words, one out of every three or four) are sexually frigid. They
either have little or no sexual desire, or if they do have, they
experience no voluptuous sensation during the act, and never have an
orgasm. If you are unmarried, well and good. But if you are married
and happen to belong to the frigid type, then _don't inform your
husband of the fact_. It may lead to great and permanent trouble. Some
husbands don't care. Some are even glad if their wives are frigid.
They can then consult their own wishes in the matter, they can have
intercourse whenever they want and _the way they want_. They do not
have to accommodate themselves to their wives' ways, they do not have
to prolong the act until she gets the orgasm, etc. In short, some
husbands consider a frigid wife a blessing, a God-sent treasure. But,
as I mentioned several times before, in sexual matters every man is a
law unto himself, and some men feel extremely bad and displeased when
they find out that their wives have "no feeling." Some become furious,
some become disgusted. Some lose all pleasure in intercourse, and some
claim to be unable to have intercourse with any woman who is not
properly responsive. Some begin to go to other women, while some
threaten or demand a divorce (of course, such men cannot really love
their wives; they may use their wives' frigidity as an _excuse_ to get
rid of them).
Now, a man has no way of knowing whether a woman has a feeling during
the act or not, whether or no she enjoys it, whether or no she has an
orgasm. These are subjective feelings, and the man cannot know them
unless you tell him. If you belong to the independent kind, if you
scorn simulation and deceit, if, as the price of being perfectly
truthful, you are willing if necessary to part with your husband or
give him a divorce, well and good. You are a free human being, and
nobody has a right to tell you what to do with your body. But if you
care for your husband, if you care for your home and perhaps children,
and do not want any disruption, then the only thing for you to do is
not to apprise your husband of your frigid condition. And it won't
hurt you to simulate a feeling which you do not experience, and even
to imitate the orgasm. He won't be any the wiser, he will enjoy you
more, and nobody will be injured by your little deception, which is
after all a species of white lie, and is nobody's business but your
own. An innocent deception which hurts nobody, but, on the contrary,
benefits all concerned, is perfectly permissible.
It may seem rather strange publicly to give advice to deceive and to
simulate. And it is undoubtedly the first time that this advice has
been given in print. But as I have only one religion--the greatest
happiness of the greatest number--I repeat that I can see nothing
wrong in advising something which benefits everybody (concerned) and
hurts nobody. More than one household which was threatened with
disruption was preserved safe and sound by a little simple advice
which I gave to the wife, without the husband's knowledge. He was
satisfied, and things after that ran smoothly.
Some women are afraid to simulate a voluptuous or orgastic feeling,
because they think the husband can discover whether their feeling is
genuine or they are only simulating. (Women, and men too, have funny
ideas on sexual subjects). This is not so. A notorious demi-mondaine,
who was greatly sought because she was known to be so "passionate,"
confessed that not once in her life did she enjoy intercourse or
experience an orgasm. But her mother, who also suffered with absolute
frigidity, taught her to simulate passion, telling her that in that
way she could make barrels of money; which she did.
It is deplorable that wives--or husbands--should ever be obliged to
have recourse to deception or simulation; perfect frankness should be
the ideal to be striven after. But under our present social conditions
and with the present moral code, an occasional white lie is the lesser
of two evils; it may be the least of a dozen evils.
CHAPTER FORTY-FOUR
RAPE
Definition of Rape--Age of Consent--Unanimous Opinion of
Experts--Exceptional Cases--False Accusation of Rape Due to
Perversion--Erotic Dreams Under Anesthesia Causing Accusations
Against Doctors and Dentists.
Having intercourse with a woman by force, without her consent, is
called rape. When the woman is not in a condition to give consent, as
when she is insane, feebleminded, unconscious or drunk, or when she is
not of the age at which she can legally give consent, it also
constitutes rape, and the punishment is the same. The age of consent
differs in different countries and in different States, but as a rule
is between sixteen and eighteen years. That is, if a girl under the
legal age of consent should give her consent or even if she should
urge the man to have intercourse with her the man would be punished
just as if he had committed rape.
The punishment for rape is very severe in all civilized countries and
ranges from ten years' imprisonment to life imprisonment, while in
some States in this Union the punishment is death.
It is not my intention to go into an exhaustive discussion of this
painful subject. In this brief chapter I merely wish to bring out two
facts.
First, that it is the almost unanimous opinion of all experts that it
is practically impossible for a man to commit rape on a normal adult
girl or woman if she really offers all the resistance of which she is
capable. Of course, if the man knocks the woman down with a blow,
rendering her unconscious, that is a different matter. But where no
brutality is used by the man, and the woman offers all the resistance
she is capable of, rape is practically impossible. It is, however,
possible that in some cases the girl may be so paralyzed by fear as to
be incapable of offering any resistance. When the man threatens her
with death or severe bodily injury, then it is rape even if she offers
no resistance.
