vol. ii, p. 395) that "in effect, matrimony is treated as a relationship that combines aspects of both status and contract."
This point of view has been vigorously set forth by Paul and Victor Margueritte, Quelques Idées.
This perspective has been strongly presented by Paul and Victor Margueritte, Quelques Idées.
I may remark that this was pointed out, and its consequences vigorously argued, many years ago by C. G. Garrison, "Limits of Divorce," Contemporary Review, Feb., 1894. "It may safely be asserted," he concludes, "that marriage presents not one attribute or incident of anything remotely resembling a contract, either in form, remedy, procedure, or result; but that in all these aspects, on the contrary, it is fatally hostile to the principles and practices of that division of the rights of persons." Marriage is not contract, but conduct.
I should mention that this was pointed out, and its consequences firmly debated, many years ago by C. G. Garrison in "Limits of Divorce," Contemporary Review, Feb. 1894. "It can be confidently stated," he concludes, "that marriage does not have any characteristic or incident of something that even slightly resembles a contract, whether in structure, remedy, process, or outcome; instead, in all these respects, it is fundamentally opposed to the principles and practices of that division of personal rights." Marriage is not a contract, but behavior.
See, e.g., P. and V. Margueritte, op. cit.
See, e.g., P. and V. Margueritte, op. cit.
As quoted by Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 29.
As quoted by Howard, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 29.
Ellen Key similarly (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 343) remarks that to talk of "the duty of life-long fidelity" is much the same as to talk of "the duty of life-long health." A man may promise, she adds, to do his best to preserve his life, or his love; he cannot unconditionally undertake to preserve them.
Ellen Key similarly (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 343) notes that talking about "the obligation of lifelong fidelity" is pretty much the same as discussing "the obligation of lifelong health." A man can promise, she adds, to do his best to maintain his life or his love; he can't unconditionally commit to keeping them.
Hobhouse, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 159, 237-9; cf. P. and V. Margueritte, Quelques Idées.
Hobhouse, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 159, 237-9; cf. P. and V. Margueritte, Quelques Idées.
"Divorce," as Garrison puts it ("Limits of Divorce," Contemporary Review, Feb., 1894), "is the judicial announcement that conduct once connubial in character and purpose, has lost these qualities.... Divorce is a question of fact, and not a license to break a promise."
"Divorce," as Garrison puts it ("Limits of Divorce," Contemporary Review, Feb., 1894), "is the legal declaration that behavior once pertaining to marriage has lost those qualities.... Divorce is a matter of fact, not a permission to break a promise."
See, ante, p. 425.
See, see above, p. 425.
It has been necessary to discuss reproduction in the first chapter of the present volume, and it will again be necessary in the concluding chapter. Here we are only concerned with procreation as an element of marriage.
It was important to talk about reproduction in the first chapter of this book, and it will be important again in the last chapter. Here, we are only focusing on procreation as a part of marriage.
Nietzold, Die Ehe in Ægypten zur Ptolemäisch-römischen Zeit, 1903, p. 3. This bond also accorded rights to any children that might be born during its existence.
Nietzold, Die Ehe in Ægypten zur Ptolemäisch-römischen Zeit, 1903, p. 3. This bond also granted rights to any children that might be born while it was in effect.
See, e.g., Ellen Key, Mutter und Kind, p. 21. The necessity for the combination of greater freedom of sexual relationships with greater stringency of parental relationships was clearly realized at an earlier period by another able woman writer, Miss J. H. Clapperton, in her notable book, Scientific Meliorism, published in 1885. "Legal changes," she wrote (p. 320), "are required in two directions, viz., towards greater freedom as to marriage and greater strictness as to parentage. The marriage union is essentially a private matter with which society has no call and no right to interfere. Childbirth, on the contrary, is a public event. It touches the interests of the whole nation."
See, e.g., Ellen Key, Mutter und Kind, p. 21. The need to balance more freedom in sexual relationships with stricter parental standards was recognized earlier by another talented woman writer, Miss J. H. Clapperton, in her influential book, Scientific Meliorism, published in 1885. "Legal changes," she wrote (p. 320), "are necessary in two areas: towards more freedom in marriage and more strictness in parentage. The marriage union is fundamentally a private matter that society should not interfere with. Childbirth, on the other hand, is a public event. It affects the interests of the entire nation."
Ellen Key, Liebe und Ehe, p. 168; cf. the same author's Century of the Child.
Ellen Key, Love and Marriage, p. 168; see the same author's Century of the Child.
In Germany alone 180,000 "illegitimate" children are born every year, and the number is rapidly increasing; in England it is only 40,000 per annum, the strong feeling which often exists against such births in England (as also in France) leading to the wide adoption of methods for preventing conception.
In Germany alone, 180,000 "illegitimate" children are born every year, and this number is rapidly increasing; in England, it’s only 40,000 a year. The strong sentiment that often exists against such births in England (as well as in France) has led to the widespread use of methods to prevent conception.
"Where are real monogamists to be found?" asked Schopenhauer in his essay, "Ueber die Weibe." And James Hinton was wont to ask: "What is the meaning of maintaining monogamy? Is there any chance of getting it, I should like to know? Do you call English life monogamous?"
"Where can you find real monogamists?" asked Schopenhauer in his essay, "Ueber die Weibe." And James Hinton often asked: "What does it mean to maintain monogamy? Is there any chance of achieving it, I’d like to know? Do you consider English life to be monogamous?"
"Almost everywhere," says Westermarck of polygyny (which he discusses fully in Chs. XX-XXII of his History of Human Marriage) "it is confined to the smaller part of the people, the vast majority being monogamous." Maurice Gregory (Contemporary Review, Sept., 1906) gives statistics showing that nearly everywhere the tendency is towards equality in number of the sexes.
"Almost everywhere," Westermarck remarks about polygyny (which he covers in detail in Chs. XX-XXII of his History of Human Marriage), "it is limited to a smaller segment of the population, with the vast majority being monogamous." Maurice Gregory (Contemporary Review, Sept., 1906) provides statistics indicating that nearly everywhere, there is a trend toward a balanced number of sexes.
In a polygamous land a man is of course as much bound by his obligations to his second wife as to his first. Among ourselves the man's "second wife" is degraded with the name of "mistress," and the worse he treats her and her children the more his "morality" is approved, just as the Catholic Church, when struggling to establish sacerdotal celibacy, approved more highly the priest who had illegitimate relations with women than the priest who decently and openly married. If his neglect induces a married man's mistress to make known her relationship to him the man is justified in prosecuting her, and his counsel, assured of general sympathy, will state in court that "this woman has even been so wicked as to write to the prosecutor's wife!"
In a polygamous society, a man is just as obligated to his second wife as he is to his first. In our culture, the man's "second wife" is often belittled with the term "mistress," and the worse he treats her and her children, the more his "morality" is praised. This is similar to how the Catholic Church, in its efforts to promote celibacy among priests, valued the priest who had affairs with women more than one who openly and decently married. If his neglect leads a married man's mistress to reveal their relationship, the man is justified in taking legal action against her, and his lawyer, confident of public support, will argue in court that "this woman has even been so wicked as to write to the prosecutor's wife!"
Howard, in his judicial History of Matrimonial Institutions (vol. ii. pp. 96 et seq.), cannot refrain from drawing attention to the almost insanely wild character of the language used in England not so many years ago by those who opposed marriage with a deceased wife's sister, and he contrasts it with the much more reasonable attitude of the Catholic Church. "Pictures have been drawn," he remarks, "of the moral anarchy such marriages must produce, which are read by American, Colonial, and Continental observers with a bewilderment that is not unmixed with disgust, and are, indeed, a curious illustration of the extreme insularity of the English mind." So recently as A.D. 1908 a bill was brought into the British House of Lords proposing that desertion without cause for two years shall be a ground for divorce, a reasonable and humane measure which is law in most parts of the civilized world. The Lord Chancellor (Lord Loreburn), a Liberal, and in the sphere of politics an enlightened and sagacious leader, declared that such a proposal was "absolutely impossible." The House rejected the proposal by 61 votes to 2. Even the marriage decrees of the Council of Trent were not affirmed by such an overwhelming majority. In matters of marriage legislation England has scarcely yet emerged from the Middle Ages.
Howard, in his judicial History of Matrimonial Institutions (vol. ii. pp. 96 et seq.), cannot help but highlight the almost absurdly wild language used in England not that long ago by those who opposed marriage to a deceased wife’s sister. He compares it to the much more reasonable stance of the Catholic Church. "Pictures have been drawn," he comments, "of the moral chaos such marriages must create, which American, Colonial, and Continental observers read with a bewilderment that is mixed with disgust, and are, in fact, a curious example of the extreme insularity of the English mind." As recently as A.D. 1908, a bill was introduced in the British House of Lords suggesting that desertion without cause for two years should be grounds for divorce—a reasonable and humane measure that's already law in most of the civilized world. The Lord Chancellor (Lord Loreburn), a Liberal and an enlightened and wise leader in the political arena, stated that such a measure was "absolutely impossible." The House voted down the proposal by 61 votes to 2. Even the marriage decrees of the Council of Trent weren’t affirmed by such a large majority. In terms of marriage legislation, England has hardly moved out of the Middle Ages.
CHAPTER XI.
THE ART OF LOVE.
Marriage Not Only for Procreation—Theologians on the Sacramentum Solationis—Importance of the Art of Love—The Basis of Stability in Marriage and the Condition for Right Procreation—The Art of Love the Bulwark Against Divorce—The Unity of Love and Marriage a Principle of Modern Morality—Christianity and the Art of Love—Ovid—The Art of Love Among Primitive Peoples—Sexual Initiation in Africa and Elsewhere—The Tendency to Spontaneous Development of the Art of Love in Early Life—Flirtation—Sexual Ignorance in Women—The Husband's Place in Sexual Initiation—Sexual Ignorance in Men—The Husband's Education for Marriage—The Injury Done by the Ignorance of Husbands—The Physical and Mental Results of Unskilful Coitus—Women Understand the Art of Love Better Than Men—Ancient and Modern Opinions Concerning Frequency of Coitus—Variation in Sexual Capacity—The Sexual Appetite—The Art of Love Based on the Biological Facts of Courtship—The Art of Pleasing Women—The Lover Compared to the Musician—The Proposal as a Part of Courtship—Divination in the Art of Love—The Importance of the Preliminaries in Courtship—The Unskilful Husband Frequently the Cause of the Frigid Wife—The Difficulty of Courtship—Simultaneous Orgasm—The Evils of Incomplete Gratification in Women—Coitus Interruptus—Coitus Reservatus—The Human Method of Coitus—Variations in Coitus—Posture in Coitus—The Best Time for Coitus—The Influence of Coitus in Marriage—The Advantages of Absence in Marriage—The Risks of Absence—Jealousy—The Primitive Function of Jealousy—Its Predominance Among Animals, Savages, etc., and in Pathological States—An Anti-Social Emotion—Jealousy Incompatible with the Progress of Civilization—The Possibility of Loving More Than One Person at a Time—Platonic Friendship—The Conditions Which Make It Possible—The Maternal Element in Woman's Love—The Final Development of Conjugal Love—The Problem of Love One of the Greatest of Social Questions.
Marriage is Not Just for Having Kids—Theologians on the Sacramentum Solationis—The Importance of the Art of Love—The Foundation of Stability in Marriage and the Requirement for Proper Procreation—The Art of Love as Protection Against Divorce—The Unity of Love and Marriage as a Principle of Modern Morality—Christianity and the Art of Love—Ovid—The Art of Love Among Primitive Cultures—Sexual Initiation in Africa and Beyond—The Natural Development of the Art of Love in Early Life—Flirting—Women's Lack of Sexual Knowledge—The Husband's Role in Sexual Initiation—Men's Lack of Sexual Knowledge—The Husband's Preparation for Marriage—The Harm Caused by Husbands' Ignorance—The Physical and Mental Effects of Poor Sexual Technique—Women Generally Understand the Art of Love Better Than Men—Ancient and Modern Views on the Frequency of Intercourse—Differences in Sexual Capacity—Sexual Desire—The Art of Love Rooted in the Biological Realities of Courtship—How to Please Women—The Lover Compared to a Musician—The Proposal as Part of Courtship—Mystical Insights in the Art of Love—The Significance of Preparations in Courtship—An Inexperienced Husband Often Causes Issues for the Wife—The Challenges of Courtship—Mutual Orgasm—The Negative Effects of Incomplete Satisfaction for Women—Interrupting Intercourse—Reserved Intercourse—The Human Approach to Intercourse—Variations in Intercourse—Positions During Intercourse—The Ideal Time for Intercourse—The Effects of Intercourse on Marriage—The Benefits of Being Apart in Marriage—The Dangers of Separation—Jealousy—The Basic Role of Jealousy—Its Dominance in Animals, Primitive People, etc., and in Mental Disorders—A Socially Harmful Emotion—Jealousy Hinders Progress in Civilization—The Potential to Love Multiple People at Once—Platonic Friendship—The Conditions That Allow It—The Maternal Aspect of a Woman's Love—The Ultimate Development of Marital Love—The Question of Love as One of Society's Biggest Challenges.
It will be clear from the preceding discussion that there are two elements in every marriage so far as that marriage is complete. On the one hand marriage is a union prompted by mutual love and only sustainable as a reality, apart from its mere formal side, by the cultivation of such love. On the other hand marriage is a method for propagating the race and having its end in offspring. In the first aspect its aim is erotic, in the second parental. Both these ends have long been generally recognized. We find them set forth, for instance, in the marriage service of the Church of England, where it is stated that marriage exists both for "the mutual society, help and comfort that the one ought to have of the other," and also for "the procreation of children." Without the factor of mutual love the proper conditions for procreation cannot exist; without the factor of procreation the sexual union, however beautiful and sacred a relationship it may in itself be, remains, in essence, a private relationship, incomplete as a marriage and without public significance. It becomes necessary, therefore, to supplement the preceding discussion of marriage in its general outlines by a final and more intimate consideration of marriage in its essence, as embracing the art of love and the science of procreation.
It will be clear from the previous discussion that there are two elements in every marriage, as long as that marriage is complete. On one hand, marriage is a union driven by mutual love and can only truly exist, beyond its formal side, through the nurturing of that love. On the other hand, marriage is a way to propagate the human race and ultimately aims at having children. In the first aspect, its purpose is romantic, while in the second, it is parental. Both of these purposes have long been recognized. We see them highlighted, for example, in the marriage service of the Church of England, which states that marriage exists for "the mutual society, help and comfort that the one ought to have of the other," and also for "the procreation of children." Without the element of mutual love, the right conditions for having children cannot exist; without the element of procreation, the sexual union, no matter how beautiful and sacred it may be, remains, at its core, a private relationship, incomplete as a marriage and lacking public significance. Therefore, it becomes necessary to add to the previous discussion of marriage in its general outlines a final and more intimate consideration of marriage in its essence, which includes the art of love and the science of procreation.
There has already been occasion from time to time to refer to those who, starting from various points of view, have sought to limit the scope of marriage and to suppress one or other of its elements. (See e.g., ante, p. 135.)
There have already been instances where we’ve mentioned those who, from different perspectives, have tried to narrow the definition of marriage and eliminate certain aspects of it. (See e.g., ante, p. 135.)
In modern times the tendency has been to exclude the factor of procreation, and to regard the relationship of marriage as exclusively lying in the relationship of the two parties to each other. Apart from the fact, which it is unnecessary again to call attention to, that, from the public and social point of view, a marriage without children, however important to the two persons concerned, is a relationship without any public significance, it must further be said that, in the absence of children, even the personal erotic life itself is apt to suffer, for in the normal erotic life, especially in women, sexual love tends to grow into parental love. Moreover, the full development of mutual love and dependence is with difficulty attained, and there is absence of that closest of bonds, the mutual coöperation of two persons in producing a new person. The perfect and complete marriage in its full development is a trinity.
In today's world, there's a trend to overlook the aspect of procreation and to see marriage solely as a connection between the two individuals involved. It's important to note that, from a public and social perspective, a marriage without children, no matter how significant it is to the partners, lacks any public meaning. Additionally, without children, even the personal romantic life can suffer, because in a normal intimate relationship, especially for women, romantic love often evolves into parental love. Furthermore, the deepening of mutual love and dependence is harder to achieve, and the strongest bond of working together to create a new life is missing. A truly complete marriage in its full realization is a threefold connection.
Those who seek to eliminate the erotic factor from marriage as unessential, or at all events as only permissible when strictly subordinated to the end of procreation, have made themselves heard from time to time at various periods. Even the ancients, Greeks and Romans alike, in their more severe moments advocated the elimination of the erotic element from marriage, and its confinement to extra-marital relationships, that is so far as men were concerned; for the erotic needs of married women they had no provision to make. Montaigne, soaked in classic traditions, has admirably set forth the reasons for eliminating the erotic interest from marriage: "One does not marry for oneself, whatever may be said; a man marries as much, or more, for his posterity, for his family; the usage and interest of marriage touch our race beyond ourselves.... Thus it is a kind of incest to employ, in this venerable and sacred parentage, the efforts and the extravagances of amorous license" (Essais, Bk. i, Ch. XXIX; Bk. iii, Ch. V). This point of view easily commended itself to the early Christians, who, however, deliberately overlooked its reverse side, the establishment of erotic interests outside marriage. "To have intercourse except for procreation," said Clement of Alexandria (Pædagogus, Bk. ii, Ch. X), "is to do injury to Nature." While, however, that statement is quite true of the lower animals, it is not true of man, and especially not true of civilized man, whose erotic needs are far more developed, and far more intimately associated with the finest and highest part of the organism, than is the case among animals generally. For the animal, sexual desire, except when called forth by the conditions involved by procreative necessities, has no existence. It is far otherwise in man, for whom, even when the question of procreation is altogether excluded, sexual love is still an insistent need, and even a condition of the finest spiritual development. The Catholic Church, therefore, while regarding with admiration a continence in marriage which excluded sexual relations except for the end of procreation, has followed St. Augustine in treating intercourse apart from procreation with considerable indulgence, as only a venial sin. Here, however, the Church was inclined to draw the line, and it appears that in 1679 Innocent XI condemned the proposition that "the conjugal act, practiced for pleasure alone, is exempt even from venial sin."
Those who want to remove the sexual aspect from marriage as unnecessary, or at least only acceptable when focused solely on procreation, have made their views known from time to time throughout history. Even in ancient times, both Greeks and Romans, during their stricter moments, promoted the idea of excluding the sexual element from marriage and limiting it to outside relationships, at least for men; they had no plans for the sexual needs of married women. Montaigne, influenced by classical traditions, articulated the reasons for removing the sexual interest from marriage: "One does not marry for oneself, no matter what anyone says; a man marries as much, or more, for his descendants and his family; the purpose and benefits of marriage affect our race beyond just ourselves.... Thus, it is a kind of incest to use, in this revered and sacred parenthood, the efforts and excesses of romantic freedom" (Essais, Bk. i, Ch. XXIX; Bk. iii, Ch. V). This perspective resonated with early Christians, who, however, conveniently ignored its opposite side: the establishment of sexual interests outside of marriage. "To engage in sexual relations except for procreation," said Clement of Alexandria (Pædagogus, Bk. ii, Ch. X), "is to harm Nature." While this statement is accurate for lower animals, it doesn't hold true for humans, particularly civilized humans, whose sexual needs are much more developed and closely tied to the most refined and elevated aspects of their being than those of animals in general. For animals, sexual desire only exists when driven by procreative needs. It's quite different for humans, who, even when procreation isn't a factor, still experience sexual love as an essential need and a key component of their highest spiritual growth. The Catholic Church, therefore, while respecting a form of restraint in marriage that limited sexual relations to procreation, has generally followed St. Augustine by treating sexual intercourse outside of procreation with leniency, seeing it as merely a minor sin. However, the Church seemed to set a boundary here, as it appears that in 1679, Innocent XI condemned the idea that "the conjugal act, practiced solely for pleasure, is free from even minor sin."
Protestant theologians have been inclined to go further, and therein they found some authority even in Catholic writers. John à Lasco, the Catholic Bishop who became a Protestant and settled in England during Edward VI's reign, was following many mediæval theologians when he recognized the sacramentum solationis, in addition to proles, as an element of marriage. Cranmer, in his marriage service of 1549, stated that "mutual help and comfort," as well as procreation, enter into the object of marriage (Wickham Legg, Ecclesiological Essays, p. 204; Howard, Matrimonial Institutions, vol. i, p. 398). Modern theologians speak still more distinctly. "The sexual act," says Northcote (Christianity and Sex Problems, p. 55), "is a love act. Duly regulated, it conduces to the ethical welfare of the individual and promotes his efficiency as a social unit. The act itself and its surrounding emotions stimulate within the organism the powerful movements of a vast psychic life." At an earlier period also, Schleiermacher, in his Letters on Lucinde, had pointed out the great significance of love for the spiritual development of the individual.
Protestant theologians have often gone further, finding some backing even in Catholic writers. John à Lasco, the Catholic Bishop who became a Protestant and settled in England during Edward VI's reign, followed many medieval theologians when he acknowledged the sacramentum solationis, along with proles, as an aspect of marriage. Cranmer, in his marriage service of 1549, stated that "mutual help and comfort," as well as procreation, are part of the purpose of marriage (Wickham Legg, Ecclesiological Essays, p. 204; Howard, Matrimonial Institutions, vol. i, p. 398). Modern theologians express this even more clearly. "The sexual act," says Northcote (Christianity and Sex Problems, p. 55), "is a love act. When properly understood, it contributes to the ethical well-being of the individual and enhances their effectiveness as a social being. The act itself and the emotions surrounding it stimulate significant movements within the mind’s vast psychic life." Earlier, Schleiermacher, in his Letters on Lucinde, also highlighted the importance of love for an individual's spiritual growth.
Edward Carpenter truly remarks, in Love's Coming of Age, that sexual love is not only needed for physical creation, but also for spiritual creation. Bloch, again, in discussing this question (The Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. VI) concludes that "love and the sexual embrace have not only an end in procreation, they constitute an end in themselves, and are necessary for the life, development, and inner growth of the individual himself."
Edward Carpenter rightly points out in Love's Coming of Age that sexual love is essential not just for making babies, but also for spiritual growth. Bloch, when discussing this topic in The Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. VI, concludes that "love and the sexual embrace aren't just about procreation; they are meaningful on their own and are crucial for the life, development, and personal growth of the individual."
It is argued by some, who admit mutual love as a constituent part of marriage, that such love, once recognized at the outset, may be taken for granted, and requires no further discussion; there is, they believe, no art of love to be either learnt or taught; it comes by nature. Nothing could be further from the truth, most of all as regards civilized man. Even the elementary fact of coitus needs to be taught. No one could take a more austerely Puritanic view of sexual affairs than Sir James Paget, and yet Paget (in his lecture on "Sexual Hypochondriasis") declared that "Ignorance about sexual affairs seems to be a notable characteristic of the more civilized part of the human race. Among ourselves it is certain that the method of copulating needs to be taught, and that they to whom it is not taught remain quite ignorant about it." Gallard, again, remarks similarly (in his Clinique des Maladies des Femmes) that young people, like Daphnis in Longus's pastoral, need a beautiful Lycenion to give them a solid education, practical as well as theoretical, in these matters, and he considers that mothers should instruct their daughters at marriage, and fathers their sons. Philosophers have from time to time recognized the gravity of these questions and have discoursed concerning them; thus Epicurus, as Plutarch tells us,[375] would discuss with his disciples various sexual matters, such as the proper time for coitus; but then, as now, there were obscurantists who would leave even the central facts of life to the hazards of chance or ignorance, and these presumed to blame the philosopher.
Some people argue that mutual love is a key part of marriage and, once it's acknowledged at the beginning, it doesn’t need to be discussed further; they think that the ability to love is natural and doesn’t require any teaching or learning. However, this couldn’t be further from the truth, especially regarding civilized humans. Even the basic act of sex needs to be taught. No one held a more strict Puritan view on sex than Sir James Paget, yet he stated (in his lecture on "Sexual Hypochondriasis") that "Ignorance about sexual matters seems to be a notable characteristic of the more civilized part of the human race. Among us, it’s clear that the methods of intercourse must be taught, and those who aren’t taught remain completely unaware of it." Gallard similarly mentions (in his Clinique des Maladies des Femmes) that young people, like Daphnis in Longus's pastoral, require a knowledgeable Lycenion for both practical and theoretical education on these topics, and he believes that mothers should educate their daughters at marriage, and fathers their sons. Philosophers have occasionally recognized the seriousness of these issues and discussed them; for instance, Epicurus, as Plutarch notes,[375] would talk with his students about various sexual matters, like the right timing for sex. Yet, both then and now, there have been those who prefer to leave the essential facts of life to chance or ignorance, and they often criticized the philosophers for this.
There is, however, much more to be learnt in these matters than the mere elementary facts of sexual intercourse. The art of love certainly includes such primary facts of sexual hygiene, but it involves also the whole erotic discipline of marriage, and that is why its significance is so great, for the welfare and happiness of the individual, for the stability of sexual unions, and indirectly for the race, since the art of love is ultimately the art of attaining the right conditions for procreation.
There is, however, much more to learn about these topics than just the basic facts of sex. The art of love definitely includes those essential facts of sexual health, but it also encompasses the entire erotic practice of marriage, which is why its importance is so significant. It affects the well-being and happiness of individuals, the stability of sexual relationships, and indirectly benefits the human race, as the art of love ultimately involves creating the right conditions for reproduction.
"It seems extremely probable," wrote Professor E. D. Cope,[376] "that if this subject could be properly understood, and become, in the details of its practical conduct, a part of a written social science, the monogamic marriage might attain a far more general success than is often found in actual life." There can be no doubt whatever that this is the case. In the great majority of marriages success depends exclusively upon the knowledge of the art of love possessed by the two persons who enter into it. A life-long monogamic union may, indeed, persist in the absence of the slightest inborn or acquired art of love, out of religious resignation or sheer stupidity. But that attitude is now becoming less common. As we have seen in the previous chapter, divorces are becoming more frequent and more easily obtainable in every civilized country. This is a tendency of civilization; it is the result of a demand that marriage should be a real relationship, and that when it ceases to be real as a relationship it should also cease as a form. That is an inevitable tendency, involved in our growing democratization, for the democracy seems to care more for realities than for forms, however venerable. We cannot fight against it; and we should be wrong to fight against it even if we could.
"It seems highly likely," wrote Professor E. D. Cope,[376] "that if this topic could be properly understood and integrated, in practical terms, into a written social science, monogamous marriage could achieve much greater success than is often seen in real life." There is no doubt about this. In most marriages, success relies solely on the understanding of love possessed by the two individuals involved. A lifelong monogamous union may indeed continue without any natural or learned skills in love, simply due to religious commitment or ignorance. However, that mindset is becoming less common. As we've noted in the previous chapter, divorces are occurring more frequently and are easier to obtain in every civilized nation. This is a trend of civilization; it's the result of a demand that marriage should be a genuine relationship, and when it stops being a true relationship, it should also end as an institution. This is an unavoidable trend, rooted in our increasing democratization, as democracy seems to prioritize realities over traditions, no matter how respected. We cannot resist it; and it would be a mistake to try, even if we could.
Yet while we are bound to aid the tendency to divorce, and to insist that a valid marriage needs the wills of two persons to maintain it, it is difficult for anyone to argue that divorce is in itself desirable. It is always a confession of failure. Two persons, who, if they have been moved in the slightest degree by the normal and regular impulse of sexual selection, at the outset regarded each other as lovable, have, on one side or the other or on both, proved not lovable. There has been a failure in the fundamental art of love. If we are to counterbalance facility of divorce our only sound course is to increase the stability of marriage, and that is only possible by cultivating the art of love, the primal foundation of marriage.
Yet while we are obligated to support the trend towards divorce and to emphasize that a valid marriage requires the commitment of both individuals to sustain it, it's hard to argue that divorce itself is a good thing. It's always a sign of failure. Two people, who at least initially felt a natural attraction to each other, have, on one side or the other or both, shown that they are not lovable. There has been a breakdown in the basic art of love. If we want to balance the ease of divorce, our best approach is to strengthen the stability of marriage, which can only be achieved by nurturing the art of love, the essential foundation of marriage.
It is by no means unnecessary to emphasize this point. There are still many persons who have failed to realize it. There are even people who seem to imagine that it is unimportant whether or not pleasure is present in the sexual act. "I do not believe mutual pleasure in the sexual act has any particular bearing on the happiness of life," once remarked Dr. Howard A. Kelly.[377] Such a statement means—if indeed it means anything—that the marriage tie has no "particular bearing" on human happiness; it means that the way must be freely opened to adultery and divorce. Even the most perverse ascetic of the Middle Ages scarcely ventured to make a statement so flagrantly opposed to the experiences of humanity, and the fact that a distinguished gynecologist of the twentieth century can make it, with almost the air of stating a truism, is ample justification for the emphasis which it has nowadays become necessary to place on the art of love. "Uxor enim dignitatis nomen est, non voluptatis," was indeed an ancient Pagan dictum. But it is not in harmony with modern ideas. It was not even altogether in harmony with Christianity. For our modern morality, as Ellen Key well says, the unity of love and marriage is a fundamental principle.[378]
It’s definitely important to highlight this point. There are still many people who haven’t grasped it. Some even seem to think that it doesn’t matter whether pleasure is part of the sexual experience. "I don’t believe that mutual pleasure in the sexual act has any real impact on happiness in life," once said Dr. Howard A. Kelly.[377] Such a statement implies—if it means anything at all—that marriage doesn’t have any significant effect on human happiness; it suggests that we should allow for infidelity and divorce. Even the most extreme ascetic of the Middle Ages wouldn’t dare to make a claim so blatantly opposite to human experience, and the fact that a respected gynecologist of the twentieth century can say it, almost as if it’s obvious, justifies the need for emphasis on the art of love today. "For a wife is a name of dignity, not pleasure," was indeed an ancient Pagan saying. But it doesn’t align with modern views. It was never fully compatible with Christianity either. As Ellen Key rightly states, in our modern morality, the unity of love and marriage is a core principle.[378]
The neglect of the art of love has not been a universal phenomenon; it is more especially characteristic of Christendom. The spirit of ancient Rome undoubtedly predisposed Europe to such a neglect, for with their rough cultivation of the military virtues and their inaptitude for the finer aspects of civilization the Romans were willing to regard love as a permissible indulgence, but they were not, as a people, prepared to cultivate it as an art. Their poets do not, in this matter, represent the moral feeling of their best people. It is indeed a highly significant fact that Ovid, the most distinguished Latin poet who concerned himself much with the art of love, associated that art not so much with morality as with immorality. As he viewed it, the art of love was less the art of retaining a woman in her home than the art of winning her away from it; it was the adulterer's art rather than the husband's art. Such a conception would be impossible out of Europe, but it proved very favorable to the growth of the Christian attitude towards the art of love.
The neglect of the art of love hasn’t been a universal issue; it’s especially typical of Christianity. The spirit of ancient Rome definitely set Europe up for this neglect, as the Romans, with their strong focus on military virtues and lack of appreciation for the finer sides of civilization, considered love a permissible indulgence. However, as a society, they weren’t ready to treat it as an art form. Their poets don’t reflect the moral sentiments of their best people in this regard. It’s quite significant that Ovid, the most notable Latin poet who wrote about the art of love, linked that art more with immorality than with morality. In his view, the art of love was less about keeping a woman at home and more about winning her away from it; it was the art of the adulterer rather than the husband. Such a perspective wouldn’t be possible outside of Europe, but it definitely supported the development of the Christian approach to the art of love.
Love as an art, as well as a passion, seems to have received considerable study in antiquity, though the results of that study have perished. Cadmus Milesius, says Suidas, wrote fourteen great volumes on the passion of love, but they are not now to be found. Rohde (Das Griechische Roman, p. 55) has a brief section on the Greek philosophic writers on love. Bloch (Beiträge zur Psychopathia Sexualis, Teil I, p. 191) enumerates the ancient women writers who dealt with the art of love. Montaigne (Essais, liv. ii, Ch. V) gives a list of ancient classical lost books on love. Burton (Anatomy of Melancholy, Bell's edition, vol. iii, p. 2) also gives a list of lost books on love. Burton himself dealt at length with the manifold signs of love and its grievous symptoms. Boissier de Sauvages, early in the eighteenth century, published a Latin thesis, De Amore, discussing love somewhat in the same spirit as Burton, as a psychic disease to be treated and cured.
Love, both as an art and a passion, seems to have been studied quite a bit in ancient times, although most of that knowledge has been lost. Suidas mentions that Cadmus Milesius wrote fourteen extensive volumes on the passion of love, but they can't be found now. Rohde (Das Griechische Roman, p. 55) has a short section about Greek philosophers who wrote on love. Bloch (Beiträge zur Psychopathia Sexualis, Teil I, p. 191) lists ancient women writers who explored the art of love. Montaigne (Essais, liv. ii, Ch. V) provides a list of classical texts on love that are no longer available. Burton (Anatomy of Melancholy, Bell's edition, vol. iii, p. 2) also lists lost books about love. Burton himself thoroughly examined the various signs of love and its painful symptoms. Boissier de Sauvages, in the early eighteenth century, published a Latin thesis titled De Amore, discussing love in a manner similar to Burton, viewing it as a psychological disorder to be treated and cured.
The breath of Christian asceticism had passed over love; it was no longer, as in classic days, an art to be cultivated, but only a malady to be cured. The true inheritor of the classic spirit in this, as in many other matters, was not the Christian world, but the world of Islam. The Perfumed Garden of the Sheik Nefzaoui was probably written in the city of Tunis early in the sixteenth century by an author who belonged to the south of Tunis. Its opening invocation clearly indicates that it departs widely from the conception of love as a disease: "Praise be to God who has placed man's greatest pleasures in the natural parts of woman, and has destined the natural parts of man to afford the greatest enjoyments to woman." The Arabic book, El Ktab, or "The Secret Laws of Love," is a modern work, by Omer Haleby Abu Othmân, who was born in Algiers of a Moorish mother and a Turkish father.
The influence of Christian asceticism had changed the perception of love; it was no longer seen, as it was in ancient times, as an art to be developed, but rather as a sickness to be treated. The true heir to the classic spirit in this regard, as in many others, was not the Christian world, but the world of Islam. The Perfumed Garden by Sheik Nefzaoui was likely written in Tunis in the early sixteenth century by an author from the south of Tunis. Its opening invocation clearly shows that it diverges significantly from the idea of love as a disease: "Praise be to God who has placed man's greatest pleasures in the natural parts of woman, and has destined the natural parts of man to bring the greatest enjoyment to woman." The Arabic book, El Ktab, or "The Secret Laws of Love," is a modern work by Omer Haleby Abu Othmân, who was born in Algiers to a Moorish mother and a Turkish father.
For Christianity the permission to yield to the sexual impulse at all was merely a concession to human weakness, an indulgence only possible when it was carefully hedged and guarded on every side. Almost from the first the Christians began to cultivate the art of virginity, and they could not so dislocate their point of view as to approve of the art of love. All their passionate adoration in the sphere of sex went out towards chastity. Possessed by such ideals, they could only tolerate human love at all by giving to one special form of it a religious sacramental character, and even that sacramental halo imparted to love a quasi-ascetic character which precluded the idea of regarding love as an art.[379] Love gained a religious element but it lost a moral element, since, outside Christianity, the art of love is part of the foundation of sexual morality, wherever such morality in any degree exists. In Christendom love in marriage was left to shift for itself as best it might; the art of love was a dubious art which was held to indicate a certain commerce with immorality and even indeed to be itself immoral. That feeling was doubtless strengthened by the fact that Ovid was the most conspicuous master in literature of the art of love. His literary reputation—far greater than it now seems to us[380]—gave distinction to his position as the author of the chief extant text-book of the art of love. With Humanism and the Renaissance and the consequent realization that Christianity had overlooked one side of life, Ovid's Ars Amatoria was placed on a pedestal it had not occupied before or since. It represented a step forward in civilization; it revealed love not as a mere animal instinct or a mere pledged duty, but as a complex, humane, and refined relationship which demanded cultivation; "arte regendus amor." Boccaccio made a wise teacher put Ovid's Ars Amatoria into the hands of the young. In an age still oppressed by the mediæval spirit, it was a much needed text-book, but it possessed the fatal defect, as a text-book, of presenting the erotic claims of the individual as divorced from the claims of good social order. It never succeeded in establishing itself as a generally accepted manual of love, and in the eyes of many it served to stamp the subject it dealt with as one that lies outside the limits of good morals.
For Christianity, any allowance of yielding to sexual desire was simply a concession to human weakness, a form of indulgence that was only acceptable when heavily regulated and restricted. From the beginning, Christians started to value virginity, and they couldn't bring themselves to embrace the idea of romantic love. Their passionate admiration in the realm of sexuality was directed toward chastity. Driven by such ideals, they could only accept human love by granting one specific type of it a religious, sacramental significance, and even that sacred element imparted a quasi-ascetic quality to love, preventing it from being seen as an art. Love gained a religious aspect but lost its moral dimension, as outside Christianity, the art of love is foundational to sexual morality where it exists at all. In Christendom, love within marriage was left to navigate its course as best as it could; the art of love was viewed as questionable, often suggesting an association with immorality, or even as inherently immoral. This sentiment was likely reinforced by the fact that Ovid was the most prominent literary figure in the art of love. His literary reputation—much greater than how we perceive it today—elevated his role as the author of the main existing guide on the subject. With the rise of Humanism and the Renaissance, and the consequent realization that Christianity had neglected an aspect of life, Ovid's *Ars Amatoria* was put on a pedestal it had not occupied before or since. It represented progress in civilization; it portrayed love not just as a basic animal instinct or mere obligation, but as a complex, humane, and refined relationship that required nurturing; "arte regendus amor." Boccaccio had a wise teacher place Ovid's *Ars Amatoria* in the hands of the youth. In an era still burdened by medieval thought, it was a much-needed guide, but it held the critical flaw, as a guide, of treating the individual’s erotic desires as disconnected from the needs of a proper social order. It never managed to become a widely accepted manual for love, and for many, it was seen as a topic lying beyond the bounds of good morals.
When, however, we take a wider survey, and inquire into the discipline for life that is imparted to the young in many parts of the world, we shall frequently find that the art of love, understood in varying ways, is an essential part of that discipline. Summary, though generally adequate, as are the educational methods of primitive peoples, they not seldom include a training in those arts which render a woman agreeable to a man and a man agreeable to a woman in the relationship of marriage, and it is often more or less dimly realized that courtship is not a mere preliminary to marriage, but a biologically essential part of the marriage relationship throughout.
When we take a broader look and explore the lessons for life that are taught to young people in many parts of the world, we often find that the concept of love, understood in different ways, is a vital part of that education. While the methods used by traditional societies are generally effective, they frequently include training in the skills that make a woman appealing to a man and a man appealing to a woman within the context of marriage. It is often somewhat vaguely understood that courtship is not just a step before marriage but an important biological component of the marriage relationship as a whole.
Sexual initiation is carried out very thoroughly in Azimba land, Central Africa. H. Crawford Angus, the first European to visit the Azimba people, lived among them for a year, and has described the Chensamwali, or initiation ceremony, of girls. "At the first sign of menstruation in a young girl, she is taught the mysteries of womanhood, and is shown the different positions for sexual intercourse. The vagina is handled freely, and if not previously enlarged (which may have taken place at the harvest festival when a boy and girl are allowed to 'keep house' during the day-time by themselves, and when quasi-intercourse takes place) it is now enlarged by means of a horn or corn-cob, which is inserted and secured in place by bands of bark cloth. When all signs [of menstruation] have passed, a public announcement of a dance is given to the women in the village. At this dance no men are allowed to be present, and it was only with a great deal of trouble that I managed to witness it. The girl to be 'danced' is led back from the bush to her mother's hut where she is kept in solitude to the morning of the dance. On that morning she is placed on the ground in a sitting position, while the dancers form a ring around her. Several songs are then sung with reference to the genital organs. The girl is then stripped and made to go through the mimic performance of sexual intercourse, and if the movements are not enacted properly, as is often the case when the girl is timid and bashful, one of the older women will take her place and show her how she is to perform. Many songs about the relation between men and women are sung, and the girl is instructed as to all her duties when she becomes a wife. She is also instructed that during the time of her menstruation she is unclean, and that during her monthly period she must close her vulva with a pad of fibre used for the purpose. The object of the dance is to inculcate to the girl the knowledge of married life. The girl is taught to be faithful to her husband and to try to bear children, and she is also taught the various arts and methods of making herself seductive and pleasing to her husband, and of thus retaining him in her power." (H. Crawford Angus, "The Chensamwali," Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1898, Heft 6, p. 479).
Sexual initiation is conducted quite thoroughly in Azimba land, Central Africa. H. Crawford Angus, the first European to visit the Azimba people, lived among them for a year and described the Chensamwali, or initiation ceremony, for girls. "At the first sign of menstruation in a young girl, she is taught the mysteries of womanhood and shown the different positions for sexual intercourse. The vagina is handled openly, and if it hasn’t been enlarged before (which may have happened at the harvest festival when a boy and girl are allowed to 'keep house' together during the day, when some quasi-intercourse may occur), it is now enlarged using a horn or corn-cob, which is inserted and held in place by bands of bark cloth. Once all signs [of menstruation] have passed, a public announcement is made for a dance for the women in the village. Men are not allowed to attend this dance, and I had to go through quite a bit of trouble to witness it. The girl being 'danced' is brought back from the bush to her mother’s hut, where she is kept in solitude until the morning of the dance. On that morning, she is placed on the ground in a sitting position while the dancers form a circle around her. Several songs referencing the genital organs are sung. The girl is then undressed and made to perform a mimic act of sexual intercourse, and if she doesn’t do the movements properly, which often happens if she is timid and shy, one of the older women will take her place and demonstrate how she should perform. Many songs about the relationship between men and women are sung, and she is taught all her duties as a wife. She is also told that during menstruation she is considered unclean and must use a pad made of fiber to close her vulva during her monthly period. The purpose of the dance is to teach the girl about married life. She learns to be faithful to her husband and to strive to bear children, and she is also educated in the various arts and techniques to make herself attractive and pleasing to her husband, thus keeping him under her influence." (H. Crawford Angus, "The Chensamwali," Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1898, Heft 6, p. 479).
In Abyssinia, as well as on the Zanzibar coast, according to Stecker (quoted by Ploss-Bartels, Das Weib, Section 119) young girls are educated in buttock movements which increase their charm in coitus. These movements, of a rotatory character, are called Duk-Duk. To be ignorant of Duk-Duk is a great disgrace to a girl. Among the Swahili women of Zanzibar, indeed, a complete artistic system of hip-movements is cultivated, to be displayed in coitus. It prevails more especially on the coast, and a Swahili woman is not counted a "lady" (bibi) unless she is acquainted with this art. From sixty to eighty young women practice this buttock dance together for some eight hours a day, laying aside all clothing, and singing the while. The public are not admitted. The dance, which is a kind of imitation of coitus, has been described by Zache ("Sitten und Gebräuche der Suaheli," Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1899, Heft 2-3, p. 72). The more accomplished dancers excite general admiration. During the latter part of this initiation various feats are imposed, to test the girl's skill and self-control. For instance, she must dance up to a fire and remove from the midst of the fire a vessel full of water to the brim, without spilling it. At the end of three months the training is over, and the girl goes home in festival attire. She is now eligible for marriage. Similar customs are said to prevail in the Dutch East Indies and elsewhere.
In Abyssinia, as well as on the Zanzibar coast, according to Stecker (quoted by Ploss-Bartels, Das Weib, Section 119), young girls are taught buttock movements that enhance their allure during intimacy. These movements, which are rotating in nature, are called Duk-Duk. Not knowing how to perform Duk-Duk is a significant embarrassment for a girl. Among the Swahili women of Zanzibar, there is a fully developed artistic system of hip movements that is showcased during intimacy. This tradition is particularly strong along the coast, and a Swahili woman is not considered a "lady" (bibi) unless she is skilled in this art. Between sixty to eighty young women practice this buttock dance together for around eight hours each day, without any clothing, while singing. The public is not allowed to watch. The dance, which mimics intimacy, has been detailed by Zache ("Sitten und Gebräuche der Suaheli," Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1899, Heft 2-3, p. 72). The most skilled dancers garner widespread admiration. During the final phase of this initiation, various challenges are presented to test the girl's talent and self-discipline. For example, she must dance up to a fire and carefully remove a container filled to the brim with water from the center of the flames without spilling any. After three months, the training concludes, and the girl returns home dressed for a celebration. She is now eligible for marriage. Similar customs are said to exist in the Dutch East Indies and beyond.
The Hebrews had erotic dances, which were doubtless related to the art of love in marriage, and among the Greeks, and their disciples the Romans, the conception of love as an art which needs training, skill, and cultivation, was still extant. That conception was crushed by Christianity which, although it sanctified the institution of matrimony, degraded that sexual love which is normally the content of marriage.
The Hebrews had seductive dances that were likely connected to the art of love in marriage. Among the Greeks and their followers, the Romans, the idea of love as an art that requires training, skill, and cultivation was still present. However, this idea was diminished by Christianity, which, while it honored the institution of marriage, belittled the romantic love that is usually part of it.
In 1176 the question was brought before a Court of Love by a baron and lady of Champagne, whether love is compatible with marriage. "No," said the baron, "I admire and respect the sweet intimacy of married couples, but I cannot call it love. Love desires obstacles, mystery, stolen favors. Now husbands and wives boldly avow their relationship; they possess each other without contradiction and without reserve. It cannot then be love that they experience." And after mature deliberation the ladies of the Court of Love adopted the baron's conclusions (E. de la Bedollière, Histoire des Mœurs des Français, vol. iii, p. 334). There was undoubtedly an element of truth in the baron's arguments. Yet it may well be doubted whether in any non-Christian country it would ever have been possible to obtain acceptance for the doctrine that love and marriage are incompatible. This doctrine was, however, as Ribot points out in his Logique des Sentiments, inevitable, when, as among the medieval nobility, marriage was merely a political or domestic treaty and could not, therefore, be a method of moral elevation.
In 1176, a baron and a lady from Champagne presented a question to a Court of Love: is love compatible with marriage? "No," said the baron. "I admire and respect the sweet intimacy of married couples, but I can't call it love. Love craves obstacles, mystery, and secret affection. Husbands and wives openly declare their bond; they have each other without doubt and without hesitation. Therefore, it can't be love that they're feeling." After careful consideration, the ladies at the Court of Love agreed with the baron's view (E. de la Bedollière, Histoire des Mœurs des Français, vol. iii, p. 334). There was certainly some truth in the baron's arguments. However, one might question whether any non-Christian society would ever accept the idea that love and marriage are incompatible. This idea was, as Ribot highlights in his Logique des Sentiments, unavoidable when, particularly among medieval nobility, marriage was merely seen as a political or domestic arrangement, and thus couldn't be a means of moral improvement.
"Why is it," asked Rétif de la Bretonne, towards the end of the eighteenth century, "that girls who have no morals are more seductive and more loveable than honest women? It is because, like the Greek courtesans to whom grace and voluptuousness were taught, they have studied the art of pleasing. Among the foolish detractors of my Contemporaines, not one guessed the philosophic aim of nearly everyone of these tales, which is to suggest to honest women the ways of making themselves loved. I should like to see the institution of initiations, such as those of the ancients.... To-day the happiness of the human species is abandoned to chance; all the experience of women is individual, like that of animals; it is lost with those women who, being naturally amiable, might have taught others to become so. Prostitutes alone make a superficial study of it, and the lessons they receive are, for the most part, as harmful as those of respectable Greek and Roman matrons were holy and honorable, only tending to wantonness, to the exhaustion alike of the purse and of the physical faculties, while the aim of the ancient matrons was the union of husband and wife and their mutual attachment through pleasure. The Christian religion annihilated the Mysteries as infamous, but we may regard that annihilation as one of the wrongs done by Christianity to humanity, as the work of men with little enlightenment and bitter zeal, dangerous puritans who were the natural enemies of marriage" (Rétif de la Bretonne, Monsieur Nicolas, reprint of 1883, vol. x, pp. 160-3). It may be added that Dühren (Dr. Iwan Bloch) regards Rétif as "a master in the Ars Amandi," and discusses him from this point of view in his Rétif de la Bretonne (pp. 362-371).
"Why is it," asked Rétif de la Bretonne, towards the end of the eighteenth century, "that girls who lack morals are more alluring and lovable than honest women? It's because, similar to the Greek courtesans who were trained in charm and sensuality, they have learned the art of pleasing. Among the foolish critics of my Contemporaines, no one recognized the philosophical purpose of nearly all these stories, which is to suggest to honest women how to be loved. I would like to see the establishment of initiations, like those of the ancients.... Nowadays, the happiness of humanity is left to chance; all women’s experiences are individual, like those of animals; they are lost with those women who, being naturally charming, could have taught others to be the same. Only prostitutes conduct a superficial study of it, and most of the lessons they learn are as damaging as those of respectable Greek and Roman matrons were virtuous and honorable; they tend only toward debauchery, draining both the wallet and physical strength, while the goal of the ancient matrons was the union of husband and wife and their mutual bond through pleasure. The Christian religion destroyed the Mysteries as disgraceful, but we can consider that destruction one of the injustices Christianity inflicted on humanity, a result of men with limited understanding and fierce zeal, harmful puritans who were natural adversaries of marriage" (Rétif de la Bretonne, Monsieur Nicolas, reprint of 1883, vol. x, pp. 160-3). It can also be noted that Dühlen (Dr. Iwan Bloch) considers Rétif to be "a master in the Ars Amandi," and discusses him from this perspective in his Rétif de la Bretonne (pp. 362-371).
Whether or not Christianity is to be held responsible, it cannot be doubted that throughout Christendom there has been a lamentable failure to recognize the supreme importance, not only erotically but morally, of the art of love. Even in the great revival of sexual enlightenment now taking place around us there is rarely even the faintest recognition that in sexual enlightenment the one thing essentially necessary is a knowledge of the art of love. For the most part, sexual instruction as at present understood, is purely negative, a mere string of thou-shalt-nots. If that failure were due to the conscious and deliberate recognition that while the art of love must be based on physiological and psychological knowledge, it is far too subtle, too complex, too personal, to be formulated in lectures and manuals, it would be reasonable and sound. But it seems to rest entirely on ignorance, indifference, or worse.
Whether or not Christianity is to blame, it’s undeniable that across Christendom, there has been a disappointing failure to appreciate the fundamental significance of the art of love, both in terms of desire and morality. Even amidst the significant sexual enlightenment happening around us, there is rarely even a hint of recognition that understanding the art of love is essential for true sexual enlightenment. For the most part, sexual education as it currently exists is purely negative, consisting of a list of prohibitions. If this failure stemmed from a conscious understanding that while the art of love should be rooted in physiological and psychological knowledge, it is too intricate, complex, and personal to be captured in lectures and manuals, that would be reasonable and justifiable. However, it seems to be based entirely on ignorance, apathy, or something worse.
Love-making is indeed, like other arts, an art that is partly natural—"an art that nature makes"—and therefore it is a natural subject for learning and exercising in play. Children left to themselves tend, both playfully and seriously, to practice love, alike on the physical and the psychic sides.[381] But this play is on its physical side sternly repressed by their elders, when discovered, and on its psychic side laughed at. Among the well-bred classes it is usually starved out at an early age.
Making love is definitely, like other arts, an art that is partly natural—"an art that nature creates"—and so it's a natural topic for learning and practicing in a playful way. Kids who are left to their own devices tend, both playfully and seriously, to explore love, both physically and emotionally.[381] But this physical exploration is harshly suppressed by adults when they find out about it, and the emotional side is laughed off. In well-to-do families, it's often shut down at a young age.
After puberty, if not before, there is another form in which the art of love is largely experimented and practised, especially in England and America, the form of flirtation. In its elementary manifestations flirting is entirely natural and normal; we may trace it even in animals; it is simply the beginning of courtship, at the early stage when courtship may yet, if desired, be broken off. Under modern civilized conditions, however, flirtation is often more than this. These conditions make marriage difficult; they make love and its engagements too serious a matter to be entered on lightly; they make actual sexual intercourse dangerous as well as disreputable. Flirtation adapts itself to these conditions. Instead of being merely the preliminary stage of normal courtship, it is developed into a form of sexual gratification as complete as due observation of the conditions already mentioned will allow. In Germany, and especially in France where it is held in great abhorrence, this is the only form of flirtation known; it is regarded as an exportation from the United States and is denominated "flirtage." Its practical outcome is held to be the "demi-vierge," who knows and has experienced the joys of sex while yet retaining her hymen intact.
After puberty, if not earlier, another way of exploring and practicing the art of love emerges, especially in England and America: flirtation. In its basic forms, flirting is completely natural and normal; we can even see it in animals. It's simply the start of courtship, at a stage where courtship can still be called off if one wishes. However, under modern civilized conditions, flirtation often goes beyond this. These conditions make marriage challenging; they make love and its commitments too serious to be treated lightly; they also make actual sex both risky and socially unacceptable. Flirtation adapts to these circumstances. Rather than being just a preliminary stage of typical courtship, it evolves into a form of sexual enjoyment as complete as the existing conditions allow. In Germany, and especially in France where it's viewed with great disdain, this is the only type of flirtation recognized; it's seen as a concept imported from the United States and is called "flirtage." Its practical result is thought to be the "demi-vierge," who knows and has experienced the pleasures of sex while still keeping her hymen intact.
This degenerate form of flirtation, cultivated not as a part of courtship, but for its own sake, has been well described by Forel (Die Sexuelle Frage, pp. 97-101). He defines it as including "all those expressions of the sexual instinct of one individual towards another individual which excite the other's sexual instinct, coitus being always excepted." In the beginning it may be merely a provocative look or a simple apparently unintentional touch or contact; and by slight gradations it may pass on to caresses, kisses, embraces, and even extend to pressure or friction of the sexual parts, sometimes leading to orgasm. Thus, Forel mentions, a sensuous woman by the pressure of her garments in dancing can produce ejaculation in her partner. Most usually the process is that voluptuous contact and revery which, in English slang, is called "spooning." From first to last there need not be any explicit explanations, proposals, or declarations on either side, and neither party is committed to any relationship with the other beyond the period devoted to flirtage. In one form, however, flirtage consists entirely in the excitement of a conversation devoted to erotic and indecorous topics. Either the man or the woman may take the active part in flirtage, but in a woman more refinement and skill is required to play the active part without repelling the man or injuring her reputation. Indeed, much the same is true of men also, for women, while they often like flirting, usually prefer its more refined forms. There are infinite forms of flirtage, and while as a preliminary part of courtship, it has its normal place and justification, Forel concludes that "as an end in itself, and never passing beyond itself, it is a phenomenon of degeneration."
This twisted form of flirting, not meant as part of courtship but just for its own sake, has been well described by Forel (Die Sexuelle Frage, pp. 97-101). He defines it as "all those expressions of the sexual instinct of one person towards another that trigger the other person's sexual instinct, with intercourse always excluded." At first, it might just be a suggestive look or an apparently accidental touch; gradually, it can escalate into caresses, kisses, embraces, and even physical contact of sexual areas, sometimes leading to orgasm. Forel notes that a sensual woman can cause ejaculation in her partner merely through the pressure of her clothing while dancing. Typically, the process is a pleasurable interaction and daydreaming, which in modern slang is known as "spooning." From beginning to end, there don’t need to be any explicit explanations, proposals, or declarations from either side, and neither person is bound to any relationship with the other beyond the time spent flirting. In one form, flirting can even be centered around a conversation that indulges in erotic and inappropriate topics. Either the man or the woman can take the lead in flirting, but a woman usually needs more finesse and skill to engage actively without scaring off the man or damaging her reputation. The same is often true for men as well, since women, while they enjoy flirting, usually prefer its more subtle forms. There are countless styles of flirting, and while it has a normal place and purpose as a precursor to courtship, Forel concludes that "as an end in itself, and never going beyond itself, it is a sign of degeneration."
From the French point of view, flirtage and flirtation generally have been discussed by Madame Bentzon ("Family Life in America," Forum, March, 1896) who, however, fails to realize the natural basis of flirtation in courtship. She regards it as a sin against the law "Thou shalt not play with love," for it ought to have the excuse of an irresistible passion, but she thinks it is comparatively inoffensive in America (though still a deteriorating influence on the women) on account of the temperament, education, and habits of the people. It must, however, be remembered that play has a proper relationship to all vital activities, and that a reasonable criticism of flirtation is concerned rather with its normal limitations than with its right to exist (see the observations on the natural basis of coquetry and the ends it subserves in "The Evolution of Modesty" in volume i of these Studies).
From the French perspective, flirting has generally been discussed by Madame Bentzon ("Family Life in America," Forum, March 1896), who, however, fails to recognize the natural role of flirting in courtship. She views it as a violation of the principle "Thou shalt not play with love," believing it should come with the justification of an irresistible passion. However, she considers it relatively harmless in America (although still a negative influence on women) due to the temperament, education, and habits of the people. It should be noted, though, that play has a proper connection to all vital activities, and a reasonable critique of flirting focuses more on its normal limits than on its right to exist (see the comments on the natural basis of coquetry and its purposes in "The Evolution of Modesty" in volume I of these Studies).
While flirtation in its natural form—though not in the perverted form of "flirtage"—has sound justification, alike as a method of testing a lover and of acquiring some small part of the art of love, it remains an altogether inadequate preparation for love. This is sufficiently shown by the frequent inaptitude for the art of love, and even for the mere physical act of love, so frequently manifested both by men and women in the very countries where flirtation most flourishes.
While flirting in its natural form—though not in the distorted form of "flirtage"—is completely justified, both as a way to test a partner and to learn a bit about the art of love, it still falls short as preparation for real love. This is clearly illustrated by the common struggles with the art of love, and even with the basic physical aspect of love, that both men and women often show in the very countries where flirting is most common.
This ignorance, not merely of the art of love but even of the physical facts of sexual love, is marked not only in women, especially women of the middle class, but also in men, for the civilized man, as Fritsch long ago remarked, often knows less of the facts of the sexual life than a milkmaid. It shows itself differently, however, in the two sexes.
This lack of knowledge, not just about the art of love but even about the physical aspects of sexual love, is evident not only in women, particularly middle-class women, but also in men. As Fritsch pointed out long ago, civilized men often know less about the realities of sexual life than a milkmaid. However, it presents itself differently in the two genders.
Among women sexual ignorance ranges from complete innocence of the fact that it involves any intimate bodily relationship at all to misapprehensions of the most various kind; some think that the relationship consists in lying side by side, many that intercourse takes place at the navel, not a few that the act occupies the whole night. It has been necessary in a previous chapter to discuss the general evils of sexual ignorance; it is here necessary to refer to its more special evils as regards the relationship of marriage. Girls are educated with the vague idea that they will marry,—quite correctly, for the majority of them do marry,—but the idea that they must be educated for the career that will naturally fall to their lot is an idea which as yet has never seemed to occur to the teachers of girls. Their heads are crammed to stupidity with the knowledge of facts which it is no one's concern to know, but the supremely important training for life they are totally unable to teach. Women are trained for nearly every avocation under the sun; for the supreme avocation of wifehood and motherhood they are never trained at all!
Among women, knowledge about sex varies widely, from complete naivety about any intimate bodily connection to various misunderstandings. Some believe that intimacy is just lying side by side, others think it happens at the navel, and many think the act lasts all night. In a previous chapter, we looked at the general problems caused by sexual ignorance; here, we need to address its specific issues in relation to marriage. Girls are raised with the vague notion that they will get married—which is true, as most of them do—but the idea that they should be educated for the role that they are likely to take on hasn’t occurred to their educators. Their minds are filled with useless facts, while they receive no valuable training for the most important aspects of life. Women are trained for nearly every profession out there; yet, they receive no training for the essential roles of being a wife and mother!
It may be said, and with truth, that the present incompetent training of girls is likely to continue so long as the mothers of girls are content to demand nothing better. It may also be said, with even greater truth, that there is much that concerns the knowledge of sexual relationships which the mother herself may most properly impart to her daughter. It may further be asserted, most unanswerably, that the art of love, with which we are here more especially concerned, can only be learnt by actual experience, an experience which our social traditions make it difficult for a virtuous girl to acquire with credit. Without here attempting to apportion the share of blame which falls to each cause, it remains unfortunate that a woman should so often enter marriage with the worst possible equipment of prejudices and misapprehensions, even when she believes, as often happens, that she knows all about it. Even with the best equipment, a woman, under present conditions, enters marriage at a disadvantage. She awakes to the full realization of love more slowly than a man, and, on the average, at a later age, so that her experiences of the life of sex before marriage have usually been of a much more restricted kind than her husband's.[382] So that even with the best preparation, it often happens that it is not until several years after marriage that a woman clearly realizes her own sexual needs and adequately estimates her husband's ability to satisfy those needs. We cannot over-estimate the personal and social importance of a complete preparation for marriage, and the greater the difficulties placed in the way of divorce the more weight necessarily attaches to that preparation.[383]
It can be said, and truthfully so, that the current inadequate training of girls will persist as long as the mothers of these girls are satisfied with demanding nothing better. It can also be stated, even more truthfully, that there is a lot regarding the knowledge of sexual relationships that a mother can properly share with her daughter. Moreover, it can be argued, most convincingly, that the art of love, which we are especially focusing on here, can only be learned through actual experience—an experience that our social customs make it hard for a virtuous girl to gain with a good reputation. Without attempting to assign blame to the different factors involved, it remains unfortunate that women often enter marriage with the worst possible set of prejudices and misunderstandings, even when they believe, as is often the case, that they know everything about it. Even with the best foundation, a woman, under current conditions, starts marriage at a disadvantage. She comes to fully understand love more slowly than a man and typically at a later age, so her experiences with sex before marriage have usually been much more limited compared to her husband's. Thus, even with the best preparation, it often doesn’t occur until several years into marriage that a woman clearly recognizes her own sexual needs and accurately assesses her husband’s ability to meet those needs. We cannot overstate the personal and social significance of thorough preparation for marriage, and the more obstacles to divorce there are, the more critical that preparation becomes.
Everyone is probably acquainted with many cases of the extreme ignorance of women on entering marriage. The following case concerning a woman of twenty-seven, who had been asked in marriage, is somewhat extreme, but not very exceptional. "She did not feel sure of her affection and she asked a woman cousin concerning the meaning of love. This cousin lent her Ellis Ethelmer's pamphlet, The Human Flower. She learnt from this that men desired the body of a woman, and this so appalled her that she was quite ill for several days. The next time her lover attempted a caress she told him that it was 'lust.' Since then she has read George Moore's Sister Teresa, and the knowledge that 'women can be as bad as men' has made her sad." The "Histories" contained in the Appendices to previous volumes of these Studies reveal numerous instances of the deplorable ignorance of young girls concerning the most central facts of the sexual life. It is not surprising, under such circumstances, that marriage leads to disillusionment or repulsion.
Everyone probably knows many examples of women being extremely uninformed about life before marriage. The case of a twenty-seven-year-old woman who was proposed to is particularly striking but not uncommon. "She wasn't sure about her feelings and asked her female cousin what love meant. The cousin lent her Ellis Ethelmer's pamphlet, The Human Flower. From it, she learned that men wanted a woman's body, and this left her so shocked that she was ill for several days. The next time her partner tried to be affectionate, she told him it was 'lust.' Since then, she's read George Moore's Sister Teresa, and discovering that 'women can be as bad as men' has made her feel sad." The "Histories" in the Appendices of earlier volumes of these Studies show many examples of young girls' shocking ignorance about basic sexual matters. Given these circumstances, it's not surprising that marriage can lead to disappointment or aversion.
It is commonly said that the duty of initiating the wife into the privileges and obligations of marriage properly belongs to the husband. Apart, however, altogether from the fact that it is unjust to a woman to compel her to bind herself in marriage before she has fully realized what marriage means, it must also be said that there are many things necessary for women to know that it is unreasonable to expect a husband to explain. This is, for instance, notably the case as regards the more fatiguing and exhausting effects of coitus on a man as compared with a woman. The inexperienced bride cannot know beforehand that the frequently repeated orgasms which render her vigorous and radiant exert a depressing effect on her husband, and his masculine pride induces him to attempt to conceal that fact. The bride, in her innocence, is unconscious that her pleasure is bought at her husband's expense, and that what is not excess to her, may be a serious excess to him. The woman who knows (notably, for instance, a widow who remarries) is careful to guard her husband's health in this respect, by restraining her own ardor, for she realizes that a man is not willing to admit that he is incapable of satisfying his wife's desires. (G. Hirth has also pointed out how important it is that women should know before marriage the natural limits of masculine potency, Wege zur Liebe, p. 571.)
It’s often said that the responsibility of introducing a wife to the privileges and responsibilities of marriage falls to the husband. However, aside from the fact that it’s unfair to a woman to require her to commit to marriage before fully understanding what it entails, it must also be acknowledged that there are many things women need to know that it’s unreasonable to expect a husband to explain. One notable example is the more tiring and exhausting effects of intercourse on a man compared to a woman. The inexperienced bride may not realize that the frequent orgasms that leave her feeling energetic and radiant can have a draining effect on her husband, and his pride often leads him to hide that truth. The bride, in her innocence, is unaware that her pleasure comes at her husband’s expense, and what feels normal for her might be too much for him. A woman with experience (for example, a widow who remarries) is careful to consider her husband’s health in this regard by tempering her own desires, as she understands that a man may not want to admit he can’t meet his wife’s needs. (G. Hirth has also noted the importance for women to know the natural limits of male potency before marriage, Wege zur Liebe, p. 571.)
The ignorance of women of all that concerns the art of love, and their total lack of preparation for the natural facts of the sexual life, would perhaps be of less evil augury for marriage if it were always compensated by the knowledge, skill, and considerateness of the husband. But that is by no means always the case. Within the ordinary range we find, at all events in England, the large group of men whose knowledge of women before marriage has been mainly confined to prostitutes, and the important and not inconsiderable group of men who have had no intimate intercourse with women, their sexual experiences having been confined to masturbation or other auto-erotic manifestations, and to flirtation. Certainly the man of sensitive and intelligent temperament, whatever his training or lack of training, may succeed with patience and consideration in overcoming all the difficulties placed in the way of love by the mixture of ignorances and prejudices which so often in woman takes the place of an education for the erotic part of her life. But it cannot be said that either of these two groups of men has been well equipped for the task. The training and experience which a man receives from a prostitute, even under fairly favorable conditions, scarcely form the right preparation for approaching a woman of his own class who has no intimate erotic experiences.[384] The frequent result is that he is liable to waver between two opposite courses of action, both of them mistaken. On the one hand, he may treat his bride as a prostitute, or as a novice to be speedily moulded into the sexual shape he is most accustomed to, thus running the risk either of perverting or of disgusting her. On the other hand, realizing that the purity and dignity of his bride place her in an altogether different class from the women he has previously known, he may go to the opposite extreme of treating her with an exaggerated respect, and so fail either to arouse or to gratify her erotic needs. It is difficult to say which of these two courses of action is the more unfortunate; the result of both, however, is frequently found to be that a nominal marriage never becomes a real marriage.[385]
The lack of understanding among women regarding the art of love, along with their complete unpreparedness for the realities of sexual life, might not be such a bad sign for marriage if it were always balanced by the knowledge, skill, and thoughtfulness of the husband. However, that's not always the case. In most situations, especially in England, we see a large group of men whose knowledge of women before marriage has mainly come from prostitutes, and a significant number of men who have had no close interactions with women, with their sexual experiences limited to masturbation or other self-pleasure, as well as flirting. Certainly, a sensitive and intelligent man, regardless of his training or lack thereof, may succeed with patience and understanding in overcoming the challenges to love created by the mix of ignorance and biases that often replace proper education in a woman's erotic life. But it can't be said that either of these two groups of men is well-prepared for the task. The training and experience a man gets from a prostitute, even in relatively good circumstances, hardly equip him for approaching a woman of his own class who lacks intimate erotic experiences. The result is often that he struggles between two equally wrong approaches. On one side, he might treat his bride like a prostitute or as a beginner to quickly shape into the sexual form he’s used to, risking either perverting or repulsing her. On the other side, realizing that his bride’s purity and dignity set her apart from the women he has previously known, he may go to the other extreme of treating her with excessive respect, failing to stimulate or satisfy her erotic needs. It's hard to say which of these two approaches is worse; however, the outcome of both often leads to a nominal marriage that never becomes a real marriage.
Yet there can be no doubt whatever that the other group of men, the men who enter marriage without any erotic experiences, run even greater risks. These are often the best of men, both as regards personal character and mental power. It is indeed astonishing to find how ignorant, both practically and theoretically, very able and highly educated men may be concerning sexual matters.
Yet there can be no doubt that the other group of men, those who enter marriage without any sexual experiences, face even greater risks. These men are often the best, both in terms of personal character and intelligence. It's truly surprising how uninformed, both practically and theoretically, very capable and well-educated men can be when it comes to sexual matters.
"Complete abstinence during youth," says Freud (Sexual-Probleme, March, 1908), "is not the best preparation for marriage in a young man. Women divine this and prefer those of their wooers who have already proved themselves to be men with other women." Ellen Key, referring to the demand sometimes made by women for purity in men (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 96), asks whether women realize the effect of their admiration of the experienced and confident man who knows women, on the shy and hesitating youth, "who perhaps has been struggling hard for his erotic purity, in the hope that a woman's happy smile will be the reward of his conquest, and who is condemned to see how that woman looks down on him with lofty compassion and gazes with admiration at the leopard's spots." When the lover, in Laura Marholm's Was war es? says to the heroine, "I have never yet touched a woman," the girl "turns from him with horror, and it seemed to her that a cold shudder went through her, a chilling deception." The same feeling is manifested in an exaggerated form in the passion often experienced by vigorous girls of eighteen to twenty-four for old roués. (This has been discussed by Forel, Die Sexuelle Frage, pp. 217 et seq.)
"Complete abstinence during youth," says Freud (Sexual-Probleme, March, 1908), "is not the best preparation for marriage for a young man. Women sense this and prefer those suitors who have already shown themselves to be experienced with other women." Ellen Key, speaking about the expectation sometimes placed on men for purity (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 96), asks whether women understand the impact of their admiration for the experienced and confident man on the shy and hesitant young man, "who may have been working hard to maintain his erotic purity, hoping that a woman's joyful smile will be the reward for his efforts, and who is forced to see that woman look down on him with lofty compassion while admiring the 'leopard's spots' of others." When the lover in Laura Marholm's Was war es? tells the heroine, "I have never yet touched a woman," the girl "turns away from him in horror, feeling a cold shudder, a chilling deception." This same feeling is shown in an exaggerated way in the strong attraction often felt by vibrant girls aged eighteen to twenty-four for older men. (This has been discussed by Forel, Die Sexuelle Frage, pp. 217 et seq.)
