Part 19 (1/2)
=Case three= is peculiar in that the fiance _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 fiance 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 circ.u.mstances 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 s.e.x AND LOVE LIFE
Seemingly Contradictory Statements--Faulty Interpretations of Words s.e.xual Instinct and Love--Difference in Manifestations of Male and Female s.e.xual Instincts--Man's s.e.x Instinct Grosser Than Woman's--Awakening of s.e.xual Desire in the Boy and in the Girl--Woman's Desire for Caresses--Man's Main Desire for s.e.xual Relations--Normal s.e.x Relations as Means of Holding a Man--A Physiological Reason Why Man is Held--Man and Physical Love--Woman and Spiritual Love--Preliminaries of s.e.xual 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 s.e.x and Love Life--Man and Woman Biologically Different.
In reading books or listening to lectures on s.e.x, you will meet with statements which will seem to you contradictory. One time you will read or hear that the s.e.x instinct is much more powerfully developed in man than it is in woman; next time you will come across the statement that s.e.x plays a much more important role in women than it does in men. One time you will hear that men are overs.e.xed, that they are by nature polygamous and promiscuous, while woman is monogamous and as a rule s.e.xually frigid; the next time you will be a.s.sured 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 s.e.x or s.e.xual 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 s.e.xual 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 s.e.x instinct bears a more sensual, a more physical, a coa.r.s.er 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 s.e.x manifestations are more centralized, more local, more concentrated in the s.e.x organs; in women they are more diffused throughout the body. In a boy of fifteen the libido s.e.xualis may be fully developed, he may have powerful erections and a strong desire for normal s.e.xual relations; in a girl of fifteen there may not be a trace of any purely s.e.xual desire; and this _lack_ of desire for _physical_ s.e.x 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 s.e.xual desire until several months after marriage. But while their desire for actual s.e.xual relations awakens much later than it does in men, their desire for love, for caresses, for hugging, for close friends.h.i.+p, 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 s.e.xes--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--s.e.xual relations. A woman can keep up with a man for years without any s.e.xual intercourse, being fully satisfied or more or less satisfied with the s.e.xual subst.i.tutes--embraces and kisses.
And here is as good a place as any to refer to the notion so a.s.siduously 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 s.e.x; it is the opposite of true of the male s.e.x 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 s.e.x 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 role 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 s.e.x and love life. If a man had to make his _choice_ between physical love, i.e., actual s.e.x 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 s.e.xuality. A man can fully enjoy s.e.xual 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 s.e.xual partner; with the woman just the opposite is the case. I am leaving out of consideration s.e.xual 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 s.e.xually potent--he may be aged and homely--his other physical attributes play but a small role 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 s.e.xual 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=
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 s.h.i.+rk all his duties, in fact he is apt to make a much bigger fool of himself than a woman is under similar circ.u.mstances. 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 s.e.x 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.
=Polygamous Tendencies in Man=
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 a.s.sert this in spite of the incredulous smiles of all the cynics and roues 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 s.e.xually 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 s.e.xual relations with her or even with prost.i.tutes. It is quite a _common_ thing 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. The _rule_ is that in her s.e.x 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?
CHAPTER FORTY-SEVEN
MATERNAL IMPRESSIONS
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 such _alleged_ cases 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.