People labor and look forward; but what do they look forward to? Our

existence is so fleeting. One intangible fleeting hour, and we drop

into the hollows of oblivion. If the only aim in life are material

things, then the absurdity of life is unquestionable. If life means

anything at all, none of man’s expressions of life can be an end in

itself. If the only divinity is the god of work, then the triviality

of life, whether of the life of the high or of that of the low, of

the king or of the beggar, is evident. What profit will accrue to

humanity even if it consisted of kings and princes only? If the future

of man is only a material well-being, there is no profit in struggling

and suffering for an aimless future. Granted that in this future

such fatalities of life, as sorrow, hunger, vice, prejudice could be

eliminated, granted that every man, woman and child will have their

equal shares in the great duties and privileges of life, will such a

life be less valueless and purposeless when death approaches?

_Morality of love._—While the three systems of conduct, just mentioned,

are founded upon certain ideals, even if they be the ideals of

materialism (paradox), the morality of a certain school of modern

writers has raised as its ideal the most perfect egotism extant. This

effeminate, fade species of literature proclaims the absolute dictature

of Eros as the new ethics. The genius of propagation has deluded

and beguiled these new moralists to proclaim their intoxication of

sensuality as a new religion of personality.[DL] Their doctrine teaches

that voluptuous sensuality is the moral ground of sexual relations.[DM]

They preach the all-importance of love as the last word of human

wisdom. Men should live for the physical desires, and in the instincts

of the moment. Man ought to ignore every thing that is not wholly

material, he must strive to be a good animal. The complete satisfaction

of his desires, the dip into the vices and pleasures of the senses, the

plenary indulgences of the flesh, are the primordial and ineffaceable

rights of man. These individualists simply deify passion. Their vulgar

eroticism and their constant erotic rumination, which fill their entire

effeminate literature, are covered with a veil of insipid verse. The

high-sounding phrases and glittering generalities, emitted by these

writers of the literature of futurism, poorly conceal the true meaning

of their religion of sensuality. A phrase that expresses their belief

in a heaven wherein men and especially women will come into their

own, really means wherein men and women will be allowed to give their

passions free rein. Nothing but sensuality is meant by phrases such as

spiritual attraction or the soul’s complement. When such a feminist

proclaims to the world that “woman wishes to cease to be a subject and

longs to be considered a human being,” she really means that every

sensual excitement she awakens should be taken seriously.

This new ethics is a mixture of self-deception, arrogance, sensuality

and irresponsibility. In their works these realists reveal their

cold, absolutely surfeited, caring for nothing. They measure a

man’s strength not by the power to subdue but by the weakness of

being subdued by passion. They preach that there is no merit in

self-control, sex-repression, generosity, service, and proclaim that

man’s unpardonable sin is that of denying his nature, his greatest

crime against life is the rigid repression of the blood. They know of

nothing holier than the sumptuous, sensuous, time-worshipping world

of paganism. All their writings are replete with unending thrills

and climaxes, all taken from the domain of sex. Their gaze roves in

voluptuous quest over the nudity of erotic sin and social transgression.

Such high-sounding phrases as “live to fulfill your nature, profess the

faith of life, or woman’s desire for self-expression, her desire to

live and find her true destiny” crope out everywhere in their writings

and only serve to befuddle weak minds. What does self-expression,

nature, destiny, mean in the mouths of people, drunk with the ravages

of sensual pleasure? What will it profit to these apostles of

sensuality, when they have fulfilled their nature, when they have found

their destiny? At the hour of death they hold in their hands only the

ashes of spent fancies.[DN]

_Philosophy of pleasure._—Another philosophy of life akin to the

morality of love is the philosophy of pleasure or rather of happiness.

The partisans of the hedonic philosophy proclaim the sole reason of

man’s existence is to procure the greatest possible amount of happiness

in this world.

Now in a certain respect, this is quite true. The ultimate appraiser

of all relative values is the promotion of happiness. The hedonic is

the supreme test of terrestrial values. The motive for most of man’s

actions is the desire for happiness. All advances of humanity, the

ethical, the artistic, the scientific and especially the material,

have contributed to the enhancement of human welfare. Civilization

means the victory of man over nature, in the interest of the greatest

good to the greatest number. Culture is the pursuit of happiness of

humanity. Progress means the advance towards a higher and higher level

of humanity’s well-being. Commerce, industry, art and science must

enhance the welfare of human society. Social ends cannot be served

unless they tend to the gratification of the desire for happiness. In

all dreams of a future utopia, human welfare and happiness is the goal.

But is it possible that the attainment of happiness and of the fleeting

transitory joy shall be the only purpose of life? The philosophy of

pleasure allots to man not only the right but also the duty of making

his attainment of happiness the only aim of his life. All law, custom,

and ethics, the three spontaneous regulators of the species “man,” are

claimed by this philosophy to exist for the sole purpose to plane the

road that leads to happiness.

But if this be true, if the value of life be only hedonic, if the sole

and only meaning of life is to enjoy and die, then man’s existence is

mere vanity. Then the community, nation, race and humanity have no

positive value. Civilization is a failure, progress is worthless, and

all our virtues are only the aberrations of the spirit. This is the

pessimism in which all philosophies, that proclaim the hedonic to be

the only aim of existence, must end and actually do end.[DO] But if

life has no meaning at all, if everything is, as Heine sings,

“Fantastic, aimless is my song

“As love, as life, as creator and creation.”

mere vanity, whence this will to live, this most deep-seated part of

our being, this unparalleled tenacity to life, manifested in the lowest

plant to the highest animal. There must be something behind this will

to live, something behind this tenacity not only of the individual’s

life, but of the life of future generations. If the only end in life

are joys that know no bounds, whence comes the emotion that causes

men to die for an abstract principle, such as honor, truth, liberty,

justice, etc.? Who has implanted in man this spirituality, this will to

work for a future he knows not?

_Moral standard in nature._—Behind the tenacity of every organic being

to life must be searched the standard of morality, behind this tenacity

must lie the will of the First Cause, of the Supreme Intelligence. The

place to look for the will of the Creative Power is, therefore, nature.

But the philosopher must not look only in one part of nature, insensate

or irrational nature, but in entire nature, human nature included.

It was the trick of the ages for the philosopher, high up on a

pedestal, to discuss the immutable laws of irrational nature in the

cosmos, without including the rational philosopher himself as a part of

nature. It was “Hic homo, hic natura.”

The truth of evolution has swept away for ever this kind of sophistry.

Evolution teaches unity in nature. The mineral, vegetable and animal

kingdoms are composed of the same elements. The transition from one

kingdom into another is almost imperceptible. There is no line to be

drawn between living and non-living matter. Botanists and zoologists

are often at a loss to determine to which kingdom certain specimens

belong.[DP] There is unity in nature, and man is no less an integral

part of nature than the air or the stars.

Now, man is a rational being. Hence an integral part of nature is

rational, and there is rationality in nature. If a thousand millions

of human brains, or a thousand million kilograms of brain-matter on

our planet possess intelligence, reason, wisdom, judgment, memory,

foresight, mind and ideas, then there is rationality in nature. Even

if this rationality is now only perceivable in the human brain, it

must, eons ago, have been present in potentiality in the primordial

cell, which developed into the human brain, the flower of organic

life. Nay, rationality must have transcended the primordial cell. “The

soul, or the power of judgment, being the factor that makes experience

possible,” says Bergson, “cannot be a complex of experience only, it

transcends experience.”

The soul, mind and body become a unity in man, a trinitarian unity,

a “Dreieinigkeit.” There is interdependence between the physical and

the mental. The higher psychic centres are dominated and domineered by

the lower, or vegetative centres. But two things, mutually dependent,

are not for that matter equivalent. The subtle and delicate influences

by which soul and body affect each other do not make them identical.

The mind which includes intellect and emotion is something entirely

different from the brain-cell. The action between mind and brain-cell

is absolutely unknown to us.

Everything tends to show that there is an intelligence behind the

creative energy in the world. All nature is in motion, in vibration,

in harmony. Five hundred millions of stars, all flaming suns, whirling

through space and carrying along with them systems of planets and

satellites, can not do so without a directing intelligence. The

universe must be supported by a principle, immanent or transcendent.

Human logic, which itself is transcendental, forces every real thinker

to acknowledge wisdom in nature. Natural, immutable laws do not explain

the harmony of things, which the soul, tuned to the high, distinctly

perceives. Who was the legislator of these laws but a transcendental

intelligence? Besides, there is an infinite beyond of which gravitation

is a puzzle. No man can imagine a limit beyond which there is nothing;

on the other hand, nobody can imagine the infinite in time and space,

things going on and on without end. Both are inconceivable, still one

must be true.

The feeling of extension and duration must hence be transcendental in

man, for it is entirely independent of reason. Reality itself—Das Ding

an sich—is inconceivable by reason and is transcendental. The very idea

of a thing is transcendental and eternal. “The logos, or the logical

axiom,” says Bergson, “is eternal. The logical essence of a circle,

e. c., the possibility of drawing a circle, is eternal and infinite. It

has neither place nor date; for ‘Nowhere,’ at ‘No moment’ has drawing a

circle begun to be possible.”

If reason and all its attributes are transcendental and eternal, then

reason can only be a part of a larger reason. From nothing comes

nothing. If there were no reason in the nature of the universe, whence

did the primordial cell, which eons later developed into the brain of

an Aristoteles, Kant, Spencer, get its reason? Whence do emotions,

such as philanthropy and pity, honor and sense of duty, justice and

love of truth, and all other ethical values come from? What is it that

comprehends, feels, loves, wills, hopes, fears? It is the soul in

man, a part of the Intelligence in the Universe, which Hinduism calls

Trimutri, Judaism designates as Jehovah, and Christianity terms Logos.

All these different names mean one and the same thing, i. e., the

transcendental intelligence behind the universe, of which man is the

conscious part of the scheme.

Hence the philosopher looking for the will of the Supreme Intelligence,

will have to return to nature, and especially to human nature. For as

Protagoras cogently once said: πάντων χρημάτων μέτρον ἄνθρωπος, “man

is the measure of all things.” Now, what does nature will? We find in

organic nature excessive production and wholesale destruction. The

abundance of the reproductive cells in plant and animal is simply

amazing. Every ejaculation in man contains two or three hundred million

spermatozoa, each one of them sufficient for impregnation. Each ovary

of the new-born baby girl contains about thirty thousand ova, each

potentially a human being. The first effort of growth is to set aside a

part of the germ itself for future reproduction, so that the germ may

be indefinitely multiplied and handed down to untold generations. The

reproductive cells, the cells which have not lost the primary power

of multiplication, are of the first consideration; the specialized

cells, or the somatic cells which cannot reproduce any longer, are

of secondary importance. Nature’s sole solicitation is the race. The

supreme law of organic nature is the preservation of the kind. Her sole

aim is the perpetuation of the species, hence the abundance of the

germ-plasm in plant and animal. Nature takes no chances. She secures

the continuance of the kind by the extravagant production of material

and the ruthless destruction of all that is superfluous. Nature

preserves the individual until it has brought forth its offspring,

after the message is delivered, the messenger is discharged. Nature

has no regard for the individual. The fly is destined as a prey to the

spider, the spider to the swallow, the swallow to the hawk, the hawk

to the eagle, and the eagle to the hunter. But what is the hunter’s

destiny?