Other factors may enter in a woman's preference for the man who has conquered other women. Even the most religious and moral young woman, Valera remarks (Doña Luz, p. 205), likes to marry a man who has loved many women; it gives a greater value to his choice of her; it also offers her an opportunity of converting him to higher ideals. No doubt when the inexperienced man meets in marriage the equally inexperienced woman they often succeed in adapting themselves to each other and a permanent modus vivendi is constituted. But it is by no means so always. If the wife is taught by instinct or experience she is apt to resent the awkwardness and helplessness of her husband in the art of love. Even if she is ignorant she may be permanently alienated and become chronically frigid, through the brutal inconsiderateness of her ignorant husband in carrying out what he conceives to be his marital duties. (It has already been necessary to touch on this point in discussing "The Sexual Impulse in Women" in vol. iii of these Studies.) Sometimes, indeed, serious physical injury has been inflicted on the bride owing to this ignorance of the husband.
Other factors might influence a woman's attraction to a man who has been with other women. Even the most religious and moral young woman, Valera notes (Doña Luz, p. 205), prefers to marry a man who has loved many women; it adds value to his choice of her and gives her a chance to inspire him toward higher ideals. No doubt, when an inexperienced man marries an equally inexperienced woman, they often manage to adapt to each other, establishing a lasting modus vivendi. However, this is not always the case. If the wife has learned through instinct or experience, she may resent her husband’s awkwardness and lack of skill in love. Even if she is unaware, she might become perpetually distant and emotionally cold due to her husband’s thoughtless approach to what he believes are his marital responsibilities. (This point was previously addressed in discussing "The Sexual Impulse in Women" in vol. iii of these Studies.) Indeed, there have been times when a bride has suffered serious physical harm because of her husband’s ignorance.
"I take it that most men have had pre-matrimonial sex-relationships," a correspondent writes. "But I have known one man at least who, up till the age of twenty, had not even a rudimentary idea of sex matters. At twenty-nine, a few months before marriage, he came to ask me how coitus was performed, and displayed an ignorance that I could not believe to exist in the mind of an otherwise intelligent man. He had evidently no instinct to guide him, as the brutes have, and his reason was unable to supply the necessary knowledge. It is very curious that man should lose this instinctive knowledge. I have known another man almost equally ignorant. He also came to me for advice in marital duties. Both of these men masturbated, and they were normally passionate." Such cases are not so very rare. Usually, however, a certain amount of information has been acquired from some for the most part unsatisfactory source, and the ignorance is only partial, though not on that account less dangerous.
"I believe most men have had sexual relationships before marriage," a correspondent writes. "But I’ve known at least one man who, by the age of twenty, didn’t even have a basic understanding of sex. At twenty-nine, just a few months before getting married, he asked me how intercourse was done and showed an ignorance I couldn't believe existed in someone otherwise intelligent. He clearly didn't have any instinct to guide him, like animals do, and his reasoning couldn't provide the knowledge he needed. It's really strange that men can lose this innate knowledge. I’ve known another man who was almost as clueless. He also came to me for guidance on marital duties. Both of these men masturbated, and they had normal sexual desires." Such cases aren't all that uncommon. Usually, though, a bit of information has been picked up from mostly unsatisfactory sources, and the ignorance is only partial, but that doesn't make it any less dangerous.
Balzac has compared the average husband to an orang-utan trying to play the violin. "Love, as we instinctively feel, is the most melodious of harmonies. Woman is a delicious instrument of pleasure, but it is necessary to know its quivering strings, study the pose of it, its timid keyboard, the changing and capricious fingering. How many orangs—men, I mean, marry without knowing what a woman is!... Nearly all men marry in the most profound ignorance of women and of love" (Balzac, Physiologie du Mariage, Meditation VII).
Balzac compared the typical husband to an orangutan trying to play the violin. "Love, as we instinctively know, is the most beautiful harmony. A woman is a delightful instrument of pleasure, but it’s essential to understand her delicate strings, study her posture, her shy keys, and the ever-changing, unpredictable finger movements. How many men, I mean orangutans, marry without knowing what a woman truly is!... Almost all men marry with a deep ignorance of women and love" (Balzac, Physiologie du Mariage, Meditation VII).
Neugebauer (Monatsschrift für Geburtshülfe, 1889, Bk. ix, pp. 221 et seq.) has collected over one hundred and fifty cases of injury to women in coitus inflicted by the penis. The causes were brutality, drunkenness of one or both parties, unusual position in coitus, disproportion of the organs, pathological conditions of the woman's organs (Cf. R. W. Taylor, Practical Treatise on Sexual Disorders, Ch. XXXV). Blumreich also discusses the injuries produced by violent coitus (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. ii, pp. 770-779). C. M. Green (Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, 13 Ap., 1893) records two cases of rupture of vagina by sexual intercourse in newly-married ladies, without evidence of any great violence. Mylott (British Medical Journal, Sept. 16, 1899) records a similar case occurring on the wedding night. The amount of force sometimes exerted in coitus is evidenced by the cases, occurring from time to time, in which intercourse takes place by the urethra.
Neugebauer (Monatsschrift für Geburtshülfe, 1889, Bk. ix, pp. 221 et seq.) has compiled over one hundred and fifty cases of injuries to women during intercourse caused by the penis. The reasons included brutality, drunkenness of one or both partners, unusual positions during sex, size disparities between the organs, and pathological conditions of the woman’s organs (Cf. R. W. Taylor, Practical Treatise on Sexual Disorders, Ch. XXXV). Blumreich also examines the injuries resulting from violent intercourse (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. ii, pp. 770-779). C. M. Green (Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, April 13, 1893) reports two cases of vaginal rupture during intercourse involving newly-married women, without signs of significant violence. Mylott (British Medical Journal, Sept. 16, 1899) documents a similar case occurring on the wedding night. The level of force sometimes used during intercourse is highlighted by the occasional incidents where intercourse occurs through the urethra.
Eulenburg finds (Sexuale Neuropathie, p. 69) that vaginismus, a condition of spasmodic contraction of the vulva and exaggerated sensibility on the attempt to effect coitus, is due to forcible and unskilful attempts at the first coitus. Adler (Die Mangelhafte Geschlechtsempfindung des Weibes, p. 160) also believes that the scarred remains of the hymen, together with painful memories of a violent first coitus, are the most frequent cause of vaginismus.
Eulenburg finds (Sexuale Neuropathie, p. 69) that vaginismus, a condition involving involuntary contraction of the vulva and heightened sensitivity during attempts at intercourse, is caused by forceful and clumsy attempts at first sex. Adler (Die Mangelhafte Geschlechtsempfindung des Weibes, p. 160) also believes that the scarred remnants of the hymen, along with painful memories of a traumatic first sexual experience, are the most common reasons for vaginismus.
The occasional cases, however, of physical injury or of pathological condition produced by violent coitus at the beginning of marriage constitute but a very small portion of the evidence which witnesses to the evil results of the prevalent ignorance regarding the art of love. As regards Germany, Fürbringer writes (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 215): "I am perfectly satisfied that the number of young married women who have a lasting painful recollection of their first sexual intercourse exceeds by far the number of those who venture to consult a doctor." As regards England, the following experience is instructive: A lady asked six married women in succession, privately, on the same day concerning their bridal experiences. To all, sexual intercourse had come as a shock; two had been absolutely ignorant about sexual matters; the others had thought they knew what coitus was, but were none the less shocked. These women were of the middle class, perhaps above the average in intelligence; one was a doctor.
The occasional cases of physical injury or medical issues caused by violent sex at the start of marriage are just a small part of the evidence showing the harmful effects of widespread ignorance about love. In Germany, Fürbringer states (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 215): "I am completely convinced that the number of young married women who have a lasting painful memory of their first sexual experience is much higher than the number who dare to see a doctor." In England, an enlightening experience occurred when a woman privately asked six married women about their wedding night experiences on the same day. For all of them, sexual intercourse was a shock; two were completely unaware of sexual matters; the others thought they knew what sex was but were still taken aback. These women were from the middle class, and perhaps above average in intelligence; one was a doctor.
Breuer and Freud, in their Studien über Hysterie (p. 216), pointed out that the bridal night is practically often a rape, and that it sometimes leads to hysteria, which is not cured until satisfying sexual relationships are established. Even when there is no violence, Kisch (Sexual Life of Woman, Part II) regards awkward and inexperienced coitus, leading to incomplete excitement of the wife, as the chief cause of dyspareunia, or absence of sexual gratification, although gross disproportion in the size of the male and female organs, or disease in either party, may lead to the same result. Dyspareunia, Kisch adds, is astonishingly frequent, though sometimes women complain of it without justification in order to arouse sympathy for themselves as sacrifices on the altar of marriage; the constant sign is absence of ejaculation on the woman's part. Kisch also observes that wedding night deflorations are often really rapes. One young bride, known to him, was so ignorant of the physical side of love, and so overwhelmed by her husband's first attempt at intercourse, that she fled from the house in the night, and nothing would ever persuade her to return to her husband. (It is worth noting that by Canon law, under such circumstances, the Church might hold the marriage invalid. See Thomas Slater's Moral Theology, vol. ii, p. 318, and a case in point, both quoted by Rev. C. J. Shebbeare, "Marriage Law in the Church of England," Nineteenth Century, Aug., 1909, p. 263.) Kisch considers, also, that wedding tours are a mistake; since the fatigue, the excitement, the long journeys, sight-seeing, false modesty, bad hotel arrangements, often combine to affect the bride unfavorably and produce the germs of serious illness. This is undoubtedly the case.
Breuer and Freud, in their Studies on Hysteria (p. 216), noted that the wedding night often feels like a rape, and this can sometimes lead to hysteria, which isn’t resolved until healthy sexual relationships are formed. Even without violence, Kisch (Sexual Life of Woman, Part II) believes that awkward and inexperienced sex, resulting in the wife feeling unfulfilled, is a major cause of dyspareunia, or lack of sexual satisfaction, though significant size differences between partners or illness can also cause this issue. Kisch adds that dyspareunia is surprisingly common, although some women may complain about it unjustly to gain sympathy as victims of marriage; the main indicator is the absence of the woman's ejaculation. Kisch also points out that many wedding night deflowerings are essentially rapes. One young bride he knew was so uninformed about the physical aspects of love and so overwhelmed by her husband's first attempt at intercourse that she ran from the house at night and would never go back to him. (It’s important to note that under Canon law, the Church might consider the marriage invalid in such cases. See Thomas Slater's Moral Theology, vol. ii, p. 318, and a relevant case, both cited by Rev. C. J. Shebbeare, "Marriage Law in the Church of England," Nineteenth Century, Aug., 1909, p. 263.) Kisch also thinks taking wedding trips is a mistake; the fatigue, excitement, long travels, sightseeing, false modesty, and poor hotel arrangements often negatively impact the bride and can lead to serious health issues. This is undoubtedly true.
The extreme psychic importance of the manner in which the act of defloration is accomplished is strongly emphasized by Adler. He regards it as a frequent cause of permanent sexual anæsthesia. "This first moment in which the man's individuality attains its full rights often decides the whole of life. The unskilled, over-excited husband can then implant the seed of feminine insensibility, and by continued awkwardness and coarseness develop it into permanent anæsthesia. The man who takes possession of his rights with reckless brutal masculine force merely causes his wife anxiety and pain, and with every repetition of the act increases her repulsion.... A large proportion of cold-natured women represent a sacrifice by men, due either to unconscious awkwardness, or, occasionally, to conscious brutality towards the tender plant which should have been cherished with peculiar art and love, but has been robbed of the splendor of its development. All her life long, a wistful and trembling woman will preserve the recollection of a brutal wedding night, and, often enough, it remains a perpetual source of inhibition every time that the husband seeks anew to gratify his desires without adapting himself to his wife's desires for love" (O. Adler, Die Mangelhafte Geschlechtsempfindung des Weibes, pp. 159 et seq., 181 et seq.). "I have seen an honest woman shudder with horror at her husband's approach," wrote Diderot long ago in his essay "Sur les Femmes"; "I have seen her plunge in the bath and feel herself never sufficiently washed from the stain of duty." The same may still be said of a vast army of women, victims of a pernicious system of morality which has taught them false ideas of "conjugal duty" and has failed to teach their husbands the art of love.
The extreme psychological importance of how defloration happens is strongly highlighted by Adler. He sees it as a common cause of lasting sexual insensitivity. "This first moment when a man fully asserts his individuality often shapes his entire life. An inexperienced and overly excited husband can instill feelings of emotional numbness in his wife, and through ongoing clumsiness and insensitivity, turn it into permanent insensitivity. A man who aggressively claims his rights with reckless masculine force only causes his wife anxiety and pain, and with each encounter, increases her aversion. A large number of women who are emotionally cold are a result of men either being awkward without realizing it, or, at times, being consciously brutal towards the delicate nature that needed to be nurtured with particular care and love, but has been stripped of its potential for growth. Throughout her life, a wistful and fearful woman will hold onto the memory of a harsh wedding night, and often enough, it continues to be a constant source of inhibition whenever her husband tries again to fulfill his desires without considering her wishes for love" (O. Adler, Die Mangelhafte Geschlechtsempfindung des Weibes, pp. 159 et seq., 181 et seq.). "I have seen an honest woman recoil in horror at her husband's approach," wrote Diderot long ago in his essay "Sur les Femmes"; "I have seen her jump into the bath and feel that she could never wash off the stain of obligation." The same can still be said for countless women, victims of a harmful moral system that has taught them misguided ideas of "marital duty" and has failed to educate their husbands on the art of love.
Women, when their fine natural instincts have not been hopelessly perverted by the pruderies and prejudices which are so diligently instilled into them, understand the art of love more readily than men. Even when little more than children they can often completely take the cue that is given to them. Much more than is the case with men, at all events under civilized conditions, the art of love is with them an art that Nature makes. They always know more of love, as Montaigne long since said, than men can teach them, for it is a discipline that is born in their blood.[386]
Women, when their natural instincts haven’t been completely twisted by the strict morals and biases that are often imposed on them, grasp the art of love more easily than men do. Even as young girls, they can often pick up on what’s being communicated to them. Unlike men, especially in our civilized society, love tends to come naturally to them. As Montaigne stated long ago, they inherently know more about love than men can ever teach them, as it’s a skill that’s ingrained in them.[386]
The extensive inquiries of Sanford Bell (loc. cit.) show that the emotions of sex-love may appear as early as the third year. It must also be remembered that, both physically and psychically, girls are more precocious, more mature, than boys (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, fourth edition, pp. 34 et seq., 200, etc.). Thus, by the time she has reached the age of puberty a girl has had time to become an accomplished mistress of the minor arts of love. That the age of puberty is for girls the age of love seems to be widely recognized by the popular mind. Thus in a popular song of Bresse a girl sings:—
The extensive research by Sanford Bell (loc. cit.) shows that feelings of romantic love can begin to emerge as early as the third year. It's also important to note that, both physically and emotionally, girls mature faster than boys (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, fourth edition, pp. 34 et seq., 200, etc.). By the time a girl hits puberty, she has had the opportunity to become quite skilled in the smaller aspects of love. The idea that puberty marks the beginning of romantic love for girls seems to be commonly accepted in society. For instance, in a popular song from Bresse, a girl sings:—
This matter of the sexual precocity of girls has an important bearing on the question of the "age of consent," or the age at which it should be legal for a girl to consent to sexual intercourse. Until within the last twenty-five years there has been a tendency to set a very low age (even as low as ten) as the age above which a man commits no offence in having sexual intercourse with a girl. In recent years there has been a tendency to run to the opposite and equally unfortunate extreme of raising it to a very late age. In England, by the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885, the age of consent was raised to sixteen (this clause of the bill being carried in the House of Commons by a majority of 108). This seems to be the reasonable age at which the limit should be set and its extreme high limit in temperate climates. It is the age recognized by the Italian Criminal Code, and in many other parts of the civilized world. Gladstone, however, was in favor of raising it to eighteen, and Howard, in discussing this question as regards the United States (Matrimonial Institutions, vol. iii, pp. 195-203), thinks it ought everywhere to be raised to twenty-one, so coinciding with the age of legal majority at which a woman can enter into business or political relations. There has been, during recent years, a wide limit of variation in the legislation of the different American States on this point, the differences of the two limits being as much as eight years, and in some important States the act of intercourse with a girl under eighteen is declared to be "rape," and punishable with imprisonment for life.
This issue of girls' early sexual maturity has a significant impact on the topic of the "age of consent," which refers to the age at which a girl can legally agree to sexual intercourse. Up until the last twenty-five years, there has been a trend to set a very low age (even as young as ten) for when a man does not commit an offense in having sexual intercourse with a girl. Recently, there's been a shift to the opposite extreme of raising it to a much older age. In England, the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885 raised the age of consent to sixteen (this part of the bill was approved in the House of Commons by a majority of 108). This age seems reasonable for setting the limit, particularly in temperate climates. It’s the age recognized by the Italian Criminal Code and in many other parts of the civilized world. However, Gladstone supported raising it to eighteen, and Howard, in discussing this issue regarding the United States (Matrimonial Institutions, vol. iii, pp. 195-203), believes it should be increased to twenty-one, aligning with the age of legal adulthood at which a woman can engage in business or political matters. In recent years, there has been a wide range of legislative differences among the various American States on this matter, with the gap between the two limits reaching up to eight years. In some significant States, sexual intercourse with a girl under eighteen is classified as "rape" and is punishable by life imprisonment.
Such enactments as these, however, it must be recognized, are arbitrary, artificial, and unnatural. They do not rest on a sound biological basis, and cannot be enforced by the common sense of the community. There is no proper analogy between the age of legal majority which is fixed, approximately, with reference to the ability to comprehend abstract matters of intelligence, and the age of sexual maturity which occurs much earlier, both physically and psychically, and is determined in women by a very precise biological event: the completion of puberty in the onset of menstruation. Among peoples living under natural conditions in all parts of the world it is recognized that a girl becomes sexually a woman at puberty; at that epoch she receives her initiation into adult life and becomes a wife and a mother. To declare that the act of intercourse with a woman who, by the natural instinct of mankind generally, is regarded as old enough for all the duties of womanhood, is a criminal act of rape, punishable by imprisonment for life, can only be considered an abuse of language, and, what is worse, an abuse of law, even if we leave all psychological and moral considerations out of the question, for it deprives the conception of rape of all that renders it naturally and properly revolting.
Such laws, however, need to be recognized as arbitrary, artificial, and unnatural. They don’t have a solid biological foundation and cannot be supported by the common sense of the community. There’s no real comparison between the age of legal adulthood, which is set roughly based on the ability to understand complex ideas, and the age of sexual maturity, which happens much earlier both physically and mentally. For women, it's marked by a specific biological event: the completion of puberty with the onset of menstruation. In societies that live under natural conditions around the world, it’s understood that a girl becomes a woman at puberty; at that time, she steps into adult life and becomes a wife and mother. Declaring that having intercourse with a woman, who by the natural instincts of humanity is viewed as old enough to take on the responsibilities of womanhood, is a criminal act of rape, punishable by life imprisonment, can only be seen as a misuse of language and, even worse, a misuse of law. Even without considering psychological and moral factors, it strips the concept of rape of everything that makes it naturally and rightfully appalling.
The sound view in this question is clearly the view that it is the girl's puberty which constitutes the criterion of the man's criminality in sexually approaching her. In the temperate regions of Europe and North America the average age of the appearance of menstruation, the critical moment in the establishment of complete puberty, is fifteen (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, Ch. XI; the facts are set forth at length in Kisch's Sexual Life of Woman, 1909). Therefore it is reasonable that the act of an adult man in having sexual connection with a girl under sixteen, with or without her consent, should properly be a criminal act, severely punishable. In those lands where the average age of puberty is higher or lower, the age of consent should be raised or lowered accordingly. (Bruno Meyer, arguing against any attempt to raise the age of consent above sixteen, considers that the proper age of consent is generally fourteen, for, as he rightly insists, the line of division is between the ripe and the unripe personality, and while the latter should be strictly preserved from the sphere of sexuality, only voluntary, not compulsory, influence should be brought to bear on the former. Sexual-Probleme, Ap., 1909.)
The sound view on this issue is clearly that it’s the girl's puberty that serves as the benchmark for determining the man's criminal behavior in sexually approaching her. In temperate regions of Europe and North America, the average age for the onset of menstruation, which marks complete puberty, is fifteen (see, e.g., Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman, Ch. XI; detailed facts can be found in Kisch's Sexual Life of Woman, 1909). Therefore, it makes sense that an adult man having sexual relations with a girl under sixteen, regardless of her consent, should be considered a criminal act and subject to severe punishment. In places where the average age of puberty is different, the age of consent should be adjusted accordingly. (Bruno Meyer, who argues against raising the age of consent above sixteen, believes that the appropriate age of consent is generally fourteen, because he correctly asserts that the distinction is between mature and immature personalities, and while the latter should be strictly protected from sexual matters, the former should only face voluntary, not compulsory, influence. Sexual-Probleme, Ap., 1909.)
If we take into our view the wider considerations of psychology, morality, and law, we shall find ample justification for this point of view. We have to remember that a girl, during all the years of ordinary school life, is always more advanced, both physically and psychically, than a boy of the same age, and we have to recognize that this precocity covers her sexual development; for even though it is true, on the average, that active sexual desire is not usually aroused in women until a somewhat later age, there is also truth in the observation of Mr. Thomas Hardy (New Review, June, 1894): "It has never struck me that the spider is invariably male and the fly invariably female." Even, therefore, when sexual intercourse takes place between a girl and a youth somewhat older than herself, she is likely to be the more mature, the more self-possessed, and the more responsible of the two, and often the one who has taken the more active part in initiating the act. (This point has been discussed in "The Sexual Impulse in Women" in vol. iii of these Studies.) It must also be remembered that when a girl has once reached the age of puberty, and put on all the manner and habits as well as the physical development of a woman, it is no longer possible for a man always to estimate her age. It is easy to see that a girl has not yet reached the age of puberty; it is impossible to tell whether a mature woman is under or over eighteen; it is therefore, to say the least, unjust to make her male partner's fate for life depend on the recognition of a distinction which has no basis in nature. Such considerations are, indeed, so obvious that there is no chance of carrying out thoroughly in practice the doctrine that a man should be imprisoned for life for having intercourse with a girl who is over the age of sixteen. It is better, from the legal point of view, to cast the net less widely and to be quite sure that it is adapted to catch the real and conscious offender, who may be punished without offending the common sense of the community. (Cf. Bloch, The Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. XXIV; he considers that the "age of consent" should begin with the completion of the sixteenth year.)
If we take a broader look at psychology, morality, and law, we’ll find plenty of reasons to support this perspective. We need to remember that, throughout their regular school years, a girl is typically more advanced, both physically and mentally, than a boy of the same age. It's important to acknowledge that this early development includes her sexual maturity; even though, on average, women tend to feel strong sexual desire somewhat later, there’s also truth in what Mr. Thomas Hardy observed (New Review, June, 1894): "It has never struck me that the spider is invariably male and the fly invariably female." Therefore, when sexual intercourse occurs between a girl and a boy who is a bit older, she is likely to be the more mature, self-assured, and responsible one, often the one who has taken the lead in initiating the act. (This point has been discussed in "The Sexual Impulse in Women" in vol. iii of these Studies.) It should also be noted that once a girl reaches puberty and adopts the behaviors and physical traits of a woman, it becomes difficult for a man to accurately judge her age. It’s easy to see when a girl hasn’t reached puberty, but it’s nearly impossible to tell if a mature woman is under or over eighteen; therefore, it is, at the very least, unfair to base a man’s lifelong fate on a distinction that has no natural foundation. These considerations are so clear that enforcing a law stating that a man should face life imprisonment for having intercourse with a girl over sixteen is impractical. It’s more sensible from a legal perspective to set the parameters more narrowly and ensure that they target genuine offenders, who can be punished without going against the community’s sense of justice. (Cf. Bloch, The Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. XXIV; he believes that the "age of consent" should start at the completion of the sixteenth year.)
It may be necessary to add that the establishment of the "age of consent" on this basis by no means implies that intercourse with girls but little over sixteen should be encouraged, or even socially and morally tolerated. Here, however, we are not in the sphere of law. It is the natural tendency of the well-born and well-nurtured girl under civilized conditions to hold herself in reserve, and the pressure whereby that tendency is maintained and furthered must be supplied by the whole of her environment, primarily by the intelligent reflection of the girl herself when she has reached the age of adolescence. To foster in a young woman who has long passed the epoch of puberty the notion that she has no responsibility in the guardianship of her own body and soul is out of harmony with modern feeling, as well as unfavorable to the training of women for the world. The States which have been induced to adopt the high limit of the age of consent have, indeed, thereby made an abject confession of their inability to maintain a decent moral level by more legitimate means; they may profitably serve as a warning rather than as an example.
It’s important to note that establishing the "age of consent" like this doesn’t mean that sexual activity with girls just over sixteen should be encouraged or even socially and morally accepted. Here, though, we are not discussing legal issues. A well-bred and well-raised girl in a civilized society naturally tends to hold herself back, and the support for that tendency must come from her entire environment, especially from her own thoughtful reflections when she reaches adolescence. Instilling in a young woman who has already gone through puberty the idea that she has no responsibility for the care of her own body and soul goes against modern beliefs and is not helpful for preparing women for the real world. The states that have chosen to set a higher age of consent have essentially admitted they cannot maintain a decent moral standard through better methods; they should serve more as a warning than an example.
The knowledge of women cannot, however, replace, the ignorance of men, but, on the contrary, merely serves to reveal it. For in the art of love the man must necessarily take the initiative. It is he who must first unseal the mystery of the intimacies and audacities which the woman's heart may hold. The risk of meeting with even the shadow of contempt or disgust is too serious to allow a woman, even a wife, to reveal the secrets of love to a man who has not shown himself to be an initiate.[387] Numberless are the jovial and contented husbands who have never suspected, and will never know, that their wives carry about with them, sometimes with silent resentment, the ache of mysterious tabus. The feeling that there are delicious privacies and privileges which she has never been asked to take, or forced to accept, often erotically divorces a wife from a husband who never realizes what he has missed.[388] The case of such husbands is all the harder because, for the most part, all that they have done is the result of the morality that has been preached to them. They have been taught from boyhood to be strenuous and manly and clean-minded, to seek by all means to put out of their minds the thought of women or the longing for sensuous indulgence. They have been told on all sides that only in marriage is it right or even safe to approach women. They have acquired the notion that sexual indulgence and all that appertains to it is something low and degrading, at the worst a mere natural necessity, at the best a duty to be accomplished in a direct, honorable and straight-forward manner. No one seems to have told them that love is an art, and that to gain real possession of a woman's soul and body is a task that requires the whole of a man's best skill and insight. It may well be that when a man learns his lesson too late he is inclined to turn ferociously on the society that by its conspiracy of pseudo-morality has done its best to ruin his life, and that of his wife. In some of these cases husband or wife or both are finally attracted to a third person, and a divorce enables them to start afresh with better experience under happier auspices. But as things are at present that is a sad and serious process, for many impossible. They are happier, as Milton pointed out, whose trials of love before marriage "have been so many divorces to teach them experience."
The knowledge of women can’t replace the ignorance of men; instead, it only highlights it. In the realm of love, the man must take the lead. He’s the one who needs to first uncover the complexities and boldness that a woman’s heart may hold. The risk of facing even a hint of contempt or disgust is too great to let a woman— even a wife— share the secrets of love with a man who hasn’t proven himself to be an experienced partner. There are countless joyful and satisfied husbands who have no idea and will never find out that their wives carry, sometimes quietly resentful, the burden of mysterious taboos. The awareness that there are delightful moments and privileges she’s never been offered or compelled to accept often creates a disconnect between a wife and a husband, who remains oblivious to what he has missed. This reality is particularly tough for such husbands because, for the most part, their actions stem from the morals they've been taught. They’ve learned since childhood to be tough, manly, and pure-minded, to strive to banish thoughts of women or desires for physical enjoyment. They've been told from all sides that only within marriage is it appropriate or even safe to approach women. They’ve come to believe that sexual enjoyment and everything related to it is something base and degrading, at worst just a natural need, or at best a duty to fulfill in a straightforward, honorable manner. No one seems to have informed them that love is an art, and truly attaining a woman's soul and body is a challenge that requires a man’s utmost skill and understanding. It’s possible that when a man learns this lesson too late, he feels a strong urge to lash out at the society that, through its fake morality, has done its best to ruin his life and that of his wife. In some cases, either the husband or wife, or both, may end up drawn to a third person, and a divorce allows them to start anew with better insights under more favorable conditions. However, as things currently stand, this is a sad and serious process, and for many, it’s impossible. They are happier, as Milton pointed out, whose experiences of love before marriage "have been so many divorces to teach them experience."
The general ignorance concerning the art of love may be gauged by the fact that perhaps the question in this matter most frequently asked is the crude question how often sexual intercourse should take place. That is a question, indeed, which has occupied the founders of religion, the law-givers, and the philosophers of mankind, from the earliest times.[389] Zoroaster said it should be once in every nine days. The laws of Manes allowed intercourse during fourteen days of the month, but a famous ancient Hindu physician, Susruta, prescribed it six times a month, except during the heat of summer when it should be once a month, while other Hindu authorities say three or four times a month. Solon's requirement of the citizen that intercourse should take place three times a month fairly agrees with Zoroaster's. Mohammed, in the Koran, decrees intercourse once a week. The Jewish Talmud is more discriminating, and distinguishes between different classes of people; on the vigorous and healthy young man, not compelled to work hard, once a day is imposed, on the ordinary working man twice a week, on learned men once a week. Luther considered twice a week the proper frequency of intercourse.
The general lack of knowledge about the art of love can be seen in the fact that one of the most common questions people ask is how often sexual intercourse should happen. This question has been debated by religious leaders, lawmakers, and philosophers throughout history.[389] Zoroaster stated it should occur once every nine days. The laws of Manes permitted intercourse for fourteen days each month, while the renowned ancient Hindu physician Susruta recommended it six times a month, except during the summer heat when it should be once a month. Other Hindu sources suggest three or four times a month. Solon’s guideline for citizens recommended intercourse three times a month, which aligns with Zoroaster's view. Mohammed, in the Koran, prescribed it once a week. The Jewish Talmud is more specific, differentiating between types of people: a vigorous young man not engaged in hard labor should have intercourse once a day, the average working man twice a week, and learned men once a week. Luther thought that twice a week was the right frequency for intercourse.
It will be observed that, as we might expect, these estimates tend to allow a greater interval in the earlier ages when erotic stimulation was probably less and erotic erethism probably rare, and to involve an increased frequency as we approach modern civilization. It will also be observed that variation occurs within fairly narrow limits. This is probably due to the fact that these law-givers were in all cases men. Women law-givers would certainly have shown a much greater tendency to variation, since the variations of the sexual impulse are greater in women.[390] Thus Zenobia required the approach of her husband once a month, provided that impregnation had not taken place the previous month, while another queen went very far to the other extreme, for we are told that the Queen of Aragon, after mature deliberation, ordained six times a day as the proper rule in a legitimate marriage.[391]
It can be seen that, as expected, these estimates generally allow for a longer interval during earlier ages when sexual stimulation was likely less common and sexual arousal was probably rare, and that the frequency increases as we move toward modern civilization. It's also noticeable that variation happens within fairly narrow limits. This is likely because all of these lawmakers were men. Women lawmakers would certainly have shown a much greater tendency for variation, since the variations in sexual desire are more pronounced in women. Thus, Zenobia required her husband to approach her once a month, unless conception had occurred the previous month, while another queen took the opposite approach, as it’s said that the Queen of Aragon, after careful consideration, decreed that six times a day was the proper standard in a legitimate marriage.
It may be remarked, in passing, that the estimates of the proper frequency of sexual intercourse may always be taken to assume that there is a cessation during the menstrual period. This is especially the case as regards early periods of culture when intercourse at this time is usually regarded as either dangerous or sinful, or both. (This point has been discussed in the "Phenomena of Periodicity" in volume i of these Studies.) Under civilized conditions the inhibition is due to æsthetic reasons, the wife, even if she desires intercourse, feeling a repugnance to be approached at a time when she regards herself as "disgusting," and the husband easily sharing this attitude. It may, however, be pointed out that the æsthetic objection is very largely the result of the superstitious horror of water which is still widely felt at this time, and would, to some extent, disappear if a more scrupulous cleanliness were observed. It remains a good general rule to abstain from sexual intercourse during the menstrual period, but in some cases there may be adequate reason for breaking it. This is so when desire is specially strong at this time, or when intercourse is physically difficult at other times but easier during the relaxation of the parts caused by menstruation. It must be remembered also that the time when the menstrual flow is beginning to cease is probably, more than any other period of the month, the biologically proper time for sexual intercourse, since not only is intercourse easiest then, and also most gratifying to the female, but it affords the most favorable opportunity for securing fertilization.
It’s worth noting that the recommended frequency of sexual intercourse typically assumes a break during the menstrual period. This is particularly true for earlier cultures where having sex at this time was often seen as either risky or sinful, or both. (This topic is discussed in the "Phenomena of Periodicity" in volume i of these Studies.) In more modern contexts, this avoidance is mainly due to aesthetic reasons. A wife, even if she wants to have sex, often feels uncomfortable being approached when she considers herself "unattractive," and the husband tends to share this view. However, it's important to mention that this aesthetic objection is largely rooted in an ongoing superstitious fear of menstruation that still exists today, which would lessen if greater cleanliness were practiced. Generally, it’s a good idea to avoid sexual intercourse during menstruation, but there are some cases where it may be reasonable to break this rule. This can happen when desire is particularly strong during this time or when sexual intercourse is physically challenging at other times but easier when menstruation causes a relaxing of the body. It’s also important to remember that the period when menstruation is just starting to lighten is probably the most biologically appropriate time for sexual intercourse, as it not only facilitates easier and more satisfying sex for the woman but also offers the best chance for fertilization.
Schurig long since brought together evidence (Parthenologia, pp. 302 et seq.) showing that coitus is most easy during menstruation. Some of the Catholic theologians (like Sanchez, and later, Liguori), going against the popular opinion, have distinctly permitted intercourse during menstruation, though many earlier theologians regarded it as a mortal sin. From the medical side, Kossmann (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 249) advocates coitus not only at the end of menstruation, but even during the latter part of the period, as being the time when women most usually need it, the marked disagreeableness of temper often shown by women at this time, he says, being connected with the suppression, demanded by custom, of a natural desire. "It is almost always during menstruation that the first clouds appear on the matrimonial horizon."
Schurig has long gathered evidence (Parthenologia, pp. 302 et seq.) showing that intercourse is easiest during menstruation. Some Catholic theologians (like Sanchez and later, Liguori), going against popular belief, have clearly allowed sex during menstruation, though many earlier theologians viewed it as a serious sin. From a medical perspective, Kossmann (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 249) supports having sex not only at the end of menstruation but even during the later part of the period, as this is typically when women most commonly need it. He notes that the significant irritability often shown by women during this time is linked to the suppression of a natural desire, as required by social norms. "It is almost always during menstruation that the first clouds appear on the matrimonial horizon."
In modern times the physiologists and physicians who have expressed any opinion on this subject have usually come very near to Luther's dictum. Haller said that intercourse should not be much more frequent than twice a week.[392] Acton said once a week, and so also Hammond, even for healthy men between the ages of twenty-five and forty.[393] Fürbringer only slightly exceeds this estimate by advocating from fifty to one hundred single acts in the year.[394] Forel advises two or three times a week for a man in the prime of manhood, but he adds that for some healthy and vigorous men once a month appears to be excess.[395] Mantegazza, in his Hygiene of Love, also states that, for a man between twenty and thirty, two or three times a week represents the proper amount of intercourse, and between the ages of thirty and forty-five, twice a week. Guyot recommends every three days.[396]
In modern times, the physiologists and doctors who have shared their views on this topic have generally aligned with Luther's statement. Haller suggested that sexual activity shouldn't occur more than twice a week.[392] Acton proposed once a week, a sentiment echoed by Hammond, even for healthy men aged twenty-five to forty.[393] Fürbringer slightly increases this recommendation by suggesting fifty to one hundred instances per year.[394] Forel recommends two or three times a week for a man in the peak of his manhood, though he notes that for some healthy and strong men, once a month may be excessive.[395] Mantegazza, in his Hygiene of Love, also states that for men aged twenty to thirty, two or three times a week is the ideal frequency, and for those aged thirty to forty-five, twice a week is appropriate. Guyot suggests every three days.[396]
It seems, however, quite unnecessary to lay down any general rules regarding the frequency of coitus. Individual desire and individual aptitude, even within the limits of health, vary enormously. Moreover, if we recognize that the restraint of desire is sometimes desirable, and often necessary for prolonged periods, it is as well to refrain from any appearance of asserting the necessity of sexual intercourse at frequent and regular intervals. The question is chiefly of importance in order to guard against excess, or even against the attempt to live habitually close to the threshold of excess. Many authorities are, therefore, careful to point out that it is inadvisable to be too definite. Thus Erb, while remarking that, for some, Luther's dictum represents the extreme maximum, adds that others can go far beyond that amount with impunity, and he considers that such variations are congenital.[397] Ribbing, again, while expressing general agreement with Luther's rule, protests against any attempt to lay down laws for everyone, and is inclined to say that as often as one likes is a safe rule, so long as there are no bad after-effects.[398]
It seems quite unnecessary to set any general rules about how often people should have sex. Individual desire and ability, even within healthy limits, can vary widely. Additionally, if we acknowledge that sometimes it’s beneficial and often necessary to curb desire for extended periods, we should avoid suggesting that regular sexual intercourse is essential. The main concern here is to prevent excess or the habit of staying too close to the point of overindulgence. Many experts are careful to highlight that being too specific on this topic is not advisable. For instance, Erb notes that for some, Luther's saying is the absolute maximum, while others can exceed that amount without any issues, and he believes such differences are inherent.[397] Ribbing, likewise, while generally agreeing with Luther's principle, objects to any attempt to create universal rules, suggesting that as often as one desires is a safe guideline, provided there are no negative consequences.[398]
It seems to be generally agreed that bad effects from excess in coitus, when they do occur, are rare in women (see, e.g., Hammond, Sexual Impotence, p. 127). Occasionally, however, evil effects occur in women. (The case, possibly to be mentioned in this connection, has been recorded of a man whose three wives all became insane after marriage, Journal of Mental Science, Jan., 1879, p. 611.) In cases of sexual excess great physical exhaustion, with suspicion and delusions, is often observed. Hutchinson has recorded three cases of temporary blindness, all in men, the result of sexual excess after marriage (Archives of Surgery, Jan., 1893). The old medical authors attributed many evil results to excess in coitus. Thus Schurig (Spermatologia, 1720, pp. 260 et seq.) brings together cases of insanity, apoplexy, syncope, epilepsy, loss of memory, blindness, baldness, unilateral perspiration, gout, and death attributed to this cause; of death many cases are given, some in women, but one may easily perceive that post was often mistaken for propter.
It’s generally agreed that negative effects from excessive sexual activity are rare in women (see, e.g., Hammond, Sexual Impotence, p. 127). However, there are occasional instances where women do experience harmful effects. (One case to note involves a man whose three wives all went insane after marriage, as recorded in the Journal of Mental Science, Jan., 1879, p. 611.) In situations of sexual excess, severe physical exhaustion, along with paranoia and delusions, is often seen. Hutchinson reported three cases of temporary blindness in men resulting from sexual excess after marriage (Archives of Surgery, Jan., 1893). Earlier medical writers attributed many negative outcomes to excessive sexual activity. For instance, Schurig (Spermatologia, 1720, pp. 260 et seq.) compiled cases of insanity, stroke, fainting, epilepsy, memory loss, blindness, baldness, one-sided sweating, gout, and even death linked to this cause; many reports of death, some concerning women, show that post was often confused with propter.
There is, however, another consideration which can scarcely escape the reader of the present work. Nearly all the estimates of the desirable frequence of coitus are framed to suit the supposed physiological needs of the husband,[399] and they appear usually to be framed in the same spirit of exclusive attention to those needs as though the physiological needs of the evacuation of the bowels or the bladder were in question. But sexual needs are the needs of two persons, of the husband and of the wife. It is not enough to ascertain the needs of the husband; it is also necessary to ascertain the needs of the wife. The resultant must be a harmonious adjustment of these two groups of needs. That consideration alone, in conjunction with the wide variations of individual needs, suffices to render any definite rules of very trifling value.
There is, however, another point that the reader of this work can hardly overlook. Almost all the suggestions for how often couples should have sex are based on the supposed physical needs of the husband,[399] and they usually focus solely on those needs, as if we were discussing the physical needs for bowel or bladder elimination. However, sexual needs involve both partners—the husband and the wife. It's not enough to identify the husband's needs; we also need to consider the wife's needs. The result should be a balanced adjustment of both sets of needs. This consideration alone, along with the wide variety of individual needs, makes any specific guidelines largely insignificant.
It is important to remember the wide limits of variation in sexual capacity, as well as the fact that such variations in either direction may be healthy and normal, though undoubtedly when they become extreme variations may have a pathological significance. In one case, for instance, a man has intercourse once a month and finds this sufficient; he has no nocturnal emissions nor any strong desires in the interval; yet he leads an idle and luxurious life and is not restrained by any moral or religious scruples; if he much exceeds the frequency which suits him he suffers from ill-health, though otherwise quite healthy except for a weak digestion. At the other extreme, a happily married couple, between forty-five and fifty, much attached to each other, had engaged in sexual intercourse every night for twenty years, except during the menstrual period and advanced pregnancy, which had only occurred once; they are hearty, full-blooded, intellectual people, fond of good living, and they attribute their affection and constancy to this frequent indulgence in coitus; the only child, a girl, is not strong, though fairly healthy.
It’s important to recognize the broad range of variation in sexual capacity and that these variations, whether high or low, can be normal and healthy. However, extreme variations may signal underlying issues. For example, there’s a man who has intercourse once a month and feels that’s enough for him; he doesn’t have any nocturnal emissions or strong desires in between. He leads a leisurely and indulgent lifestyle and isn’t held back by any moral or religious concerns. If he tries to have sex more often than that, he feels unwell, though he is otherwise quite healthy aside from some digestive issues. On the other hand, a happily married couple aged between forty-five and fifty, who are very close, have been having sex every night for twenty years, except during her periods and during her one-time advanced pregnancy. They are lively, passionate, intellectual people who enjoy the good life, and they believe that their affection and commitment to each other stem from this regular sexual activity. Their only child, a girl, isn’t particularly strong, but she is fairly healthy.
The cases are numerous in which, on special occasions, it is possible for people who are passionately attached to each other to repeat the act of coitus, or at all events the orgasm, an inordinate number of times within a few hours. This usually occurs at the beginning of an intimacy or after a long separation. Thus in one case a newly-married woman experienced the orgasm fourteen times in one night, her husband in the same period experiencing it seven times. In another case a woman who had lived a chaste life, when sexual relationships finally began, once experienced orgasm fourteen or fifteen times to her partner's three times. In a case which, I have been assured may be accepted as authentic, a young wife of highly erotic, very erethic, slightly abnormal temperament, after a month's absence from her husband, was excited twenty-six times within an hour and a quarter; her husband, a much older man, having two orgasms during this period; the wife admitted that she felt a "complete wreck" after this, but it is evident that if this case may be regarded as authentic the orgasms were of extremely slight intensity. A young woman, newly married to a physically robust man, once had intercourse with him eight times in two hours, orgasm occurring each time in both parties. Guttceit (Dreissig Jahre Praxis, vol. ii. p. 311), in Russia, knew many cases in which young men of twenty-two to twenty-eight had intercourse more than ten times in one night, though after the fourth time there is seldom any semen. He had known some men who had masturbated in early boyhood, and began to consort with women at fifteen, yet remained sexually vigorous in old age, while he knew others who began intercourse late and were losing force at forty. Mantegazza, who knew a man who had intercourse fourteen times in one day, remarks that the stories of the old Italian novelists show that twelve times was regarded as a rare exception. Burchard, Alexander VI's secretary, states that the Florentine Ambassador's son, in Rome in 1489, "knew a girl seven times in one hour" (J. Burchard, Diarium, ed. Thuasne, vol. i, p. 329). Olivier, Charlemagne's knight, boasted, according to legend, that he could show his virile power one hundred times in one night, if allowed to sleep with the Emperor of Constantinople's daughter; he was allowed to try, it is said, and succeeded thirty times (Schultz, Das Höfische Leben, vol. i, p. 581).
The instances are many where, during special moments, people who are deeply connected can engage in sex or experience orgasm an excessive number of times in just a few hours. This typically happens at the start of a romantic relationship or after being apart for a long time. For example, one newlywed woman had fourteen orgasms in one night, while her husband had seven in the same timeframe. In another case, a woman who had lived a chaste life experienced orgasm fourteen or fifteen times when she finally became sexually active, while her partner experienced it three times. In a case that I have been told can be considered authentic, a young wife with a highly sexual and slightly unusual temperament, after a month away from her husband, had excitement twenty-six times in just over an hour; her older husband had two orgasms during this time. The wife said she felt completely worn out afterward, but it's clear that if this case is indeed authentic, the orgasms were of very low intensity. A young woman, newly married to a physically strong man, once had sex with him eight times in two hours, achieving orgasm each time for both of them. Guttceit (Dreissig Jahre Praxis, vol. ii. p. 311), from Russia, reported many cases of young men aged twenty-two to twenty-eight having sex more than ten times in one night, although often after the fourth time there is usually no semen. He knew some men who had masturbated in their early youth and started having sex with women at fifteen, yet remained sexually vigorous into old age, while others who began later began losing their sexual energy by age forty. Mantegazza mentioned a man who had sex fourteen times in one day and noted that old Italian novels considered twelve times a rare exception. Burchard, the secretary to Alexander VI, recorded in 1489 that the son of the Florentine Ambassador "knew a girl seven times in one hour" (J. Burchard, Diarium, ed. Thuasne, vol. i, p. 329). Olivier, the knight of Charlemagne, is said to have bragged that he could demonstrate his virility one hundred times in one night if allowed to bed the daughter of the Emperor of Constantinople; legend has it that he was allowed to try and succeeded thirty times (Schultz, Das Höfische Leben, vol. i, p. 581).
It will be seen that whenever the sexual act is repeated frequently within a short time it is very rarely indeed that the husband can keep pace with the wife. It is true that the woman's sexual energy is aroused more slowly and with more difficulty than the man's, but as it becomes aroused its momentum increases. The man, whose energy is easily aroused, is easily exhausted; the woman has often scarcely attained her energy until after the first orgasm is over. It is sometimes a surprise to a young husband, happily married, to find that the act of sexual intercourse which completely satisfies him has only served to arouse his wife's ardor. Very many women feel that the repetition of the act several times in succession is needed to, as they may express it, "clear the system," and, far from producing sleepiness and fatigue, it renders them bright and lively.
It’s clear that whenever sexual activity happens frequently in a short period, the husband usually struggles to keep up with the wife. It’s true that a woman’s sexual energy builds up more slowly and with more effort than a man’s, but once it does build, it gains momentum. The man, whose energy is quickly sparked, often becomes exhausted quickly; the woman typically hasn’t fully reached her energy until after the first orgasm. Many young husbands, happily married, are surprised to realize that the sexual intercourse that satisfies them completely has only served to ignite their wife’s desire. A lot of women believe that having sex multiple times in a row helps to, as they put it, "clear the system," and instead of feeling tired and sleepy, it makes them feel alert and energetic.
The young and vigorous woman, who has lived a chaste life, sometimes feels when she commences sexual relationships as though she really required several husbands, and needed intercourse at least once a day, though later when she becomes adjusted to married life she reaches the conclusion that her desires are not abnormally excessive. The husband has to adjust himself to his wife's needs, through his sexual force when he possesses it, and, if not, through his skill and consideration. The rare men who possess a genital potency which they can exert to the gratification of women without injury to themselves have been, by Professor Benedikt, termed "sexual athletes," and he remarks that such men easily dominate women. He rightly regards Casanova as the type of the sexual athlete (Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Jan., 1896). Näcke reports the case of a man whom he regards as a sexual athlete, who throughout his life had intercourse once or twice daily with his wife, or if she was unwilling, with another woman, until he became insane at the age of seventy-five (Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Aug., 1908, p. 507). This should probably, however, be regarded rather as a case of morbid hyperæsthesia than of sexual athleticism.
The young and energetic woman, who has lived a pure life, sometimes feels that when she starts sexual relationships, she actually needs multiple husbands and wants to have sex at least once a day. However, later on, as she adjusts to married life, she realizes that her desires aren't excessively high. The husband has to adapt to his wife’s needs, using his sexual drive if he has it, or if not, his skill and thoughtfulness. The few men who have the kind of sexual potency that allows them to please women without harming themselves have been called "sexual athletes" by Professor Benedikt, who notes that such men easily dominate women. He correctly sees Casanova as the archetype of the sexual athlete (Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Jan., 1896). Näcke discusses a man he considers a sexual athlete who had sex once or twice a day with his wife throughout his life, or, if she wasn’t willing, with another woman, until he lost his mind at seventy-five (Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, Aug., 1908, p. 507). However, this should probably be viewed more as a case of morbid sensitivity rather than sexual athleticism.
At this stage we reach the fundamental elements of the art of love. We have seen that many moral practices and moral theories which have been widely current in Christendom have developed traditions, still by no means extinct among us, which were profoundly antagonistic to the art of love. The idea grew up of "marital duties," of "conjugal rights."[400] The husband had the right and the duty to perform sexual intercourse with his wife, whatever her wishes in the matter might be, while the wife had the duty and the right (the duty in her case being usually put first) to submit to such intercourse, which she was frequently taught to regard as something low and merely physical, an unpleasant and almost degrading necessity which she would do well to put out of her thoughts as speedily as possible. It is not surprising that such an attitude towards marriage has been highly favorable to conjugal unhappiness, more especially that of the wife,[401] and it has tended to promote adultery and divorce. We might have been more surprised had it been otherwise.
At this point, we come to the key elements of the art of love. We have observed that many moral practices and theories that have been prevalent in Christianity have given rise to traditions that are still very much alive, which were deeply opposed to the art of love. The concept of "marital duties" and "conjugal rights" emerged. The husband believed he had the right and obligation to engage in sexual relations with his wife, regardless of her feelings on the matter. Meanwhile, the wife was expected to fulfill her duty (often emphasized first) to submit to this intercourse, which she was often taught to see as something base and purely physical—an unpleasant and nearly degrading obligation she should try to forget as quickly as possible. It's not surprising that this mindset towards marriage has led to significant unhappiness for couples, especially for wives, and has contributed to the rise of adultery and divorce. We might have been more astonished if it had been any different.
The art of love is based on the fundamental natural fact of courtship; and courtship is the effort of the male to make himself acceptable to the female.[402] "The art of love," said Vatsyayana, one of the greatest of authorities, "is the art of pleasing women." "A man must never permit himself a pleasure with his wife," said Balzac in his Physiologie du Mariage, "which he has not the skill first to make her desire." The whole art of love is there. Women, naturally and instinctively, seek to make themselves desirable to men, even to men whom they are supremely indifferent to, and the woman who is in love with a man, by an equally natural instinct, seeks to shape herself to the measure which individually pleases him. This tendency is not really modified by the fundamental fact that in these matters it is only the arts that Nature makes which are truly effective. It is finally by what he is that a man arouses a woman's deepest emotions of sympathy or of antipathy, and he is often pleasing her more by displaying his fitness to play a great part in the world outside than by any acquired accomplishments in the arts of courtship. When, however, the serious and intimate play of physical love begins, the woman's part is, even biologically, on the surface the more passive part.[403] She is, on the physical side, inevitably the instrument in love; it must be his hand and his bow which evoke the music.
The art of love is rooted in the basic natural truth of courtship; and courtship is the effort of the male to make himself appealing to the female.[402] "The art of love," said Vatsyayana, one of the leading experts, "is the art of pleasing women." "A man should never indulge in a pleasure with his wife," said Balzac in his Physiologie du Mariage, "unless he has the skill to first make her want it." The entire art of love is captured there. Women, by nature and instinct, try to make themselves attractive to men, even to those they feel no attraction toward, and a woman in love with a man naturally tries to mold herself to what he finds appealing. This inclination isn't really affected by the fact that only the skills Nature provides are truly effective in these matters. Ultimately, it's who a man is that stirs a woman's deepest feelings of connection or rejection, and he often pleases her more by showing his ability to succeed in the wider world than by any learned skills in the art of courtship. However, when the serious and intimate experience of physical love begins, the woman's role is, even biologically, more passive on the surface.[403] Physically, she is inevitably the instrument in love; it must be his hand and his bow that create the music.
In speaking of the art of love, however, it is impossible to disentangle completely the spiritual from the physical. The very attempt to do so is, indeed, a fatal mistake. The man who can only perceive the physical side of the sexual relationship is, as Hinton was accustomed to say, on a level with the man who, in listening to a sonata of Beethoven on the violin, is only conscious of the physical fact that a horse's tail is being scraped against a sheep's entrails.
In discussing the art of love, it’s impossible to completely separate the spiritual from the physical. Trying to do so is, in fact, a critical error. A person who can only see the physical aspect of a sexual relationship is, as Hinton used to say, on the same level as someone who, while listening to a Beethoven sonata on the violin, is only aware of the physical action of a horse's tail being dragged across a sheep's insides.
The image of the musical instrument constantly recurs to those who write of the art of love. Balzac's comparison of the unskilful husband to the orang-utan attempting to play the violin has already been quoted. Dr. Jules Guyot, in his serious and admirable little book, Bréviaire de l'Amour Expérimental, falls on to the same comparison: "There are an immense number of ignorant, selfish, and brutal men who give themselves no trouble to study the instrument which God has confided to them, and do not so much as suspect that it is necessary to study it in order to draw out its slightest chords.... Every direct contact, even with the clitoris, every attempt at coitus [when the feminine organism is not aroused], exercises a painful sensation, an instinctive repulsion, a feeling of disgust and aversion. Any man, any husband, who is ignorant of this fact, is ridiculous and contemptible. Any man, any husband, who, knowing it, dares to disregard it, has committed an outrage.... In the final combination of man and woman, the positive element, the husband, has the initiative and the responsibility for the conjugal life. He is the minstrel who will produce harmony or cacophony by his hand and his bow. The wife, from this point of view, is really the many-stringed instrument who will give out harmonious or discordant sounds, according as she is well or ill handled" (Guyot, Bréviaire, pp. 99, 115, 138).
The image of the musical instrument frequently appears in discussions about the art of love. Balzac's analogy comparing the unskilled husband to an orangutan trying to play the violin has already been mentioned. Dr. Jules Guyot, in his insightful little book, Bréviaire de l'Amour Expérimental, makes the same comparison: "There are an immense number of ignorant, selfish, and brutal men who make no effort to learn about the instrument that God has entrusted to them and don't even realize that it’s necessary to study it to understand its simplest notes.... Every direct contact, even with the clitoris, every attempt at intercourse [when the woman isn't aroused], causes pain, instincts of repulsion, and feelings of disgust. Any man, any husband, who is unaware of this is ridiculous and deserving of contempt. Any man, any husband, who knows this and chooses to ignore it, commits an outrage.... In the ultimate relationship between man and woman, the husband, as the positive element, holds the initiative and responsibility for married life. He is the minstrel who can create harmony or discord with his hands and his touch. The wife, from this perspective, is like a multi-stringed instrument that will produce harmonious or discordant sounds, depending on whether she is treated well or poorly" (Guyot, Bréviaire, pp. 99, 115, 138).
That such love corresponds to the woman's need there cannot be any doubt. All developed women desire to be loved, says Ellen Key, not "en mâle" but "en artiste" (Liebe und Ehe, p. 92). "Only a man of whom she feels that he has also the artist's joy in her, and who shows this joy through his timid and delicate touch on her soul as on her body, can keep the woman of to-day. She will only belong to a man who continues to long for her even when he holds her locked in his arms. And when such a woman breaks out: 'You want me, but you cannot caress me, you cannot tell what I want,' then that man is judged." Love is indeed, as Remy de Gourmont remarks, a delicate art, for which, as for painting or music, only some are apt.
There’s no doubt that this kind of love aligns with a woman's needs. All developed women want to be loved, says Ellen Key, not as a "male" but as an "artist" (Liebe und Ehe, p. 92). "Only a man who has that artist's joy in her, and who expresses this joy through his gentle and subtle touch on her soul as well as her body, can keep today’s woman. She will only be with a man who continues to desire her even when he holds her tightly in his arms. When such a woman exclaims, 'You want me, but you can’t truly touch me, you don’t know what I desire,' that man is evaluated." Love is indeed, as Remy de Gourmont points out, a delicate art, for which, like painting or music, only some people have the talent.
It must not be supposed that the demand on the lover and husband to approach a woman in the same spirit, with the same consideration and skilful touch, as a musician takes up his instrument is merely a demand made by modern women who are probably neurotic or hysterical. No reader of these Studies who has followed the discussions of courtship and of sexual selection in previous volumes can fail to realize that—although we have sought to befool ourselves by giving an illegitimate connotation to the word "brutal"—consideration and respect for the female is all but universal in the sexual relationships of the animals below man; it is only at the furthest remove from the "brutes," among civilized men, that sexual "brutality" is at all common, and even there it is chiefly the result of ignorance. If we go as low as the insects, who have been disciplined by no family life, and are generally counted as careless and wanton, we may sometimes find this attitude towards the female fully developed, and the extreme consideration of the male for the female whom yet he holds firmly beneath him, the tender preliminaries, the extremely gradual approach to the supreme sexual act, may well furnish an admirable lesson.
It shouldn’t be assumed that the expectation for a lover and husband to approach a woman with the same mindset, consideration, and skilled touch as a musician approaching their instrument is just a demand from modern women who are likely neurotic or hysterical. Any reader of these Studies who has followed the discussions on dating and sexual selection in earlier volumes will realize that—while we’ve tried to mislead ourselves by giving the word "brutal" a negative connotation—consideration and respect for females is almost universal in the sexual relationships of animals below humans; it's only among the most distant from the "brutes," in civilized men, that sexual "brutality" is at all common, and even then it mostly comes from ignorance. If we look as low as insects, who haven’t been shaped by family life and are generally seen as careless and promiscuous, we may sometimes find this attitude toward females fully developed. The extreme consideration a male shows for the female, even while he firmly holds her beneath him, along with the tender preliminaries and the very gradual approach to the ultimate sexual act, can provide us with a valuable lesson.
This greater difficulty and delay on the part of women in responding to the erotic excitation of courtship is really very fundamental and—as has so often been necessary to point out in previous volumes of these Studies—it covers the whole of woman's erotic life, from the earliest age when coyness and modesty develop. A woman's love develops much more slowly than a man's for a much longer period. There is real psychological significance in the fact that a man's desire for a woman tends to arise spontaneously, while a woman's desire for a man tends only to be aroused gradually, in the measure of her complexly developing relationship to him. Hence her sexual emotion is often less abstract, more intimately associated with the individual lover in whom it is centred. "The way to my senses is through my heart," wrote Mary Wollstonecraft to her lover Imlay, "but, forgive me! I think there is sometimes a shorter cut to yours." She spoke for the best, if not for the largest part, of her sex. A man often reaches the full limit of his physical capacity for love at a single step, and it would appear that his psychic limits are often not more difficult to reach. This is the solid fact underlying the more hazardous statement, so often made, that woman is monogamic and man polygamic.
This greater difficulty and delay for women in responding to the excitement of courtship is very fundamental and—as has often been emphasized in earlier volumes of these Studies—it encompasses the entirety of a woman's erotic life, starting from the earliest age when shyness and modesty begin to emerge. A woman’s love develops much more slowly than a man’s and continues to evolve for a much longer time. There is real psychological significance in the fact that a man’s attraction to a woman tends to happen spontaneously, while a woman’s attraction to a man usually builds up gradually, depending on her developing relationship with him. As a result, her sexual feelings are often less abstract and more closely tied to the specific lover she is focused on. "The way to my senses is through my heart," Mary Wollstonecraft wrote to her lover Imlay, "but, forgive me! I think there is sometimes a shorter way to yours." She captured the essence, if not the majority, of her gender's experience. A man often reaches the full extent of his physical capacity for love in one go, and it seems that his emotional limits are not much harder to reach. This is the solid foundation behind the more controversial assertion, frequently heard, that women are monogamous while men are polygamous.
On the more physical side, Guttceit states that a month after marriage not more than two women out of ten have experienced the full pleasure of sexual intercourse, and it may not be for six months, a year, or even till after the birth of several children, that a woman experiences the full enjoyment of the physical relationship, and even then only with a man she completely loves, so that the conditions of sexual gratification are much more complex in women than in men. Similarly, on the psychic side, Ellen Key remarks (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 111): "It is certainly true that a woman desires sexual gratification from a man. But while in her this desire not seldom only appears after she has begun to love a man enough to give her life for him, a man often desires to possess a woman physically before he loves her enough to give even his little finger for her. The fact that love in a woman mostly goes from the soul to the senses and often fails to reach them, and that in a man it mostly goes from the senses to the soul and frequently never reaches that goal—this is of all the existing differences between men and women that which causes most torture to both." It will, of course, be apparent to the reader of the fourth volume of these Studies on "Sexual Selection in Man" that the method of stating the difference which has commended itself to Mary Wollstonecraft, Ellen Key, and others, is not strictly correct, and the chastest woman, after, for example, taking too hot a bath, may find that her heart is not the only path through which her senses may be affected. The senses are the only channels to the external world which we possess, and love must come through these channels or not at all. The difference, however, seems to be a real one, if we translate it to mean that, as we have seen reason to believe in previous volumes of these Studies, there are in women (1) preferential sensory paths of sexual stimuli, such as, apparently, a predominence of tactile and auditory paths as compared with men; (2) a more massive, complex, and delicately poised sexual mechanism; and, as a result of this, (3) eventually a greater amount of nervous and cerebral sexual irradiation.
On the more physical side, Guttceit mentions that a month after marriage, only about two women out of ten have fully experienced the pleasure of sexual intercourse, and it might not be until six months, a year, or even after having several children that a woman truly enjoys the physical relationship. Even then, it’s usually only with a man she deeply loves, indicating that the conditions for sexual satisfaction are much more intricate for women than for men. Similarly, on the psychological side, Ellen Key notes (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 111): "It’s certainly true that a woman seeks sexual gratification from a man. However, this desire often surfaces only after she has started to love a man enough to risk her life for him, while a man frequently wants to possess a woman physically before he loves her enough to sacrifice even his little finger for her. The fact that a woman’s love usually flows from the soul to the senses and often doesn't reach them, whereas a man's love typically goes from the senses to the soul and often fails to achieve this—this is one of the main differences between men and women that causes the most pain for both." It will be clear to readers of the fourth volume of these Studies on "Sexual Selection in Man" that the way of explaining the difference favored by Mary Wollstonecraft, Ellen Key, and others isn’t entirely accurate, and even the most modest woman, after, for example, a hot bath, might find that her heart isn’t the only route through which her senses can be influenced. Our senses are the only connections to the external world we have, and love must come through these channels or not at all. However, the difference seems to be genuine if we interpret it to mean that, as we have reason to believe in earlier volumes of these Studies, women have (1) preferred sensory pathways for sexual stimuli, such as, seemingly, a predominance of tactile and auditory pathways compared to men; (2) a more intricate, complex, and finely balanced sexual mechanism; and, as a result, (3) ultimately a greater amount of nervous and cerebral sexual energy.
It must be remembered, at the same time, that while this distinction represents a real tendency in sexual differentiation, with an organic and not merely traditional basis, it has about it nothing whatever that is absolute. There are a vast number of women whose sexual facility, again by natural tendency and not merely by acquired habits, is as marked as that of any man, if not more so. In the sexual field, as we have seen in a previous volume (Analysis of the Sexual Impulse), the range of variability is greater in women than in men.
It should be noted that while this distinction reflects a genuine trend in sexual differentiation, rooted in biology rather than just tradition, it is not absolute. There are many women whose sexual responses, due to natural inclinations rather than just learned behaviors, are as pronounced as those of any man, if not more so. In terms of sexuality, as discussed in an earlier volume (Analysis of the Sexual Impulse), the range of variability is wider among women than men.
The fact that love is an art, a method of drawing music from an instrument, and not the mere commission of an act by mutual consent, makes any verbal agreement to love of little moment. If love were a matter of contract, of simple intellectual consent, of question and answer, it would never have come into the world at all. Love appeared as art from the first, and the subsequent developments of the summary methods of reason and speech cannot abolish that fundamental fact. This is scarcely realized by those ill-advised lovers who consider that the first step in courtship—and perhaps even the whole of courtship—is for a man to ask a woman to be his wife. That is so far from being the case that it constantly happens that the premature exhibition of so large a demand at once and for ever damns all the wooer's chances. It is lamentable, no doubt, that so grave and fateful a matter as that of marriage should so often be decided without calm deliberation and reasonable forethought. But sexual relationships can never, and should never, be merely a matter of cold calculation. When a woman is suddenly confronted by the demand that she should yield herself up as a wife to a man who has not yet succeeded in gaining her affections she will not fail to find—provided she is lifted above the cold-hearted motives of self-interest—that there are many sound reasons why she should not do so. And having thus squarely faced the question in cool blood and decided it, she will henceforth, probably, meet that wooer with a tunic of steel enclosing her breast.
The idea that love is an art, a way of creating music from an instrument, and not just a simple agreement between two people, makes any verbal promise to love meaningless. If love were just a contract, based on intellectual agreement and questions and answers, it would never have existed in the first place. Love has always been an art, and no amount of logical reasoning or conversation can change that fundamental truth. This is something that many misguided lovers fail to understand when they think the first step in dating—maybe even the entire process—is for a man to propose to a woman. In reality, it's often the case that rushing into such a huge demand can ruin all the suitor’s chances. It’s unfortunate that such a significant decision as marriage is frequently made without careful thought and consideration. Yet, romantic relationships should never be just about cold calculations. When a woman is suddenly faced with the request to become a wife to a man who hasn’t yet won her heart, she will certainly find—if she rises above selfish motives—that there are many valid reasons to refuse. And having faced that question calmly and made her decision, she will likely meet that suitor with a heart shielded like armor.
"Love must be revealed by acts and not betrayed by words. I regard as abnormal the extraordinary method of a hasty avowal beforehand; for that represents not the direct but the reflex path of transmission. However sweet and normal the avowal may be when once reciprocity has been realized, as a method of conquest I consider it dangerous and likely to produce the reverse of the result desired." I take these wise words from a thoughtful "Essai sur l'Amour" (Archives de Psychologie, 1904) by a non-psychological Swiss writer who is recording his own experiences, and who insists much on the predominance of the spiritual and mental element in love.
"Love should be shown through actions, not betrayed by words. I find the rush to confess feelings in advance quite unusual; it reflects not a direct but an indirect way of expressing emotions. While a confession can be sweet and normal once there's mutual understanding, I believe it can be a risky approach to winning someone over and may lead to the opposite of what you want." I'm quoting these insightful words from a thoughtful "Essai sur l'Amour" (Archives de Psychologie, 1904) by a Swiss writer who isn't a psychologist but shares his own experiences, emphasizing the importance of the spiritual and mental aspects of love.
It is worthy of note that this recognition that direct speech is out of place in courtship must not be regarded as a refinement of civilization. Among primitive peoples everywhere it is perfectly well recognized that the offer of love, and its acceptance or its refusal, must be made by actions symbolically, and not by the crude method of question and answer. Among the Indians of Paraguay, who allow much sexual freedom to their women, but never buy or sell love, Mantegazza states (Rio de la Plata e Tenerife, 1867, p. 225) that a girl of the people will come to your door or window and timidly, with a confused air, ask you, in the Guarani tongue, for a drink of water. But she will smile if you innocently offer her water. Among the Tarahumari Indians of Mexico, with whom the initiative in courting belongs to the women, the girl takes the first step through her parents, then she throws small pebbles at the young man; if he throws them back the matter is concluded (Carl Lumholtz, Scribner's Magazine, Sept., 1894, p. 299). In many parts of the world it is the woman who chooses her husband (see, e.g., M. A. Potter, Sohrab and Rustem, pp. 169 et seq.), and she very frequently adopts a symbolical method of proposal. Except when the commercial element predominates in marriage, a similar method is frequently adopted by men also in making proposals of marriage.
It's important to note that the understanding that direct speech is inappropriate in courtship shouldn't be seen as just a sign of civilized society. In many primitive cultures, it's widely acknowledged that love proposals and their acceptance or rejection need to be communicated through symbolic actions, not through blunt questions and answers. For example, the Indians of Paraguay, who grant a lot of sexual freedom to their women but do not engage in buying or selling love, are described by Mantegazza (Rio de la Plata e Tenerife, 1867, p. 225) as having young women who will come timidly to your door or window and ask, in the Guarani language, for a drink of water. She will smile if you innocently offer her the water. In the case of the Tarahumari Indians of Mexico, where women initiate courtship, the girl takes the first step by involving her parents, then she throws small pebbles at the young man; if he throws them back, the courtship is confirmed (Carl Lumholtz, Scribner's Magazine, Sept., 1894, p. 299). In many regions, women are the ones who choose their husbands (see, e.g., M. A. Potter, Sohrab and Rustem, pp. 169 et seq.), and they often use symbolic methods for proposals. Unless there is a strong commercial aspect to marriage, men often adopt similar symbolic approaches when proposing.
It is not only at the beginning of courtship that the act of love has little room for formal declarations, for the demands and the avowals that can be clearly defined in speech. The same rule holds even in the most intimate relationships of old lovers, throughout the married life. The permanent element in modesty, which survives every sexual initiation to become intertwined with all the exquisite impudicities of love, combines with a true erotic instinct to rebel against formal demands, against verbal affirmations or denials. Love's requests cannot be made in words, nor truthfully answered in words: a fine divination is still needed as long as love lasts.
It’s not just at the start of a relationship that love doesn’t leave much room for formal declarations or clear demands that can be easily expressed in words. This also holds true in the closest connections between long-time lovers and throughout married life. The lasting aspect of modesty, which survives every sexual awakening to mix with the delicate boldness of love, comes together with a genuine erotic instinct to push back against formal requests and verbal statements of affirmation or denial. Love’s needs can’t be fully captured in words, and true responses to them can’t be just verbal either: a certain intuition is always needed as long as love endures.
The fact that the needs of love cannot be expressed but must be divined has long been recognized by those who have written of the art of love, alike by writers within and without the European Christian traditions. Thus Zacchia, in his great medico-legal treatise, points out that a husband must be attentive to the signs of sexual desire in his wife. "Women," he says, "when sexual desire arises within them are accustomed to ask their husbands questions on matters of love; they flatter and caress them; they allow some part of their body to be uncovered as if by accident; their breasts appear to swell; they show unusual alacrity; they blush; their eyes are bright; and if they experience unusual ardor they stammer, talk beside the mark, and are scarcely mistress of themselves. At the same time their private parts become hot and swell. All these signs should convince a husband, however inattentive he may be, that his wife craves for satisfaction" (Zacchiæ Quæstionum Medico-legalium Opus, lib. vii, tit. iii, quæst. I; vol. ii, p. 624 in ed. of 1688).
