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.
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 hiswife 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 effortsshouldbe 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 havenot 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 whichmay 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 articleis of such an inferior qualitythat 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 sexesare far more contaminatedthan those who have had actual sexual experience. Others again, superior in the abstract, and from the physically sexual aspect, areethically 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 finemoral 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 anabsolute guaranteeof 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.
What disastrous effects wrong teaching which inoculates the minds of our women with wrong ideas may have, the following three cases reported briefly inThe Critic and Guide, will show:
Case Onewas 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 beenabsolutely 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 twois 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 threeis peculiar in that the fiancéwasabsolutely 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 heknewthat 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.
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.
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 andpromiscuous, 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 girlof fifteen there may not be a trace of any purely sexual desire; and thislackof desire forphysicalsex 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 hisLe 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.
But to return to our thesis: the difference between man's and woman's sex and love life. If a man had to make hischoicebetween physical love, i.e., actualsex relations and spiritual love, i.e., love making, kisses, love letters, etc., he would generally choose the former. If a woman had tochoose, 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 achoice; 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.
Try as we may, we cannot get away from the fact that in man's life love occupies a subordinate place. I am speaking now of love, and not of "being in love." Being in love, as pointed out in another place, is a distinctly pathological phenomenon, akin to insanity, and when a man is in love it may engross every fiber of him, it may preoccupy every minute of his waking hours, he may neglect all his work and shirk all his duties, in fact he is apt to make a much bigger fool of himself than a woman is under similar circumstances. He is less patient, he has less control over himself, he is less able to suffer, he is less capable of self-sacrifice. But this, as I said, all refers to "being in love," which is an entirely different thing from loving. A man may love ever so deeply, and if his love is reciprocated he will go on with his work in a smooth, unruffled manner. He will do better work for it—love is a wonderful stimulus—but he will be perfectly satisfied if he sees his love for an hour or two every day, or even once or twice a week. And if he has important and interesting work to do, he can part with his love for three months or six months without his heart breaking. Not so with woman. A woman who loves considers every day on which she does not see her lover a day lost. And she is apt to be unhappy and inefficient in her work on such days, and she bears separation with much greater difficulty than does man. I do not think that this is due to the fact that a woman's love is always more intense than a man's; no. But he usually has other interests which occupy his thoughts and his emotions, while most women's thoughts and emotions are centered on the man they love. When a woman loves, she could and would spend all her time with the man she loves. She would never tire of love making (I am not referring here to sex relations), or merely of being in the man's proximity. To woman love is a cloyless thing. Man distinctly does tire. No matter how much he may love a woman, too much lovemaking becomes cloying to him, and he wants to get away. Even mere proximity, if too prolonged, becomes irksome to him, and he begins to fret and fidget, and pull at his chains, even if the chains are but of gossamer. Woman should know these facts and act accordingly.
We now come to the last point in our discussion: the polygamous or varietist tendencies in the male versus the monogamous tendencies in the female. No matter what our moralists, who try to fit the facts to their theories instead of fitting their theories to the facts, may say, the fact remains that man is a strongly polygamous or varietist animal. That many men live through their lives without having had relations with any women except their wives is cheerfully admitted. I assert this in spite of the incredulous smiles of all the cynics and roués in the world. I have known personally a great number of such men. But that they do it without any struggle, and in some cases a very severe struggle, is emphatically denied. And that hundreds of thousands of men are unequal to the struggle—or do not care to engage in any struggle—and live a sexually promiscuous life—anybody who knows anything about life as it is will testify. And his testimony will be corroborated by the reports of the vice commissions and the statements of disreputable-house keepers. To a great percentage of men a strictly monogamous life is either irksome, painful, disagreeable or an utter impossibility. While the number of women who are not satisfied with one mate is exceedingly small.
A man may love a woman deeply and sincerely and at the same time make love to another woman, or have sexual relations with her or even with prostitutes. It is quite acommonthing with men. It is quite a rare thing with women, though it may happen. As iterated and reiterated time and again, there are always exceptional cases, but we are speaking of the average and not of the exception. Theruleis that in her sex and love life woman is much more loyal, much more faithful, much more single-affectioned than is her lord and master—man.