The second point is that it has been established that of the many
accusations of rape brought before the courts _most_ are false. Out of
a hundred cases only about ten are true. The rest are false. This
false accusation of rape is due to a peculiar perversion with which
some women suffer. Some of the cases are due to hysteria, to
imagination, the women really believing that rape or an attempt at
rape was committed on them, while investigation shows the accusation
to be entirely false. Many accusations of rape are due to a desire
for revenge or merely to motives of blackmail.
Careful doctors and dentists will refuse to give laughing gas or
another anesthetic to women except in the presence of others, because,
as is well known, an anesthetic often causes in women erotic dreams
and sensations and makes them believe that the doctor was committing
or about to commit an indecent assault on them, and when they come out
of the anesthetic they may be so sure of the reality of their dream
that they will bring a complaint against the doctor. Many men have
suffered disgrace and imprisonment and have had their lives ruined or
even paid the death penalty on account of false accusations against
them by either pervert, hysterical, revengeful or blackmailing women.
CHAPTER FORTY-FIVE
THE SINGLE STANDARD OF SEXUAL MORALITY
Chastity--Double Standard of Morality--Attempt to Abolish Double
Standard--Late Marriages and Chastity in Men--Harmful Advice
Given to Young Women--Chastity in Men Not Always Due to Moral
Principles--Chaste Men and Satisfactory Husbands--A Statement by
Professor Freud--A Statement by Professor Michels--What a Girl
has a Right to Demand of Her Future Husband--Three Cases Showing
Disastrous Effects of Wrong Teachings.
When a man marries a girl he expects her to be chaste, that is, a
virgin, without any sexual experiences. Of men, the same chastity is
not expected as a general thing. As long as a man is healthy, free
from venereal disease, his previous sexual experiences do not
constitute a barrier to his marriage. This is what is known as the
double or duplex standard of sex morality.
During the past few years a number of high-minded and well-meaning men
and women have been trying to abolish this double standard and to
introduce a single standard of morality. That is, they are demanding
that the man going to the marriage bed should be just as chaste, just
as virginal as his wife is. Whether or no the efforts of these good
men and women will ever be crowned with success we will leave open.
Whether or no it is even desirable that their efforts _should_ be
crowned with success we will also leave open. A complete discussion of
these questions belongs to a more advanced book on sexual ethics. Here
I will merely say that, taking into consideration the fact that the
sexual instinct in boys awakens fully at the age of fifteen or
sixteen, and that marriage at the present time, particularly among the
professional classes, is an impossibility before the age of
twenty-eight, thirty, or thirty-five, it seems to be impossible and
undesirable to expect that men should live a perfectly chaste life
until they enter matrimony, no matter how late that event may take
place.
Those who have made a study of the sex instinct in the male seem to
think that chastity in normal, healthy men up to the age of thirty or
thereabouts is an impossibility, and where it is accomplished it is
accomplished at the expense of the physical, mental, and sexual health
of the individual. But be it as it may, and leaving disputed questions
out of discussion, the fact remains that the vast majority of men of
the present day do indulge in sex relations before marriage. And
people that are urging upon our young women to refuse to marry men who
have not been perfectly chaste are doing our womanhood a very poor
service. As it is now, with all mandom to choose from, there are many,
too many, old maids. With only ten per cent. to choose from (because
it is admitted that at least 90 per cent. of all men have
ante-matrimonial relations), what would our women do? They would
practically all have to give up any hopes of being married and
becoming mothers. And if these ten per cent., who have remained chaste
to their married day, were at least a superior class of men in every
instance, there would be some compensation in that. Unfortunately,
this is far from being the case, because, as all advanced sexologists
will tell you, there is generally something wrong with a man who
remains absolutely chaste until the age of thirty, thirty-five or
forty. It isn't moral principles in all cases; it is mostly cowardice,
or sexual weakness. And sad as it may be to state, these perfectly
good, chaste men do not generally make satisfactory husbands, and
their wives are not apt to be the happiest ones. I fully agree with
Professor Freud in his statement "that sexual abstinence does not help
to build up energetic, independent men of action, original thinkers,
bold advocates of freedom and reform, but rather goody-goody
weaklings." And still more to the purpose is the statement of
Professor Michels, who says:
"The desire that one's daughter may marry a man who, like herself, and
on an equal footing, will gain in marriage his first experience of the
most sacred mysteries of the sexual life, is one which _may lead to
profound disillusionments_. Even if to-day the demand for chaste young
men is extremely restricted, the supply is yet more so, and the
article _is of such an inferior quality_ that in actual practice the
attempt to satisfy this desire is likely to lead to results which will
fail altogether to correspond to the hopes inspired by a contemplation
of the abstract idea of purity. Many physically intact individuals of
both sexes _are far more contaminated_ than those who have had actual
sexual experience. Others again, superior in the abstract, and from
the physically sexual aspect, are _ethically inferior to the
unchaste_, so that the union with these latter would be more likely to
prove happy than a union with those who are nominally pure." And
further, "Careful fathers of marriageable daughters, who seek this
virginity in their sons-in-law, will, if they find it, seldom find it
a guarantee for the simultaneous possession of solid moral qualities."