The idea that the needs of love can't be directly stated but must be understood has been acknowledged by those who have written about the art of love, both within and outside of European Christian traditions. Zacchia, in his significant medico-legal treatise, notes that a husband should pay attention to the signs of sexual desire from his wife. "Women," he says, "when they feel sexual desire, tend to ask their husbands questions about love; they flatter and pamper them; they might accidentally uncover part of their body; their breasts seem to swell; they exhibit unusual eagerness; they blush; their eyes shine; and if they feel intense passion, they may stammer, talk off-topic, and find it hard to control themselves. At the same time, their private parts may feel warm and swell. All these signs should make it clear to a husband, no matter how oblivious he might be, that his wife is longing for fulfillment" (Zacchiæ Quæstionum Medico-legalium Opus, lib. vii, tit. iii, quæst. I; vol. ii, p. 624 in ed. of 1688).
The old Hindu erotic writers attributed great importance alike to the man's attentiveness to the woman's erotic needs, and to his skill and consideration in all the preliminaries of the sexual act. He must do all that he can to procure her pleasure, says Vatsyayana. When she is on her bed and perhaps absorbed in conversation, he gently unfastens the knot of her lower garment. If she protests he closes her mouth with kisses. Some authors, Vatsyayana remarks, hold that the lover should begin by sucking the nipples of her breasts. When erection occurs he touches her with his hands, softly caressing the various parts of her body. He should always press those parts of her body towards which she turns her eyes. If she is shy, and it is the first time, he will place his hands between her thighs which she will instinctively press together. If she is young he will put his hands on her breasts, and she will no doubt cover them with her own. If she is mature he will do all that may seem fitting and agreeable to both parties. Then he will take her hair and her chin between his fingers and kiss them. If she is very young she will blush and close her eyes. By the way in which she receives his caresses he will divine what pleases her most in union. The signs of her enjoyment are that her body becomes limp, her eyes close, she loses all timidity, and takes part in the movements which bring her most closely to him. If, on the other hand, she feels no pleasure, she strikes the bed with her hands, will not allow the man to continue, is sullen, even bites or kicks, and continues the movements of coitus when the man has finished. In such cases, Vatsyayana adds, it is his duty to rub the vulva with his hand before union until it is moist, and he should perform the same movements afterwards if his own orgasm has occurred first.
The old Hindu erotic writers emphasized the importance of a man's attentiveness to a woman's erotic needs and his skill and care in all the preliminaries of sexual activity. Vatsyayana states that he should do everything possible to ensure her pleasure. When she is lying on her bed, perhaps engaged in conversation, he gently unties her lower garment. If she objects, he silences her with kisses. Some writers, Vatsyayana notes, believe the lover should start by kissing her breasts. Once he is aroused, he touches her with his hands, softly caressing different parts of her body. He should always focus on the areas she looks at. If she is shy, especially if it’s their first time, he will place his hands between her thighs, which she instinctively brings together. If she is young, he will touch her breasts, and she will likely cover them with her hands. If she is more mature, he will do what feels right and enjoyable for both of them. Then he will take her hair and chin in his hands and kiss them. If she is very young, she will blush and close her eyes. By how she responds to his touches, he will get a sense of what she enjoys most in the act. Signs that she is enjoying herself include her body becoming relaxed, her eyes closing, losing any shyness, and engaging with him closely. Conversely, if she is not enjoying it, she might hit the bed with her hands, refuse to let him continue, act sulky, even bite or kick, and keep moving during intercourse after he has finished. In such cases, Vatsyayana adds, it is his responsibility to rub her vulva with his hand before they unite until it is moist, and he should do similar movements afterward if he finishes first.
With regard to Indian erotic art generally, and more especially Vatsyayana, who appears to have lived some sixteen hundred years ago, information will be found in Valentino, "L'Hygiène conjugale chez les Hindous," Archives Générales de Médecine, Ap. 25, 1905; Iwan Bloch, "Indische Medizin," Puschmann's Handbuch der Geschichte der Medizin, vol. i; Heimann and Stephan, "Beiträge zur Ehehygiene nach der Lehren des Kamasutram," Zeitschaft für Sexualwissenschaft, Sept., 1908; also a review of Richard Schmidt's German translation of the Kamashastra of Vatsyayana in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1902, Heft 2. There has long existed an English translation of this work. In the lengthy preface to the French translation Lamairesse points out the superiority of Indian erotic art to that of the Latin poets by its loftier spirit, and greater purity and idealism. It is throughout marked by respect for women, and its spirit is expressed in the well-known proverb: "Thou shalt not strike a woman even with a flower." See also Margaret Noble's Web of Indian Life, especially Ch. III, "On the Hindu Woman as Wife," and Ch. IV, "Love Strong as Death."
Regarding Indian erotic art in general, and especially Vatsyayana, who lived around sixteen hundred years ago, you can find information in Valentino’s “L’Hygiène conjugale chez les Hindous,” Archives Générales de Médecine, Ap. 25, 1905; Iwan Bloch’s “Indische Medizin,” Puschmann's Handbuch der Geschichte der Medizin, vol. i; Heimann and Stephan's “Beiträge zur Ehehygiene nach der Lehren des Kamasutram,” Zeitschaft für Sexualwissenschaft, Sept. 1908; and a review of Richard Schmidt's German translation of the Kamashastra by Vatsyayana in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1902, Heft 2. There has long been an English translation of this work. In the lengthy preface to the French translation, Lamairesse emphasizes how Indian erotic art is superior to that of the Latin poets due to its higher spirit, greater purity, and idealism. It consistently shows respect for women, expressed in the well-known proverb: “You shall not strike a woman even with a flower.” See also Margaret Noble’s Web of Indian Life, especially Ch. III, “On the Hindu Woman as Wife,” and Ch. IV, “Love Strong as Death.”
The advice given to husbands by Guyot (Bréviaire de l'Amour Expérimental, p. 422) closely conforms to that given, under very different social conditions, by Zacchia and Vatsyayana. "In a state of sexual need and desire the woman's lips are firm and vibrant, the breasts are swollen, and the nipples erect. The intelligent husband cannot be deceived by these signs. If they do not exist, it is his part to provoke them by his kisses and caresses, and if, in spite of his tender and delicate excitations, the lips show no heat and the breasts no swelling, and especially if the nipples are disagreeably irritated by slight suction, he must arrest his transports and abstain from all contact with the organs of generation, for he would certainly find them in a state of exhaustion and disposed to repulsion. If, on the contrary, the accessory organs are animated, or become animated beneath his caresses, he must extend them to the generative organs, and especially to the clitoris, which beneath his touch will become full of appetite and ardor."
The advice given to husbands by Guyot (Bréviaire de l'Amour Expérimental, p. 422) closely matches what was advised by Zacchia and Vatsyayana, even though they lived in very different social conditions. "When a woman is feeling sexual desire, her lips are firm and vibrant, her breasts are full, and her nipples are erect. A smart husband won’t be fooled by these signs. If they’re not there, he should create them with his kisses and touches. However, if despite his gentle and loving caresses, her lips lack warmth, her breasts aren’t full, and especially if her nipples are uncomfortably irritated by gentle sucking, he must stop himself and avoid any kind of contact with her genitals, as they would likely be in a state of exhaustion and resistant. On the other hand, if the other areas of her body are responsive or start to respond to his touches, he should continue to explore her genitals, particularly the clitoris, which will respond with desire and passion under his touch."
The importance of the preliminary titillation of the sexual organs has been emphasized by a long succession alike of erotic writers and physicians, from Ovid (Ars Amatoria end of Bk. II) onwards. Eulenburg (Die Sexuale Neuropathie, p. 79) considers that titillation is sometimes necessary, and Adler, likewise insisting on the preliminaries of psychic and physical courtship (Die Mangelhafte Geschlechtsempfindung des Weibes, p. 188), observes that the man who is gifted with insight and skill in these matters possesses a charm which will draw sparks of sensibility from the coldest feminine heart. The advice of the physician is at one in this matter with the maxims of the erotic artist and with the needs of the loving woman. In making love there must be no haste, wrote Ovid:—
The importance of the initial stimulation of the sexual organs has been highlighted by a long line of erotic writers and physicians, starting from Ovid (Ars Amatoria end of Bk. II) onward. Eulenburg (Die Sexuale Neuropathie, p. 79) believes that stimulation is sometimes essential, and Adler, who similarly emphasizes the importance of both psychological and physical courtship (Die Mangelhafte Geschlechtsempfindung des Weibes, p. 188), notes that a man who is insightful and skilled in these areas has a charm that can ignite sensitivity even in the most indifferent woman. The physician's advice aligns with the principles of the erotic artist and the desires of the loving woman. Ovid wrote that when making love, there should be no rush:—
"Husbands, like spoiled children," a woman has written, "too often miss the pleasure which might otherwise be theirs, by clamoring for it at the wrong time. The man who thinks this prolonged courtship previous to the act of sex union wearisome, has never given it a trial. It is the approach to the marital embrace, as well as the embrace itself, which constitutes the charm of the relation between the sexes."
"Husbands, like spoiled children," a woman has written, "too often miss out on the enjoyment that could be theirs by demanding it at the wrong time. The man who finds this extended courtship before having sex tedious has never truly experienced it. It's the anticipation of intimacy, along with the act itself, that makes the connection between men and women so special."
It not seldom happens, remarks Adler (op. cit., p. 186), that the insensibility of the wife must be treated—in the husband. And Guyot, bringing forward the same point, writes (op. cit., p. 130): "If by a delay of tender study the husband has understood his young bride, if he is able to realize for her the ineffable happiness and dreams of youth, he will be beloved forever; he will be her master and sovereign lord. If he has failed to understand her he will fatigue and exhaust himself in vain efforts, and finally class her among the indifferent and cold women. She will be his wife by duty, the mother of his children. He will take his pleasure elsewhere, for man is ever in pursuit of the woman who experiences the genesic spasm. Thus the vague and unintelligent search for a half who can unite in that delirious finale is the chief cause of all conjugal dissolutions. In such a case a man resembles a bad musician who changes his violin in the hope that a new instrument will bring the melody he is unable to play."
It often happens, notes Adler (op. cit., p. 186), that the wife's lack of emotion needs to be addressed—in the husband. Guyot, highlighting the same idea, writes (op. cit., p. 130): "If, after a period of careful attention, the husband understands his young bride, and if he can fulfill her deepest desires and youthful dreams, he will be loved forever; he will be her master and ruler. If he fails to understand her, he will tire himself out with useless attempts and will ultimately see her as one of those indifferent and cold women. She will be his wife out of obligation, the mother of his children. He will seek pleasure elsewhere, for a man is always on the lookout for the woman who feels that intense passion. Thus, the vague and unthinking search for a partner who can share that exhilarating climax is the main reason for all divorces. In such cases, a man is like a poor musician who keeps changing his violin, hoping that a new instrument will produce the melody he cannot play."
The fact that there is thus an art in love, and that sexual intercourse is not a mere physical act to be executed by force of muscles, may help to explain why it is that in so many parts of the world defloration is not immediately effected on marriage.[404] No doubt religious or magic reasons may also intervene here, but, as so often happens, they harmonize with the biological process. This is the case even among uncivilized peoples who marry early. The need for delay and considerate skill is far greater when, as among ourselves, a woman's marriage is delayed long past the establishment of puberty to a period when it is more difficult to break down the psychic and perhaps even physical barriers of personality.
The idea that love has an art to it and that sex isn’t just a physical act done through muscle strength might explain why, in many parts of the world, the loss of virginity isn't immediate after marriage. [404] Of course, religious or magical beliefs might also play a role, but often they align with the biological process. This is true even among primitive societies where people marry young. The need for patience and skill is much greater when, like in our society, a woman's marriage is delayed long after puberty, making it harder to break through the psychological and even physical barriers of her identity.
It has to be added that the art of love in the act of courtship is not confined to the preliminaries to the single act of coitus. In a sense the life of love is a continuous courtship with a constant progression. The establishment of physical intercourse is but the beginning of it. This is especially true of women. "The consummation of love," says Sénancour,[405] "which is often the end of love with man is only the beginning of love with woman, a test of trust, a gage of future pleasure, a sort of engagement for an intimacy to come." "A woman's soul and body," says another writer,[406] "are not given at one stroke at a given moment; but only slowly, little by little, through many stages, are both delivered to the beloved. Instead of abandoning the young woman to the bridegroom on the wedding night, as an entrapped mouse is flung to the cat to be devoured, it would be better to let the young bridal couple live side by side, like two friends and comrades, until they gradually learn how to develop and use their sexual consciousness." The conventional wedding is out of place as a preliminary to the consummation of marriage, if only on the ground that it is impossible to say at what stage in the endless process of courtship it ought to take place.
It should be noted that the art of love during courtship isn't just limited to the moments leading up to sex. In a way, the experience of love is a continuous courtship with ongoing development. The start of physical intimacy is just the beginning. This is especially true for women. "The culmination of love," says Sénancour,[405] "which often marks the end of love for men, is only the start for women—a test of trust, a measure of future enjoyment, a sort of promise for a deeper connection." "A woman's soul and body," says another writer,[406] "are not given all at once, in a single moment; instead, they are gradually revealed, bit by bit, through many steps. Rather than leaving the young woman to the groom on their wedding night, like a trapped mouse tossed to a cat, it would be better for the couple to live together like two friends and comrades until they slowly learn how to develop and embrace their sexual awareness." The traditional wedding is out of place as a precursor to marriage, especially since it's hard to pinpoint when in the ongoing process of courtship it should actually happen.
A woman, unlike a man, is prepared by Nature, to play a skilful part in the art of love. The man's part in courtship, which is that of the male throughout the zoölogical series, may be difficult and hazardous, but it is in a straight line, fairly simple and direct. The woman's part, having to follow at the same moment two quite different impulses, is necessarily always in a zigzag or a curve. That is to say that at every erotic moment her action is the resultant of the combined force of her desire (conscious or unconscious) and her modesty. She must sail through a tortuous channel with Scylla on the one side and Charybdis on the other, and to avoid either danger too anxiously may mean risking shipwreck on the other side. She must be impenetrable to all the world, but it must be an impenetrability not too obscure for the divination of the right man. Her speech must be honest, but yet on no account tell everything; her actions must be the outcome of her impulses, and on that very account be capable of two interpretations. It is only in the last resort of complete intimacy that she can become the perfect woman,
A woman, unlike a man, is equipped by Nature to play a skilled role in the art of love. The man's role in courtship, like that of the male across the animal kingdom, may be challenging and risky, but it is straightforward, relatively simple, and direct. The woman's role, having to navigate two entirely different impulses at the same time, is always more complex and indirect. This means that in every romantic moment, her actions are shaped by the combined influence of her desires (whether she’s aware of them or not) and her modesty. She has to navigate a tricky path with Scylla on one side and Charybdis on the other, and being too eager to avoid one danger could lead to disaster from the other. She must remain inscrutable to everyone, yet not so much that the right man can't read her. Her words should be truthful, but she mustn’t reveal everything; her actions should stem from her impulses, yet they should also be open to multiple interpretations. It’s only in the ultimate closeness of complete intimacy that she can become the perfect woman.
For many a woman the conditions for that final erotic avatar—"that splendid shamelessness which," as Rafford Pyke says, "is the finest thing in perfect love"—never present themselves at all. She is compelled to be to the end of her erotic life, what she must always be at the beginning, a complex and duplex personality, naturally artful. Therewith she is better prepared than man to play her part in the art of love.
For many women, the conditions for that ultimate erotic expression—"that splendid shamelessness which," as Rafford Pyke puts it, "is the finest thing in perfect love"—never come to pass. She is forced to remain, throughout her erotic life, what she must always be at the start: a complex and dual-natured person, naturally skillful. Because of this, she is better equipped than men to navigate the art of love.
The man's part in the art of love is, however, by no means easy. That is not always realized by the women who complain of his lack of skill in playing it. Although a man has not to cultivate the same natural duplicity as a woman, it is necessary that he should possess a considerable power of divination. He is not well prepared for that, because the traditional masculine virtue is force rather than insight. The male's work in the world, we are told, is domination, and it is by such domination that the female is attracted. There is an element of truth in that doctrine, an element of truth which may well lead astray the man who too exclusively relies upon it in the art of love. Violence is bad in every art, and in the erotic art the female desires to be won to love and not to be ordered to love. That is fundamental. We sometimes see the matter so stated as if the objection to force and domination in love constituted some quite new and revolutionary demand of the "modern woman." That is, it need scarcely be said, the result of ignorance. The art of love, being an art that Nature makes, is the same now as in essentials it has always been,[407] and it was well established before woman came into existence. That it has not always been very skilfully played is another matter. And, so far as the man is concerned, it is this very tradition of masculine predominance which has contributed to the difficulty of playing it skilfully. The woman admires the male's force; she even wishes herself to be forced to the things that she altogether desires; and yet she revolts from any exertion of force outside that narrow circle, either before the boundary of it is reached or after the boundary is passed. Thus the man's position is really more difficult than the women who complain of his awkwardness in love are always ready to admit. He must cultivate force, not only in the world but even for display in the erotic field; he must be able to divine the moments when, in love, force is no longer force because his own will is his partner's will; he must, at the same time, hold himself in complete restraint lest he should fall into the fatal error of yielding to his own impulse of domination; and all this at the very moment when his emotions are least under control. We need scarcely be surprised that of the myriads who embark on the sea of love, so few women, so very few men, come safely into port.
The man's role in the art of love is definitely not easy. Many women who complain about his lack of skill don't always understand this. While a man doesn't need to develop the same natural cunning as a woman, he must have a strong ability to read situations. He's not fully ready for that, because traditional masculinity values strength over insight. We're told that a man's work in the world is about dominating, and it's this domination that attracts women. There’s some truth to this idea, but relying on it too much in love can mislead a man. Force is detrimental in any art, and in the erotic art, a woman wants to be won over with love, not ordered to love. That’s crucial. Sometimes people frame the rejection of force and domination in love as if it's a new demand from the "modern woman." This is, quite frankly, a misunderstanding. The art of love, shaped by Nature, is fundamentally the same now as it has always been, and it was well established before women even existed. The fact that it hasn't always been played skillfully is another issue. For men, the traditional dominance has made it harder to play this art effectively. Women admire male strength; they even want to be compelled to pursue what they desire, yet they resist any force that goes beyond that limited scope, whether before or after that line is crossed. So, a man’s situation is actually more challenging than the women who criticize his awkwardness in love often acknowledge. He has to embody strength, not just in life but also in romantic settings; he needs to sense when, in love, strength is no longer strength because his will aligns with his partner's will; at the same time, he must exercise complete self-control to avoid the critical mistake of giving in to his desire to dominate—especially when his feelings are least in his control. It’s no wonder that among the countless people who dive into love, so few women and even fewer men make it to safety.
It may still seem to some that in dwelling on the laws that guide the erotic life, if that life is to be healthy and complete, we have wandered away from the consideration of the sexual instinct in its relationship to society. It may therefore be desirable to return to first principles and to point out that we are still clinging to the fundamental facts of the personal and social life. Marriage, as we have seen reason to believe, is a great social institution; procreation, which is, on the public side, its supreme function, is a great social end. But marriage and procreation are both based on the erotic life. If the erotic life is not sound, then marriage is broken up, practically if not always formally, and the process of procreation is carried out under unfavorable conditions or not at all.
It might still seem to some that by focusing on the laws that govern sexual life, if that life is meant to be healthy and complete, we’ve strayed from discussing the sexual instinct’s connection to society. So, it could be useful to return to the basics and point out that we’re still holding on to the core facts of personal and social life. Marriage, as we've come to understand, is a significant social institution; procreation, which is its most important public function, is a major social goal. However, both marriage and procreation are grounded in sexual life. If the sexual life is not healthy, then marriage tends to falter, whether informally or formally, and procreation may happen under poor conditions or not at all.
This social and personal importance of the erotic life, though, under the influence of a false morality and an equally false modesty, it has sometimes been allowed to fall into the background in stages of artificial civilization, has always been clearly realized by those peoples who have vitally grasped the relationships of life. Among most uncivilized races there appear to be few or no "sexually frigid" women. It is little to the credit of our own "civilization" that it should be possible for physicians to-day to assert, even with the faintest plausibility, that there are some 25 per cent. of women who may thus be described.
The social and personal importance of erotic life, influenced by false morals and a misleading sense of modesty, has often been overshadowed in artificial stages of civilization. However, this importance has always been clearly recognized by cultures that truly understand the dynamics of life. Among most uncivilized societies, there seem to be few or no "sexually frigid" women. It does not reflect well on our own "civilization" that today there are doctors who can even vaguely claim that about 25 percent of women fit this description.
The whole sexual structure of the world is built up on the general fact that the intimate contact of the male and female who have chosen each other is mutually pleasurable. Below this general fact is the more specific fact that in the normal accomplishment of the act of sexual consummation the two partners experience the acute gratification of simultaneous orgasm. Herein, it has been said, lies the secret of love. It is the very basis of love, the condition of the healthy exercise of the sexual functions, and, in many cases, it seems probable, the condition also of fertilization.
The entire sexual nature of the world is based on the idea that the close connection between a man and a woman who choose each other is mutually enjoyable. Underneath this idea is the more specific fact that during the typical act of sexual intercourse, both partners can reach the intense satisfaction of simultaneous orgasm. This, it has been said, holds the key to love. It forms the foundation of love, the basis for healthy sexual functioning, and, in many instances, it likely is also the condition necessary for conception.
Even savages in a very low degree of culture are sometimes patient and considerate in evoking and waiting for the signs of sexual desire in their females. (I may refer to the significant case of the Caroline Islanders, as described by Kubary in his ethnographic study of that people and quoted in volume iv of these Studies, "Sexual Selection in Man," Sect. III.) In Catholic days theological influence worked wholesomely in the same direction, although the theologians were so keen to detect the mortal sin of lust. It is true that the Catholic insistence on the desirability of simultaneous orgasm was largely due to the mistaken notion that to secure conception it was necessary that there should be "insemination" on the part of the wife as well as of the husband, but that was not the sole source of the theological view. Thus Zacchia discusses whether a man ought to continue with his wife until she has the orgasm and feels satisfied, and he decides that that is the husband's duty; otherwise the wife falls into danger either of experiencing the orgasm during sleep, or, more probably, by self-excitation, "for many women, when their desires have not been satisfied by coitus, place one thigh on the other, pressing and rubbing them together until the orgasm occurs, in the belief that if they abstain from using the hands they have committed no sin." Some theologians, he adds, favor that belief, notably Hurtado de Mendoza and Sanchez, and he further quotes the opinion of the latter that women who have not been satisfied in coitus are liable to become hysterical or melancholic (Zacchiæ Quæstionum Medico-legalium Opus, lib. vii, tit. iii, quæst. VI). In the same spirit some theologians seem to have permitted irrumatio (without ejaculation), so long as it is only the preliminary to the normal sexual act.
Even people with very little culture can sometimes be patient and thoughtful when trying to understand and wait for signs of sexual desire in women. (I can point to the notable case of the Caroline Islanders, as detailed by Kubary in his ethnographic study of that group and quoted in volume iv of these Studies, "Sexual Selection in Man," Sect. III.) During Catholic times, theological influence played a positive role in the same area, even though theologians were quick to identify the mortal sin of lust. It's true that the Catholic emphasis on the importance of simultaneous orgasm was largely due to the misguided belief that conception required "insemination" from both the wife and husband, but that wasn't the only reason for the theological standpoint. For example, Zacchia examines whether a man should continue with his wife until she reaches orgasm and feels satisfied, concluding that this is indeed the husband’s duty; otherwise the wife risks either experiencing orgasm in her sleep or, more likely, through self-stimulation, "since many women, when their desires haven’t been met through intercourse, place one thigh over the other, pressing and rubbing them together until orgasm occurs, believing that if they don’t use their hands, they haven’t sinned." Some theologians, he notes, support this belief, especially Hurtado de Mendoza and Sanchez, and he also cites Sanchez’s opinion that women who have not been satisfied during intercourse may become hysterical or melancholic (Zacchiæ Quæstionum Medico-legalium Opus, lib. vii, tit. iii, quæst. VI). In a similar vein, some theologians seem to have permitted irrumatio (without ejaculation), as long as it is just a precursor to the normal sexual act.
Nowadays physicians have fully confirmed the belief of Sanchez. It is well recognized that women in whom, from whatever cause, acute sexual excitement occurs with frequency without being followed by the due natural relief of orgasm are liable to various nervous and congestive symptoms which diminish their vital effectiveness, and very possibly lead to a breakdown in health. Kisch has described, as a cardiac neurosis of sexual origin, a pathological tachycardia which is an exaggeration of the physiological quick heart of sexual excitement. J. Inglis Parsons (British Medical Journal, Oct. 22, 1904, p. 1062) refers to the ovarian pain produced by strong unsatisfied sexual excitement, often in vigorous unmarried women, and sometimes a cause of great distress. An experienced Austrian gynæcologist told Hirth (Wege zur Heimat, p. 613) that of every hundred women who come to him with uterine troubles seventy suffered from congestion of the womb, which he regarded as due to incomplete coitus.
Today, doctors have fully supported Sanchez's belief. It's well-known that women who frequently experience acute sexual arousal without reaching orgasm can develop various nervous and congestive symptoms that reduce their overall well-being and may lead to health issues. Kisch described a condition he called cardiac neurosis of sexual origin, which involves a rapid heartbeat that exaggerates the normal quickening of the heart during sexual excitement. J. Inglis Parsons (British Medical Journal, Oct. 22, 1904, p. 1062) points out the ovarian pain caused by intense, unfulfilled sexual arousal, often seen in active unmarried women, and this can lead to significant distress. An experienced Austrian gynecologist told Hirth (Wege zur Heimat, p. 613) that out of every hundred women who visit him for uterine issues, seventy suffer from womb congestion, which he attributed to incomplete intercourse.
It is frequently stated that the evil of incomplete gratification and absence of orgasm in women is chiefly due to male withdrawal, that is to say coitus interruptus, in which the penis is hastily withdrawn as soon as involuntary ejaculation is impending; and it is sometimes said that the same widely prevalent practice is also productive of slight or serious results in the male (see, e.g., L. B. Bangs, Transactions New York Academy of Medicine, vol. ix, 1893; D. S. Booth, "Coitus Interruptus and Coitus Reservatus as Causes of Profound Neurosis and Psychosis," Alienist and Neurologist, Nov., 1906; also, Alienist and Neurologist, Oct., 1897, p. 588).
It’s often said that the issue of incomplete fulfillment and lack of orgasm in women is mainly caused by men pulling out, known as coitus interruptus, where the penis is quickly withdrawn just before ejaculation occurs. It's also sometimes mentioned that this common practice can lead to mild or serious effects in men (see, e.g., L. B. Bangs, Transactions New York Academy of Medicine, vol. ix, 1893; D. S. Booth, "Coitus Interruptus and Coitus Reservatus as Causes of Profound Neurosis and Psychosis," Alienist and Neurologist, Nov., 1906; also, Alienist and Neurologist, Oct., 1897, p. 588).
It is undoubtedly true that coitus interruptus, since it involves sudden withdrawal on the part of the man without reference to the stage of sexual excitation which his partner may have reached, cannot fail to produce frequently an injurious nervous effect on the woman, though the injurious effect on the man, who obtains ejaculation, is little or none. But the practice is so widespread that it cannot be regarded as necessarily involving this evil result. There can, I am assured, be no doubt whatever that Blumreich is justified in his statement (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. ii, p. 783) that "interrupted coitus is injurious to the genital system of those women only who are disturbed in their sensation of delight by this form of cohabitation, in whom the orgasm is not produced, and who continue for hours subsequently to be tormented by feelings of an unsatisfied desire." Equally injurious effects follow in normal coitus when the man's orgasm occurs too soon. "These phenomena, therefore," he concludes, "are not characteristic of interrupted coitus, but consequences of an imperfectly concluded sexual cohabitation as such." Kisch, likewise, in his elaborate and authoritative work on The Sexual Life of Woman, also states that the question of the evil results of coitus interruptus in women is simply a question of whether or not they receive sexual satisfaction. (Cf. also Fürbringer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, pp. 232 et seq.) This is clearly the most reasonable view to take concerning what is the simplest, the most widespread, and certainly the most ancient of the methods of preventing conception. In the Book of Genesis we find it practiced by Onan, and to come down to modern times, in the sixteenth century it seems to have been familiar to French ladies, who, according to Brantôme, enjoined it on their lovers.
It’s definitely true that the withdrawal method, since it involves the man suddenly pulling out without considering how aroused his partner is, often has a harmful nervous effect on the woman. In contrast, the harm to the man, who reaches ejaculation, is minimal or nonexistent. However, this practice is so common that it can't automatically be considered harmful. I have no doubt that Blumreich is correct in his statement (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. ii, p. 783) that "interrupted coitus is harmful to the genital system of only those women who are disturbed in their feelings of pleasure by this method of intercourse, who do not achieve orgasm, and who continue to suffer for hours afterward from unfulfilled desire.” Equally harmful effects can occur in normal intercourse when the man orgasms too quickly. "These phenomena, therefore," he concludes, "are not unique to interrupted coitus, but are consequences of incomplete sexual intercourse in general." Kisch, in his detailed and authoritative work The Sexual Life of Woman, also mentions that the issue of the harmful effects of coitus interruptus in women depends on whether they achieve sexual satisfaction. (Cf. also Fürbringer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, pp. 232 et seq.) This seems to be the most sensible perspective regarding what is the simplest, most common, and certainly the oldest method of preventing conception. In the Book of Genesis, Onan practices it, and moving into modern times, it appears that by the sixteenth century, French women were familiar with it and reportedly urged it upon their lovers, according to Brantôme.
Coitus reservatus,—in which intercourse is maintained even for very long periods, during which the woman may have orgasm several times while the man succeeds in holding back orgasm,—so far from being injurious to the woman, is probably the form of coitus which gives her the maximum of gratification and relief. For most men, however, it seems probable that this self-control over the processes leading to the involuntary act of detumescence is difficult to acquire, while in weak, nervous, and erethic persons it is impossible. It is, however, a desirable condition for completely adequate coitus, and in the East this is fully recognized, and the aptitude carefully cultivated. Thus W. D. Sutherland states ("Einiges über das Alltagsleben und die Volksmedizin unter den Bauern Britischostindiens," Münchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, No. 12, 1906) that the Hindu smokes and talks during intercourse in order to delay orgasm, and sometimes applies an opium paste to the glans of the penis for the same purpose. (See also vol. iii of these Studies, "The Sexual Impulse in Women.") Some authorities have, indeed, stated that the prolongation of the act of coitus is injurious in its effect on the male. Thus R. W. Taylor (Practical Treatise on Sexual Disorders, third ed., p. 121) states that it tends to cause atonic impotence, and Löwenfeld (Sexualleben und Nervenleiden, p. 74) thinks that the swift and unimpeded culmination of the sexual act is necessary in order to preserve the vigor of the reflex reactions. This is probably true of extreme and often repeated cases of indefinite prolongation of pronounced erection without detumescence, but it is not true within fairly wide limits in the case of healthy persons. Prolonged coitus reservatus was a practice of the complex marriage system of the Oneida community, and I was assured by the late Noyes Miller, who had spent the greater part of his life in the community, that the practice had no sort of evil result. Coitus reservatus was erected into a principle in the Oneida community. Every man in the community was theoretically the husband of every woman, but every man was not free to have children with every woman. Sexual initiation took place soon after puberty in the case of boys, some years later in the case of girls, by a much older person of the opposite sex. In intercourse the male inserted his penis into the vagina and retained it there for even an hour without emission, though orgasm took place in the woman. There was usually no emission in the case of the man, even after withdrawal, and he felt no need of emission. The social feeling of the community was a force on the side of this practice, the careless, unskilful men being avoided by women, while the general romantic sentiment of affection for all the women in the community was also a force. Masturbation was unknown, and no irregular relations took place with persons outside the community. The practice was maintained for thirty years, and was finally abandoned, not on its demerits, but in deference to the opinions of the outside world. Mr. Miller admitted that the practice became more difficult in ordinary marriage, which favors a more mechanical habit of intercourse. The information received from Mr. Miller is supplemented in a pamphlet entitled Male Continence (the name given to coitus reservatus in the community), written in 1872 by the founder, John Humphrey Noyes. The practice is based, he says, on the fact that sexual intercourse consists of two acts, a social and a propagative, and that if propagation is to be scientific there must be no confusion of these two acts, and procreation must never be involuntary. It was in 1844, he states, that this idea occurred to him as a result of a resolve to abstain from sexual intercourse in consequence of his wife's delicate health and inability to bear healthy children, and in his own case he found the practice "a great deliverance. It made a happy household." He points out that the chief members of the Oneida community "belonged to the most respectable families in Vermont, had been educated in the best schools of New England morality and refinement, and were, by the ordinary standards, irreproachable in their conduct so far as sexual matters are concerned, till they deliberately commenced, in 1846, the experiment of a new state of society, on principles which they had been long maturing and were prepared to defend before the World." In relation to male continence, therefore, Noyes thought the community might fairly be considered "the Committee of Providence to test its value in actual life." He states that a careful medical comparison of the statistics of the community had shown that the rate of nervous disease in the community was considerably below the average outside, and that only two cases of nervous disorder had occurred which could be traced with any probability to a misuse of male continence. This has been confirmed by Van de Warker, who studied forty-two women of the community without finding any undue prevalence of reproductive diseases, nor could he find any diseased condition attributable to the sexual habits of the community (cf. C. Reed, Text-Book of Gynecology, 1901, p. 9).
Coitus reservatus—which involves maintaining intercourse for extended periods, during which the woman can reach orgasm multiple times while the man manages to avoid climax— is far from being harmful to the woman; in fact, it likely provides her with the greatest satisfaction and relief. However, for most men, achieving this self-control over the physiological processes leading to ejaculation appears to be challenging, and for those who are weak, anxious, or overly aroused, it is often impossible. This condition is desirable for fully satisfactory intercourse, and in Eastern cultures, it is well acknowledged and carefully nurtured. W. D. Sutherland notes ("Einiges über das Alltagsleben und die Volksmedizin unter den Bauern Britischostindiens," Münchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, No. 12, 1906) that Hindu men smoke and chat during intercourse to delay climax and sometimes apply an opium paste to the tip of the penis for the same purpose. (See also vol. iii of these Studies, "The Sexual Impulse in Women.") Some experts have claimed that prolonging sexual intercourse is detrimental to men. R. W. Taylor (Practical Treatise on Sexual Disorders, third ed., p. 121) asserts that it can lead to atonic impotence, while Löwenfeld (Sexualleben und Nervenleiden, p. 74) believes that allowing for a quick and uninterrupted climax is essential to maintaining the reflex responses' vigor. This is likely true in extreme cases of excessive prolonged erection without ejaculation, but it doesn’t apply broadly to healthy individuals. Prolonged coitus reservatus was part of the complex marriage system of the Oneida community. The late Noyes Miller, who spent most of his life there, confirmed that the practice had no harmful effects. Coitus reservatus became a foundational principle within the Oneida community. Every man was theoretically the husband of every woman, yet each man was not free to father children with every woman. Sexual initiation occurred shortly after puberty for boys and several years later for girls, facilitated by a significantly older person of the opposite sex. During intercourse, the male would insert his penis into the vagina and hold it there for even up to an hour without ejaculation, although the woman would experience orgasm. Typically, the man would not ejaculate, even after withdrawing, and he would feel no need to. The community's social dynamics supported this practice, where careless and unskilled men were avoided by women, and the general romantic affection for all the women in the community played a role. Masturbation was unheard of, and no improper relationships occurred outside the community. This practice was upheld for thirty years and was eventually abandoned, not due to its failings but out of respect for outside opinions. Mr. Miller acknowledged that the practice became more difficult within conventional marriage, which tends to encourage a more mechanical way of having sex. The insights shared by Mr. Miller are further detailed in a pamphlet entitled Male Continence (the term used for coitus reservatus in the community) penned in 1872 by founder John Humphrey Noyes. He argues the practice is founded on the idea that sexual intercourse has two aspects: a social and a reproductive one, and that for reproduction to be scientific, these two acts must not be confused, and procreation must never be accidental. He explains that in 1844, he developed this idea after deciding to abstain from sexual activity due to his wife's fragile health and inability to have healthy children; he found the practice to be "a great deliverance. It made a happy household." He emphasizes that the key members of the Oneida community "belonged to the most respectable families in Vermont, had been educated in the best New England schools, and were, by conventional standards, without fault in their conduct regarding sexual matters until they intentionally started, in 1846, an experiment for a new societal structure based on principles they had long been developing and were prepared to defend to the world." Regarding male continence, Noyes felt that the community could be seen as "the Committee of Providence to test its value in real life." He states that a careful medical analysis of the community's statistics indicated that their rate of nervous diseases was significantly lower than the average outside, with only two cases of nervous disorders potentially linked to misusing male continence. This has been validated by Van de Warker, who examined forty-two women from the community and found no undue prevalence of reproductive diseases, nor could he find any health issues attributable to the community's sexual practices (cf. C. Reed, Text-Book of Gynecology, 1901, p. 9).
Noyes believed that "male continence" had never previously been a definitely recognized practice based on theory, though there might have been occasional approximation to it. This is probably true if the coitus is reservatus in the full sense, with complete absence of emission. Prolonged coitus, however, permitting the woman to have orgasm more than once, while the man has none, has long been recognized. Thus in the seventeenth century Zacchia discussed whether such a practice is legitimate (Zacchiæ Quæstionum Opus, ed. of 1688, lib. vii, tit. iii, quæst. VI). In modern times it is occasionally practiced, without any theory, and is always appreciated by the woman, while it appears to have no bad effect on the man. In such a case it will happen that the act of coitus may last for an hour and a quarter or even longer, the maximum of the woman's pleasure not being reached until three-quarters of an hour have passed; during this period the woman will experience orgasm some four or five times, the man only at the end. It may occasionally happen that a little later the woman again experiences desire, and intercourse begins afresh in the same way. But after that she is satisfied, and there is no recurrence of desire.
Noyes believed that "male continence" had never really been recognized as a practiced theory before, even though there might have been some occasional attempts at it. This seems to be true if intercourse is completely non-ejaculatory. However, extended intercourse that allows the woman to have multiple orgasms while the man has none has been acknowledged for a long time. In the seventeenth century, Zacchia discussed whether such a practice is acceptable (Zacchiæ Quæstionum Opus, ed. of 1688, lib. vii, tit. iii, quæst. VI). In modern times, it is sometimes practiced without any guiding theory and is always appreciated by women, while it seems to have no negative effect on men. In this situation, the act of intercourse can last an hour and a quarter or even longer, with the woman's peak pleasure often not occurring until three-quarters of an hour in; during this time, she may have four or five orgasms, while the man only reaches orgasm at the end. It can also happen that shortly afterward, the woman feels desire again, and intercourse starts up again in the same way. But after that, she feels satisfied, and the desire doesn't return.
It may be desirable at this point to refer briefly to the chief variations in the method of effecting coitus in their relationship to the art of love and the attainment of adequate and satisfying detumescence.
It might be helpful at this point to briefly mention the main differences in the ways of having sex and how they relate to the art of love and achieving proper and satisfying relaxation afterward.
The primary and essential characteristic of the specifically human method of coitus is the fact that it takes place face to face. The fact that in what is usually considered the typically normal method of coitus the woman lies supine and the man above her is secondary. Psychically, this front-to-front attitude represents a great advance over the quadrupedal method. The two partners reveal to each other the most important, the most beautiful, the most expressive sides of themselves, and thus multiply the mutual pleasure and harmony of the intimate act of union. Moreover, this face-to-face attitude possesses a great significance, in the fact that it is the outward sign that the human couple has outgrown the animal sexual attitude of the hunter seizing his prey in the act of flight, and content to enjoy it in that attitude, from behind. The human male may be said to retain the same attitude, but the female has turned round; she has faced her partner and approached him, and so symbolizes her deliberate consent to the act of union.
The main and crucial feature of the human approach to intercourse is that it occurs face to face. The typical position where the woman lies on her back and the man is above her is secondary. Psychologically, this front-to-front stance marks a significant improvement over the quadrupedal method. Both partners show each other their most important, beautiful, and expressive sides, enhancing the shared pleasure and harmony of their intimate union. Additionally, this face-to-face position is significant because it symbolizes that the human couple has evolved beyond the animalistic sexual behavior of a hunter capturing prey as it flees and settling for enjoyment from behind. The human male might still hold onto that mindset, but the female has turned to face her partner and has approached him, symbolizing her conscious consent to the act of union.
The human variations in the exercise of coitus, both individual and national, are, however, extremely numerous. "To be quite frank," says Fürbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 213), "I can hardly think of any combination which does not figure among my case-notes as having been practiced by my patients." We must not too hastily conclude that such variations are due to vicious training. That is far from being the case. They often occur naturally and spontaneously. Freud has properly pointed out (in the second series of his Beiträge zur Neurosenlehre, "Bruchstück" etc.) that we must not be too shocked even when the idea of fellatio spontaneously presents itself to a woman, for that idea has a harmless origin in the resemblance between the penis and the nipple. Similarly, it may be added, the desire for cunnilinctus, which seems to be much more often latently present in women than is the desire for its performance in men, has a natural analogy in the pleasure of suckling, a pleasure which is itself indeed often erotically tinged (see vol. iv of these Studies, "Sexual Selection in Man," Touch, Sect. III).
The variations in how people engage in sex, both personally and nationally, are incredibly diverse. "To be honest," says Fürbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 213), "I can barely think of any combination that isn’t included in my case notes as being practiced by my patients." We shouldn’t quickly assume that these variations result from negative conditioning. That’s definitely not the case. They often happen naturally and spontaneously. Freud correctly pointed out (in the second series of his Beiträge zur Neurosenlehre, "Bruchstück," etc.) that we shouldn’t be too shocked when the thought of fellatio comes to a woman, as that idea has a harmless origin in the similarity between the penis and the nipple. Similarly, we can note that the desire for cunnilingus, which seems to be more often subtly present in women than the desire for it in men, has a natural connection to the enjoyment of breastfeeding, a pleasure that can often have erotic undertones (see vol. iv of these Studies, "Sexual Selection in Man," Touch, Sect. III).
Every variation in this matter, remarks Remy de Gourmont (Physique de l'Amour, p. 264) partakes of the sin of luxury, and some of the theologians have indeed considered any position in coitus but that which is usually called normal in Europe as a mortal sin. Other theologians, however, regarded such variations as only venial sins, provided ejaculation took place in the vagina, just as some theologians would permit irrumatio as a preliminary to coitus, provided there was no ejaculation. Aquinas took a serious view of the deviations from normal intercourse; Sanchez was more indulgent, especially in view of his doctrine, derived from the Greek and Arabic natural philosophers, that the womb can attract the sperm, so that the natural end may be attained even in unusual positions.
Every variation in this matter, notes Remy de Gourmont (Physique de l'Amour, p. 264), is considered a sin of luxury, and some theologians have indeed classified any position in intercourse other than what is typically seen as normal in Europe as a mortal sin. On the other hand, some theologians viewed such variations as only venial sins, as long as ejaculation occurred in the vagina, similar to how some theologians would allow irrumatio as a precursor to intercourse, as long as there was no ejaculation. Aquinas took a serious view of deviations from normal intercourse; Sanchez was more lenient, especially considering his belief, based on the Greek and Arabic natural philosophers, that the womb can attract sperm, allowing for the natural purpose to be achieved even in uncommon positions.
Whatever difference of opinion there may have been among ancient theologians, it is well recognized by modern physicians that variations from the ordinary method of coitus are desirable in special cases. Thus Kisch points out (Sterilität des Weibes, p. 107) that in some cases it is only possible for the woman to experience sexual excitement when coitus takes place in the lateral position, or in the a posteriori position, or when the usual position is reversed; and in his Sexual Life of Woman, also, Kisch recommends several variations of position for coitus. Adler points out (op. cit., pp. 151, 186) the value of the same positions in some cases, and remarks that such variations often call forth latent sexual feelings as by a charm. Such cases are indeed, by no means infrequent, the advantage of the unusual position being due either to physical or psychic causes, and the discovery of the right variation is sometimes found in a merely playful attempt. It has occasionally happened, also, that when intercourse has habitually taken place in an abnormal position, no satisfaction is experienced by the woman until the normal position is adopted. The only fairly common variation of coitus which meets with unqualified disapproval is that in the erect posture. (See e.g., Hammond, op. cit. pp. 257 et seq.)
Whatever differences of opinion existed among ancient theologians, modern doctors agree that variations from the usual way of having sex can be beneficial in certain situations. Kisch notes (Sterilität des Weibes, p. 107) that in some cases, a woman can only feel sexual excitement when sex happens in a side position, in a rear position, or when the usual position is changed; in his Sexual Life of Woman, Kisch also suggests several different positions for intercourse. Adler mentions (op. cit., pp. 151, 186) the value of these positions in certain cases and observes that such variations often awaken hidden sexual feelings as if by magic. These situations are not uncommon, with the benefits of unusual positions arising from either physical or psychological reasons, and discovering the right variation might simply come from a playful attempt. It has also been found that when intercourse consistently occurs in an unusual position, a woman may not feel satisfied until the standard position is used. The only generally accepted variation of intercourse that receives outright disapproval is that in an upright position. (See e.g., Hammond, op. cit. pp. 257 et seq.)
Lucretius specially recommended the quadrupedal variation of coitus (Bk. iv, 1258), and Ovid describes (end of Bk. iii of the Ars Amatoria) what he regards as agreeable variations, giving the preference, as the easiest and simplest method, to that in which the woman lies half supine on her side. Perhaps, however, the variation which is nearest to the normal attitude and which has most often and most completely commended itself is that apparently known to Arabic erotic writers as dok el arz, in which the man is seated and his partner is astride his thighs, embracing his body with her legs and his neck with her arms, while he embraces her waist; this is stated in the Arabic Perfumed Garden to be the method preferred by most women.
Lucretius specifically recommended the four-legged variation of sex (Bk. iv, 1258), and Ovid describes (at the end of Bk. iii of the Ars Amatoria) what he considers pleasing variations, favoring the one where the woman lies partly on her side as the easiest and simplest method. However, the position that seems closest to the normal posture and has often been endorsed is what Arabic erotic writers refer to as dok el arz, in which the man sits and his partner straddles his thighs, wrapping her legs around his body and her arms around his neck, while he holds her waist; this is stated in the Arabic Perfumed Garden as the method most preferred by women.
The other most usual variation is the inverse normal position in which the man is supine, and the woman adapts herself to this position, which permits of several modifications obviously advantageous, especially when the man is much larger than his partner. The Christian as well as the Mahommedan theologians appear, indeed, to have been generally opposed to this superior position of the female, apparently, it would seem, because they regarded the literal subjection of the male which it involves as symbolic of a moral subjection. The testimony of many people to-day, however, is decidedly in favor of this position, more especially as regards the woman, since it enables her to obtain a better adjustment and greater control of the process, and so frequently to secure sexual satisfaction which she may find difficult or impossible in the normal position.
The other common variation is the reverse normal position, where the man lies on his back, and the woman adjusts to this position. This allows for several modifications that can be beneficial, particularly when the man is significantly larger than his partner. Both Christian and Muslim theologians have generally opposed this dominant position of the female. It seems they viewed the literal submission of the male involved in this position as a symbol of moral subordination. However, many people today strongly support this position, especially for women, as it allows them better adjustment and more control over the process, often leading to sexual satisfaction that they may find hard or impossible to achieve in the normal position.
The theologians seem to have been less unfavorably disposed to the position normal among quadrupeds, a posteriori, though the old Penitentials were inclined to treat it severely, the Penitential of Angers prescribing forty days penance, and Egbert's three years, if practiced habitually. (It is discussed by J. Petermann, "Venus Aversa," Sexual-Probleme, Feb., 1909). There are good reasons why in many cases this position should be desirable, more especially from the point of view of women, who indeed not infrequently prefer it. It must be always remembered, as has already been pointed out, that in the progress from anthropoid to man it is the female, not the male, whose method of coitus has been revolutionized. While, however, the obverse human position represents a psychic advance, there has never been a complete physical readjustment of the female organs to the obverse method. More especially, in Adler's opinion (op. cit., pp. 117-119), the position of the clitoris is such that, as a rule, it is more easily excited by coitus from behind than from in front. A more recent writer, Klotz, in his book, Der Mensch ein Vierfüssler (1908), even takes the too extreme position that the quadrupedal method of coitus, being the only method that insures due contact with the clitoris, is the natural human method. It must, however, be admitted that the posterior mode of coitus is not only a widespread, but a very important variation, in either of its two most important forms: the Pompeiian method, in which the woman bends forwards and the man approaches behind, or the method described by Boccaccio, in which the man is supine and the woman astride.
The theologians seem to have been less opposed to the typical position for four-legged animals, a posteriori, although the old Penitentials tended to treat it harshly. For instance, the Penitential of Angers required forty days of penance, and Egbert's prescribed three years if practiced regularly. (It is discussed by J. Petermann, "Venus Aversa," Sexual-Probleme, Feb., 1909). There are valid reasons why in many cases this position should be considered favorable, especially for women, who often prefer it. It’s important to remember, as previously mentioned, that in the evolution from primates to humans, it is the female whose method of intercourse has changed the most. While the human reverse position represents a psychological advancement, there hasn't been a complete physical adaptation of the female organs to this method. More specifically, according to Adler (op. cit., pp. 117-119), the clitoris is typically more easily stimulated during intercourse from behind than from in front. A more recent author, Klotz, in his book Der Mensch ein Vierfüssler (1908), even claims quite strongly that the quadrupedal method of intercourse, being the only one that ensures adequate contact with the clitoris, is the natural human method. However, it should be acknowledged that the rear-facing mode of intercourse is not only common but also a significant variation, especially in its two main forms: the Pompeiian method, where the woman bends forward and the man approaches from behind, or the method described by Boccaccio, where the man lies on his back and the woman straddles him.
Fellatio and cunnilinctus, while they are not strictly methods of coitus, in so far as they do not involve the penetration of the penis into the vagina, are very widespread as preliminaries, or as vicarious forms of coitus, alike among civilized and uncivilized peoples. Thus, in India, I am told that fellatio is almost universal in households, and regarded as a natural duty towards the paterfamilias. As regards cunnilinctus Max Dessoir has stated (Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Psychiatrie, 1894, Heft 5) that the superior Berlin prostitutes say that about a quarter of their clients desire to exercise this, and that in France and Italy the proportion is higher; the number of women who find cunnilinctus agreeable is without doubt much greater. Intercourse per anum must also be regarded as a vicarious form of coitus. It appears to be not uncommon, especially among the lower social classes, and while most often due to the wish to avoid conception, it is also sometimes practiced as a sexual aberration, at the wish either of the man or the woman, the anus being to some extent an erogenous zone.
Fellatio and cunnilinctus, while not strictly methods of sex since they don’t involve the penetration of the penis into the vagina, are very common as preliminaries or as alternative forms of sex, both among civilized and uncivilized people. For example, in India, I've heard that fellatio is almost universally practiced in households and seen as a natural duty toward the head of the family. Regarding cunnilinctus, Max Dessoir noted (Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Psychiatrie, 1894, Heft 5) that the upscale prostitutes in Berlin claim that about a quarter of their clients want to engage in this, with even higher numbers in France and Italy; the number of women who enjoy cunnilinctus is undoubtedly much higher. Intercourse per anum should also be seen as an alternative form of sex. It seems fairly common, especially among lower social classes, often done to avoid conception, but sometimes practiced as a sexual deviation, at the request of either partner, since the anus can be somewhat of an erogenous zone.
The ethnic variations in method of coitus were briefly discussed in volume v of these Studies, "The Mechanism of Detumescence," Section II. In all civilized countries, from the earliest times, writers on the erotic art have formally and systematically set forth the different positions for coitus. The earliest writing of this kind now extant seems to be an Egyptian papyrus preserved at Turin of the date B.C. 1300; in this, fourteen different positions are represented. The Indians, according to Iwan Bloch, recognize altogether forty-eight different positions; the Ananga Ranga describes thirty-two main forms. The Mohammedan Perfumed Garden describes forty forms, as well as six different kinds of movement during coitus. The Eastern books of this kind are, on the whole, superior to those that have been produced by the Western world, not only by their greater thoroughness, but by the higher spirit by which they have often been inspired.
The different methods of sex across cultures were briefly discussed in volume v of these Studies, "The Mechanism of Detumescence," Section II. In all civilized countries, from ancient times, writers on sexual practices have systematically laid out various positions for intercourse. The oldest known writing on this topic appears to be an Egyptian papyrus from B.C. 1300 housed in Turin, which depicts fourteen different positions. According to Iwan Bloch, the Indians recognize a total of forty-eight different positions, while the Ananga Ranga details thirty-two main forms. The Mohammedan Perfumed Garden outlines forty forms, along with six different types of movement during intercourse. Generally, Eastern texts of this nature are superior to those from the Western world, not only due to their greater depth but also because of the elevated spirit that often inspires them.
The ancient Greek erotic writings, now all lost, in which the modes of coitus were described, were nearly all attributed to women. According to a legend recorded by Suidas, the earliest writer of this kind was Astyanassa, the maid of Helen of Troy. Elephantis, the poetess, is supposed to have enumerated nine different postures. Numerous women of later date wrote on these subjects, and one book is attributed to Polycrates, the sophist.
The ancient Greek erotic writings, which are all now lost, detailed various sexual positions and were mainly credited to women. According to a legend noted by Suidas, the first writer in this genre was Astyanassa, the maid of Helen of Troy. The poetess Elephantis is said to have listed nine different positions. Many women in later times also wrote on these topics, and one book is attributed to Polycrates, the sophist.
Aretino—who wrote after the influence of Christianity had degraded erotic matters perilously near to that region of pornography from which they are only to-day beginning to be rescued—in his Sonnetti Lussuriosi described twenty-six different methods of coitus, each one accompanied by an illustrative design by Giulio Romano, the chief among Raphael's pupils. Veniero, in his Puttana Errante, described thirty-two positions. More recently Forberg, the chief modern authority, has enumerated ninety positions, but, it is said, only forty-eight can, even on the most liberal estimate, be regarded as coming within the range of normal variation.
Aretino—who wrote after Christianity had dangerously pushed erotic topics close to outright pornography, from which they are only starting to escape today—in his Sonnetti Lussuriosi, described twenty-six different methods of sexual intercourse, each illustrated with a design by Giulio Romano, a leading student of Raphael. Veniero, in his Puttana Errante, described thirty-two positions. More recently, Forberg, the main modern expert, has listed ninety positions, but it is said that only forty-eight can, even under the most generous interpretation, be considered within the normal range.
The disgrace which has overtaken the sexual act, and rendered it a deed of darkness, is doubtless largely responsible for the fact that the chief time for its consummation among modern civilized peoples is the darkness of the early night in stuffy bedrooms when the fatigue of the day's labors is struggling with the artificial stimulation produced by heavy meals and alcoholic drinks. This habit is partly responsible for the indifference or even disgust with which women sometimes view coitus.
The shame surrounding sex has made it a secretive act, which is probably why most modern civilized people tend to engage in it during the dark of night in cramped bedrooms, when they're battling the tiredness from the day's work and the artificial buzz from big meals and drinks. This trend contributes to the indifference or even disgust that some women feel toward sex.
Many more primitive peoples are wiser. The New Guinea Papuans of Astrolabe Bay, according to Vahness (Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1900, Heft 5, p. 414), though it must be remembered that the association of the sexual act with darkness is much older than Christianity, and connected with early religious notions (cf. Hesiod, Works and Days, Bk. II), always have sexual intercourse in the open air. The hard-working women of the Gebvuka and Buru Islands, again, are too tired for coitus at night; it is carried out in the day time under the trees, and the Serang Islanders also have coitus in the woods (Ploss and Bartels, Das Weib, Bk. i, Ch. XVII).
Many more primitive societies are more insightful. The New Guinea Papuans of Astrolabe Bay, according to Vahness (Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1900, Heft 5, p. 414), should be noted that the link between sexual activity and darkness goes back much further than Christianity and is tied to ancient religious beliefs (cf. Hesiod, Works and Days, Bk. II). They always engage in sexual intercourse outdoors. The hardworking women of the Gebvuka and Buru Islands are too exhausted for sex at night; instead, they do it during the day under the trees, and the Serang Islanders also have sex in the woods (Ploss and Bartels, Das Weib, Bk. i, Ch. XVII).
It is obviously impracticable to follow these examples in modern cities, even if avocation and climate permitted. It is also agreed that sexual intercourse should be followed by repose. There seems to be little doubt, however, that the early morning and the daylight are a more favorable time than the early night. Conception should take place in the light, said Michelet (L'Amour, p. 153); sexual intercourse in the darkness of night is an act committed with a mere female animal; in the day-time it is union with a loving and beloved individual person.
It’s clearly impractical to follow these examples in modern cities, even if work and weather allowed. It’s also widely accepted that sexual intercourse should be followed by rest. However, it seems there’s little doubt that early morning and daylight are better times than early night. Michelet said that conception should happen in the light (L'Amour, p. 153); having sex in the darkness of night is an act done with just a female animal; during the day, it’s a union with a loving and cherished individual.
This has been widely recognized. The Greeks, as we gather from Aristophanes in the Archarnians, regarded sunrise as the appropriate time for coitus. The South Slavs also say that dawn is the time for coitus. Many modern authorities have urged the advantages of early morning coitus. Morning, said Roubaud (Traité de l'Impuissance, pp. 151-3) is the time for coitus, and even if desire is greater in the evening, pleasure is greater in the morning. Osiander also advised early morning coitus, and Venette, in an earlier century, discussing "at what hour a man should amorously embrace his wife" (La Génération de l'Homme, Part II, Ch. V), while thinking it is best to follow inclination, remarks that "a beautiful woman looks better by sunlight than by candlelight." A few authorities, like Burdach, have been content to accept the custom of night coitus, and Busch (Das Geschlechtsleben des Weibes, vol. i, p. 214) was inclined to think the darkness of night the most "natural" time, while Fürbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 217) thinks that early morning is "occasionally" the best time.
This is widely acknowledged. The Greeks, as noted by Aristophanes in the Archarnians, considered sunrise to be the right time for sex. The South Slavs also believe that dawn is the time for sex. Many modern experts have highlighted the benefits of early morning intercourse. Morning, according to Roubaud (Traité de l'Impuissance, pp. 151-3), is the time for sex, and although desire may peak in the evening, pleasure is greater in the morning. Osiander also recommended morning sex, and Venette, earlier, in discussing "at what hour a man should lovingly embrace his wife" (La Génération de l'Homme, Part II, Ch. V), while suggesting it's best to go with one's feelings, notes that "a beautiful woman looks better in sunlight than by candlelight." A few authorities, like Burdach, have been satisfied with the practice of night intercourse, and Busch (Das Geschlechtsleben des Weibes, vol. i, p. 214) believed that the darkness of night was the most "natural" time, while Fürbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 217) thinks that early morning is "occasionally" the best time.
To some, on the other hand, the exercise of sexual intercourse in the sunlight and the open air seems so important that they are inclined to elevate it to the rank of a religious exercise. I quote from a communication on this point received from Australia: "This shameful thing that must not be spoken of or done (except in the dark) will some day, I believe, become the one religious ceremony of the human race, in the spring. (Oh, what springs!) People will have become very sane, well-bred, aristocratic (all of them aristocrats), and on the whole opposed to rites and superstitions, for they will have a perfect knowledge of the past. The coition of lovers in the springtime will be the one religious ceremony they will allow themselves. I have a vision sometimes of the holy scene, but I am afraid it is too beautiful to describe. 'The intercourse of the sexes, I have dreamed, is ineffably beautiful, too fair to be remembered,' wrote the chaste Thoreau. Verily human beauty, joy, and love will reach their divinest height during those inaugural days of springtide coupling. When the world is one Paradise, the consummation of the lovers, the youngest and most beautiful, will take place in certain sacred valleys in sight of thousands assembled to witness it. For days it will take place in these valleys where the sun will rise on a dream of passionate voices, of clinging human forms, of flowers and waters, and the purple and gold of the sunrise are reflected on hills illumined with pansies. [I know not if the writer recalled George Chapman's "Enamelled pansies used at nuptials still"], and repeated on golden human flesh and human hair. In these sacred valleys the subtle perfume of the pansies will mingle with the divine fragrance of healthy naked young women and men in the spring coupling. You and I shall not see that, but we may help to make it possible." This rhapsody (an unconscious repetition of Saint-Lambert's at Mlle. Quinault's table in the eighteenth century) serves to illustrate the revolt which tends to take place against the unnatural and artificial degradation of the sexual act.
To some, the act of having sex in the sunlight and open air seems so significant that they are inclined to elevate it to a form of religious practice. I quote from a message I received from Australia on this topic: "This shameful thing that shouldn’t be talked about or done (except in the dark) will eventually, I believe, become the only religious ceremony of humanity in the spring. (Oh, what springs!) People will be very rational, well-mannered, and aristocratic (all of them aristocrats), and overall, they'll be opposed to rituals and superstitions, as they will fully understand the past. The lovemaking of partners in spring will be the only sacred ceremony they will embrace. Sometimes I envision this holy scene, but I fear it is too beautiful to articulate. 'The union of the sexes, I have imagined, is ineffably beautiful, too lovely to be remembered,' wrote the pure-hearted Thoreau. Truly, human beauty, joy, and love will reach their highest expression during those first days of springtime coupling. When the world is one Paradise, the union of lovers, the youngest and most beautiful, will take place in certain sacred valleys in view of thousands gathered to witness it. For days, this will happen in these valleys where the sun will rise over a dream of passionate voices, intertwined human forms, flowers, and waters, with the purple and gold of the sunrise reflecting on hills brightened with pansies. [I don’t know if the writer recalled George Chapman’s "Enamelled pansies used at nuptials still"], echoed on golden human skin and hair. In these sacred valleys, the subtle scent of pansies will mingle with the divine fragrance of healthy, naked young women and men in spring coupling. You and I probably won’t see that, but we may help to make it possible." This passionate outpouring (an unintentional echo of Saint-Lambert's at Mlle. Quinault's table in the eighteenth century) illustrates the rebellion against the unnatural and artificial degradation of the sexual act.
In some parts of the world it has seemed perfectly natural and reasonable that so great and significant an act as that of coitus should be consecrated to the divinity, and hence arose the custom of prayer before sexual intercourse. Thus Zoroaster ordained that a married couple should pray before coitus, and after the act they should say together: "O, Sapondomad, I trust this seed to thee, preserve it for me, for it is a man." In the Gorong Archipelago it is customary also for husband and wife to pray together before the sexual act (Ploss and Bartels, Das Weib, Bd. i, Ch. XVII). The civilized man, however, has come to regard his stomach as the most important of his organs, and he utters his conventional grace, not before love, but only before food. Even the degraded ritual vestiges of the religious recognition of coitus are difficult to find in Europe. We may perhaps detect it among the Spaniards, with their tenacious instinct for ritual, in the solemn etiquette with which, in the seventeenth century, it was customary, according to Madame d'Aulnoy, for the King to enter the bedchamber of the Queen: "He has on his slippers, his black mantle over his shoulder, his shield on one arm, a bottle hanging by a cord over the other arm (this bottle is not to drink from, but for a quite opposite purpose, which you will guess). With all this the King must also have his great sword in one hand and a dark lantern in the other. In this way he must enter, alone, the Queen's chamber" (Madame d'Aulnoy, Relation du Voyage d'Espagne, 1692, vol. iii, p. 221).
In some parts of the world, it has seemed completely natural and reasonable for such a significant act as sex to be acknowledged by a higher power, which led to the practice of praying before sexual intercourse. For instance, Zoroaster instructed that a married couple should pray before having sex, and afterward they would say together: "O, Sapondomad, I trust this seed to you, preserve it for me, for it is a man." In the Gorong Archipelago, it's also common for husbands and wives to pray together before they engage in sexual activity (Ploss and Bartels, Das Weib, Bd. i, Ch. XVII). However, modern society tends to prioritize the stomach as the most important organ, leading people to say a conventional grace not before love but only before meals. Even the remnants of the religious acknowledgment of sexual acts are hard to find in Europe. We might still see some traces of it among Spaniards, who have a strong inclination towards ritual. In the seventeenth century, as described by Madame d'Aulnoy, it was customary for the King to enter the Queen's bedchamber with a specific, solemn etiquette: "He wears his slippers, a black mantle over his shoulder, a shield on one arm, and a bottle hanging by a cord over the other arm (this bottle is not for drinking, but for a very different purpose, which you can guess). Additionally, the King must hold his great sword in one hand and a dark lantern in the other. In this way, he must enter, alone, the Queen's chamber" (Madame d'Aulnoy, Relation du Voyage d'Espagne, 1692, vol. iii, p. 221).
In discussing the art of love it is necessary to give a primary place to the central fact of coitus, on account of the ignorance that widely prevails concerning it, and the unfortunate prejudices which in their fungous broods flourish in the noisome obscurity around it. The traditions of the Christian Church, which overspread the whole of Europe, and set up for worship a Divine Virgin and her Divine Son, both of whom it elaborately disengaged from personal contact with sexuality effectually crushed any attempt to find a sacred and avowable ideal in married love. Even the Church's own efforts to elevate matrimony were negatived by its own ideals. That influence depresses our civilization even to-day. When Walt Whitman wrote his "Children of Adam" he was giving imperfect expression to conceptions of the religious nature of sexual love which have existed wholesomely and naturally in all parts of the world, but had not yet penetrated the darkness of Christendom where they still seemed strange and new, if not terrible. And the refusal to recognize the solemnity of sex had involved the placing of a pall of blackness and disrepute on the supreme sexual act itself. It was shut out from the sunshine and excluded from the sphere of worship.
When talking about the art of love, it’s important to focus on the central fact of sex, because there’s a lot of ignorance surrounding it and unfortunate prejudices that thrive in the darkness around it. The traditions of the Christian Church, which spread across all of Europe, promoted the worship of a Divine Virgin and her Divine Son, both of whom were distanced from any personal connection with sexuality, effectively stifling any attempts to find a sacred and accepted ideal in married love. Even the Church’s own attempts to elevate marriage were undermined by its own ideals. This influence still affects our society today. When Walt Whitman wrote "Children of Adam," he was imperfectly expressing ideas about the spiritual nature of sexual love that have existed healthily and naturally across the world, but hadn’t yet reached the understanding of Christianity, where they still felt strange and even frightening. The refusal to acknowledge the seriousness of sex has cast a shadow of shame over the act itself, excluding it from the light and keeping it out of the realm of worship.
The sexual act is important from the point of view of erotic art, not only from the ignorance and prejudices which surround it, but also because it has a real value even in regard to the psychic side of married life. "These organs," according to the oft-quoted saying of the old French physician, Ambrose Paré, "make peace in the household." How this comes about we see illustrated from time to time in Pepys's Diary. At the same time, it is scarcely necessary to say, after all that has gone before, that this ancient source of domestic peace tends to be indefinitely complicated by the infinite variety in erotic needs, which become ever more pronounced with the growth of civilization.[408]
The sexual act is significant in the context of erotic art, not just because of the ignorance and biases surrounding it, but also because it holds real value for the emotional aspect of married life. "These organs," as the well-known saying from the old French physician Ambrose Paré goes, "bring peace to the home." We can see examples of this in Pepys's Diary from time to time. However, it’s worth mentioning, given everything that has been discussed, that this age-old source of domestic harmony can become increasingly complicated by the endless variety of erotic needs, which become more pronounced as civilization progresses.[408]
The art of love is, indeed, only beginning with the establishment of sexual intercourse. In the adjustment of that relationship all the forces of nature are so strongly engaged that under completely favorable conditions—which indeed very rarely occur in our civilization—the knowledge of the art and a possible skill in its exercise come almost of themselves. The real test of the artist in love is in the skill to carry it beyond the period when the interests of nature, having been really or seemingly secured, begin to slacken. The whole art of love, it has been well said, lies in forever finding something new in the same person. The art of love is even more the art of retaining love than of arousing it. Otherwise it tends to degenerate towards the Shakespearian lust,
The art of love really starts with sexual intercourse. In managing that relationship, all the forces of nature are so strongly involved that under perfect conditions—which are actually very rare in our society—the knowledge of this art and the ability to practice it come almost naturally. The true test of a love artist is their ability to prolong the connection beyond the time when nature’s interests, having been genuinely or seemingly secured, begin to fade. As has been wisely said, the essence of the art of love is in continuously discovering something new in the same person. The art of love is more about maintaining love than just sparking it. Otherwise, it risks turning into something more shallow, like Shakespearian lust.
though it must be remembered that even from the most strictly natural point of view the transitions of passion are not normally towards repulsion but towards affection.[409]
though it should be noted that even from the most strictly natural perspective, the shifts of passion typically lean towards affection rather than repulsion.[409]
The young man and woman who are brought into the complete unrestraint of marriage after a prolonged and unnatural separation, during which desire and the satisfactions of desire have been artificially disconnected, are certainly not under the best conditions for learning the art of love. They are tempted by reckless and promiscuous indulgence in the intimacies of marriage to fling carelessly aside all the reasons that make that art worth learning. "There are married people," as Ellen Key remarks, "who might have loved each other all their lives if they had not been compelled, every day and all the year, to direct their habits, wills, and inclinations towards each other."
The young man and woman who enter the unrestrained world of marriage after a long and unnatural separation, during which their desires and the fulfillment of those desires have been artificially disconnected, are definitely not in the best position to learn the art of love. They are tempted by reckless and casual indulgence in the intimacies of marriage, which leads them to carelessly disregard all the reasons that make that art worth learning. "There are married people," as Ellen Key points out, "who might have loved each other their entire lives if they hadn't been forced, every day and all year, to focus their habits, wills, and inclinations on one another."