Here nature is silent. The crown of creation seems to be here for no

purpose. Man seems to have no value whatever. The individual does

not count, it is created to be destroyed. Nature is careless of the

single life. The individual may wither, the race is more and more.[DQ]

Everything that serves to improve the race is in harmony with nature.

But to what purpose is the race here? Cosmic nature owes us the

answer. But when we return to a certain part of nature, the conscious

part of nature, human nature, we find the hints for the reason of our

existence. It is the experience of the divine urge of progress and the

certainty that the crown of altruism is of the highest value in life.

Both these qualities are transcendental, bestowed already upon the

primordial cell by the creative power of the universe. Self-sacrifice

resides in every cell. In every drop of pus millions of dead white

corpuscles, or cells can be seen who, in the defence of the colony or

the human body, sacrificed themselves in the struggle with the invading

bacteria. This cellular self-sacrifice has developed in man into the

impulse to serve others, the inner possession of every human heart.

Altruism becomes thus the criterion of morality. There is no morality

for him who lives in solitude, there is only right conduct. Morality is

bound up with altruism, which on the highest scale of moral development

overcomes egotism. Man feels then a moral obligation within himself to

serve others in the face of human need, of hunger, thirst, loneliness,

nakedness, sickness, etc. This obligation is felt in obedience to

Kant’s categorical imperative. The moral feeling is a part of man’s

life, it is transcendental. Morality and character are functions of

the brain like memory or imagination. The essence of morality is as

unexplainable by mechanical laws as the nature of life itself. The

creative power that gave life to man implanted in him moral aspirations

of the whole soul. The moral law is hence based upon human feeling.

What the throbbing heart of the best of humanity considers right is

the will of the Supreme Intelligence, and hence the moral law. Human

feeling and human longing are the basis of every moral action. When

it is agreed among the best men, everywhere, and in every epoch,

that altruism is noble and that egotism is ignoble, then altruism

is the foundation of morality. The larger the altruistic circle is,

the praiseworthier it is. To benefit one’s family is laudable, but a

service rendered in the interest of the community, of the nation, or

of the human race, is far worthier. The highest degree of morality is

hence reached in actions rendered in the interest of the race.

CHAPTER XXIII

SEXUAL MORALITY

The racial interest is also the cause of the double standard of

sex-morality of the two sexes. This is best seen by the study of the

evolution of sexual morality, or the history of marriage.[DR]

1) In the first stage, the lowest conceivable stage of savagery, when

men still lived in hordes, mankind lived in a state of “promiscuous”

intercourse like the gregarious animals. All the males of the horde

protected the females and their offspring. In the prehuman period, when

horde-life was not yet known, the semi-human creatures must have lived

in pairs, where every male protected his female and her offspring.

Without this protection the race would have died.

2) In the second stage the irregular state was abandoned and the

“consanguineous family” developed. It was founded upon intermarriage of

brothers and sisters, own or collateral, in a group. Marriage between

parents and children, as in the preceding stage, is now decreed immoral

and is prohibited.

3) In the third stage the prohibition of intermarriage in the same

clan was decreed. Experience has taught even these primitive men that

the offspring of consanguineous marriages were often deficient and

degenerate. The prohibition of intermarriage in the same clan excluded

own brothers and sisters from the marriage relations, or, in other

words, incest is now considered immoral. This so-called “punaluan

family”[DS] was founded upon intermarriage of several sisters, own or

collateral, with each other’s husbands, in a group, the joint husbands

not being necessarily kinsmen of each other, but all belonging to other

tribes than their joint wives, or of several brothers with each other’s

wives, in a group. In this so-called exogamous[DT] marriage each group

of men were conjointly married to the group of women. Adultery was as

yet unknown. The children, in all these three stages, could only know

their mother. Inheritance follows in the female line, and gynocracy or

matriarchate, the government by women, prevails. The common mother of

the clan is the origin and ruler of the same.

4) In the fourth stage communal marriage is replaced by the “pairing

family.” It is founded upon the marriage between single pairs, but

without an exclusive cohabitation. The marriage is continued during the

pleasure of the parties. Marriage between any relatives is entirely

prohibited and considered immoral. Hence marriage in a group is now

impossible. Marriage is still exogamous. The male leaves his clan and

marries into another clan. When he dies, his personal property, which

consisted of his arms and dress, is handed over to his former clan.

The main fortune remains in the clan of the wife. The children may now

know their father, yet they belong to their mother’s clan. Communistic

housekeeping prevails throughout the whole clan. Matriarchate is still

in force. The woman is still the undisputed mistress of the house and

clan. The males have only to provide the clan with food from day to

day, by hunting and fishing, and to fight the clan’s battles in its

protection. Property and descent go in the female line, and kinship is

counted through the mother.

5) During the fifth stage sources of wealth, hitherto unthought of,

develop by the training of animals and the breeding of herds. The

males, who have hitherto always been the providers of food for the

clan, are consequently the possessors of the herds, which now form

the main source of subsistence. Lest with the death of the man, his

property, the flocks, should be handed over to the former clan, change

of descent from the female to the male line is established. The man

is now the ruler. The common ancestor, formerly only the leader in

war, is now the head of the clan and manager of its possessions.

Apart of the head other leaders were necessary in the frequent wars.

The latter become preeminent among the other members of the clan and

receive individual allotments from the common wealth of the clan.[DU]

With the growth of their influence these allotments ripen finally into

individual ownership and are inherited by the children.

6) The progress during the sixth stage was caused by the law of

inheritance. Inheritance in the male line requires that the father

should know his child. The strictest fidelity of the wife is,

therefore, a condition sine qua non, her faithfulness is of the

greatest racial importance. The woman no less than the man was

interested in female purity, in the interest of her children. This

strict fidelity, exacted from the wife by men and women alike, leads to

the ‘patriarchal family’ as found in the Bible. It is founded upon the

marriage of one man with one or more wives.[DV]

Now, polygamy is a physical impossibility. Where no man or woman

remains unmated, general polygyny or polyandry is practically

impossible. The number of the two sexes is nearly equal. If infanticide

is not practiced (male infanticide has seldom been practiced, except in

Egypt, Exod. I, 16), and war captives or slaves are not available, the

general public must be content with one mate.[DW] Polygyny in this way

led to “monogamy,” founded upon marriage between single couples with

an exclusive cohabitation, as is now the rule in most of the civilized

nations.

_Female chastity._—All the changes in the marriage relations of the

sexes were thus made out of altruistic motives, in the interest of

the progeny with the sacrifice of personal comfort. Promiscuity,

consanguineous marriage, punaluan family, and the pairing family

followed each other in the interest of the health of the offspring. The

last change to female monogamy was made in the economic interest of the

progeny. The husband in sacrificing his own comfort, while providing

food and shelter for his children, must be certain that he is the

father of these children. Uncertainty would make him negligent, and the

existence of the race would be jeopardized.[DX]

Adultery on the part of the husband does not necessarily alter the

relations of the children to the parents and each other; unchastity

of the wife, however, either altogether breaks the family bond or

weakens it through doubt. The purity of the woman and her faithfulness

are, therefore, of the greatest racial importance, and it is eminently

proper that she should be in the van of moral progress. The highest

moral character, says Kant, is that which does the good not out of

inclination but from a sense of duty guided by reason, and there is

good reason for female chastity.[DY]

In the lowest savage life the woman was free and even the ruler. At

that time not the remotest vestige of the idea of chastity was to be

found. The gratification of the instinct was simply a natural process

that contained in it neither good nor evil. The jewel of chastity had

no more value than a grain of sand. For ages the sentiment of chastity

had no existence. Fornication, adultery and incest were the common

order of things, accepted by public opinion and even consecrated by

religion. Later on, chastity was known, not as a virtue but as a

necessity. But the severe punishment to which the wife was subjected

for her transgressions from the straight path of chastity has led to

the constant inculcations at home and in the community that impurity

in the woman is unholy, hated by God and most infamous. These constant

inculcations have created such a strong sentiment of female purity that

the old philosophers maintained that it was an innate instinct, always

present under normal conditions.

When the spotless purity of the wife was once accepted as the moral law

of the race, it was of vital importance for her that the man should

also be limited to one permanent mate. She had to place obstacles in

his way of finding gratification of his sensual desires elsewhere

except with a permanent mate. To accomplish her purpose, general female

chastity was of the greatest help to her. Strict female chastity is the

best means to preserve the man’s fidelity. This fact is at the bottom

of woman’s hatred for her lax sister. She never forgives the woman who

lowers the value of feminine favors. If men can find gratification of

their desires for a little money on the streets or for a small gift

among his female acquaintances, all the obstacles that chaste women

have devised for many centuries become futile and are of no avail.

Hence woman hates her fallen sister relentlessly. The law of obstacles

is at the bottom of the restrictions women have themselves imposed

upon their sex. After chastity in the wife has been dictated to her by

economic reasons, woman has been forced to develop her moral standard.

Her sexual passivity comes to woman’s aid in maintaining her purity. It

makes it easier for her to refuse a man’s advances than it is for him

to curb his passions.[DZ]

The law of obstacles has also created modesty and coyness, the twin

sisters of chastity. To increase the obstacles to men’s advances, the

woman imposed upon herself great restraint when in men’s company. All

the exterior modesty which women require in expression, dress and

behavior of their sex is to be explained by the desire to increase

the obstacles. Feminine coyness prolongs the period of courtship.

By keeping the suitor in suspense and doubt the imagination and the

sentimental side of love are developed.[EA]

Modesty and coyness, though appearing to be natural and inherited

sentiments, are nothing more than natural obstacles that tend to

increase the value of the favor granted. Woman, for this reason,

watches not only over her own modesty, but is anxious also to protect

the modesty of her sister. She watches with jealous eyes that feminine

modesty should not be offended in any way. She is ever ready to succor

her sister with all her means, in confinements, at accidents or in

cases of sickness where the presence of men might offend feminine

modesty.[EB]

Honor and virtue in woman did not originally take their rise from any

innate moral sense,—for a religious rite or a legal form even to-day

mark for her the whole difference between irredeemable sin and absolute

duty,—but from the mode of her position and in accordance with the

conditions of her relation to men.[EC] Her morality is founded rather

upon the rule of reason which is the best judge of duty. Woman’s

modesty and coyness are nothing else but reason applied to human

actions and regulating man’s appetites, desires and affections for the

good of the family, community, nation and of the human race.

Thus the fascinating details of the evolution of the marriage

relations among men teach the lesson that the strong sentiment of

chastity, this powerful moral law that controls human actions as the

law of gravitation rules the world, has grown slowly from microscopic

beginnings until it has assumed a racial consciousness which underlies

that of the individual. Throughout the three periods of the history

of mankind—savagery, barbarism, and civilization—the human heart felt

a law within, written by the strong hand of the Creator, that man has

to sacrifice personal comfort and freedom of action in the interest of

posterity, and that it is preferable to suffer the pain of repressed

passion and to bear its trial in the interest of that general morality

which our conscience tells us to be of such fundamental value.

