=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 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 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 shirk 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.

It is a thankless task to try to shatter well-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 single _well-authenticated_ case 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 the _result_ of the impression? Because a thing _follows_ another thing it does not mean that it was _caused_ by 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 is _fully formed_ and 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 cases where 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 ("s.e.x 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 but merely 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 a.s.similation, 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 antic.i.p.ation 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, than by 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 pa.s.sionate, 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 her heart. Always his appearance was most unexpected, and always accompanied by the rapt, pa.s.sionate, 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 which are 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.

CHAPTER FORTY-EIGHT

ADVICE TO THE MARRIED AND THOSE ABOUT TO BE

Marriage as an Ideal Inst.i.tution--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 s.e.x 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 Att.i.tude Towards the Marital Relation--Behavior Preliminary to and During the Act--Congenital Frigidity--Prudish and Vicious Ideas About the s.e.x Act--s.e.xual 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.