All the tendencies of our civilized life are, in personal matters, towards individualism; they involve the specialization, and they ensure the sacredness, of personal habits and even peculiarities. This individualism cannot be broken down suddenly at the arbitrary dictation of a tradition, or even by the force of passion from which the restraints have been removed. Out of deference to the conventions and prejudices of their friends, or out of the reckless abandonment of young love, or merely out of a fear of hurting each other's feelings, young couples have often plunged prematurely into an unbroken intimacy which is even more disastrous to the permanency of marriage than the failure ever to reach a complete intimacy at all. That is one of the chief reasons why most writers on the moral hygiene of marriage nowadays recommend separate beds for the married couple, if possible separate bedrooms, and even sometimes, with Ellen Key, see no objection to their living in separate houses. Certainly the happiest marriages have often involved the closest and most unbroken intimacy, in persons peculiarly fitted for such intimacy. It is far from true that, as Bloch has affirmed, familiarity is fatal to love. It is deadly to a love that has no roots, but it is the nourishment of the deeply-rooted love. Yet it remains true that absence is needed to maintain the keen freshness and fine idealism of love. "Absence," as Landor said, "is the invisible and incorporeal mother of ideal beauty." The married lovers who are only able to meet for comparatively brief periods between long absences have often experienced in these meetings a life-long succession of honeymoons.[410]
All the trends in our civilized life are pushing us towards individualism, especially in personal matters; they emphasize the importance of personal habits and quirks. This individualism can't just be dismantled overnight by tradition or even intense feelings when the usual limits are gone. Out of respect for their friends' opinions, the carefree nature of young love, or simply a fear of hurting each other's feelings, young couples often rush into a close intimacy too soon, which can harm the stability of their marriage more than never reaching complete intimacy at all. This is one of the main reasons why many modern writers on marriage’s moral health suggest couples sleep in separate beds, ideally in separate bedrooms, and sometimes, like Ellen Key, even see no problem with them living in separate homes. Undoubtedly, the happiest marriages often involve the deepest and most consistent intimacy between people who are well-suited for it. It’s not true, as Bloch claimed, that familiarity kills love. It can be harmful to a love that lacks a solid foundation, but it nourishes deeply-rooted love. However, it’s also true that time apart is necessary to keep the freshness and idealism of love alive. "Absence," as Landor said, "is the invisible and incorporeal mother of ideal beauty." Married couples who can only spend short amounts of time together after long absences often find in those moments a lifelong series of honeymoons.[410]
There can be no question that as presence has its risks for love, so also has absence. Absence like presence, in the end, if too prolonged, effaces the memory of love, and absence, further, by the multiplied points of contact with the world which it frequently involves, introduces the problem of jealousy, although, it must be added, it is difficult indeed to secure a degree of association which excludes jealousy or even the opportunities for motives of jealousy. The problem of jealousy is so fundamental in the art of love that it is necessary at this point to devote to it a brief discussion.
There’s no denying that just as being present has its risks for love, being absent does too. Absence, like presence, can eventually erase the memory of love if it lasts too long. Moreover, absence often means more interactions with the outside world, which can lead to feelings of jealousy. However, it’s worth noting that it’s really hard to create a connection that completely avoids jealousy or even situations that could spark jealousy. Jealousy is such a key issue in the art of love that we need to take a moment to discuss it briefly.
Jealousy is based on fundamental instincts which are visible at the beginning of animal life. Descartes defined jealousy as "a kind of fear related to a desire to preserve a possession." Every impulse of acquisition in the animal world is stimulated into greater activity by the presence of a rival who may snatch beforehand the coveted object. This seems to be a fundamental fact in the animal world; it has been a life-conserving tendency, for, it has been said, an animal that stood aside while its fellows were gorging themselves with food, and experienced nothing but pure satisfaction in the spectacle, would speedily perish. But in this fact we have the natural basis of jealousy.[411]
Jealousy is rooted in basic instincts that are evident at the start of animal life. Descartes described jealousy as "a kind of fear related to a desire to keep a possession." Every desire to acquire in the animal kingdom is heightened by the presence of a competitor who might grab the desired object first. This appears to be a fundamental truth in the animal world; it has been a survival instinct because, as it's been noted, an animal that just stands by while others are feasting and feels nothing but pure satisfaction in watching would quickly die off. But this fact gives us the natural foundation of jealousy.[411]
It is in reference to food that this impulse appears first and most conspicuously among animals. It is a well-known fact that association with other animals induces an animal to eat much more than when kept by himself. He ceases to eat from hunger but eats, as it has been put, in order to preserve his food from rivals in the only strong box he knows. The same feeling is transferred among animals to the field of sex. And further in the relations of dogs and other domesticated animals to their masters the emotion of jealousy is often very keenly marked.[412]
The urge related to food is the first and most obvious one that shows up in animals. It's widely recognized that when animals are around others, they tend to eat much more than when they're alone. They stop eating because they're hungry but eat, as it's been said, to keep their food safe from competitors in the only secure place they know. This same feeling is seen in animals' sexual behavior. Additionally, in the relationships between dogs and other domesticated animals and their owners, the emotion of jealousy is often very pronounced.
Jealousy is an emotion which is at its maximum among animals, among savages,[413] among children,[414] in the senile, in the degenerate, and very specially in chronic alcoholics.[415] It is worthy of note that the supreme artists and masters of the human heart who have most consummately represented the tragedy of jealousy clearly recognized that it is either atavistic or pathological; Shakespeare made his Othello a barbarian, and Tolstoy made the Pozdnischeff of his Kreutzer Sonata a lunatic. It is an anti-social emotion, though it has been maintained by some that it has been the cause of chastity and fidelity. Gesell, for instance, while admitting its anti-social character and accumulating quotations in evidence of the torture and disaster it occasions, seems to think that it still ought to be encouraged in order to foster sexual virtues. Very decided opinions have been expressed in the opposite sense. Jealousy, like other shadows, says Ellen Key, belongs only to the dawn and the setting of love, and a man should feel that it is a miracle, and not his right, if the sun stands still at the zenith.[416]
Jealousy is an emotion that peaks among animals, among primitive people, [413] among children, [414] in the elderly, in the weak, and especially in chronic alcoholics. [415] It’s noteworthy that the greatest artists and masters of the human heart, who have most effectively captured the tragedy of jealousy, recognized that it is either primitive or a sign of mental illness; Shakespeare portrayed Othello as a barbarian, and Tolstoy depicted Pozdnischeff in his Kreutzer Sonata as a madman. It is a destructive emotion, although some argue that it has contributed to chastity and fidelity. Gesell, for example, while acknowledging its harmful nature and collecting quotes to show the pain and chaos it causes, seems to believe it should still be encouraged to promote sexual virtues. Strong opposing views have also been expressed. Jealousy, like other shadows, says Ellen Key, only exists at the dawn and dusk of love, and a man should consider it a miracle, not his entitlement, if the sun stays still at its highest point. [416]
Even therefore if jealousy has been a beneficial influence at the beginning of civilization, as well as among animals,—as may probably be admitted, though on the whole it seems rather to be the by-product of a beneficial influence than such an influence itself,—it is still by no means clear that it therefore becomes a desirable emotion in more advanced stages of civilization. There are many primitive emotions, like anger and fear, which we do not think it desirable to encourage in complex civilized societies but rather seek to restrain and control, and even if we are inclined to attribute an original value to jealousy, it seems to be among these emotions that it ought to be placed.
Even if jealousy was a helpful force at the start of civilization, and even among animals—something many might accept, though it appears more as a side effect of a positive influence rather than being a positive force itself—it’s still not clear that it becomes a desirable emotion in more advanced stages of civilization. There are several basic emotions, like anger and fear, that we don’t think it’s good to encourage in complex civilized societies; instead, we aim to restrain and control them. Even if we tend to see jealousy as having some initial value, it feels like it belongs among these emotions that we should reconsider.
Miss Clapperton, in discussing this problem (Scientific Meliorism, pp. 129-137), follows Darwin (Descent of Man, Part I, Ch. IV) in thinking that jealousy led to "the inculcation of female virtue," but she adds that it has also been a cause of woman's subjection, and now needs to be eliminated. "To rid ourselves as rapidly as may be of jealousy is essential; otherwise the great movement in favor of equality of sex will necessarily meet with checks and grave obstruction."
Miss Clapperton, while discussing this issue (Scientific Meliorism, pp. 129-137), aligns with Darwin (Descent of Man, Part I, Ch. IV) in suggesting that jealousy has led to "the teaching of female virtue." However, she also points out that it has contributed to the oppression of women, and must now be removed. "It’s essential to eliminate jealousy as quickly as possible; otherwise, the significant movement toward gender equality will inevitably face obstacles and serious challenges."
Ribot (La Logique des Sentiments, pp. 75 et seq.; Essai sur les Passions, pp. 91, 175), while stating that subjectively the estimate of jealousy must differ in accordance with the ideal of life held, considers that objectively we must incline to an unfavorable estimate "Even a brief passion is a rupture in the normal life; it is an abnormal, if not a pathological state, an excrescence, a parasitism."
Ribot (La Logique des Sentiments, pp. 75 et seq.; Essai sur les Passions, pp. 91, 175) points out that, subjectively, how people view jealousy varies based on their life ideals. However, he argues that objectively, we should lean towards a negative view: "Even a brief passion disrupts normal life; it’s an abnormal, if not pathological, state—an outgrowth, a parasitism."
Forel (Die Sexuelle Frage, Ch. V) speaks very strongly in the same sense, and considers that it is necessary to eliminate jealousy by non-procreation of the jealous. Jealousy is, he declares, "the worst and unfortunately the most deeply-rooted of the 'irradiations,' or, better, the 'contrast-reactions,' of sexual love inherited from our animal ancestors. An old German saying, 'Eifersucht ist eine Leidenschaft die mit Eifer sucht was Leider schafft,' says by no means too much.... Jealousy is a heritage of animality and barbarism; I would recall this to those who, under the name of 'injured honor,' attempt to justify it and place it on a high pedestal. An unfaithful husband is ten times more to be wished for a woman than a jealous husband.... We often hear of 'justifiable jealousy.' I believe, however, that there is no justifiable jealousy; it is always atavistic or else pathological; at the best it is nothing more than a brutal animal stupidity. A man who, by nature, that is by his hereditary constitution, is jealous is certain to poison his own life and that of his wife. Such men ought on no account to marry. Both education and selection should work together to eliminate jealousy as far as possible from the human brain."
Forel (Die Sexuelle Frage, Ch. V) makes a strong argument for the idea that we need to eliminate jealousy by choosing not to have children with people who are jealous. He states that jealousy is "the worst and unfortunately the most deeply-rooted of the 'irradiations,' or, better, the 'contrast-reactions,' of sexual love inherited from our animal ancestors." An old German saying, "Eifersucht ist eine Leidenschaft die mit Eifer sucht was Leider schafft," doesn’t exaggerate the issue. Jealousy is a remnant of our primal instincts and barbaric nature; I remind those who try to justify it under the guise of 'injured honor' that it shouldn't be glorified. A woman is far better off with an unfaithful husband than a jealous one. We often hear about 'justifiable jealousy,' but I believe there's no such thing; it is always either primal or pathological; at best, it's just a form of brutal animal stupidity. A man who is inherently jealous, due to his genetic makeup, is guaranteed to poison his own life and that of his wife. Such men should never marry. Both education and selective breeding should work together to reduce jealousy as much as possible from the human mind.
Eric Gillard in an article on "Jealousy" (Free Review, Sept., 1896), in opposition to those who believe that jealousy "makes the home," declares that, on the contrary, it is the chief force that unmakes the home. "So long as egotism waters it with the tears of sentiment and shields it from the cold blasts of scientific inquiry, so long will it thrive. But the time will come when it will be burned in the Garden of Love as a noxious weed. Its mephitic influence in society is too palpable to be overlooked. It turns homes that might be sanctuaries of love into hells of discord and hate; it causes suicides, and it drives thousands to drink, reckless excesses, and madness. Makes the home! One of your married men friends sees a probable seducer in every man who smiles at his wife; another is jealous of his wife's women acquaintances; a third is wounded because his wife shows so much attention to the children. Some of the women you know display jealousy of every other woman, of their husband's acquaintances, and some, of his very dog. You must be completely monopolized or you do not thoroughly love. You must admire no one but the person with whom you have immured yourself for life. Old friendships must be dissolved, new friendships must not be formed, for fear of invoking the beautiful emotion that 'makes the home.'"
Eric Gillard, in an article on "Jealousy" (Free Review, Sept., 1896), argues against those who think jealousy "makes the home," stating that, instead, it is the main force that destroys it. "As long as egotism nourishes it with tears of sentiment and protects it from the harsh reality of scientific inquiry, it will continue to flourish. But a time will come when it will be burned in the Garden of Love like a harmful weed. Its toxic influence in society is too obvious to ignore. It turns what could be homes filled with love into places of discord and hatred; it leads to suicides and pushes thousands toward alcohol, reckless behavior, and madness. Makes the home! One of your married friends sees a potential seducer in every man who smiles at his wife; another is jealous of his wife's female friends; a third feels hurt when his wife pays too much attention to the kids. Some of the women you know are jealous of every other woman, of their husbands' friends, and some, even of his dog. You must be completely monopolized or you don’t truly love. You can only admire the person with whom you’ve confined yourself for life. Old friendships must end, new ones must not be formed, out of fear of stirring up the lovely emotion that 'makes the home.'"
Even if jealousy in matters of sex could be admitted to be an emotion working on the side of civilized progress, it must still be pointed out that it merely acts externally; it can have little or no real influence; the jealous person seldom makes himself more lovable by his jealousy and frequently much less lovable. The main effect of his jealousy is to increase, and not seldom to excite, the causes for jealousy, and at the same time to encourage hypocrisy.
Even if jealousy in romantic relationships can be seen as an emotion that supports civilized progress, it’s important to note that it only impacts things on the surface; it has little to no real effect. A jealous person rarely becomes more lovable because of their jealousy and often becomes much less lovable. The primary outcome of their jealousy is to amplify, and often provoke, the reasons for jealousy, while simultaneously promoting dishonesty.
All the circumstances, accompaniments, and results of domestic jealousy in their completely typical form, are well illustrated by a very serious episode in the history of the Pepys household, and have been fully and faithfully set down by the great diarist. The offence—an embrace of his wife's lady-help, as she might now be termed—was a slight one, but, as Pepys himself admits, quite inexcusable. He is writing, being in his thirty-sixth year, on the 25th of Oct., 1668 (Lord's Day). "After supper, to have my hair combed by Deb, which occasioned the greatest sorrow to me that ever I knew in this world, for my wife, coming up suddenly, did find me embracing the girl.... I was at a wonderful loss upon it, and the girl also, and I endeavored to put it off, but my wife was struck mute and grew angry.... Heartily afflicted for this folly of mine.... So ends this month," he writes a few days later, "with some quiet to my mind, though not perfect, after the greatest falling out with my poor wife, and through my folly with the girl, that ever I had, and I have reason to be sorry and ashamed of it, and more to be troubled for the poor girl's sake. Sixth November. Up, and presently my wife up with me, which she professedly now do every day to dress me, that I may not see Willet [Deb], and do eye me, whether I cast my eye upon her, or no, and do keep me from going into the room where she is. Ninth November. Up, and I did, by a little note which I flung to Deb, advise her that I did continue to deny that ever I kissed her, and so she might govern herself. The truth is that I did adventure upon God's pardoning me this lie, knowing how heavy a thing it would be for me, to the ruin of the poor girl, and next knowing that if my wife should know all it would be impossible for her ever to be at peace with me again, and so our whole lives would be uncomfortable. The girl read, and as I bid her returned me the note, flinging it to me in passing by." Next day, however, he is "mightily troubled," for his wife has obtained a confession from the girl of the kissing. For some nights Mr. and Mrs. Pepys are both sleepless, with much weeping on either side. Deb gets another place, leaving on the 14th of November, and Pepys is never able to see her before she leaves the house, his wife keeping him always under her eye. It is evident that Pepys now feels strongly attracted to Deb, though there is no evidence of this before she became the subject of the quarrel. On the 13th of November, hearing she was to leave next day, he writes: "The truth is I have a good mind to have the maidenhead of this girl." He was, however, the "more troubled to see how my wife is by this means likely forever to have her hand over me, and that I shall forever be a slave to her—that is to say, only in matters of pleasure." At the same time his love for his wife was by no means diminished, nor hers for him. "I must here remark," he says, "that I have lain with my moher [i.e., muger, wife] as a husband more times since this falling out than in, I believe, twelve months before. And with more pleasure to her than in all the time of our marriage before." The next day was Sunday. On Monday Pepys at once begins to make inquiries which will put him on the track of Deb. On the 18th he finds her. She gets up into the coach with him, and he kisses her and takes liberties with her, at the same time advising her "to have a care of her honor and to fear God," allowing no one else to do what he has done; he also tells her how she can find him if she desires. Pepys now feels that everything is settled satisfactorily, and his heart is full of joy. But his joy is short-lived, for Mrs. Pepys discovers this interview with Deb on the following day. Pepys denies it at first, then confesses, and there is a more furious scene than ever. Pepys is now really alarmed, for his wife threatens to leave him; he definitely abandons Deb, and with prayers to God resolves never to do the like again. Mrs. Pepys is not satisfied, however, till she makes her husband write a letter to Deb, telling her that she is little better than a whore, and that he hates her, though Deb is spared this, not by any stratagem of Pepys, but by the considerateness of the friend to whom the letter was entrusted for delivery. Moreover, Mrs. Pepys arranges with her husband that, in future, whenever he goes abroad he shall be accompanied everywhere by his clerk. We see that Mrs. Pepys plays with what appears to be triumphant skill and success the part of the jealous and avenging wife, and digs her little French heels remorselessly into her prostrate husband and her rival. Unfortunately, we do not know what the final outcome was, for a little later, owing to trouble with his eyesight, Pepys was compelled to bring his Diary to an end. It is evident, however, when we survey the whole of this perhaps typical episode, that neither husband nor wife were in the slightest degree prepared for the commonplace position into which they were thrown; that each of them appears in a painful, undignified, and humiliating light; that as a result of it the husband acquires almost a genuine and strong affection for the girl who is the cause of the quarrel; and finally that, even though he is compelled, for the time at all events, to yield to his wife, he remains at the end exactly what he was at the beginning. Nor had husband or wife the very slightest wish to leave each other; the bond of marriage remained firm, but it had been degraded by insincerity on one side and the jealous endeavor on the other to secure fidelity by compulsion.
All the circumstances, details, and effects of domestic jealousy in their typical form are well illustrated by a serious incident in the history of the Pepys household, as fully and faithfully recorded by the great diarist. The offense—an embrace with his wife's maid, as we might call her today—was slight, but, as Pepys himself admits, completely inexcusable. Writing in his thirty-sixth year on October 25, 1668 (Sunday), he notes, "After dinner, I had my hair combed by Deb, which caused me the greatest sorrow I ever felt in this world, because my wife suddenly came up and found me embracing the girl... I was at a complete loss about it, as was the girl, and I tried to brush it off, but my wife was left speechless and got angry... I was deeply troubled for this foolishness of mine... So ends this month," he writes a few days later, "with some peace of mind, though not perfect, after a severe falling out with my poor wife, largely due to my foolishness with the girl, and I have every reason to feel sorry and ashamed about it, and even more concerned for the poor girl. November 6. I got up, and my wife got up with me, as she now does every day to dress me, so that I won’t see Willet [Deb] and so she can watch me closely, to see if I look at her, and she keeps me from going into the room where she is. November 9. I got up, and I sent a little note to Deb, letting her know that I continued to deny that I ever kissed her, so she might behave accordingly. The truth is I risked God's forgiveness for this lie, knowing how serious it could be for the poor girl, and knowing that if my wife found out everything, it would be impossible for her to ever find peace with me again, making our lives miserable. The girl read it, and as I asked, she returned the note to me, tossing it to me as she walked by." The next day, however, he is "greatly troubled," as his wife has gotten a confession from the girl about the kiss. For several nights, both Mr. and Mrs. Pepys lose sleep, each weeping on their own side. Deb finds another job and leaves on November 14, and Pepys cannot see her before she goes, as his wife always keeps him under her watch. It’s clear that Pepys now feels a strong attraction to Deb, though this interest didn't exist before she became a source of conflict. On November 13, hearing that she would leave the next day, he writes: "Honestly, I have a strong desire to have this girl." However, he is "more troubled to see how my wife is now likely to have control over me forever, and that I will always be her slave—in matters of pleasure, at least." At the same time, his love for his wife hasn’t diminished, nor hers for him. "I must note," he says, "that I've been with my wife more since this fallout than in the whole year before. And with more pleasure for her than at any time during our marriage before." The next day is Sunday. On Monday, Pepys immediately starts looking into where Deb has gone. On the 18th, he finds her. She gets into the coach with him, and he kisses her and takes liberties with her, while also advising her "to protect her honor and to fear God," warning her not to let anyone else do what he has done; he also tells her how to find him if she wants. Pepys now feels that everything is settled well, and his heart is filled with joy. But his joy is short-lived, as Mrs. Pepys discovers this meeting with Deb the next day. Pepys denies it at first, then admits it, leading to an even more furious scene than before. Pepys is genuinely alarmed now, as his wife threatens to leave him; he decisively breaks off with Deb, and with a prayer to God resolves never to repeat his mistake. Mrs. Pepys is not satisfied until she has her husband write a letter to Deb, telling her that she is no better than a whore and that he hates her, although Deb is spared this fate, not through Pepys’s cleverness, but due to the kindness of the friend to whom the letter was given for delivery. Furthermore, Mrs. Pepys arranges with her husband that whenever he goes out, he will be accompanied everywhere by his clerk. We see that Mrs. Pepys is skillfully and successfully playing the role of the jealous and vengeful wife, mercilessly digging her little French heels into her helpless husband and her rival. Unfortunately, we don’t know what the final outcome was, as soon after, due to problems with his eyesight, Pepys had to stop keeping his Diary. However, it is evident when we look at this possibly typical episode that neither husband nor wife were in the least bit prepared for the common situation they found themselves in; each appears in a painful, undignified, and humiliating light; as a result, the husband develops a genuine and strong affection for the girl who caused the conflict; and finally, even though he's forced to yield to his wife for the time being, he ends up just as he started. Neither husband nor wife had the slightest desire to part from one another; their marriage bond remained strong, but it had been tarnished by insincerity on one side and a jealous effort on the other to enforce fidelity through control.
Apart altogether, however, from the question of its effectiveness, or even of the misery that it causes to all concerned, it is evident that jealousy is incompatible with all the tendencies of civilization. We have seen that a certain degree of variation is involved in the sexual relationship, as in all other relationships, and unless we are to continue to perpetuate many evils and injustices, that fact has to be faced and recognized. We have also seen that the line of our advance involves a constant increase in moral responsibility and self-government, and that, in its turn, implies not only a high degree of sincerity but also the recognition that no person has any right, or indeed any power, to control the emotions and actions of another person. If our sun of love stands still at midday, according to Ellen Key's phrase, that is a miracle to be greeted with awe and gratitude, and by no means a right to be demanded. The claim of jealousy falls with the claim of conjugal rights.
Apart from the question of its effectiveness, or even the misery it brings to everyone involved, it’s clear that jealousy doesn’t align with the progress of civilization. We’ve observed that a certain level of variation exists in sexual relationships, just like in all other types of relationships, and unless we want to keep perpetuating various evils and injustices, we need to acknowledge and confront that fact. We’ve also noted that our progress requires a constant growth in moral responsibility and self-governance, which means not only being very sincere but also recognizing that no one has the right, or even the ability, to control someone else's feelings and actions. If our sun of love stands still at noon, as Ellen Key puts it, that's a miracle to be celebrated with gratitude and definitely not a demand to be made. The claim of jealousy crumbles alongside the notion of marital rights.
It is quite possible, Bloch remarks (The Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. X), to love more than one person at the same time, with nearly equal tenderness, and to be honestly able to assure each of the passion felt for her or him. Bloch adds that the vast psychic differentiation involved by modern civilization increases the possibility of this double love, for it is difficult for anyone to find his complement in a single person, and that this applies to women as well as to men.
It is entirely possible, Bloch notes (The Sexual Life of Our Time, Ch. X), to love more than one person at the same time, with almost equal affection, and to genuinely assure each of them of the passion felt for them. Bloch adds that the extensive emotional diversity created by modern society enhances the chances of experiencing this dual love, as it's challenging for anyone to find their perfect match in just one person, and this applies to both women and men.
Georg Hirth likewise points out (Wege zur Heimat, pp. 543-552) that it is important to remember that women, as well as men, can love two persons at the same time. Men flatter themselves, he remarks, with the prejudice that the female heart, or rather brain, can only hold one man at a time, and that if there is a second man it is by a kind of prostitution. Nearly all erotic writers, poets, and novelists, even physicians and psychologists, belong to this class, he says; they look on a woman as property, and of course two men cannot "possess" a woman. (Regarding novelists, however, the remark may be interpolated that there are many exceptions, and Thomas Hardy, for instance, frequently represents a woman as more or less in love with two men at the same time.) As against this desire to depreciate women's psychic capacity, Hirth maintains that a woman is not necessarily obliged to be untrue to one man because she has conceived a passion for another man. "Today," Hirth truly declares, "only love and justice can count as honorable motives in marriage. The modern man accords to the beloved wife and life-companion the same freedom which he himself took before marriage, and perhaps still takes in marriage. If she makes no use of it, as is to be hoped—so much the better! But let there be no lies, no deception; the indispensable foundation of modern marriage is boundless sincerity and friendship, the deepest trust, affectionate devotion, and consideration. This is the best safeguard against adultery.... Let him, however, who is, nevertheless, overtaken by the outbreak of it console himself with the undoubted fact that of two real lovers the most noble-minded and deep-seeing friend will always have the preference." These wise words cannot be too deeply meditated. The policy of jealousy is only successful—when it is successful—in the hands of the man who counts the external husk of love more precious than the kernel.
Georg Hirth also points out (Wege zur Heimat, pp. 543-552) that it's important to remember that women, just like men, can love more than one person at a time. Men often deceive themselves with the belief that a woman's heart, or rather mind, can only hold one man at a time, and if there’s a second man involved, it must be treated as a form of betrayal. He notes that almost all erotic writers, poets, and novelists, even doctors and psychologists, share this mindset; they view a woman as property, and obviously, two men cannot "own" a woman. (Regarding novelists, though, it can be noted that there are many exceptions; for example, Thomas Hardy often depicts a woman as being somewhat in love with two men at once.) In response to this tendency to underestimate women's emotional capabilities, Hirth argues that a woman doesn’t have to be unfaithful to one man simply because she’s developed feelings for another man. "Today," Hirth accurately states, "only love and fairness can be seen as honorable reasons for marriage. The modern man gives his beloved wife and life partner the same freedom he enjoyed before marriage, and perhaps still does within marriage. If she chooses not to use it, as we hope she won't—then all the better! But let there be no lies, no deception; the essential foundation of modern marriage is complete honesty and friendship, profound trust, loving commitment, and respect. This is the best safeguard against infidelity.... However, let anyone who is caught in the act of infidelity find comfort in the undeniable truth that of two true lovers, the most noble and insightful friend will always be prioritized." These wise words deserve deep reflection. The strategy of jealousy only succeeds—when it does—if it’s wielded by a man who values the superficial aspects of love more than the true connection.
It seems to some that the recognition of variations in sexual relationships, of the tendency of the monogamic to overpass its self-imposed bounds, is at best a sad necessity, and a lamentable fall from a high ideal. That, however, is the reverse of the truth. The great evil of monogamy, and its most seriously weak point, is its tendency to self-concentration at the expense of the outer world. The devil always comes to a man in the shape of his wife and children, said Hinton. The family is a great social influence in so far as it is the best instrument for creating children who will make the future citizens; but in a certain sense the family is an anti-social influence, for it tends to absorb unduly the energy that is needed for the invigoration of society. It is possible, indeed, that that fact led to the modification of the monogamic system in early developing periods of human history, when social expansion and cohesion were the primary necessities. The family too often tends to resemble, as someone has said, the secluded collection of grubs sometimes revealed in their narrow home when we casually raise a flat stone in our gardens. Great as are the problems of love, and great as should be our attention to them, it must always be remembered that love is not a little circle that is complete in itself. It is the nature of love to irradiate. Just as family life exists mainly for the social end of breeding the future race, so family love has its social ends in the extension of sympathy and affection to those outside it, and even in ends that go beyond love altogether.[417]
It seems some people view recognizing the different types of sexual relationships, and the tendency of monogamy to exceed its self-imposed limits, as a sad necessity and a regrettable fall from an ideal. However, that's actually the opposite of the truth. The biggest problem with monogamy, and its most serious flaw, is its tendency to focus inward at the expense of the wider world. As Hinton said, "the devil always comes to a man in the shape of his wife and children." The family is a significant social force because it is the best way to raise children who will become future citizens; but in some ways, the family can also be an anti-social force, as it tends to consume too much of the energy that society needs to thrive. It’s possible this very fact led to changes in the monogamous system during the early stages of human history when social expansion and unity were crucial. Families often resemble, as someone put it, a secluded group of grubs that we might find when we lift a flat stone in our gardens. While the challenges of love are significant and deserve our attention, we must always remember that love isn’t a self-contained little circle. Love has a natural tendency to extend outward. Just as family life primarily exists to raise the next generation, family love aims to spread sympathy and affection beyond its own bounds, and even serves purposes that go beyond love entirely.
The question is debated from time to time as to how far it is possible for men and women to have intimate friendships with each other outside the erotic sphere.[418] There can be no doubt whatever that it is perfectly possible for a man and a woman to experience for each other a friendship which never intrudes into the sexual sphere. As a rule, however, this only happens under special conditions, and those are generally conditions which exclude the closest and most intimate friendship. If, as we have seen, love may be defined as a synthesis of lust and friendship, friendship inevitably enters into the erotic sphere. Just as sexual emotion tends to merge into friendship, so friendship between persons of opposite sex, if young, healthy, and attractive, tends to involve sexual emotion. The two feelings are too closely allied for an artificial barrier to be permanently placed between them without protest. Men who offer a woman friendship usually find that it is not received with much satisfaction except as the first installment of a warmer emotion, and women who offer friendship to a man usually find that he responds with an offer of love; very often the "friendship" is from the first simply love or flirtation masquerading under another name.
The question gets debated from time to time about how far men and women can have close friendships with each other without being romantic.[418] There's no doubt that a man and a woman can have a friendship that never crosses into sexual territory. However, this usually only happens under specific conditions that generally limit the possibility of the closest and most intimate friendship. As we've seen, love can be defined as a mix of desire and friendship, and friendship inevitably brings in a level of eroticism. Just like sexual feelings can blend into friendship, a friendship between young, healthy, and attractive people of the opposite sex often tends to include sexual feelings. The two emotions are too closely linked for a false barrier to be maintained between them without pushback. Men who try to befriend a woman often find that it's not received very well unless it’s seen as the beginning of something more romantic, and women who extend friendship to a man usually find that he responds with a romantic interest; often, that "friendship" is really just love or flirtation hiding behind another name.
"In the long run," a woman writes (in a letter published in Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. i, Heft 7), "the senses become discontented at their complete exclusion. And I believe that a man can only come into the closest mutual association with a woman by whom, consciously or unconsciously, he is physically attracted. He cannot enter into the closest psychic intercourse with a woman with whom he could not imagine himself in physical intercourse. His prevailing wish is for the possession of a woman, of the whole woman, her soul as well as her body. And a woman also cannot imagine an intimate relation to a man in which the heart and the body, as well as the mind, are not involved. (Naturally I am thinking of people with sound nerves and healthy blood.) Can a woman carry on a Platonic relation with a man from year to year without the thought sometimes coming to her: 'Why does he never kiss me? Have I no charm for him?' And in the most concealed corner of her heart will it not happen that she uses that word 'kiss' in the more comprehensive sense in which the French sometimes employ it?" There is undoubtedly an element of truth in this statement. The frontier between erotic love and friendship is vague, and an intimate psychic intercourse that is sternly debarred from ever manifesting itself in a caress, or other physical manifestation of tender intimacy, tends to be constrained, and arouses unspoken and unspeakable thoughts and desires which are fatal to any complete friendship.
"In the long run," a woman writes (in a letter published in Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Vol. 1, Issue 7), "the senses become unhappy when completely ignored. I believe that a man can only have a close relationship with a woman he is physically attracted to, whether he realizes it or not. He can't have the deepest emotional connection with a woman he can't imagine being physically intimate with. His main desire is to fully possess a woman—her soul as well as her body. Likewise, a woman cannot envision a close relationship with a man if it doesn't involve her heart, body, and mind. (Of course, I'm referring to individuals with stable nerves and healthy blood.) Can a woman maintain a Platonic relationship with a man for years without occasionally wondering, 'Why doesn’t he ever kiss me? Am I not appealing to him?' And deep down in her heart, isn’t it possible that she thinks of the word 'kiss' in the broader sense that the French sometimes use?" There is certainly some truth to this statement. The line between romantic love and friendship is blurry, and an intimate emotional connection that is strictly limited from expressing itself in a kiss or other physical signs of affection tends to feel stifled, stirring up unspoken and hidden thoughts and desires that can damage any genuine friendship.
Undoubtedly the only perfect "Platonic friendships" are those which have been reached through the portal of a preliminary erotic intimacy. In such a case bad lovers, when they have resolutely traversed the erotic stage, may become exceedingly good friends. A satisfactory friendship is possible between brother and sister because they have been physically intimate in childhood, and all erotic curiosities are absent. The most admirable "Platonic friendship" may often be attained by husband and wife in whom sympathy and affection and common interests have outlived passion. In nearly all the most famous friendships of distinguished men and women—as we know in some cases and divine in others—an hour's passion, in Sainte-Beuve's words, has served as the golden key to unlock the most precious and intimate secrets of friendship.[419]
Without a doubt, the only true "Platonic friendships" are those that come after an initial romantic connection. In this case, bad lovers, once they have moved past the romantic phase, can become really good friends. A strong friendship is possible between siblings because they were close during childhood, and any romantic curiosities are gone. The most admirable "Platonic friendship" can often be found between a husband and wife, where understanding, affection, and shared interests have lasted beyond passion. In almost all the most renowned friendships among notable men and women—some we know about and others seem divine—moments of passion, as Sainte-Beuve put it, have served as the golden key to unlock the most valuable and intimate aspects of friendship.[419]
The friendships that have been entered through the erotic portal possess an intimacy and retain a spiritually erotic character which could not be attained on the basis of a normal friendship between persons of the same sex. This is true in a far higher degree of the ultimate relationship, under fortunate circumstances, of husband and wife in the years after passion has become impossible. They have ceased to be passionate lovers but they have not become mere friends and comrades. More especially their relationship takes on elements borrowed from the attitude of child to parent, of parent to child. Everyone from his first years retains something of the child which cannot be revealed to all the world; everyone acquires something of the guardian paternal or maternal spirit. Husband and wife are each child to the other, and are indeed parent and child by turn. And here still the woman retains a certain erotic supremacy, for she is to the last more of a child than it is ever easy for the man to be, and much more essentially a mother than he is a father.
The friendships formed through the erotic connection have a level of intimacy and maintain a spiritually erotic quality that normal same-sex friendships can't achieve. This is even more true for the ultimate relationship, under the right circumstances, between husband and wife as the years pass and passion fades. They may no longer be passionate lovers, but they haven't just become friends and companions. Their relationship especially mirrors elements of the dynamic between a child and a parent. Each person retains a bit of their inner child from their early years, and everyone develops some nurturing spirit of a caregiver. In this way, a husband and wife are like children to one another and, in a sense, parents and children in turn. Still, the woman often holds a certain erotic dominance, as she tends to embody the childlike spirit more than it's easy for the man, and she is much more inherently a mother than he is a father.
Groos (Der Æsthetische Genuss, p. 249) has pointed out that "love" is really made up of both sexual instinct and parental instinct.
Groos (Der Æsthetische Genuss, p. 249) has noted that "love" is actually a combination of sexual instinct and parental instinct.
"So-called happy marriages," says Professor W. Thomas (Sex and Society, p. 246), "represent an equilibrium reached through an extension of the maternal interest of the woman to the man, whereby she looks after his personal needs as she does after those of the children—cherishing him, in fact, as a child—or in an extension to woman on the part of man of the nurture and affection which is in his nature to give to pets and all helpless (and preferably dumb) creatures."
"So-called happy marriages," says Professor W. Thomas (Sex and Society, p. 246), "represent a balance achieved when a woman extends her maternal instincts to her husband, caring for his personal needs just like she does for the children's—treasuring him, in fact, like a child—or, conversely, when a man shows the nurturing and affection he naturally gives to pets and other defenseless (and ideally quiet) beings toward a woman."
"When the devotion in the tie between mother and son," a woman writes, "is added to the relation of husband and wife, the union of marriage is raised to the high and beautiful dignity it deserves, and can attain in this world. It comprehends sympathy, love, and perfect understanding, even of the faults and weaknesses of both sides." "The foundation of every true woman's love," another woman writes, "is a mother's tenderness. He whom she loves is a child of larger growth, although she may at the same time have a deep respect for him." (See also, for similar opinion of another woman of distinguished intellectual ability, footnote at beginning of "The Psychic State in Pregnancy" in volume v of these Studies.)
"When the devotion in the bond between mother and son," a woman writes, "is combined with the relationship of husband and wife, the union of marriage is elevated to the high and beautiful dignity it deserves and can achieve in this world. It includes empathy, love, and a complete understanding, even of each other's flaws and weaknesses." "The foundation of every true woman's love," another woman writes, "is a mother's tenderness. The man she loves is a grown child, even though she may also have a deep respect for him." (See also, for a similar opinion from another woman of notable intellectual ability, footnote at the beginning of "The Psychic State in Pregnancy" in volume v of these Studies.)
It is on the basis of these elemental human facts that the permanently seductive and inspiring relationships of sex are developed, and not by the emergence of personalities who combine impossibly exalted characteristics. "The task is extremely difficult," says Kisch in his Sexual Life of Woman, "but a clever and virtuous modern wife must endeavor to combine in her single personality the sensuous attractiveness of an Aspasia, the chastity of a Lucrece, and the intellectual greatness of a Cornelia." And in an earlier century we are told in the novel of La Tia Fingida, which has sometimes been attributed to Cervantes, that "a woman should be an angel in the street, a saint in church, beautiful at the window, honest in the house, and a demon in bed." The demands made of men by women, on the other hand, have been almost too lofty to bear definite formulation at all. "Ninety-nine out of a hundred loving women," says Helene Stöcker, "certainly believe that if a thousand other men have behaved ignobly, and forsaken, ill-used, and deceived the woman they love, the man they love is an exception, marked out from all other men; that is the reason they love him." It may be doubted, however, if the great lovers have ever stood very far above the ordinary level of humanity by their possession of perfection. They have been human, and their art of love has not always excluded the possession of human frailties; perfection, indeed, even if it could be found, would furnish a bad soil for love to strike deep roots in.
It is based on these fundamental human truths that the enduringly attractive and inspiring connections of sex are created, not by the emergence of individuals who possess impossibly ideal traits. "The task is extremely challenging," says Kisch in his Sexual Life of Woman, "but a smart and virtuous modern wife must strive to blend in her single personality the sensual appeal of an Aspasia, the purity of a Lucrece, and the intellectual greatness of a Cornelia." In an earlier century, we learn from the novel La Tia Fingida, which is sometimes credited to Cervantes, that "a woman should be an angel in public, a saint in church, beautiful at the window, honest at home, and a wildcat in bed." The expectations women have of men, on the other hand, have often been too high to define clearly. "Ninety-nine out of a hundred loving women," says Helene Stöcker, "believe that even if a thousand other men have behaved badly, leaving, mistreating, and deceiving the woman they love, the man they love is an exception, set apart from all the others; that's why they love him." However, one might question whether the great lovers have ever truly been far above the average level of humanity due to their so-called perfection. They have been human, and their love skills haven't always excluded the presence of human flaws; in fact, perfection, if it could even be found, would provide a poor foundation for love to take deep root.
It is only when we realize the highly complex nature of the elements which make up erotic love that we can understand how it is that that love can constitute so tremendous a revelation and exert so profound an influence even in men of the greatest genius and intellect and in the sphere of their most spiritual activity. It is not merely passion, nor any conscious skill in the erotic art,—important as these may be,—that would serve to account for Goethe's relationship to Frau von Stein, or Wagner's to Mathilde Wesendonck, or that of Robert and Elizabeth Browning to each other.[420]
It’s only when we acknowledge the incredibly complex aspects of what makes up erotic love that we can truly understand how this kind of love can be such a profound revelation and have such a deep impact, even on the most brilliant and intellectual individuals, especially in their most spiritual pursuits. It’s not just passion, nor is it simply a conscious skill in the erotic arts—important as those may be—that explains Goethe's relationship with Frau von Stein, Wagner's connection to Mathilde Wesendonck, or the bond between Robert and Elizabeth Browning.
It may now be clear to the reader why it has been necessary in a discussion of the sexual impulse in its relationship to society to deal with the art of love. It is true that there is nothing so intimately private and personal as the erotic affairs of the individual. Yet it is equally true that these affairs lie at the basis of the social life, and furnish the conditions—good or bad as the case may be—of that procreative act which is a supreme concern of the State. It is because the question of love is of such purely private interest that it tends to be submerged in the question of breed. We have to realize, not only that the question of love subserves the question of breed, but also that love has a proper, a necessary, even a socially wholesome claim, to stand by itself and to be regarded for its own worth.
It may now be clear to the reader why it's important, in discussing the sexual impulse and its connection to society, to talk about the art of love. It's true that there is nothing more personal than an individual's erotic relationships. However, it's also true that these relationships form the foundation of social life and create the conditions—whether positive or negative—for the procreative act that is a major concern for the State. The reason the issue of love often gets overshadowed by the issue of breeding is that it is seen as so private. We need to recognize that while love serves the purpose of breeding, it also has its own important, necessary, and socially beneficial role that deserves to be considered on its own merits.
In the profoundly suggestive study of love which the distinguished sociologist Tarde left behind at his death (Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, loc. cit.), there are some interesting remarks on this point: "Society," he says, "has been far more, and more intelligently, preoccupied with the problem of answering the 'question of breed' than the 'question of love.' The first problem fills all our civil and commercial codes. The second problem has never been clearly stated, or looked in the face, not even in antiquity, still less since the coming of Christianity, for merely to offer the solutions of marriage and prostitution is manifestly inadequate. Statesmen have only seen the side on which it touches population. Hence the marriage laws. Sterile love they profess to disdain. Yet it is evident that, though born as the serf of generation, love tends by civilization to be freed from it. In place of a simple method of procreation it has become an end, it has created itself a title, a royal title. Our gardens cultivate flowers that are all the more charming because they are sterile; why is the double corolla of love held more infamous than the sterilized flowers of our gardens?" Tarde replies that the reason is that our politicians are merely ambitious persons thirsting for power and wealth, and even when they are lovers they are Don Juans rather than Virgils. "The future," he continues, "is to the Virgilians, because if the ambition of power, the regal wealth of American or European millionarism, once seemed nobler, love now more and more attracts to itself the best and highest parts of the soul, where lies the hidden ferment of all that is greatest in science and art, and more and more those studious and artist souls multiply who, intent on their peaceful activities, hold in horror the business men and the politicians, and will one day succeed in driving them back. That assuredly will be the great and capital revolution of humanity, an active psychological revolution: the recognized preponderance of the meditative and contemplative, the lover's side of the human soul, over the feverish, expansive, rapacious, and ambitious side. And then it will be understood that one of the greatest of social problems, perhaps the most arduous of all, has been the problem of love."
In the deeply insightful study of love left by the noted sociologist Tarde at his passing (Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, loc. cit.), he makes some intriguing points: "Society," he states, "has been much more focused and thoughtfully engaged with the 'question of breed' than with the 'question of love.' The first issue is addressed in all our civil and commercial laws. The second issue has never been clearly defined or confronted, not even in ancient times, and even less so since the rise of Christianity, because simply offering marriage and prostitution as solutions is clearly insufficient. Politicians have only considered its impact on population growth. That's why we have marriage laws. They claim to disdain love that doesn't lead to children. Yet, it's clear that, while love was born tied to procreation, civilization gradually seeks to liberate it. What began as a straightforward means of reproduction has transformed into an end in itself, creating for itself a noble status. Our gardens nurture flowers that are even more beautiful because they are sterile; so why is the double corolla of love viewed as more shameful than the sterilized flowers in our gardens?" Tarde argues that the reason lies in the fact that our politicians are mostly ambitious individuals driven by the desire for power and wealth, and even when they are in love, they are more like Don Juans than Virgils. "The future," he adds, "belongs to the Virgilians, because, although the pursuit of power and the royal wealth of American or European millionaires once seemed nobler, love increasingly draws out the best and highest parts of the soul, which harbor the hidden potential for the greatest contributions to science and art. More and more, those dedicated and creative individuals, focused on their peaceful pursuits, view businesspeople and politicians with disdain, and will eventually succeed in pushing them to the margins. This will undoubtedly be the major and significant revolution of humanity, an active psychological shift: the acknowledged dominance of the reflective and contemplative aspects of the human soul, the lover's essence, over the anxious, expansive, greedy, and ambitious nature. And then it will become clear that one of the greatest social challenges, perhaps the most difficult of all, has been the issue of love."
Quæstionum Convivalium, lib. iii, quæstio 6.
Quæstionum Convivalium, vol. 3, question 6.
E. D. Cope, "The Marriage Problem," Open Court, Nov. 1888.
E. D. Cope, "The Marriage Problem," Open Court, Nov. 1888.
Columbus meeting of the American Medical Association, 1900.
Columbus meeting of the American Medical Association, 1900.
Ellen Key, Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 24.
Ellen Key, On Love and Marriage, p. 24.
In an admirable article on Friedrich Schlegel's Lucinde (Mutterschutz, 1906, Heft 5), Heinrich Meyer-Benfey, in pointing out that the Catholic sacramental conception of marriage licensed love, but failed to elevate it, regards Lucinde, with all its defects, as the first expression of the unity of the senses and the soul, and, as such, the basis of the new ethics of love. It must, however, be said that four hundred years earlier Pontano had expressed this same erotic unity far more robustly and wholesomely than Schlegel, though the Latin verse in which he wrote, fresh and vital as it is, remained without influence. Pontano's Carmina, including the "De Amore Conjugali," have at length been reprinted in a scholarly edition by Soldati.
In a commendable article on Friedrich Schlegel's Lucinde (Mutterschutz, 1906, Issue 5), Heinrich Meyer-Benfey points out that while the Catholic sacramental view of marriage allows for love, it doesn't truly elevate it. He sees Lucinde, despite its flaws, as the first expression of the connection between the senses and the soul, thus serving as the foundation for a new ethics of love. However, it should be noted that four hundred years earlier, Pontano articulated this same idea of erotic unity much more powerfully and healthily than Schlegel did, even if the Latin verse in which he wrote, although fresh and vibrant, failed to have any real impact. Pontano's Carmina, which includes "De Amore Conjugali," has finally been reprinted in a scholarly edition by Soldati.
From the thirteenth to the seventeenth centuries Ovid was, in reality, the most popular and influential classic poet. His works played a large part in moulding Renaissance literature, not least in England, where Marlowe translated his Amores, and Shakespeare, during the early years of his literary activity, was greatly indebted to him (see, e.g., Sidney Lee, "Ovid and Shakespeare's Sonnets," Quarterly Review, Ap., 1909).
From the 13th to the 17th centuries, Ovid was actually the most popular and influential classic poet. His works significantly shaped Renaissance literature, especially in England, where Marlowe translated his Amores, and Shakespeare, in the early years of his writing career, owed a lot to him (see, e.g., Sidney Lee, "Ovid and Shakespeare's Sonnets," Quarterly Review, Apr. 1909).
This has already been discussed in Chapter II.
This has already been covered in Chapter II.
By the age of twenty-five, as G. Hirth remarks (Wege zur Heimat, p. 541), an energetic and sexually disposed man in a large city has, for the most part, already had relations with some twenty-five women, perhaps even as many as fifty, while a well-bred and cultivated woman at that age is still only beginning to realize the slowly summating excitations of sex.
By the age of twenty-five, as G. Hirth notes (Wege zur Heimat, p. 541), an active and sexually adventurous man in a big city has usually already been with around twenty-five women, maybe even as many as fifty, while a refined and cultured woman at that age is just starting to understand the gradual build-up of sexual excitement.
In his study of "Conjugal Aversion" (Journal Nervous and Mental Disease, Sept., 1892) Smith Baker points out the value of adequate sexual knowledge before marriage in lessening the risks of such aversion.
In his study of "Conjugal Aversion" (Journal Nervous and Mental Disease, Sept., 1892), Smith Baker highlights the importance of having enough sexual knowledge before marriage to reduce the chances of experiencing this aversion.
"It may be said to the honor of men," Adler truly remarks (op. cit., p. 182), "that it is perhaps not often their conscious brutality that is at fault in this matter, but merely lack of skill and lack of understanding. The husband who is not specially endowed by nature and experience for psychic intercourse with women, is not likely, through his earlier intercourse with Venus vulgivaga, to bring into marriage any useful knowledge, psychic or physical."
"It can be said to the credit of men," Adler accurately points out (op. cit., p. 182), "that it’s probably not their deliberate brutality that's the issue here, but rather a lack of skill and understanding. A husband who isn't naturally gifted or experienced in connecting with women is unlikely to bring any valuable knowledge, whether mental or physical, into the marriage from his past experiences."
"The first night," writes a correspondent concerning his marriage, "she found the act very painful and was frightened and surprised at the size of my penis, and at my suddenly getting on her. We had talked very openly about sex things before marriage, and it never occurred to me that she was ignorant of the details of the act. I imagined it would disgust her to talk about these things; but I now see I should have explained things to her. Before marrying I had come to the conclusion that the respect owed to one's wife was incompatible with any talk that might seem indecent, and also I had made a resolve not to subject her to what I thought then were dirty tricks, even to be naked and to have her naked. In fact, I was the victim of mock modesty; it was an artificial reaction from the life I had been living before marriage. Now it seems to me to be natural, if you love a woman, to do whatever occurs to you and to her. If I had not felt it wrong to encourage such acts between us, there might have been established a sexual sympathy which would have bound me more closely to her."
"The first night," a correspondent writes about his marriage, "she found the experience very painful and was scared and surprised by the size of my penis and how quickly I got on top of her. We had talked openly about sex before we got married, and it never crossed my mind that she didn’t know the details of the act. I thought it would disgust her to have those conversations; but now I realize I should have explained things better. Before getting married, I believed that the respect I owed to my wife didn’t allow for any discussions that might seem inappropriate, and I had decided not to subject her to what I then considered dirty tricks, even being naked together. In reality, I was affected by false modesty; it was an artificial response from the life I had led before marriage. Now it seems natural to me that if you love a woman, you should do whatever feels right for both of you. If I hadn’t thought it was wrong to encourage such intimacy between us, there might have been a sexual connection that would have brought us closer together."
Montaigne, Essais, Bk. iii, Ch. V. It is a significant fact that, even in the matter of information, women, notwithstanding much ignorance and inexperience, are often better equipped for marriage than men. As Fürbringer remarks (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 212), although the wife is usually more chaste at marriage than the husband, yet "she is generally the better informed partner in matters pertaining to the married state, in spite of occasional astonishing confessions."
Montaigne, Essays, Bk. iii, Ch. V. It's an important point that, even when it comes to knowledge, women, despite some ignorance and lack of experience, are often more prepared for marriage than men. As Fürbringer notes (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 212), while the wife is typically more virtuous at the time of marriage than the husband, "she is usually the better informed partner when it comes to issues related to married life, despite occasional surprising revelations."
"She never loses her self-respect nor my respect for her," a man writes in a letter, "simply because we are desperately in love with one another, and everything we do—some of which the lowest prostitute might refuse to do—seems but one attempt after another to translate our passion into action. I never realized before, not that to the pure all things are pure, indeed, but that to the lover nothing is indecent. Yes, I have always felt it, to love her is a liberal education." It is obviously only the existence of such an attitude as this that can enable a pure woman to be passionate.
"She never loses her self-respect or my respect for her," a man writes in a letter, "just because we are desperately in love with each other, and everything we do—some things even the most desperate prostitute might refuse—seems like just one attempt after another to turn our passion into action. I never realized before that while to the pure, all things are pure, to the lover, nothing is indecent. Yes, I’ve always felt it; loving her is a real education." It’s clear that only with this kind of attitude can a pure woman truly be passionate.
"To be really understood," as Rafford Pyke well says, "to say what she likes, to utter her innermost thoughts in her own way, to cast aside the traditional conventions that gall her and repress her, to have someone near her with whom she can be quite frank, and yet to know that not a syllable of what she says will be misinterpreted or mistaken, but rather felt just as she feels it all—how wonderfully sweet is this to every woman, and how few men are there who can give it to her!"
"To be truly understood," as Rafford Pyke aptly puts it, "to express what she wants, to share her deepest thoughts in her own way, to throw off the traditional norms that annoy and stifle her, to have someone close by with whom she can be completely open, and yet to know that not a single word she says will be misunderstood or misinterpreted, but rather felt exactly as she feels it—how incredibly sweet is this to every woman, and how few men are there who can offer it to her!"
In more recent times it has been discussed in relation to the frequency of spontaneous nocturnal emissions. See "The Phenomena of Sexual Periodicity," Sect. II, in volume i of these Studies, and cf. Mr. Perry-Coste's remarks on "The Annual Rhythm," in Appendix B of the same volume.
In recent times, there has been discussion regarding how often spontaneous nighttime emissions occur. See "The Phenomena of Sexual Periodicity," Sect. II, in volume i of these Studies, and cf. Mr. Perry-Coste's comments on "The Annual Rhythm," in Appendix B of the same volume.
See "The Sexual Impulse in Women," vol. iii of these Studies.
See "The Sexual Impulse in Women," vol. iii of these Studies.
Zenobia's practice is referred to by Gibbon, Decline and Fall, ed. Bury, vol. i, p. 302. The Queen of Aragon's decision is recorded by the Montpellier jurist, Nicolas Bohier (Boerius) in his Decisiones, etc., ed. of 1579, p. 563; it is referred to by Montaigne, Essais, Bk. iii, Ch. V.
Zenobia's practice is mentioned by Gibbon in Decline and Fall, edited by Bury, vol. i, p. 302. The Queen of Aragon's decision is documented by the Montpellier lawyer, Nicolas Bohier (Boerius) in his Decisiones, etc., published in 1579, p. 563; it is also referenced by Montaigne in Essais, Bk. iii, Ch. V.
Haller, Elementa Physiologiæ, 1778, vol. vii, p. 57.
Haller, Elements of Physiology, 1778, vol. vii, p. 57.
Hammond, Sexual Impotence, p. 129.
Hammond, *Sexual Impotence*, p. 129.
Fürbringer, Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 221.
Fürbringer, Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 221.
Forel, Die Sexuelle Frage, p. 80.
Forel, Die Sexuelle Frage, p. 80.
Guyot, Bréviaire de l'Amour Expérimental, p. 144.
Guyot, Bréviaire de l'Amour Expérimental, p. 144.
Erb, Ziemssen's Handbuch, Bd. xi, ii, p. 148. Guttceit also considered that the very wide variations found are congenital and natural. It may be added that some believe that there are racial variations. Thus it has been stated that the genital force of the Englishman is low, and that of the Frenchman (especially Provençal, Languedocian, and Gascon) high, while Löwenfeld believes that the Germanic race excels the French in aptitude to repeat the sex act frequently. It is probable that little weight attaches to these opinions, and that the chief differences are individual rather than racial.
Erb, Ziemssen's Handbook, Vol. xi, ii, p. 148. Guttceit also thought that the wide variations observed are innate and natural. Additionally, some people believe that there are racial differences. For example, it's been claimed that the sexual stamina of the English is low, while that of the French (especially those from Provence, Languedoc, and Gascony) is high. Meanwhile, Löwenfeld argues that the Germanic race is better than the French at frequently repeating sexual activity. However, it's likely that these opinions carry little weight and that the main differences are based on individuals rather than race.
Ribbing, L'Hygiène Sexualle, p. 75. Kisch, in his Sexual Life of Woman, expresses the same opinion.
Ribbing, L'Hygiène Sexualle, p. 75. Kisch, in his Sexual Life of Woman, shares the same view.
Mohammed, who often displayed a consideration for women very rare in the founders of religions, is an exception. His prescription of once a week represented the right of the wife, quite independently of the number of wives a man might possess.
Mohammed, who often showed a level of consideration for women that is quite rare among religious founders, is an exception. His mandate of once a week recognized the rights of the wife, regardless of how many wives a man might have.
How fragile the claim of "conjugal rights" is, may be sufficiently proved by the fact that it is now considered by many that the very term "conjugal rights" arose merely by a mistake for "conjugal rites." Before 1733, when legal proceedings were in Latin, the term used was obsequies, and "rights," instead of "rites," seems to have been merely a typesetter's error (see Notes and Queries, May 16, 1891; May 6, 1899). This explanation, it should be added, only applies to the consecrated term, for there can be no doubt that the underlying idea has an existence quite independent of the term.
How fragile the claim of "conjugal rights" is can be clearly shown by the fact that many now believe the term "conjugal rights" actually came into use because of a mistake for "conjugal rites." Before 1733, when legal proceedings were conducted in Latin, the term used was obsequies, and "rights," instead of "rites," seems to have been just a typesetter's error (see Notes and Queries, May 16, 1891; May 6, 1899). It should be noted that this explanation only applies to the established term, as there’s no doubt that the fundamental concept exists independently of the term itself.
"In most marriages that are not happy," it is said in Rafford Pyke's thoughtful paper on "Husbands and Wives" (Cosmopolitan, 1902), "it is the wife rather than the husband who is oftenest disappointed."
"In most unhappy marriages," it is stated in Rafford Pyke's insightful article on "Husbands and Wives" (Cosmopolitan, 1902), "it's usually the wife, rather than the husband, who feels the most disappointed."
See "Analysis of the Sexual Impulse," in vol. iii of these Studies.
See "Analysis of the Sexual Impulse," in vol. iii of these Studies.
It is well recognized by erotic writers, however, that women may sometimes take a comparatively active part. Thus Vatsyayana says that sometimes the woman may take the man's position, and with flowers in her hair and smiles mixed with sighs and bent head, caressing him and pressing her breasts against him, say: "You have been my conqueror; it is my turn to make you cry for mercy."
It is well recognized by erotic writers, however, that women may sometimes take a more active role. Thus Vatsyayana says that sometimes the woman may take the man's position, and with flowers in her hair and smiles mixed with sighs and a lowered head, caressing him and pressing her breasts against him, say: "You have been my conqueror; now it's my turn to make you cry for mercy."
Thus among the Swahili it is on the third day after marriage that the bridegroom is allowed, by custom, to complete defloration, according to Zache, Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1899, II-III, p. 84.
Thus among the Swahili, it is on the third day after marriage that the groom is permitted, by tradition, to complete defloration, according to Zache, Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1899, II-III, p. 84.
De l'Amour, vol. ii, p. 57.
De l'Amour, vol. ii, p. 57.
Robert Michels, "Brautstandsmoral," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Jahrgang I, Heft 12.
Robert Michels, "Bridal Morality," Gender and Society, Volume I, Issue 12.
I may refer once more to the facts brought together in volume iii of these Studies, "The Analysis of the Sexual Impulse."
I might mention again the information gathered in volume iii of these Studies, "The Analysis of the Sexual Impulse."
This has been pointed out, for instance, by Rutgers, "Sexuelle Differenzierung," Die Neue Generation, Dec., 1908.
This has been pointed out, for example, by Rutgers, "Sexual Differentiation," The New Generation, Dec., 1908.
Thus, among the Eskimo, who practice temporary wife-exchange, Rasmussen states that "a man generally discovers that his own wife is, in spite of all, the best."
Thus, among the Eskimo, who practice temporary wife exchange, Rasmussen states that "a man usually realizes that his own wife is, after all, the best."
"I have always held with the late Professor Laycock," remarks Clouston (Hygiene of Mind, p. 214), "who was a very subtle student of human nature, that a married couple need not be always together to be happy, and that in fact reasonable absences and partings tend towards ultimate and closer union." That the prolongation of passion is only compatible with absence scarcely needs pointing out; as Mary Wollstonecraft long since said (Rights of Woman, original ed., p. 61), it is only in absence or in misfortune that passion is durable. It may be added, however, that in her love-letters to Imlay she wrote: "I have ever declared that two people who mean to live together ought not to be long separated."
"I have always agreed with the late Professor Laycock," says Clouston (Hygiene of Mind, p. 214), "who was a very insightful student of human nature, that a married couple doesn't have to be together all the time to be happy, and that reasonable periods apart can actually lead to a stronger bond." It's pretty obvious that keeping passion alive often requires some distance; as Mary Wollstonecraft pointed out long ago (Rights of Woman, original ed., p. 61), passion only lasts in absence or through hardship. However, it's worth noting that in her love letters to Imlay, she wrote: "I have always said that two people who plan to be together shouldn't stay apart for too long."
"Viewed broadly," says Arnold L. Gesell, in his interesting study of "Jealousy" (American Journal of Psychology, Oct., 1906), "jealousy seems such a necessary psychological accompaniment to biological behavior, amidst competitive struggle, that one is tempted to consider it genetically among the oldest of the emotions, synonymous almost with the will to live, and to make it scarcely less fundamental than fear or anger. In fact, jealousy readily passes into anger, and is itself a brand of fear.... In sociability and mutual aid we see the other side of the shield; but jealousy, however anti-social it may be, retains a function in zoölogical economy: viz., to conserve the individual as against the group. It is Nature's great corrective for the purely social emotions."
"Viewed broadly," says Arnold L. Gesell in his fascinating study of "Jealousy" (American Journal of Psychology, Oct. 1906), "jealousy seems like such a necessary psychological aspect of biological behavior in competitive situations that one might consider it one of the oldest emotions, almost synonymous with the will to live, and nearly as fundamental as fear or anger. In fact, jealousy easily turns into anger and is itself a form of fear.... In sociability and mutual support, we see the opposite side of the coin; however, jealousy, no matter how anti-social it may be, serves a purpose in the animal kingdom: namely, to protect the individual against the group. It is Nature's primary check against purely social emotions."
Many illustrations are brought together in Gesell's study of "Jealousy."
Many illustrations are gathered in Gesell's study of "Jealousy."
Jealousy among lower races may be disguised or modified by tribal customs. Thus Rasmussen (People of the Polar North, p. 65) says in reference to the Eskimo custom of wife-exchange: "A man once told me that he only beat his wife when she would not receive other men. She would have nothing to do with anyone but him—and that was her only failing!" Rasmussen elsewhere shows that the Eskimo are capable of extreme jealousy.
Jealousy among less developed societies may be hidden or altered by cultural practices. For example, Rasmussen (People of the Polar North, p. 65) discusses the Eskimo practice of wife exchange: "A man once told me that he only hit his wife when she wouldn’t accept other men. She wouldn’t engage with anyone but him—and that was her only flaw!" Rasmussen also illustrates that the Eskimo can experience intense jealousy.
See, e.g., Moll, Sexualleben des Kindes, p. 158; cf., Gesell's "Study of Jealousy."
See, e.g. Moll, Sexualleben des Kindes, p. 158; cf. Gesell's "Study of Jealousy."
Jealousy is notoriously common among drunkards. As K. Birnbaum points out ("Das Sexualleben der Alkokolisten," Sexual-Probleme, Jan., 1909), this jealousy is, in most cases, more or less well-founded, for the wife, disgusted with her husband, naturally seeks sympathy and companionship elsewhere. Alcoholic jealousy, however, goes far beyond its basis of support in fact, and is entangled with delusions and hallucinations. (See e.g., G. Dumas, "La Logique d'un Dément," Revue Philosophique, Feb., 1908; also Stefanowski, "Morbid Jealousy," Alienist and Neurologist, July, 1893.)
Jealousy is well-known to be common among heavy drinkers. As K. Birnbaum notes ("Das Sexualleben der Alkokolisten," Sexual-Probleme, Jan., 1909), this jealousy is often based on real issues, as the wife, frustrated with her husband, naturally looks for understanding and companionship elsewhere. However, the jealousy stemming from alcoholism goes much further than its factual foundation and becomes intertwined with delusions and hallucinations. (See e.g., G. Dumas, "La Logique d'un Dément," Revue Philosophique, Feb., 1908; also Stefanowski, "Morbid Jealousy," Alienist and Neurologist, July, 1893.)
Ellen Key, Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 335.
Ellen Key, On Love and Marriage, p. 335.
Schrempf points out ("Von Stella zu Klärchen," Mutterschutz, 1906, Heft 7, p. 264) that Goethe strove to show in Egmont that a woman is repelled by the love of a man who knows nothing beyond his love to her, and that it is easy for her to devote herself to the man whose aims lie in the larger world beyond herself. There is profound truth in this view.
Schrempf points out ("Von Stella zu Klärchen," Mutterschutz, 1906, Heft 7, p. 264) that Goethe aimed to illustrate in Egmont that a woman is turned off by a man who knows nothing beyond his love for her, and that it's easy for her to commit to a man whose goals reach beyond just her. There’s deep truth in this perspective.
A discussion on "Platonic friendship" of this kind by several writers, mostly women, whose opinions were nearly equally divided, may be found, for instance, in the Lady's Realm, March, 1900.
A discussion on "Platonic friendship" like this by several writers, mostly women, whose opinions were almost equally split, can be found, for example, in the Lady's Realm, March, 1900.
There are no doubt important exceptions. Thus Mérimée's famous friendship with Mlle. Jenny Dacquin, enshrined in the Lettres à une Inconnue, was perhaps Platonic throughout on Mérimée's side, Mlle. Dacquin adapting herself to his attitude. Cf. A. Lefebvre, La Célèbre Inconnue de Mérimée, 1908.
There are undoubtedly important exceptions. For example, Mérimée's well-known friendship with Mlle. Jenny Dacquin, celebrated in the Lettres à une Inconnue, was probably Platonic on Mérimée’s part, with Mlle. Dacquin adjusting to his perspective. Cf. A. Lefebvre, La Célèbre Inconnue de Mérimée, 1908.
The love-letters of all these distinguished persons have been published. Rosa Mayreder (Zur Kritik der Weiblichkeit, pp. 229 et seq.) discusses the question of the humble and absolute manner in which even men of the most masculine and impetuous genius abandon themselves to the inspiration of the beloved woman. The case of the Brownings, who have been termed "the hero and heroine of the most wonderful love-story that the world knows of," is specially notable; (Ellen Key has written of the Brownings from this point of view in Menschen, and reference may be made to an article on the Brownings' love-letters in the Edinburgh Review, April, 1899). It is scarcely necessary to add that an erotic relationship may mean very much to persons of high intellectual ability, even when its issue is not happy; of Mary Wollstonecraft, one of the most intellectually distinguished of women, it may be said that the letters which enshrine her love to the worthless Imlay are among the most passionate and pathetic love-letters in English.
The love letters of all these notable individuals have been published. Rosa Mayreder (Zur Kritik der Weiblichkeit, pp. 229 et seq.) explores how even the most traditionally masculine and fiery geniuses can surrender themselves to the inspiration of the woman they love. The Brownings, who have been described as "the hero and heroine of the most wonderful love story that the world knows of," are especially noteworthy; (Ellen Key has written about the Brownings from this perspective in Menschen, and you can refer to an article on the Brownings' love letters in the Edinburgh Review, April 1899). It’s hardly necessary to point out that an erotic relationship can hold significant meaning for highly intelligent individuals, even if it doesn't end well; Mary Wollstonecraft, one of the most intellectually remarkable women, had love letters to the unworthy Imlay that are among the most passionate and moving love letters in English.
CHAPTER XII.
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION.
The Relationship of the Science of Procreation to the Art of Love—Sexual Desire and Sexual Pleasure as the Conditions of Conception—Reproduction Formerly Left to Caprice and Lust—The Question of Procreation as a Religious Question—The Creed of Eugenics—Ellen Key and Sir Francis Galton—Our Debt to Posterity—The Problem of Replacing Natural Selection—The Origin and Development of Eugenics—The General Acceptance of Eugenical Principles To-day—The Two Channels by Which Eugenical Principles are Becoming Embodied in Practice—The Sense of Sexual Responsibility in Women—The Rejection of Compulsory Motherhood—The Privilege of Voluntary Motherhood—Causes of the Degradation of Motherhood—The Control of Conception—Now Practiced by the Majority of the Population in Civilized Countries—The Fallacy of "Racial Suicide"—Are Large Families a Stigma of Degeneration?—Procreative Control the Outcome of Natural and Civilized Progress—The Growth of Neo-Malthusian Beliefs and Practices—Facultative Sterility as Distinct from Neo-Malthusianism—The Medical and Hygienic Necessity of Control of Conception—Preventive Methods—Abortion—The New Doctrine of the Duty to Practice Abortion—How Far is this Justifiable?—Castration as a Method of Controlling Procreation—Negative Eugenics and Positive Eugenics—The Question of Certificates for Marriage—The Inadequacy of Eugenics by Act of Parliament—The Quickening of the Social Conscience in Regard to Heredity—Limitations to the Endowment of Motherhood—The Conditions Favorable to Procreation—Sterility—The Question of Artificial Fecundation—The Best Age of Procreation—The Question of Early Motherhood—The Best Time for Procreation—The Completion of the Divine Cycle of Life.
The Relationship of the Science of Procreation to the Art of Love—Sexual Desire and Sexual Pleasure as the Conditions of Conception—Reproduction Previously Left to Chance and Desire—The Issue of Procreation as a Religious Question—The Belief in Eugenics—Ellen Key and Sir Francis Galton—Our Responsibility to Future Generations—The Challenge of Replacing Natural Selection—The Origin and Development of Eugenics—The General Acceptance of Eugenics Principles Today—The Two Ways in Which Eugenics Principles Are Being Implemented—The Sense of Sexual Responsibility in Women—The Rejection of Forced Motherhood—The Privilege of Choosing Motherhood—Reasons for the Decline of Motherhood—The Control of Conception—Now Practiced by Most People in Civilized Countries—The Myth of "Racial Suicide"—Are Large Families a Sign of Decline?—Procreative Control as a Result of Natural and Civilized Progress—The Rise of Neo-Malthusian Beliefs and Practices—Facultative Sterility as Different from Neo-Malthusianism—The Medical and Health Necessity of Conception Control—Preventive Methods—Abortion—The New Belief in the Duty to Seek Abortion—How Far Is This Justifiable?—Castration as a Method of Controlling Procreation—Negative Eugenics and Positive Eugenics—The Question of Marriage Certificates—The Inadequacy of Eugenics Through Legislation—The Awakening of Social Awareness About Heredity—Limitations on the Privileges of Motherhood—Conditions That Favor Procreation—Infertility—The Question of Artificial Insemination—The Best Age for Procreation—The Issue of Early Motherhood—The Best Time for Procreation—The Completion of the Divine Cycle of Life.
We have seen that the art of love has an independent and amply justifiable right to existence apart, altogether, from procreation. Even if we still believed—as all men must once have believed and some Central Australians yet believe[421]—that sexual intercourse has no essential connection with the propagation of the race it would have full right to existence. In its finer manifestations as an art it is required in civilization for the full development of the individual, and it is equally required for that stability of relationships which is nearly everywhere regarded as a demand of social morality.
We’ve established that the art of love has a legitimate and justified right to exist independently of reproduction. Even if we still believed—as all people must have at some point and some Central Australians still believe—that sexual intercourse isn’t fundamentally linked to the continuation of the species, it would still deserve to exist. In its more refined forms as an art, it’s essential in civilization for the complete development of the individual, and it’s equally necessary for the stability of relationships, which is generally seen as a requirement of social morality.
When we now turn to the second great constitutional factor of marriage, procreation, the first point we encounter is that the art of love here also has its place. In ancient times the sexual congruence of any man with any woman was supposed to be so much a matter of course that all questions of love and of the art of love could be left out of consideration. The propagative act might, it was thought, be performed as impersonally, as perfunctorily, as the early Christian Fathers imagined it had been performed in Paradise. That view is no longer acceptable. It fails to commend itself to men, and still less to women. We know that in civilization at all events—and it is often indeed the same among savages—erethism is not always easy between two persons selected at random, nor even when they are more specially selected. And we also know, on the authority of very distinguished gynæcologists, that it is not in very many cases sufficient even to effect coitus, it is also necessary to excite orgasm, if conception is to be achieved.