Is she on account of it better than, superior to, man? It is futile to speak of better or worse, of superior or inferior. This is the way they are. This is the way man and woman have been made by nature, by a thousand centuries of heredity, by a thousand centuries of environment. The differences lie in biological roots, and it is futile to fight and rail against nature and biology. The proper thing to do is to recognize the facts and make the best of them. To act the part of the ostrich, deliberately to ignore facts which are not pleasant, may be easy, but is it wise?
Wide-spread Belief in Maternal Impressions—No Single Well-authenticated Case of Maternal Impression—Birth of Monstrosities—Ridiculous Examples Given by Physicians—So-called Shock Often a Product of Mother's Imagination—Four Cases of Alleged Maternal Impressions—Mother's Health During Pregnancy May Have Effect Upon Child's General Health.
Wide-spread Belief in Maternal Impressions—No Single Well-authenticated Case of Maternal Impression—Birth of Monstrosities—Ridiculous Examples Given by Physicians—So-called Shock Often a Product of Mother's Imagination—Four Cases of Alleged Maternal Impressions—Mother's Health During Pregnancy May Have Effect Upon Child's General Health.
It is believed by many people that strong impressions made upon the mother during pregnancy may produce marks or defects in the child. This belief dates from earliest antiquity, and is widespread among all races. The belief particularly refers to the emotions of fright or sudden surprise; thus it is believed that if a woman during pregnancy should be frightened by some animal, the child might carry the mark of the animal upon its body, or it might even be born in the shape of the animal. Thousands of suchallegedcases are given in proof. There is hardly a layman, or, particularly, a laywoman, who does not claim to know of authentic cases of maternal impressions.
It is a thankless task to try to shatterwell-established beliefs, and I do not hope to succeed in persuading all my readers that all the stories and examples of maternal impressions are untrue and lack scientific foundation. But I consider it my duty to state my belief, whether you accept it or not. In my opinion there is not a singlewell-authenticatedcase of maternal impression. There is hardly a case of defect or monstrosity where the cause is supposed to be due to maternal impression, which cannot be explained in some natural way, or simply by accident. Thousands of women are frightened or shocked by disagreeable sights, by crippled men, by animals, and still their children are born perfectly normal. On the other hand, many marked, or defective, or monstrous children are born in which no maternal impressions can be given as the cause. So why can it not happen when the mother was frightened by something during her pregnancy, and the child was born with some mark or defect, that the latter was simply an accident and not theresultof the impression? Because a thingfollowsanother thing it does not mean that it wascausedby that other thing.
Many of the cases given as examples, and by physicians too, are so ridiculous that no scientific man can give them the slightest credence for one moment. When a physician (Dr. Thomas J.Savage) tells us that he attended a lady who had been frightened by a large green frog at or about the middle of pregnancy, and that she gave birth to a monstrosity, the head of which was that of a large frog in shape, with the eyes and mouth and even the coloring of a frog, then he is either telling an untruth, or he shows himself as ignorant and credulous as any illiterate old woman can be. The doctor should know that at the middle of pregnancy the child isfully formedand that there is no possibility of an already formed human being changing its shape into that of an animal. Another example given by the same doctor, and showing the calibre of his mentality, is that of a child which, when an infant, not old enough to walk, "would crawl over the floor and pick up little objects such as pins, tacks, small beads, without the slightest difficulty or fumbling." The reason for this "remarkable" skill the good doctor ascribes to the fact that four months before the birth of this child the mother had an outing in the woods and had derived great enjoyment from gathering hickory nuts which she found scattered among the leaves with which the ground was thickly covered!
Very often the so-called shock or fright which the mother experiences during gestation is simply a product of her imagination. We know of many caseswhere the mothers never mentioned that anything happened to them, and only after the child was born with some kind of mark or defect they began to hunt for causes and claimed that such and such a thing happened to them while they were pregnant, but on close investigation the alleged event was found to have originated in the mother's brain.
