Hudibras has ludicrously plac’d the Seat of Male-Honour, in the Posteriors, whereby it is secur’d from any Attack in Front; but Female Honour, notwithstanding the apparent Safety of the Situation, like a Debtor’s House upon the Verge of two Counties, is liable to be attack’d both Ways; à parte ante, & à parte post,
That the Seat of Honour in Females has this double Aspect, like Janus bifrons, and consequently that it is two Ways accessible, has already been taken Notice of by almost all the Writers upon this Subject; but it is worth remarking here, that Lycurgus had an Eye to it when he modelled the Spartan Petticoat; for tho’ the Warmth of the Climate obliged the Women to be very open in that Part of their Dress, insomuch that, if we believe Plutarch, in his Comparison of Numa and Lycurgus, the Habit which the Maidens of Laconia wore came but to their Knees, and was open on both Sides, so that as they walked their Thighs appear’d bare; yet this wise Law-giver would not permit them to make the least Aperture, either in the fore or hind Part of that Garment; rightly judging, that those two sacred Avenues to a Maid’s Honour ought to be guarded with the utmost Caution.
For this same Reason the upright Posture of the Body has always been esteem’d the most decent; and it has ever been the Mode, in all Countries, for Ladies to cursey instead of bowing: for, tho’ a Female-Bow, might seem a modest and coy Reclension of the Body, with regard to the Person saluted, yet it would occasion a very indecent Projection to those who should happen to be behind; especially since that dangerous Fashion of Postern-Plackets has crept into the European Petticoat.
But to return to our present Argument, the Design of which was to prove the following Syllogism.
The only way to preserve Female Chastity, is to prevent the Men from laying Siege to it: And this Project of the Publick Stews is the only Way to prevent Mens laying Siege to it: Therefore this Project is the only Way to preserve Female Chastity.
The former Part of the Proposition is, I hope, sufficiently proved. It is, indeed, evident, from the bare Consideration of the Nature of Females, that if the Men are suffer’d to go on, as they now do, in the Pursuit of Pleasure, there is no possible Way can be found out, effectually, to secure the Virtue of any one Woman of any Rank, or in any Station of Life. If a Woman is handsome, she has the more Tryals to undergo; if homely, and for that Reason seldom attack’d, the Novelty of the Address makes the greater Impression: If she is married, it is odds but there’s a Failure at home, and habitual Pleasures are not easily foregone, especially when they may be enjoy’d with Safety: If a Maid, her unexperienc’d Virgin-Heart is capable of any Impression: If she is rich, Ease and Luxury make the Blood run mad; and Love, if high-dieted, is ungovernable: If poor, she will be the easier bribed, when Love and Avarice jointly must be gratified.
In short, to sum up all, there is in the Passion of Love a certain fatal Crisis, to which all Womenkind are capable of being wrought-up: The Difference of Virtue consisting only in this, that it is very hard to work a virtuous Woman up to this Crisis, and requires a very unlucky Concurrence of Circumstances: Whereas a Woman without a good Stock of Virtue, must have an unaccountable Series of good Fortune if she escapes. But, virtuous or not virtuous, when this Passion is once rais’d to the critical Height, it is absolutely irresistible.
Since therefore Female Virtue cannot effectually be secured, but by preventing the Men from laying Siege to it, it remains for us to examine, if this Prevention can be effected by any other Method than that of erecting the Publick Stews, and whether or no when erected, they will have the desired Effect.
That young Men, in a good State of Health, have their Desires towards Women much stronger, and more violent, than for the Enjoyment of any thing else in this Life, is a Truth not to be contested. And it is likewise as certain, that young Men will gratify these Desires, unless the Legislature can affix such a Penalty to the Commission of the Fact, that the Apprehension of the Penalty may give their Minds more Uneasiness, than refraining from the Gratification.
Now there are but three Things which Men fear in this Life, viz. Shame, Poverty, and Bodily Pain, and consequently but three Sorts of Punishments, which the Legislature can inflict. The first of these, indeed, might be omitted; for Shame is so very little in the Power of the Laws, that it hardly deserves the Name of a Penalty. If the Pillory, and such like infamous Punishments, are more terrible for the Shame that attends them, than for the bodily Pain, it is not because such a Posture of a Man’s Body, with his Neck through a Hole, is in itself ignominious, or that any Law can make it so; but because it publishes to the World, that a Man has been prov’d to commit such a certain Action, in its own Nature scandalous, which he is asham’d to have thus publickly made known. The truth is, “Honour and Dishonour being only the different Opinions of Mankind, as to the Good or Evil of any Action; and these Opinions in the Mind arising, as Dr. Clarke well observes, from the natural Fitness or Unfitness of the Actions themselves, cannot be alter’d or determin’d by any Secular Force.” And that they are entirely out of the Power of the Legislature, is evident in the Instance of Duelling; where a Man often receives Honour for a Breach of the Law, nay is forced to break it in Defence of his Honour.