working for it, due to civilization, not only corrupts the sexual life
of the wealthy and the poverty stricken, but has the same effect on
the middle classes. A healthy and normal sexual life must be
associated with honest and arduous work. We have already remarked that
the solution of the sexual question depends partly on the suppression
of alcoholic drink. We may add that another side of the question
depends on the extirpation of the greed for money. If human beings
could work for the social welfare without private interest, sexual
relations would soon take their natural course. But it must be
admitted that it is difficult to find a practical solution for the
problem of social economy.
=Rank and Social Position.=--Class distinction and social position
have always played a part in sexual life. This is especially the case
where certain class customs and prejudices prescribe a special code
for marriage. The consanguinity of the nobility and of royal families,
who can only marry among themselves, has resulted in obvious
degeneration. Originally there was the desire to preserve the purity
of noble blood, and rules formulated with this object at first had
some success; but in the long run the exclusiveness of such selection
produces degeneration of the group which puts it into practice.
On the other hand, the severe rules which govern marriages among the
nobility have resulted in driving the latter to extra-nuptial sexual
intercourse. In their sexual excesses, the nobility, and even crowned
heads, seldom amuse themselves with honest and virtuous girls of the
working classes, but more generally with actresses of loose morals,
dancing girls, and hysterical sirens and adventuresses of all kinds,
so long as they are pretty. Since the time of the feudal system, the
nobility, having lost its real reason for existence, only lives on its
traditions. It remains in general in a state of idle depravity,
faithful to its old traditions, except when it has succeeded in
adapting itself to the work of modern life. It has, in fact, preserved
the vices of its ancestors rather than their virtues.
The more than doubtful offspring of extra-nuptial intercourse among
the nobility have often been adopted or raised to the nobility.
Moreover, kings and princes have often ennobled unworthy persons who
had succeeded in pandering to their follies or exciting their sexual
passions. It is, therefore, not to be wondered at if in the offspring
of such unions, the blood of the highest nobility is tainted with that
of the worst kinds of heredity.
Another sign or effect of the degeneration of the nobility is found in
the marriages they so often contract with wealthy heiresses, often of
mediocre quality, in order to repair their escutcheon. In the Middle
Ages, the nobility regarded it as degrading to work for their living,
and this prejudice accelerated their degeneration; for nowadays the
heroic and chivalrous deeds of the Middle Ages have little opportunity
for their performance.
Other social classes present certain sexual peculiarities; for example
the disastrous consequences of celibacy among the Catholic priests.
This excludes an important and intelligent portion of the species from
reproduction, and also favors clandestine debauchery.
The army and navy also exert a detrimental action on sexual life.
First of all they foster one of the lowest forms of prostitution;
soldiers' women are proverbial, and one of them alone may infect a
whole regiment. In the second place, the absence of normal sexual
intercourse favors all kinds of perversion, such as pederasty,
masturbation, etc. The abominable sexual life of soldiers and sailors
corrupts them to such an extent that when they marry later on they
come to their wives with filthy habits, to say nothing of syphilis and
gonorrhea. The result is the procreation of offspring who are more or
less tainted in body and mind by the effects of venereal disease
combined with alcohol. We have already mentioned the rules which
forbid German officers to marry a woman unless she possesses a certain
fortune.
In the Norwegian mercantile marine the customs contrast happily with
those we have just mentioned, and permit officers to live on board
with their wives. In all respects the Norwegian serves as a model in
the sexual question; does he not favor conjugal life by only charging
half-price on the boats for women who travel with their husbands!
Other classes have a less obvious influence on sexual life. On the
whole, however, all sexual isolation of castes has an unfavorable
influence. Wherever the prejudices of a caste compel its members to
intermarry, certain special degenerations are produced. Good quality
in man is not derived from class or position, but from true innate or
hereditary nobility of character, and this alone should be the object
of positive selection, without any distinction of classes.
=Individual Life.=--There is no doubt that the mode of life of the
individual exerts an influence on his sexual life. High living
combined with little bodily exercise generally increases the sexual
appetite, while insufficient food combined with severe muscular work
diminishes it.
Intellectual work acts in a variable manner. A distinguished
psychologist assured me that intense intellectual work excited his
sexual appetite; others have said the opposite. As a rule, a sedentary
life increases the sexual appetite; a life full of occupation and
muscular activity diminishes it. But the question is complicated by
other influences.
Alcohol diminishes sexual power, while exalting desire or even
perverting it. The artificial excitants of the sexual appetite,
cultivated by modern civilization by interested speculation, act in
rather a different way. Erotic pictures, obscene novels and dramas,
etc., constitute an unhealthy medium in our centers of civilization,
which overexcites and corrupts the sexual appetite. The more delicate
and poisonous the perfume of this atmosphere and the more aesthetic the
refinement by which it titillates the senses, the greater is its
destructive action.
The question of the reunion or separation of the sexes plays an
important part. Life in common among girls and boys from infancy
usually diminishes sexual excitation, in the same way as among
brothers and sisters. We find something analogous in different
branches of human activity where the two sexes live together; for
instance, at college, in the fields, and in general where work and
play is common to both sexes.
There are, however, certain exceptions to this rule, which must not be
taken too generally. Under certain circumstances, life in common of
the two sexes leads to unfavorable and even perverted sexual
excitation. This is especially the case when alcohol adds its
influence; also among nervous or ill-balanced individuals. In my
opinion it is absolutely unreasonable for the superintendent of a
lunatic asylum to organize balls at which the insane of both sexes are
provided with beer or wine. I have only seen bad results from this,
while I have obtained excellent effects from a temporary reunion of
the insane of both sexes, by avoiding all alcoholic drinks as well as
everything which could excite the sexual appetite, such as dancing, or
the bringing together of erotic or perverted individuals. A young
female onanist who suffered from sexual excitement complicated with a
nervous condition, complained to me of being obliged to work as a
telegraphist among young men, as this continually excited her
eroticism without the possibility of satisfying it.
This situation, which is a common one in both sexes, gives us a
valuable indication. No doubt life in common for the two sexes is
normal and natural, but only on the condition that it leads eventually
to normal sexual intercourse as the result of love. It is neither
healthy nor normal to excite an appetite continually without
satisfying it. Any one who wishes to live a continent life, for
religious or other reasons, ought not to expose himself to continual
excitement by too great intimacy with the opposite sex; he should, on
the contrary, avoid everything which tends to excite his sexual
appetite and seek everything which tends to pacify it. I am not
referring here to individuals of a naturally cold and indifferent
nature, who run little or no risk under such circumstances.
Certain occupations, such as those of employees in stores, telegraph
offices, etc., in which the two sexes are closely associated in their
work, constitute from this point of view a double-edged sword. Other
unhealthy and monotonous occupations, combined with bad conditions of
food and lodging, and with all kinds of seduction--factory hands for
example--have a positively deleterious effect on sexual life, which
becomes absolutely depraved when the two sexes work together. The
situation is hardly any better when they are only separated during
working hours.
=Internats.=--All internats, _i.e._, all establishments where
individuals of the same sex live in the same dwelling for a long time,
exert a peculiar influence on sexual life--schools and convents, for
example.
The great inconvenience of all these establishments lies in the danger
of contamination from habits of onanism or pederasty. Inverts are
strongly attracted towards internats, where they find their heart's
desire where they can easily indulge their perverted passions; the
dormitory of such an institution having the same effect on them as
that of a girl's school would have on a young man. (Vide Chapter
VIII.)
This is a matter which has not received sufficient attention in
organizing boarding-schools for boys and girls, because it was not
known that homosexual instincts are hereditary and innate. Such cases
were regarded only as acquired bad habits.
Lunatic asylums are especially attractive to sexual inverts, who apply
for the positions of attendants or nurse so as to be able to indulge
their passions on the insane patients, who are incapable of betraying
them.
Without being homosexual, nor even seduced by inverts, many normal but
erotic individuals try to satisfy their sexual appetite on their
companions--boys by pederasty, girls by lesbian love, and both sexes
by mutual onanism.
The chief danger is that of some sexually perverted individual gaining
entry to a boarding-school and contaminating numbers of normal
individuals, without anything being discovered; because it is much
more difficult to supervise a school than a family. This could be
remedied better by confidence between masters and pupils than by
supervision.
=Varia.=--I should never finish if I attempted to describe all the
influences of environment. The examples mentioned will suffice to
show that, in a natural appetite such as the sexual, the two extremes
of asceticism and excess lead to evil and unnatural aberrations, and
that the important point is to find or create a healthy environment
for a healthy sexual life.
We hear a good deal about good or bad luck or chance in the matter of
love. I do not deny that fortuitous circumstances often determine the
happiness of an individual in his love affairs. But it is all the more
deplorable that what is called the good manners of society make it so
difficult to correct Cupid's blunders. There is room for improvement
in this direction, and many spoilt lives and much unhappiness might be
avoided. The unfavorable influence of environment might often be
corrected by separation or change, if this could be done in time.
FOOTNOTES:
[7] Vide "Alkoholvergiftung und Degeneration" by Bunge: Leipzig 1904;
and "Hygiene of the Nerves and Mind" by Forel: Stuttgart 1905.
CHAPTER XII
RELIGION AND SEXUAL LIFE
=Transformation of Profane Customs into Religious
Dogmas.=--Ethnography has taught us that in the course of time human
tribes often unconsciously transform profane customs into integral
parts of their religion, either by attributing them to a divine
origin, or by elevating them to the rank of commandments of the gods,
or by connecting them with other dogmas, combining them with worship,
etc.
Sexual connection plays an important part in this matter. A great
number of religious rites and customs are nothing else than the
customs of sexual life (taken in its widest sense) which have been
symbolized; inversely, a number of dogmas have for their only motive
the application of a religious basis to sexual customs, which gives
them more authority.
The religious rites react powerfully on the sexual life and on the way
in which the members of the tribe or people understand it. We will
give a few striking examples.
We have seen in Chapter VI that polygamy depends first on the idea of
ownership, and secondly on marriage by purchase, to which it owes its
historic origin. But the fact that Islamism and Mormonism, for
example, have made polygamy an integral part of their religious
dogmas, has given to the whole organization of the Mahometans and
Mormons, as well as to their point of view of existence, a particular
direction which cannot be ignored. In reality, we are just as
polygamous as they are, but our theoretical and religious sexual
morality is monogamous while theirs is polygamous, each based on
contradictory "divine commandments."
Among certain Buddhists, the wife is compelled to follow her husband
to the grave, which naturally influences sexual life profoundly.
Among many savage races there exists matriarchism, which gives the
woman a high social position. This has even been made a religious
dogma, while it simply originates from the natural and just idea that
the mother is much more intimately connected with the children than
the father.
The duty imposed on men to marry the widow of their brother originated
from a profane command intended to regulate unions; eventually this
was made a religious dogma. In the same way circumcision among the
Jews had its origin in a hygienic custom having no relation to
religious faith. This did not prevent it becoming later on as
important a custom as baptism in Christianity. For the Jewish people
it has the advantage of protecting them to a great extent from
venereal infection, and against one of the chief causes of
masturbation.
=Catholicism.=--We have already spoken of the celibacy of the Catholic
priests and of its lay origin. The Catholic religion also contains a
series of detailed precepts concerning sexual connection in general
and marriage in particular; precepts which were only gradually
transformed into religious dogmas. As they determine to a great extent
opinions and manners in the sexual domain, they exert a considerable
social influence.