In short, while the subject of maternal impressions is an interesting one and demands further investigation, there is at the present time no scientific justification for the belief in maternal impressions. Particularly must we scout any stories of maternal impressions during the latter part of pregnancy, during the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, or ninth month. Because after the child is fully formed no mental or psychic impressions can make birthmarks on it, amputate its limbs, or convert it into any sort of monstrosity.
After the above was written and ready for the printer I came across four cases of alleged maternal impressions in a book by Laura A. Calhoun ("Sex Determination and Its Practical Application"). The first three cases the author relates without any comment, taking them evidently for pure coin. The fourth case the lady investigated, and she is frank to say that what seemed at first as a clear case of maternal impression was nothing of the kind butmerely a case of heredity. In order to break the monotony for a little while I will reproduce here the four cases in the lady's own words.
The first was that of "a mother who, during pregnancy, was obliged for a certain continuous time to eat sheep's flesh. She took such a sudden abhorrence and distaste of the meat that she only ate it rather than go meat hungry. After the birth of her baby she recovered from this spasmodic distaste of this particular meat. But the child from its first meat-eating days could not endure the smell or the taste of the sheep's flesh. Whenever the child attempted to eat that meat, the result was always the same—indigestion and want of assimilation, and usually attended with acute indigestion cramps."In the second case "another pregnant mother's particular 'longing' was for mackerel. Her baby was born with what seemed to be the outlines, in a brownish color, of a mackerel on its side, and which design never faded in after years, and the child's ability to eat and digest mackerel was more than normal."The third case: "The 'longing' of another pregnant mother was for brains to eat. This was provided for her. But as she was slowly approaching the dish of deliciously prepared food, quivering with delight and with the eagerness of a child to be eating it, a cat sprang to the plate and before she could prevent it ate the brains and licked the plate clean.She wept as a child might have done, and was as unhappy and brokenhearted over this fate of the brains food for which she had waited with such keen anticipation of satisfaction as a little child might have been. Shortly after that the little baby was born, and upon one of its shoulder-blades was a representation of the mess of brains, designed in brownish outlines, and which did not fade as the child grew up."The fourth case: "There lived in a little house in the midst of a flower garden, that in its turn gave into a wide-spreading orchard, a loving and loyal husband and wife with their firstborn child. The wife was now in the first months of pregnancy with her second child. Their nearest neighbor was a Mexican family, among the members of which was a dashing young man of about twenty-two. He and his sister and mother were frequent visitors to this little household of three. But the young Mexican was the most frequent, and the husband's being home or not did not disconcert him. Men of affairs must need spend morning hours, and sometimes afternoon hours, too, inside of offices, but wealthy and aristocratic young Mexicans ride horses all day, decked out with silver, leather, and velvet trappings, both horse and rider. It was this lady's custom to walk among her flowers and fruit trees. And it became the custom of this young caballero to suddenly appear before her during these promenades. Her startled eyes would no sooner perceive the vision of his blazing, dark eyes fastened upon her, thanby one pretext and another she made him understand that he was dismissed, and would herself retire into the house. When she would be about to open a gate, suddenly and unexpectedly the young Mexican would appear on the other side and with gracious suavity open the gate, always his passionate, dark eyes upon her, though his words were reserved and polite. If the husband were present, it was still the same. By every means possible he would prolong his stay.One summer day this lady was lying on her couch on the veranda, sleeping, her eyes covered over. At that time she was having an eye malady that was epidemic in that part of the country. She heard footsteps approaching, but did not disturb herself, as she supposed it was her husband. After some time she suddenly threw off the covering from her face, and there to her astonished eyes stood the young Mexican, intensely looking down upon her with deep concern. At that moment the husband arrived, and the young man told him of a weed growing in that locality that he said would cure the eye malady. When the leaves of this plant were crushed there oozed a yellowish milk; with about a half-dozen applications of this milk to the sore eyes they were healed.After that the young caballero would ride up and down, Mexican fashion, in front of the house, drawing rein whenever he could get a glimpse of the lady or a word with her. This never failed to annoy her, and also to strike a sudden, sharp terror into herheart. Always his appearance was most unexpected, and always accompanied by the rapt, passionate, dark gaze. Though he was a most clean-souled young man.Afterward, when the baby was born, one of the child's eyes was marked by the color and fire of the dashing Spaniard's eyes, while its other eye was a calmish blue-gray eye. This was all the more remarkable as neither of the parents of the child had such eyes. Was it a case of maternal impression?Upon investigation I found that the grandparents of the baby's mother had just such eyes as the baby. The grandfather's were big, dark, flashing eyes, and the grandmother's the mild, blue-gray eyes. So 'bang!' went the theory of mental impression, and in its place came the physical law of reversion."