When we turn to the second key aspect of marriage, which is procreation, the first thing we notice is that the art of love plays an important role here as well. In ancient times, it was taken for granted that any man could connect with any woman, and questions about love and the art of love were often ignored. People believed that the act of reproduction could happen as mechanically and casually as early Christian thinkers imagined it had in Paradise. That perspective is no longer valid. It doesn’t resonate with men, and even less so with women. We understand that in modern society—though it’s often similar in more primitive cultures—sparks don't fly easily between two randomly chosen individuals, or even when they are more carefully selected. Furthermore, based on the insights of respected gynecologists, it’s often not enough just to achieve intercourse; it's also essential to reach orgasm for conception to occur.
Many primitive peoples, as well as the theologians of the Middle Ages, have believed that sexual excitement on the woman's part is necessary to conception, though they have sometimes mixed up that belief with false science and mere superstition. The belief itself is supported by some of the most cautious and experienced modern gynæcologists. Thus, Matthews Duncan (in his lectures on Sterility in Women) argued that the absence of sexual desire in women, and the absence of pleasure in the sexual act, are powerful influences making for sterility. He brought forward a table based on his case-books, showing that of nearly four hundred sterile women, only about one-fourth experienced sexual desire, while less than half experienced pleasure in the sexual act. In the absence, however, of a corresponding table concerning fertile women, nothing is hereby absolutely proved, and, at most, only a probability established.
Many early cultures, as well as theologians from the Middle Ages, believed that a woman’s sexual excitement is essential for conception, though they sometimes mixed this belief with incorrect science and mere superstition. This belief is supported by some of the most careful and experienced modern gynecologists. For instance, Matthews Duncan (in his lectures on Sterility in Women) argued that the lack of sexual desire in women and the absence of pleasure during sex are significant factors contributing to sterility. He presented a table based on his case studies, showing that out of nearly four hundred sterile women, only about one-fourth felt sexual desire, while less than half experienced pleasure in the sexual act. However, without a similar table for fertile women, nothing can be definitively proven, and at best, only a probability can be established.
Kisch, more recently (in his Sexual Life of Woman), has dealt fully with this question, and reaches the conclusion that it is "extremely probable" that the active erotic participation of the woman in coitus is an important link in the chain of conditions producing conception. It acts, he remarks, in either or both of two ways, by causing reflex changes in the cervical secretions, and so facilitating the passage of the spermatozoa, and by causing reflex erectile changes in the cervix itself, with slight descent of the uterus, so rendering the entrance of the semen easier. Kisch refers to the analogous fact that the first occurrence of menstruation is favored by sexual excitement.
Kisch, more recently (in his Sexual Life of Woman), has thoroughly examined this issue and concludes that it is "extremely likely" that a woman's active erotic involvement during intercourse plays a significant role in the conditions leading to conception. He notes that it works in one or both of two ways: by causing reflex changes in the cervical secretions, which helps the sperm travel more easily, and by triggering reflex erectile changes in the cervix itself, with a slight lowering of the uterus, making it easier for the semen to enter. Kisch also points out the related fact that sexual arousal can promote the onset of menstruation.
Some authorities go so far as to assert that, until voluptuous excitement occurs in women, no impregnation is possible. This statement seems too extreme. It is true that the occurrence of impregnation during sleep, or in anæsthesia, cannot be opposed to it, for we know that the unconsciousness of these states by no means prevents the occurrence of complete sexual excitement. We cannot fail, however, to connect the fact that impregnation frequently fails to occur for months and even years after marriage, with the fact that sexual pleasure in coitus on the wife's part also frequently fails to occur for a similar period.
Some experts even claim that without sexual excitement in women, pregnancy is impossible. This claim seems a bit extreme. It is true that pregnancy can happen during sleep or anesthesia, as we know these unconscious states do not prevent total sexual arousal. However, we cannot ignore the connection between the fact that pregnancy often does not happen for months or even years after marriage and that the wife's enjoyment during intercourse often also doesn't happen for a similar length of time.
"Of all human instincts," Pinard has said,[422] "that of reproduction is the only one which remains in the primitive condition and has received no education. We procreate to-day as they procreated in the Stone Age. The most important act in the life of man, the sublimest of all acts since it is that of his reproduction, man accomplishes to-day with as much carelessness as in the age of the cave-man." And though Pinard himself, as the founder of puericulture, has greatly contributed to call attention to the vast destinies that hang on the act of procreation, there still remains a lamentable amount of truth in this statement. "Future generations," writes Westermarck in his great history of moral ideas,[423] "will probably with a kind of horror look back at a period when the most important, and in its consequences the most far-reaching, function which has fallen to the lot of man was entirely left to individual caprice and lust."
"Of all human instincts," Pinard has said,[422] "the instinct to reproduce is the only one that remains in its primitive state and hasn’t been shaped by education. We reproduce today just like they did in the Stone Age. The most significant act in a person's life, the greatest of all since it involves reproduction, is still done today with as much carelessness as it was back in the days of cave dwellers." And although Pinard himself, as the founder of infant care, has greatly highlighted the immense impact of procreation, there’s still a regrettable amount of truth in this statement. "Future generations," writes Westermarck in his comprehensive history of moral ideas,[423] "will likely look back in horror at a time when the most important, and in its outcomes the most significant, function assigned to humanity was completely left to personal choice and desire."
We are told in his Table Talk, that the great Luther was accustomed to say that God's way of making man was very foolish ("sehr närrisch"), and that if God had deigned to take him into His counsel he would have strongly advised Him to make the whole human race, as He made Adam, "out of earth." And certainly if applied to the careless and reckless manner in which procreation in Luther's day, as still for the most part in our own, was usually carried out there was sound common sense in the Reformer's remarks. If that is the way procreation is to be carried on, it would be better to create and mould every human being afresh out of the earth; in that way we could at all events eliminate evil heredity. It was, however, unjust to place the responsibility on God. It is men and women who breed the people that make the world good or bad. They seek to put the evils of society on to something outside themselves. They see how large a proportion of human beings are defective, ill-conditioned, anti-social, incapable of leading a whole and beautiful human life. In old theological language it was often said that such were "children of the Devil," and Luther himself was often ready enough to attribute the evil of the world to the direct interposition of the Devil. Yet these ill-conditioned people who clog the wheels of society are, after all, in reality the children of Man. The only Devil whom we can justly invoke in this matter is Man.
We learn from his Table Talk that the great Luther used to say that God's way of creating humans was very foolish ("sehr närrisch"), and that if God had invited him into His plans, he would have strongly advised Him to make the entire human race, just like Adam, "out of earth." And certainly, if you think about the careless and reckless way procreation happened in Luther's time, just as it often does today, there’s a lot of sense in the Reformer's comments. If that’s how procreation is going to work, it would be better to create each person fresh from the earth; that way we could at least eliminate bad heredity. However, it was unfair to place the blame on God. It’s people who produce the individuals that make the world good or bad. They try to shift the problems of society onto something outside themselves. They notice how many people are flawed, troubled, antisocial, and unable to live a complete and beautiful life. In old religious terms, it was often said that such people were "children of the Devil," and Luther himself was always quick to attribute the world’s evils to the direct interference of the Devil. Yet these troubled individuals who hold back society are, in reality, the children of Man. The only Devil we can rightly point to in this situation is Man.
The command "Be fruitful and multiply," which the ancient Hebrews put into the mouth of their tribal God, was, as Crackanthorpe points out,[424] a command supposed to have been uttered when there were only eight persons in the world. If the time should ever again occur when the inhabitants of the world could be counted on one's fingers, such an injunction, as Crackanthorpe truly observes, would again be reasonable. But we have to remember that to-day humanity has spawned itself over the world in hundreds and even thousands of millions of creatures, a large proportion of whom, as is but too obvious, ought never to have been born at all, and the voice of Jehovah is now making itself heard through the leaders of mankind in a very different sense.
The command "Be fruitful and multiply," which the ancient Hebrews attributed to their tribal God, was, as Crackanthorpe points out,[424] a directive that was meant to be spoken when there were only eight people in the world. If there ever comes a time again when the world's population could be counted on one’s fingers, such an instruction, as Crackanthorpe rightly notes, would make sense once more. But we have to remember that today humanity has spread itself across the globe in the hundreds and even thousands of millions, and a large number of these individuals, as is all too clear, should never have been born at all. The voice of Jehovah is now being heard through the leaders of humanity in a very different way.
It is not surprising that as this fact tends to become generally recognized, the question of the procreation of the race should gain a new significance, and even tend to take on the character of a new religious movement. Mere morality can never lead us to concern ourselves with the future of the race, and in the days of old, men used to protest against the tendency to subordinate the interests of religion to the claims of "mere morality." There was a sound natural instinct underlying that protest, so often and so vigorously made by Christianity, and again revived to-day in a more intelligent form. The claim of the race is the claim of religion. We have to beware lest we subordinate that claim to our moralities. Moralities are, indeed, an inevitable part of our social order from which we cannot escape; every community must have its mores. But we are not entitled to make a fetich of our morality, sacrificing to it the highest interests entrusted to us. The nations which have done so have already signed their own death-warrant.[425] From this point of view, the whole of Christianity, rightly considered, with its profound conviction of the necessity for forethought and preparation for the life hereafter, has been a preparation for eugenics, a schoolmaster to discipline within us a higher ideal than itself taught, and we cannot therefore be surprised at the solidity of the basis on which eugenical conceptions of life are developing.
It’s not surprising that as this idea becomes widely acknowledged, the question of race reproduction takes on new importance and may even evolve into a new religious movement. Simply relying on morality can never lead us to consider the future of the race, and in the past, people used to react against the idea of prioritizing the needs of religion over "simple morality." There was a deep natural instinct behind that pushback, often expressed by Christianity and now revived in a more thoughtful way. The needs of the race are just as important as the needs of religion. We need to be cautious not to prioritize those needs below our moral standards. Morality is indeed an unavoidable part of our social structure, which we cannot ignore; every community must have its own mores. However, we shouldn’t treat our morality as an idol, sacrificing our most important responsibilities for it. The nations that have done so have effectively signed their own death warrant. From this perspective, the entirety of Christianity, when viewed correctly, with its strong belief in the importance of planning and preparing for the afterlife, has served as a foundation for eugenics—a guide to instill in us a higher ideal than it originally taught. Therefore, it’s not surprising to see a solid foundation for eugenic ideas about life developing.
The most distinguished pioneers of the new movement of devotion to the creation of the race seem independently to have realized its religious character. This attitude is equally marked in Ellen Key and Francis Galton. In her Century of the Child (English translation, 1909), Ellen Key entirely identifies herself with the eugenic movement. "It is only a question of time," she elsewhere writes (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 445), "when the attitude of society towards a sexual union will depend not on the form of the union, but on the value of the children created. Men and women will then devote the same religious earnestness to the psychic and physical perfectioning of this sexual task as Christians have devoted to the salvation of their souls."
The most notable pioneers of the new movement focused on racial creation seem to have independently recognized its religious aspect. This viewpoint is clearly evident in both Ellen Key and Francis Galton. In her Century of the Child (English translation, 1909), Ellen Key fully aligns herself with the eugenics movement. "It's just a matter of time," she states elsewhere (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, p. 445), "before society’s view on sexual unions will depend not on the type of union but on the value of the children produced. Men and women will then apply the same seriousness to the mental and physical enhancement of this sexual endeavor as Christians have applied to the salvation of their souls."
Sir Francis Galton, writing a few years later, but without doubt independently, in 1905, on "Restrictions in Marriage," and "Eugenics as a Factor in Religion" (Sociological Papers of the Sociological Society, vol. ii, pp. 13, 53), remarks: "Religious precepts, founded on the ethics and practice of older days, require to be reinterpreted, to make them conform to the needs of progressive nations. Ours are already so far behind modern requirements that much of our practice and our profession cannot be reconciled without illegitimate casuistry. It seems to me that few things are more needed by us in England than a revision of our religion, to adapt it to the intelligence and needs of this present time.... Evolution is a grand phantasmagoria, but it assumes an infinitely more interesting aspect under the knowledge that the intelligent action of the human will is, in some small measure, capable of guiding its course. Man has the power of doing this largely, so far as the evolution of humanity is concerned; he has already affected the quality and distribution of organic life so widely that the changes on the surface of the earth, merely through his disforestings and agriculture, would be recognizable from a distance as great as that of the moon. Eugenics is a virile creed, full of hopefulness, and appealing to many of the noblest feelings of our nature."
Sir Francis Galton, writing a few years later, but undoubtedly independently, in 1905, on "Restrictions in Marriage," and "Eugenics as a Factor in Religion" (Sociological Papers of the Sociological Society, vol. ii, pp. 13, 53), states: "Religious teachings, based on the ethics and practices of earlier times, need to be reinterpreted to align with the needs of progressive societies. Ours are already so far behind modern expectations that much of our practice and profession cannot be justified without questionable reasoning. It seems to me that few things are more urgently needed in England than a revision of our religion, to adjust it to the understanding and needs of this current time.... Evolution is a fascinating journey, but it becomes even more intriguing when we recognize that the thoughtful actions of the human will can, to some extent, influence its direction. Humans have a significant ability to impact the evolution of humanity; they have already changed the quality and distribution of organic life so extensively that the alterations on the planet's surface, caused by deforestation and agriculture, would be noticeable from as far away as the moon. Eugenics is a strong belief, filled with optimism, and resonates with many of the highest ideals of our nature."
As will always happen in every great movement, a few fanatics have carried into absurdity the belief in the supreme religious importance of procreation. Love, apart from procreation, writes one of these fanatics, Vacher de Lapouge, in the spirit of some of the early Christian Fathers (see ante p. 509), is an aberration comparable to sadism and sodomy. Procreation is the only thing that matters, and it must become "a legally prescribed social duty" only to be exercised by carefully selected persons, and forbidden to others, who must, by necessity, be deprived of the power of procreation, while abortion and infanticide must, under some circumstances, become compulsory. Romantic love will disappear by a process of selection, as also will all religion except a new form of phallic worship (G. Vacher de Lapouge, "Die Crisis der Sexuellen Moral," Politisch Anthropologische Revue, No. 8, 1908). It is sufficient to point out that love is, and always must be, the natural portal to generation. Such excesses of procreative fanaticism cannot fail to occur, and they render the more necessary the emphasis which has here been placed on the art of love.
As always happens in every major movement, a few extremists have taken the belief in the absolute religious significance of procreation to ridiculous lengths. Love, separate from procreation, claims one of these extremists, Vacher de Lapouge, echoing some of the early Christian Fathers (see ante p. 509), is a deviation similar to sadism and sodomy. Procreation is the only thing that matters, and it should become "a legally mandated social duty" that only a select few can fulfill, while others must, by default, be denied the ability to procreate. Moreover, under certain conditions, abortion and infanticide should become mandatory. Romantic love will fade away through a process of selection, as will all religions, except for a new type of phallic worship (G. Vacher de Lapouge, "Die Crisis der Sexuellen Moral," Politisch Anthropologische Revue, No. 8, 1908). It's important to note that love is, and always should be, the natural gateway to creation. Such extremes of procreation fanaticism are bound to arise, making the emphasis placed here on the art of love even more essential.
"What has posterity done for me that I should do anything for posterity?" a cynic is said to have asked. The answer is very simple. The human race has done everything for him. All that he is, and can be, is its creation; all that he can do is the result of its laboriously accumulated traditions. It is only by working towards the creation of a still better posterity, that he can repay the good gifts which the human race has brought him.[426] Just as, within the limits of this present life, many who have received benefits and kindnesses they can never repay to the actual givers, find a pleasure in vicariously repaying the like to others, so the heritage we have received from our ascendents we can never repay, save by handing it on in a better form to our descendants.
"What has future generations ever done for me that I should do anything for them?" a cynic is said to have asked. The answer is quite simple. Humanity has done everything for him. Everything he is, and everything he can become, is a result of their collective efforts; all he can achieve is built on their hard-earned traditions. By working towards creating an even better future for others, he can repay the valuable gifts humanity has given him.[426] Just as many who enjoy benefits and kindnesses they can never fully repay to the actual givers find joy in paying it forward to others, we can never truly repay the legacy we've inherited from our ancestors, except by passing it on in a better form to our descendants.
It is undoubtedly true that the growth of eugenical ideals has not been, for the most part, due to religious feeling. It has been chiefly the outcome of a very gradual, but very comprehensive, movement towards social amelioration, which has been going on for more than a century, and which has involved a progressive effort towards the betterment of all the conditions of life. The ideals of this movement were proclaimed in the eighteenth century, they began to find expression early in the nineteenth century, in the initiation of the modern system of sanitation, in the growth of factory legislation, in all the movements which have been borne onwards by socialism hand in hand with individualism. The inevitable tendency has been slowly towards the root of the matter; it began to be seen that comparatively little can be effected by improving the conditions of life of adults; attention began to be concentrated on the child, on the infant, on the embryo in its mother's womb, and this resulted in the fruitful movement of puericulture inspired by Pinard, and finally the problem is brought to its source at the point of procreation, and the regulation of sexual selection between stocks and between individuals as the prime condition of life. Here we have the science of eugenics which Sir Francis Galton has done so much to make a definite, vital, and practical study, and which in its wider bearings he defines as "the science which deals with those social eugenics that influence, mentally or physically, the racial qualities of future generations." In its largest aspect, eugenics is, as Galton has elsewhere said, man's attempt "to replace Natural Selection by other processes that are more merciful and not less effective."
It is definitely true that the rise of eugenics ideals has mostly not been driven by religious beliefs. Instead, it has primarily emerged from a gradual but extensive movement towards social improvement that has been happening for over a century, focusing on enhancing all aspects of life. The principles of this movement were announced in the eighteenth century, and they started to take shape early in the nineteenth century, through the beginning of modern sanitation, the development of factory laws, and all the movements propelled by socialism alongside individualism. The inevitable trend has been slowly directed towards the core issue; it became clear that improving the living conditions of adults can only achieve so much. Attention shifted to children, infants, and even embryos in their mothers' wombs, leading to the influential movement of child-rearing inspired by Pinard. Ultimately, the issue is traced back to reproduction, focusing on managing sexual selection among different genetic lines and individuals as the essential condition for life. Here we find the science of eugenics, which Sir Francis Galton has significantly contributed to as a clear, impactful, and practical field of study, and he defines it in broader terms as "the science which deals with those social eugenics that influence, mentally or physically, the racial qualities of future generations." In its most expansive view, eugenics is, as Galton has said elsewhere, humanity's effort "to replace Natural Selection by other processes that are more merciful and not less effective."
In the last chapter of his Memories of My Life (1908), on "Race Improvement," Sir Francis Galton sets forth the origin and development of his conception of the science of eugenics. The term, "eugenics," he first used in 1884, in his Human Faculty, but the conception dates from 1865, and even earlier. Galton has more recently discussed the problems of eugenics in papers read before the Sociological Society (Sociological Papers, vols. i and ii, 1905), in the Herbert Spencer Lecture on "Probability the Foundation of Eugenics," (1907), and elsewhere. Galton's numerous memoirs on this subject have now been published in a collected form by the Eugenics Education Society, which was established in 1907, to further and to popularize the eugenical attitude towards social questions; The Eugenics Review is published by this Society. On the more strictly scientific side, eugenic studies are carried on in the Eugenics Laboratory of the University of London, established by Sir Francis Galton, and now working in connection with Professor Karl Pearson's biometric laboratory, in University College. Much of Professor Pearson's statistical work in this and allied directions, is the elaboration of ideas and suggestions thrown out by Galton. See, e.g., Karl Pearson's Robert Boyle Lecture, "The Scope and Importance to the State of the Science of National Eugenics" (1907). Biometrika, edited by Karl Pearson in association with other workers, contains numerous statistical memoirs on eugenics. In Germany, the Archiv für Rassen und Gesellschafts-biologie, and the Politisch-Anthropologische Revue, are largely occupied with various aspects of such subjects, and in America, The Popular Science Monthly from time to time, publishes articles which have a bearing on eugenics.
In the final chapter of his Memories of My Life (1908), titled "Race Improvement," Sir Francis Galton presents the origins and development of his ideas on the science of eugenics. He first introduced the term "eugenics" in 1884 in his work Human Faculty, but the concept dates back to 1865 and even earlier. Galton has more recently addressed the challenges of eugenics in papers presented to the Sociological Society (Sociological Papers, vols. i and ii, 1905), during the Herbert Spencer Lecture on "Probability the Foundation of Eugenics" (1907), and in other venues. His many writings on this topic have now been compiled by the Eugenics Education Society, which was founded in 1907 to promote and popularize the eugenics perspective on social issues; The Eugenics Review is published by this Society. On the more scientific side, eugenic studies are being conducted at the Eugenics Laboratory of the University of London, which was established by Sir Francis Galton and is now collaborating with Professor Karl Pearson's biometric laboratory at University College. Much of Professor Pearson's statistical work in this area builds on ideas and suggestions put forward by Galton. See, for example, Karl Pearson's Robert Boyle Lecture, "The Scope and Importance to the State of the Science of National Eugenics" (1907). Biometrika, edited by Karl Pearson along with other contributors, includes many statistical papers on eugenics. In Germany, the Archiv für Rassen und Gesellschafts-biologie and the Politisch-Anthropologische Revue focus extensively on various aspects of these topics, while in America, The Popular Science Monthly occasionally publishes articles related to eugenics.
At one time there was a tendency to scoff, or to laugh, at the eugenic movement. It was regarded as an attempt to breed men as men breed animals, and it was thought a sufficiently easy task to sweep away this new movement with the remark that love laughs at bolts and bars. It is now beginning to be better understood. None but fanatics dream of abolishing love in order to effect pairing by rule. It is merely a question of limiting the possible number of mates from whom each may select a partner, and that, we must remember, has always been done even by savages, for, as it has been said, "eugenics is the oldest of the sciences." The question has merely been transformed. Instead of being limited mechanically by caste, we begin to see that the choice of sexual mates must be limited intelligently by actual fitness. Promiscuous marriages have never been the rule; the possibility of choice has always been narrow, and the most primitive peoples have exerted the most marked self-restraint. It is not so merely among remote races but among our own European ancestors. Throughout the whole period of Catholic supremacy the Canon law multiplied the impediments to matrimony, as by ordaining that consanguinity to the fourth degree (third cousins), as well as spiritual relationship, is an impediment, and by such arbitrary prohibitions limited the range of possible mates at least as much as it would be limited by the more reasonable dictates of eugenic considerations.
At one point, people tended to mock or laugh at the eugenics movement. It was seen as an effort to breed humans like animals, and many thought it was easy to dismiss this new movement by saying that love ignores rules and barriers. Now, it’s starting to be better understood. Only extremists believe love should be abolished in order to enforce regulations on pairing. It's just a matter of narrowing down the possible partners each person can choose from, and that’s something that's always been done, even by primitive societies, because, as they say, "eugenics is the oldest of the sciences." The issue has simply shifted. Instead of being limited by class, it’s becoming clear that the selection of sexual partners should be intelligently limited by actual suitability. Random marriages have never been the norm; the options have always been few, and the most basic societies have shown the most self-restraint. This isn’t just true among distant cultures but also among our own European ancestors. Throughout the entire period of Catholic dominance Canon law increased the obstacles to marriage by stating that consanguinity up to the fourth degree (third cousins) and spiritual relationships are impediments. Such arbitrary restrictions narrowed the pool of potential mates just as much as more reasonable eugenic guidelines would.
At the present day it may be said that the principle of the voluntary control of procreation, not for the selfish ends of the individual, but in order to extinguish disease, to limit human misery, and to raise the general level of humanity by substituting the ideal of quality for the vulgar ideal of mere quantity, is now generally accepted, alike by medical pathologists, embryologists and neurologists, and by sociologists and moralists.
Nowadays, it can be said that the principle of voluntarily controlling reproduction—not for selfish purposes but to eliminate disease, reduce human suffering, and improve the overall quality of life by prioritizing quality over sheer numbers—is widely accepted by medical pathologists, embryologists, neurologists, as well as sociologists and moralists.
It would be easy to multiply quotations from distinguished authorities on this point. Thus, Metchnikoff points out (Essais Optimistes, p. 419) that orthobiosis seems to involve the limitation of offspring in the fight against disease. Ballantyne concludes his great treatise on Antenanal Pathology with the statement that "Eugenics" or well-begetting, is one of the world's most pressing problems. Dr. Louise Robinovitch, the editor of the Journal of Mental Pathology, in a brilliant and thoughtful paper, read before the Rome Congress of Psychology in 1905, well spoke in the same sense: "Nations have not yet elevated the energy of genesic function to the dignity of an energy. Other energies known to us, even of the meanest grade, have long since been wisely utilized, and their activities based on the principle of the strictest possible economy. This economic utilization has been brought about, not through any enforcement of legislative restrictions, but through steadily progressive human intelligence. Economic handling of genesic function will, like the economic function of other energies, come about through a steady and progressive intellectual development of nations." "There are circumstances," says C. H. Hughes, ("Restricted Procreation," Alienist and Neurologist, May, 1908), "under which the propagation of a human life may be as gravely criminal as the taking of a life already begun."
It would be easy to find quotes from respected experts on this topic. For instance, Metchnikoff mentions (Essais Optimistes, p. 419) that maintaining good health seems to involve limiting the number of children in order to fight disease. Ballantyne concludes his major work on Antenanal Pathology by stating that "Eugenics," or the proper way to reproduce, is one of the most urgent issues in the world. Dr. Louise Robinovitch, the editor of the Journal of Mental Pathology, in an insightful and well-articulated paper presented at the Rome Congress of Psychology in 1905, remarked similarly: "Nations have yet to raise the importance of genetic function to the status of a crucial force. Other known energies, even the most basic ones, have long been wisely utilized and their functions managed with the utmost efficiency. This economic use has been achieved not through strict legislation, but through the gradual advancement of human intelligence. Proper management of genetic function will, like the economic management of other energies, come about through the steady and ongoing intellectual growth of nations." "There are situations," says C. H. Hughes, ("Restricted Procreation," Alienist and Neurologist, May, 1908), "where bringing a new life into the world can be as seriously wrong as taking a life that already exists."
From the general biological, as well as from the sociological side, the acceptance of the same standpoint is constantly becoming more general, for it is recognized as the inevitable outcome of movements which have long been in progress.
From both a biological and sociological perspective, the acceptance of this same viewpoint is becoming increasingly widespread, as it is seen as the unavoidable result of long-standing movements.
"Already," wrote Haycraft (Darwinism and Race Progress, p. 160), referring to the law for the prevention of cruelty to children, "public opinion has expressed itself in the public rule that a man and woman, in begetting a child, must take upon themselves the obligation and responsibility of seeing that that child is not subjected to cruelty and hardship. It is but one step more to say that a man and a woman shall be under obligation not to produce children, when it is certain that, from their want of physique, they will have to undergo suffering, and will keep up but an unequal struggle with their fellows." Professor J. Arthur Thomson, in his volume on Heredity (1908), vigorously and temperately pleads (p. 528) for rational methods of eugenics, as specially demanded in an age like our own, when the unfit have been given a better chance of reproduction than they have ever been given in any other age. Bateson, again, referring to the growing knowledge of heredity, remarks (Mendel's Principles of Heredity, 1909, p. 305): "Genetic knowledge must certainly lead to new conceptions of justice, and it is by no means impossible that, in the light of such knowledge, public opinion will welcome measures likely to do more for the extinction of the criminal and the degenerate than has been accomplished by ages of penal enactment." Adolescent youths and girls, said Anton von Menger, in his last book, the pregnant Neue Sittenlehre (1905), must be taught that the production of children, under certain circumstances, is a crime; they must also be taught the voluntary restraint of conception, even in health; such teaching, Menger rightly added, is a necessary preliminary to any legislation in this direction.
"Already," wrote Haycraft (Darwinism and Race Progress, p. 160), referring to the law for the prevention of cruelty to children, "public opinion has made it clear that when a man and woman have a child, they must take on the obligation and responsibility to ensure that child is not subjected to cruelty and hardship. It's only a small step further to say that a man and a woman should be obligated not to have children when it’s clear that, due to their poor physical condition, those children will suffer and will struggle unfairly compared to others." Professor J. Arthur Thomson, in his book on Heredity (1908), passionately and reasonably advocates (p. 528) for rational eugenics methods, especially in our time, when the unfit have been given greater opportunities to reproduce than ever before. Bateson, again, commenting on the increasing understanding of heredity, notes (Mendel's Principles of Heredity, 1909, p. 305): "Knowledge of genetics will certainly lead to new ideas of justice, and it is entirely possible that, in light of such knowledge, public opinion will support measures that could do more to eliminate criminals and degenerates than has been achieved through ages of legal punishment." Adolescent boys and girls, said Anton von Menger in his last book, the significant Neue Sittenlehre (1905), must be taught that having children, under certain circumstances, is a crime; they must also be taught to voluntarily avoid conception, even when they are healthy; such education, Menger rightly pointed out, is a necessary step before any legislation in this area.
Of recent years, many books and articles have been devoted to the advocacy of eugenic methods. Mention may be made, for instance, of Population and Progress (1907), by Montague Crackanthorpe, President of the Eugenics Education Society. See also, Havelock Ellis, "Eugenics and St. Valentine," Nineteenth Century and After, May, 1906. It may be mentioned that nearly thirty years ago, Miss J. H. Clapperton, in her Scientific Meliorism (1885, Ch. XVII), pointed out that the voluntary restraint of procreation by Neo-Malthusian methods, apart from merely prudential motives, there clearly recognized, is "a new key to the social position," and a necessary condition for "national regeneration." Professor Karl Pearson's Groundwork of Eugenics, (1909) is, perhaps, the best brief introduction to the subject. Mention may also be made of Dr. Saleeby's Parenthood and Race Culture (1909), written in a popular and enthusiastic manner.
In recent years, many books and articles have focused on promoting eugenic methods. For example, there's Population and Progress (1907) by Montague Crackanthorpe, who was the President of the Eugenics Education Society. Also, Havelock Ellis wrote "Eugenics and St. Valentine," which appeared in Nineteenth Century and After in May 1906. It's worth noting that nearly thirty years ago, Miss J. H. Clapperton highlighted in her Scientific Meliorism (1885, Ch. XVII) that the voluntary restraint of procreation using Neo-Malthusian methods, beyond just practical reasons, represents "a new key to the social position" and is crucial for "national regeneration." Professor Karl Pearson's Groundwork of Eugenics (1909) is probably the best short introduction to the topic. Additionally, Dr. Saleeby's Parenthood and Race Culture (1909) is written in a popular and enthusiastic style.
How widely the general principles of eugenics are now accepted as the sound method of raising the level of the human race, was well shown at a meeting of the Sociological Society, in 1905, when, after Sir Francis Galton had read papers on the question, the meeting heard the opinions of numerous sociologists, economists, biologists, and well-known thinkers in various lands, who were present, or who had sent communications. Some twenty-one expressed more or less unqualified approval, and only three or four had objections to offer, mostly on matters of detail (Sociological Papers, published by the Sociological Society, vol. ii, 1905).
How widely accepted the general principles of eugenics are as a valid method for improving the human race was clearly demonstrated at a meeting of the Sociological Society in 1905. After Sir Francis Galton presented papers on the topic, the meeting heard the views of many sociologists, economists, biologists, and prominent thinkers from various countries, either present or who had sent in their opinions. About twenty-one expressed mostly unconditional approval, while only three or four raised objections, mostly concerning minor details (Sociological Papers, published by the Sociological Society, vol. ii, 1905).
If we ask by what channels this impulse towards the control of procreation for the elevation of the race is expressing itself in practical life, we shall scarcely fail to find that there are at least two such channels: (1) the growing sense of sexual responsibility among women as well as men, and (2) the conquest of procreative control which has been achieved in recent years, by the general adoption of methods for the prevention of conception.
If we ask how this drive to control reproduction for the improvement of the race is showing up in real life, we will likely discover at least two main ways: (1) the increasing awareness of sexual responsibility among both women and men, and (2) the advances in reproductive control made in recent years through the widespread use of methods to prevent conception.
It has already been necessary in a previous chapter to discuss the far-reaching significance of woman's personal responsibility as an element in the modification of the sexual life of modern communities. Here it need only be pointed out that the autonomous authority of a woman over her own person, in the sexual sphere, involves on her part a consent to the act of procreation which must be deliberate. We are apt to think that this is a new and almost revolutionary demand; it is, however, undoubtedly a natural, ancient, and recognized privilege of women that they should not be mothers without their own consent. Even in the Islamic world of the Arabian Nights, we find that high praise is accorded to the "virtue and courage" of the woman who, having been ravished in her sleep, exposed, and abandoned on the highway, the infant that was the fruit of this involuntary union, "not wishing," she said, "to take the responsibility before Allah of a child that had been born without my consent."[427] The approval with which this story is narrated clearly shows that to the public of Islam it seemed entirely just and humane that a woman should not have a child, except by her own deliberate will. We have been accustomed to say in later days that the State needs children, and that it is the business and the duty of women to supply them. But the State has no more right than the individual to ravish a woman against her will. We are beginning to realize that if the State wants children it must make it agreeable to women to produce them, as under natural and equitable conditions it cannot fail to be. "The women will solve the question of mankind," said Ibsen in one of his rare and pregnant private utterances, "and they will do it as mothers." But it is unthinkable that any question should ever be solved by a helpless, unwilling, and involuntary act which has not even attained to the dignity of animal joy.
It has already been important in a previous chapter to discuss the significant impact of a woman's personal responsibility on the sexual life of modern societies. Here, it is enough to note that a woman's autonomy over her own body in the sexual realm involves a conscious choice about procreation. We tend to view this as a new and almost revolutionary demand; however, it is actually a natural, ancient, and acknowledged right of women not to become mothers without their own consent. Even in the Islamic world of the Arabian Nights, we see high praise given to the "virtue and courage" of a woman who, after being violated in her sleep and left alone on the road, chose to abandon the infant resulting from this non-consensual union, stating, "not wishing," she said, "to take the responsibility before Allah of a child that had been born without my consent."[427] The approval with which this story is recounted clearly indicates that to the Islamic public, it seemed entirely fair and humane that a woman should have a child only by her own choice. We have come to say in modern times that the State needs children, and it is the duty of women to provide them. But the State has no more right than the individual to violate a woman against her will. We are starting to understand that if the State wants children, it must make it appealing for women to have them, as under fair and natural conditions, it cannot fail to be. "The women will solve the question of mankind," said Ibsen in one of his rare and meaningful private statements, "and they will do it as mothers." But it is unimaginable that any issue could ever be resolved through a helpless, unwilling, and involuntary act that has not even reached the level of animal joy.
It is sometimes supposed, and even assumed, that the demand of women that motherhood must never be compulsory, means that they are unwilling to be mothers on any terms. In a few cases that may be so, but it is certainly not the case as regards the majority of sane and healthy women in any country. On the contrary, this demand is usually associated with the desire to glorify motherhood, if not, indeed, even with the thought of extending motherhood to many who are to-day shut out from it. "It seems to me," wrote Lady Henry Somerset, some years ago ("The Welcome Child," Arena, April, 1895), "that life will be dearer and nobler the more we recognize that there is no indelicacy in the climax and crown of creative power, but, rather, that it is the highest glory of the race. But if voluntary motherhood is the crown of the race, involuntary compulsory motherhood is the very opposite.... Only when both man and woman have learned that the most sacred of all functions given to women must be exercised by the free will alone, can children be born into the world who have in them the joyous desire to live, who claim that sweetest privilege of childhood, the certainty that they can expand in the sunshine of the love which is their due." Ellen Key, similarly, while pointing out (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, pp. 14, 265) that the tyranny of the old Protestant religious spirit which enjoined on women unlimited submission to joyless motherhood within "the whited sepulchre of marriage" is now being broken, exalts the privileges of voluntary motherhood, while admitting that there may be a few exceptional cases in which women may withdraw themselves from motherhood for the sake of the other demands of their personality, though, "as a general rule, the woman who refuses motherhood in order to serve humanity, is like a soldier who prepares himself on the eve of battle for the forthcoming struggle by opening his veins." Helene Stöcker, likewise, reckons motherhood as one of the demands, one of the growing demands indeed, which women now make. "If, to-day," she says (in the Preface to Liebe und die Frauen, 1906), "all the good things of life are claimed even for women—intellectual training, pecuniary independence, a happy vocation in life, a respected social position—and at the same time, as equally matter-of-course, and equally necessary, marriage and child, that demand no longer sounds, as it sounded a few years ago, the voice of a preacher in the wilderness."
It’s often thought, and even assumed, that when women say motherhood shouldn’t be mandatory, they mean they don’t want to be mothers at all. In some cases, this might be true, but it definitely doesn’t apply to the majority of sane and healthy women in any country. On the contrary, this demand is typically tied to the desire to honor motherhood, and even to consider extending motherhood to many who are currently excluded from it. “It seems to me,” wrote Lady Henry Somerset years ago (“The Welcome Child,” Arena, April 1895), “that life will be more precious and meaningful the more we understand that there’s no shame in the peak and essence of creative power; rather, it’s the greatest honor of the human race. But if voluntary motherhood is the pinnacle of humanity, then involuntary, forced motherhood is the exact opposite… Only when both men and women recognize that the most sacred function given to women must be fulfilled solely by their free choice can children be brought into the world with the joyful desire to live, who embrace that sweetest privilege of childhood—the certainty that they will thrive in the warmth of the love they deserve.” Ellen Key, likewise, while noting (Ueber Liebe und Ehe, pp. 14, 265) that the oppressive old Protestant religious mindset compelling women to submit to joyless motherhood within “the whited sepulchre of marriage” is now being dismantled, highlights the value of voluntary motherhood, while acknowledging that there may be exceptional cases where women might choose to step away from motherhood to fulfill other aspects of their personalities. However, “as a general rule, a woman who turns down motherhood to serve humanity is like a soldier getting ready for battle by opening his own veins.” Helene Stöcker also sees motherhood as one of the increasing demands women are making. “Today,” she states (in the Preface to Liebe und die Frauen, 1906), “when all the good things in life are expected for women—intellectual development, financial independence, a fulfilling career, and a respected social standing—then marriage and children are also seen as just as natural and necessary. That demand no longer sounds like the voice of a preacher in the wilderness, as it did a few years ago.”
The degradation to which motherhood has, in the eyes of many, fallen, is due partly to the tendency to deprive women of any voice in the question, and partly to what H. G. Wells calls (Socialism and the Family, 1906) "the monstrous absurdity of women discharging their supreme social function, bearing and rearing children, in their spare time, as it were, while they 'earn their living' by contributing some half mechanical element to some trivial industrial product." It would be impracticable, and even undesirable, to insist that married women should not be allowed to work, for a work in the world is good for all. It is estimated that over thirty per cent. of the women workers in England are married or widows (James Haslam, Englishwoman, June, 1909), and in Lancashire factories alone, in 1901, there were 120,000 married women employed. But it would be easily possible for the State to arrange, in its own interests, that a woman's work at a trade should always give way to her work as a mother. It is the more undesirable that married women should be prohibited from working at a profession, since there are some professions for which a married woman, or, rather, a mother, is better equipped than an unmarried woman. This is notably the case as regards teaching, and it would be a good policy to allow married women teachers special privileges in the shape of increased free time and leave of absence. While in many fields of knowledge an unmarried woman may be a most excellent teacher, it is highly undesirable that children, and especially girls, should be brought exclusively under the educational influence of unmarried teachers.
The way motherhood is viewed by many has declined, partly because women have been sidelined in the conversation and partly due to what H. G. Wells describes in Socialism and the Family (1906) as "the ridiculous situation of women performing their vital social role of having and raising children in their free time, while they 'earn their living' by contributing some half-hearted effort to some minor industrial product." It’s impractical and even undesirable to say that married women shouldn’t work; having jobs is beneficial for everyone. It’s estimated that over thirty percent of women workers in England are married or widows (James Haslam, Englishwoman, June, 1909), and in Lancashire factories alone, there were 120,000 married women working in 1901. However, it would be totally feasible for the State to ensure that a woman's job in her trade should always take a backseat to her responsibilities as a mother. It's even more undesirable to prohibit married women from pursuing careers, as there are some professions where married women, or mothers, are actually better suited than unmarried women. Teaching is a notable example, and it would be wise to grant married women teachers special considerations like more free time and leave. While unmarried women can be excellent teachers in many subjects, it's not ideal for children, particularly girls, to be solely educated by unmarried teachers.
The second great channel through which the impulse towards the control of procreation for the elevation of the race is entering into practical life is by the general adoption, by the educated classes of all countries—and it must be remembered that, in this matter at all events, all classes are gradually beginning to become educated—of methods for the prevention of conception except when conception is deliberately desired. It is no longer permissible to discuss the validity of this control, for it is an accomplished fact and has become a part of our modern morality. "If a course of conduct is habitually and deliberately pursued by vast multitudes of otherwise well-conducted people, forming probably a majority of the whole educated class of the nation," as Sidney Webb rightly puts it, "we must assume that it does not conflict with their actual code of morality."[428]
The second major way that the push for controlling reproduction to improve the race is making its way into real life is through the widespread adoption by educated people in all countries— and it’s important to note that, in this respect, all social classes are slowly becoming more educated— of methods to prevent conception unless it is intentionally desired. It’s no longer acceptable to debate the legitimacy of this control, as it’s a done deal and has become a part of our modern moral standards. "If a pattern of behavior is consistently and intentionally practiced by large numbers of otherwise well-behaved individuals, likely representing the majority of the educated class in the nation," as Sidney Webb correctly points out, "we must assume that it does not contradict their actual moral code." [428]
There cannot be any doubt that, so far as England is concerned, the prevention of conception is practiced, from prudential or other motives, by the vast majority of the educated classes. This fact is well within the knowledge of all who are intimately acquainted with the facts of English family life. Thus, Dr. A. W. Thomas writes (British Medical Journal, Oct. 20, 1906, p. 1066): "From my experience as a general practitioner, I have no hesitation in saying that ninety per cent. of young married couples of the comfortably-off classes use preventives." As a matter of fact, this rough estimate appears to be rather under than over the mark. In the very able paper already quoted, in which Sidney Webb shows that "the decline in the birthrate appears to be much greater in those sections of the population which give proofs of thrift and foresight," that this decline is "principally, if not entirely, the result of deliberate volition," and that "a volitional regulation of the marriage state is now ubiquitous throughout England and Wales, among, apparently, a large majority of the population," the results are brought forward of a detailed inquiry carried out by the Fabian Society. This inquiry covered 316 families, selected at random from all parts of Great Britain, and belonging to all sections of the middle class. The results are carefully analyzed, and it is found that seventy-four families were unlimited, and two hundred and forty-two voluntarily limited. When, however, the decade 1890-99 is taken by itself as the typical period, it is found that of 120 marriages, 107 were limited, and only thirteen unlimited, while of these thirteen, five were childless at the date of the return. In this decade, therefore, only seven unlimited fertile marriages are reported, out of a total of 120.
There is no doubt that, in England, the prevention of conception is practiced by the vast majority of educated people, either for practical reasons or other motives. This fact is well-known among those who are closely familiar with English family life. Dr. A. W. Thomas writes (British Medical Journal, Oct. 20, 1906, p. 1066): "From my experience as a general practitioner, I have no hesitation in saying that ninety percent of young married couples from the comfortably-off classes use preventives." In fact, this rough estimate may actually be an understatement. In the insightful paper already mentioned, Sidney Webb demonstrates that "the decline in the birthrate seems to be much greater in those segments of the population that show evidence of thrift and foresight," and that this decline is "mainly, if not entirely, due to deliberate choices." He also points out that "a conscious regulation of the marriage state is now widespread throughout England and Wales, apparently among a large majority of the population." The outcomes of a thorough survey conducted by the Fabian Society are presented. This survey included 316 families randomly selected from across Great Britain, representing all middle-class segments. The results are carefully analyzed, showing that seventy-four families were unconstrained, while two hundred and forty-two chose to limit their families. However, when specifically examining the decade from 1890 to 1899, it is revealed that out of 120 marriages, 107 were limited, and only thirteen were not limited, of which five were childless at the time of the report. Thus, during this decade, only seven marriages that were not limited and fertile are recorded, out of a total of 120.
What is true of Great Britain is true of all other civilized countries, in the highest degree true of the most civilized countries, and it finds expression in the well-known phenomenon of the decline of the birthrate. In modern times, this movement of decline began in France, producing a slow but steady diminution in the annual number of births, and in France the movement seems now to be almost, or quite, arrested. But it has since taken place in all other progressive countries, notably in the United States, in Canada, in Australia, and in New Zealand, as well as in Germany, Austro-Hungary, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway. In England, it has been continuous since 1877. Of the great countries, Russia is the only one in which it has not yet taken place, and among the masses of the Russian population we find less education, more poverty, a higher deathrate, and a greater amount of disease, than in any other great, or even small, civilized country.
What applies to Great Britain applies to all other civilized countries, especially to the most advanced ones, and it's reflected in the well-known phenomenon of the declining birthrate. This decline began in France, leading to a slow but steady decrease in the annual number of births, and in France, this trend now seems to have almost, if not entirely, stopped. However, it has occurred in all other progressive countries, especially in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, as well as in Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway. In England, this decline has been ongoing since 1877. Among the large countries, Russia is the only one where this hasn't happened yet, and among the Russian population, we see less education, more poverty, a higher death rate, and a greater prevalence of disease than in any other large or even small civilized country.
It is sometimes said, indeed, that the decline of the birthrate is not entirely due to the voluntary control of procreation. It is undoubtedly true that certain other elements, common under civilized conditions, such as the postponement of marriage in women to a comparatively late age, tend to diminish the size of the family. But when all such allowances have been made, the decline is still found to be real and large. This has been shown, for instance, by the statistical analyses made by Arthur Newsholme and T. H. C. Stevenson, and by G. Yule, both published in Journal Royal Statistical Society, April, 1906.
It is often claimed that the drop in birth rates isn’t just because people are choosing to have fewer children. It’s clear that other factors, common in modern society, like women delaying marriage until later in life, contribute to smaller families. However, even after considering these factors, the decline in birth rates is still significant and noticeable. This has been demonstrated, for example, by the statistical analyses conducted by Arthur Newsholme and T. H. C. Stevenson, as well as G. Yule, all published in Journal Royal Statistical Society, April 1906.
Some have supposed that, since the Catholic Church forbids incomplete sexual intercourse, this movement for the control of procreation will involve a relatively much greater increase among Catholic than among non-Catholic populations. This, however, is only correct under certain conditions. It is quite true that in Ireland there has been no fall in the birthrate, and that the fall is but little marked in those Lancashire towns which possess a large Irish element. But in Belgium, Italy, Spain, and other mainly Catholic countries, the decline in the birthrate is duly taking place. What has happened is that the Church—always alive to sexual questions—has realized the importance of the modern movement, and has adapted herself to it, by proclaiming to her more ignorant and uneducated children that incomplete intercourse is a deadly sin, while at the same time refraining from making inquiries into this matter among her more educated members. The question was definitely brought up for Papal judgment, in 1842, by Bishop Bouvier of Le Mans, who stated the matter very clearly, representing to the Pope (Gregory XVI) that the prevention of conception was becoming very common, and that to treat it as a deadly sin merely resulted in driving the penitent away from confession. After mature consideration, the Curia Sacra Poenitentiaria replied by pointing out, as regards the common method of withdrawal before emission, that since it was due to the wrong act of the man, the woman who has been forced by her husband to consent to it, has committed no sin. Further, the Bishop was reminded of the wise dictum of Liguori, "the most learned and experienced man in these matters," that the confessor is not usually called upon to make inquiry upon so delicate a matter as the debitum conjugale, and, if his opinion is not asked, he should be silent (Bouvier, Dissertatio in sextum Decalogi præceptum; supplementum ad Tractatum de Matrimonio. 1849, pp. 179-182; quoted by Hans Ferdy, Sexual-Probleme, Aug., 1908, p. 498). We see, therefore, that, among Catholic as well as among non-Catholic populations, the adoption of preventive methods of conception follows progress and civilization, and that the general practice of such methods by Catholics (with the tacit consent of the Church) is merely a matter of time.
Some people have thought that because the Catholic Church prohibits incomplete sexual intercourse, the movement for controlling reproduction would grow significantly more among Catholics than non-Catholics. However, this is only true under specific conditions. It's true that in Ireland, the birthrate hasn't decreased, and there's only a slight decline in those towns in Lancashire with a large Irish population. But in Belgium, Italy, Spain, and other mainly Catholic countries, the birthrate is indeed declining. What has happened is that the Church—always attentive to sexual issues—has recognized the importance of the modern movement and has adjusted by telling her less educated members that incomplete intercourse is a serious sin while not probing this issue with her more educated members. The question was formally raised for Papal judgment in 1842 by Bishop Bouvier of Le Mans, who clearly expressed to Pope Gregory XVI that preventing conception was becoming very common and that labeling it as a serious sin only pushed repentant individuals away from confession. After careful consideration, the Curia Sacra Poenitentiaria responded by indicating that regarding the common method of withdrawal before ejaculation, since it was due to the man's wrong act, the woman who was coerced by her husband to agree to it hasn’t sinned. Additionally, the Bishop was reminded of the wise saying of Liguori, "the most knowledgeable and experienced person in these matters," that the confessor is not normally expected to inquire about such delicate issues as the debitum conjugale, and if he isn't asked for his opinion, he should remain silent (Bouvier, Dissertatio in sextum Decalogi præceptum; supplementum ad Tractatum de Matrimonio. 1849, pp. 179-182; quoted by Hans Ferdy, Sexual-Probleme, Aug., 1908, p. 498). Therefore, we see that the adoption of preventive methods of conception follows progress and civilization among both Catholic and non-Catholic populations, and that the widespread practice of such methods by Catholics (with the Church's tacit approval) is just a matter of time.
From time to time many energetic persons have noisily demanded that a stop should be put to the decline of the birthrate, for, they argue, it means "race suicide." It is now beginning to be realized, however, that this outcry was a foolish and mischievous mistake. It is impossible to walk through the streets of any great city, full of vast numbers of persons who, obviously, ought never to have been born, without recognizing that the birthrate is as yet very far above its normal and healthy limit. The greatest States have often been the smallest so far as mere number of citizens is concerned, for it is quality not quantity that counts. And while it is true that the increase of the best types of citizens can only enrich a State, it is now becoming intolerable that a nation should increase by the mere dumping down of procreative refuse in its midst. It is beginning to be realized that this process not only depreciates the quality of a people but imposes on a State an inordinate financial burden.
From time to time, many energetic individuals have loudly insisted that we need to stop the decline in the birthrate because, they argue, it leads to "race suicide." However, it's starting to be recognized that this outcry was a foolish and harmful mistake. It's impossible to walk through the streets of any major city, filled with countless people who clearly shouldn't have been born, without acknowledging that the birthrate is still well above its normal and healthy limit. The greatest states have often had very few citizens in terms of sheer numbers because it's quality, not quantity, that matters. While it’s true that increasing the number of the best types of citizens can only benefit a state, it’s becoming unacceptable for a nation to grow simply by allowing a flood of undesirable births. People are beginning to realize that this trend not only lowers the quality of a population but also places an excessive financial burden on the state.
It is now well recognized that large families are associated with degeneracy, and, in the widest sense, with abnormality of every kind. Thus, it is undoubtedly true that men of genius tend to belong to very large families, though it may be pointed out to those who fear an alarming decrease of genius from the tendency to the limitation of the family, that the position in the family most often occupied by the child of genius is the firstborn. (See Havelock Ellis, A Study of British Genius, pp. 115-120). The insane, the idiotic, imbecile, and weak-minded, the criminal, the epileptic, the hysterical, the neurasthenic, the tubercular, all, it would appear, tend to belong to large families (see e.g., Havelock Ellis, op. cit., p. 110; Toulouse, Les Causes de la Folie, p. 91; Harriet Alexander, "Malthusianism and Degeneracy," Alienist and Neurologist, Jan., 1901). It has, indeed, been shown by Heron, Pearson, and Goring, that not only the eldest-born, but also the second-born, are specially liable to suffer from pathological defect (insanity, criminality, tuberculosis). There is, however, it would seem, a fallacy in the common interpretation of this fact. According to Van den Velden (as quoted in Sexual-Probleme, May, 1909, p. 381), this tendency is fully counterbalanced by the rising mortality of children from the firstborn onward. The greater pathological tendency of the earlier children is thus simply the result of a less stringent selection by death. So far as they show any really greater pathological tendency, apart from this fallacy, it is perhaps due to premature marriage. There is another fallacy in the frequent statement that the children in small families are more feeble than those in large families. We have to distinguish between a naturally small family, and an artificially small family. A family which is small merely as the result of the feeble procreative energy of the parents, is likely to be a feeble family; a family which is small as the result of the deliberate control of the parents, shows, of course, no such tendency.
It’s now widely accepted that large families are linked to degeneration and, in general, various kinds of abnormalities. It’s definitely true that men of genius often come from very large families, although those worried about a significant decline in genius due to smaller families should note that the role most frequently held by a genius child is that of the firstborn. (See Havelock Ellis, A Study of British Genius, pp. 115-120). Individuals who are insane, idiotic, imbecilic, weak-minded, criminal, epileptic, hysterical, neurasthenic, or tubercular seem to be more common in large families (see e.g., Havelock Ellis, op. cit., p. 110; Toulouse, Les Causes de la Folie, p. 91; Harriet Alexander, "Malthusianism and Degeneracy," Alienist and Neurologist, Jan., 1901). Indeed, researchers like Heron, Pearson, and Goring have shown that not just firstborn children, but also second-born ones are particularly likely to experience pathological issues (insanity, criminality, tuberculosis). However, there seems to be a misconception in the common interpretation of this finding. According to Van den Velden (as quoted in Sexual-Probleme, May, 1909, p. 381), this tendency is completely balanced out by the increasing mortality rate of children from the firstborn onward. The greater pathological tendency of the earlier children is simply the outcome of less rigorous selection by death. To the extent that they show any genuinely higher pathological tendency, excluding this misconception, it may be related to premature marriage. There’s also a misunderstanding in the frequent claim that children from smaller families are weaker than those from larger families. We need to differentiate between a naturally small family and an artificially small family. A family that is only small because the parents have weak reproductive abilities is likely to be weak itself; a family that is small due to the parents’ conscious control shows no such tendency.
These considerations, it will be seen, do not modify the tendency of the large family to be degenerate. We may connect this phenomenon with the disposition, often shown by nervously unsound and abnormal persons, to believe that they have a special aptitude to procreate fine children. "I believe that everyone has a special vocation," said a man to Marro (La Pubertà, p. 459); "I find that it is my vocation to beget superior children." He begat four,—an epileptic, a lunatic, a dipsomaniac, and a valetudinarian,—and himself died insane. Most people have come across somewhat similar, though perhaps less marked, cases of this delusion. In a matter of such fateful gravity to other human beings, no one can safely rely on his own unsupported impressions.
These considerations, as you can see, don't change the tendency of large families to be degenerate. We might link this phenomenon to the tendency, often seen in people who are nervously unstable or abnormal, to think they have a special talent for having exceptional children. "I believe that everyone has a unique calling," a man told Marro (La Pubertà, p. 459); "I feel it's my calling to father superior children." He fathered four—an epileptic, a mentally ill person, an alcoholic, and a disabled person—and he himself died insane. Most people have encountered similar, though maybe less extreme, examples of this delusion. In matters this serious for other people's lives, no one can reliably depend on their own unverified feelings.
The demand of national efficiency thus corresponds with the demand of developing humanitarianism, which, having begun by attempting to ameliorate the conditions of life, has gradually begun to realize that it is necessary to go deeper and to ameliorate life itself. For while it is undoubtedly true that much may be done by acting systematically on the conditions of life, the more searching analysis of evil environmental conditions only serves to show that in large parts they are based in the human organism itself and were not only pre-natal, but pre-conceptional, being involved in the quality of the parental or ancestral organisms.
The need for national efficiency aligns with the need to develop humanitarianism, which started by trying to improve living conditions but has slowly come to understand that it’s essential to enhance life itself. While it’s certainly true that many improvements can be made by addressing living conditions in a systematic way, a deeper analysis of harmful environmental factors reveals that in many cases, these issues are rooted in the human organism itself, originating not just before birth but even before conception, tied to the quality of the parent or ancestor organisms.
Putting aside, however, all humanitarian considerations, the serious error of attempting to stem the progress of civilization in the direction of procreative control could never have occurred if the general tendencies of zoölogical evolution had been understood, even in their elements. All zoölogical progress is from the more prolific to the less prolific; the higher the species the less fruitful are its individual members. The same tendency is found within the limits of the human species, though not in an invariable straight line; the growth of civilization involves a diminution in fertility. This is by no means a new phenomenon; ancient Rome and later Geneva, "the Protestant Rome," bear witness to it; no doubt it has occurred in every high centre of moral and intellectual culture, although the data for measuring the tendency no longer exist. When we take a sufficiently wide and intelligent survey, we realize that the tendency of a community to slacken its natural rate of increase is an essential phenomenon of all advanced civilization. The more intelligent nations have manifested the tendency first, and in each nation the more educated classes have taken the lead, but it is only a matter of time to bring all civilized nations, and all social classes in each nation, into line.[429] This movement, we have to remember—in opposition to the ignorant outcry of certain would-be moralists and politicians—is a beneficent movement. It means a greater regard to the quality than to the quantity of the increase; it involves the possibility of combating successfully the evils of high mortality, disease, overcrowding, and all the manifold misfortunes which inevitably accompany a too exuberant birthrate. For it is only in a community which increases slowly that it is possible to secure the adequate economic adjustment and environmental modifications necessary for a sane and wholesome civic and personal life.[430] If those persons who raise the cry of "race suicide" in face of the decline of the birthrate really had the knowledge and intelligence to realize the manifold evils which they are invoking they would deserve to be treated as criminals.
Setting aside all humanitarian concerns, the major mistake of trying to halt the progress of civilization towards reproductive control could never have happened if the general trends of zoological evolution had been understood, even at a basic level. All zoological progress moves from more prolific to less prolific; the higher the species, the less fertile its individual members are. The same trend is seen within the human species, though not in a straight line; the advancement of civilization involves a decrease in fertility. This is not a new phenomenon; ancient Rome and later Geneva, "the Protestant Rome," serve as examples; it has likely occurred in every center of moral and intellectual culture, although the data to measure this tendency is no longer available. When we take a sufficiently broad and informed view, we see that a community's tendency to slow its natural growth rate is a key feature of all advanced civilizations. The more intelligent nations have shown this tendency first, and within each nation, the more educated classes have led the way, but it’s only a matter of time before all civilized nations and all social classes in each nation align. This movement, we have to remember—in contrast to the ignorant cries of some self-proclaimed moralists and politicians—is a positive one. It reflects a greater focus on the quality rather than the quantity of increase; it involves the possibility of successfully addressing the issues of high mortality, disease, overcrowding, and all the various misfortunes that inevitably come with too many births. For it is only in a community that grows slowly that we can achieve the necessary economic adjustments and environmental changes for a healthy and balanced civic and personal life. If those who shout "race suicide" due to the decline in birthrates truly understood the many evils they are calling into existence, they would deserve to be treated as criminals.
On the practical side a knowledge of the possibility of preventing conception has, doubtless, never been quite extinct in civilization and even in lower stages of culture, though it has mostly been utilized for ends of personal convenience or practiced in obedience to conventional social rules which demanded chastity, and has only of recent times been made subservient to the larger interests of society and the elevation of the race. The theoretical basis of the control of procreation, on its social and economic, as distinct from its eugenic, aspects, may be said to date from Malthus's famous Essay on Population, first published in 1798, an epoch-marking book,—though its central thesis is not susceptible of actual demonstration,—since it not only served as the starting-point of the modern humanitarian movement for the control of procreation, but also furnished to Darwin (and independently to Wallace also) the fruitful idea which was finally developed into the great evolutionary theory of natural selection.
On a practical level, the knowledge of how to prevent conception has, without a doubt, never completely disappeared in civilization and even in earlier stages of culture. However, it has mostly been used for personal convenience or followed social norms that required chastity. Only recently has it been applied to serve the broader interests of society and the betterment of humanity. The theoretical foundation for controlling reproduction, focusing on its social and economic aspects rather than just eugenics, can be traced back to Malthus's famous Essay on Population, first published in 1798. This groundbreaking book not only marked a significant turning point but also initiated the modern humanitarian movement for controlling procreation. Additionally, it provided Darwin (and independently, Wallace) with the valuable concept that eventually evolved into the major theory of natural selection.
Malthus, however, was very far from suggesting that the control of procreation, which he advocated for the benefit of mankind, should be exercised by the introduction of preventive methods into sexual intercourse. He believed that civilization involved an increased power of self-control, which would make it possible to refrain altogether from sexual intercourse, when such self-restraint was demanded in the interests of humanity. Later thinkers realized, however, that, while it is undoubtedly true that civilization involves greater forethought and greater self-control, we cannot anticipate that those qualities should be developed to the extent demanded by Malthus, especially when the impulse to be controlled is of so powerful and explosive a nature.
Malthus, however, was far from suggesting that controlling reproduction, which he supported for the sake of humanity, should involve using preventive methods during sex. He believed that civilization required greater self-control, enabling people to completely abstain from sexual activity when necessary for the good of society. Later thinkers recognized, though, that while it’s certainly true that civilization brings more foresight and self-discipline, we can’t expect those qualities to develop to the level Malthus envisioned, especially given how strong and urgent the sexual impulse can be.
James Mill was the pioneer in advocating Neo-Malthusian methods, though he spoke cautiously. In 1818, in the article "Colony" in the supplement to the Encyclopædia Britannica, after remarking that the means of checking the unrestricted increase of the population constitutes "the most important practical problem to which the wisdom of the politician and moralist can be applied," he continued: "If the superstitions of the nursery were discarded, and the principle of utility kept steadily in view, a solution might not be very difficult to be found." Four years later, James Mill's friend, the Radical reformer, Francis Place, more distinctly expressed the thought that was evidently in Mill's mind. After enumerating the facts concerning the necessity of self-control in procreation and the evils of early marriage, which he thinks ought to be clearly taught, Place continues: "If a hundredth, perhaps a thousandth part of the pains were taken to teach these truths, that are taken to teach dogmas, a great change for the better might, in no considerable space of time, be expected to take place in the appearance and the habits of the people. If, above all, it were once clearly understood that it was not disreputable for married persons to avail themselves of such precautionary means as would, without being injurious to health, or destructive of female delicacy, prevent conception, a sufficient check might at once be given to the increase of population beyond the means of subsistence; vice and misery, to a prodigious extent, might be removed from society, and the object of Mr. Malthus, Mr. Godwin, and of every philanthropic person, be promoted, by the increase of comfort, of intelligence, and of moral conduct, in the mass of the population. The course recommended will, I am fully persuaded, at some period be pursued by the people even if left to themselves."[431]
James Mill was a pioneer in promoting Neo-Malthusian methods, although he was careful with his words. In 1818, in the article "Colony" in the supplement to the Encyclopædia Britannica, he noted that finding ways to manage the unchecked growth of the population is “the most important practical problem to which the wisdom of the politician and moralist can be applied.” He added, “If the superstitions of the nursery were set aside, and the principle of utility was kept clearly in focus, a solution might not be very hard to find.” Four years later, Mill's friend, the Radical reformer Francis Place, more clearly articulated what was evidently on Mill's mind. After detailing the importance of self-control in procreation and the drawbacks of early marriage, which he believed should be clearly taught, Place stated: “If a fraction, maybe even a tiny portion, of the effort spent teaching these truths were applied to teaching dogmas, we could expect a significant positive change in the behavior and conditions of people in a relatively short time. If, above all, it was widely understood that it was not disgraceful for married couples to use precautionary methods that would, without harming health or compromising women’s delicacy, prevent conception, a significant restraint could quickly be placed on population growth beyond the means of support; vice and suffering could be greatly reduced in society, and the goals of Mr. Malthus, Mr. Godwin, and every compassionate individual could be advanced by fostering greater comfort, intelligence, and moral conduct among the population. I am fully convinced that the approach I recommend will eventually be adopted by people, even if left to their own devices.”[431]
It was not long before Place's prophetic words began to be realized, and in another half century the movement was affecting the birthrate of all civilized lands, though it can scarcely yet be said that justice has been done to the pioneers who promoted it in the face of much persecution from the ignorant and superstitious public whom they sought to benefit. In 1831, Robert Dale Owen, the son of Robert Owen, published his Moral Physiology, setting forth the methods of preventing conception. A little later the brothers George and Charles Drysdale (born 1825 and 1829), two ardent and unwearying philanthropists, devoted much of their energy to the propagation of Neo-Malthusian principles. George Drysdale, in 1854, published his Elements of Social Science, which during many years had an enormous circulation all over Europe in eight different languages. It was by no means in every respect a scientific or sound work, but it certainly had great influence, and it came into the hands of many who never saw any other work on sexual topics. Although the Neo-Malthusian propagandists of those days often met with much obloquy, their cause was triumphantly vindicated in 1876, when Charles Bradlaugh and Mrs. Besant, having been prosecuted for disseminating Neo-Malthusian pamphlets, the charge was dismissed, the Lord Chief Justice declaring that so ill-advised and injudicious a charge had probably never before been made in a court of justice. This trial, even by its mere publicity and apart from its issue, gave an enormous impetus to the Neo-Malthusian movement. It is well known that the steady decline in the English birthrate begun in 1877, the year following the trial. There could be no more brilliant illustration of the fact, that what used to be called "the instruments of Providence" are indeed unconscious instruments in bringing about great ends which they themselves were far from either intending or desiring.
It didn't take long for Place's prophetic words to start coming true, and within another fifty years, the movement was impacting the birthrate in all civilized countries. However, it can hardly be said that justice has been served to the pioneers who promoted it despite facing significant persecution from the ignorant and superstitious public they aimed to help. In 1831, Robert Dale Owen, the son of Robert Owen, published his Moral Physiology, which outlined methods for preventing conception. Shortly after, brothers George and Charles Drysdale (born 1825 and 1829) became passionate philanthropists who dedicated much of their efforts to spreading Neo-Malthusian principles. In 1854, George Drysdale published his Elements of Social Science, which enjoyed significant circulation across Europe in eight different languages for many years. While it was not entirely a scientific or sound work, it certainly had a major influence and reached many who had never encountered any other literature on sexual topics. Even though the Neo-Malthusian advocates of that time faced a lot of criticism, their cause was ultimately vindicated in 1876 when Charles Bradlaugh and Mrs. Besant were prosecuted for distributing Neo-Malthusian pamphlets. The charge was dismissed, with the Lord Chief Justice stating that such a poorly thought-out charge had likely never been made in a court of law. This trial, merely by its public exposure regardless of the outcome, gave a significant boost to the Neo-Malthusian movement. It's well known that the steady decline in the English birthrate began in 1877, the year after the trial. There could be no clearer example of the fact that what were once called "the instruments of Providence" are indeed unconscious tools in achieving significant outcomes that they themselves never intended or desired.
In 1877, Dr. C. R. Drysdale founded the Malthusian League, and edited a periodical, The Malthusian, aided throughout by his wife, Dr. Alice Drysdale Vickery. He died in 1907. (The noble and pioneering work of the Drysdales has not yet been adequately recognized in their own country; an appreciative and well-informed article by Dr. Hermann Rohleder, "Dr. C. R. Drysdale, Der Hauptvortreter der Neumalthusianische Lehre," appeared in the Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, March, 1908). There are now societies and periodicals in all civilized countries for the propagation of Neo-Malthusian principles, as they are still commonly called, though it would be desirable to avoid the use of Malthus's name in this connection. In the medical profession, the advocacy of preventive methods of sexual intercourse, not on social, but on medical and hygienic grounds, began same thirty years ago, though in France, at an earlier date, Raciborski advocated the method of avoiding the neighborhood of menstruation. In Germany, Dr. Mensinga, the gynæcologist, is the most prominent advocate, on medical and hygienic grounds, of what he terms "facultative sterility," which he first put forward about 1889. In Russia, about the same time, artificial sterility was first openly advocated by the distinguished gynæcologist, Professor Ott, at the St. Petersburg Obstetric and Gynæcological Society. Such medical recommendations, in particular cases, are now becoming common.
In 1877, Dr. C. R. Drysdale started the Malthusian League and edited a magazine called The Malthusian, with help from his wife, Dr. Alice Drysdale Vickery. He passed away in 1907. (The noble and groundbreaking work of the Drysdales has yet to be fully recognized in their own country; a thoughtful and informed article by Dr. Hermann Rohleder, "Dr. C. R. Drysdale, Der Hauptvortreter der Neumalthusianische Lehre," was published in the Zeitschrift für Sexualwissenschaft, March 1908). Today, there are societies and magazines in all developed countries promoting Neo-Malthusian principles, as they are still often referred to, although it would be better to avoid using Malthus's name in this context. In the medical field, the promotion of preventive sexual methods, not for social reasons but for medical and hygienic ones, began around thirty years ago, although Raciborski had already promoted avoiding intercourse during menstruation in France at an earlier date. In Germany, Dr. Mensinga, a gynecologist, is the leading advocate for what he calls "facultative sterility," which he first proposed around 1889. In Russia, around the same time, artificial sterility was first openly supported by the prominent gynecologist, Professor Ott, at the St. Petersburg Obstetric and Gynecological Society. Such medical recommendations for specific cases are becoming more common now.
There are certain cases in which a person ought not to marry at all; this is so, for instance, when there has been an attack of insanity; it can never be said with certainty that a person who has had one attack of insanity will not have another, and persons who have had such attacks ought not, as Blandford says (Lumleian Lectures on Insanity, British Medical Journal, April 20, 1895), "to inflict on their partner for life, the anxiety, and even danger, of another attack." There are other and numerous cases in which marriage may be permitted, or may have already taken place, under more favorable circumstances, but where it is, or has become, highly desirable that there should be no children. This is the case when a first attack of insanity occurs after marriage, the more urgently if the affected party is the wife, and especially if the disease takes the form of puerperal mania. "What can be more lamentable," asks Blandford (loc. cit.), "than to see a woman break down in childbed, recover, break down again with the next child, and so on, for six, seven, or eight children, the recovery between each being less and less, until she is almost a chronic maniac?" It has been found, moreover, by Tredgold (Lancet, May 17, 1902), that among children born to insane mothers, the mortality is twice as great as the ordinary infantile mortality, in even the poorest districts. In cases of unions between persons with tuberculous antecedents, also, it is held by many (e.g., by Massalongo, in discussing tuberculosis and marriage at the Tuberculosis Congress, at Naples, in 1900) that every precaution should be taken to make the marriage childless. In a third class of cases, it is necessary to limit the children to one or two; this happens in some forms of heart disease, in which pregnancy has a progressively deteriorating effect on the heart (Kisch, Therapeutische Monatsheft, Feb., 1898, and Sexual Life of Woman; Vinay, Lyon Medical, Jan. 8, 1889); in some cases of heart disease, however, it is possible that, though there is no reason for prohibiting marriage, it is desirable for a woman not to have any children (J. F. Blacker, "Heart Disease in Relation to Pregnancy," British Medical Journal, May 25, 1907).
