But these men would probably also decline the office; and even if they were willing, it is very doubtful if they would be in a position to make the suggested examinations, which, after all, require real medical skill; and, finally, the only result would be—to increase the number of quacks. Therefore, this idea of the examination of the male visitors to brothels is Utopian.
No, the true hope lies in absolute freedom; in relieving prostitution from the oppression of the police; in its gradual separation from criminality; in—I am not afraid of the word—in an “ennoblement” of prostitution.[389] The “prostitute” (German Dirne = drab) must disappear, and the “human being” must reawaken. The prostituted woman must be readmitted into the social community. No more coercion! Free and voluntary treatment, in polyclinics[390] and hospitals; the “rescue” of youthful prostitutes,[391] not in the prison-like “Magdalen Homes,” but by means of ethically instructive influence from human being to human being, of the value of which the “Letters to Prostitutes” of the noble philanthropist Frau Eggers-Smidt,[392] and also the experiences of the Salvation Army,[393] give such admirable evidence.
Very aptly, also, Kromayer has shown to what an extent a change in our present attitude towards sexual intercourse outside the conditions of coercive marriage, the removal of the stamp of infamy from such intercourse, would limit prostitution, and therewith also limit venereal diseases.[394] This is as clear as daylight. But, unfortunately, those very persons who declare the existing conditions in respect of prostitution to be absolutely intolerable will not admit its truth.
The misery of the life of these unhappy creatures must be relieved, but we must do it ourselves, and soon; for they are not in a position to do so. The last, the highest goal of the campaign against venereal disease is the humanization of the prostitute.[395]
Supplementary Note.—In the essay on “The Woman’s Question” in the sociological section of his work, “The Ethic of Free-Thought,” Karl Pearson discusses the question of Prostitution in relation to the Woman’s Question at large. His remarks have especial interest in view of what is said above about “the ennoblement of prostitution” and “the humanization of the prostitute,” and it seems expedient to quote the passage at length (op. cit., 1888, pp. 379-382).—Translator.
“The emancipation of woman, while placing her in a position of social responsibility, will make it her duty to investigate many matters of which she is at present frequently assumed to be ignorant. It may be doubted whether the identification of purity and ignorance has had wholly good effects in the past; indeed, it has frequently been the false cry with which men have sought to hide their own anti-social conduct. It is certain, however, that it cannot last in the future, and man will have to face the fact that woman’s views and social action with regard to many sex-problems may widely differ from his own. It is of the utmost importance that woman, not only on account of the part she already plays in the education of the young, but also because of the social responsibilities her emancipation must bring, should have a full knowledge of the laws of sex. Every attempt hitherto to grapple with prostitution has been a failure. What will women do when they thoroughly grasp the problem, and have a voice in the attitude the state should assume in regard to it? At present hundreds do not know of its existence; thousands only know of it to despise those who earn their living by it; one in ten thousand has examined the causes which lead to it, has felt that degradation, if there be any, lies not in the prostitute, but in the society where it exists; not in the women of the streets, but in the thousands of women in society, who are ignorant of the problem, ignore it, or fear to face it. What will be the result of woman’s action in the matter? Can it possibly be effectual, or will it merely tend to embitter the relations of men and women? Possibly an expression of woman’s opinion on this point in society and the press would do much, but then it must be an educated opinion, one which recognizes facts and knows the difficulties of the problem. An appeal to chivalry, to a Christian dogma, to a Biblical text, will hardly avail. The description we have of Calvin’s Geneva shows that puritanic suppression is wholly idle. What form will be taken by the reasoned action of women, cognizant of historical and sexualogical fact?
“Perhaps it may be that women, when they fully grasp the problem, will despair, as many men do, of its solution. They may remark that prostitution has existed in nearly all historic times, and among nearly all races of men. It has existed as an institution as long as monogamic marriage has existed; it may be itself the outcome of that marriage. I do not know whether any trace of a like promiscuity has been found in the animals nearest allied to man—I believe not. The periodic instinct has probably preserved them from it. How mankind came to lose the periodic instinct, and how that loss may possibly be related to the solely human institution of marriage, are problems not without interest. On the one hand, it has been asserted that prostitution is a logical outcome of our present social relations, while, on the other hand, it is held to be a survival of matriarchal licence, and not a sine qua non of all forms of human society. There is very considerable evidence to show that a large percentage of women are driven to prostitution by absolute want, or by the extremities to which a seduced woman is forced by the society which casts her out. This point is important. It may, perhaps, be that our social system, quite as much as man’s supposed needs, keeps prostitution alive. The frequency with which prostitutes, for the sake of their own living, seduce comparative boys, may be as much a cause of the evil as male passion itself. The socialists hold the sale of a woman’s person to be directly associated with the monopoly of surplus labour. Is the emancipated woman likely to adopt this view? and if so shall we not have a wide-reaching social reconstruction forced upon us? That emancipated woman would strive for a vast economic reorganization, as the only means of preserving the self-respect and independence of her sex, is a possibility with the gravest and most wide-reaching consequences. We cannot emancipate woman without placing her in a position of political and social influence equal to man’s. It may well be that she will regard economic and sexual problems from a very different standpoint, and the result will infallibly lead to the formation of a woman’s party, and to a more or less conscious struggle between the sexes. Would this end in an increased social stability or another subjection of sex?
“Woman may, however, conclude that the alternative is true—that prostitution is not the outcome of our present social organisation, but a feature of all forms of human society. She must, then, treat it as a necessary evil or as a necessary good. In the former case she will at least insist on an equal social stigma attaching to both sexes if she does not demand, as in the instance of any other form of anti-social conduct, so far as practicable its legal repression. In the latter case—that is, if its existence really tends in some way to the welfare or stability of society—women will have to admit that prostitution is an honourable profession; they cannot shirk that conclusion, bitter as it may appear to some. The ‘social outcast’ would then have to be recognized as filling a social function, and the problem would reduce to the amelioration of her life, and to her elevation in the social scale. Either there is a means of abolishing prostitution, or all participators must be treated alike as anti-social, or the prostitute is an honourable woman—no other possibility suggests itself. Society has hitherto failed to find a remedy, perhaps because only man has sought for one; woman, when she for the time fully grasps the problem, must be prepared for one, or must recognize the alternatives. There cannot be a doubt, however, that in a matter so closely concerning her personal dignity she will take action, and that, if only in this one matter, her freedom will raise questions, which many would prefer to ignore, and which, when raised, will undoubtedly touch principles apparently fundamental to our existing social organization.”