The absolute interdiction of divorce among the Catholics (man has not
the right to separate those whom God has joined together) seals
forever the most unfortunate unions and leads to misfortunes of all
kinds, separation of the married couple, _liaisons_ apart from
marriage, etc. According to Liguori, the Catholic Church prescribes a
number of details concerning sexual relations in marriage. The woman
who, during coitus places herself upon the man instead of under him,
commits a sin. The position and manner of performing coitus are
prescribed in the most minute details, and the holy fathers make the
woman play a part unworthy of her position as wife, while according
the man the widest liberty.
In truly Catholic marriage it is prescribed to procreate as many
children as possible, and all preventive measures in coitus are
severely condemned. Hence, if the woman is very fruitful, the husband
has only the choice between complete abstention from coitus (when both
conjoints are in agreement) and pregnancies following without
interruption. The woman never has the right to refuse coitus to her
husband, nor the latter to refuse it to his wife, so long as he is
capable of accomplishing it.
It is easy to understand what powerful effects such precepts have had
and still have on the conjugal life of the Catholics, particularly on
the quantity and quality of their descendants.
=Aural Confession.=--Confession requires special mention. In his book,
"Fifty Years in the Roman Church" (Jeheber, Geneva), on page 151,
Father Chiniqui, the celebrated Canadian reformer, who later on became
a Protestant, and for many years played an important part in the
Canadian Catholic clergy, mentions the points on which the confessor
interrogates the penitents of both sexes. One cannot reproach him with
being incompetent.
No doubt the Church of to-day would reply that the confessor is not
obliged to put all these questions and that the details are left to
his tact. We will agree that there is a difference between the Canada
of the last century, a new and primitive country, and the Europe of
the present day. But I maintain: First, that the confessor does not
content himself with listening to what the penitents of both sexes
tell him, but that it is his duty to interrogate them; secondly, that
a celibate Catholic person, extremely serious and virtuous, to whom I
put the question unawares, informed me that not only are sexual
matters dealt with at the confessional, but that they play the
principal role. And, as it is a question of warning the penitents
against so-called sins, mortal or not, or of absolving them, I fail to
see how the priest can avoid speaking of them, when the detailed
precepts of which we have spoken exist.
I reproduce here the original Latin text. It deals with questions
which have been treated in Chapter VIII, so that I shall dispense with
giving a translation.
The confessor puts the following questions to his penitents:
1. _Peccant uxores, quae susceptum viri semen ejiciunt, vel ejicere
conantur_ (Dens, vol. VII, p. 147).
2. _Peccant conjuges mortaliter, si, copula incepta, prohibeant
seminationem._
3. _Si vir jam seminaverit, dubium fit an femina lethaliter peccat,
si se retrahat a seminando; aut peccat lethaliter vir non expectando
seminationem uxoris_ (p. 153).
4. _Peccant conjuges inter se circa actum conjugalem. Debet servari
modus, sive situs; uno ut non servetur debitum vas, sed copula
habeatur in vase praepostero, aliquoque non naturali. Si fiat
accedendo a postero, a latere, stando, sedendo, vel si vir sit
succumbus_ (p. 166).
5. _Impotentia. Est incapacitas perficiendi copulam carnalem perfectam
cum seminatione viri in vase se debito, seu, de se, aptam generationi.
Vel, ut si mulier sit nimis arcta respectu unius non respectu
alterius_ (p. 273).
6. _Notatur quod pollutio, in mulieribus possit perfici, ita ut semen
earum non effluat extra membrum genitale. Indicium istius allegat
Billuart, si scilicet mulier sensiat seminis resolutionem cum magno
voluptatis sensu, qua completa, passio satiatur_ (vol. IV, p. 168).
7. _Uxor se accusans, in confessione, quod negaverit debitum,
interrogatur an ex pleno rigore juris sui id petiverit_ (vol. VII, p.
168).
8. _Confessarius poenitentem, qui confitetur se peccasse cum
sacerdote, vel solicitatem ab eo ad turpia, potest interrogare utrum
ille sacerdos sit ejus confessarius, an in confessione sollicitaverit_
(vol. VI, p. 297).
In volumes V and VII of Dens may be found many such precepts,
impossible to reproduce, on which the pious casuist desires his
penitents to be examined.
Let us now pass on to the celebrated Liguori. Among numerous other
obscene questions of a refined erotic nature, every confessor is bound
to put the two following to his penitents:
1. _Quaerat an sit semper mortale, si vir immitat pudenda in os
uxoris...?_
_Verius affirmo, quia in hoc actu, ob calorem oris, adest proximum
periculum pollutionis, et videtur nova species luxuriae contra
naturam, dicta irruminatio._
2. _Eodem modo, Sanchez damnat virum de mortali qui, in actu copulae,
immite ret digitum in vas praeposterum uxoris; quia, ut ait, in hoc
actu, adest affectus ad-Sodomiam_ (Liguori, t. VI, p. 935).
Let us now leave the celebrated Liguori and pass on to Burchard, the
bishop of Worms. He has written a book on the questions which the
priest should put at the confessional. Although this book no longer
exists it has been for ages the guide of the Roman Catholic priests at
the confessional. Dens, Liguori, Debreyne, etc., have taken from it
their most savory passages, to recommend them as a study for our
present confessors. We will give a few examples:
(_a_) To young men:
1. _Fecisti solus tecum fornicationem ut quidam facere solent; ita
dico ut ipse tuum membrum virile in manum tuam acciperes, et sic
duceres praeputium tuum, et manu propria commoveres, ut sic per illam
delectationem semen projiceres?_
2. _Fornicationem fecisti cum masculo intra coxas; ita dico ut tuum
virile membrum intra coxas alterius mitteres, et sic agitando semen
funderes?_
3. _Fecisti fornicationem, ut quidam facere solent, ut tuum virile
membrum in lignum perforatum aut in aliquod hujus modi mitteres et sic
per illam commotionem et delectationem semen projiceres?_
4. _Fecisti fornicationem contra naturam, id est, cum masculis vel
animalibus coire, id est, cum equo, cum vacca vel asina, vel aliquo
animali?_ (vol. I, p. 136).
(_b_) To young girls or women (same collection, p. 115):
1. _Fecisti quod quaedam mulieres solent, quoddam molimen, aut
machinamentum in modum virilis membri ad mensuram tuae voluptatis, et
illud loco verendorum tuorum aut alterius cum aliquibus ligaturis ut
fornicationem faceres cum aliis mulieribus, vel alio eodem
instrumento, sive alio tecum?_
2. _Fecisti quod quaedam mulieres facere solent, ut jam supra dicto
molimine vel alio aliquo machinamento, tu ipsa in te solam faceres
fornicationem?_
3. _Fecisti quod quaedam mulieres facere solent, quando libidinem se
vexantem extinguere volunt, quae se conjugunt quasi coire debeant et
possint, et conjungunt invicem puerperio sua, et si fricando pruritum
illarum extinguere desiderant?_
4. _Fecisti quod quaedam mulieres facere solent, ut cum filio tuo
parvulo fornicationem faceres, ita dico ut filium tuum supra
turpidinem tuam poneres ut sic imitaberis fornicationem?_
5. _Fecisti quod quaedam mulieres facere solent, ut succumberes aliquo
jumento et illud jumentum ad coitum qualicumque posses ingenio ut sic
coiret tecum?_
The celebrated Debreyne has written a whole book on the same subject
for the instruction of young confessors, and in it he has enumerated
all kinds of debauchery and sexual perversion which he could imagine,
"Maechiology," or _Treatise on all the Sins against the Sixth_
(seventh in the Decalogue) _and the Ninth_ (tenth) _Commandments_, as
well as on all questions of married life connected with them.
This book is very celebrated and is widely studied in the Roman
Church. We only quote from it the two following questions:
To men:
_Ad cognoscendum an usque ad pollutionem se tetigerint, quando tempore
et quo fine se tetigerint; an tunc quoddam motus in corpore experti
fuerint, et per quantum temporis spatium; an cessantibus tactibus
nihil insolitum et turpe acciderit; ad non longe majorem in corpore
voluptatem perciperint in fine inactum quam in eorum principio; an tum
in fine quando magnam delectationem carnalem senserunt, omnes motus
corporis cessaverint; an non malefacti fuerint?_ etc., etc.
To girls:
_Quae sese tetigisse fatentur, an non aliquem pruritum extinguere
tentaverit, et utrum pruritus ille cessaverit cum magnam senserint
voluptatem; an tunc ipsimet tactus cessaverint?_
Among a thousand other analogous precepts the reverend Kenrick, bishop
of Boston, in the United States, gives the following to his
confessors:
_Uxor quae, in usu matrimonii, se vertit, ut non recipiat semen, vel
statim post illud acceptum surgit, ut expellatur, lethaliter peccat;
sed opus non est ut diu resuspina jaceat, quum matrix, brevi semen
attrahat, et mox, arctissime claudatur._
_Puellae patienti licet se vertere et conari ut non recipiat semen,
quod injuria et emittitur; sed, acceptum non licet expellere, quia jam
possessionem pacificam habet et haud absque injuria naturae
ejiceretur._
_Conjuges senes plerumque coeunt absque culpa, licet contingat semen
extra vas effundi; id enim per accidens fit ex infirmitati naturae._
_Quod si vires adeo sint fractae ut nulla sit seminandi intra vas
spes, jam nequeunt jure conjugi uti_ (vol. III, p. 317).
Such is the teaching of Chiniqui, the man whose courage and powerful
individuality succeeded in introducing abstinence from alcohol in
Canada. His long life was that of a pioneer and an inflexible champion
of social and moral reform in that country, based on Christianity. He
died at the age of ninety.
I have quoted the erotic precepts of the confessional from him, as I
was anxious to quote from an absolutely reliable source. It was not
with a light heart that Chiniqui abandoned the Catholic Church, but
only after violent and bitter struggles with conscience, struggles of
which he relates the tragic episodes, and which lasted for many years.
He commences the chapter from which we have quoted with the following
words: "Let legislators, fathers and husbands read this chapter and
ask themselves the question whether the respect which they owe to
their mothers, their wives and their daughters does not impose upon
them the duty of forbidding auricular confession. How is it possible
for a young girl to remain pure in mind after such conversations with
an unmarried man? Is she not more prepared for the depths of vice than
for conjugal life?" The author of these lines is a man who was obliged
for many years to be a confessor himself, and who understood to what
extent confession corrupted the sexual life of women and priests. It
is true that persons, priests or women, of strong character, and
especially those with a cold nature from the sexual point of view, may
resist such sexual excitation. But has confession been specially
instituted for this type of character? Every one who is not a
hypocrite will own that it is exactly the contrary.
=Religious Prudery.=--The results of such a combination of sexual life
with religious prescriptions are a mixture of ridiculous prudery and
continual eroticism. In certain convents (those of the nuns of
Galicia, for example) the nuns forbid their pupils to wash the sexual
organs, because it is improper! In Austria the nuns often cover the
crucifix in their bedroom with a handkerchief, "so that Christ cannot
see their nakedness"! But the convents of nuns, in the Middle Ages,
were often transformed into brothels; and it is not uncommon to see
hypocrites or the subjects of erotic hysteria (both men and women)
perform sexual orgies of the worst kind under the cloak of religious
ecstasy.
=Hottentots. Eunuchs.=--Among the Hottentots, the lips of the vulva
(_labia minora_) in women are artificially elongated, and among the
Orientals eunuchs are made. In themselves these two operations have
certainly nothing to do with religion and only originated in profane
customs. In the course of time they were made religious precepts,
which has deeply rooted them in the customs of the people.
