That the husband cannot sustain this relation satisfactorily and without injury to himself unless there is reciprocation on the part of the wife.
That under this mutual relation there is no loss to either party, but a mutual compensation.
This theory has its arguments and certainly is more humane than the first.
A woman once consulted me who was the mother of five children, all born within ten years. These were puny, scrofulous, nervous, and irritable. She herself was a fit subject for doctors and drugs. Every organ in her body seemed diseased, and every function perverted. She was dragging out a miserable existence. Like other physicians, I had prescribed in vain for her many maladies. One day she chanced to inquire how she could safely prevent conception. This led me to ask how great was the danger. She said: “Unless my husband is absent from home, few nights have been exempt since we were married, except it may be three or four immediately after confinement.”
“And yet your husband loves you?”
“O, yes, he is kind and provides for his family. Perhaps I might love him but for this. While now—(will God forgive me?)—I detest, I loathe him, and if I knew how to support myself and children, would leave him.”
“Can you talk with him upon this subject?”
“I think I can.”
“Then there is hope, for many women cannot do that. Tell him I will give you treatment to improve your health, and if he will wait until you can respond, take time for the act, have it entirely mutual from first to last, the demand will not come so frequently.”
“Do you think so?”