The first was that of "a mother who, during pregnancy, was obliged for a certain continuous time to eat sheep's flesh. She took such a sudden abhorrence and distaste of the meat that she only ate it rather than go meat hungry. After the birth of her baby she recovered from this spasmodic distaste of this particular meat. But the child from its first meat-eating days could not endure the smell or the taste of the sheep's flesh. Whenever the child attempted to eat that meat, the result was always the same—indigestion and want of assimilation, and usually attended with acute indigestion cramps."
In the second case "another pregnant mother's particular 'longing' was for mackerel. Her baby was born with what seemed to be the outlines, in a brownish color, of a mackerel on its side, and which design never faded in after years, and the child's ability to eat and digest mackerel was more than normal."
The third case: "The 'longing' of another pregnant mother was for brains to eat. This was provided for her. But as she was slowly approaching the dish of deliciously prepared food, quivering with delight and with the eagerness of a child to be eating it, a cat sprang to the plate and before she could prevent it ate the brains and licked the plate clean.She wept as a child might have done, and was as unhappy and brokenhearted over this fate of the brains food for which she had waited with such keen anticipation of satisfaction as a little child might have been. Shortly after that the little baby was born, and upon one of its shoulder-blades was a representation of the mess of brains, designed in brownish outlines, and which did not fade as the child grew up."
The fourth case: "There lived in a little house in the midst of a flower garden, that in its turn gave into a wide-spreading orchard, a loving and loyal husband and wife with their firstborn child. The wife was now in the first months of pregnancy with her second child. Their nearest neighbor was a Mexican family, among the members of which was a dashing young man of about twenty-two. He and his sister and mother were frequent visitors to this little household of three. But the young Mexican was the most frequent, and the husband's being home or not did not disconcert him. Men of affairs must need spend morning hours, and sometimes afternoon hours, too, inside of offices, but wealthy and aristocratic young Mexicans ride horses all day, decked out with silver, leather, and velvet trappings, both horse and rider. It was this lady's custom to walk among her flowers and fruit trees. And it became the custom of this young caballero to suddenly appear before her during these promenades. Her startled eyes would no sooner perceive the vision of his blazing, dark eyes fastened upon her, thanby one pretext and another she made him understand that he was dismissed, and would herself retire into the house. When she would be about to open a gate, suddenly and unexpectedly the young Mexican would appear on the other side and with gracious suavity open the gate, always his passionate, dark eyes upon her, though his words were reserved and polite. If the husband were present, it was still the same. By every means possible he would prolong his stay.
One summer day this lady was lying on her couch on the veranda, sleeping, her eyes covered over. At that time she was having an eye malady that was epidemic in that part of the country. She heard footsteps approaching, but did not disturb herself, as she supposed it was her husband. After some time she suddenly threw off the covering from her face, and there to her astonished eyes stood the young Mexican, intensely looking down upon her with deep concern. At that moment the husband arrived, and the young man told him of a weed growing in that locality that he said would cure the eye malady. When the leaves of this plant were crushed there oozed a yellowish milk; with about a half-dozen applications of this milk to the sore eyes they were healed.
After that the young caballero would ride up and down, Mexican fashion, in front of the house, drawing rein whenever he could get a glimpse of the lady or a word with her. This never failed to annoy her, and also to strike a sudden, sharp terror into herheart. Always his appearance was most unexpected, and always accompanied by the rapt, passionate, dark gaze. Though he was a most clean-souled young man.
