The sexual life of woman in its physiological, pathological and hygienic aspects

by E. Heinrich Kisch

Ribbing writes, “Although the sexual impulse is the product of a powerful natural developmental force, still the temporary, and sometimes even the permanent, control of this impulse is a moral civilizing force of enormous importance.” This writer is opposed to the use of artificial preventive measures; he considers them untrustworthy and dangerous to health. Untrustworthy, for the reason that nature has endowed living organisms with a strong impulse toward conjugation and has equipped with very powerful forces the processes by which fertilization is effected. Every physician is familiar with cases in which preventive measures have proved ineffective. This fact is proved also by the statistics of prostitution. Although prostitutes are fully instructed in the use of preventive measures, which they almost universally employ, nevertheless every year a smaller or larger number of prostitutes become pregnant. These measures are dangerous to health, partly because of their interference with natural functions, because many of them are clumsy and ill adapted; and partly, again, because owing to their use the woman fails to enjoy the natural periods of repose which are entailed by pregnancy, parturition, and lactation. Noteworthy also are the psychical considerations adduced by Ribbing against the use of preventive measures. The majority of well-bred women feel deeply wounded if they believe themselves to be regarded merely as a means of enjoyment, not as individuals, as persons with inalienable rights. For the man also there is danger, for it is easy for him to acquire a dislike to the wife who, even though on his own initiative, occupies herself with the technique of the sexual life in a manner which he feels instinctively to be opposed to the chastity and puremindedness demanded by every man from his wife. Ribbing therefore advises a certain measure of sexual abstinence in married life.

Max Nordau also insists on the moral disadvantages of the wide diffusion of the use of preventive measures. “If a race or nation has reached this point in its downward career, the individuals of which it is composed lose the capacity of loving in a healthy and natural manner. The sense of the family disappears; the men will not marry, because they find it inconvenient to burden themselves with the responsibility for another human life, and to care for any other creature than themselves; the women dread the pains and inconveniences of motherhood, and if they marry, they endeavour, by the employment of the most immoral means, to ensure barrenness. The reproductive instinct, of which reproduction has ceased to be the aim, is in some annulled, whilst in others it degenerates into the most peculiar and irrational perversities. The act of sexual union, the most sublime function of the organism, is degraded into a profligate act of lust; it is no longer undertaken in the interest of the perpetuation of the species, but exclusively for the pleasure of the individual, and without any relation to the needs of the community.”

Alfred Russel Wallace has advocated sexual continence as a preventive measure during the period of maximum vitality and strength; he advises that the age of marriage of women should be considerably advanced, in order to diminish their fertility. If woman’s average age at marriage were 29, instead of 20 years, the fertility of marriages would be reduced in the ratio of 8 : 5.

The desired goal of artificial sterility will not, however, be reached through the advocacy of moderation and continence. The numerous additional measures employed for this purpose may be classified as physiological and artificial; the latter class may be further subdivided into mechanical and operative.

By physiological means for the prevention of conception, we understand measures which aim at producing sterility by reducing the number of acts of intercourse and by restricting these acts to certain defined periods of time. The physiological preventive measures, apart from the higher ethical value they possess in comparison with artificial measures, have the advantage that they may be regarded as harmless to the general health of the woman and to the integrity of her reproductive organs in particular; they have, however, this very serious disadvantage, that the results of their use are very uncertain, so that they offer no more than a probability, and often a very moderate probability that conception will be prevented.

As a physiological measure for the attainment of facultative sterility “without breaking any moral law,” Capellmann advised abstinence from coitus during a period of fourteen days after menstruation and three to four days before the commencement of the flow. Without laying too much stress on the fact that by following this recommendation the period during which the intercourse is permissible would be extremely restricted, it is necessary to point out that, whilst in this way the occurrence of conception may be rendered less probable, its prevention is by no means guaranteed, for it is an established fact that a woman may be impregnated by intercourse on any single day of the intermenstrual interval. Capellmann’s advice, embodying, as he expresses it, the “only morally permissible” means for the prevention of conception, was not original, for the same recommendation was given at an earlier date by Raciborski, who, however, regarded the measure as very uncertain. Capellmann is of opinion that it is sufficiently trustworthy for practical purposes.

Bebel, who is a declared opponent of Malthusianism, none the less lays down positive rules for the diminution of procreative capacity and of fertility by regulation of the diet. He refers to the example of the bees, which, by a change of nutriment, can produce a new queen-bee at will. “Thus the bees,” he says, “are in advance of human beings in their knowledge of sexual development. Presumably they have not been compelled, for a couple of thousand years, to listen to sermons informing them that to occupy themselves about sexual matters is ‘improper’ and ‘immoral.’ There is no doubt whatever that the mode of nutrition has an influence on the composition of the male semen, and also on the susceptibility to fertilization of the female ovum; hence the increase in population must to a very important extent depend on the mode of nutrition. If this could be definitely established, we should have, in the supply of nutriment, a means of regulating the population. As an example of the effect, in this connection, of the mode of nutrition in the human species, it is reported that in consequence of the fatty and nutritious diet of the old Bavarian peasants, who lived chiefly on very rich puddings, the marriages of the well-to-do peasants were frequently childless. However, it must not be forgotten that pre-conjugal intercourse, which was customary in that part of the world, and was somewhat promiscuous in character, may have contributed to cause this sterility.” Finally, Bebel points out that the woman of the future “will be unwilling to bear a large number of children. She will wish to enjoy a measure of personal freedom and independence, and will not consent to pass half or three-quarters of the best years of her life either pregnant, or with a child at her breast. From this it will result that the population will be regulated, without unwholesome sexual abstinence, and without the employment of unpleasant preventive measures.” However, Bebel gives us no details as to the precise manner in which this regulation is to be effected.

Tolstoi, in his widely celebrated book “The Kreuzer Sonata,” condemns absolutely the gratification of the sexual impulse. He demands the recognition of the fact that “sexual congress, in which a man either avoids the natural consequences—the birth of children,—or else throws the whole burden of these consequences on the woman, is opposed to the simplest demands of morality, is in fact utterly base.” To render possible the sexual abstinence he regards as morally necessary, men must not only endeavour to live in a natural way, but they must consume no alcohol, eat with great moderation, abstain from meat, and not be afraid of hard work. Tolstoi even demands that men and women shall be so brought up “that both before and after marriage they may regard love, and the sensual passion associated therewith, not as they do at present, as a sublime and poetical state, but as a bestial condition degrading to humanity.” Tolstoi is, however, utterly opposed to the use of preventive measures: “first, because they liberate men from the cares and sorrows entailed by having children, which must be regarded as the penance to be paid for sensual love; and, secondly, because their use is closely allied to the crime most repugnant to the human conscience, the crime of murder.” Chastity is no less a duty after marriage than before; after marriage man and wife must “continue to pray to be delivered from temptation, and must endeavour to replace sensual love by the pure relationship of brother and sister.”

Eulenburg regards the modern diffusion and the continuous increase in the use of preventive measures as signs of decadence; Löwenfeld, on the other hand, regarding the social conditions of the present day as the principal source of the use of preventive measures, sees therein no moral decay, but on the contrary rather a rise in the moral standard of life.

Another physiological means of prevention is to be found in avoiding cohabitation in that season or month in which, judging by the woman’s previous deliveries, she would appear to have been peculiarly susceptible to impregnation. Cohnstein maintained that in woman, as in the lower animals, the capacity for conception was associated with a particular season of the year, that there was, in fact, an individual time of predilection for impregnation. The assumption that there is such a time of predilection is, however, traversed by the fact, familiar to all who have recorded the birthdays of children in large families, that these occur in the most diverse months of the year. It has, indeed, been statistically proved that certain months and seasons are especially favourable to conception, that a maximum of conceptions occurs in the spring, and a second much smaller maximum in the winter; but these variations in the number of conceptions depend mainly on social factors, as, for instance, upon the customary season for marriage, opportunity for intercourse between the sexes, common labours in the house or in the open, etc. This alleged time of predilection for conception cannot, therefore, seriously be considered in the discussion of measures for the prevention of pregnancy.