All a girl has a right to demand is that her future husband be in good
health, physically and sexually, and that he be free from venereal
disease. His previous sexual life, provided he is a man of fine moral
character in general, is no concern of hers. Even if the man was
unfortunate enough to have contracted gonorrhea, that fact should
constitute no bar to marriage, provided he is completely cured of it.
The only exception is that of syphilis. The girl has a right to refuse
absolutely to enter into union with any man who has been infected with
syphilis unless she is willing, and does it with her eyes open, to
live her life without any children. In syphilis we can never give an
_absolute guarantee_ of cure and we have no right to subject a woman
to any danger of infection with syphilis, be the danger ever so
slight, without her knowledge and consent.
=Disastrous Effects of Wrong Teachings=
What disastrous effects wrong teaching which inoculates the minds of
our women with wrong ideas may have, the following three cases
reported briefly in _The Critic and Guide_, will show:
=Case One= was a girl of twenty-four, of well-to-do parents, a college
graduate. She was engaged to a really very nice, sympathetic young
man, who undoubtedly would have made her an excellent husband. But
during her last two years in college she became imbued with the single
standard stupidity, and "chastity for men, votes for women" became her
slogan. She asked her fiancé if he had been absolutely chaste before
he met her. He did not want to play the hypocrite, and he told her the
truth that he had not. But he assured her that he had never been
infected and that his general and sexual health was in excellent
condition. Being then in an exalted mood, she impulsively broke the
engagement, declaring that her husband will have to be as "pure" as
she was. She soon regretted her step, because she loved the man; but
pride did not let her take the initiative towards a reconciliation,
and in the meantime her former fiancé fell in love with and married
another girl. After four years had passed, and she was in danger of
becoming an old maid, she married a man considerably beneath her
socially and intellectually, and in every way inferior to her former
fiancé. Her marriage is not a happy one.
=Case two= is similar to case one, except that the young lady in
question--now not so very young--is still living in single
blessedness, and the chances of her ever being a wife or even
somebody's sweetheart are rapidly vanishing. I might add that her
fiancé whom she discarded because of his lack of virginity was a very
bright young physician, who is now very successful and very happily
married. She I hear is a very unhappy person, in danger of sinking
into a permanent state of melancholia. And she had been of a very
jolly disposition.
=Case three= is peculiar in that the fiancé _was_ absolutely chaste.
She asked him, and he told her that he had never had any relations
with anybody and he never had a trace or suspicion of any venereal
disease. The young lady was not satisfied. She wanted her fiancé to
bring her a certificate from a specialist testifying to that effect.
The young man told her that it was foolish, that he would not subject
himself to the expense and annoyance of a number of tests when he
_knew_ that not only did he not have any venereal disease, but that
there was no possibility of his getting any. No, that did not satisfy
her. She became suspicious. "If you have nothing to fear, why do you
object to bringing a certificate?" "I have nothing to fear, but I
demand that you respect me and trust me sufficiently to believe that I
am telling the truth when I declare a thing with such positiveness. If
you do not have that much confidence in me now, our future life does
not hold much promise of success." One word led to another, and then
he broke the engagement, as any self-respecting man under the
circumstances would. He is married, and she is not and probably never
will be. Three young lives ruined by perverse teachings.
CHAPTER FORTY-SIX
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MAN'S AND WOMAN'S SEX AND LOVE LIFE
Seemingly Contradictory Statements--Faulty Interpretations of
Words Sexual Instinct and Love--Difference in Manifestations of
Male and Female Sexual Instincts--Man's Sex Instinct Grosser Than
Woman's--Awakening of Sexual Desire in the Boy and in the
Girl--Woman's Desire for Caresses--Man's Main Desire for Sexual
Relations--Normal Sex Relations as Means of Holding a Man--A
Physiological Reason Why Man is Held--Man and Physical
Love--Woman and Spiritual Love--Preliminaries of Sexual
Intercourse in Men and Women--Physical Attributes--Mental and
Spiritual Qualities--Difference Between Love and "Being in
Love"--Love as a Stimulus to Man--When the Man Loves--When the
Woman Loves--Man's More Engrossing Interests--Lovemaking Irksome
to Man--Man's Polygamous Tendencies--Woman Single-affectioned in
Her Sex and Love Life--Man and Woman Biologically Different.
In reading books or listening to lectures on sex, you will meet with
statements which will seem to you contradictory. One time you will
read or hear that the sex instinct is much more powerfully developed
in man than it is in woman; next time you will come across the
statement that sex plays a much more important rôle in women than it
does in men. One time you will hear that men are oversexed, that they
are by nature polygamous and promiscuous, while woman is monogamous
and as a rule sexually frigid; the next time you will be assured that
without love a woman's life is nothing, and you will be confronted
with Byron's well-known and oft quoted two lines: Man's love is of
man's life a thing apart, 'Tis woman's whole existence.
These contradictions are only apparent and result from two facts:
first, that the words sex or sexual instinct and love are used
indiscriminately and interchangeably as if they were synonymous terms,
which they are not; second, there is failure to bear in mind the
essential differences in the natures and manifestations of the sexual
instincts in the male and the female. If these differences are made
clear, the apparent contradictions will disappear. The outstanding
fact to bear in mind is that in man the sex instinct bears a more
sensual, a more physical, a coarser and grosser character, if you have
no objection to these adjectives, than it does in woman. In women it
is finer, more spiritual, more platonic, to use this stereotyped and
incorrect term. In men the sex manifestations are more centralized,
more local, more concentrated in the sex organs; in women they are
more diffused throughout the body. In a boy of fifteen the libido
sexualis may be fully developed, he may have powerful erections and a
strong desire for normal sexual relations; in a girl of fifteen there
may not be a trace of any purely sexual desire; and this _lack_ of
desire for _physical_ sex relations may manifest itself in women up to
the age of twenty or twenty-five (something that we never see in
normal men); in fact, women of twenty-five and even older, who have
not been stimulated and whose curiosity has not been aroused by
novels, pictures, and tales of their married companions, may not
experience any sexual desire until several months after marriage. But
while their desire for actual sexual relations awakens much later than
it does in men, their desire for love, for caresses, for hugging, for
close friendship, for love letters, awakens much earlier than in men,
and occupies a greater part in their life; they think of love more
during their waking hours, and they dream of it more than men do.
A man--always bear in mind that when speaking of men and women I
always speak of the average; exceptions in either direction will be
found in both sexes--a man, I say, will generally tire of paying
attentions to a woman if he feels that they will not eventually lead
to the biologic goal--sexual relations. A woman can keep up with a man
for years without any sexual intercourse, being fully satisfied or
more or less satisfied with the sexual substitutes--embraces and
kisses.
And here is as good a place as any to refer to the notion so
assiduously inculcated in the minds of young women, that a persistent
refusal of man's demands is a sure way of keeping a man's affections;
that as soon as man has satisfied his desires, he has no further use
for the girl. This may be the case with the lowest dregs--morally--of
the male sex; it is the opposite of true of the male sex as a whole.
And I believe that Marcel Prevost was the first one to point it out
(in his _Le Jardin Secret_). Nothing will hold a man's affections so
surely as normal sex relations. And the cause of this is not, as might
be surmised, merely a moral one, the man considering himself in honor
and duty bound to stick to the woman whose body he possessed. No,
there is a much stronger and surer reason: the reason is of a
physiological character. There is born a strong physical attraction
which in the man's subconsciousness plays a stronger rôle than honor
and duty. Excesses of course must be avoided, for excesses lead to
satiety, and satiety is just as inimical to love as is excitement
without any satisfaction.
=Choice Between Physical and Spiritual Love=
But to return to our thesis: the difference between man's and woman's
sex and love life. If a man had to make his _choice_ between physical
love, i.e., actual sex relations and spiritual love, i.e., love
making, kisses, love letters, etc., he would generally choose the
former. If a woman had to _choose_, she would generally choose the
latter. The man and the woman would prefer both at the same time:
physical and spiritual love. But that is not the question. The
question is: if it came to a _choice_; and then the results would be
as I have just indicated. The correctness of my statements will be
corroborated by anybody having some knowledge of human sexuality. A
man can fully enjoy sexual intercourse without any preliminaries; with
a woman the preliminaries are of the utmost importance, and when these
are lacking she is often incapable of experiencing any pleasure. Nay,
the feeling of pleasure is not infrequently replaced by a feeling of
dissatisfaction and even disgust. A man cares more for the physical
and less for the mental and spiritual attributes of his sexual
partner; with the woman just the opposite is the case. I am leaving
out of consideration sexual impotence, because this is a real
disability, and a man suffering with it only irritates the woman
without satisfying her. For this she will not stand. But where the man
is sexually potent--he may be aged and homely--his other physical
attributes play but a small rôle with woman; his mental and spiritual
qualities count with her for a good deal more. While a woman may be
able to give a man perfect sexual satisfaction, and she may have an
angelic character, if her body is not all that could be desired, the
man will be dissatisfied and unhappy.
=Love in Man Occupies Subordinate Place=