=Religious Eroticism.=--The examples which we have cited show to what
extent man is disposed to clothe his eroticism with the cloak of
religion. He then attributes a divine origin to his desires and lays
the precepts which he attaches to them on the commandments of his God
or gods, so as to sanctify them. Hence, the unnatural influence of a
mysticism, which is nothing else than the crystallized product of the
fantastic imagination of men, raised to a dogma, imposes itself
indirectly on natural sexual life, by entering at the back door under
the cloak of religion. It is obvious that grave abuses or even vices
often acquire the seal and power of religious precepts; while in the
same domain a number of other customs or precepts are based on good
hygienic or moral principles, for example, circumcision and conjugal
fidelity.
It is perhaps in the domain of pathology that the relations of
religion to sexual life are the most striking (see Chapter VIII). We
must not forget that the facts of reproduction seem to ignorant people
and especially to barbarians, to be of a very mysterious nature. These
people have no idea of germinal cells or their conjugation. They see
in conception, embryogeny, pregnancy and birth, the miraculous effects
of a divine and occult higher power--of the divinity, often even of
the devil.
The violent excitement which is associated with the sexual appetite
and with love urges man to ecstasy; hence it is not to be wondered at
that eroticism is so often complicated by ecstatic religious
sentiments.
In his book on Psychopathia sexualis, Krafft-Ebing remarks how easily
religion, poetry and eroticism are combined and mingled in the obscure
feelings and presentiments of maturing youth. In the life of saints
there is always the question of sexual temptations, in which the most
elevated and ideal sentiments are mixed with the most repugnant erotic
images. On the same basis are developed the sexual orgies of different
religious fetes in the ancient world, as well as in certain modern
sects.
Mysticism, religious ecstasy and sexual voluptuousness are often
combined in a real trinity, and one often sees unsatisfied sensuality
seek compensation in religious exaltation. Krafft-Ebing cites the
following cases from Friedreich's "Legal Psychology" (p. 389):
In this way the nun Blaubekin was perpetually tormented by the
thought of what happened to the part of Jesus' body removed by
circumcision.
In order to make his devotions to the lamb of God, Veronique
Juliani, who was canonized by Pope Pius II, took into his
chamber a terrestrial lamb, embraced it and sucked its breasts.
Saint Catherine of Genes often suffered from such internal heat,
that, to cool herself, she laid on the ground, crying: "Love,
love, I can do no more!" In doing this she felt a peculiar
inclination for her confessor. One day, putting his hand to her
nose, she perceived an odor which penetrated her heart, "a
celestial odor the voluptuousness of which could wake the dead."
=The Role of Mental Pathology in Religious Eroticism.=--Among the
insane, and especially in women, but also in men afflicted with
_paranoia_ (a mental disease) we often find a strange and repugnant
mixture of eroticism and religious images. Such are the everlasting
betrothals with Christ, the Virgin Mary, with God or with the Holy
Spirit, betrothals in which the venereal orgasm is combined with
imaginary coitus and masturbation, followed by imaginary pregnancy and
childbirth. These symptoms give us a clear indication of the relation
which exists between eroticism and religious exaltation. The French
alienists have even designated them by the characteristic term of
"erotico-religious delirium." A single visit to the female division of
a lunatic asylum is often sufficient to satisfy the visitor.
A point which has received less attention is the immense historical
influence which certain psychopathological personalities, chiefly
hysterical subjects, but also some crazy persons or hereditary
visionaries, have exercised at all times on human destiny, usually by
the aid of the suggestive effects of sexual and religious ideas
(erotico-religious), the connections of which have not always been
clear.
Every psychiatrist knows the insane whose delirium is combined with
religious or mystic exaltation, and who by the mysticism of their
delirium have exercised and continue to exercise a profound influence
on the mass of humanity which surround them--"Panurge's Sheep," if I
may use the expression. These people are themselves so dominated by
the pathological influence of their auto-suggestions or their delirium
that they behave with the fanaticism of fakirs, and exhibit an
extraordinary energy and perseverance in the pursuit of the object of
their morbid ideas. By their assurance, the sentiment of
infallibility, and the fire of faith which is manifested in their
prophetical manner, they fascinate the feeble brains of the people who
surround them and attract them by their suggestive action.
A very human and often powerful eroticism is usually associated with
their delirium; but it is covered by a cloak of religious ecstasy,
which imposes on natures disposed to exaltation, and renders them
blind to the ignominy which often lies under this ecstasy.
What makes these patients so persuasive is the fact that they are
themselves persuaded. Even the normal man, we must admit, is guided
less by reason than by sentiment, and the persons we have just
described exert a powerful action on sentiment, and this more by their
piercing glance, their prophetic and dominating tone, their manner and
appearance, than by the extremely confused text of their discourses
and doctrines.
In this way there are always arising small epidemics of attraction in
which a group of individuals allows itself to be infatuated by
so-called prophets, messiahs, holy virgins and other visionaries, who
are only lunatics or crazy persons. Under their influence are produced
certain forms of insanity by contagion, which have been called double,
triple or quadruple madness, and which may sometimes take the form of
an epidemic.
When the "prophet" is more consistent in his words and actions, or
when his environment is still very ignorant and superstitious, the
crowd of believers increases still more rapidly, and thus one sees
even at the present day in less-civilized countries new sects or
religious guilds, more or less ephemeral, in which the spirit of the
prophet sometimes stirs up grave sexual orgies.
Among more cultured people the prophet is generally exposed or sent to
a lunatic asylum, much to the indignation of his disciples, who often
consist of his wife and children and a few feeble-minded
acquaintances.
Thanks to the cheapness of printing, these prophets often publish
their new religious system and sell it among their dupes. I possess a
small library of works of this kind which have been sent me by their
authors; probably with the idea that they might one day be taken for
fools, and to prove to me in advance that they were not.
According to them, God has personally revealed to them the new truth
in which they believe, and has appointed them as prophets. Erotic
images are generally associated with their system. One of them, whose
system is astronomical, divides the planets into males and females.
Another, a lunatic, describes the pathological sexual sensations by
the term of "psycho-sexual contact by action at a distance." These are
phenomena which we meet with at each step in psychiatry, and which
give the clue to what follows.
=The Historical Role of Mental Anomalies which are Not Very Apparent
and Border on Genius. Their Influence on Religious Eroticism.=--These
persons are not always afflicted with paranoia or other grave
psychoses, but often hereditary and constitutional psychopaths who are
only half-crazy or simply hysterical, and who may, in spite of this
defect, possess a certain degree of intellectual power, an energetic
will and the fire of enthusiasm. Things then take an essentially
different course, even when they rest on an analogous basis.
The prophet combines with his exaltation a logic which is often very
concise in its details, although applied on a morbid basis. Moreover,
he clothes his utterances in fine and poetical language, and in this
way succeeds in rallying round him, not a flock of Panurge's ignorant
sheep, but more elevated people and even a considerable proportion of
the surrounding society. In this case pathological exaltation may be
united to a high moral and intellectual ideal, which is very apt to
veil the bizarre fancies of the prophet. We thus meet with the
astonishing but undeniable fact that certain great historical
personalities who have exercised a powerful influence on humanity were
of more or less pathological nature. We discover among them
erotico-religious traits, more or less marked, often even as the
leading threads of their arguments.
This important category of individuals constitutes a whole series of
transitions between the insane prophets of whom we have spoken and
well-balanced men of genius. It is often very difficult to understand
and interpret the series of intermediate forms, so graduating and so
variable, which exist between insanity and genius. It is necessary to
guard against any exclusive generalization in one way or the other.
In any case, the fact that many men of genius are of pathological
nature does not authorize us to regard every person of genius or
originality as insane, whether he attacks the routine and prejudices
of his contemporaries, or whether he opens up new horizons and goes
out of the beaten track. Let me cite a few examples.
Joan of Arc was, in my opinion, a hysterical genius whose
hallucinations were auto-suggestive. The distress of France had
profoundly agitated her, and, fired with the desire to save her
country, her brain was affected by auto-suggestion with hallucinations
of the voices of saints and visions, which pointed out her mission and
which she regarded as coming from real saints in heaven. At that
period such things were common enough and need not surprise us. In
spite of her good sense and modesty, Joan of Arc was urged by an
exaltation unconscious of self. By a destiny as astonishing as
providential, this young girl of genius, and at the same time
pathological, exalted by ecstatic hallucinations, led France to a
victorious war of freedom. The most conscientious historical sources
show that the morality of Joan of Arc was pure and above reproach. Her
replies to the invidious questions of the Inquisition are admirable
and bear witness both to her high intelligence and the moral elevation
of her sentiments. It is evident that the sentiments of love were
transformed in her into religious ecstasy and enthusiasm for the ideal
of her mission, a frequent occurrence among women.
Another remarkable example is that of Thomas a Becket. The sudden
transformation of this man of the world into an ascetic priest (it is
true, on the occasion of his nomination as archbishop), from this
devoted friend and servitor of the king of England into his most
violent adversary, and into a champion of the Church against the
State, evidently represents the auto-suggestive transformation of a
hysterical subject, for this is the only way of explaining such a
sudden and complete contradiction which caused him to change suddenly
from one fanaticism to a contrary one.
The religious exaltation of the Mormon prophet, Smith, was no doubt
combined with eroticism, which made him organize his sect on the basis
of polygamy.
Mahomet also had visions, and sexual connection plays an important
part in his teaching and prophesies. The apostle St. Paul was also a
visionary who passed suddenly from one extreme to another as the
result of hallucination. Pascal, Napoleon, and Rousseau presented very
marked pathological traits.
Although some of these cases have no direct connection with the sexual
question, I have mentioned them to show how such personalities exert
their influence on the masses, and through them on history. As soon as
they acquire authority, their peculiar ideas and sexual conceptions,
however exclusive or even absurd they may be, react strongly on their
contemporaries, as we see to-day the ascetic ideas of Tolstoi
influence his numerous disciples.
Sudden conversions, whatever may be their nature, especially when the
convert goes from one extreme to another, are not the fruit of reason,
but depend on suggestion or auto-suggestion and especially on
pathological suggestibility. (Vide Chapter IX).
In other respects sexual anomalies often govern the acts of hysterical
persons and other psychopaths. The Roman emperors, Nero, Tiberius and
Caligula were almost certainly sadists and enjoyed sexual pleasure at
the sight of the sufferings of their victims. Valerie, Messalina and
Catherine de Medici were also female sadists. Under the hypocritical
veil of religion, Catherine de Medici was the principal instigator of
the Massacre of St. Bartholomew at Paris, and wallowed in pleasure at
the sight of the massacre of the Huguenots.
On the other hand, masochism may give tone to the thoughts and sexual
feelings of certain persons of great influence, such as Rousseau, and
to sects of ascetics, such as the fakirs, etc.
Involuntarily, therefore, the sexual feelings of every prophet and
founder of religion, even during a short period of his life only,
influence more or less his religious system and consequently the laws
of morality based on it, which remain after his death.
Hence it is that sentiments, as variable in different individuals as
sexual sentiments, are obliged to submit to the constraint of fixed
and tyrannical dogmas which martyrize for centuries, or even thousands
of years, men who have other opinions than the founder of the religion
or its interpreters who succeed him.
In religion we see everywhere idealized eroticism, and often idealism
perfumed with eroticism. The Songs of Solomon, the original sense of
which was very lay, like that of most religious matters, has been made
allegorical and applied to the Christian Church, but it was and will
always remain an erotic poem.
It is hardly necessary to add that natural eroticism very often leads
the severe and ascetic preachers of morality to the grossest
hypocrisy. Priests and other pious persons often preach an idealized
asceticism, while in secret they commit the most disgusting sexual
excesses.
We must not, however, judge such crying inconsistencies too severely;
they are to a great extent unconscious and are the result of the shock
of passion against the tyranny of dogma, prejudice, and public
opinion. They are often also the result of mental anomalies. When
science is allowed to enlighten sexual life freely and openly, the
hypocrisy of normal people will cease, and that of the abnormal will
be recognized in time and prevented from doing harm.
=Transformation of Eroticism into Religious Sentiment.=--In ordinary
life we find everywhere traces of the mixture of religion with sexual
sensations and images. The religious ceremonies of marriage among all
peoples constitute a significant remnant thereof.
When we look for the causes of sudden and progressive religious
exaltation we often discover that it is nothing else than compensation
for disappointed love. I refer here to true and fervid exaltation,
identified with the whole inner consciousness, and not to the religion
of habit which the average man scarcely remembers in his daily life,
and only observes on Sunday in the form of a conventional promenade,
or a contribution to the church. This religion of habit is only an
empty form, which awakes no sentiment, and consequently is associated
with no sensation, even erotic, in its followers.
In other individuals it may be otherwise, and certainly was so
formerly. Everything goes to prove that the exalted sentiments of
sympathy from which our religion is to a great extent derived, such as
the holy fervor, the devotional ardor and the delights of ecstasy
which it has so often procured for its followers and still procures
for some of them, whether their object be God, Allah, Jehovah, Jesus
Christ, Buddha, Vishnu, the Virgin Mary, or the Saints, that these
sentiments have to a great extent their roots in primary erotic
sensations and sentiments, or represent the direct transformation of
them.
It is needless to say that all this may take place quite unconsciously
and with the purest intentions. I hasten to add that the majority of
true religious sentiments come from quite a different source.
When we study the religious sentiment profoundly, especially in the
Christian religion, and Catholicism in particular, we find at each
step its astonishing connection with eroticism. We find it in the
exalted adoration of holy women, such as Mary Magdalene, Marie de
Bethany, for Jesus, in the holy legends, in the worship of the Virgin
Mary in the Middle Ages, and especially in art. The ecstatic Madonnas
in our art galleries cast their fervent regards on Jesus or on the
heavens. The expression in Murillo's "Immaculate Conception" may be
interpreted by the highest voluptuous exaltation of love as well as by
holy transfiguration. The "Saints" of Correggio regard the Holy Virgin
with an amorous ardor which may be celestial, but appears in reality
extremely terrestrial and human.
Numerous sects, both ancient and modern, have entered on the scene in
a hardly less libidinous manner; for example, the sexual excesses of
the anabaptists in former times and the sexual ecstasies of certain
modern sects in America.
If the objection is raised that these sects are the pathological
excrescences of religion, I reply with their disciples as follows: "We
have come into the world because your State religions are sunk in
indifference, hypocrisy and hollow formality, offering nothing to the
human heart but empty phrases. It behooves us to awaken from this
sleep. We want enthusiasm and fervor to transform the inner life of
man and convert him." These words, which we can see and hear
everywhere by opening our eyes and ears, constitute a formal avowal of
the suggestive factor in religion. (See Chapter IX.)
In the Canton of Zurich I have myself often had occasion to observe,
especially among women, the followers of the singular sect of the
Pastor Zeller, of Maennedorf. He is a kind of visionary prophet who
heals people after the manner of Christ and John the Baptist, by
placing his hands on them and anointing them with oil. The cures which
he obtains are due naturally to suggestion, like those of Lourdes, but
he attributes them to divine miracles. He even told me naively that he
heard a grinding (crepitation) in a broken bone, which he regarded as
a miraculous cure! A crowd of women, mostly hysterical, collected
around this man with an ardor which was unconsciously directed much
more to his person than to that of God or Christ whom he was supposed
to symbolize. I have treated patients who had been to him, and who
associated with his person both the mildest and the most carnal erotic
images--of course, in the innocence of their hearts.
It is far from me to reproach this sincere man and many others of the
same kind, especially the priests who are surrounded by a halo of
sanctity pushed to ecstasy. I only maintain that when a human being
exalts himself in the search for pure-mindedness and sanctity, thus
denying his true nature, he is always in danger of falling
unconsciously into the most gross sensuality, and at the same time of
sanctifying this sensuality.
=Description of Religious Eroticism by the Poets.=--The Swiss poet,
Gottfried Keller, with his peculiar genius has described religious
eroticism in an admirable way, especially in his seven legends. Read,
for example, _Dorothea's Blumenkoerbchen_ (Dorothea's little
flower-basket), in which the terrestial lover of Dorothea ends by
becoming jealous of her celestial lover, of whom she always speaks in
the most exalted sentiments. Wherever she went she spoke in the most
tender terms and expressed the most ardent desire for a celestial
lover that she had found, who waited in immortal beauty to press her
against his shining breast. When the wicked prefect had bound Dorothea
on the gridiron under which was placed a slow fire, this hurt her
delicate body, and she uttered smothered cries. Then her terrestrial
lover, Theophilus, forcing his way through the crowd, burst her bonds
and said with a sad smile, "Does it hurt you, Dorothea?" But when
suddenly freed from all pain she immediately replied: "How could it
hurt me, Theophilus? I lay on the roses of the lover I adore! This is
my wedding day!" Keller shows us here, along with eroticism, the
suggestive effect of ecstasy, which among martyrs, may reach the most
complete anaesthesia.
Goethe has also described erotico-religious ecstasy; for example, at
the end of the second part of Faust, in the prayers addressed by
certain anchorites to the queen of heaven.
=Distinction Between Religion and the Ecstasy Derived from
Eroticism.=--It would be quite false to maintain that religion in
itself arises from sexual sensations. The terror of death and the
enigmas of existence, the sentiments of human weakness and
insufficiency of life, the want of consolation for all miseries, the
hope of a future life, all play an important part in the origin of
religions. On the other hand, it is necessary to recognize the
considerable role of the erotic sexual factor in religious sentiments
and dogmas, where on the one hand it leads to ardent fervor, while on
the other hand it tyrannizes, especially by the exclusiveness of its
residues transformed into dogmas, the natural expansion of the erotic
sentiments which are so variable in individuals.
One of the most difficult and important future tasks of social science
toward humanity is, therefore, to set free sexual relations from the
tyranny of religious dogmas, by placing them in harmony with the true
and purely human laws of natural ethics.
=Compensations.=--In the animal series we have seen that sentiments of
sympathy are derived, in a general way, by phylogeny, from the
sentiments of sexual attraction, and we often see in man a sexual
love, deceived, despised or transfigured, seek compensation or
idealization in the fervor or religious exaltation. The question
naturally presents itself whether this compensation or this ideal is
indispensable, and if other objects of a human and not mystical nature
cannot take its place.
There are, in my opinion, purely human ideals, which are capable of
transfiguring erotic love "religiously" quite as well as the mysticism
of so-called divine revelations. Christianity is called the religion
of love, and the apostle Paul even places charity higher than faith.
But what is charity but the synthesis of the social sentiments of
sympathy, devotion and self-denial, for the benefit of humanity?
Cannot it, therefore, be established on another basis than that of
cheques to be drawn on paradise? Cannot exaltation and fervor apply
their powerful faith, the beauty of their form and the elevation of
their sentiments to the social ideal and the future welfare of our
children? Cannot we replace the cult of religious legends, the
adoration of the works of Jehovah and Christ, as they are given in the
Bible, by the religion of our descendants and their welfare?
In my opinion, the suggestion of religious ecstasy and love might well
be directed toward the benefit of society. Its fanaticism is admirably
adapted to shake the indifference and indolence of men; but this
source of energy should not be wasted in the adoration of legendary
mirages, but used for the efficacious culture of a true human religion
of love on earth.
CHAPTER XIII
RIGHTS IN SEXUAL LIFE--GENERALITIES
=Rights and Liberty.=--Human ideas of right are very curious. Every
one appeals to right and liberty, and naturally thinks of himself
first, without perceiving that in continually claiming his proper
rights, he tramples under foot those of others. How beautiful are
these words Rights and Liberty! But in everyday life in what an
uncompromising way they oppose each other! To give satisfaction to my
rights and liberty, the right of complete development, according to my
natural sentiments, is a thing which is perfectly impossible; or, is
only practicable by constantly infringing the right and liberty of my
fellow beings.
Nevertheless people keep harping on this theme; with the exalted tone
of intimate conviction they inveigh against our social organization,
cursing the malice of others, but show themselves perfectly incapable
of resolving the contradictions which gave rise to their thirst for
liberty and justice.
The cry of despair addressed to right and liberty by modern society is
nothing else than the expression of the instinctive sentiment of anger
and revolt produced by the natural evolution of our phylogeny. The
savage instincts, still considerable in the hereditary foundation of
human nature (the mneme), revolt against the straight-jacket placed on
them by social life, and against the want of liberty on the earth,
which is already too small for humanity.
The natural man is eager for expansion and liberty, and accustoms
himself with difficulty to the severe restrictions which social
necessities impose upon him. His nature is still that of a
semi-nomadic animal, living as an autocrat with his family, possessed
of a number of egoistic wants, and, wherever he goes, opposing the
rights, liberties and desires of other men, who generally compel him
to subordinate his desires to theirs. This is the true reason of this
impotent cry of vexation and anger against the malice of others and
the defectiveness of social organization. And yet this cry is
absolutely necessary, in order that we may find and put in practice a
social formula as tolerable as possible for the future. But, if we
except the question of capital and labor, there is no domain in which
social hindrance is so cruelly felt as in the sexual.
What is human right? Apart from formally admitted distinctions we
shall divide what is called right from the psychological and human
point of view into two categories of ideas; _natural rights_ and
_conventional rights_.
=Natural Rights. Right of the Stronger.=--Natural right is quite a
relative idea: the right to life and its conditions. But, as in this
world, which is said to be created by a personal and perfect God,
things are so amicably arranged that living creatures can only exist
by devouring one another, the oldest effective natural right of every
living being is precisely that of devouring others weaker than itself.
This is the right of the stronger. Therefore, the absolute natural
right is the right of the stronger.
=Rights of Groups. Ants.=--These notions become altered, however, if
we regard them from the point of view of _relative_ natural right.
This does not concern all living beings, but only certain groups. The
rights of groups are relative from a double point of view. On the one
hand they give the group of individuals concerned the right of
interfering with the right to life of other groups, even to
extinction. On the other hand--and this is the better aspect of the
rights of groups--they are completed by what are called the duties of
each individual toward others of the same group, that is to say, the
obligation to have regard for and even protect their rights equally as
his own. The rights of a group include the social rights and duties in
the limits of that group.
It is among animals, especially the ants, that we find the most ideal
organization of the rights of a group. Each individual of the ant
colony acts in the interests of the community, which are the same as
its own. It has the right to be nourished and housed and to satisfy
all its immediate wants, but at the same time it is its duty to labor
unceasingly in building and repairing the common dwelling, to nourish
its fellows, to aid in the reproduction and bringing-up of the brood,
to defend the community and even to take the offensive against every
living being who does not belong to the community, in order to
increase its resources.
The rights and duties have here become completely _instinctive by
adaptation_, that is to say, they are performed without commands or
instruction. They result spontaneously from the natural organization
of ants without the least external obligation intervening. Here, the
cry of distress of the ferocious human beast, of whom we have just
spoken, is completely absent, for duty is replaced by instinct or by
appetite, and its accomplishment is accompanied by a natural sentiment
of pleasure. Every ant could be idle without being punished by its
comrades, if it were capable of wishing to be so, but this is
impossible. Communities of ants can only exist on the basis of the
social instinct of labor and mutual support, without which they would
immediately disappear.
=Egoism and the Rights of Groups in Man. Human Rights.=--The notions
of the rights of groups in man are infinitely more complicated and
more difficult to understand. As we have already seen, the most
primordial instinctive sentiment in man is limited to his family and
his immediate surroundings. But here even it leaves much to be
desired. Family disputes, quarrels between brothers and sisters are
frequent enough; parricide, fratricide and infanticide are not rare.
In addition to this, beyond the narrow circle of the family, disputes,
hatred between individuals, deception, robbery and many worse things
are always the order of the day. In struggles between parties and
classes, in the abuse of privileges of caste and fortune, in war, in
commerce, in a word in everything, private interests of egoism take
precedence of the general interests of humanity.
These facts, and a thousand other pitiable phenomena of the same kind
in human society, bear witness to the egoistic and rapacious nature of
man, which proves how little the social instinct is developed in his
brain. Human society is founded much more on custom and tradition,
imposed by the force of circumstances, than on nature. Human infants
resemble kittens at first much more than young social beings. In
primitive times, when the earth appeared large to man, the rights of
groups were limited to small communities which looked upon other men,
the same as animals and plants, as legitimate prey. Cannibalism and
even the chase show clearly that man began by becoming more rapacious
and more carnivorous than his pithecanthropoid ancestor, and his
cousin the ape of the present day.
It is only later, after the progressive enlargement of stronger
communities at the expense of weaker; still later, when man commenced
to comprehend the sufferings for the community which result from the
autocracy and passion for unlimited pleasure of a few persons;
finally, when he discovered the narrow limits of the earth, that
notions of humanity and humanitarianism, that is to say the sentiment
of human solidarity, were able to develop in the general conscience.
It was, however, one of the ancients who said "I am a man and nothing
human can be strange to me." But in his time, as in that of Jesus
Christ, civilization was already far advanced and influenced by the
wide humanitarian ideas, more ancient still, of the Assyrians and the
Buddhists.
Every one who reflects will understand that the relativity of the
rights of groups in man and that of the duties which correspond to
them, must in time expand and be applied, little by little, to all the
human inhabitants of the earth. What is more difficult is the
definition of what should be understood under the term of humanity,
capable of being socialized and cultivated.
No doubt, the gap which exists between the lowest living human race
and the highest ape is considerable and without direct transition.
However, we gradually begin to recognize, on the one hand, that we
have certain duties toward animals, at least toward those which serve
us, and, on the other hand, we know that certain of the lower human
races, such as the pigmies, the Veddas and even the Negroes, are
inaccessible to a higher civilization, and especially incapable by
themselves of maintaining what a number of their individuals learn by
training when they live among us. We shall, therefore, have to choose
finally between the gradual extinction of these races or that of our
own.
It is not my business to deal with this question here, to trace the
limits of civilizable humanity, or to examine the rights and duties of
civilized men to each other relatively to the rest of the living
world; or, in other words, to what extent civilized man should have
the relative right of subjecting other living beings, exploiting them
in his own interests, nourishing them, or eventually exterminating
them for the safety of his own existence.
As regards the animal and vegetable kingdoms, from the amoeba to the
orang-utan, the question is simple enough and settled. It is much more
difficult to decide for men and for peoples separated from us by great
racial differences. I must emphasize the profoundness of this
difference. It is evident that the higher cultivated races, or rather
blends of races, which live to-day will do better to live in peace
than to mutually exterminate each other.
It is necessary to discuss these questions at the risk of hurting the
feelings of sentimental persons. But what is the use of being blind to
such patent facts? It is not too soon to look closely into the future,
and it is only thus that we can arrive at any useful result. The
natural rights of man should evolve more and more from a complex of
social rights and duties toward a single great group, which we may
call _civilized humanity_, the relative limits of which can only be
traced by repeated trials and by practical experience. The instincts
of the wild beast are still so deeply rooted, even in civilized men,
that they can only be adapted gradually and even painfully to a
natural right thus understood and limited. We must honestly admit that
such a right only merits very relatively the denomination of _natural
rights_. In fact, social rights are necessarily artificial in man. A
few elementary rights and duties only are quite natural, especially in
the sexual domain. We are concerned here with adaptations in the form
of instincts which serve for the support and development of the
family, as well as for the protection of the individual. Among these
we may mention the right to life, the duty of labor and the right to
labor, the right of the infant to be nourished by its mother and to be
cared for and protected by its parents, the duty of parents to nourish
their children, the duty of the husband to protect his wife, the right
to obtain nourishment from the animal and vegetable kingdoms, the
right to satisfy the sexual appetite, etc.
There exists, however, a series of other rights and duties, which are
so necessary that they may be termed natural. Such are the right to
possess a dwelling place; to defend one's life against attack; to
think and believe what one wishes so long as one does not impose one's
ideas and faith on others; the duty to respect the life and property
of one's neighbor; the duty to give a healthy and sufficient education
to youth, both in body and mind, etc.
If we regard the matter without prejudice, certain rights and duties
which have been hitherto considered as natural and self-evident,
become very doubtful. Such are ecclesiastical and religious rights and
duties, patriotic and national duties, the rights and duties of war,
the rights of privileged classes, the rights of property, etc. It is
clear, from an unprejudiced examination of the development of
humanity, that these so-called rights and duties are only the historic
legacies of mysticism or of limited human groupings, and in great part
artificial. The rights and duties of members of the groups in question
consisted in mutually protecting their opinions and their national and
religious interests, etc., and in subjecting or even trampling under
foot those of other human groups. These lead us quite naturally to the
second category of general notions of rights.
=Conventional Rights.=--To speak correctly, conventional rights are
not rights. They are simply a dogmatic sanction applied to all kinds
of customs and abuses that men have appropriated, according to local
circumstances and their fortuitous conquests or acquisitions. Here,
the consequences of the natural rights of the stronger, religious
mysticisms and all sorts of human passions, the sexual appetite
especially, play a very varied and complex role.
The absurdity and injustice of conventional rights is shown by the
difference, often even the absolute contrast, of the corresponding
conception of rights among different peoples. In one, polygamy is a
right and even a divine institution; in another, it is a crime.
Individual murder is generally considered as criminal, but in warfare
the slaughter of masses becomes a duty and even a virtue. Theft and
rapine are regarded in times of peace as crimes, but in time of war,
under the form of annexation and plunder they are the uncontested
rights of the victor. In a kingdom, the monarch is looked upon as a
holy person and offense to his majesty as a crime; in a democracy, it
is individual domination which is regarded as criminal.
Falsehood and mental restriction are, in certain cases at least, the
rights or even the duty of the Catholic, who is only forbidden to
swear falsely in the name of God and religion, while others consider
all falsehood more or less unjustifiable; others again regard every
oath as sinful.
The contradictions, inconsistencies, unnatural prescripts and
tyrannies of what is called conventional rights in different peoples
are innumerable, and the notions of our rights which we have inherited
from the Romans are not much better.
=Retaliation.=--In historical epochs, we see the rights of the
stronger succeeded by certain notions of rights which may still be
considered as primordial; such is the law of retaliation or lynch law,
based on the natural sentiment of vengeance, which is itself derived
from anger, jealousy and pride, and says "An eye for an eye and a
tooth for a tooth." The law of retaliation is very natural and very
human. Although of savage origin, it has at least the merit of
recognizing in men an equal right in retaliation for injury caused in
a brutal fashion, without considering inner motives.
=Expiation.=--We also find in the old law another notion derived
partly from the preceding, but chiefly from religious mysticism--the
notion of expiation. After constructing in his own image a divinity
blinded by human passions, man attributed to him, from fear of
vengeance, sentiments of anger and indignation regarding his baseness
and malice toward his neighbor. He then conciliated the divinity and
appeased his wrath by making sacrifices, human or otherwise.
At first, sacrifices were not made of criminals or guilty persons, but
of innocent lambs, men or beasts, sometimes with all kinds of torture,
to appease the supposed wrath of the gods. Gradually, however, these
customs became more humane and were changed to the notions of
expiation which we still have. Whosoever has committed a crime should
expiate it by some kind of pain, eventually by death. In our modern
penal law, notions of expiation and retaliation are blended, and when
we study its roots in ethnology we are not surprised to see the
expiation and punishment of so-called crimes against God or religion.
We find in this fact a singular mixture of religious and judicial
notions. A curious way of appeasing the divinity is the sacrifice of
animals and other offerings which ancient and savage peoples made and
still make, in returning thanks for victory or some other good
fortune, or to appease supposed wrath.
=Themis.=--In spite of all these errors, ancient civilization
represented as the ideal of right a goddess of justice, _Themis_, with
eyes blindfolded and holding scales in her hands. The scales signified
that right and wrong should be carefully weighed against each other;
the bandage, that the judge should pronounce his verdict without
regard to persons, and be inaccessible to all outside influence. For
the limited ideas of that period, little removed from retaliation and
expiation, this blind woman with her scales was a sufficient
representation of justice. She had no need to trouble about the
psychology of human nature, mental disorders, diminished
responsibility or ideal social improvement.
=Themis Unblindfolded. Fallacy of Free-will.=--Nowadays the task of
our goddess is not so simple, for the progress of humanity and
science, especially of psychology and psychiatry, oblige her whether
she wishes or not, to completely remove her bandage, so as to see
clearly into the human brain.
It is not simply a question of knowing whether an accused person has
or has not committed the act which he is accused of, but also whether
he knew what he was doing, what were the motives which urged him, and
who is the real instigator of the misdeed. Alcohol, mental anomalies
and diseases, suggestions, passions, etc., concur in influencing the
human brain so that it is hardly responsible for its acts.
Again, on further examination, we find that the accepted and
historical notion of free-will, that is to say the absolute liberty of
man's will, which constitutes the very existence of our old penal law,
becomes not only more problematical, but may even be considered as a
purely human illusion, resting on the fact that the indirect and
remote motives of our actions are mainly subconscious.
The great philosopher, Spinoza, has already demonstrated this truth in
a masterly manner, and modern science confirms it in all respects.
Every effect has its cause, and all our resolutions are the result of
the activities of our brain, in their turn determined or influenced by
hereditary engrams (instincts and dispositions) or acquired
(memories), which are their internal causes, and combine with causes
acting from without. Let us admit freely the fallacy of the old axiom
of human free-will and endeavor to understand that what we consider as
free will is nothing else than the very variable faculty of our brain,
more or less developed in different individuals, of adapting its
activity to that of its environment, and especially to that of other
men. Also let us endeavor to take into account that our will and all
our actions are, consciously or unconsciously, determined by a complex
of energies or hereditary engrams (character), combined with those
which have acted upon us from without during our life, as well as with
emotional or intellectual sensory impressions.
Our whole conception of rights, and especially of penal law, should
then change. We should entirely do away with _retaliation_, a
barbarous relic of a more or less animal sentiment of our ancestors,
and _expiation_, the relic of a superannuated and superstitious
mysticism. Modern and truly scientific reformers of penal law have
already taken account of this necessity. But, in spite of the complete
inefficacy of the old penal system as regards the diminution of crime,
they have so far only put into practice few of their ideas.
=Justification of Rights and Laws.=--After what we have just said,
there only remain, two reasons to justify the existence of rights and
laws:
(1). To protect human society against criminals, and in general to
institute ideas and laws with a view to regulate the mutual interests
of men, in such a way as to result in natural conditions of existence
as advantageous as possible, both for the individual and for society:
(2). To study the causes of crimes, social conflicts, imperfections
and inequalities, so as to obtain, by contending against these causes,
an improvement in men and their social condition. It is true that what
we demand here means a complete transformation of the notions of
conventional right, not only in our old penal law, but also to a great
extent in civil law; but this transformation is inevitable and has
even already commenced. Its object is to liberate right from the grasp
of an old metaphysico-religious dogmatism, and from crystalized
doctrines derived from superannuated custom and abuse, and to found
itself on the applied and social natural history of man, who then only
will merit the name of _homo sapiens_ which was given to him by
Linnaeus, the great nomenclator of living beings.
Jurists have already too long based metaphysics on old barbarous
customs and superstitious mysticism, transformed into dogmas. It is
time that Themis removed her bandage, studied psychology,
psychopathology and science, and submitted the impartial handling of
her scales to the influence of truer and juster human factors, even if
her work thereby becomes more difficult and more complicated.
=Sexual Rights.=--While sexual sentiments form part of the most sacred
and intimate conditions of individual happiness, they are also closely
and indissolubly connected with the social welfare of humanity. In no
domain is it more difficult to combine harmoniously the welfare of the
community with that of the individual, and this is why questions of
right in sexual matters are among the most difficult to solve.
The satisfaction of the sexual appetite in man is part of his natural
rights. Natural science compels us to formulate this principle; yet it
is a dogma the consequences of which may become very grave and even
fatal; for the satisfaction of a man's sexual appetite implies, not
only the direct participation of one or more human beings in a common
act, but also that of a much greater number in its indirect effects;
and it may occasion, according to circumstances, more harm than good.
If the question of reproduction did not exist, it would be more easy
to put individualism in more or less harmonious accord with
socialism. It is thus the sexual relations which present the greatest
difficulties in the social domain.
In spite of the considerable progress which has been accomplished, our
modern law is still based to a great extent on the barbarous principle
of the legal inequality of the sexes. The mind of man and that of
woman are no doubt of different quality; nevertheless, in a society
which does not possess asexual individuals like that of the ants and
bees, and in which the two sexes are compelled to work together
harmoniously for the social welfare, there is no reason to subordinate
one sex to the other. Man may have 130 or 150 grammes more brain
tissue than woman and be superior to her in his faculty of combination
and invention, but this is no reason why we should only accord his
wife and mother inferior social rights to his own. His bodily strength
will always protect him against the possible encroachments of woman.
A first postulate is, therefore, the equality of the two sexes before
the law. A second postulate consists in the emancipation of infancy,
in the sense that it should never be considered as an object of
possession or of exploitation, as was and is still so often the case.
These are the fundamental principles of a normal sexual law. In no
animal do we find the abuses which man is permitted to practice toward
his wife and children. Let us now pass on to special questions.
CIVIL LAW
The object of civil law is to regulate the relations of men to each
ether. Properly speaking it does not punish, that is to say, it
requires no expiation and is not concerned with crime. It seeks to
improve the social basis for mutual obligations and contracts.
Nevertheless, it borders on penal law as regards the question of
damages which one individual must pay another whom he has injured even
involuntarily, as well as by the coercive measures, both
administrative and operative, which it employs.
Although resting on a natural basis better adapted to the social
welfare than penal law, civil law still contains the traditions of
religious mysticism and the abuse of conventional right.
I shall here analyze in a few words what concerns our subject in
actual civil law, and shall point out the modifications which appear
to me desirable. It is, however, impossible for me to enter into the
details of codes, owing to absence of special knowledge. Moreover,
this would lead us too far from our subject.
=Marriage and Sexual Relations in General.=--The coitus of two
individuals, performed with mutual deliberation and causing no harm to
a third person, should be considered as a private affair, and should
have no connection with either civil or penal law.
However great may be the necessary restrictions of this general axiom,
it must be recognized as valid in principle. Society has no right to
restrict the liberty of individuals so long as it, or one of its
members, is not injured by these individuals. So long as coitus is
freely performed by adult and responsible persons, has no indirect
consequences, and does not cause fecundation, neither society nor any
one is injured.
In the practice of law this axiom is not yet generally accepted. Many
laws, especially among the Germanic peoples, punish concubinage, or
extra-nuptial coitus. Even when concubinage is tolerated, it is
considered illegitimate, so that the woman who gives herself to it and
the children who result from it, have much to suffer. Although they
constitute simple religious precepts, the ordinances of Liguori and
others concerning coitus influence in a high degree sexual relations
in Catholic countries.
As a rule, coitus is only legally recognized as licit in marriage. But
we have seen in Chapter VI how elastic is the term marriage, which
varies from polygamy and monogamy to polyandry, and from marriage for
short periods to indissoluble marriage, to say nothing of the cases
where women are sacrificed on their husbands' tombs. We have seen that
religious traditions, arising themselves from barbarous customs, play
a great part in conjugal law. It is only by infinite trouble that the
principle of civil marriage has made its way in modern civilized
states. Even to-day, religious marriage is in some countries only form
of union which is legally recognized. These simple facts show to what
extent we are still hidebound by tradition.
The idea that marriage is a divine institution and that man has the
right to contract, but not to dissolve it, is still a widespread
belief, however bizarre it may be. We shall not enter here into the
detail of the religious forms of marriage, which is referred to in
Chapters VI and XII.
It is evident, from our modern and scientific point of view, which is
purely human and social, that civil law only can be recognized as
valid. Religious forms and ceremonies must be considered as belonging
to a private domain. For this reason they concern neither the State
nor society, and should be refused all legal character; for it is our
duty to strive and liberate humanity from the tyranny of all imposed
creeds, as we should combat all so-called State religion.
=Civil Marriage.=--What then is civil marriage, and what ought it to
be? Our actual civil marriage is the result of trials and compromises
which require improvement. It is a contract between two persons of
opposite sex whose mutual object is the reproduction of the human
species. In this contract the law is unfortunately too much concerned
with the personal relations of the two contracting parties, and too
little with the interests of their eventual posterity, which
necessitates care and attention on the part of the social legislator.
Moreover, the traditional conception of the dependence of woman
disturbs the purity and justice of civil marriage.
In my opinion, the first fundamental principles of civil marriage
should be absolute legal equality of the two conjoints and complete
separation of property. The momentary amorous intoxication of a woman
should not allow a man to appropriate her property in whole or in
part; only truly barbarous laws could permit such iniquity, and they
should be banished from all the codes of civilized countries.
Moreover, in countries where woman enjoys important rights, the
community of property furnishes those who are unscrupulous with the
means of completely despoiling their husbands.
Further, in common conjugal life, the domestic work of the wife should
not be considered as obligatory and requiring no special
remuneration. Her work has as much right to be considered as that of
the husband, and should be entered to the wife as an asset.
Community of property is so immoral that it should be considered
invalid in case of ulterior dispute, when it has been instituted by
private contract. It is the business of the conjoints to put it in
practice if they wish, so long as they are of one mind. But when
dissensions or divorce take place, it only injures the one who has
remained honest, and at the same time the children.
This is why such contracts ought never be definitely binding to the
conjoints. Even if the marriage is not unhappy, the extravagances or
blunders of one of the conjoints may ruin the whole family, in the
case of common property.
The _duration_ of marriage is very important. If a marriage contract
exacts sexual fidelity till death, divorce is nonsense. Yet, in
practice, it is obvious cruelty to keep two individuals legally bound
together who can no longer live with each other. Thus, the provision
and license of divorce are necessities of civil law which are
certainly not ideal, but which cannot be passed over without favoring
family disturbance and without sanctioning illegality and evil.
Among the most frequent causes of divorce are desire for change in the
husband, venereal diseases, disputes, incompatibility of temper,
mental disorders, immorality, ill-treatment and crime. The sterility
of one of the conjoints and incapacity for coitus may also be
mentioned as reasons for divorce, although in certain circumstances,
as we shall see, limited polyandry or polygyny may be much more humane
than divorce.
As soon as divorce is admitted, important and complicated questions of
law arise when there are children. We shall refer to these later. The
legal license of complete divorce thus transforms marriage into a
temporary contract, which is not so far removed as one would think
from the ideal relations of free love.
We will examine the circumstances which, apart from the procreation of
children, may attribute legal importance to the sexual relations of
two persons. I must first of all observe that, if it wishes, civil
legislation can very well create a state of things which gives to
children born outside marriage the same rights and the same social
position as legitimate children, and I will even add that such social
equality would respond to the most elementary sentiments of human
rights, if these were not already influenced in advance by prejudice
and mysticism.
=Minors.=--Civil law should stipulate that minors have not the right
to marry. This may appear cruel in certain cases, but society has the
right and the duty to intervene. Minors should be protected against
all sexual abuse. A young girl under the age of seventeen and a boy
under eighteen or twenty should be prevented from all sexual
relations. This is a postulate of individual and social hygiene and
consequently of all healthy matrimonial law.
=Lunatics.=--The same applies to lunatics, who are legally comparable
to minors. Have we the right to forcibly separate a married couple, or
a couple living in concubinage, because one of the conjoints has
become insane, when the other does not wish for separation? In Germany
the procedure of nullity of marriage has been invented for these
cases, but without gaining much. I shall return to this point in
connection with another subject, but I may remark here that it is not
the continuation of marriage nor that of sexual connection which
injures society, but only the procreation of children. Therefore it is
only the procreation of children, which should be legally prohibited,
and sexual connection only when the healthy conjoint agrees to its
suppression, or when the interests of the afflicted one necessitate
it.
In the future these particular cases may be regulated in the most
convenient and humane way possible.
Certain bodily infirmities which one of the conjoints has concealed
from the other, or of which he was not himself aware, should also
impair the validity of the marriage contract. Such are chronic
infectious diseases, especially venereal, impotence in the man and
sterility in the woman, when the cause was previously known. But here
again, the law should only intervene at the request of the person
injured, and to take certain measures to prevent the procreation of
abortions, without interfering with sexual connection.
=Adultery.=--An important question is that of adultery. Here again, we
are of opinion that the law has not performed its duty. Proved
adultery, when fidelity has been promised by contract should give the
injured party the right of immediate and absolute divorce.
Certain forms of adultery, which take place with the assent of the two
conjoints, have in reality the character of bigamy and should neither
be recognized by civil nor penal law. I will cite as an example, the
case where two conjoints wish to live together for various reasons,
while the impotence, disease or sterility of one of them induces him
to concede to the other liberty of sexual connection with a third
person, apart from marriage. In such a case neither society nor any
one else is injured and all motive for legal intervention is wanting
(vide Andre Couvreur: _La Graine_).
=Divorce.=--The question of divorce becomes extremely difficult when
one of the conjoints wishes for it and the other does not, and when no
other reason exists for determining the marriage. We are here
concerned with the malicious caprices of the god of love, from which
the world will never be free.
In my opinion, the law in such cases can only do one thing, and that
is to protect the rights of the children, if there are any, and to
compel the inconstant conjoint to provide for their nourishment.
The law should also protect the pecuniary and other civil rights of
the conjoint who wishes to continue life in common. Here especially we
can recognize the necessity for the separation of property. On the
other hand, I am convinced that it is useless to maintain at any price
a union which one party does not wish for. In practice no good results
from it; it is rather a moral question than a question of law.
In such cases we may observe the despair of the conjoint who has
remained faithful, both in the marital and legal relations of
marriage. The law cannot do everything, and here it is powerless; all
that it can do is to exact delay and attempt at reconciliation, which
sometimes succeeds.
=The Right to Satisfaction of the Sexual Appetite.=--We now come to a
delicate question. The right to satisfy the sexual appetite must
necessarily be restricted in more than one respect if injury to third
parties is to be avoided. If we except certain pathological cases, the
chief difficulty lies in the fact that the normal sexual appetite can
only be satisfied by the cohabitation of two persons, and that what
satisfies the one may often injure or deeply wound the other, and even
the children. The matter may go so far as to concern penal law, and we
shall refer to it again in this connection. But, even from the point
of view of civil law, permission to satisfy the sexual appetite must
necessarily depend on the consent of both parties. In my opinion no
exception to this rule can be tolerated.
It is not enough to protect minors; it is also necessary to prevent
the abuse of the persons of adults against their will. The institution
of so-called Christian marriage still contains barbarous dispositions
in this respect, the wife being generally obliged to surrender herself
to her lord and master as often as he pleases. This is the dark side
of the picture which exacts sexual fidelity in man.
Inversely, for physiological reasons, a very erotic and sexually
exacting woman cannot obtain satisfaction, man being incapable of
commanding erections voluntarily. She can only bring an action for
divorce if she can prove that her husband is completely impotent.
It is sufficient to reflect on these facts to see how difficult is the
regulation of sexual connection by law. The legislation of details in
this domain becomes of necessity an injustice.
We have already considered the great individual variability of the
sexual appetite. Attempts to regulate it by the rules of a monogamous
matrimonial code are absurd and impracticable. With all the respect
due to the moral sentiments of Tolstoi, we are obliged to declare that
his ascetic opinions on sexual relations are only the dreams of an
enthusiast.
When a libidinous man marries a young girl who is sexually frigid, and
when coitus continues to be a horror to his wife, it is quite as cruel
to demand continence in the husband as submission in his wife. In such
cases, the conditions can only be made tolerable by divorce, consent
to concubinage, or bigamy, when a relative adaptation cannot be
obtained by mutual concessions. At present our prejudices only allow
divorce in such cases.
When a man and woman are already tied by pregnancy or by a child, and
when, apart from the differences in their sexual appetites, love and
concord reign between them, separation would be cruel.
I readily agree that such extreme circumstances should not be the
rule, and that in many cases the one who is the more erotic can
restrain himself, and the one who is cold become accustomed to coitus.
Nevertheless, in the present chapter we are not concerned with morals
but with rights, and we have only to reply to the question of knowing
what should be done when, in sexual connection between two conjoints,
one desires it and the other does not.
The concentration of sexual passion on a single individual, which is
generally good from the social point of view, is fatal in these
special cases. A man falls passionately in love with a woman, or a
woman with a man, but instead of being reciprocal this love is
despised by the other. Such a misfortune, which often leads to the
most tragic consequences, not only in novels but also in real life, is
only reparable by the renunciation of the one who loves. It is surely
less cruel to renounce a proposed union than to become the sexual prey
of a person one does not love. It is, therefore, inhuman and immoral,
as much in religion as in poetry, to preach in any form, the
exclusiveness of sentiments, the indissolubility of monogamous
marriage, and the immutability of love.
It has often been stated that a woman can only love once in her life.
Such a false and cruel generalization must be energetically opposed.
It is the business of sentimental poets to delude themselves with such
sentiments, but those who think it a duty to adhere to dogmas of this
kind are to be pitied. It is not only death or illness of one of the
conjoints, dissensions and infidelity, which may cause separation of a
sexual union, but as is frequently the case, rejected love may
transform into perpetual martyrdom the life of a person imbued with
such ideas. The ascetic sentimentalism which results from this has a
strong element of suggestion which is bad to cultivate.
If we would give the one who does not love the absolute right of
repelling the sexual advances of the other, not only the law but
morality should in return allow the rejected lover to make another
choice, where his desire for love will find an echo.
At the present day many people, especially women, prefer to endure
their unhappiness and even that of their children to the opprobrium to
which they are often exposed by public opinion in divorce or
remarriage, or even in becoming engaged to another person, when their
love has been rejected. It is, therefore, the duty of the legislator
to banish from the law everything which may appear to sanction such
opprobrium.
Most laws recognize not only impotence, but also assault, cruelty,
venereal disease, adultery, etc., as grounds for divorce, but the
pressure of public opinion causes the existing laws to be too little
used. We must remember that such violations of conjugal duties give
the injured party the right of claiming damages.
Nevertheless, we may say that the simplest civil action by one
conjoint against the other is veritably monstrous when it is not
accompanied by an action for divorce. When once the couple have come
to legal disputes, their marriage is in reality dissolved and its
continuation is an absurdity.
=Venereal Diseases.=--A very important question from the humanitarian
and hygienic point of view is that of venereal disease. A man (or
woman) who knows himself (or herself) to be affected with a venereal
disease in an infectious state, and who in spite of this has
connection with a woman, should be regarded as a criminal, at least if
the woman with whom he has connection is not affected with the same
disease.
Here the law should intervene by awarding heavy damages to the party
who has been infected; eventually it may be treated as a criminal
offense. In such cases claim should be made by the injured party, but
unfortunately this is seldom done owing to feelings of shame. In the
future, however, we may hope that the law may be improved for the
benefit of humanity, for this would be one of the most efficacious
means of combating venereal disease, and hence avoiding much
misfortune for families and children.
It would also be desirable to prevent the procreation of syphilitic
infants, for instance, by the use of preventatives (vide Chapter XIV).
=Prostitution.=--Another difficult question is that of the relation of
civil law to prostitution. All State regulation of prostitution is to
be absolutely condemned; but what position should civil law take up
with regard to free prostitution? We have already seen what an
abominable social evil is this commerce in human bodies, as regards
social morality. But it is absolutely useless to try and abolish this
commerce without attacking its lord and master--_money_. The venality
of man implies the commerce of his body, and as long as everything can
be got for money, coitus can be bought. It is, therefore, this
venality which must be attacked, not only by condemning it in words
but by cutting its roots. If the State will not withdraw its
protecting hand from prostitution, it might at least combat
proxenetism and the public manifestations of prostitution, by all the
legal and administrative measures at its disposal. It would thus
reduce the matter to intimate personal relations.
Let us hope that, little by little, a social organization more just to
labor and wages, combined with the prohibition of alcoholic drinks,
will, in the future, annihilate the causes of commerce in human
bodies.
=Children as a Reason for Civil Marriage.=--To resume; we find that
civil marriage should, by progressive reforms, become a much more free
contract than it is at present, having for its object a common sexual
life. The law should abandon its useless and often harmful chicanery
concerning the questions of sexual relations and love, and regulate
more carefully the duties of parents toward their children, and thus
protect future generations against the abuse of the present
generation.
The difference which exists between marriage and free love should
gradually disappear, by instituting natural intimate relations on the
basis of sentiments of social morality, instead of maintaining the
pretended divine origin of a social institution. It is difficult to
avoid a smile when we hear the term "divine institution" applied to
the marriage of a rich girl with a man who has been bought for her.
(Vide Chapter X.)
Various propositions have been made to give more dignity to the unions
of free love, which now exist and which always have existed. Modern
women have remarked that the absurd custom of naming the celibate
woman differently to the married stigmatizes in society a number of
poor women and innocent children, and that it would be quite as just
to apply the term "damoiseau" to celibate men as "mademoiselle" to
non-married girls. An unmarried woman who has a child, and who has
only committed the sin of obeying nature, is branded with the stamp of
shame.
It is the children who constitute the true bond of marriage and give
it a legal character. When there are no children all legal and State
interference with conjugal affairs loses its sense so long as no one
is injured, and civil marriage can then be greatly simplified. I
maintain that so long as a sterile union, of whatever kind, between
responsible persons is voluntary, provokes no conflict between those
who have contracted it, and causes no injury to a third party, the law
has no right to meddle with it; because this union does not concern
society nor any of its members, excepting the two parties interested,
who are in accord.
At the present time, in many countries, the existing laws can be
utilized to form marriage contracts stipulating separation of
property, the right of each of the conjoints to the produce of his or
her work, as well as certain reciprocal rights and duties between the
parents and children. Matters can thus be arranged so as to correct
more or less the defects of the law.
=Marriage of Inverts.=--A peculiar and characteristic phenomenon is
the ardent desire of many sexual perverts, especially inverts, to
become secretly engaged or married to the abnormal homosexual object
of their love. It is needless to say that there can be no question of
legal regulation of such pathological marriages. But the law may
ignore them when they do no harm to any one, and regard them as
private affairs, especially when they prevent much worse evils, such
as the marriage of an invert to a normal individual.
=Civil Rights of Children. Matriarchism.=--As we have already said, it
is the children who constitute the real phylogenetic and
psychological bonds in marriage and the family, bonds which are deeply
rooted in human nature. This is so true that among many savage
peoples, if not in most, marriage is not considered legal as long as
it is sterile. Even among civilized people sterile women are generally
regarded as of less value. We may, therefore, regard the article in
the Code Napoleon which forbids inquiry into paternity as an unnatural
measure, or as a monstrosity of civil law.
Two human beings who procreate others contract common duties and
responsibility of the highest importance. They are, perhaps, the
highest social duties that man can assume. Is it not then infamous and
unnatural to legally liberate one only of the procreators, the man,
from all his responsibilities, simply because certain religious or
civil formalities were omitted before procreation?
Is the man less guilty than the woman in procreation apart from
marriage, if we can use the term guilt in such cases? Is it not a
ridiculous and cruel irony to call _natural children_ those born apart
from marriage? Perhaps legitimate children are supernatural, or
unnatural! Is it not infamous to brand with the seal of shame, even
before their birth, poor illegitimate children, and to confirm this
indignity by making them bear their mother's name instead of their
father's?
The most elementary natural law exacts that all children, whether
"legitimate" or "illegitimate," should have the same social rights,
and that they should bear either the name of their real father or that
of their mother; the latter denomination would be the more natural and
logical. Denomination by the maternal line corresponds to the system
of matriarchism (Chapters VI and XIX), which is often met with among
savage races, and which is more just and leads to less abuse than
patriarchism. Moreover, when women shall have obtained their proper
rights, there will be an end of the exclusive authority of one of the
conjoints in marriage.
Equality in the rights of the two sexes will naturally lead to
denomination in the maternal line, for reasons of simplicity, the
mother being more closely related to the child than the father.
Maternity may, no doubt, be sometimes uncertain, as in the case of
foundlings or changelings, but on the whole it is infinitely more easy
to establish than paternity. It is sufficient for the mother to have
sexual connection with two men at the time of conception to render
paternity doubtful. Again, the mother has a number of pains, cares and
dangers to undergo in the course of the procreation and education of
children, which the father escapes. Nature thus gives the mother the
right to give her name to the family. Our legislation is unfortunately
far from recognizing such natural right. We may nevertheless form a
primary proposition, because in my opinion its recognition would avoid
much complicated litigation:
_In nature, whenever the offspring of an animal have a protracted and
dependent infancy, it is the duty of the parents to nourish them and
bring them up. To allow human parents to dispense with this duty, on
the grounds of badly constructed and unnatural social theories, is to
encourage promiscuity, and consequently degeneration of society. It is
easy to change social customs which are only based on artificial
dogmas sanctioned by tradition, fashion and habit, whether they are of
a religious nature or otherwise. But a social organization can never
violate with impunity the true laws of human nature which are deeply
rooted in our phylogenetic instincts, without disastrous effects._
In Chapters VI and VII we have given irrefutable proof that family
life and the sentiments of sympathy between husband and wife, parents
and children, constitute the phylogenetic basis of the sexual
relations of humanity. Whatever may be the egoistic polygamous
instincts of man, we can affirm that a natural and true monogamy
constitutes the highest and best form of his sexual relations and of
his love. No doubt there are many exceptions which must be taken into
account. It is absurd to shut our eyes to the fact that our degenerate
social customs have created unnatural circumstances in which parents
behave shamefully toward their children, exploiting them, training
them systematically to mendacity, prostitution and crime, or else
ill-treating them. We even see unnatural parents, to save legal
consequences, get rid of children who inconvenience them by the aid of
slow and coldly calculated martyrdom, which leads them to certain
death. It is, therefore, necessary to establish special legal
provision for all these exceptional cases, to protect children against
the power of unworthy parents and all forms of abuse.
I must here draw attention to the impulse which has recently been
given to Austrian legislation on the protection of children, by Lydia
von Wolfring. The State brings up, in philanthropic institutions,
children who have been maltreated, neglected or abandoned, after
removal from their unworthy parents, but without relieving the latter
of their duty in providing nourishment. According to Miss Wolfring's
system, they are cared for by honest couples without children who wish
for them, under the supervision of the aforesaid institutions. In this
way the children enjoy family life.
For educational reasons, the natural family may be imitated in these
artificial ones, by giving to each couple children of both sexes and
different ages. The result is perfect: I have seen in Vienna
artificial families of ten children formed in this way. This shows
again the rule confirmed by the exception; it would be better for the
good seed to be more fruitful and the bad sterile.
The normal condition must, however, always be for parents to bring up
their own children. But here the State and the school should come to
their aid, and even intervene with authority; for society is under the
obligation of educating its children to a certain degree of culture,
and maternal or paternal authority should not have the right to
prevent or even attenuate this social work. Obligatory and gratuitous
education is thus a duty of the State which is becoming more and more
recognized everywhere, although it is still very incomplete and often
badly carried out.
The State should, moreover, protect the children by restricting the
power of parents more than is done at present. The child should not be
allowed to become an object for exploitation by its parents. It has
also the right to be protected against all unmerited punishment and
ill-treatment. Corporal punishment, which is still practiced in some
schools, is a relic of barbarism which ought to disappear.
The State should severely enforce the duty of the procreators of
children to nourish their offspring. Rich or poor, no father or mother
should escape this duty, whether the child is legitimate or
illegitimate. In our imperfect social condition, it is still much too
easy for the man to escape and abandon his child to the mother, or to
public charity. He should be compelled to provide for the life and
education of his children, whether legitimate or illegitimate, if he
does not bring them up himself. If unable to provide money, he should
do the equivalent in labor. Such measures, strictly enforced, would be
more efficacious than all the complicated laws on sexual relations, in
maintaining monogamy and fidelity.
I repeat, that these measures should apply to all unworthy parents
from whom we are obliged to remove the children. These parents are not
always of the poorer class.
It may be objected that I am unjust in charging such duties to poor
people who can often hardly keep themselves. I agree that in the
present state of society it is quite impossible for many parents to
undertake such important duties. But duty means right, and it is
evident that we must place rights by the side of the duties which we
impose on parents.
True justice in this question can only be attained by the essential
progress of socialism. By socialism, I do not mean certain vague
communistic doctrines, nor the Utopias of anarchists who imagine that
"man was born good," but simply an essential social progress in the
struggle against the domination of individual capital, that is to say,
usury applied to the labor of others owing to the possession of means
of production, which is now left to speculators. Men should be enabled
to enjoy the product of their labor, so that they can lead a human
life worthy of the name, in sexual matters as in others. But this is
not all.
From the social point of view, it is absolutely unjust that men who
procreate children should alone bear the burden of the future
generation. We know the egoistic proverb of the celibates, who say: "I
have the right to take life easily, to enjoy myself and be idle, if I
renounce the happiness of having children, either of my own accord or
from necessity." This proverb, which may be transposed into "after me
the deluge," cannot be recognized by any healthy social legislation.
It is the duty of the State to relieve large families, to facilitate
the procreation of healthy children, and to impose more work and taxes
(for instance, artificial families) on sterile individuals. The old
laws were better than ours in this respect.
I have mentioned above the excellent custom, which exists at the
present day in Norway, of only charging half-price on the boats to
married women and other female members of the same family. I cannot
here enter into the details of this question, but if such reforms are
some day realized, if universal compulsory education, pensions for old
age, orphans and invalids, etc., are introduced, then no man will have
valid motives for escaping the duty of feeding his children and
bringing them up decently in family life. This will be left only to
the idle and vicious.
Moreover, I can support my propositions by facts. If we compare the
nature of delinquents, abandoned children, vagabonds, etc., in a
country where little or nothing has been done for the people (Russia,
Galicia, Vienna, etc.), with that of the same individuals in
Switzerland, for example, where much has already been done for the
poor, we find this result: In Switzerland, these individuals are
nearly all tainted with alcoholism or pathological heredity; they
consist of alcoholics, incorrigibles, and congenital decadents, and
education can do little for them, because nearly all those who have a
better hereditary foundation have been able to earn their living by
honest work. In Russia, Galicia, and even in Vienna, we are, on the
contrary, astonished to see how many honest natures there are among
the disinherited, when they are provided with work and education.
This fact speaks more than the contradictory statements which the
fanatics of party politics hurl at each other's heads.
=Inquiry into Paternity.=--It will be objected that inquiry into
paternity is often very difficult and dangerous. I do not deny this;
but, when women have obtained their natural rights, and when the
education of young girls is guided by the principles which we have
enunciated in Chapter XVII, the matter will become much easier.
Moreover, even now, we can with energy and good will determine
paternity in most cases. Although the great improvement in means of
transport assists fugitives, it also favors the discovery and arrest
of individuals all over the world. International relations between all
civilized states are improving from day to day. When the world is more
completely conquered by civilization, we may hope that it will become
increasingly difficult for evildoers to escape their duties.
Regarding this question from all points of view it is impossible for
us to give up this primordial condition for the preservation of human
society, which consists in making parents responsible for the
nourishment and education of their children.
The famous ideas of phalanstery and promiscuity, so often advanced,
originated in theoretical and dogmatic minds which had lost their
instinctive sense of human nature, and ignored what natural science
and ethnology have revealed to us.
But the responsibility of parents extends to another domain--the duty
of not procreating children who are unhealthy in body and mind. We
shall return to this question later on.
=Guardianship.=--An excellent institution of our present legislation
is that of the guardianship of orphans, lunatics, etc. It requires to
be developed extensively and with care. On the contrary, an evil
custom is the right accorded by certain countries to parishes charged
with poor and abandoned orphans, of delivering them by public tender
to the man who offers the lowest pension--and only requires them for
work. This system results in odious abuse, such as neglect, mendicity
and ill-treatment.
The fate of illegitimate children who are "farmed out" is still worse.
A tacit alliance is established between rapacity on the one hand and
social sexual hypocrisy on the other. A number of infanticides and
abortions result, either from poverty, or from sentiments of shame due
to our moral customs. Here, civil law and penal law should combine and
take energetic humanitarian measures to put a stop to this sad abuse.
An excellent institution is that of homes in the country established
for unmarried mothers and their children, and for abandoned mothers in
general.
=Free Love and Civil Marriage.=--When all the propositions we have
drawn up have been realized by social legislation, the difference
which now exists between marriage and free love will be little more
than a form. The consequences of these two kinds of union will become
the same, both for parents and children; the only distinction will
consist in the existence or non-existence of official control. True
monogamy will lose nothing, but will gain much.
We shall not then have obligatory monogamy as at present, absolute in
form, artificially maintained by the aid of prostitution, that is by
the most disgusting form of promiscuity which renders monogamy
illusory; but we shall have in its place a relative monogamy much more
solidly built on the natural rights of the two sexes, it is true more
free in form, but fundamentally much stronger in the natural and
instinctive duties dictated by a truly free and reasoned union, as
well as by the duties by which parents will be bound to their
children.
=Form and Duration of Civil Marriage.=--Although it may be true that
monogamy constitutes the most normal and natural form of family union,
and offers the best conditions for lasting happiness, both for parents
and children, we must be blindly prejudiced not to admit that it is
unnatural to consider it as the only sheet anchor in sexual
relationship, the only admissible form of marriage, and to make it a
straight-jacket. History and ethnography show us that polygamous races
are strongly developed and are still developing; on the other hand, it
is true that polyandrous races degenerate.
Again, impartial observation of our Christian monogamy shows us that
it depends to a great extent on appearances, that it is full of
trickery and hypocrisy, and that to legally enforce it for life must
be considered as absolutely impossible.
In Catholic countries which prohibit divorce, the latter has been
replaced by separation, and this becomes the most constant source of
adultery. The more the laws of a country impede divorce, the more one
must close one's eyes to promiscuity or prostitution, which has even
been regulated by the State by the aid of proxenetism, all the while
preaching monogamy in a loud voice.
These bitter lessons which practice has given to the partisan, of
obligatory monogamy, prove the absurdity of attempting to restrain the
natural appetites of man by force and by artificial obstacles. That
which succeeds, not without difficulty, with some strong characters,
and more easily with naturally cold temperaments, is impossible to
realize in the masses.
Polyandry is usually the result of poverty, and the polyandrous races
are little fecund and tend to disappear. The normal man is
instinctively more polygynous than the normal woman is polyandrous.
There are, however, cases where polyandry is justifiable. There are
women whose sexual appetite, more or less pathological, is so
insatiable that a normal man is incapable of satisfying it.
If such women were served by several Don Juans by means of a free
contract, this would be better than giving themselves in despair to
prostitution (there are some prostitutes created by nymphomania). This
system would also be better than the seduction of normal young girls
by the Don Juans in question.
Polygyny is still more indicated when the sterility of the woman or
her repugnance to sexual intercourse cause family disturbances.
In speaking of polygamy in Chapter VI, we have shown that it exists in
several forms, and that these are not all so humiliating for the women
as people think, who only know of the shameful abuses of the
Mussulman's harem. What lowers the moral level of polygyny is
especially the barbarous system of marriage by purchase, by which the
women become slaves burdened with heavy labor, and are in a state of
legal dependence. We have seen that polygyny has a higher moral
character among certain Indian tribes where matriarchism rules, and
where the wife is mistress of the house and family. The danger of
degradation of the woman ceases when she is equal to the man as
regards rights and property. In fact, in such a social state, polygyny
can only constitute an exception. It is here entirely free and becomes
all the more innocent because divorce is facilitated and strict laws
on the feeding and education of the children limit the male sexual
appetite.
I even venture to maintain that the stability of monogamous marriage,
which should be based on mutual sentiments of respect and love, would
be much better guaranteed than hitherto by legal liberty of conjugal
ties, and by duty to children such as I have proposed. If this became
recognized as conventional, men and women fit to understand each
other and love in a lasting manner, would find suitable mates more
easily, and would become united more permanently when their chains
were voluntary.
If marriages on trial became more frequent in the form of short
unions, ending with separation, this would not be a great evil, for
similar unions occur every day in a much baser form. Moreover, the
effect of legislation with regard to children would put a curb on
immorality and passion, which cause their worst effects.
If the objection is raised that this would lead immoral people to
avoid the procreation of children so as to enjoy more varied sexual
pleasures, I reply that this would be beneficial, for this anti-social
class of individuals would be eliminated by sterility, by a kind of
negative selection. We thus place two natural appetites in antagonism;
that of procreation on the one hand, and sexual enjoyment on the
other. Whoever inclines to the first, which is the higher and tends to
preserve the species, is obliged to restrain himself in the second,
without, however, falling into unnatural asceticism.