Every union not based upon this kind of sensual attachment is decried as mere prostitution in marriage. Any marriage influenced by such motives as loneliness, poverty, welfare of the nearest relatives, the advance in social position, advance in business or in the professions, without the obligatory romance, which after all is only refined animalism, is considered contemptible. Such motives are held to be honorable enough to govern any other action in the life of the individual, but when it comes to marriage the line is drawn. Without the quickly wearing off glamor of a silly moon-light romance, the best of motives for contracting marriage relations are nowadays considered ulterior, and the sought-for party regards itself as having married under a misapprehension.
Even eugenic power is attributed to this wonderful love. Two intellectual and physical giants will beget weaklings, so we are told, if their union has not preceded by love’s desire; while if two weaklings marry upon short notice, guided only by their pent-up sex promptings, the offspring, as a child of love, is prophesied to become a physical and intellectual giant. As if the chromosomes, the carriers of the determiners of the unit-characters, could be influenced by love’s perjuries.
[AG] Those feminists who clamor for the wife’s right to her individuality show that they have never experienced the emotion of true love.
[AH] If Samson’s love for Delilah would have been of the sentimental kind and not mere infatuation, his love would have been turned into contempt and resentment, long before his betrayal, for her, who, he must have seen, was trying to elicit the secret of his strength for some sinister purpose. But being of a sensual nature, he was betrayed by two women whom he thought he loved but with whom he was only deeply infatuated.
[AI] Sorrow is an only child, but happiness was born twins; one can be sad, it takes two to be happy.
[AJ] Thus capitalism has been evolved from primal communism, feudalism, industrialism, capitalism; and we are gradually verging to state socialism.
Marriage has been evolved from original permanent mating of the prehuman state to primal promiscuity, consanguine family, punaluan family, pairing family, patriarchal family, to strict female and loose male monogamy, and is gradually reaching, through the modern feminine movement, not, as some radicals seem to think, to variety, but to strict male and female monogamy.
Through the entire range of higher animals, even among the polygamous, the female is always monogamous, at least for the period between one impregnation to the other. As soon as she has been impregnated by one male, during the period of rut, she does not admit any other male until the next period, and woman is no exception. If she has the power she will force men to monogamy, but she will never return herself to promiscuity.
[AK] This is often the case even among the noblest of men; among women, even among the worst, as the demi-mondaines, the heart has to be also somewhat engaged.
[AL] In a lesser degree, the same may be said of the man, only the care for procuring food distracts his attention from the ultimate aim of life.