CHAPTER XXIV

MALE CHASTITY

The history of the evolution of marriage furnishes the reason for

woman’s chastity. The purity of the wife and her faithfulness are of

the greatest racial importance. Chastity has been forced upon her in

a just and laudable cause, not by men[ED] but by economic conditions.

When the moral law once had been established restricting the wife

to a permanent mate, she had to place obstacles, in the form of

general chastity, modesty and coyness, in the way of man’s finding

gratification of his sensual desires elsewhere except with a permanent

mate.

Now, is there a racial reason why men should be as chaste as women?

There are two valid racial reasons why in the interest of posterity men

should be held to as strict a form of chastity as women are. The two

reasons are the “Spirocheta pallida” and the “Gonococcus,” or in other

words, “syphilis” and “gonorrhoea.”

Of the triad of venereal infections, “chancroid” (chancroid may produce

extensive ulcerative processes and mutilate the sexual organs),

“syphilis” and “gonorrhoea” the two latter are of the greatest menace

to the continuation of the human race. Especially gonorrhoea is

undermining the vital forces of humanity, on account of its wide spread

among men.

Neisser, the discoverer of the gonococcus, claims that of the adult

male population inhabiting large cities only an insignificant

proportion escapes gonorrhoeal infection.[EE]

The reason of the spread of gonorrhoea is the mistaken idea that

gonorrhoea is a local trouble. Even among the educated people who have

had the best opportunities of education and refinement, there are

very few who know that gonorrhoea, once acquired, may remain latent

for years and still be the means of infecting an innocent wife and

destroying the eyesight of her child. The so-called cure of gonorrhoea

is not seldom only the establishment of toleration of the presence

of the gonococcus on the part of the individual’s urethra. But the

imperceptible discharge still remains virulently contagious to the

healthy virginal genito-urinary passage of the young wife and to the

delicate tender conjunctiva of the new-born baby.

The non-multiplying gonococci, which have apparently been deprived

of their power to cause suppuration any longer at the point of the

first infection, may possess full virulence and also the capacity of

producing suppuration if transferred to some other mucous membrane,

especially in the virginal vulva, urethra, Bartholinian glands, cervix,

tubes, ovaries and peritoneum of the newly-married wife.[EF]

Even if the non-multiplying gonococci should remain inactive in the

female genital tract in the beginning of married life, they may

do a great deal of damage later on. Gonococci may remain in the

genital tract during the entire period of pregnancy, without clinical

manifestations, and yet become active during the puerperium, which

explains many obscure cases of puerperal infection. In this way the

ignorance of the prolonged infectious character of latent chronic

gonorrhoea has ruined many and many a young wife. The individual

considers himself cured, while in fact the gonorrhoea remains

contagious for many years to the innocent wife and her child.

The disease is markedly accentuated in virulence and danger in the wife

and mother in fulfilling her marital and maternal functions, and the

results of the disease are appalling. Eighty per cent. of the deaths

from inflammatory diseases, peculiar to women, seventy-five per cent.

of all special surgical operations performed on women, many of them

serious desexing operations, and sixty per cent. of all the work done

by specialists in diseases of women are the result of gonorrhoea.

Besides the numerous fatal operations in the wake of gonorrhoea of the

urogenital tract, septicaemia or pyaemia may sometimes develop, which,

as a rule, lead to death.

The so-called one-child sterility is accounted for, in a large measure,

by the extension of a preexisting gonorrhoeal infection during the

puerperium. In this way fifty per cent. or more of all the infected

women are rendered sterile, in addition many are condemned to a

life-long invalidism. The aspirations, centred in motherhood and

children, are thus swept away.

Besides mutilating the innocent women, gonorrhoea destroys the eyesight

of innocent babies. From seventy to eighty per cent. of the ophthalmia,

which blots out the eyes of babies, and fifteen to twenty-five

per cent. of all blindness is caused by gonococcus infection. In

the passage of the child through the infected maternal parts, the

conjunctiva becomes, as a rule, infected, and the danger of blindness

is imminent.[EG]

Besides this danger of infecting the innocent mother and child,

gonorrhoea is not such an innocent disease even for the man himself.

It is not a local disease only, it is a general infection and its

manifestations may be as grave to the individual as syphilis. The

infection may ascend to the urinary passages and cause a catarrh of

the bladder and an infection of the ureters and kidneys. It may affect

the genital organs, as the testicles and prostate in men, and uterus

and tubes and ovaries in women. The germs of gonorrhoea may enter the

blood and attack the joints. (Osier says: In many respects gonorrhoeal

arthritis is the most damaging, disabling and serious of all the

complications of gonorrhoea.) The germs may also enter the heart and

cause endocarditis and they may invade the brain and cause meningitis

and myelitis.[EH]

_Syphilis._—The other most appalling venereal disease is syphilis. The

constitutional disturbances caused by syphilis and the risks to the

offspring make this disease one of the most dreaded affections known

to medical science. Even the primary infection may become disastrous

to the man and woman. Still the acute stage, but for its contagiosity,

would be of secondary importance. Syphilis is essentially a chronic

disease. The duration of the disease is unlimited. It may remain latent

for years and then break out, either in form of chronic inflammations

or in form of syphilitic tumors or gummata. Fournier found during the

tertiary period of syphilis, as late as in the tenth year after the

primary infection, mucous papules in the mouth and in the vagina, which

had recently reappeared. This shows that even during the tertiary stage

syphilis may become a source of infection for others.[EI]

Syphilis plays an important rôle in the etiology of almost every known

disease. Syphilis spares no tissue or structure, it affects every organ

of the body.

In the alimentary canal and its accessory glands, syphilis may cause

cicatrical obstructions of the esophagus, affections of the stomach

and intestines and gummatous productions of the rectum. The liver,

and sometimes the pancreas are affected, either in form of chronic

syphilitic inflammations or in form of gummatous nodules.

The following case is very instructive. The patient, a young girl

eleven years of age, who for some time previously suffered from

diabetes insipidus, could not be aroused from her quiet sleep one

morning. The author saw the child at about 4 P. M. She was still

quietly sleeping, and no matter which means he applied to awaken

her, going so far as to burn the soles of her feet, she could not be

aroused. The following morning the author found the child sitting in

bed perfectly well and only awaiting his permission to go to school.

The next morning the child was found again in a comatous state from

which she could not be aroused by every known means. In this state she

died the following night.

At the autopsy, the author found a small nodule, of the size of a

large pea, on the left side of the dura mater, pressing upon the left

frontal lobe, and at the point of entrance of the vena portae he

discovered the liver turned into a grayish-looking mass of the size of

a child’s hand.

Both, the nodule of the dura mater and the liver, were taken to

the Pathological Institute, where the two tumors were found to be

syphilitic gummata. The child was suffering from hereditary syphilis.

In the respiratory tract we find, in the first place, the affections

of the nose. The septum of the nose is often destroyed, and the nose

sinks in, in the form of a triangle. The palate is sometimes destroyed

already in the secondary stage, and the patient’s speech is greatly

impaired. The syphilitic affections of the larynx cause extensive

destructions of the organ and a permanent impairment of the phonation.

Deformities of the trachea are not seldom the consequences of syphilis.

Pneumonia may also be caused by syphilis. Infiltrations of the lungs

are not such a rare occurrence. Gummata of the lungs may undergo the

destructive process, and cavities are formed which are not infrequently

diagnosed as tuberculosis.

The circulatory system is very often affected by syphilis, in the form

of arteriosclerosis. Gummata are sometimes found in all the muscular

parts of the heart. Syphilitic myocarditis and sclerotic endocarditis

are not rare. The syphilitic affection of the ganglia and the nerves

of the heart are the cause of different forms of angina pectoris. The

spleen and the other blood-producing organs, the bone-marrow, are

frequently the seat of syphilitic manifestations. Pseudoleukaemia is

often caused by syphilis. The different aneurisms are often caused by

syphilis of the arteries.

The genito-urinary system is especially affected by syphilis. Apart

from the initial affection, which is usually found at the genitals,

tertiary syphilis of the genital organs is not rare. Syphilitic

orchitis and gummata of the penis and testicles are often observed.

Gummata are also found on the external genitals of women. The ovaries

are often affected in form of diffuse or gummatous oöphoritis. Syphilis

is not seldom the etiological factor of Bright’s disease.

The skeleton is also often affectedly syphilis. Besides the

bone-marrow, the bones themselves are especially subject to syphilitic

lesions. No joint escapes the attack of syphilis. The most frequently

affected joints are the knees and the elbows.

The muscles are affected by syphilis in form of an irritative myositis

and of chronic interstitial inflammations. Gummatous infiltrations of

the muscles are no rarity. The tendons are affected in form of an acute

irritative tendo-synovitis. Swelling of the bursae is quite frequently

met with in syphilitic patients.

Syphilis of the nervous system is especially disastrous for the

patient. Syphilis not rarely causes cerebral and spinal meningitis.

Most of the tumors found in the brain are of syphilitic origin and

cause headaches, insomnia, flashing of light before the eyes, vertigo,

epileptic convulsions, a retarded pulse, polyuria and polydipsia, and

greatly affect the eyesight. Gummata of the brain also cause aphasia,

hemiplegia and paralysis. Syphilis of the spinal cord manifests itself

by heavy weight of the extremities, neuralgia, paralysis of the muscles

and paresis of the bladder and rectum. The insanity caused by syphilis

may mimic every known form of mental derangement, such as mania,

melancholia, paretic dementia, locomotor ataxia and general paresis.

Any of these terrible diseases may be the gift the young wife receives

from her infected husband in the wedding-night. Still the danger from

syphilis for the woman is by far less imminent than that threatening

her from gonorrhoea. No man, except he be an idiot, would think of

getting married while still suffering from syphilis of the initial and

secondary stages, when the disease is highly infectious. During the

latent and tertiary stages the danger of infecting the wife is very

slight indeed. But there is no immunity for the offspring, during the

latent and tertiary stages.

The two venereal diseases are thus, each in its way, inflicting the

greatest suffering upon the innocent wife and child, disrupting the

family and causing the degeneration of the race. There is no greater

scourge devastating every nation to-day than the two venereal diseases.

No other disease has such a murderous influence upon the offspring as

syphilis, and no other disease is so destructive to the health and

reproductive function of woman as gonorrhoea.

Thus the dangers of venereal diseases beset not only the individual but

through the individual the whole race. Both venereal diseases respect

no social position and recoil before no virtue. They ramify through

every class and rank of society. Like “pallida mors” they approach with

equal step the habitations of the poor and the palaces of the rich.

With these dangers staring at him, no man has a right to justify the

double standard of sex-morality. No young man should even think of

exposing himself, his future wife and offspring to all these dangers

for the mere pittance of a short momentary enjoyment in the company

of the pestiferous individuals, of these fallen angels whom the Bible

describes as the “strange woman which flattereth with her words, her

feet go down to death, her steps take hold on hell, going down to the

chambers of death.”