There are certain situations in which a person should not marry at all; for example, if they have experienced an episode of insanity. It's impossible to say with certainty that someone who has had one episode won't have another, and people who have experienced such episodes shouldn't, as Blandford states (Lumleian Lectures on Insanity, British Medical Journal, April 20, 1895), "impose on their lifelong partner the anxiety, and even danger, of another episode." There are other cases where marriage may be allowed, or may already have occurred, under more favorable conditions, but where it's highly advisable to avoid having children. This is particularly true if the first episode of insanity happens after marriage, especially if the affected person is the wife, and particularly if the condition manifests as puerperal mania. "What could be more tragic," asks Blandford (loc. cit.), "than to watch a woman deteriorate during childbirth, recover, and then relapse with each subsequent child, over six, seven, or eight children, with each recovery being less and less complete, until she becomes almost a chronic maniac?" Furthermore, Tredgold (Lancet, May 17, 1902) found that among children born to insane mothers, the mortality rate is twice that of the normal infant mortality rate, even in the poorest areas. In cases where individuals have a history of tuberculosis, many believe (e.g., Massalongo, discussing tuberculosis and marriage at the Tuberculosis Congress in Naples, 1900) that all precautions should be taken to ensure the marriage remains childless. In a third category of cases, it's necessary to limit the number of children to one or two; this occurs in certain types of heart disease, where pregnancy progressively worsens the heart condition (Kisch, Therapeutische Monatsheft, Feb., 1898, and Sexual Life of Woman; Vinay, Lyon Medical, Jan. 8, 1889); in some heart disease cases, however, while there's no reason to prohibit marriage, it's advisable for a woman not to have any children (J. F. Blacker, "Heart Disease in Relation to Pregnancy," British Medical Journal, May 25, 1907).
In all such cases, the recommendation of preventive methods of intercourse is obviously an indispensable aid to the physician in emphasizing the supremacy of hygienic precautions. In the absence of such methods, he can never be sure that his warnings will be heard, and even the observance of his advice would be attended with various undesirable results. It sometimes happens that a married couple agree, even before marriage, to live together without sexual relations, but, for various reasons, it is seldom found possible or convenient to maintain this resolution for a long period.
In all these situations, recommending preventive methods of intercourse is clearly a crucial support for the doctor in highlighting the importance of hygiene practices. Without these methods, he can never be certain that his warnings will be taken seriously, and even following his advice could lead to various unwanted consequences. Sometimes, a married couple decides, even before they get married, to live together without having sex, but for many reasons, it's rarely practical or easy to stick to that decision for a long time.
It is the recognition of these and similar considerations which has led—though only within recent years—on the one hand, as we have seen, to the embodiment of the control of procreation into the practical morality of all civilized nations, and, on the other hand, to the assertion, now perhaps without exception, by all medical authorities on matters of sex that the use of the methods of preventing conception is under certain circumstances urgently necessary and quite harmless.[432] It arouses a smile to-day when we find that less than a century ago it was possible for an able and esteemed medical author to declare that the use of "various abominable means" to prevent conception is "based upon a most presumptuous doubt in the conservative power of the Creator."[433]
The awareness of these and similar factors has led—though only in recent years—to the incorporation of reproductive control into the practical ethics of all civilized nations. Additionally, as we have observed, it has resulted in the widespread agreement among medical experts regarding sexual matters that, under certain circumstances, using methods to prevent conception is urgently necessary and completely safe.[432] It's almost amusing today to realize that less than a century ago, a respected and skilled medical author could claim that using "various abominable means" to prevent conception was "based upon a most presumptuous doubt in the conservative power of the Creator."[433]
The adaptation of theory to practice is not yet complete, and we could not expect that it should be so, for, as we have seen, there is always an antagonism between practical morality and traditional morality. From time to time flagrant illustrations of this antagonism occur.[434] Even in England, which played a pioneering part in the control of procreation, attempts are still made—sometimes in quarters where we have a right to expect a better knowledge—to cast discredit on a movement which, since it has conquered alike scientific approval and popular practice, it is now idle to call in question.
The adaptation of theory to practice isn’t finished yet, and we can’t really expect it to be, because, as we've seen, there’s always conflict between practical morality and traditional morality. Every now and then, blatant examples of this conflict come up.[434] Even in England, which was a pioneer in birth control, there are still efforts—sometimes from places where we should expect better knowledge—to undermine a movement that has gained both scientific approval and public acceptance; it’s pointless to question it now.
It would be out of place to discuss here the various methods which are used for the control of procreation, or their respective merits and defects. It is sufficient to say that the condom or protective sheath, which seems to be the most ancient of all methods of preventing conception, after withdrawal, is now regarded by nearly all authorities as, when properly used, the safest, the most convenient, and the most harmless method.[435] This is the opinion of Krafft-Ebing, of Moll, of Schrenck-Notzing, of Löwenfeld, of Forel, of Kisch, of Fürbringer, to mention only a few of the most distinguished medical authorities.[436]
It wouldn't be appropriate to discuss here the different methods used for birth control, or their pros and cons. It's enough to say that the condom, which seems to be the oldest method of preventing conception, after withdrawal, is now considered by almost all experts as, when used correctly, the safest, most convenient, and least harmful method.[435] This is the view of Krafft-Ebing, Moll, Schrenck-Notzing, Löwenfeld, Forel, Kisch, and Fürbringer, to name just a few of the leading medical authorities.[436]
There is some interest in attempting to trace the origin and history of the condom, though it seems impossible to do so with any precision. It is probable that, in a rudimentary form, such an appliance is of great antiquity. In China and Japan, it would appear, rounds of oiled silk paper are used to cover the mouth of the womb, at all events, by prostitutes. This seems the simplest and most obvious mechanical method of preventing conception, and may have suggested the application of a sheath to the penis as a more effectual method. In Europe, it is in the middle of the sixteenth century, in Italy, that we first seem to hear of such appliances, in the shape of linen sheaths, adapted to the shape of the penis; Fallopius recommended the use of such an appliance. Improvements in the manufacture were gradually devised; the cæcum of the lamb was employed, and afterwards, isinglass. It appears that a considerable improvement in the manufacture took place in the seventeenth or eighteenth century, and this improvement was generally associated with England. The appliance thus became known as the English cape or mantle, the "capote anglaise," or the "redingote anglaise," and, under the latter name, is referred to by Casanova, in the middle of the eighteenth century (Casanova, Mémoires, ed. Garnier, vol. iv, p. 464); Casanova never seems, however, to have used these redingotes himself, not caring, he said, "to shut myself up in a piece of dead skin in order to prove that I am perfectly alive." These capotes—then made of goldbeaters' skin—were, also, it appears, known at an earlier period to Mme. de Sévigné, who did not regard them with favor, for, in one of her letters, she refers to them as "cuirasses contre la volupté et toiles d'arraignée contre le mal." The name, "condom," dates from the eighteenth century, first appearing in France, and is generally considered to be that of an English physician, or surgeon, who invented, or, rather, improved the appliance. Condom is not, however, an English name, but there is an English name, Condon, of which "condom" may well be a corruption. This supposition is strengthened by the fact that the word sometimes actually was written "condon." Thus, in lines quoted by Bachaumont, in his Diary (Dec. 15, 1773), and supposed to be addressed to a former ballet dancer who had become a prostitute, I find:—
There’s a growing interest in tracing the origin and history of the condom, but it seems nearly impossible to do so accurately. It’s likely that, in a basic form, this device is very ancient. In China and Japan, it seems that rounds of oiled silk paper were used to cover the vagina, at least by prostitutes. This appears to be the simplest and most straightforward mechanical way to prevent conception, which may have led to the idea of using a sheath on the penis as a more effective method. In Europe, it’s in the mid-sixteenth century, specifically in Italy, that we first hear about these devices, which were linen sheaths shaped to fit the penis; Fallopius recommended using such a device. Improvements in manufacturing were gradually developed; lamb cecum was used, and later, isinglass. It seems that a significant enhancement in production occurred in the seventeenth or eighteenth century, and this advancement was mainly linked to England. The device then became known as the English cape or mantle, the "capote anglaise," or the "redingote anglaise," and it’s referred to by Casanova in the mid-eighteenth century (Casanova, Mémoires, ed. Garnier, vol. iv, p. 464); however, Casanova never seems to have used these redingotes himself, claiming he did not wish "to shut myself up in a piece of dead skin to prove that I am perfectly alive." These capotes—then made of goldbeater's skin—seem to have also been known earlier to Mme. de Sévigné, who viewed them unfavorably; in one of her letters, she referred to them as "cuirasses contre la volupté et toiles d'arraignée contre le mal." The term "condom" dates back to the eighteenth century and first appeared in France; it’s generally believed to be named after an English physician or surgeon who invented, or rather improved, the device. However, "condom" is not an English name, but there is an English name, Condon, from which "condom" may very well be a corruption. This theory is supported by the fact that the word was sometimes actually written "condon." Thus, in lines quoted by Bachaumont in his Diary (Dec. 15, 1773), which are thought to be directed at a former ballet dancer who had become a prostitute, I find:—
The difficulty remains, however, of discovering any Englishman of the name of Condon, who can plausibly be associated with the condom; doubtless he took no care to put the matter on record, never suspecting the fame that would accrue to his invention, or the immortality that awaited his name. I find no mention of any Condon in the records of the College of Physicians, and at the College of Surgeons, also, where, indeed, the old lists are very imperfect, Mr. Victor Plarr, the librarian, after kindly making a search, has assured me that there is no record of the name. Other varying explanations of the name have been offered, with more or less assurance, though usually without any proofs. Thus, Hyrtl (Handbuch der Topographischen Anatomic, 7th ed., vol. ii, p. 212) states that the condom was originally called gondom, from the name of the English discoverer, a Cavalier of Charles II's Court, who first prepared it from the amnion of the sheep; Gondom is, however, no more an English name than Condom. There happens to be a French town, in Gascony, called Condom, and Bloch suggests, without any evidence, that this furnished the name; if so, however, it is improbable that it would have been unknown in France. Finally, Hans Ferdy considers that it is derived from "condus"—that which preserves—and, in accordance with his theory, he terms the condom a condus.
The challenge remains, however, of finding any Englishman named Condon who can realistically be linked to the condom; he likely didn’t bother to document it, never imagining the fame his invention would bring or the lasting legacy his name would have. I can’t find any reference to a Condon in the records of the College of Physicians, and at the College of Surgeons as well, where the old lists are quite patchy, Mr. Victor Plarr, the librarian, kindly looked into it and confirmed that there's no record of that name. Various other theories about the name have been proposed, often with varying levels of confidence and usually without any supporting evidence. For example, Hyrtl (Handbuch der Topographischen Anatomic, 7th ed., vol. ii, p. 212) claims that the condom was originally called gondom, named after the English inventor, a Cavalier in Charles II's court, who first made it from the sheep's amnion; however, Gondom is no more an English name than Condom. There is a town in Gascony, France, named Condom, and Bloch speculates, with no proof, that this is where the name came from; if that’s the case, it’s unlikely it would have been unknown in France. Lastly, Hans Ferdy believes it comes from "condus"—meaning that which preserves—and, according to his theory, he refers to the condom as a condus.
The early history of the condom is briefly discussed by various writers, as by Proksch, Die Vorbauung der Venerischen Krankheiten, p. 48; Bloch, Sexual Life of Our Time, Chs. XV and XXVIII; Cabanès, Indiscretions de l'Histoire, p. 121, etc.
The early history of the condom is briefly covered by various writers, such as Proksch, Die Vorbauung der Venerischen Krankheiten, p. 48; Bloch, Sexual Life of Our Time, Chs. XV and XXVIII; Cabanès, Indiscretions de l'Histoire, p. 121, etc.
The control of procreation by the prevention of conception has, we have seen, become a part of the morality of civilized peoples. There is another method, not indeed for preventing conception, but for limiting offspring, which is of much more ancient appearance in the world, though it has at different times been very differently viewed and still arouses widely opposing opinions. This is the method of abortion.
The management of reproduction through contraception has, as we've observed, become a part of the ethics of civilized societies. There is another approach, not to prevent conception, but to limit the number of children, which has been around for much longer, although it has been viewed quite differently at various times and still evokes strong opposing views. This approach is abortion.
While the practice of abortion has by no means, like the practice of preventing conception, become accepted in civilization, it scarcely appears to excite profound repulsion in a large proportion of the population of civilized countries. The majority of women, not excluding educated and highly moral women, who become pregnant against their wish contemplate the possibility of procuring abortion without the slightest twinge of conscience, and often are not even aware of the usual professional attitude of the Church, the law, and medicine regarding abortion. Probably all doctors have encountered this fact, and even so distinguished and correct a medico-legist as Brouardel stated[437] that he had been not infrequently solicited to procure abortion, for themselves or their wet-nurses, by ladies who looked on it as a perfectly natural thing, and had not the least suspicion that the law regarded the deed as a crime.
While abortion is by no means as accepted as contraception in society, it seems to provoke little strong disgust among many people in civilized countries. Most women, including educated and highly moral ones, who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant often consider the option of having an abortion without feeling any guilt, and many aren’t even aware of the typical views held by the Church, the law, and the medical community regarding abortion. It's likely that all doctors have seen this, and even a highly respected medical legal expert like Brouardel stated[437] that he had frequently been asked by women, either for themselves or their wet-nurses, to facilitate an abortion, seeing it as a perfectly normal option, completely unaware that the law considered it a crime.
It is not, therefore, surprising that abortion is exceedingly common in all civilized and progressive countries. It cannot, indeed, unfortunately, be said that abortion has been conducted in accordance with eugenic considerations, nor has it often been so much as advocated from the eugenic standpoint. But in numerous classes of cases of undesired pregnancy, occurring in women of character and energy, not accustomed to submit tamely to conditions they may not have sought, and in any case consider undesirable, abortion is frequently resorted to. It is usual to regard the United States as a land in which the practice especially flourishes, and certainly a land in which the ideal of chastity for unmarried women, of freedom for married women, of independence for all, is actively followed cannot fail to be favorable to the practice of abortion. But the way in which the prevalence of abortion is proclaimed in the United States is probably in large part due to the honesty of the Americans in setting forth, and endeavoring to correct, what, rightly or wrongly, they regard as social defects, and may not indicate any real pre-eminence in the practice. Comparative statistics are difficult, and it is certainly true that abortion is extremely common in England, in France, and in Germany. It is probable that any national differences may be accounted for by differences in general social habits and ideals. Thus in Germany, where considerable sexual freedom is permitted to unmarried women and married women are very domesticated, abortion may be less frequent than in France where purity is stringently demanded from the young girl, while the married woman demands freedom for work and for pleasure. But such national differences, if they exist, are tending to be levelled down, and charges of criminal abortion are constantly becoming more common in Germany; though this increase, again, may be merely due to greater zeal in pursuing the offence.
It’s not surprising that abortion is very common in all civilized and progressive countries. Unfortunately, it can't be said that abortion has been carried out with eugenic considerations in mind, nor has it often been advocated from that perspective. However, in many cases of unwanted pregnancy, especially among women of character and determination who aren't willing to accept situations they didn’t choose and find undesirable, abortion is often seen as a solution. The United States is often viewed as a place where this practice is particularly widespread, and it's true that a society that actively promotes ideals of chastity for unmarried women, freedom for married women, and independence for everyone is likely to be more accepting of abortion. The perception of abortion's prevalence in the U.S. is probably largely due to the honesty of Americans in discussing and attempting to address what they see as social issues, rather than indicating an actual superiority in the practice. Comparative statistics can be challenging to interpret, and it's certainly clear that abortion is also very common in England, France, and Germany. Any national differences might be attributed to variations in social habits and ideals. For example, in Germany, where unmarried women have some sexual freedom and married women tend to lead more domestic lives, the rate of abortion may be lower than in France, where strict purity is expected of young girls and married women seek both work and leisure. However, if such national differences do exist, they are becoming less pronounced, and reports of illegal abortions are increasingly common in Germany; though this rise may simply reflect a greater effort to address the crime.
Brouardel (op. cit., p. 39) quotes the opinion that, in New York, only one in every thousand abortions is discovered. Dr. J. F. Scott (The Sexual Instinct, Ch. VIII), who is himself strongly opposed to the practice, considers that in America, the custom of procuring abortion has to-day reached "such vast proportions as to be almost beyond belief," while "countless thousands" of cases are never reported. "It has increased so rapidly in our day and generation," Scott states, "that it has created surprise and alarm in the minds of all conscientious persons who are informed of the extent to which it is carried." (The assumption that those who approve of abortion are necessarily not "conscientious persons" is, as we shall see, mistaken.) The change has taken place since 1840. The Michigan Special Committee on Criminal Abortion reported in 1881 that, from correspondence with nearly one hundred physicians, it appeared that there came to the knowledge of the profession seventeen abortions to every one hundred pregnancies; to these, the committee believe, may be added as many more that never came to the physician's knowledge. The committee further quoted, though without endorsement, the opinion of a physician who believed that a change is now coming over public feeling in regard to the abortionist, who is beginning to be regarded in America as a useful member of society, and even a benefactor.
Brouardel (op. cit., p. 39) reports the view that in New York, only one in every thousand abortions is detected. Dr. J. F. Scott (The Sexual Instinct, Ch. VIII), who is strongly against the practice, believes that in America, the trend of getting abortions has now reached "such vast levels as to be almost unbelievable," while "countless thousands" of cases go unreported. "It has grown so quickly in our time," Scott states, "that it has caused surprise and concern among all responsible individuals who are aware of how widespread it has become." (The idea that those who support abortion are not necessarily "responsible individuals" is, as we will see, incorrect.) This shift has occurred since 1840. The Michigan Special Committee on Criminal Abortion reported in 1881 that, based on correspondence with nearly one hundred physicians, it seemed that there were seventeen abortions for every one hundred pregnancies known to the profession; the committee believes that many more cases went undetected by physicians. The committee also cited, though without endorsing, the opinion of a doctor who felt that public attitudes toward abortion providers are changing, and they are starting to be viewed in America as valuable members of society, even as benefactors.
In England, also, there appears to have been a marked increase of abortion during recent years, perhaps specially marked among the poor and hard-working classes. A writer in the British Medical Journal (April 9, 1904, p. 865) finds that abortion is "wholesale and systematic," and gives four cases occurring in his practice during four months, in which women either attempted to produce abortion, or requested him to do so; they were married women, usually with large families, and in delicate health, and were willing to endure any suffering, if they might be saved from further child-bearing. Abortion is frequently effected, or attempted, by taking "Female Pills," which contain small portions of lead, and are thus liable to produce very serious symptoms, whether or not they induce abortion. Professor Arthur Hall, of Sheffield, who has especially studied this use of lead ("The Increasing Use of Lead as an Abortifacient," British Medical Journal, March 18, 1905), finds that the practice has lately become very common in the English Midlands, and is gradually, it appears, widening its circle. It occurs chiefly among married women with families, belonging to the working class, and it tends to become specially prevalent during periods of trade depression (cf. G. Newman, Infant Mortality, p. 81). Women of better social class resort to professional abortionists, and sometimes go over to Paris.
In England, there seems to have been a significant rise in abortion in recent years, particularly among the poor and working-class people. A contributor to the British Medical Journal (April 9, 1904, p. 865) states that abortion is "widespread and systematic," citing four cases from his practice over four months, where women either attempted to have an abortion or asked him to perform one; these were married women, often with large families and in fragile health, who were willing to endure any pain to avoid having more children. Abortion is often carried out or attempted by using "Female Pills," which contain small amounts of lead, posing the risk of severe symptoms, regardless of whether they lead to abortion. Professor Arthur Hall from Sheffield, who has specifically researched this use of lead ("The Increasing Use of Lead as an Abortifacient," British Medical Journal, March 18, 1905), notes that this practice has recently become quite common in the English Midlands and seems to be expanding. It primarily occurs among married women with families in the working class, and it tends to increase during times of economic downturn (cf. G. Newman, Infant Mortality, p. 81). Women from higher social classes tend to seek out professional abortionists, sometimes traveling to Paris to do so.
In France, also, and especially in Paris, there has been a great increase during recent years in the practice of abortion. (See e.g., a discussion at the Paris Société de Médecine Légale, Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, May, 1907.) Doléris has shown (Bulletin de la Société d'Obstétrique, Feb., 1905) that in the Paris Maternités the percentage of abortions in pregnancies doubled between 1898 and 1904, and Doléris estimates that about half of these abortions were artificially induced. In France, abortion is mainly carried on by professional abortionists. One of these, Mme. Thomas, who was condemned to penal servitude, in 1891, acknowledged performing 10,000 abortions during eight years; her charge for the operation was two francs and upwards. She was a peasant's daughter, brought up in the home of her uncle, a doctor, whose medical and obstetrical books she had devoured (A. Hamon, La France en 1891, pp. 629-631). French public opinion is lenient to abortion, especially to women who perform the operation on themselves; not many cases are brought into court, and of these, forty per cent. are acquitted (Eugène Bausset, L'Avortement Criminel, Thèse de Paris, 1907). The professional abortionist is, however, usually sent to prison.
In France, particularly in Paris, there has been a significant rise in the practice of abortion in recent years. (See e.g., a discussion at the Paris Société de Médecine Légale, Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, May 1907.) Doléris has shown (Bulletin de la Société d'Obstétrique, Feb. 1905) that in the Paris Maternités, the rate of abortions in pregnancies doubled between 1898 and 1904, and Doléris estimates that about half of these abortions were artificially induced. In France, abortion is mainly conducted by professional abortionists. One of these, Mme. Thomas, who was sentenced to penal servitude in 1891, admitted to performing 10,000 abortions over eight years; her fee for the procedure started at two francs. She was a peasant's daughter, raised in the home of her uncle, a doctor, whose medical and obstetrical books she had thoroughly studied (A. Hamon, La France en 1891, pp. 629-631). French public opinion is generally tolerant of abortion, especially regarding women who perform the procedure on themselves; not many cases are taken to court, and of those, forty percent are acquitted (Eugène Bausset, L'Avortement Criminel, Thèse de Paris, 1907). However, professional abortionists typically face imprisonment.
In Germany, also, abortion appears to have greatly increased during recent years, and the yearly number of cases of criminal abortion brought into the courts was, in 1903, more than double as many as in 1885. (See, also, Elisabeth Zanzinger, Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. II, Heft 5; and Sexual-Probleme, Jan., 1908, p. 23.)
In Germany, abortion also seems to have significantly increased in recent years, and the annual number of criminal abortion cases brought to court in 1903 was more than double what it was in 1885. (See, also, Elisabeth Zanzinger, Gender and Society, Vol. II, Issue 5; and Sexual Issues, Jan. 1908, p. 23.)
In view of these facts it is not surprising that the induction of abortion has been permitted and even encouraged in many civilizations. Its unqualified condemnation is only found in Christendom, and is due to theoretical notions. In Turkey, under ordinary circumstances, there is no punishment for abortion. In the classic civilization of Greece and Rome, likewise, abortion was permitted though with certain qualifications and conditions. Plato admitted the mother's right to decide on abortion but said that the question should be settled as early as possible in pregnancy. Aristotle, who approved of abortion, was of the same opinion. Zeno and the Stoics regarded the fœtus as the fruit of the womb, the soul being acquired at birth; this was in accordance with Roman law which decreed that the fœtus only became a human being at birth.[438] Among the Romans abortion became very common, but, in accordance with the patriarchal basis of early Roman institutions, it was the father, not the mother, who had the right to exercise it. Christianity introduced a new circle of ideas based on the importance of the soul, on its immortality, and the necessity of baptism as a method of salvation from the results of inherited sin. We already see this new attitude in St. Augustine who, discussing whether embryos that died in the womb will rise at the resurrection, says "I make bold neither to affirm nor to deny, although I fail to see why, if they are not excluded from the number of the dead, they should not attain to the resurrection of the dead."[439] The criminality of abortion was, however, speedily established, and the early Christian Emperors, in agreement with the Church, edicted many fantastic and extreme penalties against abortion. This tendency continued under ecclesiastical influence, unrestrained, until the humanitarian movement of the eighteenth century, when Beccaria, Voltaire, Rousseau and other great reformers succeeded in turning the tide of public opinion against the barbarity of the laws, and the penalty of death for abortion was finally abolished.[440]
In light of these facts, it's not surprising that abortion has been allowed and even encouraged in many cultures. Its complete condemnation is primarily found in Christian societies, based on theoretical ideas. In Turkey, under normal circumstances, there's no punishment for abortion. Similarly, in ancient Greece and Rome, abortion was allowed, though with specific conditions and limits. Plato acknowledged a mother's right to choose abortion but argued that this decision should be made as early as possible in a pregnancy. Aristotle, who also supported abortion, shared this view. Zeno and the Stoics saw the fetus as merely the fruit of the womb, with the soul entering at birth; this concept aligned with Roman law, which stated that a fetus only became a human being at birth.[438] Among the Romans, abortion became quite common, but, based on the patriarchal nature of early Roman society, it was the father, not the mother, who held the right to decide. Christianity introduced a new set of beliefs focused on the significance of the soul, its immortality, and the necessity of baptism for salvation from the effects of original sin. This shift in perspective can be seen in St. Augustine, who, when discussing whether embryos that died in the womb would be resurrected, stated, "I dare not affirm nor deny, although I do not understand why, if they are not excluded from the number of the dead, they should not achieve the resurrection of the dead."[439] However, the idea that abortion was a crime was quickly established, and the early Christian Emperors, in agreement with the Church, enacted many harsh and extreme penalties against abortion. This trend continued under church influence unabated until the humanitarian movement of the eighteenth century, when reformers like Beccaria, Voltaire, Rousseau, and others succeeded in changing public opinion against the brutality of these laws, leading to the eventual abolition of the death penalty for abortion.[440]
Medical science and practice at the present day—although it can scarcely be said that it speaks with an absolutely unanimous voice—on the whole occupies a position midway between that of the classic lawyers and that of the later Christian ecclesiastics. It is, on the whole, in favor of sacrificing the fœtus whenever the interests of the mother demand such a sacrifice. General medical opinion is not, however, prepared at present to go further, and is distinctly disinclined to aid the parents in exerting an unqualified control over the fœtus in the womb, nor is it yet disposed to practice abortion on eugenic grounds. It is obvious, indeed, that medicine cannot in this matter take the initiative, for it is the primary duty of medicine to save life. Society itself must assume the responsibility of protecting the race.
Medical science and practice today—although it can't be said to have a completely unified stance—generally finds itself somewhere between the views of traditional lawyers and those of later Christian leaders. Overall, it leans toward the idea of sacrificing the fetus when the mother's interests require such a choice. However, the prevailing medical opinion is not ready to take this further and is clearly reluctant to support parents in having unrestricted control over the fetus in the womb, nor does it lean towards performing abortions for eugenic reasons. It's clear that medicine cannot take the lead on this issue, as its main duty is to preserve life. Society as a whole must take responsibility for safeguarding the future of the human race.
Dr. S. Macvie ("Mother versus Child," Transactions Edinburgh Obstetrical Society, vol. xxiv, 1899) elaborately discusses the respective values of the fœtus and the adult on the basis of life-expectancy, and concludes that the fœtus is merely "a parasite performing no function whatever," and that "unless the life-expectancy of the child covers the years in which its potentiality is converted into actuality, the relative values of the maternal and fœtal life will be that of actual as against potential." This statement seems fairly sound. Ballantyne (Manual of Antenatal Pathology: The Fœtus, p. 459) endeavors to make the statement more precise by saying that "the mother's life has a value, because she is what she is, while the fœtus only has a possible value, on account of what it may become."
Dr. S. Macvie ("Mother versus Child," Transactions Edinburgh Obstetrical Society, vol. xxiv, 1899) details the respective values of the fetus and the adult based on life expectancy, concluding that the fetus is essentially "a parasite performing no function whatsoever," and that "unless the life expectancy of the child includes the years during which its potential is turned into reality, the relative value of maternal and fetal life will be based on the actual versus the potential." This statement seems quite sound. Ballantyne (Manual of Antenatal Pathology: The Fetus, p. 459) tries to clarify this by stating that "the mother's life has value because of who she is, while the fetus only has potential value due to what it might become."
Durlacher, among others, has discussed, in careful and cautious detail, the various conditions in which the physician should, or should not, induce abortion in the interests of the mother ("Der Künstliche Abort," Wiener Klinik, Aug. and Sept., 1906); so also, Eugen Wilhelm ("Die Abtreibung und das Recht des Arztes zur Vernichtung der Leibesfrucht," Sexual-Probleme, May and June, 1909). Wilhelm further discusses whether it is desirable to alter the laws in order to give the physician greater freedom in deciding on abortion. He concludes that this is not necessary, and might even act injuriously, by unduly hampering medical freedom. Any change in the law should merely be, he considers, in the direction of asserting that the destruction of the fœtus is not abortion in the legal sense, provided it is indicated by the rules of medical science. With reference to the timidity of some medical men in inducing abortion, Wilhelm remarks that, even in the present state of the law, the physician who conscientiously effects abortion, in accordance with his best knowledge, even if mistakenly, may consider himself safe from all legal penalties, and that he is much more likely to come in conflict with the law if it can be proved that death followed as a result of his neglect to induce abortion.
Durlacher, among others, has discussed in careful detail the various situations in which a doctor should or shouldn't perform an abortion for the sake of the mother ("Der Künstliche Abort," Wiener Klinik, Aug. and Sept., 1906); similarly, Eugen Wilhelm ("Die Abtreibung und das Recht des Arztes zur Vernichtung der Leibesfrucht," Sexual-Probleme, May and June, 1909) also addresses this topic. Wilhelm further explores whether it's advisable to change the laws to give physicians more freedom in deciding about abortions. He concludes that this isn't necessary and could actually be harmful by excessively restricting medical freedom. Any changes in the law should simply clarify that the destruction of the fetus isn't considered abortion in the legal sense, as long as it's justified by medical science. Regarding the hesitation of some doctors in performing abortions, Wilhelm notes that, even under the current legal framework, a physician who responsibly carries out an abortion, based on their best knowledge—even if incorrect—can consider themselves protected from legal consequences. In fact, they are much more likely to face legal issues if it can be shown that a patient's death was a result of their failure to perform an abortion.
Pinard, who has discussed the right to control the fœtal life (Annales de Gynécologie, vols. lii and liii, 1899 and 1900), inspired by his enthusiastic propaganda for the salvation of infant life, is led to the unwarranted conclusion that no one has the rights of life and death over the fœtus; "the infant's right to his life is an imprescriptible and sacred right, which no power can take from him." There is a mistake here, unless Pinard deliberately desires to place himself, like Tolstoy, in opposition to current civilized morality. So far from the infant having any "imprescriptible right to life," even the adult has, in human societies, no such inalienable right, and very much less the fœtus, which is not strictly a human being at all. We assume the right of terminating the lives of those individuals whose anti-social conduct makes them dangerous, and, in war, we deliberately terminate, amid general applause and enthusiasm, the lives of men who have been specially selected for this purpose on account of their physical and general efficiency. It would be absurdly inconsistent to say that we have no rights over the lives of creatures that have, as yet, no part in human society at all, and are not so much as born. We are here in presence of a vestige of ancient theological dogma, and there can be little doubt that, on the theoretical side at all events, the "imprescriptible right" of the embryo will go the same way as the "imprescriptible right" of the spermatozöon. Both rights are indeed "imprescriptible."
Pinard, who has talked about the right to control fetal life (Annales de Gynécologie, vols. lii and liii, 1899 and 1900), driven by his passionate advocacy for saving infant lives, comes to the baseless conclusion that no one has the right to decide the fate of the fetus; "the infant's right to life is an imprescriptible and sacred right, which no power can take from him." This is a mistake unless Pinard intentionally wants to position himself, like Tolstoy, against established moral beliefs. Far from the infant having any "imprescriptible right to life," even adults in human societies don’t possess such an inalienable right, and much less so does the fetus, which isn’t even fully recognized as a human being. We claim the right to end the lives of individuals whose harmful actions pose a threat, and in war, we consciously end the lives of men who have been specially chosen for this purpose based on their physical capabilities and overall effectiveness, often with widespread support and enthusiasm. It would be incredibly inconsistent to claim we have no rights over the lives of beings that haven’t yet participated in human society and aren’t even born. This represents a remnant of outdated theological beliefs, and it’s almost certain that, theoretically speaking, the "imprescriptible right" of the embryo will fade away just like the "imprescriptible right" of the sperm. Both rights are indeed "imprescriptible."
Of recent years a new, and, it must be admitted, somewhat unexpected, aspect of this question of abortion has been revealed. Hitherto it has been a question entirely in the hands of men, first, following the Roman traditions, in the hands of Christian ecclesiastics, and later, in those of the professional castes. Yet the question is in reality very largely, and indeed mainly, a woman's question, and now, more especially in Germany, it has been actively taken up by women. The Gräfin Gisela Streitberg occupies the pioneering place in this movement with her book Das Recht zur Beiseitigung Keimenden Lebens, and was speedily followed, from 1897 onwards, by a number of distinguished women who occupy a prominent place in the German woman's movement, among others Helene Stöcker, Oda Olberg, Elisabeth Zanzinger, Camilla Jellinek. All these writers insist that the fœtus is not yet an independent human being, and that every woman, by virtue of the right over her own body, is entitled to decide whether it shall become an independent human being. At the Woman's Congress held in the autumn of 1905, a resolution was passed demanding that abortion should only be punishable when effected by another person against the wish of the pregnant women herself.[441] The acceptance of this resolution by a representative assembly is interesting proof of the interest now taken by women in the question, and of the strenuous attitude they are tending to assume.
In recent years, a new and somewhat unexpected angle on the issue of abortion has emerged. Until now, it has been a topic entirely controlled by men, initially through Christian clerics following Roman traditions, and later by professionals in various fields. However, this issue is fundamentally a women’s issue, and especially in Germany, it has been actively embraced by women. Countess Gisela Streitberg is at the forefront of this movement with her book Das Recht zur Beiseitigung Keimenden Lebens, and she was soon joined from 1897 onward by several notable women who are prominent in the German women’s movement, including Helene Stöcker, Oda Olberg, Elisabeth Zanzinger, and Camilla Jellinek. All these authors argue that the fetus is not yet an independent human being and that every woman, by virtue of her right over her own body, has the authority to decide whether it will develop into an independent human being. During the Women’s Congress held in the fall of 1905, a resolution was passed stating that abortion should only be punishable if performed by someone else against the wishes of the pregnant woman herself.[441] The passage of this resolution by a representative assembly is an interesting indication of the growing involvement of women in this issue and the determined stance they are starting to take.
Elisabeth Zanzinger ("Verbrechen gegen die Leibesfrucht," Geschlecht und Gesellschaft, Bd. II, Heft 5, 1907) ably and energetically condemns the law which makes abortion a crime. "A woman herself is the only legitimate possessor of her own body and her own health.... Just as it is a woman's private right, and most intimate concern, to present her virginity as her best gift to the chosen of her heart, so it is certainly a pregnant woman's own private concern if, for reasons which seem good to her, she decides to destroy the results of her action." A woman who destroys the embryo which might become a burden to the community, or is likely to be an inferior member of society, this writer urges, is doing a service to the community, which ought to reward her, perhaps by granting her special privileges as regards the upbringing of her other children. Oda Olberg, in a thoughtful paper ("Ueber den Juristischen Schutz des Keimenden Lebens," Die Neue Generation, June, 1908), endeavors to make clear all that is involved in the effort to protect the developing embryo against the organism that carries it, to protect a creature, that is, against itself and its own instincts. She considers that most of the women who terminate their pregnancies artificially would only have produced undesirables, for the normal, healthy, robust woman has no desire to effect abortion. "There are women who are psychically sterile, without being physically so, and who possess nothing of motherhood but the ability to bring forth. These, when they abort, are simply correcting a failure of Nature." Some of them, she remarks, by going on to term, become guilty of the far worse offence of infanticide. As for the women who desire abortion merely from motives of vanity, or convenience, Oda Olberg points out that the circles in which these motives rule are quite able to limit their children without having to resort to abortion. She concludes that society must protect the young life in every way, by social hygiene, by laws for the protection of the workers, by spreading a new morality on the basis of the laws of heredity. But we need no law to protect the young creature against its own mother, for a thousand natural forces are urging the mother to protect her own child, and we may be sure that she will not disobey these forces without very good reasons. Camilla Jellinek, again (Die Strafrechtsreform, etc., Heidelberg, 1909), in a powerful and well-informed address before the Associated German Frauenvereine, at Breslau, argues in the same sense.
Elisabeth Zanzinger ("Crimes Against the Fetus," Gender and Society, Vol. II, Issue 5, 1907) strongly and energetically criticizes the law that makes abortion a crime. "A woman is the only rightful owner of her own body and health.... Just like it’s a woman's personal right and most intimate matter to offer her virginity as her best gift to the one she loves, it’s certainly a pregnant woman’s decision to choose, for reasons that make sense to her, whether to terminate the results of her actions." A woman who ends a pregnancy that might become a burden to society or is likely to result in a less-than-desirable member of the community, this writer argues, is doing a service to the community, which should reward her, perhaps by granting her special privileges regarding the upbringing of her other children. Oda Olberg, in a thoughtful article ("On the Legal Protection of Developing Life," The New Generation, June, 1908), tries to clarify everything involved in the effort to protect the developing embryo from the organism that carries it, to protect a being, that is, from itself and its instincts. She believes that most women who choose to end their pregnancies would have only produced children who would be undesirable, as a normal, healthy woman has no desire to terminate a pregnancy. "There are women who are psychologically sterile, even though they are physically capable, and who have nothing of motherhood aside from the ability to give birth. When they choose to abort, they are simply correcting a flaw in Nature." Some of them, she notes, by going on to have children, become guilty of the far worse crime of infanticide. As for women seeking abortion merely out of vanity or convenience, Oda Olberg points out that the social circles where these motivations prevail are quite capable of controlling their family size without resorting to abortion. She concludes that society must protect the young life in every way, through social hygiene, laws for worker protection, and fostering a new morality based on the laws of heredity. However, we don't need laws to protect a young being from its own mother, as countless natural instincts are prompting the mother to safeguard her child, and we can be confident that she won’t ignore these instincts without very good reasons. Camilla Jellinek, again (The Criminal Law Reform, etc., Heidelberg, 1909), in a strong and informed speech to the Associated German Women's Associations in Breslau, argues similarly.
The lawyers very speedily came to the assistance of the women in this matter, the more readily, no doubt, since the traditions of the greatest and most influential body of law already pointed, on one side at all events, in the same direction. It may, indeed, be claimed that it was from the side of law—and in Italy, the classic land of legal reform—that this new movement first begun. In 1888, Balestrini published, at Turin, his Aborto, Infanticidio ed Esposizione d'Infante, in which he argued that the penalty should be removed from abortion. It was a very able and learned book, inspired by large ideas and a humanitarian spirit, but though its importance is now recognized, it cannot be said that it attracted much attention on publication.
The lawyers quickly came to help the women in this situation, especially since the traditions of the most prominent and powerful legal body already pointed, at least in one direction, toward this cause. It can be argued that this new movement first gained traction from the legal perspective—and in Italy, the birthplace of legal reform. In 1888, Balestrini published his book Aborto, Infanticidio ed Esposizione d'Infante in Turin, where he argued that the penalty for abortion should be removed. It was a well-written and scholarly book, driven by big ideas and a humanitarian spirit, but while its significance is now acknowledged, it didn’t attract much attention when it was first published.
It is especially in Germany that, during recent years, lawyers have followed women reformers, by advocating, more or less completely, the abolition of the punishment for abortion. So distinguished an authority as Von Liszt, in a private letter to Camilla Jellinek (op. cit.), states that he regards the punishment of abortion as "very doubtful," though he considers its complete abolition impracticable; he thinks abortion might be permitted during the early months of pregnancy, thus bringing about a return of the old view. Hans Gross states his opinion (Archiv für Kriminal-Anthropologie, Bd. XII, p. 345) that the time is not far distant when abortion will no longer be punished. Radbruch and Von Lilienthal speak in the same sense. Weinberg has advocated a change in the law (Mutterschutz, 1905, Heft 8), and Kurt Hiller (Die Neue Generation, April, 1909), also from the legal side, argues that abortion should only be punishable when effected by a married woman, without the knowledge and consent of her husband.
It is especially in Germany that, in recent years, lawyers have followed women reformers by advocating, to varying degrees, for the abolition of the punishment for abortion. A prominent authority like Von Liszt, in a private letter to Camilla Jellinek (op. cit.), states that he views the punishment for abortion as "very questionable," although he believes that a complete abolition is impractical; he suggests that abortion might be allowed during the early months of pregnancy, thus reviving the old perspective. Hans Gross expresses his view (Archiv für Kriminal-Anthropologie, Bd. XII, p. 345) that the time is not far off when abortion will no longer be penalized. Radbruch and Von Lilienthal express similar sentiments. Weinberg has pushed for a change in the law (Mutterschutz, 1905, Heft 8), and Kurt Hiller (Die Neue Generation, April, 1909), also from a legal perspective, argues that abortion should only be punishable if performed by a married woman without her husband's knowledge and consent.
The medical profession, which took the first step in modern times in the authorization of abortion, has not at present taken any further step. It has been content to lay down the principle that when the interests of the mother are opposed to those of the fœtus, it is the latter which must be sacrificed. It has hesitated to take the further step of placing abortion on the eugenic basis, and of claiming the right to insist on abortion whenever the medical and hygienic interests of society demand such a step. This attitude is perfectly intelligible. Medicine has in the past been chiefly identified with the saving of lives, even of worthless and worse than worthless lives; "Keep everything alive! Keep everything alive!" nervously cried Sir James Paget. Medicine has confined itself to the humble task of attempting to cure evils, and is only to-day beginning to undertake the larger and nobler task of preventing them.
The medical profession, which first took a stand on abortion in modern times, hasn't moved forward since then. It has accepted the principle that when the mother's interests conflict with those of the fetus, the latter must be sacrificed. It has been reluctant to take the next step of justifying abortion on eugenic grounds and to assert the right to mandate abortion whenever the medical and health interests of society require it. This position is completely understandable. In the past, medicine has primarily been focused on saving lives, even those deemed worthless or worse; "Keep everything alive! Keep everything alive!" Sir James Paget anxiously exclaimed. Medicine has limited itself to the modest goal of trying to cure problems and is only now starting to take on the broader and more noble task of preventing them.
"The step from killing the child in the womb to murdering a person when out of the womb, is a dangerously narrow one," sagely remarks a recent medical author, probably speaking for many others, who somehow succeed in blinding themselves to the fact that this "dangerously narrow step" has been taken by mankind, only too freely, for thousands of years past, long before abortion was known in the world.
"The leap from terminating a pregnancy to committing murder once the baby is born is a dangerously small one," wisely points out a recent medical writer, likely echoing the sentiments of many others who manage to ignore the fact that this "dangerously small leap" has been taken by humanity far too easily for thousands of years, long before abortion existed in the world.
Here and there, however, medical authors of repute have advocated the further extension of abortion, with precautions, and under proper supervision, as an aid to eugenic progress. Thus, Professor Max Flesch (Die Neue Generation, April, 1909) is in favor of a change in the law permitting abortion (provided it is carried out by the physician) in special cases, as when the mother's pregnancy has been due to force, when she has been abandoned, or when, in the interests of the community, it is desirable to prevent the propagation of insane, criminal, alcoholic, or tuberculous persons.
Here and there, some respected medical authors have supported the idea of expanding access to abortion, with precautions and proper oversight, as a way to promote eugenic progress. For instance, Professor Max Flesch (Die Neue Generation, April 1909) advocates for a legal change that would allow abortions (as long as they are performed by a doctor) in specific situations, such as when a mother became pregnant due to violence, when she has been abandoned, or when it's deemed necessary for the community to prevent the births of individuals with mental illness, criminal tendencies, alcoholism, or tuberculosis.
In France, a medical man, Dr. Jean Darricarrère, has written a remarkable novel, Le Droit d'Avortement (1906), which advocates the thesis that a woman always possesses a complete right to abortion, and is the supreme judge as to whether she will or not undergo the pain and risks of childbirth. The question is, here, however, obviously placed not on medical, but on humanitarian and feminist grounds.
In France, a doctor named Dr. Jean Darricarrère has written an impressive novel, Le Droit d'Avortement (1906), which argues that a woman always has the full right to abortion and is the ultimate decision-maker about whether she wants to endure the pain and risks of childbirth. However, the focus here is clearly not on medical issues, but on humanitarian and feminist principles.
We have seen that, alike on the side of practice and of theory, a great change has taken place during recent years in the attitude towards abortion. It must, however, clearly be recognized that, unlike the control of procreation by methods for preventing conception, facultative abortion has not yet been embodied in our current social morality. If it is permissible to interpolate a personal opinion, I may say that to me it seems that our morality is here fairly reasonable.[442] I am decidedly of opinion that an unrestricted permission for women to practice abortion in their own interests, or even for communities to practice it in the interests of the race, would be to reach beyond the stage of civilization we have at present attained. As Ellen Key very forcibly argues, a civilization which permits, without protest, the barbarous slaughter of its carefully selected adults in war has not yet won the right to destroy deliberately even its most inferior vital products in the womb. A civilization guilty of so reckless a waste of life cannot safely be entrusted with this judicial function. The blind and aimless anxiety to cherish the most hopeless and degraded forms of life, even of unborn life, may well be a weakness, and since it often leads to incalculable suffering, even a crime. But as yet there is an impenetrable barrier against progress in this direction. Before we are entitled to take life deliberately for the sake of purifying life, we must learn how to preserve it by abolishing such destructive influences—war, disease, bad industrial conditions—as are easily within our social power as civilized nations.[443]
We’ve seen that there’s been a significant shift in how both practice and theory view abortion in recent years. However, it’s important to recognize that, unlike the control of reproduction through contraception, elective abortion hasn’t yet been accepted in our current social ethics. If I may share a personal opinion, it seems to me that our morality on this issue is fairly reasonable. I strongly believe that allowing women unrestricted access to abortion for their own interests, or even communities doing so for the greater good, would be a step beyond the level of civilization we’ve currently reached. As Ellen Key compellingly argues, a civilization that allows the brutal killing of its carefully selected adults in war, without objection, hasn’t earned the right to intentionally eliminate its least viable life forms in the womb. A society that recklessly wastes life cannot responsibly handle decisions about life and death. The blind, aimless drive to protect the most hopeless and degraded aspects of life, including unborn life, can be seen as a weakness and, since it often results in immense suffering, perhaps even a crime. But right now, there’s a significant barrier to progress in this area. Before we can morally justify taking life to enhance the quality of life, we need to learn how to preserve it by eliminating destructive influences—like war, disease, and poor industrial conditions—that are well within our control as civilized nations.
There is, further, another consideration which seems to me to carry weight. The progress of civilization is in the direction of greater foresight, of greater prevention, of a diminished need for struggling with the reckless lack of prevision. The necessity for abortion is precisely one of those results of reckless action which civilization tends to diminish. While we may admit that in a sounder state of civilization a few cases might still occur when the induction of abortion would be desirable, it seems probable that the number of such cases will decrease rather than increase. In order to do away with the need for abortion, and to counteract the propaganda in its favor, our main reliance must be placed, on the one hand, on increased foresight in the determination of conception and increased knowledge of the means for preventing conception,[444] and on the other hand, on a better provision by the State for the care of pregnant women, married and unmarried alike, and a practical recognition of the qualified mother's claim on society.[445] There can be little doubt that, in many a charge of criminal abortion, the real offence lies at the door of those who have failed to exercise their social and professional duty of making known the more natural and harmless methods for preventing conception, or else by their social attitude have made the pregnant woman's position intolerable. By active social reform in these two directions, the new movement in favor of abortion may be kept in check, and it may even be found that by stimulating such reform that movement has been beneficial.
There’s also another point that I think is important. The advancement of society is moving towards better planning, greater prevention, and a reduced need to deal with reckless decisions. The necessity for abortion is one of those outcomes of irresponsible behavior that society tends to reduce. While we can agree that in a healthier society, there may still be some situations where abortion could be seen as necessary, it’s likely that the number of those situations will decrease rather than increase. To eliminate the need for abortion and counter the promotion of it, we must focus, on one hand, on better planning around conception and more knowledge about how to prevent conception,[444] and on the other hand, on better support from the government for the care of pregnant women, whether married or unmarried, along with a practical acknowledgment of a qualified mother’s rights within society.[445] It’s clear that in many cases of illegal abortion, the real issue lies with those who have neglected their social and professional responsibilities to inform others about safer and more natural methods to prevent conception or have contributed to making the situation for pregnant women unbearable. Through active social reform in these two areas, the growing movement in favor of abortion can be controlled, and it may even turn out that encouraging such reforms has been beneficial to the cause.
We have seen that the deliberate restraint of conception has become a part of our civilized morality, and that the practice and theory of facultative abortion has gained a footing among us. There remains a third and yet more radical method of controlling procreation, the method of preventing the possibility of procreation altogether by the performance of castration or other slighter operation having a like inhibitory effect on reproduction. The other two methods only effect a single act of union or its results, but castration affects all subsequent acts of sexual union and usually destroys the procreative power permanently.
We have seen that intentionally limiting conception has become part of our modern morality, and that the practice and understanding of elective abortion has gained acceptance among us. There is also a third, more extreme way to control procreation, which involves completely preventing the possibility of procreation through castration or other less invasive procedures that similarly inhibit reproduction. The other two methods only affect a single sexual act or its outcomes, but castration impacts all future sexual acts and typically removes the ability to reproduce permanently.
Castration for various social and other purposes is an ancient and widespread practice, carried out on men and on animals. There has, however, been on the whole a certain prejudice against it when applied to men. Many peoples have attached a very sacred value to the integrity of the sexual organs. Among some primitive peoples the removal of these organs has been regarded as a peculiarly ferocious insult, only to be carried out in moments of great excitement, as after a battle. Medicine has been opposed to any interference with the sexual organs. The oath taken by the Greek physicians appears to prohibit castration: "I will not cut."[446] In modern times a great change has taken place, the castration of both men and women is commonly performed in diseased conditions; the same operation is sometimes advocated and occasionally performed in the hope that it may remove strong and abnormal sexual impulses. And during recent years castration has been invoked in the cause of negative eugenics, to a greater extent, indeed, on account of its more radical character, than either the prevention of conception or abortion.
Castration for various social and other reasons is an ancient and widespread practice, done on both men and animals. However, there has generally been a certain prejudice against its application to men. Many cultures have attached great importance to the integrity of the sexual organs. Among some primitive societies, the removal of these organs has been seen as an exceptionally brutal insult, only performed during moments of intense emotion, such as after a battle. The medical field has opposed any interference with the sexual organs. The oath taken by Greek physicians seems to prohibit castration: "I will not cut."[446] In modern times, a significant shift has occurred; the castration of both men and women is commonly performed in cases of disease. This procedure is sometimes recommended and occasionally done in hopes of eliminating strong and abnormal sexual urges. In recent years, castration has also been promoted for the purpose of negative eugenics, more significantly, in fact, because of its more radical nature compared to either the prevention of conception or abortion.
The movement in favor of castration appears to have begun in the United States, where various experiments have been made in embodying it in law. It was first advocated merely as a punishment for criminals, and especially sexual offenders, by Hammond, Everts, Lydston and others. From this point of view, however, it seems to be unsatisfactory and perhaps illegitimate. In many cases castration is no punishment at all, and indeed a positive benefit. In other cases, when inflicted against the subject's will, it may produce very disturbing mental effects, leading in already degenerate or unbalanced persons to insanity, criminality, and anti-social tendencies generally, much more dangerous than the original state. Eugenic considerations, which were later brought forward, constitute a much sounder argument for castration; in this case the castration is carried out, by no means in order to inflict a barbarous and degrading punishment, but, with the subject's consent, in order to protect the community from the risk of useless or mischievous members.
The push for castration seems to have started in the United States, where various attempts have been made to incorporate it into law. Initially, it was promoted solely as a punishment for criminals, particularly sexual offenders, by individuals like Hammond, Everts, Lydston, and others. However, from this perspective, it appears unsatisfactory and perhaps unjustified. In many instances, castration is not a punishment at all and can actually serve as a positive benefit. In other cases, when performed against a person's will, it may lead to significant mental disturbances, causing already troubled or unstable individuals to become insane, commit crimes, or develop anti-social behaviors that are much more dangerous than their original condition. Later, eugenics arguments emerged, providing a much stronger case for castration; in this context, the procedure is performed, not as a cruel and humiliating punishment, but with the individual’s consent, to safeguard the community from the potential dangers posed by unproductive or harmful members.
The fact that castration can no longer be properly considered a punishment, is shown by the possibility of deliberately seeking the operation simply for the sake of convenience, as a preferable and most effective substitute for the adoption of preventive methods in sexual intercourse. I am only at present acquainted with one case in which this course has been adopted. This subject is a medical man (of Puritan New England ancestry) with whose sexual history, which is quite normal, I have been acquainted for a long time past. His present age is thirty-nine. A few years since, having a sufficiently large family, he adopted preventive methods of intercourse. The subsequent events I narrate in his own words: "The trouble, forethought, etc., rendered necessary by preventive measures, grew more and more irksome to me as the years passed by, and finally, I laid the matter before another physician, and on his assurances, and after mature deliberation with my wife, was operated on some time since, and rendered sterile by having the vas deferens on each side exposed through a slit in the scrotum, then tied in two places with silk and severed between the ligatures. This was done under cocaine infiltrative anæsthesia, and was not so extremely painful, though what pain there was (dragging the cord out through the slit, etc.) seemed very hard to endure. I was not out of my office a single day, nor seriously disturbed in any way. In six days all stitches in the scrotum were removed, and in three weeks I abandoned the suspensory bandage that had been rendered necessary by the extreme sensitiveness of the testicles and cord.
The fact that castration can no longer be seen as a punishment is highlighted by the option of choosing the surgery for convenience, as a preferred and effective alternative to using preventive methods during sexual intercourse. I currently know of just one instance where this approach has been taken. The subject is a medical professional (of Puritan New England descent) whose normal sexual history I have been familiar with for a long time. He is thirty-nine years old now. A few years ago, after having a large family, he opted for preventive methods during intercourse. Here’s how he described the subsequent events: "The hassle, planning, and other factors needed for preventive measures became increasingly bothersome to me over the years. Eventually, I discussed the situation with another physician. Based on his advice and after careful consideration with my wife, I underwent the operation some time ago, becoming sterile by having the vas deferens on both sides exposed through a cut in the scrotum, tied in two places with silk, and then severed between the ligatures. This was performed under cocaine infiltrative anesthesia and wasn’t excessively painful, although the pain I did experience (like pulling the cord out through the cut) was quite hard to handle. I didn't take a single day off work and wasn't seriously affected in any way. Six days later, all stitches in the scrotum were removed, and in three weeks, I stopped using the suspensory bandage that had been necessary due to the extreme sensitivity of the testicles and cord."
"The operation has proved a most complete success in every way. Sexual functions are absolutely unaffected in any way whatsoever. There is no sense of discomfort or uneasiness in the sexual tract, and what seems strangest of all to me, is the fact that the semen, so far as one can judge by ordinary means of observation, is undiminished in quantity and unchanged in character. (Of course, the microscope would reveal its fatal lack.)
"The operation has been a total success in every way. Sexual functions are completely unaffected in every way at all. There’s no discomfort or uneasiness in the sexual area, and what seems the strangest of all to me is the fact that the semen, as far as one can tell by normal means of observation, is the same in quantity and unchanged in quality. (Of course, a microscope would show its serious deficiency.)
"My wife is delighted at having fear banished from our love, and, taken all in all, it certainly seems as if life would mean more to us both. Incidentally, the health of both of us seems better than usual, particularly so in my wife's case, and this she attributes to a soothing influence that is attained by allowing the seminal fluid to be deposited in a perfectly normal manner, and remain in contact with the vaginal secretions until it naturally passes off.
"My wife is thrilled that fear has been removed from our love, and overall, it really feels like life means more to both of us. By the way, we both seem healthier than usual, especially my wife, who believes this is due to a calming effect achieved by allowing the seminal fluid to be deposited in a completely normal way and stay in contact with the vaginal secretions until it naturally exits."
"This operation being comparatively new, and, as yet, not often done on others than the insane, criminal, etc., I thought it might be of interest to you. If I shed even the faintest ray of light on this greatest of all human problems ... I shall be glad indeed."
"This operation is relatively new and is still mostly performed only on the insane, criminals, and so on. I thought it might be of interest to you. If I can bring even the slightest insight into this greatest of all human issues... I would be very glad."
Such a case, with its so far satisfactory issue, certainly deserves to be placed on record, though it may well be that at present it will not be widely imitated.
Such a case, with its satisfactorily resolved outcome, definitely deserves to be documented, even though it might not be widely copied right now.
The earliest advocacy of castration, which I have met with as a part of negative eugenics, for the specific "purpose of prophylaxis as applied to race improvement and the protection of society," is by Dr. F. E. Daniel, of Texas, and dates from 1893.[447] Daniel mixed up, however, somewhat inextricably, castration as a method of purifying the race, a method which can be carried out with the concurrence of the individual operated on, with castration as a punishment, to be inflicted for rape, sodomy, bestiality, pederasty and even habitual masturbation, the method of its performance, moreover, to be the extremely barbarous and primitive method of total ablation of the sexual organs. In more recent years somewhat more equitable, practical, and scientific methods of castration have been advocated, not involving the removal of the sexual glands or organs, and not as a punishment, but simply for the sake of protecting the community and the race from the burden of probably unproductive and possibly dangerous members. Näcke has, from 1899 onwards, repeatedly urged the social advantages of this measure.[448] The propagation of the inferior elements of society, Näcke insists, brings unhappiness into the family and is a source of great expense to the State. He regards castration as the only effective method of prevention, and concludes that it is, therefore, our duty to adopt it, just as we have adopted vaccination, taking care to secure the consent of the subject himself or his guardian, of the civil authorities, and, if necessary, of a committee of experts. Professor Angelo Zuccarelli of Naples has also, from 1899 onwards, emphasized the importance of castration in the sterilization of the epileptic, the insane of various classes, the alcoholic, the tuberculous, and instinctive criminals, the choice of cases for operation to be made by a commission of experts who would examine school-children, candidates for public employments, or persons about to marry.[449] This movement rapidly gained ground, and in 1905 at the annual meeting of Swiss alienists it was unanimously agreed that the sterilization of the insane is desirable, and that it is necessary that the question should be legally regulated. It is in Switzerland, indeed, that the first steps have been taken in Europe to carry out castration as a measure of social prophylaxis. The sixteenth yearly report (1907) of the Cantonal asylum at Wil describes four cases of castration, two in men and two in women, performed—with the permission of the patients and the civil authorities—for social reasons; both women had previously had illegitimate children who were a burden on the community, and all four patients were sexually abnormal; the operation enabled the patients to be liberated and to work, and the results were considered in every respect satisfactory to all concerned.[450]
The earliest support for castration, which I found as part of negative eugenics, aimed at "preventing issues related to race improvement and protecting society," comes from Dr. F. E. Daniel of Texas, dating back to 1893.[447] Daniel, however, confusingly mixed castration as a way to purify the race—a method that can be done with the individual's consent—with castration as a punishment for crimes like rape, sodomy, bestiality, pederasty, and even habitual masturbation, using the extreme and primitive method of complete removal of sexual organs. In more recent years, more equitable, practical, and scientific methods of castration have been suggested, which do not involve removing sexual glands or organs and are not punitive, but simply aimed at protecting the community and society from potentially unproductive and possibly dangerous individuals. Näcke has repeatedly stressed the social benefits of this approach since 1899.[448] Näcke argues that allowing the propagation of inferior elements in society leads to family unhappiness and significant costs to the state. He sees castration as the only effective preventive method and concludes that we have a responsibility to adopt it, just as we accept vaccination, ensuring to obtain the subject’s consent or that of their guardian, the civil authorities, and, if necessary, a panel of experts. Professor Angelo Zuccarelli from Naples has also highlighted the importance of castration for the sterilization of epileptics, various classes of the insane, alcoholics, tuberculosis patients, and instinctive criminals since 1899, suggesting that a commission of experts should choose candidates for surgery by examining school children, public employment applicants, or those wishing to marry.[449] This movement quickly gained traction, and in 1905, at the annual meeting of Swiss alienists, it was unanimously agreed that sterilizing the insane is desirable and that the matter needs legal regulation. In Switzerland, indeed, early steps have been taken in Europe to implement castration as a social preventative measure. The sixteenth annual report (1907) of the Cantonal asylum at Wil describes four cases of castration—two in men and two in women—carried out with the consent of the patients and civil authorities for social reasons; both women had previously given birth to illegitimate children who were a burden on the community, and all four patients had sexual abnormalities; the operations allowed the patients to be released and to work, and the results were deemed satisfactory for everyone involved.[450]
The introduction of castration as a method of negative eugenics has been facilitated by the use of new methods of performing it without risk, and without actual removal of the testes or ovaries. For men, there is the simple method of vasectomy, as recommended by Näcke and many others. For women, there is the corresponding, and almost equally simple and harmless method of Kehrer, by section and ligation of the Fallopian tubes through the vagina, as recommended by Kisch, or Rose's very similar procedure, easily carried out in a few minutes by an experienced hand, as recommended by Zuccarelli.
The introduction of castration as a way of negative eugenics has been made easier by new techniques that allow it to be done without risk and without the actual removal of the testes or ovaries. For men, there's the straightforward method of vasectomy, as suggested by Näcke and many others. For women, there's the similar and almost equally simple and safe method developed by Kehrer, involving the cutting and tying of the Fallopian tubes through the vagina, as recommended by Kisch, or Rose's very similar procedure, which can be performed quickly in just a few minutes by someone experienced, as recommended by Zuccarelli.
It has been found that repeated exposure to the X-rays produces sterility in both sexes, alike in animals and men, and X-ray workers have to adopt various precautions to avoid suffering from this effect. It has been suggested that the application of the X-rays would be a good substitute for castration; it appears that the effects of the application are only likely to last a few years, which, in some doubtful cases, might be an advantage. (See British Medical Journal, Aug. 13, 1904; ib., March 11, 1905; ib., July 6, 1907.)
It has been found that repeated exposure to X-rays can cause sterility in both sexes, affecting both animals and humans, and X-ray workers need to take various precautions to avoid this issue. It has been suggested that using X-rays could be a viable alternative to castration; the effects of the treatment only seem to last a few years, which in some uncertain cases might actually be beneficial. (See British Medical Journal, Aug. 13, 1904; ib., March 11, 1905; ib., July 6, 1907.)
It is scarcely possible, it seems to me, to view castration as a method of negative eugenics with great enthusiasm. The recklessness, moreover, with which it is sometimes proposed to apply it by law—owing no doubt to the fact that it is not so obviously repulsive as the less radical procedure of abortion—ought to render us very cautious. We must, too, dismiss the idea of castration as a punishment; as such it is not merely barbarous but degrading and is unlikely to have a beneficial effect. As a method of negative eugenics it should never be carried out except with the subject's consent. The fact that in some cases it might be necessary to enforce seclusion in the absence of castration would doubtless be a fact exerting influence in favor of such consent; but the consent is essential if the subject of the operation is to be safeguarded from degradation. A man who has been degraded and embittered by an enforced castration might not be dangerous to posterity, but might very easily become a dangerous member of the society in which he actually lived. With due precautions and safeguards, castration may doubtless play a certain part in the elevation and improvement of the race.[451]
It seems almost impossible to view castration as a method of negative eugenics with any real enthusiasm. The carelessness with which it's sometimes suggested to implement it through law—probably because it doesn't seem as obviously repulsive as the more extreme measure of abortion—should make us very cautious. We also need to set aside the idea of castration as a punishment; it's not just cruel but also degrading and unlikely to have any positive outcomes. As a method of negative eugenics, it should only be performed with the subject's consent. While there might be cases where enforced separation could be necessary without castration, this fact would likely encourage individuals to give their consent; however, that consent is crucial to protect the person involved from degradation. A man who has been degraded and bitter as a result of involuntary castration might not pose a threat to future generations, but he could easily become a dangerous member of his community. With the right precautions and safeguards, castration could potentially play a role in the betterment and improvement of the race.[451]
The methods we have been considering, in so far as they limit the procreative powers of the less healthy and efficient stocks in a community, are methods of eugenics. It must not, however, be supposed that they are the whole of eugenics, or indeed that they are in any way essential to a eugenic scheme. Eugenics is concerned with the whole of the agencies which elevate and improve the human breed; abortion and castration are methods which may be used to this end, but they are not methods of which everyone approves, nor is it always clear that the ends they effect would not better be attained by other methods; in any case they are methods of negative eugenics. There remains the field of positive eugenics, which is concerned, not with the elimination of the inferior stocks but with ascertaining which are the superior stocks and with furthering their procreative power.
The methods we've been discussing, as far as they limit the reproductive abilities of the less healthy and efficient groups in a community, are considered methods of eugenics. However, it shouldn't be assumed that these are the entirety of eugenics, or that they are essential to a eugenics plan. Eugenics encompasses all strategies that elevate and improve the human race; while abortion and castration can be used to achieve this goal, not everyone agrees with these methods, and it's not always clear that the outcomes they produce couldn't be better achieved through other means. In any case, they represent negative eugenics. There's also the area of positive eugenics, which focuses not on eliminating inferior groups but on identifying superior groups and enhancing their reproductive capabilities.
While the necessity of refraining from procreation is no longer a bar to marriage, the question of whether two persons ought to marry each other still remains in the majority of cases a serious question from the standpoint of positive as well as of negative eugenics, for the normal marriage cannot fail to involve children, as, indeed, its chief and most desirable end. We have to consider not merely what are the stocks or the individuals that are unfit to breed, but also what are these stocks or individuals that are most fit to breed, and under what conditions procreation may best be effected. The present imperfection of our knowledge on these questions emphasizes the need for care and caution in approaching their consideration.
While the need to avoid having children is no longer a barrier to marriage, the question of whether two people should marry each other still remains a serious issue in most cases, from both a positive and a negative eugenics perspective. Normal marriage is naturally expected to involve children, as it is, indeed, its main and most desired purpose. We must think about not only which families or individuals are unfit to reproduce, but also which families or individuals are most suitable to reproduce, and under what circumstances procreation can be best achieved. Our current lack of complete knowledge on these matters highlights the importance of being careful and cautious when considering them.
It may be fitting, at this point, to refer to the experiment of the Oneida Community in establishing a system of scientific propagation, under the guidance of a man whose ability and distinction as a pioneer are only to-day beginning to be adequately recognized. John Humphrey Noyes was too far ahead of his own day to be recognized at his true worth; at the most, he was regarded as the sagacious and successful founder of a sect, and his attempts to apply eugenics to life only aroused ridicule and persecution, so that he was, unfortunately, compelled by outside pressure to bring a most instructive experiment to a premature end. His aim and principle are set forth in an Essay on Scientific Propagation, printed some forty years ago, which discusses problems that are only now beginning to attract the attention of the practical man, as within the range of social politics. When Noyes turned his vigorous and practical mind to the question of eugenics, that question was exclusively in the hands of scientific men, who felt all the natural timidity of the scientific man towards the realization of his proposals, and who were not prepared to depart a hair's breadth from the conventional customs of their time. The experiment of Noyes, at Oneida, marked a new stage in the history of eugenics; whatever might be the value of the experiment—and a first experiment cannot well be final—with Noyes the questions of eugenics passed beyond the purely academic stage in which, from the time of Plato, they had peacefully reposed. "It is becoming clear," Noyes states at the outset, "that the foundations of scientific society are to be laid in the scientific propagation of human beings." In doing this, we must attend to two things: blood (or heredity) and training; and he puts blood first. In that, he was at one with the most recent biometrical eugenists of to-day ("the nation has for years been putting its money on 'Environment,' when 'Heredity' wins in a canter," as Karl Pearson prefers to put it), and at the same time revealed the breadth of his vision in comparison with the ordinary social reformer, who, in that day, was usually a fanatical believer in the influence of training and surroundings. Noyes sets forth the position of Darwin on the principles of breeding, and the step beyond Darwin, which had been taken by Galton. He then remarks that, when Galton comes to the point where it is necessary to advance from theory to the duties the theory suggests, he "subsides into the meekest conservatism." (It must be remembered that this was written at an early stage in Galton's work.) This conclusion was entirely opposed to Noyes' practical and religious temperament. "Duty is plain; we say we ought to do it—we want to do it; but we cannot. The law of God urges us on; but the law of society holds us back. The boldest course is the safest. Let us take an honest and steady look at the law. It is only in the timidity of ignorance that the duty seems impracticable." Noyes anticipated Galton in regarding eugenics as a matter of religion.
It might be relevant now to mention the experiment of the Oneida Community in creating a system of scientific breeding, guided by a man whose talents and pioneering spirit are only just starting to get the recognition they deserve today. John Humphrey Noyes was too advanced for his time to be appreciated at his true value; at best, he was seen as a wise and successful founder of a sect, and his efforts to apply eugenics to life were met with mockery and hostility, which unfortunately forced him to end a very enlightening experiment prematurely. His goals and principles are laid out in an Essay on Scientific Propagation, published about forty years ago, discussing issues that are only now beginning to draw the attention of practical individuals, as within the scope of social policies. When Noyes applied his dynamic and practical approach to eugenics, that topic was solely in the hands of scientific professionals, who were filled with the usual hesitance that comes from proposing bold ideas and were unwilling to stray from the established customs of their era. Noyes’ experiment at Oneida represented a new direction in the history of eugenics; whatever its actual value—and a first experiment can’t be conclusive—Noyes moved the discussion of eugenics beyond the purely academic realm in which, since Plato’s time, it had comfortably rested. "It is becoming clear," Noyes states at the beginning, "that the foundations of a scientific society will be established through the scientific propagation of human beings." In doing this, we need to focus on two aspects: blood (or heredity) and training; and he emphasizes blood first. In this, he aligned with today’s most current biometric eugenists ("the nation has been investing in 'Environment' for years, while 'Heredity' wins easily," as Karl Pearson puts it), and at the same time showcased his broader perspective compared to the typical social reformer of his time, who generally held a strong belief in the impact of training and environment. Noyes outlines Darwin’s views on breeding principles and recognizes the advancement made by Galton beyond Darwin. He then notes that when Galton reaches the point of needing to move from theory to the actions that theory implies, he "subsides into the meekest conservatism." (It's important to remember that this was written early in Galton's career.) This conclusion was completely against Noyes' pragmatic and religious nature. "The duty is clear; we say we should do it—we want to do it; but we can’t. The law of God pushes us forward; but the law of society holds us back. The boldest path is the safest. Let’s honestly and steadily face the law. It is only in the fear of ignorance that the duty appears impossible." Noyes anticipated Galton in viewing eugenics as a religious issue.
Noyes proposed to term the work of modern science in propagation "Stirpiculture," in which he has sometimes been followed by others. He considered that it is the business of the stirpiculturist to keep in view both quantity and quality of stocks, and he held that, without diminishing quantity, it was possible to raise the quality by exercising a very stringent discrimination in selecting males. At this point, Noyes has been supported in recent years by Karl Pearson and others, who have shown that only a relatively small portion of a population is needed to produce the next generation, and that, in fact, twelve per cent. of one generation in man produces fifty per cent. of the next generation. What we need to ensure is that this small reproducing section of the population shall be the best adapted for the purpose. "The quantity of production will be in direct proportion to the number of fertile females," as Noyes saw the question, "and the value produced, so far as it depends on selection, will be nearly in inverse proportion to the number of fertilizing males." In this matter, Noyes anticipated Ehrenfels. The two principles to be held in mind were, "Breed from the best," and "Breed in-and-in," with a cautious and occasional introduction of new strains. (It may be noted that Reibmayr, in his recent Entwicklungsgeschichte des Genics und Talentes, argues that the superior races, and superior individuals, in the human species, have been produced by an unconscious adherence to exactly these principles.) "By segregating superior families, and by breeding these in-and-in, superior varieties of human beings might be produced, which would be comparable to the thoroughbreds in all the domestic races." He illustrates this by the early history of the Jews.
Noyes suggested calling the work of modern science in propagation "Stirpiculture," a term that others have occasionally adopted. He believed that it’s the stirpiculturist's job to focus on both the quantity and quality of breeding stocks. He argued that it is possible to enhance quality without reducing quantity by being very selective when choosing males. Recently, Karl Pearson and others have supported Noyes's view, demonstrating that only a relatively small part of a population is required to produce the next generation. In fact, twelve percent of one generation in humans contributes to fifty percent of the next. What we need to ensure is that this small reproducing group is the best suited for that purpose. "The quantity of production will be in direct proportion to the number of fertile females," according to Noyes, "and the value produced, as far as it relates to selection, will be nearly in inverse proportion to the number of fertilizing males." In this context, Noyes anticipated Ehrenfels. The two guiding principles to remember were, "Breed from the best," and "Breed in-and-in," while cautiously and occasionally introducing new strains. (It’s worth noting that Reibmayr, in his recent Entwicklungsgeschichte des Genics und Talentes, argues that superior races and individuals in the human species have emerged from an unconscious adherence to these very principles.) "By segregating superior families and breeding them in-and-in, superior varieties of humans could be produced that would be comparable to thoroughbreds in all domestic breeds." He illustrates this with the early history of the Jews.
Noyes finally criticises the present method, or lack of method, in matters of propagation. Our marriage system, he states, "leaves mating to be determined by a general scramble." By ignoring, also, the great difference between the sexes in reproductive power, it "restricts each man, whatever may be his potency and his value, to the amount of production of which one woman, chosen blindly, may be capable." Moreover, he continues, "practically it discriminates against the best, and in favor of the worst; for, while the good man will be limited by his conscience to what the law allows, the bad man, free from moral check, will distribute his seed beyond the legal limits, as widely as he dares." "We are safe every way in saying that there is no possibility of carrying the two precepts of scientific propagation into an institution which pretends to no discrimination, allows no suppression, gives no more liberty to the best than to the worst, and which, in fact, must inevitably discriminate the wrong way, so long as the inferior classes are most prolific and least amenable to the admonitions of science and morality." In modifying our sexual institutions, Noyes insists there are two essential points to remember: the preservation of liberty, and the preservation of the home. There must be no compulsion about human scientific propagation; it must be autonomous, directed by self-government, "by the free choice of those who love science well enough to 'make themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake.'" The home, also, must be preserved, since "marriage is the best thing for man as he is;" but it is necessary to enlarge the home, for, "if all could learn to love other children than their own, there would be nothing to hinder scientific propagation in the midst of homes far better than any that now exist."
Noyes finally critiques the current method, or lack of method, in terms of reproduction. He states that our marriage system "leaves mating to be determined by a general scramble." By disregarding the significant differences between the sexes in reproductive capacity, it "restricts each man, regardless of his ability or worth, to the production level of one woman, chosen at random." Furthermore, he adds that "practically, it discriminates against the best and in favor of the worst; for, while a decent man will be limited by his conscience to what the law permits, a bad man, unburdened by moral constraints, will spread his seed beyond the legal limits as widely as he dares." "We can confidently say that there is no way to apply the two principles of scientific reproduction in an institution that makes no distinctions, allows no restrictions, grants no more freedom to the best than to the worst, and which, in fact, will inevitably discriminate in the wrong direction, as long as the inferior classes are the most prolific and least responsive to the teachings of science and morality." In reforming our sexual institutions, Noyes emphasizes two key points to remember: the preservation of freedom and the preservation of the home. There must be no coercion regarding human scientific reproduction; it must be self-directed, guided by self-governance, "by the free choice of those who appreciate science enough to 'make themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake.'" The home must also be preserved, since "marriage is the best thing for man as he is;" however, it’s important to expand the concept of home because, "if everyone could learn to love children other than their own, there would be nothing to prevent scientific reproduction within homes that are far better than any we have now."
This memorable pamphlet contains no exposition of the precise measures adopted by the Oneida Community to carry out these principles. The two essential points were, as we know, "male continence" (see ante p. 553), and the enlarged family, in which all the men were the actual or potential mates of all the women, but no union for propagation took place, except as the result of reason and deliberate resolve. "The community," says H. J. Seymour, one of the original members (The Oneida Community, 1894, p. 5), "was a family, as distinctly separated from surrounding society as ordinary households. The tie that bound it together was as permanent, and at least as sacred, as that of marriage. Every man's care, and the whole of the common property, was pledged for the maintenance and protection of the women, and the support and education of the children." It is not probable that the Oneida Community presented in detail the model to which human society generally will conform. But even at the lowest estimate, its success showed, as Lord Morely has pointed out (Diderot, vol. ii, p. 19), "how modifiable are some of these facts of existing human character which are vulgarly deemed to be ultimate and ineradicable," and that "the discipline of the appetites and affections of sex," on which the future of civilization largely rests, is very far from an impossibility.
This memorable pamphlet doesn’t explain the exact measures the Oneida Community took to implement these principles. The two key points were, as we know, "male continence" (see ante p. 553), and the expanded family structure, where all the men were actual or potential partners of all the women, but no reproductive unions occurred unless due to reason and conscious decision. "The community," says H. J. Seymour, one of the original members (The Oneida Community, 1894, p. 5), "was a family, distinctly separate from the surrounding society like regular households. The bond that kept it together was as lasting and at least as sacred as marriage. Every man's care, along with all communal property, was dedicated to the maintenance and protection of the women and the support and education of the children." It’s unlikely that the Oneida Community outlined a model that human society in general will adopt. But even at a minimum, its success illustrated, as Lord Morley pointed out (Diderot, vol. ii, p. 19), "how adaptable some of these aspects of current human character are, which are commonly believed to be ultimate and unchangeable," and that "the regulation of sexual appetites and affections," which significantly influences the future of civilization, is far from impossible.
In many respects, the Oneida Community was ahead of its time,—and even of ours,—but it is interesting to note that, in the matter of the control of conception, our marriage system has come into line with the theory and practice of Oneida; it cannot, indeed, be said that we always control conception in accordance with eugenic principles, but the fact that such control has now become a generally accepted habit of civilization, to some extent deprives Noyes' criticism of our marriage system of the force it possessed half a century ago. Another change in our customs—the advocacy, and even the practice, of abortion and castration—would not have met with his approval; he was strongly opposed to both, and with the high moral level that ruled his community, neither was necessary to the maintenance of the stirpiculture that prevailed.
In many ways, the Oneida Community was ahead of its time—and even ours—but it's interesting to see that when it comes to controlling conception, our marriage system has aligned with the theory and practices of Oneida. While we can’t say that we always control conception based on eugenic principles, the fact that such control has become a generally accepted part of modern civilization somewhat weakens Noyes' criticism of our marriage system compared to how it was viewed fifty years ago. Another shift in our customs—the promotion and even the practice of abortion and castration—wouldn't have been accepted by him; he was strongly against both, and with the high moral standards in his community, neither was needed to maintain the stirpiculture that existed.
The Oneida Community endured for the space of one generation, and came to an end in 1879, by no means through a recognition of failure, but by a wise deference to external pressure. Its members, many of them highly educated, continued to cherish the memory of the practices and ideals of the Community. Noyes Miller (the author of The Strike of a Sex, and Zugassant's Discovery) to the last, looked with quiet confidence to the time when, as he anticipated, the great discovery of Noyes would be accepted and adopted by the world at large. Another member of the Community (Henry J. Seymour) wrote of the Community long afterwards that "It was an anticipation and imperfect miniature of the Kingdom of Heaven on earth."
The Oneida Community lasted for one generation and ended in 1879, not because of a failure, but due to a wise response to outside pressure. Its members, many of whom were well-educated, continued to hold dear the memories of the Community’s practices and ideals. Noyes Miller (the author of The Strike of a Sex and Zugassant's Discovery) always believed that one day, as he expected, his significant discovery would be recognized and embraced by the world. Another member of the Community, Henry J. Seymour, later described it as "an anticipation and imperfect miniature of the Kingdom of Heaven on earth."
Perhaps the commonest type of proposal or attempt to improve the biological level of the race is by the exclusion of certain classes of degenerates from marriage, or by the encouragement of better classes of the community to marry. This seems to be, at present, the most popular form of eugenics, and in so far as it is not effected by compulsion but is the outcome of a voluntary resolve to treat the question of the creation of the race with the jealous care and guardianship which so tremendously serious, so godlike, a task involves, it has much to be said in its favor and nothing against it.
Perhaps the most common way people propose to improve the biological quality of the race is by excluding certain classes of degenerates from marriage or encouraging better segments of the community to marry. This seems to be, at the moment, the most popular approach to eugenics, and as long as it’s not enforced by force but comes from a voluntary commitment to treat the issue of creating the race with the careful attention and protection that such a serious and divine task requires, there are plenty of positive aspects to it and nothing negative against it.
But it is quite another matter when the attempt is made to regulate such an institution as marriage by law. In the first place we do not yet know enough about the principles of heredity and the transmissibility of pathological states to enable us to formulate sound legislative proposals on this basis. Even so comparatively simple a matter as the relationship of tuberculosis to heredity can scarcely be said to be a matter of common agreement, even if it can yet be claimed that we possess adequate material on which to attain a common agreement. Supposing, moreover, that our knowledge on all these questions were far more advanced than it is, we still should not have attained a position in which we could lay down general propositions regarding the desirability or the undesirability of certain classes of persons procreating. The question is necessarily an individual question, and it can only be decided when all the circumstances of the individual case have been fairly passed in review.
But it's a completely different story when it comes to trying to regulate something like marriage through law. First of all, we still don’t know enough about heredity and how certain conditions can be passed down to create solid legal proposals. Even something as seemingly straightforward as the connection between tuberculosis and heredity isn’t something everyone agrees on, and we certainly don’t have enough data to reach a common understanding. Moreover, even if our knowledge on all these issues were much more advanced, we still wouldn’t be in a position to make broad statements about whether it’s good or bad for certain groups of people to have children. This issue is inherently individual, and it can only be resolved when all the specifics of each case have been carefully considered.
The objection to any legislative and compulsory regulation of the right to marry is, however, much more fundamental than the consideration that our knowledge is at present inadequate. It lies in the extraordinary confusion, in the minds of those who advocate such legislation, between legal marriage and procreation. The persons who fall into such confusion have not yet learnt the alphabet of the subject they presume to dictate about, and are no more competent to legislate than a child who cannot tell A from B is competent to read.
The objection to any laws or mandatory regulations on the right to marry is, however, much more fundamental than the fact that our knowledge is currently lacking. It stems from the significant misunderstanding among those who support such legislation, mixing up legal marriage and having children. Those who make this mistake haven’t yet grasped the basics of the topic they think they can control, and they are no more qualified to make laws than a child who can't distinguish A from B is qualified to read.
Marriage, in so far as it is the partnership for mutual help and consolation of two people who in such partnership are free, if they please, to exercise sexual union, is an elementary right of every person who is able to reason, who is guilty of no fraud or concealment, and who is not likely to injure the partner selected, for in that case society is entitled to interfere by virtue of its duty to protect its members. But the right to marry, thus understood, in no way involves the right to procreate. For while marriage per se only affects the two individuals concerned, and in no way affects the State, procreation, on the other hand, primarily affects the community which is ultimately made up of procreated persons, and only secondarily affects the two individuals who are the instruments of procreation. So that just as the individual couple has the first right in the question of marriage, the State has the first right in the question of procreation. The State is just as incompetent to lay down the law about marriage as the individual is to lay down the law about procreation.
Marriage, as a partnership for mutual support and comfort between two people who are free to engage in sexual relations if they choose, is a basic right of anyone who can think rationally, who commits no fraud or deception, and who is not likely to harm their chosen partner. In that case, society has the right to step in because it has a duty to protect its members. However, the right to marry, understood in this way, does not automatically include the right to have children. While marriage primarily impacts the two people involved and does not directly affect the State, procreation primarily concerns the community, which is ultimately made up of those who are born, and only secondarily affects the couple who are creating new life. Therefore, just as the individual couple has the primary right regarding marriage, the State has the primary right concerning procreation. The State is just as unqualified to dictate the terms of marriage as individuals are to dictate the terms of procreation.
That, however, is only one-half of the folly committed by those who would select the candidates for matrimony by statute. Let us suppose—as is not indeed easy to suppose—that a community will meekly accept the abstract prohibitions of the statute book and quietly go home again when the registrar of marriages informs them that they are shut out from legal matrimony by the new table of prohibited degrees. An explicit prohibition to procreate within marriage is an implicit permission to procreate outside marriage. Thus the undesirable procreation, instead of being carried out under the least dangerous conditions, is carried out under the most dangerous conditions, and the net result to the community is not a gain but a loss.
That, however, is only half of the mistake made by those who would choose marriage partners through laws. Let’s imagine—as it’s not easy to imagine—that a community will passively accept the abstract rules from the law and simply go home when the marriage registrar tells them they are barred from legal marriage by the new list of prohibited relationships. A clear ban on having children within marriage is essentially a green light for having children outside of marriage. So the unwanted procreation, instead of happening in the safest way possible, occurs under the riskiest circumstances, and the overall outcome for the community is not a benefit but a drawback.
What seems usually to happen, in the presence of a formal legislative prohibition against the marriage of a particular class, is a combination of various evils. In part the law becomes a dead letter, in part it is evaded by skill and fraud, in part it is obeyed to give rise to worse evils. This happened, for instance, in the Terek district of the Caucasus where, on the demand of a medical committee, priests were prohibited from marrying persons among whose relatives or ancestry any cases of leprosy had occurred. So much and such various mischief was caused by this order that it was speedily withdrawn.[452]
What usually happens when there's a formal law banning the marriage of a certain group is a mix of various problems. Sometimes the law becomes irrelevant, other times it's sidestepped through cleverness and deceit, and sometimes it's followed, which leads to even worse issues. For example, this occurred in the Terek district of the Caucasus where, at the request of a medical committee, priests were banned from marrying anyone with a family history of leprosy. This rule caused so many different problems that it was quickly overturned.[452]
If we remember that the Catholic Church was occupied for more than a thousand years in the attempt to impose the prohibition of marriage on its priesthood,—an educated and trained body of men, who had every spiritual and worldly motive to accept the prohibition, and were, moreover, brought up to regard asceticism as the best ideal in life,[453]—we may realize how absurd it is to attempt to gain the same end by mere casual prohibitions issued to untrained people with no motives to obey such prohibitions, and no ideals of celibacy.
If we remember that the Catholic Church spent over a thousand years trying to enforce a marriage ban on its priests—a well-educated and trained group of men who had every spiritual and worldly reason to follow this ban, and who were also taught to see asceticism as the best way to live—[453]—we can understand how ridiculous it is to try to achieve the same goal through casual prohibitions directed at untrained people who have no reasons to comply with such bans and no ideals of celibacy.
The hopelessness and even absurdity of effecting the eugenic improvement of the race by merely placing on the statute book prohibitions to certain classes of people to enter the legal bonds of matrimony as at present constituted, reveals the weakness of those who undervalue the eugenic importance of environment. Those who affirm that heredity is everything and environment nothing seem strangely to forget that it is precisely the lower classes—those who are most subjected to the influence of bad environment—who procreate most copiously, most recklessly, and most disastrously. The restraint of procreation, and a concomitant regard for heredity, increase pari passu with improvement of the environment and rise in social well-being. If even already it can be said that probably fifty per cent. of sexual intercourse—perhaps the most procreatively productive moiety—takes place outside legal marriage, it becomes obvious that statutory prohibition to the unfit classes to refrain from legal marriage merely involves their joining the procreating classes outside legal matrimony. It is also clear that if we are to neglect the factor of environment, and leave the lower social classes to the ignorance and recklessness which are the result of such environment, the only practical method of eugenics left open is that by castration and abortion. But this method—if applied on a wholesale scale as it would need to be[454] and without reference to the consent of the individual—is entirely opposed to modern democratic feeling. Thus those short-sighted eugenists who overlook the importance of environment are overlooking the only practical channel through which their aims can be realized. Attention to procreation and attention to environment are not, as some have supposed, antagonistic, but they play harmoniously into each other's hands. The care for environment leads to a restraint on reckless procreation, and the restraint of procreation leads to improved environment.
The hopelessness and even absurdity of trying to improve the race through laws that prohibit certain groups from entering into marriage shows the weakness of those who underestimate the eugenic importance of environment. Those who claim that heredity is everything and environment is nothing seem to forget that it's the lower classes—those most affected by bad environments—who tend to have the most children, often without care, and with negative consequences. The limitation of procreation, along with consideration for heredity, increases alongside improvements in the environment and rises in social well-being. If it's true that probably fifty percent of sexual intercourse—arguably the most productive part—happens outside legal marriage, it's clear that prohibiting the unfit classes from legal marriage only drives them to procreate outside it. It's also clear that if we ignore the environment and leave lower social classes to the ignorance and recklessness that come from it, the only eugenic method left would be through castration and abortion. However, this approach—if applied on a large scale as it would need to be and without the individual's consent—is completely against modern democratic values. Thus, those short-sighted eugenicists who overlook the importance of environment are missing the only realistic way to achieve their goals. Attention to procreation and attention to environment are not opposed, as some think, but actually support each other. Caring for the environment leads to a restraint on careless procreation, and restraining procreation leads to an improved environment.
Legislation on marriage, to be effectual, must be enacted in the home, in the school, in the doctor's consulting room. Force is helpless here; it is education that is needed, not merely instruction, but the education of the conscience and will, and the training of the emotions.
Legislation on marriage, to be effective, must be established at home, in schools, and in the doctor's office. Force is useless here; what’s needed is education—not just instruction, but the education of conscience and will, along with the development of emotions.
Legal action may come in to further this process of education, though it cannot replace it. Thus it is very desirable that when there has been a concealment of serious disease by a party to a marriage such concealment should be a ground for divorce. Epilepsy may be taken as typical of the diseases which should be a bar to procreation, and their concealment equivalent to an annulment of marriage.[455] In the United States the Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut laid it down in 1906 that the Superior Court has the power to pass a decree of divorce when one of the parties has concealed the existence of epilepsy. This weighty deliverence, it has been well said,[456] marks a forward step in human progress. There are many other seriously pathological conditions in which divorce should be pronounced, or indeed, occur automatically, except when procreation has been renounced, for in that case the State is no longer concerned in the relationship, except to punish any fraud committed by concealment.
Legal action can support this educational process, but it can't replace it. Therefore, it's important that if one spouse hides a serious illness during marriage, that should be grounds for divorce. Epilepsy is an example of a condition that should prevent reproduction, and hiding it is like invalidating the marriage.[455] In the United States, the Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut ruled in 1906 that the Superior Court can grant a divorce if one spouse has concealed the existence of epilepsy. This significant ruling,[456] has been noted as a step forward for humanity. There are many other serious medical conditions where divorce should be granted, or even happen automatically, unless reproduction has been renounced, as in that case, the State has no further interest in the relationship, apart from addressing any fraud related to concealment.
The demand that a medical certificate of health should be compulsory on marriage, has been especially made in France. In 1858, Diday, of Lyons, proposed, indeed, that all persons, without exception, should be compelled to possess a certificate of health and disease, a kind of sanitary passport. In 1872, Bertillon (Art. "Demographic," Dictionnaire Encyclopédique des Sciences Médicales) advocated the registration, at marriage, of the chief anthropological and pathological traits of the contracting parties (height, weight, color of hair and eyes, muscular force, size of head, condition of vision, hearing, etc., deformities and defects, etc.), not so much, however, for the end of preventing undesirable marriages, as to facilitate the study and comparison of human groups at particular periods. Subsequent demands, of a more limited and partial character, for legal medical certificates as a condition of marriage, have been made by Fournier (Syphilis et Mariage, 1890), Cazalis (Le Science et le Mariage, 1890), and Jullien (Blenorrhagie et Mariage, 1898). In Austria, Haskovec, of Prague ("Contrat Matrimonial et L'Hygiène Publique," Comptes-rendus Congrès International de Médecine, Lisbon, 1906, Section VII, p. 600), argues that, on marriage, a medical certificate should be presented, showing that the subject is exempt from tuberculosis, alcoholism, syphilis, gonorrhœa, severe mental, or nervous, or other degenerative state, likely to be injurious to the other partner, or to the offspring. In America, Rosenberg and Aronstam argue that every candidate for marriage, male or female, should undergo a strict examination by a competent board of medical examiners, concerning (1) Family and Past History (syphilis, consumption, alcoholism, nervous, and mental diseases), and (2) Status Presens (thorough examination of all the organs); if satisfactory, a certificate of matrimonial eligibility would then be granted. It is pointed out that a measure of this kind would render unnecessary the acts passed by some States for the punishment by fine, or imprisonment, of the concealment of disease. Ellen Key also considers (Liebe und Ehe, p. 436) that each party at marriage should produce a certificate of health. "It seems to me just as necessary," she remarks, elsewhere (Century of the Child, Ch. I), "to demand medical testimony concerning capacity for marriage, as concerning capacity for military service. In the one case, it is a matter of giving life; in the other, of taking it, although certainly the latter occasion has hitherto been considered as much the more serious."
The requirement for a medical certificate of health to be mandatory for marriage has been particularly emphasized in France. In 1858, Diday from Lyons proposed that everyone, without exception, should be required to have a health and disease certificate, essentially a kind of health passport. In 1872, Bertillon (Art. "Demographic," Dictionnaire Encyclopédique des Sciences Médicales) supported the idea of registering the main anthropological and pathological characteristics of the individuals getting married (height, weight, hair and eye color, muscle strength, head size, vision and hearing conditions, deformities, and defects) not primarily to prevent undesirable marriages but to aid in the study and comparison of human groups during specific periods. Following that, more limited calls for legal medical certificates as a condition for marriage were made by Fournier (Syphilis et Mariage, 1890), Cazalis (Le Science et le Mariage, 1890), and Jullien (Blenorrhagie et Mariage, 1898). In Austria, Haskovec from Prague ("Contrat Matrimonial et L'Hygiène Publique," Comptes-rendus Congrès International de Médecine, Lisbon, 1906, Section VII, p. 600) argues that, upon marriage, a medical certificate should be provided, confirming that the individual is free from tuberculosis, alcoholism, syphilis, gonorrhea, severe mental or nervous conditions, or any other degenerative state that could harm the other partner or the offspring. In America, Rosenberg and Aronstam assert that every person intending to marry, regardless of gender, should undergo a thorough examination by a qualified medical board regarding (1) Family and Past History (syphilis, tuberculosis, alcoholism, nervous, and mental illnesses), and (2) Present Status (comprehensive evaluation of all organs); if the results are satisfactory, a certificate of marital eligibility would then be issued. It has been noted that this kind of measure would make unnecessary the laws enacted by some states that impose penalties for hiding diseases. Ellen Key also believes (Liebe und Ehe, p. 436) that each party getting married should present a health certificate. "It seems just as essential," she notes elsewhere (Century of the Child, Ch. I), "to require medical evidence regarding the capacity for marriage as it is for military service. In one case, it's about giving life; in the other, taking it, although the latter has historically been seen as the more serious issue."
The certificate, as usually advocated, would be a private but necessary legitimation of the marriage in the eyes of the civil and religious authorities. Such a step, being required for the protection alike of the conjugal partner and of posterity, would involve a new legal organization of the matrimonial contract. That such demands are so frequently made, is a significant sign of the growth of moral consciousness in the community, and it is good that the public should be made acquainted with the urgent need for them. But it is highly undesirable that they should, at present, or, perhaps, ever, be embodied in legal codes. What is needed is the cultivation of the feeling of individual responsibility, and the development of social antagonism towards those individuals who fail to recognize their responsibility. It is the reality of marriage, and not its mere legal forms, that it is necessary to act upon.
The certificate, as often suggested, would serve as a private but essential validation of the marriage in the eyes of civil and religious authorities. This requirement, aimed at protecting both partners and any future children, would lead to a new legal framework for marriage contracts. The frequent calls for such measures indicate a growing moral awareness in society, and it’s important for the public to understand the pressing need for them. However, it’s highly undesirable for these demands to be enshrined in legal codes at this time, or perhaps ever. What’s truly needed is fostering a sense of individual responsibility and creating social disapproval towards those who fail to acknowledge their responsibilities. It's the essence of marriage, not just its legal forms, that should guide our actions.
The voluntary method is the only sound way of approach in this matter. Duclaux considered that the candidate for marriage should possess a certificate of health in much the same way as the candidate for life assurance, the question of professional secrecy, as well as that of compulsion, no more coming into one question than into the other. There is no reason why such certificates, of an entirely voluntary character, should not become customary among those persons who are sufficiently enlightened to realize all the grave personal, family, and social issues involved in marriage. The system of eugenic certification, as originated and developed by Galton, will constitute a valuable instrument for raising the moral consciousness in this matter. Galton's eugenic certificates would deal mainly with the natural virtues of superior hereditary breed—"the public recognition of a natural nobility"—but they would include the question of personal health and personal aptitude.[457]
The voluntary method is the only sensible approach to this issue. Duclaux believed that anyone looking to get married should have a health certificate, similar to how someone applying for life insurance does. The issues of professional confidentiality and coercion apply equally in both cases. There's no reason why these entirely voluntary certificates shouldn't become standard among those who are aware of the serious personal, familial, and social implications of marriage. The idea of eugenic certification, as introduced and expanded by Galton, will serve as a valuable tool for raising awareness on this topic. Galton's eugenic certificates would primarily focus on the positive traits of a superior hereditary lineage—"the public acknowledgment of a natural nobility"—but they would also address personal health and individual capabilities.[457]
To demand compulsory certificates of health at marriage is indeed to begin at the wrong end. It would not only lead to evasions and antagonisms but would probably call forth a reaction. It is first necessary to create an enthusiasm for health, a moral conscience in matters of procreation, together with, on the scientific side, a general habit of registering the anthropological, psychological, and pathological data concerning the individual, from birth onwards, altogether apart from marriage. The earlier demands of Diday and Bertillon were thus not only on a sounder but also a more practicable basis. If such records were kept from birth for every child, there would be no need for special examination at marriage, and many incidental ends would be gained. There is difficulty at present in obtaining such records from the moment of birth, and, so far as I am aware, no attempts have yet been made to establish their systematic registration. But it is quite possible to begin at the beginning of school life, and this is now done at many schools and colleges in England, America, and elsewhere, more especially as regards anthropological, physiological, and psychological data, each child being submitted to a thorough and searching anthropometric examination, and thus furnished with a systematic statement of his physical condition.[458] This examination needs to be standardized and generalized, and repeated at fixed intervals. "Every individual child," as is truly stated by Dr. Dukes, the Physician to Rugby School, "on his entrance to a public school should be as carefully and as thoroughly examined as if it were for life insurance." If this procedure were general from an early age, there would be no hardship in the production of the record at marriage, and no opportunity for fraud. The dossier of each person might well be registered by the State, as wills already are, and, as in the case of wills, become freely open to students when a century had elapsed. Until this has been done during several centuries our knowledge of eugenics will remain rudimentary.
Demanding mandatory health certificates for marriage is definitely starting off on the wrong foot. Not only would it lead to workarounds and conflicts, but it would likely spark a backlash. It's crucial to first foster a genuine enthusiasm for health and create a moral awareness about reproduction, along with establishing a scientific practice of recording anthropological, psychological, and pathological information about individuals from birth onward, independent of marriage. The earlier proposals by Diday and Bertillon were therefore not only more sound but also more feasible. If such records were maintained from birth for every child, there wouldn’t be a need for special examinations at marriage, and many additional benefits would arise. Currently, it's difficult to obtain comprehensive records from the moment of birth, and as far as I know, no systematic efforts have been made to establish their registration. However, it’s entirely possible to start at the beginning of a child's school life, and this is already being practiced in many schools and colleges in England, America, and elsewhere, especially regarding anthropological, physiological, and psychological data. Each child undergoes a thorough anthropometric examination, resulting in a systematic overview of their physical condition. This examination needs to be standardized and generalized, with recurring assessments at set intervals. "Every individual child," as Dr. Dukes, the Physician to Rugby School, rightly points out, "should be examined as carefully and thoroughly upon entering a public school as if it were for life insurance." If this practice were standardized from an early age, there would be no burden in producing the record at marriage, and less chance for fraud. Each person’s dossier could be registered by the State, just like wills currently are, and, similar to wills, could become accessible to researchers after a century. Until this has been achieved over several centuries, our understanding of eugenics will remain basic.
There can be little doubt that the eugenic attitude towards marriage, and the responsibility of the individual for the future of the race, is becoming more recognized. It is constantly happening that persons, about to marry, approach the physician in a state of serious anxiety on this point. Urquhart, indeed (Journal of Mental Science, April, 1907, p. 277), believes that marriages are seldom broken off on this ground; this seems, however, too pessimistic a view, and even when the marriage is not broken off the resolve is often made to avoid procreation. Clouston, who emphasizes (Hygiene of the Mind, p. 74) the importance of "inquiries by each of the parties to the life-contract, by their parents and their doctors, as to heredity, temperament, and health," is more hopeful of the results than Urquhart. "I have been very much impressed, of late years," he writes (Journal of Mental Science, Oct., 1907, p. 710), "with the way in which this subject is taking possession of intelligent people, by the number of times one is consulted by young men and young women, proposing to marry, or by their fathers or mothers. I used to have the feeling in the back of my mind, when I was consulted, that it did not matter what I said, it would not make any difference. But it is making a difference; and I, and others, could tell of scores of marriages which were put off in consequence of psychiatric medical advice."
There’s no doubt that the eugenic attitude toward marriage and individual responsibility for the future of the race is becoming more widely recognized. It's common for people about to get married to approach a doctor with serious concerns about this issue. Urquhart, in fact (Journal of Mental Science, April 1907, p. 277), believes that marriages are rarely called off for this reason; however, this seems too pessimistic, and even when a marriage isn't ended, many decide to avoid having children. Clouston, who emphasizes (Hygiene of the Mind, p. 74) the importance of “the inquiries each party to the marriage contract, alongside their parents and doctors, should make regarding heredity, temperament, and health,” is more optimistic about the outcomes than Urquhart. “I have been very impressed, in recent years,” he writes (Journal of Mental Science, Oct. 1907, p. 710), “with how this topic is capturing the attention of smart people, by the number of times I’ve been consulted by young men and women who are planning to marry, or by their parents. I used to think, when consulted, that it didn’t matter what I said; it wouldn’t make a difference. But it is making a difference, and I, along with others, could share many stories about marriages that were postponed due to psychiatric medical advice.”
Ellen Key, also, refers to the growing tendency among both men and women, to be influenced by eugenic consideration in forming partnerships for life (Century of the Child, Ch. I). The recognition of the eugenic attitude towards marriage, the quickening of the social and individual conscience in matters of heredity, as also the systematic introduction of certification and registration, will be furthered by the growing tendency to the socialization of medicine, and, indeed, in its absence would be impossible. (See e.g., Havelock Ellis, The Nationalization of Health.) The growth of the State Medical Organization of Health is steady and continuous, and is constantly covering a larger field. The day of the private practitioner of medicine—who was treated, as Duclaux (L'Hygiène Sociale, p. 263) put it, "like a grocer, whose shop the customer may enter and leave as he pleases, and when he pleases"—will, doubtless, soon be over. It is now beginning to be felt that health is far too serious a matter, not only from the individual but also from the social point of view, to be left to private caprice. There is, indeed, a tendency, in some quarters, to fear that some day society may rush to the opposite extreme, and bow before medicine with the same unreasoning deference that it once bowed before theology. That danger is still very remote, nor is it likely, indeed, that medicine will ever claim any authority of this kind. The spirit of medicine has, notoriously, been rather towards the assertion of scepticism than of dogma, and the fanatics in this field will always be in a hopelessly small minority.
Ellen Key also talks about the increasing trend among both men and women to consider eugenics when choosing life partners (Century of the Child, Ch. I). The acknowledgment of the eugenics perspective on marriage, the heightened social and individual awareness regarding heredity, and the organized implementation of certification and registration will be supported by the rising trend of socializing medicine; without this, it would be impossible. (See e.g., Havelock Ellis, The Nationalization of Health.) The development of the State Medical Organization of Health is steady and ongoing, consistently expanding its scope. The era of the private medical practitioner—who was perceived, as Duclaux (L'Hygiène Sociale, p. 263) described, "like a grocer, whose shop the customer may enter and leave as they wish"—is likely coming to an end. It's becoming clear that health is too serious an issue, both from an individual and a societal perspective, to be left to personal whims. There's even a concern in some circles that society might one day swing to the opposite extreme, showing medicine the same blind respect it once showed theology. However, that risk is still quite distant, and it’s unlikely that medicine will ever assume such authority. The nature of medicine has always leaned more toward skepticism than dogma, and the extremists in this area will always remain a tiny minority.
The general introduction of authentic personal records covering all essential data—hereditary, anthropometric and pathological—cannot fail to be a force on the side of positive as well as of negative eugenics, for it would tend to promote the procreation of the fit as well as restrict that of the unfit, without any legislative compulsion. With the growth of education a regard for such records as a preliminary to marriage would become as much a matter of course as once was the regard to the restrictions imposed by Canon law, and as still is a regard to money or to caste. A woman can usually refrain from marrying a man with no money and no prospects; a man may be passionately in love with a woman of lower class than himself but he seldom marries her. It needs but a clear general perception of all that is involved in heredity and health to make eugenic considerations equally influential.
The widespread introduction of real personal records that cover all important information—genetic, physical, and medical—will definitely impact both positive and negative eugenics, as it would encourage the reproduction of those who are fit and limit that of those who are not, all without any legal requirements. As education expands, it will become standard to consider such records before marriage, just as it once was to follow the restrictions of Canon law, and as it still is to think about money or social class. A woman can typically choose not to marry a man who has no money or future prospects; likewise, a man may be deeply in love with a woman from a lower class but he rarely marries her. It only takes a clear understanding of heredity and health for eugenic factors to become just as influential.
A discriminating regard to the quality of offspring will act beneficially on the side of positive eugenics by substituting the pernicious tendency to put a premium on excess of childbirth by the more rational method of putting a premium on the quality of the child. It has been one of the most unfortunate results of the mania for protesting against that decline of the birthrate which is always and everywhere the result of civilization, that there has been a tendency to offer special social or pecuniary advantages to the parents of large families. Since large families tend to be degenerate, and to become a tax on the community, since rapid pregnancies in succession are not only a serious drain on the strength of the mother but are now known to depreciate seriously the quality of the offspring, and since, moreover, it is in large families that disease and mortality chiefly prevail, all the interests of the community are against the placing of any premium on large families, even in the case of parents of good stock. The interests of the State are bound up not with the quantity but with the quality of its citizens, and the premium should be placed not on the families that reach a certain size but on the individual children that reach a certain standard; the attainment of this standard could well be based on observations made from birth to the fifth year. A premium on this basis would be as beneficial to a State as that on the merely numerical basis is pernicious.
A careful focus on the quality of children will positively influence eugenics by replacing the harmful trend of rewarding large families with a more sensible approach that values the quality of each child. One of the unfortunate outcomes of the obsession with opposing the decline in birth rates—a decline that is always associated with civilization—has been the tendency to provide special social or financial incentives to parents with many children. Large families often lead to poorer outcomes and can become a burden on society. Rapid consecutive pregnancies not only significantly weaken the mother but also seriously reduce the quality of the offspring. Additionally, larger families are more prone to disease and higher mortality rates. Therefore, it's in the best interest of the community to avoid rewarding large families, even if the parents are from good stock. The State's interests are more tied to the quality, not just the quantity, of its citizens. Rewards should be focused on individual children who meet a certain standard rather than on families that reach a specific size; this standard could be assessed based on observations from birth to age five. A reward system based on this criterion would benefit the State much more than one based solely on numerical growth.
This consideration applies with still greater force to the proposals for the "systematic endowment of motherhood" of which we hear more and more. So moderate and judicious a social reformer as Mr. Sidney Webb writes: "We shall have to face the problem of the systematic endowment of motherhood, and place this most indispensable of all professions upon an honorable economic basis. At present it is ignored as an occupation, unremunerated, and in no way honored by the State."[459] True as this statement is, it must always be remembered that an indispensable preliminary to any proposal for the endowment of motherhood by the State is a clear conception of the kind of motherhood which the State requires. To endow the reckless and indiscriminate motherhood which we see around us, to encourage, that is, by State aid, the production of citizens a large proportion of whom the State, if it dared, would like to destroy as unfit, is too ridiculous a proposal to deserve discussion.[460] The only sound reason, indeed, for the endowment of motherhood is that it would enable the State, in its own interests, to further the natural selection of the fit.
This idea is even more relevant to the proposals for a "systematic endowment of motherhood" that we're hearing more about. A thoughtful social reformer like Mr. Sidney Webb says: "We will need to address the issue of systematically supporting motherhood and put this essential profession on a respectable economic footing. Right now, it's overlooked as a job, unpaid, and not recognized by the State." [459] While this statement is true, it’s important to remember that any serious proposal for State support of motherhood must first have a clear understanding of what kind of motherhood the State wants to promote. Supporting the careless and indiscriminate motherhood we see around us, encouraging the birth of citizens that the State would prefer to eliminate as unfit, is such a laughable idea that it hardly warrants discussion.[460] The only valid reason for the endowment of motherhood is that it would allow the State, in its own best interest, to promote the natural selection of those who are fit.
As to the positive qualities which the State is entitled to endow in its encouragement of motherhood, it is still too early to speak with complete assurance. Negative eugenics tends to be ahead of positive eugenics; it is easier to detect bad stocks than to be quite sure of good stocks. Both on the scientific side and on the social side, however, we are beginning to attain a clearer realization of the end to be attained and a more precise knowledge of the methods of attaining it.[461]
As for the positive qualities that the State can promote to support motherhood, it's still too early to be completely certain. Negative eugenics is generally more advanced than positive eugenics; it's easier to identify undesirable traits than to be sure about desirable ones. However, both in science and society, we are starting to gain a clearer understanding of the goals we want to achieve and a more precise knowledge of how to achieve them.[461]
Even when we have gained a fairly clear conception of the stocks and the individuals which we are justified in encouraging to undertake the task of producing fit citizens for the State, the problems of procreation are by no means at an end. Before we can so much as inquire what are the conditions under which selected individuals may best procreate, there is still the initial question to be decided whether those individuals are both fertile and potent, for this is not guaranteed by the fact that they belong to good stocks, nor is even the fact that a man and a woman are fertile with other persons any positive proof that they will be fertile with each other. Among the large masses of the population who do not seek to make their unions legal until those unions have proved fertile, this difficulty is settled in a simple and practical manner. The question is, however, a serious and hazardous one, in the present state of the marriage law in most countries, for those classes which are accustomed to bind themselves in legal marriage without any knowledge of their potency and fertility with each other. The matter is mostly left to chance, and as legal marriage cannot usually be dissolved on the ground that there are no offspring, even although procreation is commonly declared to be the chief end of marriage, the question assumes much gravity. The ordinary range of sterility is from seven to fifteen per cent. of all marriages, and in a very large proportion of these it is a source of great concern. This could be avoided, in some measure, by examination before marriage, and almost altogether by ordaining that, as it is only through offspring that a marriage has any concern for the State, a legal marriage could be dissolved, after a certain period, at the will of either of the parties, in the absence of such offspring.
Even when we have a pretty clear idea of the families and individuals we should encourage to help create viable citizens for the State, the issues surrounding reproduction are far from solved. Before we can even ask what conditions would allow selected individuals to reproduce successfully, we first need to determine if those individuals are both fertile and capable of reproducing. This isn't guaranteed just because they come from good families, nor does the fact that a man and a woman are fertile with others mean they will be fertile together. For many people who wait to make their relationships official until they have already proven to be fertile, this problem is resolved in a simple and practical way. However, it's a serious and risky issue in the current marriage laws of most countries, especially for those groups who tend to enter into legal marriages without knowing their reproductive abilities with each other. Most of the time, it gets left to chance, and since legal marriages usually can't be dissolved on the basis of being childless—even though having children is commonly stated as the main purpose of marriage—the issue becomes significant. The typical rate of infertility in marriages ranges from seven to fifteen percent, and in a large number of those cases, it leads to considerable concern. This could be alleviated to some extent through pre-marital screenings, and almost entirely if we establish that, since it's only through children that a marriage holds any significance for the State, a legal marriage could be ended, after a certain period, at the request of either party if no children have resulted.
It was formerly supposed that when a union proved infertile, it was the wife who was at fault. That belief is long since exploded, but, even yet, a man is generally far more concerned about his potency, that is, his ability to perform the mechanical act of coitus, than about his fertility, that is, his ability to produce living spermatozoa, though the latter condition is a much more common source of sterility. "Any man," says Arthur Cooper (British Medical Journal, May 11, 1907), "who has any sexual defect or malformation, or who has suffered from any disease or injury of the genito-urinary organs, even though comparatively trivial or one-sided, and although his copulative power may be unimpaired, should be looked upon as possibly sterile, until some sort of evidence to the contrary has been obtained." In case of a sterile marriage, the possible cause should first be investigated in the husband, for it is comparatively easy to examine the semen, and to ascertain if it contains active spermatozoa. Prinzing, in a comprehensive study of sterile marriages ("Die Sterilen Ehen," Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaft, 1904, Heft 1 and 2), states that in two-fifths of sterile marriages the man is at fault; one-third of such marriages are the result of venereal diseases in the husband himself, or transmitted to the wife. Gonorrhœa is not now considered so important a cause of sterility as it was a few years ago; Schenk makes it responsible for only about thirteen per cent. sterile marriages (cf. Kisch, The Sexual Life of Woman). Pinkus (Archiv für Gynäkologie, 1907) found that of nearly five hundred cases in which he examined both partners, in 24.4 per cent. cases, the sterility was directly due to the husband, and in 15.8 per cent. cases, indirectly due, because caused by gonorrhœa with which he had infected his wife.
It was once believed that when a couple had trouble conceiving, the blame fell solely on the wife. That idea has been debunked for a long time now, but even today, men tend to worry more about their performance during sex than about their fertility, which is actually a more common cause of infertility. "Any man," says Arthur Cooper (British Medical Journal, May 11, 1907), "who has any sexual defect or malformation, or who has suffered from any disease or injury to the reproductive organs, even if it's relatively minor, and although his ability to perform sex may be unaffected, should be considered possibly sterile until proven otherwise." If a couple is facing infertility, the investigation should start with the husband, since it's relatively easy to examine the semen and check for active sperm. Prinzing, in a detailed study of infertile marriages ("Die Sterilen Ehen," Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaft, 1904, Heft 1 and 2), found that in two-fifths of these cases, the issue lies with the man; one-third of these couples experience infertility due to sexually transmitted diseases in the husband, either from their own condition or passed on to their partner. Gonorrhea is no longer regarded as a major cause of infertility, unlike a few years back; Schenk attributes it to only about thirteen percent of infertility cases (cf. Kisch, The Sexual Life of Woman). Pinkus (Archiv für Gynäkologie, 1907) discovered that in nearly five hundred cases where both partners were examined, sterility was directly due to the husband in 24.4 percent of cases, and indirectly due to him in 15.8 percent of cases, as a result of gonorrhea that he transmitted to his wife.
When sterility is due to a defect in the husband's spermatozoa, and is not discovered, as it usually might be, before marriage, the question of impregnating the wife by other methods has occasionally arisen. Divorce on the ground of sterility is not possible, and, even if it were, the couple, although they wish to have a child, have not usually any wish to separate. Under these circumstances, in order to secure the desired end, without departing from widely accepted rules of morality, the attempt is occasionally made to effect artificial fecundation by injecting the semen from a healthy male. Attempts have been made to effect artificial fecundation by various distinguished men, from John Hunter to Schwalbe, but it is nearly always very difficult to effect, and often impossible. This is easy to account for, if we recall what has already been pointed out (ante p. 577) concerning the influence of erotic excitement in the woman in securing conception; it is obviously a serious task for even the most susceptible woman to evoke erotic enthusiasm à propos of a medical syringe. Schwalbe, for instance, records a case (Deutsche Medizinisches Wochenschrift, Aug., 1908, p. 510) in which,—in consequence of the husband's sterility and the wife's anxiety, with her husband's consent, to be impregnated by the semen of another man,—he made repeated careful attempts to effect artificial fecundation; these attempts were, however, fruitless, and the three parties concerned finally resigned themselves to the natural method of intercourse, which was successful. In another case, recorded by Schwalbe, in which the husband was impotent but not sterile, six attempts were made to effect artificial fecundation, and further efforts abandoned on account of the disgust of all concerned.
When infertility is caused by a problem with the husband's sperm and it's not discovered, as often happens, before marriage, the issue of using other methods to impregnate the wife sometimes comes up. Divorce due to infertility isn't an option, and even if it were, the couple, who want a child, usually don't want to separate. In these situations, to achieve their goal while still adhering to widely accepted moral standards, attempts are occasionally made to perform artificial insemination by injecting semen from a healthy male. Various notable figures, from John Hunter to Schwalbe, have tried to perform artificial insemination, but it is almost always very difficult to accomplish, and often impossible. This is understandable when we consider what has already been noted (ante p. 577) about the role of erotic excitement in women when it comes to conception; it’s clearly a challenging task for even the most sensitive woman to generate erotic interest in a medical syringe. For example, Schwalbe recounts a case (Deutsche Medizinisches Wochenschrift, Aug., 1908, p. 510) in which, due to the husband's infertility and the wife's desire, with her husband's agreement, to conceive using another man's sperm, he made several careful attempts at artificial insemination; however, these efforts were unsuccessful, and eventually all three involved decided to revert to natural intercourse, which worked. In another case recorded by Schwalbe, where the husband was impotent but not sterile, six attempts were made to achieve artificial insemination, but further attempts were abandoned due to the discomfort felt by everyone involved.
Opinion, on the whole, has been opposed to the practice of artificial fecundation, even apart from the question of the probabilities of success. Thus, in France, where there is a considerable literature on the subject, the Paris Medical Faculty, in 1885, after some hesitation, refused Gérard's thesis on the history of artificial fecundation, afterwards published independently. In 1883, the Bordeaux legal tribunal declared that artificial fecundation was illegitimate, and a social danger. In 1897, the Holy See also pronounced that the practice is unlawful ("Artificial Fecundation before the Inquisition," British Medical Journal, March 5, 1898). Apart, altogether, from this attitude of medicine, law, and Church, it would certainly seem that those who desire offspring would do well, as a rule, to adopt the natural method, which is also the best, or else to abandon to others the task of procreation, for which they are not adequately equipped.
Opinion, overall, has been against the practice of artificial insemination, even setting aside the question of its chances of success. In France, where there is a lot of writing on the topic, the Paris Medical Faculty, in 1885, after some indecision, refused Gérard's thesis on the history of artificial insemination, which was later published separately. In 1883, the Bordeaux court ruled that artificial insemination was illegitimate and a social threat. In 1897, the Holy See also declared that the practice is unlawful ("Artificial Fecundation before the Inquisition," British Medical Journal, March 5, 1898). Aside from the stance of medicine, law, and the Church, it would seem that those who want children would generally be better off using natural methods, which are also the best, or else letting others handle the procreation for which they are not well-suited.
When we have ascertained that two individuals both belong to sound and healthy stocks, and, further, that they are themselves both apt for procreation, it still remains to consider the conditions under which they may best effect procreation.[462] There arises, for instance, the question, often asked, What is the best age for procreation?
When we've confirmed that two people come from strong and healthy backgrounds, and that they are both capable of having children, we still need to think about the best conditions for them to reproduce.[462] For example, a common question is, what is the best age to have children?
The considerations which weigh in answering this question are of two different orders, physiological, and social or moral. That is to say, that it is necessary, on the one hand, that physical maturity should have been fully attained, and the sexual cells completely developed; while, on the other hand, it is necessary that the man shall have become able to support a family, and that both partners shall have received a training in life adequate to undertake the responsibilities and anxieties involved in the rearing of children. While there have been variations at different times, it scarcely appears that, on the whole, the general opinion as to the best age for procreation has greatly varied in Europe during many centuries. Hesiod indeed said that a woman should marry about fifteen and a man about thirty,[463] but obstetricians have usually concluded that, in the interests alike of the parents and their offspring, the procreative life should not begin in women before twenty and in men before twenty-five.[464] After thirty in women and after thirty-five or forty in men it seems probable that the best conditions for procreation begin to decline.[465] At the present time, in England and several other civilized countries, the tendency has been for the age of marriage to fall at an increasingly late age, on the average some years later than that usually fixed as the most favorable age for the commencement of the procreative life. But, on the whole, the average seldom departs widely from the accepted standard, and there seems no good reason why we should desire to modify this general tendency.
The factors to consider in answering this question fall into two main categories: physiological and social or moral. This means that, on one hand, it's important for physical maturity to be fully achieved and for the reproductive cells to be fully developed. On the other hand, it's necessary for the man to be able to support a family, and for both partners to have life experiences that prepare them to handle the responsibilities and challenges of raising children. Although there have been variations over time, it doesn't seem like the general consensus on the ideal age for procreation has changed much in Europe over many centuries. Hesiod suggested that women should marry around fifteen and men around thirty, but most obstetricians have concluded that, for the well-being of both parents and children, procreation should not start in women before the age of twenty and in men before twenty-five. After age thirty for women and after thirty-five or forty for men, it appears that the optimal conditions for procreation begin to lessen. Currently, in England and several other developed countries, there's a trend toward marrying at an increasingly older age, generally several years later than the ages typically regarded as best for starting a family. However, on the whole, the average age doesn’t stray too far from the accepted standard, and there doesn't seem to be a compelling reason to change this overall trend.
At the same time, it by no means follows that wide variations, under special circumstances, may not only be permissible, but desirable. The male is capable of procreating, in some cases, from about the age of thirteen until far beyond eighty, and at this advanced age, the offspring, even if not notable for great physical robustness, may possess high intellectual qualities. (See e.g., Havelock Ellis, A Study of British Genius, pp. 120 et seq.) The range of the procreative age in women begins earlier (sometimes at eight), though it usually ceases by fifty, or earlier, in only rare cases continuing to sixty or beyond. Cases have been reported of pregnancy, or childbirth, at the age of fifty-nine (e.g., Lancet, Aug. 5, 1905, p. 419). Lepage (Comptes-rendus Société d'Obstétrique de Paris, Oct., 1903) reports a case of a primipara of fifty-seven; the child was stillborn. Kisch (Sexual Life of Woman, Part II) refers to cases of pregnancy in elderly women, and various references are given in British Medical Journal, Aug. 8, 1903, p. 325.
At the same time, it doesn't mean that big differences, under certain conditions, might not only be okay but also beneficial. Males can potentially father children from around the age of thirteen and often well into their eighties. Even at this advanced age, while the offspring might not be known for their physical strength, they could still have exceptional intellectual abilities. (See e.g., Havelock Ellis, A Study of British Genius, pp. 120 et seq.) The range of reproductive age in women starts earlier (sometimes as young as eight), but it usually ends by fifty, with only rare cases lasting until sixty or beyond. There have been reports of pregnancy and childbirth at fifty-nine (e.g., Lancet, Aug. 5, 1905, p. 419). Lepage (Comptes-rendus Société d'Obstétrique de Paris, Oct., 1903) describes a case of a first-time mother at fifty-seven; the child was stillborn. Kisch (Sexual Life of Woman, Part II) mentions instances of pregnancy in older women, with various references included in British Medical Journal, Aug. 8, 1903, p. 325.
Of more importance is the question of early pregnancy. Several investigators have devoted their attention to this question. Thus, Spitta (in a Marburg Inaugural Dissertation, 1895) reviewed the clinical history of 260 labors in primiparæ of 18 and under, as observed at the Marburg Maternity. He found that the general health during pregnancy was not below the average of pregnant women, while the mortality of the child at birth and during the following weeks was not high, and the mortality of the mother was by no means high. Picard (in a Paris thesis, 1903) has studied childbirth in thirty-eight mothers below the age of sixteen. He found that, although the pelvis is certainly not yet fully developed in very young girls, the joints and bones are much more yielding than in the adult, so that parturition, far from being more difficult, is usually rapid and easy. The process of labor itself, is essentially normal in these cases, and, even when abnormalities occur (low insertion of the placenta is a common anomaly) it is remarkable that the patients do not suffer from them in the way common among older women. The average weight of the child was three kilogrammes, or about 6 pounds, 9 ounces; it sometimes required special care during the first few days after birth, perhaps because labor in these cases is sometimes slow. The recovery of the mother was, in every case, absolutely normal, and the fact that these young mothers become pregnant again more readily than primiparæ of a more mature age, further contributes to show that childbirth below the age of sixteen is in no way injurious to the mother. Gache (Annales de Gynécologie et d'Obstétrique, Dec., 1904) has attended ninety-one labors of mothers under seventeen, in the Rawson Hospital, Buenos Ayres; they were of so-called Latin race, mostly Spanish or Italian. Gache found that these young mothers were by no means more exposed than others to abortion or to other complications of pregnancy. Except in four cases of slightly contracted pelvis, delivery was normal, though rather longer than in older primiparæ. Damage to the soft parts was, however, rare, and, when it occurred, in every case rapidly healed. The average weight of the child was 3,039 grammes, or nearly 6¾ pounds. It may be noted that most observers find that very early pregnancies occur in women who begin to menstruate at an unusually early age, that is, some years before the early pregnancy occurs.
Of greater concern is the issue of early pregnancy. Several researchers have focused on this topic. Spitta (in a Marburg Inaugural Dissertation, 1895) examined the clinical history of 260 deliveries in first-time mothers aged 18 and under, as observed at the Marburg Maternity. He found that overall health during pregnancy was not below the average for pregnant women, while the mortality rate of the child at birth and in the following weeks was not high, and the mortality rate for mothers was also not high. Picard (in a Paris thesis, 1903) studied childbirth in thirty-eight mothers under the age of sixteen. He found that while the pelvis is not fully developed in very young girls, the joints and bones are much more flexible than in adults, making labor generally quicker and easier. The labor process itself is normally straightforward in these cases, and even when issues arise (low placenta insertion is a common occurrence), it’s notable that the patients do not experience the same level of discomfort as older women do. The average weight of the baby was three kilograms, or about 6 pounds, 9 ounces; it sometimes required special care during the first few days after birth, possibly because labor in these instances can sometimes be slow. The recovery for the mother was, in every case, completely normal, and the fact that these young mothers become pregnant again more easily than older first-time mothers further suggests that giving birth before age sixteen is not harmful to the mother. Gache (Annales de Gynécologie et d'Obstétrique, Dec., 1904) attended to ninety-one deliveries of mothers under seventeen at Rawson Hospital in Buenos Aires; they were mainly of Latin descent, mostly Spanish or Italian. Gache found that these young mothers were not more at risk for abortion or other pregnancy complications than others. Except in four cases of slightly contracted pelvis, deliveries were normal, though they took a bit longer than those in older first-time mothers. Damage to the soft tissues was rare, and when it did occur, it healed quickly in every case. The average weight of the baby was 3,039 grams, or nearly 6¾ pounds. It is worth noting that most observers find that very early pregnancies often occur in women who begin menstruating at an unusually young age, specifically several years before the early pregnancy happens.
It is clear, however, that young mothers do remarkably well, while there is no doubt whatever that they bear unusually fine infants. Kleinwächter, indeed, found that the younger the mother, the bigger the child. It is not only physically that the children of young mothers are superior. Marro has found (Pubertà, p. 257) that the children of mothers under 21 are superior to those of older mothers both in conduct and intelligence, provided the fathers are not too old or too young. The detailed records of individual cases confirm these results, both as regards mother and child. Thus, Milner (Lancet, June 7, 1902) records a case of pregnancy in a girl of fourteen; the labor pains were very mild, and delivery was easy. E. B. Wales, of New Jersey, has recorded the history (reproduced in Medical Reprints, Sept. 15, 1890) of a colored girl who became pregnant at the age of eleven. She was of medium size, rather tall and slender, but well developed, and began to menstruate at the age of ten. She was in good health and spirits during pregnancy, and able to work. Delivery was easy and natural, not notably prolonged, and apparently not unduly painful, for there were no moans or agitation. The child was a fine, healthy boy, weighing not less than eleven pounds. Mother and child both did well, and there was a great flow of milk. Whiteside Robertson (British Medical Journal, Jan. 18, 1902) has recorded a case of pregnancy at the age of thirteen, in a Colonial girl of British origin in Cape Colony, which is notable from other points of view. During pregnancy, she was anæmic, and appeared to be of poor development and doubtfully normal pelvic conformation. Yet delivery took place naturally, at full term, without difficulty or injury, and the lying-in period was in every way satisfactory. The baby was well-proportioned, and weighed 7½ pounds. "I have rarely seen a primipara enjoy easier labor," concluded Robertson, "and I have never seen one look forward to the happy realization of motherhood with greater satisfaction."
It’s clear that young mothers do really well, and there’s no doubt they have exceptionally healthy babies. Kleinwächter found that the younger the mother, the larger the child. The advantages of children of young mothers aren’t just physical. Marro found (Pubertà, p. 257) that the children of mothers under 21 excel in behavior and intelligence compared to those of older mothers, as long as the fathers aren’t too old or too young. Detailed case records back up these findings for both mothers and children. For example, Milner (Lancet, June 7, 1902) documented a case of a 14-year-old girl who had mild labor pains and an easy delivery. E. B. Wales from New Jersey reported (reproduced in Medical Reprints, Sept. 15, 1890) on a colored girl who became pregnant at 11. She was medium-sized, fairly tall and slim, but well-developed, starting her period at age 10. She stayed healthy and in good spirits during her pregnancy and was able to work. The delivery was straightforward and natural, with no significant pain, as there were no cries or distress. The baby was a healthy boy weighing at least 11 pounds. Both mother and child were doing well, and there was a strong milk supply. Whiteside Robertson (British Medical Journal, Jan. 18, 1902) reported on a 13-year-old girl from Cape Colony of British descent who had an interesting case for other reasons. She was anemic during her pregnancy and seemed to have poor development and questionable pelvic structure. Still, she delivered naturally, at full term, without complications, and the recovery period was completely satisfactory. The baby was well-formed and weighed 7½ pounds. "I have rarely seen a first-time mother have an easier delivery," Robertson concluded, "and I’ve never seen one look forward to the joyful experience of motherhood with more satisfaction."
The facts brought forward by obstetricians concerning the good results of early pregnancy, as regards both mother and child, have not yet received the attention they deserve. They are, however, confirmed by many general tendencies which are now fairly well recognized. The significant fact is known, for instance, that in mothers over thirty, the proportion of abortions and miscarriages is twice as great as in mothers between the ages of fifteen and twenty, who also are superior in this respect to mothers between the ages of twenty and thirty (Statistischer Jahrbuch, Budapest, 1905). It was, again, proved by Matthews Duncan, in his Goulstonian lecture, that the chances of sterility in a woman increase with increase of age. It has, further, been shown (Kisch, Sexual Life of Woman, Part II) that the older a woman at marriage, the greater the average interval before the first delivery, a tendency which seems to indicate that it is the very young woman who is in the condition most apt for procreation; Kisch is not, indeed, inclined to think that this applies to women below twenty, but the fact, observed by other obstetricians, that mothers under eighteen tend to become pregnant again at an unusually short interval, goes far to neutralize the exception made by Kisch. It may also be pointed out that, among children of very young mothers, the sexes are more nearly equal in number than is the case with older mothers. This would seem to indicate that we are here in presence of a normal equilibrium which will decrease as the age of the mother is progressively disturbed in an abnormal direction.
The information presented by obstetricians about the positive outcomes of early pregnancy for both mother and child hasn’t received the focus it deserves yet. However, it's backed by many general trends that are now widely acknowledged. For instance, it’s well-known that in mothers over thirty, the rates of abortions and miscarriages are twice as high as in mothers aged fifteen to twenty, who are also better off in this regard compared to those between twenty and thirty (Statistischer Jahrbuch, Budapest, 1905). Additionally, Matthews Duncan demonstrated in his Goulstonian lecture that the likelihood of a woman being sterile increases with age. Further research (Kisch, Sexual Life of Woman, Part II) indicates that the older a woman is at marriage, the longer the average time before her first childbirth, suggesting that very young women are more likely to conceive. Kisch doesn’t believe this applies to women under twenty, but the fact noted by other obstetricians that mothers under eighteen tend to get pregnant again relatively quickly challenges Kisch's exception. It’s also worth mentioning that among children of very young mothers, the ratio of boys to girls is more balanced compared to those of older mothers. This suggests that we are observing a natural balance that shifts towards abnormality as the mother's age increases.
The facility of parturition at an early age, it may be noted, corresponds to an equal facility in physical sexual intercourse, a fact that is often overlooked. In Russia, where marriage still takes place early, it was formerly common when the woman was only twelve or thirteen, and Guttceit (Dreissig Jahre Praxis, vol. i, p. 324) says that he was assured by women who married at this age that the first coitus presented no especial difficulties.
The ease of giving birth at a young age is often linked to the ease of engaging in physical sexual intercourse, a point that is frequently ignored. In Russia, where people still marry young, it used to be common for women to marry at just twelve or thirteen. Guttceit (Dreissig Jahre Praxis, vol. i, p. 324) mentions that he was told by women who married at this age that the first sexual experience was not particularly difficult.
There is undoubtedly, at the present time, a considerable amount of prejudice against early motherhood. In part, this is due to a failure to realize that women are sexually much more precocious than men, physically as well as psychically (see ante p. 35). The difference is about five years. This difference has been virtually recognized for thousands of years, in the ancient belief that the age of election for procreation is about twenty, or less, for women, but about twenty-five for men; and it has more lately been affirmed by the discovery that, while the male is never capable of generation before thirteen, the female may, in occasional instances, become pregnant at eight. (Some of the recorded examples are quoted by Kisch.) In part, also, there is an objection to the assumption of responsibilities so serious as those of motherhood by a young girl, and there is the very reasonable feeling that the obligations of a permanent marriage tie ought not to be undertaken at an early age. On the other hand, apart from the physical advantages, as regards both mother and infant, on the side of early pregnancies, it is an advantage for the child to have a young mother, who can devote herself sympathetically and unreservedly to its interests, instead of presenting the pathetic spectacle we so often witness in the middle-aged woman who turns to motherhood when her youth and mental flexibility are gone, and her habits and tastes have settled into other grooves; it has sometimes been a great blessing even to the very greatest men, like Goethe, to have had a youthful mother. It would also, in many cases, be a great advantage for the woman herself if she could bring her procreative life to an end well before the age of twenty-five, so that she could then, unhampered by child-bearing and mature in experience, be free to enter on such wider activities in the world as she might be fitted for.
There is definitely a lot of prejudice against young motherhood these days. Partly, this comes from not realizing that women mature sexually much faster than men, both physically and emotionally (see ante p. 35). The age difference is roughly five years. This has been recognized for centuries in the belief that women are ready for parenthood around twenty or even younger, while men are ready around twenty-five. It has also been confirmed by the fact that while males can't father children before the age of thirteen, females can, in rare cases, become pregnant as young as eight (some documented examples are cited by Kisch). Additionally, there's a concern about young girls taking on such serious responsibilities of motherhood, along with a reasonable view that permanent marriage commitments shouldn’t be made at a young age. On the other hand, despite the physical benefits for both mother and baby associated with early pregnancies, having a young mother can be better for the child. A young mom can fully commit to her child’s needs, unlike the often sad situation we see with middle-aged women who choose motherhood after they've lost their youth and flexibility, settling into established habits and preferences. Having a youthful mom has even been a significant blessing for great men like Goethe. Furthermore, for many women, it would be very beneficial to wrap up their reproductive years before turning twenty-five, so they can then freely pursue a wider range of activities in the world, unburdened by the responsibilities of child-rearing and with more life experience.
Such an arrangement of the procreative life of women would, obviously, only be a variation, and would probably be unsuited for the majority. Every case must be judged on its own merits. The best age for procreation will probably continue to be regarded as being, for most women, around the age of twenty. But at a time like the present, when there is an unfortunate tendency for motherhood to be unduly delayed, it becomes necessary to insist on the advantages, in many cases, of early motherhood.
Such an arrangement of women's reproductive life would, clearly, just be a variation and likely wouldn't suit most people. Each situation needs to be evaluated on its own merits. The best age for having children will probably still be seen as around twenty for most women. However, in a time like now, when there is an unfortunate trend of delaying motherhood, it's important to emphasize the benefits, in many cases, of becoming a mother early.
There are other conditions favorable or unfavorable to procreation which it is now unnecessary to discuss in detail, since they have already been incidentally dealt with in previous volumes of these Studies. There is, for instance, the question of the time of year and the time of the menstrual cycle which may most properly be selected for procreation.[466] The best period is probably that when sexual desire is strongest, which is the period when conception would appear, as a matter of fact, most often to occur. This would be in spring or early summer,[467] and immediately after (or shortly before) the menstrual period. The Chinese have observed that the last day of menstruation and the two following days—corresponding to the period of œstrus—constitute the most favorable time for fecundation, and Bossi, of Genoa, has found that the great majority of successes in both natural and artificial fecundation occur at this period.[468] Soranus, as well as the Talmud, assigned the period about menstruation as the best for impregnation, and Susruta, the Indian physician, said that at this time pregnancy most readily occurs because then the mouth of the womb is open, like the flower of the water-lily to the sunshine.
There are other conditions that can help or hinder reproduction that we don’t need to go into detail about right now, since they’ve already been touched on in earlier volumes of these Studies. For example, there’s the timing of the year and the timing of the menstrual cycle that are best suited for conception. The ideal time is likely when sexual desire is highest, which is typically when conception seems to most often happen. This tends to be in the spring or early summer, and right after (or shortly before) the menstrual period. The Chinese have noted that the last day of menstruation and the two days that follow—matching the period of estrus—are the most favorable times for conception. Bossi from Genoa has discovered that most successful natural and artificial conceptions occur during this time. Soranus and the Talmud also indicated that the time around menstruation is optimal for getting pregnant, and Susruta, the Indian physician, stated that pregnancy is most likely to happen then because the cervix is open, similar to how a water-lily flower opens to the sunlight.
We have now at last reached the point from which we started, the moment of conception, and the child again lies in its mother's womb. There remains no more to be said. The divine cycle of life is completed.
We have finally come back to where we began, to the moment of conception, and the child is once again in its mother’s womb. There’s nothing more to say. The sacred cycle of life is complete.
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 330.
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 330.
Academy of Medicine of Paris, March 31, 1908.
Academy of Medicine of Paris, March 31, 1908.
The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, p. 405.
The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. ii, p. 405.
Population and Progress, p. 41.
Population and Progress, p. 41.
Cf. Reibmayr, Entwicklungsgeschichte des Talentes und Genics, Bd. II, p. 31.
Cf. Reibmayr, Development History of Talent and Genics, Vol. II, p. 31.
"The debt that we owe to those who have gone before us," says Haycraft (Darwinism and Race Progress, p. 160), "we can only repay to those who come after us."
"The debt we owe to those who came before us," says Haycraft (Darwinism and Race Progress, p. 160), "we can only repay to those who come after us."
Mardrus, Les Mille Nuits, vol. xvi, p. 158.
Mardrus, Les Mille Nuits, vol. 16, p. 158.
Sidney Webb, Popular Science Monthly, 1906, p. 526 (previously published in the London Times, Oct. 11, 16, 1906). In Ch. IX of the present volume it has already been necessary to discuss the meaning of the term, "morality."
Sidney Webb, Popular Science Monthly, 1906, p. 526 (previously published in the London Times, Oct. 11, 16, 1906). In Ch. IX of the present volume it has already been necessary to discuss the meaning of the term, "morality."
Thus, in Paris, in 1906, in the rich quarters, the birthrate per 1,000 inhabitants was 19.09; in well-to-do quarters, 22.51; and in poor quarters, 29.70. Here we see that, while the birthrate falls and rises with social class, even among the poor and least restrained class the birthrate is still but little above the general average for England, where prevention is widespread, and very considerably lower than the average (now rapidly falling) in Germany. It is evident that even among the poor class there is a process of leveling up to the higher classes in this matter.
Thus, in Paris, in 1906, in affluent neighborhoods, the birthrate per 1,000 inhabitants was 19.09; in more prosperous areas, it was 22.51; and in lower-income areas, it was 29.70. Here we see that while the birthrate decreases and increases with social class, even among the poor and least controlled class, the birthrate is still just slightly above the general average for England, where birth control is common, and significantly lower than the average (which is now rapidly declining) in Germany. It’s clear that even among the poor, there is a trend toward aligning with the higher classes in this regard.
I have developed these points more in detail in two articles in the Independent Review, November, 1903, and April, 1904. See also, Bushee, "The Declining Birthrate and Its Causes," Popular Science Monthly, Aug., 1903.
I have elaborated on these points in more detail in two articles in the Independent Review, November 1903, and April 1904. Also, check out Bushee, "The Declining Birthrate and Its Causes," Popular Science Monthly, August 1903.
Francis Place, Illustrations and Proofs of the Principle of Population, 1822, p. 165.
Francis Place, Illustrations and Proofs of the Principle of Population, 1822, p. 165.
See, e.g., a weighty chapter in the Sexualleben und Nervenleiden of Löwenfeld, one of the most judicious authorities on sexual pathology. Twenty-five years ago, as many will remember, the medical student was usually taught that preventive methods of intercourse led to all sorts of serious results. At that time, however, reckless and undesirable methods of prevention seem to have been more prevalent than now.
See, e.g., a significant chapter in the Sexualleben und Nervenleiden by Löwenfeld, one of the most knowledgeable experts on sexual pathology. Twenty-five years ago, as many will recall, medical students were typically taught that preventive methods of intercourse resulted in various serious consequences. Back then, however, risky and ineffective prevention methods seemed to be more common than they are today.
