The Sexual Question Part 42

Again, the doctor may be consulted with regard to certain hereditary taints, or possibly only a bad ancestral history, and whether marriage is advisable under the circ.u.mstances. In some cases there may be some doubt and it is necessary to know the opinion of the other party concerned, and whether this party is also affected in a similar way, etc. The first duty of the doctor is to demand absolute frankness and to say, "under this or that condition and in such and such circ.u.mstances, you may perhaps marry, but under no pretext have you the right to conceal the truth from your betrothed. It is to your own interest to be frank, for no marriage founded on deceit can be happy.

Give me permission to discuss the matter with your _fiancee_ (or _fiance_). We shall then see what is best to be done."

In my experience, the person who consults a doctor usually accepts this proposal, and we can thus avoid many misfortunes and do much good.

It is impossible to fix a general rule. According to the degree of hereditary taint or the nature of the infirmity, we allow marriage with or without children, or do not allow it. In such cases it is rarely necessary to have recourse to the threat of denunciation, but this may be required in the case of egoistic or vicious individuals.

On several occasions a betrothed couple have come to me for advice as to their proposed marriage, and have freely disclosed their most intimate relations and antecedents. This is as it always should be, if men were more loyal in s.e.xual matters and understood better their true interests. In this way the doctor's task is greatly facilitated. When the public is more enlightened on the whole question it will become more and more easy to arrive at a just conclusion, even without the doctor's help.

=Artificial Abortion.=--We have already spoken of another question which is often put to doctors--that of artificial abortion. (Vide Chapter XIII.) In every case of this kind all the circ.u.mstances must be carefully weighed. I repeat here, that in the future more attention should be paid to social interests, instead of always requiring the preservation of an embryo for the sole reason that the state of the mother does not contra-indicate pregnancy or accouchement. The question is whether a miserable abortion or an idiot should be allowed to come into the world. If we allow children who are born monsters, idiots or invalids to live, we should at least do what we can to prevent them being born. It will no doubt be objected that it is much easier to recognize the quality of a child after birth than before, and this objection is quite legitimate. But so long as the laws protect the lives of the most miserable monsters we must get out of the difficulty as best we can.

=Treatment of s.e.xual Disorders.=--We cannot enter here into all the details of a purely medical question, and shall only touch on certain special points. Patients with venereal disease are often treated in a very defective manner, because many of them are ashamed to submit to rational treatment. The treatment of venereal diseases should be carried out with more regard for the feelings of the patients; there should be special hospitals for each s.e.x, with separate divisions, so that patients can be treated without betraying their ident.i.ty. The fear of being recognized prevents many better-cla.s.s women from applying for treatment. The idea of being placed in the venereal divisions of a hospital along with common prost.i.tutes is unbearable to them. For this reason I maintain that anonymous treatment should be inst.i.tuted at hospitals in all the chief localities. This humanitarian work would benefit not only the patients, but society in general, by diminis.h.i.+ng the number of venereal infections. Treatment by private pract.i.tioners is too costly for poor people and does not easily remain anonymous. Therefore, the creation of hospitals for venereal disease is very necessary in the public interest, and would benefit public health much more than the regulation of prost.i.tution.

The treatment of s.e.xual perversions is also very important. These disorders are either hereditary, or acquired by auto-suggestion or evil example. By provoking suggestion and good habits in the opposite direction, hypnotic suggestion is alone capable of acting directly against the evil. Other remedies, such as distraction of the mind by work or fatigue, by marriage, electricity, etc., have only an indirect suggestive action. When a perversion has been acquired by auto-suggestion or by habit, especially in the case of onanism, hypnotic suggestion should always be employed. In compensatory masturbation, where normal s.e.xual appet.i.te exists, and where it is only the opportunity of satisfying it that is wanting, marriage or normal s.e.xual intercourse are sufficient to cure the bad habit.