Afterward, when the baby was born, one of the child's eyes was marked by the color and fire of the dashing Spaniard's eyes, while its other eye was a calmish blue-gray eye. This was all the more remarkable as neither of the parents of the child had such eyes. Was it a case of maternal impression?
Upon investigation I found that the grandparents of the baby's mother had just such eyes as the baby. The grandfather's were big, dark, flashing eyes, and the grandmother's the mild, blue-gray eyes. So 'bang!' went the theory of mental impression, and in its place came the physical law of reversion."
I do not wish to be misunderstood as claiming that a mother's condition during pregnancy has no effect on the child, and that she need therefore take no precautions and pay no particular attention to her health and her feelings. This is not so. But what I do want to convey is this: That if a mother's health during pregnancy is bad, if she is a prey to worry and anxiety, if she was subjected to great fright or to a shock, then the child's general health may suffer. It may be stillborn, or the mother may have a miscarriage. But it will not produce those specific marks, deformities and monstrosities whichare commonly supposed to be the results of maternal impressions.
If I lay somewhat special stress upon the subject of maternal impressions, it is because I pity the poor mothers and want to spare them as much as possible unnecessary worry and anxiety. Besides I want them to believe in the truth and not in error.
Marriage as an Ideal Institution—Monogamic Marriage—Some Reasons for Husbands' Deviations—Importance of First Few Weeks of Married Life—Necessity for Understanding at Beginning—Preventing and Breaking Habits—The Wife's Individuality—Husbands Who are Childish, Not Vicious—Wife's Interest in Husband's Affairs—The "Slob" Husband—The Well-groomed Husband—Bad Odor from the Mouth—Odors from Other Parts of the Body—Treatment for Bad Odor from Perspiration—A Beneficial Powder—Advice Regarding Flirting—Dainty Underwear—Fine External Clothes and Cheap and Soiled Underwear—Delicate Adjustments of Sex Act Required with Some Men—Wife Who Discusses Her Husband's Foibles—A Professional Secret—A Case of Temporary Impotence—The Wife's Indiscretion—The Disastrous Result—A Big Stomach—The Wife's Attitude Towards the Marital Relation—Behavior Preliminary to and During the Act—Congenital Frigidity—Prudish and Vicious Ideas About the Sex Act—Sexual Intercourse for Procreative Purposes Only—Fear of Pregnancy on the Part of the Wife—The Remedy—Other Causes—Wife who Makes too Frequent Demands—Sacrificing the Future to the Present—Esthetic Considerations.
Marriage as an Ideal Institution—Monogamic Marriage—Some Reasons for Husbands' Deviations—Importance of First Few Weeks of Married Life—Necessity for Understanding at Beginning—Preventing and Breaking Habits—The Wife's Individuality—Husbands Who are Childish, Not Vicious—Wife's Interest in Husband's Affairs—The "Slob" Husband—The Well-groomed Husband—Bad Odor from the Mouth—Odors from Other Parts of the Body—Treatment for Bad Odor from Perspiration—A Beneficial Powder—Advice Regarding Flirting—Dainty Underwear—Fine External Clothes and Cheap and Soiled Underwear—Delicate Adjustments of Sex Act Required with Some Men—Wife Who Discusses Her Husband's Foibles—A Professional Secret—A Case of Temporary Impotence—The Wife's Indiscretion—The Disastrous Result—A Big Stomach—The Wife's Attitude Towards the Marital Relation—Behavior Preliminary to and During the Act—Congenital Frigidity—Prudish and Vicious Ideas About the Sex Act—Sexual Intercourse for Procreative Purposes Only—Fear of Pregnancy on the Part of the Wife—The Remedy—Other Causes—Wife who Makes too Frequent Demands—Sacrificing the Future to the Present—Esthetic Considerations.