Michael Ryan, Philosophy of Marriage, p. 9. To enable "the conservative power of the Creator" to exert itself on the myriads of germinal human beings secreted during his life-time by even one man, would require a world full of women, while the corresponding problem as regards a woman is altogether too difficult to cope with. The process by which life has been built up, far from being a process of universal conservation, has been a process of stringent selection and vast destruction; the progress effected by civilization merely lies in making this blind process intelligent.
Michael Ryan, Philosophy of Marriage, p. 9. To allow "the conservative power of the Creator" to influence the countless potential human beings produced during one man's lifetime would need a world filled with women, whereas the related issue for women is simply too complex to handle. The way life has developed, rather than being a process of universal preservation, has been one of strict selection and massive destruction; the advancement brought about by civilization lies only in making this random process more thoughtful.
Thus, in Belgium, in 1908 (Sexual-Probleme, Feb., 1909, p. 136), a physician (Dr. Mascaux) who had been prominent in promoting a knowledge of preventive methods of conception, was condemned to three months imprisonment for "offense against morality!" In such a case, Dr. Helene Stöcker comments (Die Neue Generation, Jan., 1909, p. 7), "morality" is another name for ignorance, timidity, hypocrisy, prudery, coarseness, and lack of conscience. It must be remembered, however, in explanation of this iniquitous judgment, that for some years past the clerical party has been politically predominant in Belgium.
Thus, in Belgium, in 1908 (Sexual-Probleme, Feb., 1909, p. 136), a doctor (Dr. Mascaux) who had been active in promoting knowledge of preventive methods of conception was sentenced to three months in prison for "offense against morality!" In this case, Dr. Helene Stöcker comments (Die Neue Generation, Jan., 1909, p. 7), "morality" is just another term for ignorance, fear, hypocrisy, prudishness, crudeness, and lack of conscience. It should be noted, however, to explain this unjust judgment, that for several years the clerical party has held political dominance in Belgium.
It has been objected that the condom cannot be used by the very poorest, on account of its cost, but Hans Ferdy, in a detailed paper (Sexual-Probleme, Dec., 1908), shows that the use of the condom can be brought within the means of the very poorest, if care is taken to preserve it under water when not in use. Nyström (Sexual Probleme, Nov., 1908, p. 736) has issued a leaflet for the benefit of his patients and others, recommending the condom, and explaining its use.
It has been argued that the condom is too expensive for the very poorest people, but Hans Ferdy, in a detailed paper (Sexual-Probleme, Dec., 1908), shows that the cost of using condoms can be manageable for the very poorest if they are kept submerged in water when not in use. Nyström (Sexual Probleme, Nov., 1908, p. 736) has published a leaflet for his patients and others, promoting the condom and explaining how to use it.
Thus, Kisch, in his Sexual Life of Woman, after discussing fully the various methods of prevention, decides in favor of the condom. Fürbringer similarly (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, pp. 232 et seq.) concludes that the condom is "relatively the most perfect anti-conceptual remedy." Forel (Die Sexuelle Frage, pp. 457 et seq.) also discusses the question at length; any æsthetic objection to the condom, Forel adds (p. 544), is due to the fact that we are not accustomed to it; "eye-glasses are not specially æsthetic, but the poetry of life does not suffer excessively from their use, which, in many cases, cannot be dispensed with."
So, Kisch, in his Sexual Life of Woman, after thoroughly discussing the different methods of prevention, concludes that the condom is the best option. Similarly, Fürbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, pp. 232 et seq.) also determines that the condom is "relatively the most perfect anti-conceptual remedy." Forel (Die Sexuelle Frage, pp. 457 et seq.) also explores this topic extensively; any aesthetic objections to the condom, Forel adds (p. 544), stem from our lack of familiarity with it; "glasses aren’t particularly aesthetic, but the poetry of life doesn’t suffer much from their use, which, in many cases, is necessary."
L'Avortement, p. 43.
Abortion, p. 43.
There are some disputed points in Roman law and practice concerning abortion; they are discussed in Balestrini's valuable book, Aborto, pp. 30 et seq.
There are some debated issues in Roman law and practice regarding abortion; these are addressed in Balestrini's important book, Aborto, pp. 30 et seq.
Augustine, De Civitate Dei, Bk. XXII, Ch. XIII.
Augustine, City of God, Bk. XXII, Ch. XIII.
The development of opinion and law concerning abortion has been traced by Eugène Bausset, L'Avortement Criminel, Thèse de Paris, 1907. For a summary of the practices of different peoples regarding abortion, see W. G. Sumner, Folkways, Ch. VIII.
The evolution of views and legislation around abortion has been outlined by Eugène Bausset, L'Avortement Criminel, Thèse de Paris, 1907. For an overview of how various cultures approach abortion, refer to W. G. Sumner, Folkways, Ch. VIII.
Die Neue Generation, May, 1908, p. 192. It may be added that in England the attachment of any penalty at all to abortion, practiced in the early months of pregnancy (before "quickening" has taken place), is merely a modern innovation.
Die Neue Generation, May, 1908, p. 192. It’s worth noting that in England, imposing any penalties for abortion during the early months of pregnancy (before "quickening" occurs) is just a recent development.
Even Balestrini, who is opposed to the punishment of abortion, is no advocate of it. "Whenever abortion becomes a social custom," he remarks (op. cit., p. 191), "it is the external manifestation of a people's decadence, and far too deeply rooted to be cured by the mere attempt to suppress the external manifestation."
Even Balestrini, who is against the punishment of abortion, doesn't support it either. "Whenever abortion becomes a social norm," he notes (op. cit., p. 191), "it reflects a society's decline, and it's too deeply embedded to be fixed just by trying to eliminate the outward signs."
Cf. Ellen Key, Century of the Child, Ch. I. Hirth (Wege zur Heimat, p. 526) is likewise opposed to the encouragement of abortion, though he would not actually punish the pregnant woman who induces abortion. I would especially call attention to an able and cogent article by Anna Pappritz ("Die Vernichtung des Keimenden Lebens," Sexual-Probleme, July, 1909) who argues that the woman is not the sole guardian of the embryo she bears, and that it is not in the interests of society, nor even in her own interests, that she should be free to destroy it at will. Anna Pappritz admits that the present barbarous laws in regard to abortion must be modified, but maintains that they should not be abolished. She proposes (1) a greatly reduced punishment for abortion; (2) this punishment to be extended to the father, whether married or unmarried (a provision already carried out in Norway, both for abortion and infanticide); (3) permission to the physician to effect abortion when there is good reason to suspect hereditary degeneration, as well as when the woman has been impregnated by force.
Cf. Ellen Key, Century of the Child, Ch. I. Hirth (Wege zur Heimat, p. 526) is also against promoting abortion, although he wouldn’t actually punish the pregnant woman who has an abortion. I want to highlight a strong and compelling article by Anna Pappritz ("Die Vernichtung des Keimenden Lebens," Sexual-Probleme, July 1909) who argues that the woman isn’t the only guardian of the embryo she carries and that it’s not in society’s interest, nor in her own interest, for her to have the freedom to destroy it at will. Anna Pappritz acknowledges that the current harsh laws regarding abortion need to be changed, but she believes they shouldn’t be completely eliminated. She suggests (1) a significantly reduced punishment for abortion; (2) that this punishment should also apply to the father, regardless of whether he is married or not (a provision already implemented in Norway for both abortion and infanticide); (3) allowing doctors to perform abortions when there’s strong reason to suspect hereditary issues, as well as in cases of rape.
Cf. Dr. Max Hirsch, Sexual-Probleme, Jan., 1908, p. 23.
Cf. Dr. Max Hirsch, Sexual-Probleme, Jan., 1908, p. 23.
Bausset (op. cit.) sets forth various social measures for the care of pregnant and child-bearing women, which would tend to lessen criminal abortion.
Bausset (op. cit.) outlines several social initiatives for the support of pregnant and new mothers, aimed at reducing the occurrence of illegal abortions.
Gomperz, Greek Thinkers, vol. i, p. 564.
Gomperz, Greek Thinkers, vol. 1, p. 564.
F. E. Daniel, President of the State Medical Association of Texas, "Should Insane Criminals or Sexual Perverts be Allowed to Procreate?" Medico-legal Journal, Dec., 1893; id., "The Cause and Prevention of Rape," Texas Medical Journal, May, 1904.
F. E. Daniel, President of the Texas State Medical Association, "Should Insane Criminals or Sexual Perverts Be Allowed to Procreate?" Medico-legal Journal, Dec. 1893; id., "The Cause and Prevention of Rape," Texas Medical Journal, May 1904.
P. Näcke, "Die Kastration bei gewissen Klassen von Degenerirten als ein Wirksamer Socialer Schutz," Archiv für Kriminal-Anthropologie, Bd. III, 1899, p. 58; id. "Kastration in Gewissen Fällen von Geisteskrankheit," Psychiatrisch-Neurologische Wochenschrift, 1905, No. 29.
P. Näcke, "Castration in Certain Classes of Degenerates as an Effective Social Protection," Archive for Criminal Anthropology, Vol. III, 1899, p. 58; id. "Castration in Certain Cases of Mental Illness," Psychiatric-Neurological Weekly, 1905, No. 29.
Angelo Zuccarelli, "Asessualizzazione o sterilizzazione dei Degenerati," L'Anomalo, 1898-99, No. 6; id., "Sur la nécessité et sur les Moyens d'empêcher la Réproduction des Hommes les plus Dégénérés," International Congress Criminal Anthropology, Amsterdam, 1901.
Angelo Zuccarelli, "Asexualization or Sterilization of the Degenerate," L'Anomalo, 1898-99, No. 6; id., "On the Necessity and Means of Preventing the Reproduction of the Most Degenerate Men," International Congress on Criminal Anthropology, Amsterdam, 1901.
Näcke, Neurologisches Centralblatt, March 1, 1909. The original account of these operations is reproduced in the Psychiatrisch-Neurologische Wochenschrift, No. 2, 1909, with an approving comment by the editor, Dr. Bresler. As regards castration in America, see Flood, "Castration of Idiot Children," American Journal Psychology, Jan., 1899; also, Alienist and Neurologist, Aug., 1909, p. 348.
Näcke, Neurological Central Journal, March 1, 1909. The original report of these procedures is reprinted in the Psychiatric-Neurological Weekly, No. 2, 1909, with a positive comment from the editor, Dr. Bresler. Regarding castration in America, see Flood, "Castration of Idiot Children," American Journal of Psychology, Jan., 1899; also, Alienist and Neurologist, Aug., 1909, p. 348.
It is probable that castration may prove especially advantageous in the case of the feeble-minded. "In Somersetshire," says Tredgold ("The Feeble-Mind as a Social Danger," Eugenics Review, July, 1909), "I found that out of a total number of 167 feeble-minded women, nearly two-fifths (61) had given birth to children, for the most part illegitimate. Moreover, it is not uncommon, but, rather the rule, for these poor girls to be admitted into the workhouse maternity wards again and again, and the average number of offspring to each one of them is probably three or four, although even six is not uncommon." In his work on Mental Deficiency (pp. 288-292) the same author shows that propagation by the mentally deficient is, in England, "both a terrible and extensive evil."
It’s likely that castration could be particularly beneficial for individuals with intellectual disabilities. "In Somersetshire," Tredgold states ("The Feeble-Mind as a Social Danger," Eugenics Review, July, 1909), "I found that out of a total of 167 feeble-minded women, almost two-fifths (61) had given birth to children, mostly illegitimate. Furthermore, it’s not unusual, but rather the norm, for these unfortunate girls to be admitted to the workhouse maternity wards repeatedly, and the average number of children for each of them is probably three or four, although having six isn’t rare." In his work on Mental Deficiency (pp. 288-292), the same author shows that reproduction among the mentally deficient is, in England, "both a terrible and widespread problem."
This example is brought forward by Ledermann, "Skin Diseases and Marriage," in Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage.
This example is presented by Ledermann, "Skin Diseases and Marriage," in Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage.
I may here again refer to Lea's instructive History of Sacerdotal Celibacy.
I would like to refer again to Lea's informative History of Sacerdotal Celibacy.
In England, 35,000 applicants for admission to the navy are annually rejected, and although the physical requirements for enlistment in the army are nowadays extremely moderate, it is estimated by General Maurice that at least sixty per cent. of recruits and would-be recruits are dismissed as unfit. (See e.g., William Coates, "The Duty of the Medical Profession in the Prevention of National Deterioration," British Medical Journal, May 1, 1909.) It can scarcely be claimed that men who are not good enough for the army are good enough for the great task of creating the future race.
In England, 35,000 people who apply to join the navy are rejected every year. Even though the physical standards for joining the army are now quite low, General Maurice estimates that at least sixty percent of recruits and potential recruits are deemed unfit. (See e.g., William Coates, "The Duty of the Medical Profession in the Prevention of National Deterioration," British Medical Journal, May 1, 1909.) It’s hard to argue that men who aren't good enough for the army are suitable for the important job of shaping the future generation.
The recognition of epilepsy as a bar to procreation is not recent. There is said to be a record in the archives of the town of Luçon in which epilepsy was adjudged to be a valid reason for the cancellation of a betrothal (British Medical Journal, Feb. 14, 1903, p. 383).
The acknowledgment of epilepsy as a reason to prevent having children isn't new. There's a record in the archives of the town of Luçon that states epilepsy was considered a valid reason to cancel a betrothal (British Medical Journal, Feb. 14, 1903, p. 383).
British Medical Journal, April 14, 1906. In California and some other States, it appears that deceit regarding health is a ground for the annulment of marriage.
British Medical Journal, April 14, 1906. In California and some other states, it seems that dishonesty about health can be a reason to annul a marriage.
Sir F. Galton, Inquiries Into Human Faculty, Everyman's Library edition, pp. 211 et seq.; cf. Galton's collected Essays in Eugenics, recently published by the Eugenics Education Society.
Sir F. Galton, Inquiries Into Human Faculty, Everyman's Library edition, pp. 211 et seq.; cf. Galton's collected Essays in Eugenics, recently published by the Eugenics Education Society.
For some account of the methods and results of the work in schools, see Bertram C. A. Windle, "Anthropometric Work in Schools," Medical Magazine, Feb., 1894.
For details on the methods and results of the work in schools, see Bertram C. A. Windle, "Anthropometric Work in Schools," Medical Magazine, Feb., 1894.
The most notable steps in this direction have been taken in Germany. For an account of the experiment at Karlsruhe, see Die Neue Generation, Dec., 1908.
The most notable steps in this direction have been taken in Germany. For an account of the experiment at Karlsruhe, see Die Neue Generation, Dec., 1908.
Wiethknudsen (as quoted in Sexual-Probleme, Dec., 1908, p. 837) speaks strongly, but not too strongly, concerning the folly of any indiscriminate endowment of procreation.
Wiethknudsen (as quoted in Sexual-Probleme, Dec., 1908, p. 837) expresses a strong opinion, but not excessively so, about the foolishness of randomly granting the ability to procreate.
On the scientific side, in addition to the fruitful methods of statistical biometrics, which have already been mentioned, much promise attaches to work along the lines initiated by Mendel; see W. Bateson, Mendel's Principles of Heredity, 1909; also, W. H. Lock, Recent Progress in the Study of Variation, Heredity, and Evolution, and R. C. Punnett, Mendelism, 1907 (American edition, with interesting preface by Gaylord Wilshire, from the Socialistic point of view, 1909).
On the scientific side, along with the effective methods of statistical biometrics already mentioned, there's a lot of potential in the work started by Mendel; see W. Bateson, Mendel's Principles of Heredity, 1909; also, W. H. Lock, Recent Progress in the Study of Variation, Heredity, and Evolution, and R. C. Punnett, Mendelism, 1907 (American edition, with an interesting preface by Gaylord Wilshire, from a Socialistic perspective, 1909).
The study of the right conditions for procreation is very ancient. In modern times we find that even the very first French medical book in the vulgar tongue, the Régime du Corps, written by Alebrand of Florence (who was physician to the King of France), in 1256, is largely devoted to this matter, concerning which it gives much sound advice. See J. B. Soalhat, Les Idées de Maistre Alebrand de Florence sur la Puériculture, Thèse de Paris, 1908.
The study of the right conditions for reproduction goes way back. In modern times, we see that even the first French medical book in everyday language, the Régime du Corps, written by Alebrand of Florence (who was a physician to the King of France), in 1256, is mostly focused on this topic and offers a lot of solid advice. See J. B. Soalhat, Les Idées de Maistre Alebrand de Florence sur la Puériculture, Thèse de Paris, 1908.
Hesiod, Works and Days, II, 690-700.
Hesiod, Works and Days, II, 690-700.
This has long been the accepted opinion of medical authorities, as may be judged by the statements brought together two centuries ago by Schurig, Parthenologia, pp. 22-25.
This has long been the widely accepted view of medical experts, as can be seen in the statements compiled two centuries ago by Schurig, Parthenologia, pp. 22-25.
The statement that, on the average, the best age for procreation in men is before, rather than after, forty, by no means assumes the existence of any "critical" age in men analogous to the menopause in women. This is sometimes asserted, but there is no agreement in regard to it. Restif de la Bretonne (Monsieur Nicolas, vol. x, p. 176) said that at the age of forty delicacy of sentiment begins to go. Fürbringer believes (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 222) that there is a decisive turn in a man's life in the sixth decade, or the middle of the fifth, when desire and potency diminish. J. F. Sutherland also states (Comptes-rendus Congrès International de Médecine, 1900, Section de Psychiatrie, p. 471) that there is, in men, about the fifty-fifth year, a change analogous to the menopause in women, but only in a certain proportion of men. It would appear that in most men the decline of sexual feeling and potency is very gradual, and at first manifests itself in increased power of control.
The idea that, on average, the best age for men to have children is before forty, rather than after, does not suggest that there is a "critical" age for men similar to menopause in women. This is sometimes claimed, but there's no consensus on it. Restif de la Bretonne (Monsieur Nicolas, vol. x, p. 176) mentioned that at forty, sensitivity starts to decline. Fürbringer believes (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 222) that a significant change occurs in a man’s life during the sixth decade, or the middle of the fifth, when desire and potency begin to decrease. J. F. Sutherland also states (Comptes-rendus Congrès International de Médecine, 1900, Section de Psychiatrie, p. 471) that around the age of fifty-five, men experience a change similar to menopause in women, but this only happens in a certain percentage of men. It seems that in most men, the decline in sexual feelings and potency is very gradual, initially showing up as increased control.
See, in vol. i, the study of "The Phenomena of Sexual Periodicity."
See, in vol. i, the study of "The Phenomena of Sexual Periodicity."
Among animals, also, spring litters are often said to be the best.
Among animals, spring litters are often considered the best.
Bossi's results are summarized in Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, Sept., 1891. Alebrand of Florence, the French King's physician in the thirteenth century, also advised intercourse a day after the end of menstruation.
Bossi's results are summarized in Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle, September 1891. Alebrand of Florence, the French King's physician in the thirteenth century, also recommended intercourse a day after menstruation ends.
POSTSCRIPT.
"The work that I was born to do is done," a great poet wrote when at last he had completed his task. And although I am not entitled to sing any Nunc dimittis, I am well aware that the task that has occupied the best part of my life can have left few years and little strength for any work that comes after. It is more than thirty years ago since the first resolve to write the work now here concluded began to shape itself, still dimly though insistently; the period of study and preparation occupied over fifteen years, ending with the publication of Man and Woman, put forward as a prolegomenon to the main work which, in the writing and publication, has occupied the fifteen subsequent years.
"The work I was meant to do is finished," a great poet said when he finally completed his task. And while I don't have the right to sing any Nunc dimittis, I know that the work that has taken up the best part of my life has left me with few years and little strength for anything that comes next. It’s been more than thirty years since I first decided to write what is now completed, starting off vaguely but persistently; the study and preparation took over fifteen years, culminating in the publication of Man and Woman, which served as an introduction to the main work that has taken the following fifteen years to write and publish.
It was perhaps fortunate for my peace that I failed at the outset to foresee all the perils that beset my path. I knew indeed that those who investigate severely and intimately any subject which men are accustomed to pass by on the other side lay themselves open to misunderstanding and even obloquy. But I supposed that a secluded student who approached vital social problems with precaution, making no direct appeal to the general public, but only to the public's teachers, and who wrapped up the results of his inquiries in technically written volumes open to few, I supposed that such a student was at all events secure from any gross form of attack on the part of the police or the government under whose protection he imagined that he lived. That proved to be a mistake. When only one volume of these Studies had been written and published in England, a prosecution, instigated by the government, put an end to the sale of that volume in England, and led me to resolve that the subsequent volumes should not be published in my own country. I do not complain. I am grateful for the early and generous sympathy with which my work was received in Germany and the United States, and I recognize that it has had a wider circulation, both in English and the other chief languages of the world, than would have been possible by the modest method of issue which the government of my own country induced me to abandon. Nor has the effort to crush my work resulted in any change in that work by so much as a single word. With help, or without it, I have followed my own path to the end.
It was probably lucky for my peace of mind that I didn’t realize all the dangers ahead of me at the beginning. I did know that those who dig deep into topics that people usually ignore risk being misunderstood and even criticized. But I thought that a private student who tackled important social issues carefully, addressing only educators instead of the general public, and who presented the findings in complex, specialized books that few would read, would be safe from any serious backlash from the police or the government he believed was protecting him. That turned out to be a mistake. After just one volume of these Studies was written and published in England, a prosecution initiated by the government stopped the sale of that volume in England, prompting me to decide not to publish the remaining volumes in my own country. I’m not complaining. I’m thankful for the early and generous support my work found in Germany and the United States, and I recognize that it has reached a broader audience, in both English and the major languages of the world, than would have been possible with the low-key release method that my own government pushed me to give up. Moreover, the attempt to suppress my work hasn’t changed it by even a single word. With help or without, I have continued on my own path to the end.
For it so happens that I come on both sides of my house from stocks of Englishmen who, nearly three hundred years ago, had encountered just these same difficulties and dangers before. In the seventeenth century, indeed, the battle was around the problem of religion, as to-day it is around the problem of sex. Since I have of late years realized this analogy I have often thought of certain admirable and obscure men who were driven out, robbed, and persecuted, some by the Church because the spirit of Puritanism moved within them, some by the Puritans because they clung to the ideals of the Church, yet both alike quiet and unflinching, both alike fighting for causes of freedom or of order in a field which has now for ever been won. That victory has often seemed of good augury to the perhaps degenerate child of these men who has to-day sought to maintain the causes of freedom and of order in another field.
For it turns out that I am descended from Englishmen who faced these same challenges and dangers nearly three hundred years ago. In the seventeenth century, the struggle was over religion, much like today’s struggle over sexuality. Recently, I've noticed this similarity and often think about certain admirable yet obscure individuals who were exiled, robbed, and persecuted—some by the Church due to the spirit of Puritanism within them, and others by the Puritans because they clung to the Church’s ideals. Yet both groups remained calm and resolute, fighting for freedom or order in a realm that has now been permanently secured. That victory often seems promising to the possibly less virtuous descendants of these individuals, who today strive to uphold freedom and order in another arena.
It sometimes seems, indeed, a hopeless task to move the pressure of inert prejudices which are at no point so obstinate as this of sex. It may help to restore the serenity of our optimism if we would more clearly realize that in a very few generations all these prejudices will have perished and be forgotten. He who follows in the steps of Nature after a law that was not made by man, and is above and beyond man, has time as well as eternity on his side, and can afford to be both patient and fearless. Men die, but the ideas they seek to kill live. Our books may be thrown to the flames, but in the next generation those flames become human souls. The transformation is effected by the doctor in his consulting room, by the teacher in the school, the preacher in the pulpit, the journalist in the press. It is a transformation that is going on, slowly but surely, around us.
It often feels like a daunting challenge to shift the weight of stubborn biases, especially regarding gender. But it might bring back some of our optimism if we realize that in just a few generations, these biases will fade away and be forgotten. Those who follow Nature's laws, which are beyond human control, have both time and eternity supporting them, allowing them to be patient and brave. People may die, but the ideas they try to suppress endure. Our books might be burned, but in the next generation, those flames turn into human souls. This change is happening through doctors in their offices, teachers in schools, preachers in their sermons, and journalists in the media. It's a transformation that's occurring, slowly but surely, all around us.
I am well aware that many will not feel able to accept the estimate of the sexual situation as here set forth, more especially in the final volume. Some will consider that estimate too conservative, others too revolutionary. For there are always some who passionately seek to hold fast to the past; there are always others who passionately seek to snatch at what they imagine to be the future. But the wise man, standing midway between both parties and sympathizing with each, knows that we are ever in the stage of transition. The present is in every age merely the shifting point at which past and future meet, and we can have no quarrel with either. There can be no world without traditions; neither can there be any life without movement. As Heracleitus knew at the outset of modern philosophy, we cannot bathe twice in the same stream, though, as we know to-day, the stream still flows in an unending circle. There is never a moment when the new dawn is not breaking over the earth, and never a moment when the sunset ceases to die. It is well to greet serenely even the first glimmer of the dawn when we see it, not hastening towards it with undue speed, nor leaving the sunset without gratitude for the dying light that once was dawn.
I know that many people won’t agree with the view on the sexual situation presented here, especially in the final volume. Some will think this view is too conservative, while others will see it as too radical. There will always be those who cling passionately to the past, and others who eagerly reach for what they imagine to be the future. But the wise person, standing in between both sides and empathizing with each, understands that we are always in a state of change. The present, in every era, is just the meeting point of the past and the future, and we can’t argue with either. We can't have a world without traditions, and life cannot exist without progress. As Heraclitus recognized at the beginning of modern philosophy, we cannot step into the same river twice, even though, as we know today, the river flows in an endless loop. There’s never a moment when dawn isn’t breaking across the earth, nor a moment when sunset stops fading away. It’s important to calmly acknowledge even the first light of dawn when we see it, not rushing towards it too quickly, nor leaving the sunset without appreciating the fading light that was once dawn.
In the moral world we are ourselves the light-bearers, and the cosmic process is in us made flesh. For a brief space it is granted to us, if we will, to enlighten the darkness that surrounds our path. As in the ancient torch-race, which seemed to Lucretius to be the symbol of all life, we press forward torch in hand along the course. Soon from behind comes the runner who will outpace us. All our skill lies in giving into his hand the living torch, bright and unflickering, as we ourselves disappear in the darkness.
In the moral world, we are the ones who carry the light, and the cosmic process becomes tangible through us. For a short time, we have the chance, if we choose, to illuminate the darkness around us. Like in the ancient torch relay, which Lucretius saw as a symbol of all life, we move forward with the torch in hand along our path. Soon, the runner following behind will surpass us. Our only skill is passing the bright, unwavering torch into their hands as we ourselves fade into the darkness.
HAVELOCK ELLIS.
Havelock Ellis.
INDEX OF AUTHORS.
- Abdias, 158.
- Achery, 24, 270.
- Acton, 191, 261, 270.
- Adam, Mme., 79, 411, 465.
- Adler, Felix, 485.
- Adler, O., 523, 525, 527, 546.
- Adner, 456.
- Aguilaniedo, 260, 265, 266, 300, 305.
- Alebrand, 633, 638.
- Alexander, Dr. H., 278, 591.
- Alexandre, Alcide, 30.
- Allée, A., 27.
- Allen, L. M., 9.
- Allen, Mary W., 49, 50.
- Ambrose, St., 158.
- Amélineau, 43.
- Ammon, 209.
- Amram, D. W., 394.
- Angela de Fulginio, 153.
- Angus, H. C., 88, 515.
- Anstie, 187, 188, 189.
- Aquinas, 16, 168, 180, 220, 283.
- Ardu, 278.
- Arendt, Henrietta, 260.
- Aretino, 558.
- Aristotle, 167, 222, 604.
- Aronstam, 625.
- Ascarilla, 278.
- Aschaffenburg, 259, 268.
- Astengo, 9.
- Astor, Mary, 397.
- Astruc, 322.
- Athanasius, 128.
- Athenæus, 95, 230.
- Audry, 327.
- Augagneur, 191.
- Augustine, St., 16, 96, 98, 123, 125, 126, 132, 167, 168, 232, 282, 399, 432, 604.
- Aurientis, 347.
- Ayala, 322.
- Bacchimont, 11.
- Bachaumont, 600.
- Badley, J. H., 49, 53.
- Baelz, 108.
- Baer, K. M., 303.
- Baker, Smith, 459, 521.
- Balestrini, 604, 608, 610.
- Ballantyne, Dr., 9, 11, 584, 605.
- Ballantyne, Miss H., 76.
- Balls-Headley, 188.
- Balzac, 281, 525, 539.
- Bangs, L. B., 551.
- Bartels, Max, 14, 41.
- Basedow, 56.
- Basil, St., 167.
- Bateson, 585, 630.
- Baumgarten, 266, 274.
- Bausset, 605, 611.
- Bax, Belfort, 363, 474.
- Bazan, Emilia Pardo, 91.
- Beadnell, C. M., 88.
- Beddoes, 50, 56.
- Bedollière, 195, 462, 517.
- Bell, Sanford, 37, 38, 528.
- Benecke, 134, 234.
- Benedikt, 537.
- Bentzon, Mme., 519.
- Bérault, G., 252, 287.
- Berg, Leo, 89.
- Bernard, St., 119.
- Berry, F., 73.
- Bertherand, 233.
- Bertillon, 625.
- Besant, Mrs., 446.
- Beza, 441, 442.
- Bierhoff, 333.
- Birnbaum, 564.
- Bishop, G. P., 448, 452, 478.
- Bishop, Mrs., 108.
- Blacker, 24, 597.
- Blake, William, 86, 101, 144.
- Blandford, 61, 597.
- Blaschko, 251, 253, 266.
- Bloch, Iwan,
- Bluhm, Agnes, 15.
- Blumreich, 552.
- Boccaccio, 514.
- Bohier, 533.
- Bois, Jules, 235.
- Boissier, de Sauvages, 513.
- Bollinger, 27.
- Bölsche, 107.
- Bonger, 225, 259, 264, 291.
- Bongi, S., 245.
- Bonhoeffer, 277.
- Boniface, St., 295.
- Bonnifield, 187.
- Bonstetten, 136.
- Booth, C., 261, 289, 303, 388.
- Booth, D. S., 551.
- Bossi, 638.
- Bouchacourt, 7, 9, 17, 19.
- Bougainville, 149.
- Bourget, 79.
- Bouvier, 590.
- Boyle, F., 105.
- Brachet, 186.
- Braun, Lily, 4, 400.
- Brénier de Montmorand, 153.
- Brénot, H., 19.
- Breuer, 526.
- Brieux, 357.
- Brinton, 134.
- Brouardel, 601, 602.
- Brougham Lord, 91.
- Brown, Dr. Charlotte, 74.
- Bruns, Ivo, 308.
- Brynmor-Jones, 380, 392, 461.
- Bucer, 441.
- Budge, A. W., 152.
- Buffon, 143.
- Bulkley, D., 339.
- Büller, 25.
- Bumm, 329.
- Bunge, 15.
- Burchard, 163, 243, 537.
- Burdach, 559.
- Buret, 321.
- Burnet, 429.
- Burton, Sir R., 381.
- Burton, Robert, 96, 208, 284, 513.
- Busch, 185, 390, 559.
- Bushee, 593.
- Butler, G., 43.
- Butterfield, 208.
- Byers, 30.
- Cabanis, 185.
- Caird, Mona, 148, 471.
- Callari, 275.
- Calvin, 441, 442.
- Calza, 241.
- Canudo, 223.
- Capitaine, 125, 127.
- Caron, 7.
- Carpenter, Edward, 46, 79, 116, 172, 314, 419, 510.
- Casanova, 600.
- Caspari, 464.
- Cataneus, 321.
- Cattell, J. McKeen, 210.
- Caufeynon, 163.
- Cazalis, 625.
- Chaignon, 30.
- Chambers, E. K., 98.
- Chambers, W. G., 77.
- Chapman, G., 437.
- Chapman, J., 501.
- Cheetham, 218.
- Cheng, Mme., 14.
- Cheyne, 235.
- Child, May, 427.
- Chotzen, M., 83.
- Chrysostom, 126, 152, 154.
- Cicero, 239.
- Ciuffo, 293.
- Clapperton, Miss, 379, 487, 565, 585.
- Clappier, 11, 12.
- Clarke, 67.
- Clement of Alexandria, 16, 101, 125, 127, 509.
- Clement E., 461.
- Cleveland, C., 356.
- Clouston, 84, 426, 562, 628.
- Coates, W., 624.
- Codrington, R. W., 227.
- Coghlan, 385.
- Colombey, 247.
- Coltman, 236, 237.
- Commenge, 269, 275.
- Cook, G. W., 70.
- Cook, Capt. J., 149, 226.
- Cooper, A., 631.
- Cope, E. D., 425, 472, 501, 511.
- Correa, Roman, 174.
- Coryat, 241.
- Crackanthorpe, 579, 585.
- Cranmer, 443.
- Crawley, A. E., 123, 145, 221, 371, 393, 398, 424, 425, 435.
- Crocker, 326.
- Curr, 390.
- Gushing, W., 331.
- Cyples, 223.
- Daniel, F. E., 614.
- Dareste, 18.
- Dargun, 391.
- Darmesteter, J., 236.
- Darricarrère, 609.
- Darwin, 565.
- Daudet, A., 45.
- D'Aulnoy, Mme., 560.
- Daya, W., 385.
- Debreyne, 16.
- D'Enjoy, Paul, 461, 490.
- Dens, 16.
- Deodhar, Mrs. Kashibai, 306.
- Descartes, 563.
- Despine, 275.
- Després, 250, 264, 346, 381.
- Dessoir, Max, 557.
- Diaz de Isla, 323.
- Diday, 625.
- Diderot, 123, 491, 527.
- Digby, Sir K., 164.
- Dill, 151, 373, 397.
- Dluska, Mme., 25.
- Dodd, Catherine, 77.
- Doléris, 603.
- Donaldson, Principal, 308, 394, 397, 398, 399.
- Donnay, 136.
- Drysdale, C. R., 345, 595, 596.
- Drysdale, G., 595.
- Duclaux, 310, 334, 340, 341, 346, 628.
- Dühren, see Bloch, Iwan.
- Dufour, P., 239, 240, 294.
- Dukes, 627.
- Dulaure, 99, 232.
- Dulberg, 331.
- Dumas, G., 564.
- Duncan, Matthews, 187, 577, 636.
- Dunnett, 69.
- Dunning, 329.
- Dupouey, 234.
- Durkheim, 424, 435.
- Durlacher, 605.
- Dyer, I., 249, 348, 353.
- Edgar, J. Clifton, 72.
- Egbert, S., 353.
- Ehrenfels, C. von, 502, 619.
- Elliot, G. F. S., 97.
- Ellis, Sir A. B., 147, 148, 229.
- Ellis, Havelock,
- Ellis, William, 149.
- Elmy, Ben., see Ethelmer, Ellis.
- Enderlin, Max, 49, 91, 92, 107.
- Engelmann, 65, 68, 76.
- Ennius, 96.
- Enzensberger, 145.
- Erb, 193, 330, 339, 535.
- Erhard, F., 166, 287.
- Escherich, 25.
- Esmein, 429, 433, 438, 442.
- Espy de Metz, 358.
- Ethelmer, Ellis, 53, 521.
- Eulenburg, 107, 191, 525, 546.
- Evans, Mrs. Grainger, 69.
- Farnell, 165, 230, 231.
- Farrer, R. T., 307.
- Federow, 259.
- Ferdy, H., 590, 599, 600.
- Féré, 19, 191, 208, 268.
- Ferrand, 164.
- Ferrero, G., 267, 280, 414.
- Ferriani, 258, 290.
- Fiaschi, 233.
- Fiaux, 266.
- Fielding, 412, 427.
- Finger, 334.
- Fischer, W., 268.
- Fitchett, 407.
- Flesch, Max, 205, 352, 609.
- Flogel, 218.
- Flood, 615.
- Forberg, 558.
- Forel, 106, 131, 141, 363, 419, 519, 524, 534, 565, 599.
- Fornasari, 277.
- Fothergill, J. M., 63.
- Fouquet, 322.
- Fournier, 322, 327, 339, 625.
- Fox, G., 446.
- Fracastorus, 321, 335.
- Fraser, Mrs., 135.
- Frazer, J. G., 68, 145, 231, 233, 392.
- Freeman, 440.
- French, H. C., 327.
- Freud, 36, 42, 79, 166, 185, 189, 199, 524, 526, 555.
- Friedjung, 27.
- Friedländer, 397.
- Fuchs, N., 404.
- Funk, W., 356.
- Fürbringer, 19, 35, 191, 526, 527, 534, 552, 555, 559, 599, 634.
- Fürth, Henriette, 52.
- Gache, 635.
- Gaedeken, 382.
- Gallard, 510.
- Galton, Sir F., 580, 582, 583, 618, 626.
- Gardiner, J. S., 235.
- Garrison, C. G., 475, 478, 481.
- Gaultier, J. de, 171, 371.
- Gautier, L., 401, 432.
- Geary, N., 80, 348, 440, 477.
- Gennep, A. Van, 235.
- Gérard, 633.
- Gerhard, Adele, 70.
- Gerhard, W., 106.
- Gerson, A., 216, 288, 413, 494.
- Gesell, 563.
- Gibb, W. T., 276, 337.
- Gibbon, 150.
- Giles, A. E., 72, 187.
- Giles, H. A., 14.
- Gillard, E., 566.
- Gillen, 87, 221, 392, 424, 533, 576.
- Gilles de la Tourette, 191.
- Ginnell, 461.
- Giuffrida-Ruggeri, 278.
- Glück, L., 321.
- Godard, 37.
- Godfrey, J. A., 185, 211, 314, 423, 425, 426, 447.
- Godwin, W., 483.
- Goethe, 472.
- Gomperz, 612.
- Goncourt, 65, 290, 309, 356.
- Goodchild, F. M., 44, 263, 266.
- Goring, 591.
- Gottheil, 251.
- Gottschling, 88.
- Gourmont, Remy de, 136, 540, 555.
- Graef, R. de, 120.
- Graf, A., 244.
- Grandin, 331, 353.
- Green, C. M., 525.
- Gregory the Great, 16, 180.
- Gregory of Nazianzen, 220.
- Gregory of Nyssa, 126.
- Gregory of Tours, 159, 399.
- Gregory M., 492.
- Griesinger, 186.
- Gross, 36, 572.
- Gross, H., 608.
- Grosse, 409.
- Gulick, L. H., 74.
- Gurlitt, L., 54, 224.
- Gury, 414.
- Guttceit, 535, 537, 541, 637.
- Guyau, 85.
- Guyot, 225, 534, 539, 545.
- Gyurkovechky, 182, 202.
- Haddon, A. C., 87, 101.
- Hagelstange, 219, 431.
- Hale, 409.
- Hall, A., 603.
- Hall, Stanley, 40, 60, 67, 82, 109.
- Hall, W., 5, 6.
- Haller, 534.
- Hamilton, A., 238.
- Hammer, 185, 269, 272, 273.
- Hammond, W. A., 37, 534, 535, 612.
- Hamon, A., 603.
- Hard, Hedwig, 274, 296.
- Hardy, Thomas, 529.
- Harris, A., 10.
- Harrison, F., 94.
- Hartland, E. S., 231.
- Harwood, W. L., 331.
- Haskovec, 625.
- Haslam, J., 409, 588.
- Hausmeister, P., 251.
- Havelburg, 320.
- Hawkesworth, 227.
- Haycraft, 581, 584.
- Hayes, P. J., 439.
- Haynes, E. S. P., 434.
- Hegar, 191.
- Heidenhain, A., 83.
- Heidingsfeld, 251.
- Heimann, 545.
- Hellmann, 77, 122, 300.
- Hellpach, 168, 190, 306.
- Helme, T. A., 11, 16.
- Helvétius, 139.
- Herbert, Auberon, 470.
- Herman, G., 41.
- Hermant, A., 300.
- Herodotus, 108, 229, 232, 233, 391, 408, 409.
- Heron, 591.
- Hesiod, 558, 633.
- Hiller, 609.
- Hinton, 111, 112, 116, 132, 144, 165, 169, 181, 190, 315, 364, 445, 492, 501, 539, 570.
- Hirsch, Max, 611.
- Hirschfeld, Magnus, 80, 270, 273, 456.
- Hirth, G., 312, 496, 521, 522, 551, 569.
- Hobhouse, L. T., 370, 394, 396, 401, 405, 408, 409, 410, 431, 460, 470, 480.
- Hobson, J. A., 410.
- Hoffmann, E., 324.
- Holbach, 115, 425.
- Holder, A. B., 323.
- Holmes, T., 378.
- Holt, R. B., 235, 498.
- Hopkins, Ellice, 53, 289.
- Hort, 155.
- Houzel, 72.
- Howard, G. B., 424, 429, 432, 436, 440, 441, 446, 448, 451, 464, 471, 477, 506, 528.
- Howitt, A. W., 424.
- Hudrey-Menos, J., 58.
- Hughes, C. H., 584.
- Humboldt, W. Von, 222, 444, 463.
- Hutchinson, Sir J., 535.
- Hutchinson, Woods, 130, 140, 258, 276, 286, 289, 299, 410, 422, 468.
- Hyde, J. N., 104.
- Hyrtl, 600.
- Jacobi, Mary P., 66.
- Jacobsohn, L., 192.
- Janet, 146, 198.
- Janke, 270.
- Jastrow, M., 229.
- Jeannel, 265, 292, 295.
- Jellinek, C., 608.
- Jentsch, K., 196.
- Jerome, H., 101, 151, 152, 155, 207.
- John of Salisbury, 98.
- Jones, Sir W., 129.
- Jullien, 625.
- Kaan, 50.
- Kalbeck, 110.
- Karin, Karina, 59.
- Keller, G., 36.
- Kelly, H. A., 512.
- Kennedy, Helen, 65, 69.
- Key, Ellen,
- Keyes, E. L., 55, 59.
- Kiernan, 278, 474.
- Kind, A., 44, 54.
- Kingsley, C., 469.
- Kirk, E. B., 54.
- Kisch,
- Klotz, 556.
- Knott, J., 322.
- Kossmann, 534.
- Kowalewsky, Sophie, 141.
- Krafft-Ebing, 182, 194, 326, 416, 599.
- Krauss, F. S., 163, 227, 231.
- Krukenberg, Frau, 49.
- Kubary, 550.
- Kullberg, 261.
- Kurella, 273.
- Lacroix, P., 229.
- Lafargue, Paul, 165.
- La Jeunesse, E., 299.
- Lallemand, 182.
- Lambkin, 325, 327, 406.
- Lancaster, 60.
- Landor, 173.
- Landret, 335.
- Langsdorf, 89.
- Lapie, 419.
- Laplace, 141.
- Lasco, John à, 509.
- Lauvergne, 186.
- Laycock, 562.
- Lea, 153, 162, 180, 283, 419, 496, 623.
- Lecky, 281, 307, 370, 374, 398, 460, 495.
- Lederer, 186, 202.
- Ledermann, 622.
- Lee, Sidney, 514.
- Lefebvre, A., 572.
- Legg, J. W., 432, 509.
- Lemonnier, C., 46, 134.
- Lenkei, 104.
- Lepage, 634.
- Letourneux, 8.
- Lévy-Bruhl, 371.
- Lewis, Denslow, 47, 353.
- Lewitt, 204.
- Leyboff, 10.
- Lilienthal, 608.
- Lindsey, B. B., 63.
- Lippert, 266, 291.
- Lischnewska, Maria, 54, 57, 106.
- Liszt, 608.
- Livingstone, W. P., 389.
- Lock, W. H., 630.
- Logan, 257.
- Lombroso, 267, 275, 280, 414.
- Löwenfeld, 185, 194, 535, 598.
- Lowndes, 320.
- Lucas, Clement, 337.
- Lucretius, 556.
- Lumholtz, 543.
- Luther, 181, 441, 499, 532, 578.
- Lydston, 612.
- Lyttelton, E., 46, 49, 59, 311.
- Maberly, G. C., 480.
- MacMurchy, Dr. Helen, 69.
- Macvie, 605.
- Madam, M., 500.
- Maeterlinck, 115.
- Magruder, J., 427.
- Maillard-Brune, 13.
- Maine, 395.
- Maitland, 40, 424, 440.
- Malthus, 138, 594.
- Mandeville, B., 249, 285, 364.
- Mannhardt, 231.
- Mantegazza, A., 266, 293.
- Mantegazza, P., 534, 543.
- Marçais, 394.
- Marchesini, 62.
- Marcuse, J., 107.
- Marcuse, M., 202, 271.
- Margueritte, P., 250, 334, 465, 473.
- Margueritte, V., 250, 334, 357, 465, 473.
- Marholm, L., 594.
- Marro, 50, 58, 290, 293, 363, 592, 635.
- Martindale, Miss, 22.
- Martineau, 292.
- Marx, V., 393.
- Massalongo, 599.
- Masson, 444.
- Mathews, A., 368.
- Mathews, R. H., 87.
- Matignon, 237, 287.
- Maudsley, 140.
- Maurice, General, 623.
- Mayor, 155.
- Mayreder, Rosa, 176, 404, 417, 574.
- McBride, G. H., 72.
- McCleary, G. F., 9, 10.
- McIlquham, 397.
- Melancthon, 442.
- Menger, A. von, 27, 350, 585.
- Menjago, 171.
- Mensinga, 596.
- Meredith, G., 472.
- Mérimée, 166, 572.
- Merrick, 257, 266, 268, 288, 289, 294.
- Metchnikoff, 46, 90, 324, 360, 584.
- Meyer-Benfey, H., 514.
- Meyer, Bruno, 377, 529.
- Meyer, E. H., 382.
- Meyrick, 399, 499.
- Michelet, 558.
- Michels, R., 306, 547.
- Migne, 152.
- Mill, J., 594.
- Mill, J. S., 397.
- Millais, J. G., 422.
- Miller, Noyes, 553, 629.
- Miln, L. J., 498.
- Milner, 636.
- Milton, 443.
- Möbius, 90.
- Molinari, G. de, 263, 286.
- Moll,
- Mönkemöller, 268.
- Montaigne, 509, 513, 527.
- Montesquieu, 464.
- Montmorency, 448.
- Mookerji, 330.
- Moore, Samson, 29.
- Morasso, 268, 274.
- More, Sir T., 102, 354.
- Moreau, Christophe, 252.
- Morley, Lord, 281, 464, 620.
- Morley, Margaret, 53.
- Morris, William, 144.
- Morrow, 345.
- Mortimer, G., 387.
- Moryson, Fynes, 105.
- Mott, F. W., 324, 325, 326.
- Multatuli, 50.
- Münsterberg, 459, 486.
- Murray, Gilbert, 222.
- Mylott, 525.
- Näcke, 41, 84, 191, 194, 287, 326, 538, 614, 615.
- Naumann, F., 4.
- Nefzaoui, 513.
- Neisser, 287, 324, 329, 352.
- Neugebauer, 525.
- Newman, G., 6, 10, 11, 15, 603.
- Newsholme, A., 590.
- Niessen, Max von, 361.
- Nietzold, 394, 487.
- Nietzsche, 87, 99, 132, 140, 170, 219, 220, 317, 368.
- Niven, 11.
- Noble, M., 545.
- Noggerath, 330.
- Northcote, Rev. H., 16, 49, 93, 123, 181, 196, 385, 509.
- Notthaft, 321.
- Noyes, J. H., 553, 617.
- Nyström, 183, 185, 202, 599.
- Obersteiner, 326.
- Obici, 62.
- Odo of Cluny, 119.
- Oefele, 328.
- Okamura, 322.
- Olberg, Oda, 607.
- Omer, Haleby, 513.
- Ostwald, H., 271.
- Ott, 597.
- Ovid, 513, 546, 556.
- Owen, R. D., 595.
- Paget, Sir J., 191, 510, 609.
- Palladius, 152.
- Pappritz, Anna, 610.
- Parent-Duchâtelet, 256, 259, 261, 265, 294, 307.
- Paré, 561.
- Parsons, E. C., 378.
- Parsons, J., 551.
- Patmore, C., 45.
- Paton, Noel, 16.
- Paul, Dr. H., 166.
- Paulucci de Calboli, 303.
- Paulus, 475.
- Pearson, K., 222, 583, 585, 618.
- Péchin, 7.
- Pepys, 98, 129, 297, 414, 495, 566.
- Pernet, 320.
- Perruc, 11.
- Perry-Coste, 532.
- Petermann, J., 556.
- Petrie, Flinders, 230, 394.
- Picard, 635.
- Pike, 403.
- Pinard, 7, 8, 9, 19, 578, 582, 606.
- Pinkus, 632.
- Pinloche, 56.
- Place, Francis, 595.
- Plato, 95, 230, 604.
- Plarr, V., 600.
- Plautus, 396.
- Playfair, Sir W. S., 64.
- Ploss, 14, 16, 68, 516, 560.
- Plutarch, 108, 220, 510.
- Pole, M. T., 53.
- Pollack, Flora, 337.
- Pollock, Sir F., 401, 424, 440.
- Potter, M. A., 380, 381, 543.
- Potton, 262.
- Power, D'Arcy, 324.
- Powys, 386.
- Prat, 138.
- Price, J., 341.
- Prevost, M., 79.
- Prinzing, 632.
- Probst-Biraben, 146.
- Proksch, 601.
- Pudor, 99, 105, 112.
- Punnett, 630.
- Pyke, Rafford, 485, 531, 538.
- Rabelais, 482.
- Rabutaux, 224, 240, 242, 284.
- Raciborski, 269, 596.
- Radbruch, 608.
- Ramdohr, 37.
- Ramsay, Sir W. M., 156, 165, 234.
- Rasmussen, 405, 561, 564.
- Ratramnus, 124.
- Redlich, 195.
- Reed, C., 554.
- Régnier, H. de, 301.
- Reibmayr, 77, 174, 293, 580, 619.
- Reinhard, 329.
- Remo, P., 252, 266.
- Remondino, 183.
- Renan, 141, 156, 160.
- Renooz, Céline, 110.
- Renouf, C., 35.
- Renouvier, 138.
- Restif de la Bretonne, 349, 517, 634.
- Reuss, 225, 263, 292, 295.
- Reuther, F., 83.
- Revillout, 393.
- Rhys, Sir J., 380, 392, 461.
- Ribbing, 191, 535.
- Ribot, 565.
- Rich, H., 35.
- Richard, C., 286.
- Richard, E., 225, 253.
- Richmond, Mrs. Ennis, 50, 53, 59.
- Ritter, Dr. Mary, 69.
- Robert, U., 242.
- Robertson, W., 636.
- Robinovitch, L., 584.
- Rogers, Anna, 485.
- Rohde, 513.
- Rohleder, 184, 196, 203.
- Rolfincius, 122.
- Rosenberg, 625.
- Rosenthal, 422.
- Rousseau, 101.
- Routh, 186.
- Rudeck, 242, 384.
- Rufinus Tyrannius, 127.
- Ruggles, W., 330.
- Rüling, Anna, 273.
- Ruskin, 92.
- Russell, Mrs. Bertrand, 30.
- Rust, H., 88.
- Rutgers, 561.
- Ryan, M., 378, 598.
- Ryckère, E. de, 265.
- Sabine, J. K., 69.
- Sacher-Masoch, Wanda von, 469.
- Sainte-Beuve, 247.
- Saleeby, 585.
- Salimbene, 163.
- Salvat, 22, 83.
- Sanborn, Lura, 72, 73.
- Sanchez, T., 180.
- Sandoz, F., 104.
- Sanger, 257, 266, 289, 294.
- Sarraute-Lourié, Mme., 10.
- Schäfenacker, 91.
- Schaudinn, 324.
- Schlegel, F., 101, 514.
- Schmid, Marie von, 32.
- Schmidt, R., 129, 545.
- Schneider, C. K., 262.
- Schopenhauer, 137, 281, 320, 492.
- Schrader, O., 383, 403.
- Schrank, 241, 295.
- Schreiber, Adele, 200, 427.
- Schreiner, Olive, 408.
- Schrempf, 570.
- Schrenck-Notzing, 182, 599.
- Schroeder, E. A., 27, 370.
- Schroeder, T., 54, 224, 498.
- Schultz, Alwyn, 98, 163, 537.
- Schultze-Malkowsky, E., 36.
- Schurig, 182, 533, 535, 634.
- Schurtz, H., 227, 228, 309.
- Schwalbe, 632.
- Scott, Colin, 170.
- Scott, J. F., 184, 191, 602.
- Ségur, 397.
- Seligmann, 68.
- Sellman, W. A. B., 74.
- Sénancour, 80, 98, 102, 164, 167, 376, 415, 495, 500, 547.
- Seneca, 220.
- Séropian, 9, 19.
- Sévigné, Mme. de, 600.
- Seymour, H. J., 620.
- Shakespeare, 564.
- Shaw, G. B., 358.
- Shebbeare, Rev. C. J., 526.
- Shelley, 144.
- Sherwell, 259, 265, 289, 294.
- Shufeldt, 93, 97, 114, 422, 465, 471, 483.
- Sidgwick, H., 170, 225, 366, 367.
- Sidis, Boris, 78.
- Sieroshevski, 147.
- Simmel, 299.
- Simon, Helene, 70.
- Sinclair, Sir W., 11.
- Smith, Robertson, 228, 392.
- Soalhat, 633.
- Somerset, Lady Henry, 587.
- Sommer, R., 58, 108.
- Soranus, 18, 638.
- Spencer, Baldwin, 87, 221, 392, 424, 576.
- Spencer, Herbert, 135, 317.
- Spitta, 635.
- Stanmore, Lord, 100, 406.
- Stefanowski, 564.
- Stefánsson, 461.
- Stevenson, R. L., 406.
- Stevenson, T. H. C., 590.
- Stöcker, Helene, 200, 375, 405, 419, 573, 587, 598.
- Strampff, 441.
- Stratz, C. H., 93, 103, 109.
- Streitberg, Gräfin, 607.
- Ströhmberg, 259, 268.
- Sturge, Miss, 70.
- Suidas, 557.
- Sullivan, W. C., 15.
- Sumner, W. G., 229, 370, 400, 605.
- Susruta, 532, 638.
- Sutherland, J. F., 634.
- Sutherland, W. D., 16, 552.
- Sykes, J. F. J., 5, 30.
- Tait, W., 270, 292, 294.
- Talbot, E. S., 278.
- Tammeo, 275.
- Tarde, 120, 131, 141, 310, 376, 426, 574.
- Tarnowsky, Pauline, 277.
- Taylor, R. W., 312, 525, 552.
- Tenney, 330.
- Tennyson, 427.
- Terman, L. M., 35.
- Tertullian, 96, 127.
- Theresa, W., 169.
- Thomas, A. W., 589.
- Thomas, N. W., 424.
- Thomas, Prof. W., 140, 495, 572.
- Thomson, J. A., 585.
- Thoreau, 103, 143.
- Thuasne, 163, 243.
- Tilt, 65, 187.
- Tobler, 68.
- Todhunter, 144.
- Tolstoy, 564.
- Tout, C. Hill, 145.
- Traill, 498.
- Tredgold, 597, 616.
- Trewby, 54.
- Troll-Borostyáni I. von, 260.
- Trollope, A., 299.
- Turnbull, 150.
- Vacher de Lapouge, 581.
- Valentino, 545.
- Valera, 524.
- Vanderkiste, 291.
- Varendonck, 77.
- Vatsyayana, 539, 544.
- Vaux, Rev. J. E., 403.
- Velden, Van den, 591.
- Velten, 134.
- Venette, 558.
- Veniero, 558.
- Vickery, A. Drysdale, 596.
- Vinay, 597.
- Vinci, L. de, 118.
- Vines, Miss, 23.
- Virchow, 322.
- Vitrey, 27.
- Voltaire, 247.
- Vries, de, 1.
- Wächter, 429.
- Wagner, C., 222.
- Wahrmund, 419, 491.
- Wales, E. B., 636.
- Walter, J. von, 161.
- Ward, Lester, 483.
- Wardlaw, R., 225.
- Warker, Van de, 554.
- Warren, M. A., 54.
- Wasserschleben, 162.
- Watkins, 75.
- Webb, Sidney, 589, 629.
- Weinberg, 608.
- Weininger, 309.
- Welander, 266.
- Welch, F. H., 252.
- Wells, H. G., 172, 588.
- Werthauer, 45, 110.
- Wessmann, 88.
- Westermarck,
- Wharton, 225.
- Wheeler, C. B., 444.
- Wheeler, Mrs., 397.
- Whitaker, Nellie C., 71.
- Whitman, Walt, 560.
- Wiedow, 25.
- Wilcox, Ella W., 190.
- Wilhelm, 606.
- William of Malmsbury, 153.
- Williams, Dawson, 10.
- Williams, Hugh, 162.
- Williams, W. Roger, 35.
- Windle, C. A., 627.
- Wollstonecraft, M., 541, 563.
- Yule, G. Adney, 590.
- Zacchia, 477, 544, 550, 554.
- Zache, 516, 547.
- Zanzinger, E., 604, 607.
- Zeno, 604.
- Zoroaster, 532, 559.
- Zuccarelli, 615, 616.
INDEX OF SUBJECTS.
- Abortion,
- Abstinence,
- Abyssinia,
- Achilleus and Nereus,
- legend of, 158.
- Adultery, 450 et seq.
- Africa,
- chastity on West Coast of, 147.
- Alcohol,
- Alexander VI and courtesans, 243.
- Ambil anak Marriage, 301.
- America,
- American Indians,
- Aphrodite Pandemos, 230.
- Art in relation to sexual impulse, 90, 223.
- Asceticism,
- Ascetics,
- attitude towards sex of mediæval, 119.
- Aspasia, 308.
- Athletics for women, 75.
- Aucassin et Nicolette, 161.
- Australia,
- Auvergne,
- story of the Two Lovers of, 159.
- Azimba Land,
- Babies,
- children's theories on the origin of, 40 et seq.
- Babylonia,
- Bawenda,
- sexual initiation among, 88.
- Beena marriage, 391.
- Beethoven, 184.
- Behn, Aphra, 308.
- Belgium,
- prostitution in, 257.
- Bestial,
- human sexual impulse not, 130.
- Bible in relation to sexual education, 90.
- Biometrics, 583, 630.
- Birth,
- civilized tendency to premature, 9.
- Birthrate,
- decline of, 589 et seq.
- Blindness in relation to gonorrhœa, 329.
- Botany in sexual education, 58.
- Bredalbane case, 477.
- Breed versus nurture, 34.
- Bride-price, 432.
- Brothel,
- Bundling, 380.
- Burmah,
- prostitution in, 235.
- Canon law,
- Carlyle, 174.
- Carnival,
- origin of, 218.
- Castration,
- Chastity,
- Child,
- Childhood,
- China,
- Chivalry on position of women,
- influence of, 401.
- Christianity,
- attitude towards chastity, 151 et seq.
- attitude towards lust, 179.
- attitude towards nakedness, 96.
- failed to recognize importance of art of love, 517.
- its influence on position of women, 398 et seq.
- on marriage, 429 et seq.
- mixed attitude towards sexual impulse, 124 et seq., 513.
- towards prostitution, 282 et seq.
- towards seduction, 180.
- Civilization and prostitution, 187 et seq.
- and the sexual impulse, 199.
- Coitus,
- a posteriori, 556.
- best time for, 558.
- during pregnancy, 16 et seq.
- ethnic variations in, 557.
- excess in, 535.
- injuries due to unskilful, 525.
- interruptus, 551.
- morbid horror of, 81.
- needs to be taught, 510.
- prayer before, 559.
- proper frequency of, 533.
- religious significance of, 230, 559.
- reservatus, 552.
- Collusion,
- doctrine of, 451.
- Conception,
- Concubine, 498.
- Condom, 599.
- Conjugal rights or rites, 538.
- Consent,
- age of, 528.
- Consultation de Nourrisson, 29.
- Contract,
- marriage as a, 470 et seq.
- Corinth,
- Country life and sexuality, 38.
- Courtesan,
- origin of term, 243.
- Courtship,
- the art of, 538, et seq.
- Criminality in relation to prostitution, 267.
- Cyprus,
- prostitution at, 233.
- Dancing,
- D'Aragona, Tullia, 244.
- Divorce,
- by mutual consent, 463 et seq.
- causes for, 448.
- in ancient Rome, 429.
- in ancient Wales, 461.
- in China, 461.
- in England, 447.
- in France, 455, 465.
- in Germany, 455.
- in Japan, 460.
- in Russia, 457.
- in Switzerland, 457.
- in United States, 458 et seq., 624.
- Milton's views on, 444.
- modern tendency of, 462 et seq.
- Protestant attitude towards, 441.
- question of damages for, 450.
- reform of, 454.
- tendency of legislation regarding, 624.
- transmission of venereal disease as a cause for, 349.
- Drama,
- modern function of the, 222.
- Dysmenorrhœa, 187.
- Economic factor,
- Education in matters of sex, 33 et seq.
- for women, 75.
- Egypt,
- Eldest born child,
- characteristics of, 591.
- England,
- Erotic element in marriage, 508.
- Eskimo,
- Eugenics, 7.
- Excretory centers as affecting estimate of sexual impulse, 120 et seq.
- Exogamy,
- origin of, 423.
- Families and degeneracy,
- large, 591.
- Father in relation to family, 2.
- Fecundation,
- artificial, 632.
- Festivals,
- Fidus, 115.
- Fiji,
- chastity in, 406.
- Flirtation, 518.
- Fools, Feast of, 219.
- Fornication,
- France,
- Franco, Veronica, 245.
- Gallantry,
- the ancient conception of, 412.
- Geisha, the, 307.
- General paralysis and syphilis, 325.
- Genius,
- Germany,
- Gestation,
- length of, 9.
- Girdle of chastity, 163.
- Girls,
- Girls,
- Gnostic elements in early Christian literature, 156.
- Goddesses in forefront of primitive pantheons, 392.
- Gonorrhœa,
- nature and results of, 328 et seq.
- And see Venereal Diseases.
- Goutte de Lait, 29.
- Greeks,
- Group-marriage, 423.
- Gynæcocracy,
- alleged primitive, 390.
- Hetairæ, 234, 308.
- Hindu attitude towards sex, 129, 544.
- Holland,
- prostitution in, 250.
- Homosexuality among prostitutes, 272.
- Huddersfield scheme, 28.
- Hysteria, 183.
- Ideals, of girls,
- masculine, 77.
- Illegitimacy, 292.
- Imperia, 244.
- Impotency in popular estimation, 174.
- Impurity,
- India,
- Individualism and Socialism, 24.
- Infantile mortality, 5.
- Infantile sexuality, 36.
- Insanity and prostitution, 275.
- Intellectual work in relation to sexual activity in men, 185.
- in women, 190.
- Ireland,
- Italy,
- Jamaica,
- results of free sexual unions in, 388.
- Japan,
- Jealousy, 563 et seq.
- Jesus, 184.
- Jews,
- Judas Thomas's Acts, 156 et seq.
- Lactation, 24.
- Lectures on sexual hygiene, 83.
- Lenclos, Ninon de, 246, 308.
- Love,
- an essential part of marriage, 508.
- art of, 507 et seq.
- definition of, 132 et seq.
- difficulties of art of, 530, 547.
- for more than one person, 371.
- future development of, 574.
- how far an illusion, 137 et seq.
- in childhood, 36 et seq., 528.
- in relation to chastity, 172, 176.
- inevitable mystery of, 136.
- its value for life, 115 et seq.
- testimonies to immense importance of, 139 et seq.
- Lust,
- Lydian prostitution, 233, 234.
- Mahommedanism
- Male continence, 554.
- Malthus, 594.
- Mammary activity in infancy, 34.
- Manuals of sexual hygiene, 53, 81.
- Maoris,
- results of loss of old faith among, 147.
- Marriage,
- advantages of early, 379.
- ambil anak, 391.
- and prostitution, 225, 296, 363.
- as a contract, 470 et seq.
- as a fact, 477 et seq.
- as a sacrament, 435, 479.
- as an ethical sacrament, 479.
- beena, 391.
- by capture, 148.
- certificates for, 622.
- criticism of, 364.
- evolution of, 421 et seq.
- for a term of years, 472.
- from legal point of view, 375.
- in early Christian times, 429, et seq.
- in old English law, 402.
- in relation to eugenics, 621.
- in relation to morals, 373.
- in Rome, 428.
- independent of forms, 480 et seq.
- inferior forms of, 489.
- love as a factor of, 508 et seq.
- modern tendencies in regard to, 377 et seq.
- objections to early, 37.
- objects of, 507.
- procreation as a factor of, 576 et seq.
- Protestant attitude towards, 440 et seq.
- trial, 379 et seq.
- variations in order of, 491 et seq.
- Masturbation,
- Matriarchy,
- alleged primitive, 390.
- Matrilineal descent, 391.
- Mendelism, 630.
- Mendes,
- the rite at, 232.
- Menstruation,
- Missionaries' attempt to impose European customs, 99 et seq.
- Modesty consistent with nakedness, 108.
- Monogamy, 421 et seq., 491.
- Montanist element in early Christian literature, 156.
- Morality,
- meaning of the term, 367 et seq.
- Motherhood,
- Mothers,
- Mylitta,
- prostitution at temple of, 229.
- Mystery in matters of sex, evil of, 50, 110.
- Nakedness,
- an alleged sexual stimulant, 97.
- as a prime tonic of life, 112.
- consistent with modesty, 108.
- educational value of, 106.
- hygienic value of, 104, 111.
- in literature and art, 90 et seq.
- in mediæval Europe, 98.
- in relation to sexual education, 95 et seq.
- its moral value, 114 et seq.
- its spiritual value, 102.
- modern attitude towards, 101 et seq.
- Neo-Malthusianism, 588 et seq.
- Neurasthenia,
- Newton, 184.
- New Zealand,
- Night-courtship customs, 380.
- Notification of Births Act, 29.
- venereal diseases, 343.
- Nurture versus breed, 34.
- Nutrition compared to reproduction, 169, 198, 201.
- Obscenity,
- early Christian views of, 126 et seq.
- Orgy,
- Oneida Community, 553, 617 et seq.
- Ouled-Nail prostitution, 233.
- Ovarian irritation, 187.
- Ovid, 514.
- Penitentials, the, 162.
- Physician,
- Platonic friendship, 571.
- Poetry in relation to sexual impulse, 90.
- Polygamy, 366, 412, 490, et seq.
- Precocity,
- Pregnancy,
- Premature birth, 10 et seq.
- Procreation,
- Promiscuity,
- theory of primitive, 284.
- Prostitutes,
- as artists, 299.
- as guardians of the home, 281 et seq.
- at the Renaissance, 243 et seq.
- attitudes towards bully, 270.
- in Austria, 241.
- in classic times, 239.
- in France, 240.
- in Italy, 241.
- injustice of social attitude towards, 310.
- number of servants who become, 264 et seq., 290 et seq.
- psychic and physical characteristics, 274 et seq.
- tendency to homosexuality, 272.
- their motives for adopting avocation, 256 et seq., 288 et seq.
- their sexual temperament, 268 et seq.
- under Christianity, 240.
- Prostitution,
- among savages, 226, 234.
- as affected by Christianity, 239.
- as an equivalent of criminality, 267.
- causes of, 254 et seq.
- civilizational value of, 289 et seq.
- decay of State regulation of, 250.
- definition of, 224.
- economic factor of, 259 et seq.
- essentially unsatisfactory nature of, 313.
- in modern times, 248.
- in relation to marriage, 363.
- in the East, 235 et seq.
- moral justification of, 280 et seq.
- need for humanizing, 306.
- on the stage, 356.
- origin and development of, 224 et seq.
- present social attitude towards, 302 et seq.
- regulation of, 249, 331, 339.
- religious, 228 et seq., 235.
- rise of secular, 234.
- to acquire marriage portion, 233.
- Protestantism,
- attitude towards prostitution, 284.
- Prudery in ancient times, 101.
- Puberty,
- Puericulture, 7 et seq.
- Puritans,
- Quaker conception of marriage, 446.
- Rape,
- Religious prostitution, 228 et seq., 235.
- Renaissance,
- prostitutes at the, 243 et seq.
- Reproduction compared to nutrition, 169, 198, 201.
- Responsibility in matters of sex,
- Rest,
- Ring,
- origin of wedding, 432.
- Robert of Arbrissel, 160.
- Romantic literature of chastity, 158.
- love, late origin of, 135.
- Rome,
- Russia,
- Sabbath orgy, 221.
- Sacrament,
- Sacred prostitution, 228, 235.
- Sale-marriage, 432.
- Savages,
- Scandinavian method of dealing with venereal diseases, 344.
- School,
- Schools for mothers, 29.
- Seduction,
- early Church's attitude towards, 180.
- Servants frequently become prostitutes, 264 et seq., 290 et seq.
- Sexual abstinence, 169 et seq.
- Sexual anæsthesia,
- a cause of, 526.
- Sexual education, 33 et seq.
- Sexual hygiene and art, 92, 223.
- Sexual innocence,
- value of, 44.
- Sexual morality, 362 et seq.
- Sexual neurasthenia, 183, 189, 203.
- Sexual physiology in education, 57.
- Sexual precocity, 35, 209, 528, 634.
- Shakespeare in relation to sexual education, 90.
- Slavs,
- Socialism and individualism, 24.
- Spain,
- prostitution in, 266.
- Stage,
- prostitution on the, 356.
- State,
- Sterility in relation to gonorrhœa, 329.
- Stirpiculture, 618.
- causes of, 631.
- Stork legend of origin of babies, 41.
- Suckling in relation to puericulture, 24.
- Swahili,
- sexual education among, 516.
- Switzerland,
- Syphilis,
- Tahiti,
- chastity and unchastity in old, 148.
- Teachers and sexual hygiene, 83.
- Teutonic custom,
- Theatre,
- Thekla,
- legend of, 156.
- Town life and sexuality, 38, 293 et seq.
- Trappists,
- régime of, 208.
- Trent, Council of, 434, 437.
- Trial-marriage, 379 et seq.
- Wagner's music dramas, 223.
- Wales,
- divorce in ancient, 461.
- White slavery, 302.
- Wife-purchase among ancient Germans, 431.
- in modern times, 403.
- Woman movement, 4, 68, 409 et seq.
- Women,
- alleged tendency to dissimulation, 412.
- among the Jews, 394.
- and sexual abstinence, 185 et seq.
- erotic characteristics of, 541.
- ignorance of art of love, 520.
- in Arabia, 394.
- in Babylonia, 393.
- in Egypt, 393, 408.
- in modern Europe, 397.
- in relation to divorce, 468.
- in relation to free sexual unions, 386 et seq.
- in Rome, 395, 428.
- inequality before the law, 473.
- moral equality with men, 438, 495.
- must not be compulsory mothers, 586.
- not attracted to innocent men, 524.
- position as affected by Teutonic custom, 401 et seq.
- procreative age of, 634.
- their high status in ancient Ireland, 392.
- their need of economic independence, 407.
- their need of personal responsibility, 405, 469.
- their need of sexual knowledge, 44 et seq., 351.
- understand love better than men, 527.
- Zoölogy and sexual education, 59.
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!