A very remarkable means of bringing about artificial sterility, one resembling the operative procedures sometimes adopted in western countries, is employed in various parts of the world, and notably in the East Indies and in the Sunda Islands, namely, the induction of an artificial malposition of the uterus, more especially of anteversion. Thus, van der Burg writes from the Dutch Indies: “In the girls the sexual impulse develops very early, and is gratified without fear of consequences, when the services of certain skilled elderly women have been requisitioned.” These women appear, in fact, to understand, by means of pressure, rubbing, and kneading, through the abdominal walls (not by the vaginal route), how to induce anteversion or retroversion of the uterus, to such an extent as to prevent the occurrence of conception. It is said that the only inconvenient consequences of this procedure are trifling pains in the lumbo-sacral and inguinal regions, and some trouble in passing water during the first few days after the manipulations have been effected. Later, when a girl who has been treated in this way wishes to marry and become a mother, by a reversal of the manipulations the uterus is restored to its natural position. It is said that these skilled women have been called in by European women in the Dutch Indies, who did not wish to have many children; but it appears that in a woman who has once given birth to a child, the result of the manipulations is less to be depended upon, than in the case of a virgin.
A means of ensuring artificial sterility, which in all civilized states is punishable as a criminal offence, and which is nevertheless very frequently practised, is the artificial induction of abortion. Especially in North America it would appear that there exist regular professional abortionists. In this connection, Thomas, the well-known American gynecologist, writes as follows: “Statistics showing the frequency of criminal abortion are not, and probably never will be, available, for this crime cannot be adequately controlled by human society, and commonly eludes legal punishment. It seems a hard saying, but it is a true one, to assert, that the law pursues unremittingly him who has killed his fellow-man, while it leaves immune him who has killed the embryo in the mother’s womb. On my table there lies at this moment one of the most widely circulated, most respected, and most carefully edited daily newspapers of New York—a paper which finds its way into the best circles of society, and also into the hands of girls and women throughout the country. In its columns I find fifteen advertisements which emanate beyond all question from professional abortionists—from men and women who gain their livelihood by child-murder.”
O. Reyher remarks also that in American newspapers advertisements such as the following are of every-day occurrence: “Pills for the regulation of the periods. Ladies expecting to be confined are warned not to use them on any account, for if they do so abortion will infallibly ensue.”
Emmet, in his “Textbook of Gynecology” also complains of the terrible frequency of criminal abortion, so that “every day we see more unhappiness and misery result from the misuse of conjugal relationships than we see in an entire month as a result of births which take place in a natural manner.”
Pomeroy also says that “The prevention of conception and the destruction of the unborn life are pre-eminently American sins;” and he adds that if no bounds are set to their spread, “they must, sooner or later, lead to universal misfortune. In the course of our practices we come into contact with women who would hesitate to kill a fly, but who think nothing of having destroyed half a dozen or more of their own unborn children.”
The American Medical Congress offered a prize for a brief and readable essay, suitable for diffusion among women, showing the criminality and the physical harmfulness of artificial abortion. The prize was awarded to Storer’s essay, entitled “Why Not?”
Among the ancient Greeks, the fear of over-population led to the practice of homosexual intercourse. The states of ancient Greece were in most cases of a very small area, so that a very moderate increase in population would render the means of subsistence insufficient. Hence intercourse with women was avoided, and the sexual impulse was gratified in unnatural ways. Inspired by this fear of over-population, Aristotle urged upon men that they avoid women, and should indulge in the love of men and boys, and at an earlier date, Socrates had celebrated the love of boys as a mark of higher culture. The most notable men of classical Greece practised homosexual intercourse; authors and poets celebrated the love of boys. Stimulated by their example, Sappho of Lesbos became the inspired poetess of the love of women for members of their own sex (Lesbian love).
Among the Romans it was rather satiety in consequence of sexual excesses which led in that country to the diffusion of the Greek love of boys; the consequent childlessness diminished to such an extent the numbers of the Roman burghers and patricians, that Augustus, in the year 16 B. C., enacted the Julian law, by which the procreation of children was rewarded, whilst celibacy became a punishable offence.
At the present day the fear of an excessively large number of children, in relation to the property possessed by the parents and in regard to nutritive possibilities, has led among whole classes, and even among entire nations, to the adoption of preventive measures in sexual intercourse; these measures have, in fact, been developed into a system, which finds adherents among all strata of the population, but more especially, as it is easy to understand, among certain well-to-do sections of the community. In France this system has been adopted to such an extent as to amount to a national calamity.
In few countries of the civilized world, remarks Bebel, are marriages so frequent, relatively to the population, as they are in France, whilst in no country is the average number of children per marriage so small, or the increase of population so slow. The French bourgeoisie long ago adopted this system, and the peasantry and the artizan classes are following their example. In many parts of Germany the same causes have led to the same results. In France, in addition to the prevention of pregnancy and the practice of artificial abortion, infanticide and the exposure of children are also actually employed to keep down the population.