Whether marriage in its present form is an ideal institution destined to endure forever, whether it is in need of radical reforms before it can be considered ideal, or whether it has fundamental irremediable defects, are questions which we are not goingto discuss here. The fact is that at the present time the greatest part of the adult population of the world is married; and the part that isn't would like to be. And the greater part of civilized humanity living in a state of monogamic marriage, it behooves us to make the best of it, to get out of it the greatest amount of happiness that we can, obviate as much unhappiness as possible, and to do everything in our power to make it permanent. Separation or divorce are remedies of last resort, and people have recourse to them when they are at the end of their tether. But the proper thing to do is to avoid the necessity of having to have recourse to them. And I believe that a careful, thoughtful perusal of this chapter will help husband and wife to get along better, to avoid unnecessary friction and to retain the mutual physical and spiritual attraction which we call Love for a longer period than might otherwise be the case.
I have the confidence and listen to the intimate confessions of more men and woman probably than any other physician in America, or perhaps in the world. For reasons easily understood they tell me things which they would not think of telling to their regular physician. I have learned of many of the reasons, which in many families led first to a coolness, then to an estrangement, or to quarrels, toseparation and divorce. I know the first steps which in many instances draw the husband to another woman. And I wish to tell you, that while I firmly believe in the polygamous or rather varietist tendencies of the average man, nevertheless I am convinced that one of the great reasons why so many married men patronize prostitutes, or have mistresses or lady friends, is to be found in the wives themselves. Many wivesdrivetheir husbands to other women, and are alone responsible for their suffering, for the cooling of their husbands' affections, and perhaps even desertion. And in the following pages I will endeavor, as stated before, to point out some of the rocks and shoals on which the matrimonial bark is so often shattered, and to offer the wives some suggestions which will help them to retain their husbands' affections and perhaps even also their fidelity.
While the advice is intended primarily for wives, there will be found here and there a salutary piece of advice for husbands. Some of the advice is applicable to both partners, and as to those suggestions which concern the husband only—it will be a good thing for the wives to call their husbands' attention to them.
The first few weeks or the first few months are the most important in the life of a married couple.The stability of the marriage, the future happiness, often depend upon the things which are done or left undone during the initial weeks of married life. A certain understanding must be reached from the very beginning. If your husband does certain things which displease you and which you know should not be done, it is best to say so at the very start. It is easier to prevent the establishment of a habit than to break a habit after it has been established.
Retain Your Individuality.The first piece of advice I have to give you is:Retain your individuality. It is a trite but perfectly true observation that altogether too many men who during courtship were chivalry personified assume a dictatorial tone as soon as the knot has been tied. They think that the wife has actually ceased to exist as a separate human being, that she has been absorbed, and with the loss of her name she has lost all right to have her own opinions, her own tastes, and, of course, her own friends. Friends who are obnoxious to one of the marital partners one must give up sometimes; but do not permit your entire personality to be obscured. Explain to your husband that you are still an independent living human being. I do not say, you should at once start a fight. Nothing is more offensive to me than the militant, pugnacious woman,who wears a chip on the shoulder and is continually ready to insist on her "rights." But with gentleness and firmness much can be accomplished. And you want to remember that many husbands act the way they do, not because they are vicious, but because they are stupid or childish. Sometimes it is mere thoughtlessness. They have been brought up wrongly, and some of them sincerely imagine that by repressing the wife's personality, by blotting it out, they are acting in her interest. "It is for her own good." A serious talk with a husband will sometimes have a wonderful effect. It may sometimes change entirely the current of his thoughts. Of course if the husband is a cad, a conceited fool, or a brute, you can do nothing with him; but fortunately not all husbands belong to those categories.
Interest in Husband's Affairs.Be interested in your husband's affairs. No matter what your husband's occupation may be, you should possess enough intelligence to be able to understand what he is doing. It is almost unbelievable how little some wives know about their husband's profession or work. It is a bad thing when strange women understand your husband's work better than you do, and when he finds in them more intelligent and more sympathetic listeners. He may go to them for sympathy. If your husband is a scientist or aresearch worker or a professional man it is not necessary that you be familiar with all the details of his work, but with the general character you should be. And if you can be of assistance to him in his work, if it be only looking up references, compiling tables and statistics or merely typewriting, it will be appreciated by him, and will sometimes help to knit the bonds a bit closer.