We must not, however, too easily admit the existence of acquired perversions. Apart from compensatory masturbation, which is not a perversion, but only an outlet to a pent-up natural want, true acquired perversions are rather rare, and as we have seen generally auto-suggestive. Pederasts, sodomists, and others, whose perverse habits are truly acquired, have usually taken to them for want of something better, and prefer normal coitus if they have the opportunity and the means of procuring it. It is true, however, that some debauchees contract these perverse habits from desire for change, or from fear of infection or conception, but these individuals seldom consult the doctor.

Thus the individuals who consult a doctor are nearly always more or less pathological, and belong to the domain of hereditary or auto-suggestive perversions. For the first, at least, we avoid recommending marriage. Von Schrenck-Notzing has sometimes succeeded in transforming hereditary inversion into normal s.e.xual appet.i.te for women, by hypnotic suggestion. I have also succeeded myself, two or three times. After a cure of long duration, confirmed by frequent visits to prost.i.tutes, Von Schrenck-Notzing has ventured to recommend marriage; but I have never done this, as I do not consider a cure sufficient to guarantee definite success, in the case of disorders so deeply rooted in the const.i.tution. In such cases I have endeavored, as far as possible, to weaken the s.e.xual appet.i.te and induce the patient to be contented with nocturnal emissions. I have always debarred inverts from marriage, impressing them with the fact that to marry would be a crime, and that they had a hundred times better m.a.s.t.u.r.b.a.t.e; or, if they wish to attempt intercourse with women, to be contented with a mistress, avoiding the procreation of children.

Unfortunately, our present laws and customs prevent us from recommending or even allowing inverts to "marry" their fellows, as they so strongly desire to do. This would be very innocent from the social point of view, and the poor wretches would be content, and would cease to be a menace to normal individuals.

I am, therefore, of the same opinion as those who demand the suppression of all laws which punish or prosecute s.e.xual inversion and pederasty committed between adults and in common agreement. So long as pederasts do not harm normal individuals, and so long as they do not seduce minors, they should be left alone, the same as all other s.e.xually perverted individuals who are not dangerous. But when a patient of this kind wishes to be treated, through shame or nervous excitement, the doctor should hypnotize him and suggest distraction of mind by useful occupations. Psychic treatment is always the most efficacious. It is only in cases where it is certain that the perversion is purely acquired and easily curable that marriage can be allowed, or the procreation of children. I am not referring here to sterile marriages between perverts or psychopaths, which we have mentioned above, and which can always be allowed when the two parties are fully enlightened on the subject.

Frequent emissions, masturbation, s.e.xual hyperaesthesia and impotence may often be improved or even cured by suggestion. In such cases, if the s.e.xual appet.i.te is otherwise normal, marriage need not always be prohibited. Each case must be judged on its merits.

In s.e.xual anaesthesia marriage is an error based on a grave misconception. Even in partial anaesthesia it may have deplorable effects. We are now only speaking of anaesthesia in man. Most young virgins are anaesthetic in the sense that they are not acquainted with the venereal o.r.g.a.s.m and cannot tell how far their hitherto dormant s.e.xual appet.i.te will develop. The s.e.xual instruction which we have recommended for young girls would have the advantage of making those who are absolutely s.e.xually frigid disgusted with marriage and coitus, as soon as they know all about it.

The consequences of s.e.xual anaesthesia are much more innocent in woman than in man, because this anaesthesia neither prevents coitus nor fecundation. A woman who is s.e.xually anaesthetic may marry a man who is affected with the same condition, when both parties are aware of the fact and desire to contract a union which is hardly s.e.xual, but rather a union of minds with a common ideal. This is the true platonic love which is admitted in theory. It is not very common and must not be confounded with h.o.m.os.e.xual inclinations. It has its object of existence, for those affected with anaesthesia may feel the want of affection and of home, as well as sentimental communion. If they desire children they can adopt them.

Unfortunately for themselves, the subjects of s.e.xual anaesthesia have as little idea of s.e.xual sensations as a blind man has of colours; this causes them to commit great blunders, because they do not comprehend the nature of the s.e.xual appet.i.te in others, and often marry an erotic individual without knowing what they are doing.

The special treatment of diseases of the male and female s.e.xual organs is beyond the scope of this book. I may, however, remark that specialists are often wrong in treating the genital organs locally for pathological symptoms which depend on cerebral disorder, which can only yield to psychic treatment and suggestion. This is the case with many disorders of menstruation in women, psychic impotence and frequent seminal emissions in men, masturbation, etc., (except cases due to phimosis, or local irritation caused by worms, etc.) I hasten to add that this remark in no way excuses errors in the opposite direction, viz, neglect of local treatment, when this is indicated after careful examination.

CHAPTER XV

s.e.xUAL MORALITY

=Law and Morality.=--The limits of morality and law are difficult to fix. With the old conception of law and the expiation of crime it was otherwise. Yet it is precisely the old law, based on dogma and religious metaphysics, which has most usurped the domain of morality, by considering as crimes all kinds of acts which, without hurting men in the least degree, were opposed to the ruling ideas and prejudices concerning religion and morality.

=Human and Religious Morality.=--What then const.i.tutes ethics or true human morality? A dogmatic system, of ethics has been built on a collection of commandments supposed to be inspired by G.o.d. Religions have established different duties toward G.o.d, and these duties or commandments are in part very inhuman. This has often resulted in direct contradictions between ethics attributed to divine revelation, and pure human ethics. Moreover, the divine commandments vary in different religions.

The G.o.d of certain Malays commands them to eat the heart of their enemies; Jehovah was vindictive and jealous, ordering Abraham to sacrifice his own son to prove his faith, causing whole tribes to be annihilated, even drowning the whole of humanity by the flood, while the G.o.d of the Christians is milder and more conciliating; Allah rules as a fatalist and orders the ma.s.sacre of the Christians and abstinence from alcohol, while Jesus Christ tells men to love their enemies and allows wine; the G.o.d of the Hindus orders the widow to follow her husband to the grave; a number of other G.o.ds exact human sacrifice; Buddha taught oblivion in the future, others a more or less eternal paradise, h.e.l.l and purgatory, according to the conduct of men.

It will be agreed that it is difficult to obtain anything logical or coherent from the total of different religious moralities. As regards the s.e.xual question, so-called divine commandments, such as those of monogamy and polygamy, directly contradict each other.

For this reason, we will leave the so-called revealed morality to the priests of diverse religions who pretend to have received them directly from G.o.d, and will confine ourselves to the study of purely human morality. This should never be based on any dogmatic formula, like the above on their religious dogmas; it must be evolved from the natural conditions of human life.

=Morality and Hygiene.=--Morality is intimately connected with hygiene, and wherever there appears to be a contradiction between hygiene and ethics this is due to the fact that individual hygiene has only been considered, and not public or social hygiene--that is the hygiene of the race. It is the duty of the medical profession to place social above individual hygiene, to subordinate the hygienic welfare of the individual to that of society. A contradiction may exist between individual morality and hygiene, never between social morality and hygiene.

=Definition of Morality.=--How can we define morality or ethics?

Liberated as far as possible from all hypothesis, ethics is theoretically the study of what is good or bad in human actions, and practically, as regards morality, the duty of doing good and avoiding evil. But this is hardly explicit, for what do we understand by good and evil? Not only do some consider good what others consider evil, but the words which Goethe puts into the mouth of the devil (in "_Faust_")--that while wis.h.i.+ng evil he often did good--will always be true. This gives a faithful representation of the deplorable want of adaptation which exists between the good and evil effects of our actions on the one hand, and the goodness or wickedness of our motives on the other hand. The inverse is also true, for good intentions often have evil results. We must, therefore, carefully distinguish between the ethical motives of the good and bad effects of an action.

If we continue our a.n.a.lysis we shall discover that the same action may be good for one and bad for another. When a wolf devours a lamb, it is good for the wolf but bad for the lamb. We cannot live without destroying other lives, animal or vegetable. The money we earn comes out of the pockets of others without their always obtaining a corresponding profit, and so on. Morality is thus _relative_, and we have not the faculty of discovering anything which is absolutely good or absolutely bad in itself.

All that men can expect by mutual exchange of their wisdom and good will is to do as little evil and as much good as possible, that is to say, to diminish the amount of their physical and psychic ills by improving their mutual conditions of existence, and thus increasing the amount of good. Even this is only possible by limiting the ideas of good and evil almost exclusively to humanity, trampling on the conditions of existence and the development of other beings, or at least concerning ourselves with them only as far as they are useful to us.

Further, we have seen that it is very difficult to extend the conception of social welfare to all the living races of humanity, for some of them are at the same time so fecund and so inferior in quality, that if they were allowed to multiply around us without any precaution they would soon starve and supplant us. Then the barbarity of their lower instincts (vide weight of brain in different races at end of Chapter VI) would soon take the upper hand and become general, as the negroes of Hayti have shown us by a lesson which is worthy of our attention.

Therefore, an exaggeration of moral sentiments, resting on a false basis, would have the positive result of striking a fatal blow at our social morality, slowly built up during hundreds or thousands of years.

Lastly, the same action may first of all do evil and afterwards good, for example, a painful lesson; or _vice versa_, as in the satisfaction of a gluttonous appet.i.te.

=Morality can only be Relative.=--It follows from these considerations that our moral duties can only be relative, and cannot bind us in the same way nor in the same degree to all living beings, not even to all men, if we would avoid sacrificing what is lofty to what is vile. In theory, the definition of human morality will consist in a just and scientific definition of social welfare and the exigencies which it imposes on individuals, in order that the latter do not do evil in attempting to do good. In practice, it will be the general effort made to develop successfully this social welfare by the aid of individual will. This presupposes in the first place education of the will, the dispositions to useful work, and the altruistic sentiments of each individual. It is neither theoretical dogma nor preaching, but action and example which make for the education of man.

The n.o.blest task of moral action is to strive for the welfare of future generations.

=Altruism and Egoism.=--Properly understood, altruism and egoism do not form an antinomy, or only quite a relative antinomy. It is absolutely wrong to found social order by letting loose all our egoistic appet.i.tes without restriction. But it is quite as wrong to oppose them with an exaggerated and unnatural asceticism, which reflects in our eyes an erroneous ideal of altruism.

When a bee or an ant disgorges the honey from its stomach for the benefit of its companions, it enjoys it. By sacrificing its life for the hive or the nest, it satisfies an altruistic or social instinct.

Cannot man also be more happy in giving than receiving? How can we explain the great sacrifices, the martyrs who suffer and die for their country, for their family, for science, for an idea, if enthusiasm--an expanded sentiment of pleasure--did not lead man to disinterested sacrifice, or if an inner obsession did not find its satisfaction in the welfare of humanity?

Let us seek all measures which by social adaptation can enn.o.ble our human egoism, reduce it to its indispensable and just measure, and maintain it in proper equilibrium, by the aid of an active altruism; that is to say, by social habits of self-sacrifice for the benefit of the community. We shall then obtain a paradise on earth, no doubt very relative, but far preferable to our present anarchy based on the strife of personal interests.

The chief thing wanting is a good hereditary quality among human individuals, a quality which is still entirely left to chance, by the most deplorable selection; the second requisite is the education of character and will in our children. Our religion and our schools have shown themselves incapable of raising the bulk of the people above barbarism, that is to say from apathy, vulgarity of sentiment, routine, ignorance and prejudice. No doubt intellectual culture and religious ethics have accomplished a certain amount of moral progress, but the methods employed in our churches and schools have not advanced with science. They are in no sense adapted to our present moral wants and still less to the exigencies of the future.

It is on the basis of a natural human morality, such as we have just described, that we must found s.e.xual morality or ethics, and it is not difficult to form clear ideas on this subject, if we take the trouble to examine the facts explained in the first fourteen chapters of this book.

From the social and moral point of view we may consider an action as _positive_ or useful, _neutral_ or indifferent, and _negative_ or harmful. But the same action may be at the same time positive, negative or indifferent, relatively to one or more groups of individuals. But in ethics it is not only a question of the action in itself, but especially the inner motives which lead to it; for, to leave the good and ill of society to chance and ignorance, is to deny the possibility of progress. It is difficult for a man to accomplish positive social actions, when the moral sentiments of conscience and duty are wanting. On the other hand, a narrow-minded individual, with false judgment, will accomplish negative social actions through moral motives, while in certain cases an individual may accomplish positive social acts fortuitously through perverse motives. Through vengeance, a generous legacy may be left which injures an individual, while profiting the public. Without being perverse, motives may be simply egoistic and lead to good by calculated egoism.

By altruist, we understand a man animated by powerful moral sentiments which preside over social humanitarian volitions. By the term pure egoist, we designate one in whom self forms the exclusive object of sentiments of sympathy. In himself, the egoist is indifferent from the moral point of view, so long as he injures no one, and the altruist himself cannot live without a certain amount of egoism. The ideal of social sentiment therefore consists in the combined action of egoistic and altruistic sentiments, adapted to the wants of society and its members. As among certain ants, there should exist a complete compensatory regulation between the egoistic sentiments and appet.i.tes on the other hand. The antagonist of altruism is not the egoist, but the perverse individual whose acts are by instinct almost constantly negative from the moral point of view. Egoism urges a man in such an irresistible way to abuse and harm others in order to satisfy himself, that a pure egoist can rarely remain indifferent from the moral point of view. These considerations suffice to show the impossibility of basing social order on pure egoism, as so many people desire.

=s.e.xual Morality.=--s.e.xual morality depends upon what we have just said. By itself, the s.e.xual appet.i.te is indifferent from the moral point of view. A great confusion of ideas, based on religious misunderstanding, has led to the term morality being more and more identified with that of moral conduct in the s.e.xual domain. In short, ethics has been more or less confounded with s.e.xuality. From this point of view, a s.e.xually anaesthetic individual is regarded as extremely "moral," while he is perhaps in other respects a knave. In reality his s.e.xual indifference has not the least moral value. For the same reason an invert is not virtuous because he does not seduce girls.

From the Protestant point of view it is immoral to burden one's wife with continual pregnancies, while from the Catholic point of view it is immoral to interfere with these pregnancies by preventive measures.

Nevertheless, the s.e.xual appet.i.te gives rise to much conflict with human morality, for the simple reason that it looks upon human beings as objects of pleasure. Fetichism, in which the s.e.xual appet.i.te is directed toward inanimate objects, and sodomy, directed to animals, are by themselves almost incapable of entering into conflict with morality as we understand it.

The opinion of many people who consider the employment of anticonceptional measures as immoral, while defending prost.i.tution, shows how much ideas vary on the subject of s.e.xual ethics. Preachers of morality, and even priests, sometimes blame a young man who wishes to marry his mistress, and urge him to get rid of her and the child by paying a sum of money. The inconsistency of men in the way they introduce their so-called moral ideas into s.e.xual questions is simply incredible. Their heads are full of a jumble of hypocrisy, mysticism, prejudice, pecuniary interests, veneration for old traditional customs called good manners, a jumble which absolutely confuses all ideas of a healthy s.e.xual morality. Look at the indignation of parents when their children become betrothed to persons whom they consider to be beneath them in social position, or who possess too little money! And all these people are unconscious of their immorality, which sails under the flag of morality!

What standpoint are we to take in the s.e.xual domain, which is free from prejudice, with regard to true human morality? This is the question which an honest and truly moral man has to put to himself.

The first principle is the old medical adage: _Above all things do no harm_; the second is: _Be as useful as possible, both individually and socially._

The commandment of s.e.xual morality will thus be: _Thou shalt do no harm willingly to any person, nor to humanity, by thy s.e.xual appet.i.te or acts, and thou shalt do thy utmost to promote the happiness of thy neighbor and the welfare of society._

Endowed with s.e.xual appet.i.te and the faculty of love, the social man will utilize both for the benefit of the community as well as his own.

If he acts honorably his task will not be easy, but he will experience all the more satisfaction, for his good deeds will bring their own reward. He should bear in mind the following examples: