Is there not a deliverance, a redemption, in the idea that for the old world there was a time in which syphilis did not exist; that this time, in comparison with the time which has elapsed since syphilis first appeared, was almost infinitely long; and that for this reason, when we look out into the future, the history of the lues venerea assumes the character of a simple episode in the history of European civilized humanity?
At the same time, the definite acceptance of this view would be an urgent warning to all those obscurantists of both sexes who imagine that the problem of the diffusion of venereal diseases can be solved exclusively by religious and moral considerations, and who thus confuse the simplest and clearest relationships, place everything upon an insecure foundation, and exclude every possibility of a successful campaign against syphilis.
Even to-day it unfortunately happens that many continue, as of old, to believe that sexual intercourse is a sin for which a punishment has been provided, and that this punishment is a venereal disease—for example, syphilis. Tylor, the celebrated English anthropologist, has proved that this idea has developed out of the animism extending back into prehistoric times, which regarded all illnesses as the work of demons. We are still influenced by this doctrine, this gloomy, demoniacal conception in respect of everything sexual. I need hardly remind the reader of the ideas of Tolstoi, and of his disciple, the unhappy Dr. Weininger, a disciple exceeding even his master in respect of fanatical condemnation of sexual intercourse. Until recently the laws regulating our German system of workmen’s insurance against illness continued to exhibit definite traces of our legislators’ adhesion to this view. The majority of physicians and historians who said that syphilis was as old as sexual intercourse itself, who employed the phrase ubi Venus ibi syphilis, were unconsciously influenced by this idea, that venereal diseases are to be regarded as a mark of the Divine wrath.
This theological theory, as we may call it, of the origin of syphilis is opposed by certain incontrovertible facts, which suffice to show its utter nullity and untenability.
The mere fact that there exists a blameless infection with syphilis (syphilis innocentium), that, for example, in certain districts of Russia as many as 90 % of the cases of this disease are acquired quite independently of sexual intercourse, by simple contact, shows the absurdity of this superstitious idea.
In the second place, it is a widely known fact that quite frequently persons who are still entirely uncontaminated, blameless initiates, become infected with syphilis on the very first occasion in which they have sexual intercourse, whilst greater experience and more exact knowledge of the threatening dangers induce notorious debauchees to adopt effective measures of protection (which, however, would be useless if syphilis were really a divinely decreed punishment for licentiousness of this kind!).
In the third place, the occurrence of syphilis in little children—partly owing to inheritance, partly, however, acquired in the way already mentioned by casual contact—affords a striking refutation of the above idea, which, unfortunately, still dominates and fascinates a large circle of people.
We could adduce further arguments against this view, but what we have said should suffice to show clearly the untenability of such a superstition. The syphilis of one individual is not the consequence of sexual intercourse, but the consequence of another case of syphilis in another individual—that is to say, syphilis is a specific infective disease, transmissible only by means of its peculiar specific virus, and this transmission can be effected without any sexual intercourse, by means of contacts of other kinds. Syphilis arises only from syphilis.
We have, therefore, to attack this disease precisely in the same manner as the other venereal diseases. As a Portuguese physician has most aptly remarked, to the tyranny of syphilis we must oppose the tyranny of human reason. The principal aim of a campaign against venereal diseases will be the organization of the means offered to us by reason and experience to cope with the disease. The knowledge of these means must be diffused in ever-wider circles of humanity, and care must be taken that every individual is fully and clearly informed regarding the importance and the dangers of syphilis and the other venereal diseases.
Here also history is our teacher, our lamp of truth, and promises us complete success as the result of our campaign against venereal diseases.