There is another important reason for being interested in and understanding your husband's business. When the husband dies—and a man is not infrequently snatched away in the prime of youth and vigor—the wife is often left to the mercies of the cold world, without money and without a profession. If she understands the husband's business she can continue it and remain economically independent. This has reference not only to ordinary business, like stores or agencies, but to more or less specialized occupations, such for instance as publishing. We know the cases of two widows of publishers of medical journals. When their husbands died everybody was commiserating with them: what will they make a living from? But they understood the details of their husbands' business, and they kept right on. And now those journals are financially more successful than they were when the husbands were at the helm.
Wife's Behavior Toward Sexual Relations.I am now coming to a delicate subject. But, delicate though it is, it must be dealt with unflinchingly, because it is probably responsible for more male infidelity than all other causes combined. I speak of the relation of the wife to her marital duties, in other words, to sexual relations. Too many women regard the sexual act as a nuisance, as an ordeal, as something disagreeable to get through with as quickly as possible; they regard the husband's demands in this line as an imposition, as unfair or even as brutal; and their behavior preliminary to and during the act is such as to cool the ardor of any refined and sensitive man. The reasons for this behavior on the part of many wives are manifold; this is not the place to consider them in detail. I will allude to them briefly. One great cause is congenital frigidity. The woman is cold, frigid, has no desire for sex relations and experiences no pleasure, no sensation from them. Such women are not to blame; they are to be pitied. But even they can behave so as not to repel their husbands. (SeeChapter XLIII).
Another great cause is the vicious, prudish bringing up, by which the sex act is regarded as something unclean, indecent, animal-like, brutal. Such Women need a good "talking-to," and if they areonly not natural born fools, one good explanation often fixes matters. On a par with this general prudishness is the infamous idea promulgated by a few semi-insane, mentally decrepit men and women, that sexual intercourse is for the purpose of propagation only. That only when a child is wanted is the relation permissible; at all other times it is a sin, an "act of prostitution," an offense in the eyes of God, etc., etc. Of course if the wife has such ideas the husband deserves little sympathy. A man should know what ideas the woman entertains whom he is going to make his wife and the mother of his children. But, unfortunately, this, the most important subject of sex and sexuality, is never touched upon by the engaged couple (it would be so indelicate!), and after they are married they often find themselves at opposite poles. Here also a good heart-to-heart talk will do a world of good. I have had several such cases where a little conversation or even a letter saved the couple from disruption.
In many cases the cause of refusal is fear of pregnancy. In this case the wife is right. But the remedy is simple: give her full instruction in the use of contraceptive measures. Other causes are: excessive masturbation, vaginismus, local malformation, inflammation, etc. But whatever the causesof the wife's "bad behavior" may be, they are all amenable to treatment. Some need medical treatment, some psychic treatment, and some nothing but just a common-sense, heart-to-heart talk.
And I would emphasize: Do not repel your husbands when they ask for sexual favors—at least do not repel them too often. Households in which relations are had rather frequently and in which the wives lend their full and eager participation are happier households than those in which the sexual act is indulged in rarely, and with grumbling and side-remarks on the part of the wife.
But of course you should not go to the other extreme either. You should not make too frequent demands upon your husband. With a man the act means a good deal more than it does with a woman; it entails a great deal more of physical and mental exhaustion, and a wife who is unreasonable in this respect is sowing the seeds of discord and unhappiness. She is sacrificing the future to the present. The husband is apt to become afflicted with satiety or impotence—and the wife may have to lead a life of continence for much longer than she would have had to if she had been moderate. In no department of life is moderation so important as in sex life. Non-use, insufficient use and excessive use are all bad. A mutually joyful, eager and moderatelyfrequent participation in the sexual act will contribute most to a happy and long life.