These meretricious women are constantly seeking those whom they may

devour and are laughing at the wholesale ruin they are spreading.

These unscrupulous courtesans are individuals without industry,

preferring indolent lives with a show of finery and a brief period of

gratification of their sensuality. They indulge their selfish lust ad

libitum, with no thought as to what the result may be.

Most of the devotees of Venus vulgativa spend their brief lives,

trying to lead boys and young men into wickedness and mischief. As

a rule, they are all unclean and diseased and rejoice to return to

their partners, the so-called “prostituants,” the infection they have

received from other prostituants. The young man, therefore, will

in the majority of cases surely carry away some foul disease from

these women. When we consider how difficult and rare a thing it is to

thoroughly cure a woman of gonorrhoea, it is easily understood how

dangerous it is for the youth to trust himself at any time in her

subsequent life within her infected presence.

Hence the youth have no right to become the main contributors to the

resources of the venal woman, whether of the street or of the palatial

home. Clandestine vice is, as a rule, more dangerous in regard to

contracting venereal diseases than the immorality of the street. The

majority of young men drift into illicit, sensual life and its dangers

and pitfalls without the least physiological necessity. Until the

age of twenty of the woman and twenty-five of the man is reached,

youth itself gains by complete abstinence. The teens, says Ellen Key,

should be the age of the erotic prologue not of the drama. Premature

erotic claims are less the result of the needs of the organism than

the influence of the imagination upon it. The young boys of sixteen

to twenty-five are only in love with love. It is the longing for love

rather than love itself that renders them an easy prey for the venal

woman.

Masculine chastity must not, therefore, be laughed at. The necessity

of self-control and of chastity must be impressed upon the mind of the

young man as the only way to secure the strong mental and physical

qualities for the future paternal relations.[EJ]

There is not the slightest shadow of support in any teachings of

physiology or hygiene for the double standard of morality of the

sexes. There is no reason why a moral wrong in the woman should be

a justifiable necessity with the man. From no medical studies and

investigations anywhere attainable, would the physical necessity of

sowing of “wild oats” for a young man hold good. No one will deny that,

as far as the gentler sex is concerned, continence (at least between

the age of sixteen to thirty-five) is compatible with health, then

the general belief of young men that sensual indulgence is necessary

for healthy manhood, has no justification in physiology. Purity is

as little injurious to a man as to a woman. It is a most absurd and

erroneous teaching that, unless inclination is gratified, a man’s

health will suffer.

The instinct of generation has been compared with the instinct of

hunger and thirst, and as the latter must be satisfied, so must the

former be gratified. But there is no proper parallelism between these

two instincts. Food and drink are vital necessities of the organism

from the first day of conception, to replace the stuffs consumed in the

metabolism of the vital functions. The generative instinct appears a

number of years after birth, hence does not serve any vital necessity.

This instinct could, if at all, only be compared with the instinct of

micturition or defecation, and the relief of the physical pressure in

the generative organs is brought about by the self-regulating action of

nocturnal emissions. It may be more natural and agreeable for a healthy

man and woman, after they have reached a certain age, to indulge in the

exercise of their organs of generation at reasonable intervals, than to

abstain from it. But to proclaim that this abstinence, compatible with

health in women, is injurious to men, is sheer absurdity.

It is especially hard to understand how any medical men could recommend

to a young man to resort to illicit relations for health and to

jeopardize his own health and that of his future family. If it is

justified to recommend illicit relations to a young man, as a cure for

masturbation and its resulting neurasthenia, instead of explaining

to him that a healthy hygiene and the exercise of his will-power

will make easy the control of the desire without any loss of health,

then why not recommend the same remedy to young women. Continence

is no more injurious to the man than to the woman. The conventional

view that incontinence in men is a necessary condition of health

must be corrected. Instead of the popular fallacy that a young man

is physically the worse for a clean moral life, the entire weight of

evidence of the world’s foremost medical scholars is unreservedly of

the opinion that he is physically better for it.[EK] It is recognized

by the highest authorities that continence is perfectly compatible

with the most perfect health. Chastity properly understood is health,

it never does any harm to mind or body.[EL] It is the consensus of

the opinions of most of the great medical thinkers that it is not

prejudicial to the health of a man to keep his body clean until he has

found a true mate in life.[EM]

The boy who has just passed adolescence ought, therefore, to learn

that the injudicious premature use of the organs of generation is

prejudicial to his health and is beset with great dangers.[EN] There

is a great distinction between puberty and nubility, and the boy must

learn to check his sensual impulses until marriage which is not so very

hard to accomplish.

There are enough sexual stoics in the world to prove by practical

experience that continence is not only possible but also practicable.

Caesar says of the ancient Teutons: “Ante annum vicesimum sextum

feminis notionem habere inter res turpissimas habeatur.” “It was

considered one of the most shameful things to have any relations with

a woman before the twenty-sixth year of age” (Bellum Gallicum). Yet

no one will dispute that the ancient Teutons were strong and healthy.

These ancient barbarians seem to have learned by experience that

before this time sexual maturity is not yet complete. The same thing

was found in modern times by Eulenburg (Zeitschr. f. Bekämpf. d.

Geschlechtskrankheiten, 1907, p. 194), that the combined statistics

teach that complete sexual maturity is reached by the woman only after

the twentieth year of age, and by the man not before the twenty-fifth

year.

Besides the historic proof there are daily examples which show the

compatibility of chastity with health at any age. Many young men,

engaged to be married, remain chaste for long periods without detriment

to their health, although often living in continuous sexual excitement.

Patients suffering from venereal diseases abstain during long periods

of treatment without any impairment of their general health. Men

remain chaste and healthy during long periods when their wives are

ill or during the periods of confinements. Athletes, training for

some physical contest, remain in enforced continence and yet healthy.

Seafaring men are often continent for long periods without injury.

It is not known that the discoverers of the North Pole have greatly

suffered by their enforced continence.

These few examples tend to show that abstinence is not detrimental

to health. In fact, no other condition of life is more thoroughly

consistent with perfect mental and physical vigor than absolute

chastity. The instinct only needs to be controlled. Continence is only

a matter of habit. When the young man has not been debased by vile

practices, it is usually a comparatively easy task to be continent and

requires no extraordinary efforts. Every year of voluntary effort, at

chastity, renders the task easier by force of habit.[EO]

Hence when the young man has been taught the advisability of sensual

control, when the positive assurance has been given to him that total

abstinence can be maintained without loss of power and when his

fears of impairing his health have been dispelled, he will exercise

his will-power and refrain from a departure from moral standards,

especially when the dearth of wholesome information regarding the

dangers of such a departure has been removed.

In large cities sensual control is made very hard for the young

man. The unfortunate phase of the life in a big city is the early

introduction of the youth to temptations and vicious conditions. Vice

is obtruding upon him at every nook and corner. A vile so-called

literature, a suggestive perverse art and an obscene stage panders his

sensual curiosity.

But because, forsooth, it is hard to control that does not mean that

he has to yield to temptation. It is true that the sexual appetite may

assume imperiousness, but only in a certain class of men, in hereditary

weaklings, whose imagination is constantly fed by lascivious thoughts

and sensual images.

But the cause of the unchastity of boys is not that they become

sensually mature earlier than they could judiciously enter into

matrimony, the trouble lies in the fact that boys cannot see why they

should abstain from a tickling amusement, which in their opinion does

nobody any harm. Herein lies the greatest obstacle to continence. The

youth does not know the ethical why, especially in our modern times

with its religious laxity. The ethics of religion, even in its best

days, had not had the power to control sensual passion and to create

total abstinence, although religion, especially Christianity, has

preached the same for the last two thousand years. In modern times with

the almost divine worship of the personality of the individual the

religious motive for chastity seems to fail entirely.

Hence the ethics of evolution and the ethics of sex-hygiene must be

tried. If the theory of evolution is right, and the purpose of our

being in this world is to assert life, then the aim of life can not be

the single individual but the species, which can only be preserved by

the right offspring. The child or what is the same the family[EP] will

have to furnish the motive for man’s continence. The importance of the

chastity of women to the family has been recognized from the earliest

history. It is now time to teach the man the importance of his chastity

to the family, state and nation. He has to know his responsibility

just as the woman knows hers. Rational chastity must be founded upon

the sentiment of human responsibility. The average man in his heart

does not acknowledge to himself that there is any competent reason

why he should control his passion beyond the sentimental idea of the

justice of men’s remaining chaste if they require it of women. It must,

therefore, be shown to the man that there is also an important racial

reason for him to abandon promiscuous life.[EQ]

If it is shown to the young man, at a time when his heart and mind are

still in the thrall of the early and eternal poetry of the race, that

it is as important to humanity that he should be chaste as it is for

the woman to be pure, then he will refrain from illicit indulgence.

The following case is very instructive in this respect. A student

of philosophy at one of the greatest German universities who led

a promiscuous life like any other student, gave up such life

immediately after reading Tolstoy’s Kreutzer-Sonate. For the first

time, as he expressed it, he saw the reason why he should be as chaste

as he expects his bride to be.

This shows what a moral lesson may do even for him who grew up to

manhood without any sex-instruction. The young man who has the desire

not to be dominated or controlled by sensual passions and propensities,

requires settled principles, a firm purpose, and a strong will. But if

the training of his will-power has begun from early childhood, thus

effecting the needed self-discipline, and if disgust against everything

vulgar, as the company of lax women, has been implanted in his heart,

he will find the means to get out of the way of vice and to avoid the

contamination by venal sensuality. The best means of vast importance

as occupying and consuming the sexual powers in a substitute form are

bodily and mental labors. These labors, as a rule, are lulling to sleep

sensuality.

If the control of the sex-reflexes is not cultivated, if the training

of the will is ignored, meretricious venery will surely take hold of

him and infect him, it being only a matter of time when it happens.

The young man will exercise continence if he has been taught from

early childhood that his sensual yearnings must be restrained like his

propensity to overeat, to overdrink or to overexercise. Because a young

man wants a thing it is not necessarily good for him to have it. Man

has little right to satisfy his desire by unchastity, says Ellen Key,

as he has to satisfy hunger by theft.[ER]

If the young man has learned in time the responsibility and duty of the

man towards the woman, if he has been made aware of the fact that one

false step ruins the girl irremediably for her entire life, if his

attention has been called upon the serious consequences for the woman,

such as pregnancy, motherhood and social ostracism, he will not so

easily ever try to seduce an innocent girl. He will treat every woman

he meets with in life as he wishes his own sister or future wife to be

treated by others.

The young man has further to learn that every union of bodies without

the harmony of the souls is humiliating and immoral. That does not

mean that the idea should be imparted to our youth that the sexual

impulse is something low and bestial, as some moralists would like us

to believe. On the contrary, we must teach our youth that a healthy

and natural exercise of the human organism is a precious blessing that

must not be squandered and recklessly defiled. We must teach the young

man that for the future offspring’s sake the monogamic marriage is the

only one which the ideal man will resort to. Until his mate is found

he will have to control his sensual desires. The control of sensuality

develops the deeper feelings of love. Bought love kills the finest

instruments of mental activity. Promiscuity destroys the relations of

the young companionship. Free love leaves all the best human qualities

undeveloped. To form the healthy germ of society, marriage must be

unitary and permanent. The individual love assists the elevation of the

race. Monogamy was victorious from the experience of its advantages. It

exists for the sake of the race.

The race-enhancing form of union is a permanent monogamy. From the

physiological standpoint monogamic marriage is a natural and healthful

institution. It affords a free outlet to sensuality without generally

exhausting it by the unceasing excitement in the presence of new

objects. Novelty is the chief stimulus to the sexual feeling and is

the main cause of overindulgence and its sequels. In centralizing

affection upon one person, marriage furnishes the greatest scope of

its development and expansion. Marriage favors the development of a

great number of faculties which otherwise would be in danger of being

abused. Marriage contributes to the general morality of mankind by the

regularity which it brings to all the actions of life, by the calmness

which it spreads over human existence, and by the harmony which it

introduces into the functional exercise of all our necessities. It

creates in man a greater attachment to life in helping to overcome a

great number of difficulties. Marriage, therefore, contributes to the

progress of humanity, and man is by duty bound that the selection of

a mate should contribute to the enhancement of the human race. Every

individual acquires duties towards the race. The man or the woman who

transgresses the path of strict monogamy has done a disservice to

humanity. From the point of view of evolutionary ethics, men and women

must make absolute chastity the rule of their lives.

FOOTNOTES:

[DG] In a treatise on the science of sex-attraction, such as this,

the author is of the opinion, that the much-mooted question about

the double standard of sexual morality of the two sexes ought to be

thoroughly discussed.

In human affairs there is no effect without its adequate cause.

Codified law, custom and ethics, the three determiners and regulators

of human conduct, have all their reasons. If there is a double standard

of sex-morality there must be a reason for it. What is this reason?

Is this reason still extant? Is there still any justification for the

existence of the double moral standard? Have not any other reasons

arisen for a change of this double standard?

In modern times law and ethics do not know of any double standard of

sex-morality. In no civilized country do the laws punish any voluntary

sexual misconduct but adultery, and in the latter the prohibition is

for men and women alike. Ethics, on the other hand, allows sexual

relations in marriage only, and then mostly for the purpose of

propagation. Even such a radical as Zola says: “Si l’enfant n’est pas

au bout, l’amour n’est qu’une saleté inutile.” But as far as custom is

concerned there is no question of the existence of a double standard

of sex-morality. Even the most violent, rabid free-lover will resent

any allegations of a dissolute character in his mother, while he will

listen with perfect equanimity to narrations of the fast life of his

father. Whence comes this difference, which seems to be ingrained in

the heart of every man and woman? What is the cause of this phenomenon?

The answer that men with the power in their hands have sexually

enslaved womankind, shows not only ignorance of history and biology (no

species could survive for any length of time without the harmonious

coöperation of the two sexes. Where the female of the species is

actually kept subject to the male, where she is treated with cruelty

by him, or where the male neglects to protect and take loving care

of the female, the species has no survival power and dies), but also

poor logic. If the double standard of morality were not due to racial

evolution, if it could have been changed without hurting the race,

sensual men would have changed it long ago, because it is against

these men’s interest to have all women live in strict chastity. An

unchaste man needs an unchaste female partner. If all women—prostitutes

included, sic!—were chaste, where on earth could he get his partner?

Hence the assertion, frequently found, especially in feministic

literature, that men-made laws sexually enslaved women, is entirely

illogical.

In fact, among the culture-nations laws against unchastity never

existed. Even the Bible has only laws against adultery. The adulteress

and her paramour were both stoned (Deuteron. xxii, 24), but the sexual

relations of the unmarried woman with any man were entirely ignored by

the law. Even rape was no criminal offense—the father of the girl had

only a civil action against the rapist (Deuteron. xxii, 28). Such laws

would just suit sensual men. It is in their interest that all women

except their own wives should lead dissolute lives. But it is in the

interest of the married woman, where adultery is prohibited, that all

other women should be strictly chaste, so that her husband would be

compelled to be faithful to her. Hence it is custom (and in matters of

custom woman rules supreme) that dictates chastity. The punishment of

a woman’s false step is social ostracism, decreed by women themselves,

not by men-made laws. The men-made laws, on the contrary, strike men

harder than women. The punishment of the woman’s misconduct in marriage

is loss of husband and children, while the man loses wife and children

and has to pay her alimony, during her natural life, in the bargain.

Yet the fallacy is repeated again and again about men wishing to

enslave their mothers, sisters, wives and daughters.

But why does custom punish woman’s misconduct and why not man’s? Why

does the Biblical law discriminate between men and women in regard to

adultery? A married woman’s adultery is punished with death, while

the law is silent about the married man’s adultery with a single

woman. Why this discrimination that is as old as history? Was there a

justification for the double standard, and should not the twentieth

century change the double into a single standard? If changed, should

men become as chaste as women or should womankind be pulled down into

the gutter of sensuality to meet the demands of men?

The majority of mankind—women included—believes in the justification of

the double standard of sex-morality for the two sexes. Men are thought

to have greater erotic needs than women.

Recently there arose a new spirit in the domain of sex-morality which

demands a single standard for both sexes. The societies for moral

prophylaxis demand that men should become as chaste as women. In this

way the social evil and its satellites, the venereal diseases, would

disappear. On the other hand, the radicals have raised a unanimous

revolt against self-control in the domain of chastity for either

sex. These new moralists preach the right of men and women to the

fulfillment of every instinct, every impulse, every dream in all its

fullness. This is proclaimed as the new standard of sex-morality.

But in truth this subjugation of the individual to the instincts is

a complete denial of morality. For morality is the arrest of the

instincts by the intellect.

In this part of our treatise the author will try to find the reason for

the double standard of sexual morality for the two sexes. Why since the

dawn of history the married woman was kept to a rigorous chastity. How

the chastity of the single woman has developed as a corollary of the

law of adultery, and he will thoroughly discuss the reasons why the

double standard of morality is at present utterly without justification.

[DH] The parallel points in both creeds dealing with social justice are

among others the following:

“Thou shalt love thy neighbor “Thou shalt love thy neighbor

as thyself.”—Moses iii, 19, 18. as thyself.”—Matth. xxii, 39.

”Hatred stirreth up strifes, but “Charity suffers long and is

love covers all sins.”—Prov. x, 12. kind.”—I Corinth. xiii, 4.

“I dwell with him that is of “Blessed are the poor in spirit,

contrite and humble spirit.”—Isaia for theirs is the kingdom of

57, 15. heaven.”—Matth. v, 3.

“He has sent me to comfort all “Blessed are they that mourn;

that mourn.”—Isaia 61, 2. for they shall be comforted.”

—Matth. v, 4.

“He that followeth after mercy “Blessed are the merciful.”

findeth life.”—Prov. 21, 21. —Matth. v, 7.

“They that sow in tears shall “Blessed are ye that hunger

reap in joy, he that goeth forth now, for ye shall be filled;

and weepeth, shall come again blessed are ye that weep now,

rejoicing.”—Psalm 126, 5. for ye shall laugh.”

—Luke vi, 21.

“A man’s pride shall bring him “Whosoever shall exalt himself

low, but honor shall uphold the shall be abased, and he that

humble in spirit.”—Prov. 29, 23. shall humble himself shall be

—Matth. 23, 12.

“He shall save the humble person.” “God resisteth the proud, but

—Job xxii, 29. giveth grace unto the humble.”

exalted.”—James iv, 6.

“Ho, everyone that thirsteth “Come unto me all ye that labor

come ye to the waters and he and are heavy laden, I will

that hath no money come ye buy give you rest.”—Matth. xi, 28.

and eat.”—Isaiah 55, 1.

“Thou shalt not harden thine “Give to every man that asketh

heart, nor shut thine hand from of thee.”—Luke vi, 30.

the poor brother, but thou shalt

open thine hand wide unto him.”

—Moses v, 15, 7.

“Judge righteously between “Judge not according to the

every man: ye shall not respect appearance but judge righteous

persons in judgment.”—Moses v, judgment.”—John vii, 24.

1, 16.

[DI] Socialism applies the same tactics towards Christianity, as

Christianity used towards Judaism. Christianity borrowed Israel’s

greatest Book, the Bible, written from the first chapter of Genesis to

the last of Revelations, at different times in different languages, but

always by the sons of Israel, appropriated the moral tenets of these

Jewish prophets and rabbis (Jesus is often addressed by the title rabbi

in the New Testament) and repudiated the descendants of these Jewish

thinkers. Christianity, for generations, deprived these descendants

of the enjoyment of these human rights, their ancestors have woven

for mankind, and accused them of forming an element destructive of

social peace, in whose great Book social peace and justice were first

preached. The Hammurabi codex, which in regard to civil and criminal

statutes shows a certain parallelism with the Pentateuch, is far

inferior to these books in the multitude of social laws.

[DJ] If you meet with your neighbor on the sidewalk push him into the

middle of the road and let him be mangled by the passing vehicles.

Then you have made a long stride forward toward the perfect man. If

you do not do it to him he will do it to you. Only the stronger has a

right to survive, so that a perfect aristocracy may arise. But while

this doctrine of the survival of the strongest was with Nietzsche only

a philosophical dream, the prototype of the Superman, which is “Push

forward; overcome obstacles; take wherever you can find; grasp and do

not let go; live your own life fully, it is all you have; let others

look out for themselves,” has always been in existence since time

immemorial.

[DK] The spirit of this intoxication of work is shown in phrases such

as this: “Women deteriorated to the point where she was unfitted to do

a fair share of the world’s work.” Is work a privilege or a necessity?

Who is the power that has decreed this share of the world’s work? Do

animals in freedom work? By the way, the alleged deterioration which

presupposes a transmission from mother to daughter, with the exclusion

of her son, is a biological impossibility. If the deterioration has

become a unit-character, the mother must transmit half of it to her son

and half to her daughter, so that boy and girl are still born equal.

The only way such deterioration could be transmitted from mother to

daughter—who inherits half the good qualities of her father to balance

this deterioration—is that it has become a sex-unit-character, like the

female breasts, hair or skin, which is contrary to all the teachings

of biology. Even Lamarck would never claim that such an acquired

characteristic as deterioration for work could be transmitted from

mother to daughter with the exclusion of her son. On the other hand,

if deterioration is not a unit-character transmissible to the son, it

cannot be transmitted to the daughter either.

[DL] When the sweet-sixteen is punished by her mother for flirting with

boys, then her personality has been violated.

[DM] This voluptuous sensuality is given naturally the poetical name

of love, with which it really has nothing in common except the final

sex-expression and its desire.

[DN] The psychic bulwark, says Ch. v. Ehrenfels, against the horrors

of the thought of death and against the terrors of existence can only

be raised by man when he puts himself into a certain relation to the

metaphysical riddles of the universe, into a relation to the contrast

between the fleeting and eternal, between the movable and immovable,

between the finite and the infinite. The ethical values of individual

conduct may be thus characterized as those which are awakened in

man, when he places himself, with his wishes and actions, before the

tribunal of the eternal and inscrutable. Individual moral conduct, in

contrast to social morality which is determined by the moral imperative

and ethical relative values, is in this way regulated by the perennial

threats of the inevitable appearance of death.

To escape from this thought the morality of love recommends the plunge

into the whirl of sensual life. But at the approach of death man sees

that the transitory intoxication of the senses is also pure vanity. For

it is almost axiomatic among thinking men that the only way to acquire

the ability to look upon the terrors of existence and the fleetingness

of life with equanimity and consolation is to put their labors in such

a direction, where there is hope for the continuation of their works

beyond the individual existence far into the infinite, such as the

artist hopes of his art, the scientist of his science, and the creative

genius of his creation.

[DO] Even Homer, the happy, life-enjoying Greek poet, expresses the

same pessimism (Iliad ix, 318).

ἴση μοῖρα μένοντι καὶ εἰ μάλα τις πολεμίζοι

ἐν δὲ ἰῇ τιμῇ ἠμὲν κακὸς ἠδὲ καὶ ἐσθλός

κατθαν’ ὁμῶς ὅτ’ ἀεργὸς ἀνὴρ ὅ τε πολλὰ ἐοργώς

“The same fate awaits him who remains home and him who risks his life

in the war for his country; in the same estimation are held the coward

and the brave. They both die in the same way, the idler and he who has

accomplished ever so much in life.”

The greatest rhapsody of pessimism is found in the Bible, in

Ecclesiastes. The quintessence of the royal preacher’s philosophy is,

“All is vanity.” “One generation passes away, the other comes, without

aim or end, purpose or intent.” Here is the sun, speeding through the

heavens, for which purpose or intent?

“The sun riseth and the sun sets and hasteth to the same place, where

it rose”; without aim or end. Here is the wind blowing furiously a

gale, to which purpose or intent?

“The wind goes to the south and turns to the north, it whirls about

continually and returns again according to his circuit,” without aim or

end. Here is the river, the torrent rushing down a precipice, to which

purpose or intent? “All the rivers run into the sea, yet the sea is not

full, unto the place from whence the rivers came, thither they return

again”; without aim or end. All things turn in a circuit without aim or

end, purpose or intent. All is vanity and vexation of the spirit.

“What happens to the fool, so it happens to the wise. There is no

remembrance of the wise more than of the fool forever. How dieth the

wise man? As the fool. In the days to come shall all be forgotten” (ii,

15, 16).

Then the preacher turned, in search for a definite purpose in life,

to different philosophies of human conduct, he becomes in turn a

work-worshipper, love-worshipper, pleasure-worshipper; and what did

he find? “There is nothing good in the things God has created but

for a man to rejoice” (iii, 12). Thus it appears to him that the

philosophy of pleasure is the only purpose in life. But a little later

he finds that also this philosophy is of no profit. “But a man has no

preeminence above the beast; for all is vanity” (iii, 19).

Then comes a passage which shows how pessimism blinds the keenest

observer. “There is one alone, he has neither child nor brother, yet

is there no end of all his labor, neither is his eye satisfied with

riches, neither says he, for whom do I labor? This also is vanity” (iv,

8).

Now, this fact of the lonely man working for the future without

apparent purpose, ought to have given the philosopher a hint, that

there must be something behind this will to labor without aim or

end. “Arbores serit agricola quarum fructibus nunquam fruetur.” But

pessimist as our philosopher is, he returns to his philosophy. “This

also is vanity.”

[DP] Jagadis Chandra Bose (The Modern Review, Calcutta, 1914) succeeded

in establishing the perfect parallelism between animal and plant. He

found that all plants are sensitive and that in certain of them are

tissues which beat spontaneously like the heart-beat of the animal.

Response to electric stimulus, too, is identical in the plant and in

the animal. In short, the life of the plant is the life of the animal

in almost all its incidents, only in less degree.

[DQ] In nature the individual counts for nothing, the race for

everything. Nature is pitiless in the destruction of individuals.

Thousands of animal lives are consumed to feed one lion throughout its

life, millions of plant lives to feed one ox. In nature the individual

is as ruthlessly sacrificed as in war. In this respect war is more in

harmony with the designs of nature than peace.

In peace all the manifestations of life are individualistic. Eating,

drinking, sleeping, and amusing one’s self are all actions in the

interest of the preservation of the individual. Even the impulse of the

preservation of the kind, or of propagation, is in the last analysis

individualistic in nature. It is the aspiration to save at least one

part of the individual from general annihilation. The child is the

part of the parents which survives after the parents’ death. All the

activities of man, even the noblest, partake of a certain egoistic

element. The mother in sacrificing her life to save her child is

unconsciously merely sacrificing the older part in order to save the

younger part, of herself. But when the very existence of the individual

is in jeopardy, when life itself is at stake, then all ideals centering

in altruism are cast aside, and the Satanic cynic grins, muttering the

Biblical verses:

“Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life.

“But put forth thine hand, and touch his bone and his flesh,

“And he will curse thee to thy face.” (Job ii, 4-5.)

But all egoistic tendencies are silent in war. Here the individual

is merely an insignificant little wheel in the huge war-machine.

Here the individual counts for nothing, the nation for everything,

the individual must perish that the nation may flourish ever after.

Now, what is the modern nation, but an idea, what is the monarch in

western countries or the flag, but a symbol? Men live as happy, as

content, as free in London, Brussels, Paris, or Berlin. Ostend, e. g.,

would not materially change its mode of life, whether it is Belgian,

French, British, or German. (The semi-Asiatic Russia naturally forms

an exception. Anyone who has lived near the German-Russian frontier

and has observed the sunny German village with its clean paved

streets, lined with pretty large-windowed brick houses, all supplied

with the modern urban comforts, where tidiness and cleanliness, light

and well-being, happiness and prosperity dwell; and compared with

this sunshine, only a hundred yards away, on the Russian side, has

seen the dirty, streetless Russian village, with its windowless,

straw-roofed, low, wooden shanties where man and beast live under one

roof in squalor, filth, poverty and misery—and here it is where real

civilization reveals itself, not in the borrowed, French mannerism in

the palace of Petrograd—will not doubt for one moment that there is a

vast difference between the life under a semi-Asiatic civilization and

that under western civilizations. At this corner of the world, war is

utilitarian as among the barbarians in ancient times. Here the Teutonic

civilization is in war against the slavery of the knout.) But what are

the western nations fighting for? They are fighting for an ideal; here

men give their lives for a symbol.

Herein lies the chief service of war. (War is also calling out men’s

higher virtues, such as love and devotion to the fatherland, sympathy

with one’s compatriots, display of sacrifice, return to simple life,

etc.) It is the creator of the highest idealism, which is capable

of the supreme sacrifice, life itself. Such high idealism is found

only among the warlike nations of the world throughout human history.

These same warlike nations, the Hebrews (the Bible is replete of

war-narratives), the Greeks, the Romans and the Teutons, have also

built up the higher civilizations. Only those absorbed in the category

of the ideal, in the enthusiasm of humanity, can be seized by the great

ecstatic impulsion to war. The vulgar, the ignorant, the selfish,

engrossed in their own small affairs and engulfed in the mire of

utilitarianism, for whom the only meaning, worth and work of life is

barter, have no conception of the highest sacrifice, which is life, and

can not comprehend the meaning of war, nor do they ever contribute to

the ideal edifice of a higher civilization.

[DR] The author will follow here the discoveries of Morgan as described

in his “Ancient Society.”

Morgan divides the human history into three periods—savagery, barbarism

and civilization. He then subdivides the first two epochs into three

stages each.

In the lower stage of savagery man lived on trees and in caves. His

food consisted of fruits, thus being compelled to live in warm climates

where his food was always to be had. In this stage men lived in a kind

of monogamy.

The middle stage of savagery begins with the discovery of fire. Fish

was added to man’s food. In this way men were able to move in hordes in

colder climates.

The upper stage of savagery dates back from the invention of the bow

wherewith man could hunt his prey.

The lower stage of barbarism begins with introduction of pottery, the

middle stage with the introduction of agriculture and the upper stage

with the discovery of metals. The last is the stage wherein the Homeric

Greeks live.

Simultaneously with humanity’s advance from the lower to the higher

stages, the relations of the sexes also changed.

[DS] Punalua is an Indian word for uncle. In this family the children

do not know their father, but they know the brother of their mother.

The uncle is thus the relative who looks after the special interests of

his sister’s children within the clan.

[DT] Many scholars differentiate between endogamous and exogamous

tribes. But Morgan has shown that Endogamy and Exogamy are only two

different stages, that in the course of evolution every human tribe has

passed through the endogamous and exogamous stages. The Bible knows

yet the exogamous stage. “Therefore, shall a man leave his father and

mother and shall cleave unto his wife” (Genesis ii, 24). This shows

that exogamy lasted into the stage of the pairing family. In the

patriarchic family of the Bible, it is the woman who leaves her clan

and joins that of her husband. The same is the case among the Homeric

Greeks (Ilias vi, 29).

[DU] Homer often describes such gifts. Meleager is offered by the

Aetolians fifty acres of land, if he agreed to fight the Kouretes

(Ilias ix, 578).

[DV] The transition from the matriarchate to the patriarchate has been

dramatized in the Orestea of Aeschylus.

Apollo proclaims:

“Not is the mother the child’s progenitor.

“She shelters and carries only the awakened life.

“The father begets, she only preserves him the pledge.”

The Erinnyes thereupon lament:

“Thus thou sinkest, the gods’ ancient epoch.”

[DW] For this reason polygamy even in the countries where it was

theoretically allowed was very rarely actually met with. Throughout

the entire history of the polygamous Jews only about half a dozen

polygamous marriages are recorded.

Tacitus found among the Teutons only a few nobles to possess concubines

besides their wives.

[DX] “It is, indeed,” says Hartmann, “her own bed which the immoral

wife besmirches. While the husband misconducts himself outside the

family circle, the iniquity of the woman is bound to effect a change in

the home.”

Even the unchastity of the single woman has far more serious biological

consequences than that of the man. Her transgression creates a perfect

blood chaos in her future offspring. Long after a man’s death a woman

sometimes bears children to another man, who resemble the first. The

absorbed sperma seems to leave an indelible impression upon the woman.

[DY] The masculine morality is as yet very little influenced by reason.

Hence the male standard of morality of sex is as yet very low. So much

so that with meretricious venery rampant, male monogamy is as yet a

dream of the idealist. Yet there is a valid reason why the man should

not be inferior to woman in the standard of chastity. If there was no

racial reason for his chastity in ancient times, there is a good reason

for him to be chaste now.

[DZ] The man, says Schopenhauer, can beget a hundred children annually

if he had so many wives, hence he is looking for many; the woman can

only beget one child and is hence always desirous to preserve the

supporter of her offspring.

[EA] Female coyness is found in many animals where it serves to

increase the tumescence of the male. Animal coyness is especially

developed during pregnancy when no animal admits the male any longer.

[EB] Feminine modesty and coyness have become real instinctive

sentiments by which woman dominates man. This dominance is so great

that among all peoples the male sex is and was always subjected to the

rule of the female despite appearances to the contrary, and in the face

of all the laws against her.

[EC] Virtue and moral consciousness, says Schrenk-Notzing, are not

inherited in any person, man or woman. We inherit only the disposition

to goodness and right-willing as we may that of cruelty.

[ED] The radical preachers of revolt against chastity are fond to

assert that chastity has been forced upon women by men. This assertion

does not betray profound logic. The entire institution of monogamy, or

of marriage for that matter, is in the interest of woman and eminently

adapted to her needs only. Woman’s greatest need is to love and to be

loved, a man can more readily sublimate his sexual instinct into higher

channels.

The same shallowness of observation is shown in catch-phrases, such

as this: “Once women married because they were not permitted to work

at all, now they marry because they are forced to work beyond their

endurance.” And why do men marry? Not for the satisfaction of their

sexual desires; this they can have without the valuable privilege of

being allowed to support some other men’s daughters. No, men and women

marry because, if they are not degenerates, they are driven to marriage

by the permanent mating instinct, which is innate in man for the

benefit of the offspring.

[EE] Noeggerat claims that, in the city of New York, of 1000 married

men 800 have had gonorrhoea, 90 per cent. of all these have not been

healed and can infect their wives. As a result, at least three out of

every five married women in New York have gonorrhoea as a gift of their

husbands.

These statistics may be somewhat exaggerated, still the percentage of

diseased young men is appalling. At least 50 per cent. of young men

approaching the age of maturity become infected with venereal diseases

in a single year.

Kirchner, of the Prussian ministerium of cultus, claims that about

one hundred thousand men suffer daily of venereal diseases within the

Prussian monarchy. The result is a loss of a daily income of at least

250,000 marks, or a loss of 90,000,000 marks a year.

Rogers claims that over ninety per cent. of our young men stray from

the paths of virtue before marriage; sixty per cent. contract venereal

diseases which are difficult to cure. More wives than prostitutes have

venereal diseases, innocently contracted from husbands. Thousands of

unborn babies are annually killed by parental infection. Sixty per

cent. of the blindness in this country is due to venereal diseases.

One-eighth of all cases in New York hospitals are venereal. Two hundred

thousand infected persons walk the streets of New York daily.

Among men the author meets with in his practice or socially, the man

who never had gonorrhoea once at least in his life is an extreme rarity.

[EF] When a newly married woman experiences a burning pain in

urinating, noticing at the same time a certain leucorrhoea, in

ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, it is caused by the gonococcus. If

two weeks after she was married, she feels pain in her lower abdomen,

the case is suspicious of gonorrhoeal salpingitis. The gonorrhoeal

infection reaches the tubes about ten to fourteen days after the

initial infection of the cervix. The vagina may not be affected at all.

Gonorrhoeal vaginitis is exceedingly rare. The pavement epithelium,

covering the vaginal surface, seems to afford protection against the

specific infection. Gonorrhoeal endometritis is also rare. Gonorrhoea

infects the female genital tract by jumps. From the urethra and vulva

the infection jumps to the cervix and hence to the tubes and ovaries.

[EG] According to Neisser there are in Germany thirty thousand blind

persons whose loss of sight may be thus accounted for.

[EH] These gonorrhoeal complications may serve as a deterrent for the

individual but would have nothing to do with morality, if they would

not also be met with in the innocent party. If gonorrhoea and its

complications would only affect the individual that voluntarily exposes

itself to infection, it would be of no more moral concern than measles

or pneumonia. But gonorrhoea insidiously strikes the innocent women and

children. Hence it is subject to the “moral imperative,” “Thou shalt

not kill, blind or maim your wife and child.” To give such a loathsome

disease to another person is hence a moral crime, apart from the fact

that the misconduct of the unchaste man is to the detriment of himself

and of the race and is immoral. Still writers who call themselves

independent thinkers demand yet better proofs of the immorality of

man’s unchastity.

The only excuse for the men who carry gonorrhoea into their families

is that they do not know the consequences. As a rule, the misfortune

comes upon the family quite unaware. The man cannot even be blamed

of negligence. Not only the woman acquires gonorrhoea without her

knowledge and in absence of all local or general symptoms, but even the

man does not know that he is still harboring infectious material in his

genital tract.

Prof. Bum has found gonococci in the urine and in the urethral

secretions, five and ten years after the onset of the infection. At

such a late period no man ever thinks of still being infectious, and in

this way he becomes not infrequently unaware the murderer of his mate.

[EI] The prevalence of syphilis is estimated at 18 per cent. of the

adult population. Ruggles found in New York City, in the better class

of families, one-third of the sons of adult age to be infected with

syphilis. Syphilis causes about forty per cent. of all miscarriages.

The mortality of syphilitic children is about sixty per cent. Syphilis

is the only disease transmitted to the offspring in full virulence.

Sixty to eighty per cent. of all infected children die before they are

born, or come into the world with the mark of death upon them. The

mortality of the children who have inherited syphilis from the father

is about twenty-eight per cent., of those who have inherited it from

the mother is over sixty per cent. A large number of those who survive

childhood dies from hereditary syphilis between the ages of ten and

twenty.

[EJ] Let several men in the club or at the saloon-bar touch in their

conversation the topic of sex, and they will poke fun at the man who

never had a venereal disease.

[EK] Among the European working-classes and peasants, according to

Ellen Key, the free union of love has long been the custom. This

premature sexual life contributes to hinder the full bodily and mental

development of the lower classes.

[EL] All ethical possessions in the inner man, his modesty, morality,

his divine adoration, his aesthetic and his social service are all due

to the repression of sexuality.

[EM] Pflüger (In Jacobsohn’s Article, St. Petersburg Med. Wochenschr.,

1907, p. 97) says: If all the authorities of the world should proclaim

the innocuousness of continence, it would have no influence upon youth,

for forces are here active which will break every obstacle.

Thus even Pflüger admits that continence is compatible with perfect

health and only thinks that the force of sensuality would sweep aside

all recommendations of abstinence. Now, about the possibility of total

abstinence, there may be a great difference of opinion. But granted

absolute abstinence is only an ideal, no ideal can be realized,

otherwise it would not be an ideal. We can only approach an ideal,

and this would be a great gain in regard to sexual continence. Näcke

says that absolute sexual abstinence is an utopia just as the total

abolition of prostitution, public and clandestine, or the absolute

abstinence from alcohol. Man’s impulses are too powerful, but they may

be restrained and kept in proper bounds.

[EN] Statistics show that it is not at all the question about the men

being continent, but about the boy controlling early passions. Most men

contract venereal diseases between the ages of sixteen and twenty-five.

The mature man is always able to control his passions. The more

healthy, says Chassaignac, and the nearer the normal an individual is,

the better he can not only control his passions, but the less is his

condition likely to be disturbed by continence. It is the neurasthenic

who is most prone to be upset by an attempted or enforced continence

and who, as well, is most given to excess.

[EO] The Talmudists, the keenest observers of human life and conduct,

knew this when they said אבר קטן יש באדם משביעו רעב ומרעיבו שבע

(Sanhedrin, p. 107A). “There is a small organ in the body of a man

which is always hungry if one is trying to satisfy it, and is always

satisfied if one starves it.”

[EP] The family, i. e., near their father and mother, is the only

institution where children were meant to be brought up. No collective

work, settlements, vacation homes or asylums can protect or guide

friendless children properly. The spiritual and emotional education of

the child, the awakening of its higher sentiments can only be carried

out in the atmosphere of the parental home, under the guidance of love

and affection of those who have given life to this child.

[EQ] Since men’s deviation from the strict path of chastity jeopardizes

the very existence of the race, sexual morality must be binding upon

all men, under all conditions without any regard to the original reason

for the establishment of the moral law. A law, in its nature, can

not acknowledge any exceptions. There may be a case where infection

could be excluded with absolute certainty, just as there may be a case

where the father’s doubt would have no consequences for the child.

Embezzlement is also sometimes allowed and even a duty, as Cicero shows

in “De Officiis,” “Si gladium quis apud te sana mente deposuerit,

repetat insaniens, reddere peccatum sit officium non reddere.” In a

remote future, under communism, as Mardach paints it, all the reasons

for male or female sexual morality may become non-existent. Then the

standard will surely change. But in our present state of society one

standard of morality must be established for men and women, from which

no one should have a right to deviate, no matter even if the reasons

for the standard are not applicable in the particular case.

[ER] The imperious instinct which decrees the perpetuation of the race,

says Lewis, can be controlled and directed aright by the consistent

knowledge of truth. When the young man has been taught the dignity

of virility, when he has learned that purity is conducive to bodily

development, while vice carries with it the most serious diseases in

its train and the danger not only of ruining his own life but also

the health of his future bride and the entire progeny, he will not

stoop to vice for the gratification of his desires. The average man

is not a criminal, he does not wreck the life and health of his wife

and children knowingly and wilfully. In most cases he does it through

ignorance of the nature and terrible consequences of the disease.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anjel Archiv für Psychiatrie, Vol. VIII, p. 394.

Ball, B. La Folie érotique, 1887.

Barrus, Clara Amer. Jour. of Insanity, 1895, p. 480.

Berg, I. Das sexuelle Problem in Kunst und Leben.

Bible Proverbs II, 16; V, 5; VII, 27.

Bischoff, Th. I. W. 1. Zeitschr. f. rat. Med., Vol. IV, 1854.

2. Wiener Med. Wochenschr., 1875, p. 450.

Bloch, Iwan Beiträge zur Aetiologie der Psychopathia

Sexualis.

Brouardel Gazette des Hôpitaux, 1886.

Chassaignac, Ch. New Orleans Med. and Surgical Journ., 1907,

p. 927.

Dubock, Julius Die Psychologie der Liebe.

Ellis, Havelok Studies in the Psychology of Sex.

Freud, Sigmund Drei Abhandlungen über Sexualtheorie.

Freund, S. Die Beziehungen der weiblichen

Geschlechtsorgane zu andern Organen.

Galton, Francis Genius and Heredity.

Garnier, Paul La Génération universelle, Observations sur

les Instincts.

Grosse, Ernst Anfänge der Kunst.

Hegar, Alfred Der Geschlechtstrieb.

Heine, H. Atta Troll.

Herodotos Euterpe 46.

Howard, Clifford Sex-Worship.

Howard, Wm. L. Masturbation, 1906.

Hume, David Treatise on Morals.

Jacobi, Abr. Amer. Journ. of Obstetrics, 1876.

Jacobson, Ludwig St. Petersburg med. Wochenschrift, 1907,

p. 97.

Kant, Emanuel Der Character des Geschlechts, Vol. VII.

Kisch, E. Heinrich Das Geschlechtsleben des Weibes.

Kristeller, S. Berliner klin. Wochenschrift, 1871, p. 315.

MacKenzie, John N. Journ. of Med. Science, 1884.

Magnan, Valentin Des Anomalies, des Aberrations et des

Perversions sexuelles, 1885.

Morgan, I. H. Ancient Society.

Mortimer, Geoffrey Chapters on Human Love.

Mundé, Paul Amer. Journ. Obstetr., Vol. XVI, p. 846.

Näcke, P. Sexual-Probleme, 1908, p. 321.

Nordau, Max Die Parodoxe.

Parke, J. R. Human Sexuality.

Ploss, Heinrich Das Weib in der Natur und Völkerkunde.

Rogers, P. F. Journ. Am. Med. Ass., 1909, p. 648.

Rohleder, Hermann Vorlesungen über Sexualtrieb.

Rosse, Irving C. Virginia Med. Monthly, 1892.

Roubaud, A. F. Traité de l’Impuissance, 1876.

Schrenk-Notzing, A. V. Therapeutische Suggestion in Psychopathia

Sexualis.

Sérieux, Paul Recherche clinique sur les Anomalies de

l’Instinct Sexual, 1888.

Talmey, B. S. 1. Woman, A Treatise on Feminine Love.

2. Genesis, Manuel for Instruction of Children

in Sex.

3. Neurasthenia Sexualis, On Impotence in Men

and Women.

Tardieu, A. A. Étude médico-légale sur les Attentats aux

Moeurs.

Ungewitter, Director Archiv für Kriminalanthropologie und

Kriminalistik, Vol. 32, p. 347.

Weber-Liel Monatschrift für Ohrenheilkunde, Vol. XVII.

Wernich, A. Berliner klin. Wochenschrift. 1873.

Westphal, C. Archiv für Psychiatrie, Vol. II, p. 73.

Wise, P. M. Alienist and Neurologist, 1883.

Woodruff, Chas. Edward Expansion of Races.

INDEX

Abdomen, 58;

pain in lower, 394

Abélard, 258

Aberration of the spirit, 378

Ablation of genitals in sadism, 260

Abnegation, sublimity of, 372

Abortion, laws of, 364

Aboulia, 242, 352

Abraham, 3, 250

Absolute impotence, 198

Abstinence, 178, 180;

feasibility of, 5;

church and, 6;

Justinus and, 5;

to prevent conception, 364;

in women, 179

Abstract truth, 367;

principle of, 379

Abundance of reproductive cells, 381

Accelerator urinae, 77, 81

Acme of venereal paroxysm, 218

Acquaintance, chance, 333

Act—sexual, 357;

climax of, 357;

course of, 90;

duration, 357;

divine, 4

Adam, 341

Adolescence, abstinence of, 5

Adoration, 134, 228;

of vulva, 3;

of sex, 2

Adultery, 110, 111, 388;

punishment of, 367, 368

Advantage of humanity, 373

Aeschylus, 387

Affection—complex sentiment of, 133;

disinterested, 136

Affinity, 130, 139, 145

Age, remote—of prostitution, 338;

suitable for marriage, 348

Aim—of life, 377, 404;

of corset, 7;

of eugenics, 338

Aims in life, 372

Alcohol—impotence by, 182;

sex excitement by, 365

Algolagnie, 253

Alimony, 368

Allantois, 22

Allotments, 387

Aloisia Sigea, 258

Altruism—in reproduction, 12;

crown of, 383;

morality and, 384;

in sentimental love, 136

Altruistic materialists, 371

America, bodily characteristics in, 15

Amoeba, 60, 112

Amos, 5

Amphiaster, 63

Amphibia, 19

Amphimixis, 16

Anabolism, 365

Anaesthesia, 169, 314;

in children, 106;

female, 182, 209, 211;

symptoms of female, 214

Anal—kiss, 255;

depression, 26;

membrane, 23

Anatomy—of cervix, 50;

female genitals, 41;

male genitals, 29;

plants, 318;

of sex, 60

Ancient society, 385

Androcele, 117

Androgynos, 277

Anemia and marriage, 362

Angina pectoris, syphilitic, 397

Animal passion, 147

Animalism, 135

Animals—abstinence in, 180;

spayed, 345

Anjel, 234

Annihilation general, 382

Anorchismus, 190

Anther, 118

Anti-conceptional, 340;

devices, 364;

douches, 88

Anti-selection, 346

Anti-social, 340

Anti-suicide, 340

Antiquity, religion of, 2

Antorgastic libido, 216, 221;

in women, 90

Anuria, 205

Anxiety attacks, 197

Aphrodite, 2, 274

Apollo, 387

Apostoli, 215

Appetites, man’s two, 1

Approach of death, 375

Aristocracy, 340, 372

Ark, divine, 3

Art, 365

Artemis, 274

Arteriae helicinae, 38

Arteriosclerosis syphilitica, 397

Arthritis gonorrhoica, 395

Articles of attire, fetich of, 265

Asceticism, veneration of, 5

Ashereh, 3

Aspermia, 190

Aspiration of sperma, 87

Assassination in love, 134

Assimilation of food, 116, 126

Aster, 61

Atheists, 371

Athens, 346

Atonic impotence, 193

Attachment, 106, 133;

of children, 110, 324

Attraction—spiritual, 376;

impulse of, of mates, 125

Attributes of divinity, 275

Augustinus, 6

Authority—of the divine will, 371;

of religion, 326

Azoospermia, 191

Baal, 3

Bailly-Maitre, 277

Bain, 133, 259

Ball, 229

Barbarism, period of, 385

Barrus, 220

Barter, the meaning of life, 383

Bartholinian glands, 28, 45, 89

Basement membrane, 69

Bawdry, 224

Beauty, 142;

sculptor and, 8;

of sex, 56

Beck, 88

Bed for married couple, 350

Belaschko, 331

Benseman, 239

Berg, 8

Berger, 237

Bergson, 17, 103

Bestiality, 309

Bets in masturbation, 239

Bible, 3, 368, 378, 399

Binary fission, 112

Binding of sex morality, 405

Binet, 266

Biogenetic axiom, Haeckel’s, 17

Biological monogamy, 148

Birds, 19

Birth-rate, fall of, 340

Bischoff, 37

Bisexuality, 273

Blackmer, 165

Bladder—development, 23;

paresis, 204;

spasm, 205

Blastula, 18

Blending, 16

Bloch, 333

Blends, 98

Blood-chaos, 346

Blumroder, 263

Boas, 15

Boettcher’s crystals, 74, 191

Bondage, sexual, 253

Bosom, 8, 365

Botanists, 379

Bow, invention of, 385

Brachycephalic, 15

Breasts at menstruation, 320

Brehem, 351

Bride’s promise of obedience, 151

Bridgman, 327

Bright’s disease, syphilitic, 398

Brouardel, 235

Brown-Séquard, 85

Brunettes, 98

Bulbs, laceration of, 184

Bulwark against horror of death, 376

Bum, 396

Buffon, 276

Burbank, 16

Burton, 268

Business, the narcotic of, 153

Buttocks, 317

Caesar, 127

Calculation in love, 111

Calyx, 116

Capitalism, evolution of, 141

Capryl odors, 98

Career of prostitute, 332

Castrates, 186

Castration, 344;

in incest, 251;

for prevention of conception, 364

Categorical imperative, 383

Catherine de Medici, 263

Cause of drink, 153

Causes of masturbation in children, 167

Cell-hunger, 114

Cells—exhausted, 112;

abundance of reproductive, 381

Central spindle, 63

Centre—of sex, 77, 78, 80, 81, 106;

of truth, 177

Centres—growth of generative, 108;

nervous, male, 39;

female, 55

Centrosome, 61

Cerebrasthenia, 200;

e abusu sexuali, 351

Cervix—anatomy, 50;

erection, 87, 89;

ulceration of, 174

Chain of sex-activity, 111, 174

Change—of bodily characteristics in America, 15;

of female genitals, 362;

of woman’s psyche, 306

Character of masturbator, 171, 172

Characteristics, secondary, 84, 108, 137, 327

Charity, 339

Chassaignac, 402

Chastity, 177;

female, 232, 388;

health in, 402;

male, 392;

in marriage, 350;

violated, 158

Chemotropismus, erotic, 124, 130, 275

Chevalier, 284, 285

Child of love, 135

Children—attachments of, 110, 324;

education of, 318;

erethism in, 106;

exposure of, 339;

jealousy in, 106;

love of, 105;

modesty of, 106;

sex-instinct, 106

Chilodon, 113, 274

Chlorosis and marriage, 362

Chorda dorsalis, 19

Christianity and sexuality, 5;

defectives and, 339;

Judaism, 371

Chromatin, 61

Chromosomes, 61, 135

Church and abstinence, 6

Chyle, 103

Cicero, 405

Cimon, 250

Circle, essence of, 381

Circulation, 92

Circumcision—acquired characteristic, 16;

phallic ritual of, 3

Civilization, 373;

meaning of, 377;

metallic basis of, 373;

period of, 385;

war and, 373

Clan, intermarriage within, 386

Clandestine—love, 157;

vice, 400

Cleopatra, 250

Climacterium, 209

Climax of act, 357

Clitoris, 28, 44, 90, 237, 289;

emblem of, 3;

libido in anomalies of, 185;

in orgasmus retardatus, 220;

at puberty, 182

Cloaca, 20, 22, 26

Clothes—female, 307;

in homosexuality, 287;

irradiation of sex, 7;

in transvestism, 301

Coccygodynia, 352

Coeducation, 335

Coelom, 19

Coitus interruptus, 360

Colic, spermatic, 201

Colliculus, 36;

in excesses, 169;

hypertrophy of, 200, 201;

in nocturnal erections, 177;

physiology of, 72, 75, 82

Colonial protozoa, 114

Column, a sex-symbol, 3

Communal marriage, 383

Complement, soul’s, 376

Conception—favorable time of, 349;

in intermenstrual period, 349, 358;

prevention of, 340;

in rape, 360

Confinement—intercourse after, 356;

libido after, 184, 213

Conjugation, 113, 114, 275;

odor feminae during, 98;

scale of, 112;

of cells, 115

Consanguineous—family, 385;

marriage, 127

Consciousness, loss of—at orgasm, 92;

in plants, 116

Consensualism, 175

Consequences of girl’s false step, 407

Conspiracy of silence, 6

Contempt—in love, 138;

of sex, 9

Continence, 176;

habit of, 403;

obstacles of, 404;

odor feminae in, 98;

in women, 179, 400

Contra-selection, 339

Contrectation, impulse of, 104

Convulsions at orgasm, 92

Copper of Sinai, 373

Copulation, 108, 110;

duration of, 99, 357

Corals, 17

Corolla, 116

Corset, 301, 365;

aim of, 7

Cosmic value, 372

Cosmos, rationality in, 379

Costal respiration, 58, 59

Course of sexual act, 90

Courtesans—career of, 150;

character of, 399;

fashion, 7;

in Old Testament, 4;

in temples, 4

Coverings of genitals, 7

Coyness, 145, 390

Craze for luxuries, 347

Creative evolution, 13

Criterion—of love, 138;

of marital hygiene, 351;

of morality, 368, 384

Cross, symbol of, 4

Cross-dressing, 297