Dainty Underwear.This may be considered too delicate or too trifling a subject to discuss in an important sex book. But nothing is too delicate or too trifling that concerns human happiness, and you will believe me if I tell you that nice underwear or dainty lingerie plays a very important rôle in marital life. And every married woman should have as fine and as dainty underwear as she can possibly afford. A fine or elaborate nightgown may be more important than an expensive skirt or hat. Unfortunately too many women ignore this fact. Externally they will be well dressed, while their petticoats, drawers and undershirts will be of the commonest quality and of questionable freshness and immaculateness. And if anything in a woman's toilet should be immaculately fresh and clean it is, I emphasize, her underwear. Silk and lace and delicate batiste should be preferred, if they can be afforded, and attention should be paid to the color. As a rule, a delicate pink is the color that most men prefer. The sex act with some men requires the most delicate adjustments, and the condition of the underwear may determine the man's desire and ability or inability to accomplish the act. I therefore repeat: whether you are newly married or have beenmarried a quarter of a century, be sure that your underwear is the very best that your means will allow you, and that it is always sweet, fresh and dainty. It will help you to retain the affection of your husband. I know that some allegedly wise ones will scoff at this statement. They may say that an affection that may be influenced by the kind and condition of underwear is not worth having or retaining. But what do these wise ones know! What do they know of the numerous subtle influences which gradually either strengthen or undermine our affections? Follow this advice and you will be grateful.
Do Not Offend Against Esthetics.Some women think that because they are married to their husbands they owe the latter no esthetic consideration. Things that they would be horrified to let a stranger see they do before their husband's eyes without hesitation. For instance, not to beat about the bush, though the subject is not a pleasant one, they will urinate in their husbands' presence, or they will let him see their soiled menstrual napkins, etc. Some husbands may not mind it; but some men are very sensitive—men on the whole are more esthetic than women—and an indifference towards the wife may have its origin in some vulgar or unesthetic procedure on the wife's part. The sexual act, as mentioned before, is a very delicate mechanism, and itis very easy to disarrange it. The act of micturition before the man is known in many instances to have instantly abolished the man's sexual desire which was present before. And a man told me that because he noticed in a closet a lot of rags soiled with menstrual blood he was unable to enjoy relations with his wife for several months. You may think that these are all small things, but life is made up of little things, and many a married life went smash on account of disregarding the little things.
A High Stomach.Avoid if you possibly can a high stomach, or a big stomach, or what we call in technical language a pendulous abdomen. Nothing is more fatal to woman's beauty—and to man's love—than a big stomach, and particularly a hang-down stomach. It at once takes away her youthfulness and makes her matronly—and matronliness is fatal to romance. It is not so much general stoutness that is objected to—some men, as is well known, prefer plump, stout women. And there are some savage tribes in which the preference is given to obese women with enormous abdomens, but this is not the case with the Caucasian race—not in civilized countries, at any rate, and surely not in the United States. First, reduce your carbohydrates, use massage and hydrotherapy, walk for hours at a time, but reduce your big abdomen—or, stillbetter, don't let it get big. Prevention here, as elsewhere, is much better than cure.
Bad Odor from the Mouth.I know of no other physical ailment which is so dangerous, so fatal to the permanency of the love relation as is a strong, offensive odor from the mouth. As a noxious gas blights a delicate plant, so will a strong bad odor blight the delicate plant of love. Yes, a strong malodorous whiff will cool the most ardent passion. The public would be astounded if it knew how many cases of separation and divorce are due to nothing else but a bad odor from the mouth. Therefore, if you happen to suffer from this unfortunate ailment, lose no time in applying to a competent physician, and do not tire of treating yourself, no matter how irksome and time-consuming the treatment may be, until you are completely cured. It is important to your happiness.
Odors from Other Parts of Body.Odors from other parts of the body should be conspicuous by their absence. Normally no artificial aids are needed. Frequent bathing and general cleanliness are alone sufficient. The natural feminine odor—odor feminae—is pleasant, attractive and needs no disguise. But where an unpleasant odor from the genitals, feet or armpits is present the proper treatment should be applied, and in such cases the useof a delicate perfume, sachet or scented talcum powder, is quite permissible. Not only permissible but advisable.
A very good treatment for perspiration and bad odor from the feet is the following: bathe the feet night and morning in a basin of water to which has been added an ounce (two tablespoonfuls) of formaldehyde solution. Dry carefully, and then rub in well the following powder. It is simple, cheap and efficient: