diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/63898-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63898-0.txt | 6349 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 6349 deletions
diff --git a/old/63898-0.txt b/old/63898-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index b05dfb3..0000000 --- a/old/63898-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,6349 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Women, Children, Love, and Marriage, by -Catherine Gasquoine Hartley - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: Women, Children, Love, and Marriage - -Author: Catherine Gasquoine Hartley - -Release Date: November 27, 2020 [EBook #63898] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WOMEN, CHILDREN, LOVE, MARRIAGE *** - - - - -Produced by Turgut Dincer and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - - - - - - - - WOMEN, CHILDREN, LOVE AND MARRIAGE - - - - - WOMEN, CHILDREN, - LOVE and MARRIAGE - - BY - C. GASQUOINE HARTLEY - - AUTHOR OF “THE TRUTH ABOUT WOMAN,” “WOMEN’S WILD OATS,” - “MOTHER AND SON,” ETC. - - [Illustration] - - LONDON - HEATH CRANTON, LIMITED - 6 FLEET LANE E.C.4 - 1924 - - _Printed in Great Britain for Heath Cranton, Ltd., by Clements Bros., - Chatham_ - - And we won’t, we simply _will not_ face the world as we’ve made it, - and our own souls as we find them, and take the responsibility. We’ll - never get anywhere till we stand up man to man and face _everything_ - out, and break the old forms, but never let our pride and courage of - life be broken. - - D. H. LAURENCE in “Aaron’s Rod.” - - - - -CONTENTS - - PAGE - - Foreword 11 - - - SECTION I.—WOMEN 13 - - 1. Women and Cats 15 - - 2. The Women of Spain 19 - - 3. The Dangerous Age 29 - - 4. The Legal Position of the Mother 35 - - 5. Problems of Birth Control 37 - - - SECTION II.—CHILDREN 41 - - 1. A Boy’s Misery 43 - - 2. Criminals Made in Our Nurseries 49 - - 3. The Tyranny of Parents 51 - - 4. The Superfluous Father 55 - - 5. The Perfect Mother 59 - - 6. Nobody’s Children 61 - - 7. Let Us Pension the Mothers 71 - - 8. Boy and Girl Offenders and Adult Misunderstanding 73 - - 9. New Ways of Teaching Children 79 - - 10. Difficulties and Mistakes in Sex Education 87 - - 11. Sex Instruction. The Age at which Knowledge Should - be given 107 - - 12. The Myth of the Virtuous Sex 113 - - 13. Sentimental Tampering with Difficult Problems - with some Remarks on Sex Favouritism 117 - - 14. The Seduction of Men 123 - - 15. Playing with Love 127 - - - SECTION III.—MARRIAGE AND OTHER RELATIONSHIPS 131 - - 1. Is Passionate Love the Surest Foundation for - Marriage? 133 - - 2. Marriage Reform 139 - - 3. To-day’s Ideas on Marriage. Are we seeking - vainly after happiness? 141 - - 4. Why Men are Unfaithful 145 - - 5. Why Wives are Unfaithful 149 - - 6. Should Doctors Tell? 157 - - 7. The Modern Wife and the Old-fashioned Husband 161 - - 8. The Temporary Gentleman and his Young Wife 165 - - 9. Is Marriage Too Easy? 169 - - 10. Passionate Friendships 173 - - 11. Conclusion—Regeneration 187 - - INDEX 189 - - - - -FOREWORD - - -The essays here collected were written on various occasions over a -considerable space of time. This will account for the diversity in the -subjects and for a certain amount of restatement of my own beliefs and -position. - -I have not thought it advisable to attempt to alter this, since though -some of the things I have said before may be repeated, the point of -view and special application are in each case different. - -Some of the essays have appeared already in various journals, but all -have been very carefully revised and altered and the great majority -entirely re-written. - -In spite of the diversity of the subjects there is a common idea -beneath all the essays—a common back-ground of faith. I do not know -whether I am justified in my confidence that this idea—this faith is -abundantly manifest. If I should try to formulate it into one short -statement, I should say it was the responsibility that the old have to -the young—the debt that one generation owes to the next. - -In my gospel there is one commandment which may not be broken: _Ye -shall not hurt a little child._ - - C. GASQUOINE HARTLEY. - - MERTON PARK, - _March, 1924_. - - - - -SECTION I - -WOMEN - - - - -WOMEN AND CATS - - -In an admirable speech that I heard a few weeks ago, women were likened -to cats. I do not remember exactly in what connection, however this -does not matter. - -But this remark set me thinking—it was not the first time, by many, -that I had heard a man sum up the evil characteristics possessed, or -supposed to be possessed, by my sex by likening us to cats. I now asked -myself was this true? I want to be frank. Let me confess at once that I -have come to the conclusion that the speaker was right. Women and cats -have many qualities in common. I have another confession to make. When -I first thought of this question of women and cats, I am bound to say -that I felt that I did not like either cats or women, in fact I was not -sure that I didn’t dislike them. - -But wait, please, my sisters, before you let your anger fall upon me. -This knowledge was so wounding to my self-pride that it forced me -into an inquiry. I had made a fatal mistake. I soon found the reason -of my dislike. I had been thinking of women and cats as a class and -not as individuals. I disliked them just as one dislikes the Chinese, -Portuguese, pigs or almost any other class of beings thought of -collectively. Of course this is absurd, but then nine times out of -every ten we are absurd—or unreasonable, which is the same thing, and -only by recognising this can we find the truth. Who is there who has -never admired some individual cat? Is there any misogynist who has -never loved some individual woman? - -Before I come to the real subject of this woman—cat likeness, I would -like to say that we women are a little tired of being classed _en -masse_. We really are growing wearied of hearing about ourselves. We -claim to be appraised as individuals, some good, some bad, most of us a -compound of good qualities and bad, but not all alike, not collective. -We object to this communion of character. I remember talking to a -Frenchman about Englishwomen. He said, “By the ones and the twos you -are charmantes, très charmantes, but altogether—no—horrible!” This male -logic is ridiculous. Men revile us as a class and sell their bodies and -souls to us as individuals. - -Now let us look further—What are the class-cat qualities that are also -the class-woman qualities? - -Few subjects are at once so easy and so difficult to approach as this -one of woman and also of cat—our tiny, intimate tiger. We may purr -commonplaces, or scratch and spit rage, but the illusive individuality -of women and cats escapes description. Yes, the more I consider this -subject of women and cats the more convinced I am that this likeness is -a compliment to my sex. Like Balaam’s ass of old those who set out to -curse us are made to bless. - -For a moment I want you to think of a beautiful kitten, of her -brilliant devilry, her perfect curves, the elusive wonder of her -unwinking eyes like orange flowers, the delicate nuances of expression -in her tail. Now, I want you to ask yourselves the nature of your -regard for this perfect animal. You prize her rather for her beauty, -than for her friendship. You call her pet, idiotic names, play with -her, then go away and forget her. - -The kitten grows up, becomes a cat, and old. She ceases to interest -you. Her work is now to catch mice—to serve you. Do you think the cat -does not feel this change in her mode of life—this too sudden loss of -joy, which is forced upon her as soon as she attains her maturity. -If you doubt this, make a real friend—not a plaything—of a kitten. -We did this once. The kitten passionately loved my husband; when he -went walking she went part of the distance with him; often she waited -for him, or watched for his return loudly purring a welcome. Then my -husband proved faithless; the kitten grew old and less beautiful, and -we got a dog; he ceased to notice her. That cat died; yes, slowly pined -away from grief. I acknowledge all cats are not so sensitive; they -have not been made friends. The common cat develops an immense power -of ignoring your past passionate and playful petting. She becomes -distantly indifferent, or coquettishly variable—purring at one hour, -scratching at another. She remembers her past; she understands what you -valued in her. All that is herself she keeps for herself. - -Contrast the cat with the dog. The blind worship of the one, the -exquisitely calm indifference of the other. The dog accepts you, -whatever treatment you give him, because you have loved him for -himself—made him your companion, your friend. But can you expect this -from the cat? You have never made her your friend; you have not found -it worth while to understand her. She deceives you. She scratches you -with those exquisite velvet paws do you annoy her. You cannot teach -her not to thieve. But why? She has no other weapon, and the great -life force urges her to self-protection. And how splendidly she defends -herself; how persistent and how successful she is in gaining her -desires. And how well she understands the advantages that beauty gives -to her; advantages she can gain from nothing else. There is something -really splendid in the trouble the cat takes over her personal attire; -to keep the seductive whiteness of her shirt front’s pretty fur, the -glossy shine of her splendid tiger skin. The dog would be quite happy -and proud when dirty—ugliness is allowed to him. But the cat!—only when -her self-respect is dead can she neglect to be beautiful. - -Yes, now I have come to think about cats, I am filled with adoration. -With every force against her the cat has kept her power! Her rudeness -is sublime! Her aloofness is adorable! You may scratch her chin, she -will permit this if she feels inclined, but the allowing of this -familiarity does not forward your intimacy with her in the least—she -knows what your advances mean. Sometimes she will not respond to your -supplications—you cannot compel her. She wishes to sit upon your lap, -a dozen times you send her down and each time she returns; you want -her to sit upon your lap, and a dozen times she refuses and jumps -down. She imposes her will upon you with a lordship that admits of no -dispute. The personality of the cat is persistent and overwhelming, -she is inconceivably herself. Nothing living—no, not even woman—is so -self-supporting—I do not mean this economically, but artistically,—and -self-centred as the cat. She is the great ego—the supreme type of the -Super-Me. - -I have said almost nothing at all about the character of woman. Is it -necessary? I think not. - - - - -THE WOMEN OF SPAIN - - -Wherever I go in Spain, in the streets of the towns, in the churches, -in the work-rooms, I am impressed with the fine types of the women; -their strength and quietness—the same quality which Valeria, the -Spanish novelist, speaks of as “a notable robustness.” - -There is a fascination about Spanish women not easy to define. Not all -of them are beautiful, and it is, of course, easy to find women of -all degrees of ugliness, but the proportion of those who are strong -and beautiful seems to me to be very large. There is greater variety -of types in northern than in southern Spain. While there are many -women who are dark, with golden complexions, and quite Arabian eyes, a -proportion of fair women will be found with bright brown, auburn, and -some, even golden hair. One sees rosy complexions and blue eyes that -remind one of England; though mixed grey eyes are more frequent. Many -of the faces have finely modelled features, quite classic in outline. -Certainly the most beautiful and distinguished faces are not found -among the women of the so-called upper classes, but belong to the -fish-girls and market-women of the towns and the peasants of the rural -districts. And this presence of a really fine type among the workers of -a race is a certain indication of an old civilisation. - -Many of the women workers in northern Spain are singularly individual. -They are usually tall, and have very distinct features, especially the -nose. It is a face in which every line has character, much strength, -and also humour, rising quickly to the beautiful eyes, but slowly -to the mouth, lengthening it into a smile. They all look like women -whom no man could venture to insult. I do not know whether one must -attribute it to their dress—the vivid coloured handkerchiefs which set -their faces, as it were, in an Oriental frame—but these women have a -serious, passionate look, which is completely fascinating. They are -different from the women of southern Spain, who are smaller, more -graceful, perhaps more piquant, but certainly less beautiful. - -Living in Spain, you come to understand that this land is really the -connecting link between Europe and Africa. Both in their physical -traits and in their character, the Spaniards show their relation to the -North African type; seldom, indeed, is a Spaniard entirely a European. -And it is amongst the women that the resemblance stands out most -clearly. There are women with dark long African faces. You will see -them among the _flamencos_ of Seville or in the gipsy quarter of the -Camino del Sacre-Monte at Granada,—women with slow sinuous movements, -which you notice best when you see them dance, and wonderful eyes that -flash a slow fire, quite unforgettable in their strange beauty. In -dress you still find the Oriental love of bright and violent colours. -The elegant Manilla shawls and the mantillas which give such special -distinction to the women of southern Spain, are modifications of the -Eastern veil. The elaborately dressed hair, built up with combs, with -one rose or carnation giving a note of colour, has also a very ancient -origin. - -Racial types may nearly always be best studied in the women of a -nation, and this is certainly so in a very old civilisation like -Spain, where many forces have combined to waste the men of the race. -Representing as they do both on the physical and psychic side a -conservative tendency, and with a lower variational aptitude than men, -women preserve more markedly primitive racial elements of character. -This may possibly explain why the women of Spain, on the whole, are -finer than the men. - -How well I recall these women as I have seen them often, gathered for -the morning markets in the towns; chaffering, laughing, and carrying -on their work in the conversational Spanish manner. Here is commercial -activity united with a picturesque beauty, unspoilt by the usual -ugliness of business. Ugliness is not a necessary growth of progress. -There is terrible poverty in Spain. The peasants in the country and -the labourers in the towns suffer much injustice in too heavy rents -and an unfair burden of taxation. But as I have come to know them, -I have realised that the sum of their poverty is, after all, so much -less than the sum of their knowledge of the art of living. Not their -poverty, but their splendid capacity for eluding its misery, is what is -so remarkable. These workers have colour not only in their dresses, but -in their souls. - -I see again a charming scene that I chanced upon one day in the -beautiful town of Vigo, which is situated in Galicia, in the extreme -north-west, and is one of the seaports by which the stranger enters -Spain. The day was saddened with heavy rain; a company of girls, who -had just finished their work of packing the fish for market, had -gathered in two empty railway vans, and were dancing together, in the -most delightful way, watched and applauded by a group of youths. - -It was a dance of quick movement and of great variety. It was not a -dance of the feet only, every part of the girls’ bodies played its -part in the performance, the swaying figures, the beckoning hands, -the glittering smiles, that came and went in their dark eyes—all -contributed to the dance, which like all Spanish dances was a love -drama of intense passion; but always decorous, always beautiful. And -the watching youths took their part by a rhythmic clapping of hands and -stamping of feet. There was something infectious in this spontaneous -gaiety. These girls, I felt, understand happiness, and, as I watched -them, the world seemed once more a place in which workers could have -their share of the joy of living. - -Nor does this overflowing and joyous vigour belong to youth alone. I -have seen mothers, stout and matronly, at play in the national games, -throwing large heavy balls of wood along the grass with a healthy -pleasure in muscular movement. Women, no longer young, may as often be -seen dancing as the girls. Well, I remember one woman; she was quite -old, and her skin was a yellowed mass of wrinkles. But the wrinkles -on her face were but the work of time and the hardness of living, and -went no deeper than the skin; they had not touched her soul. She was a -little bowed, yet she held herself finely, as indeed, do all Spanish -women. I shall never forget her perfect absence of self-consciousness; -her abandonment as she quivered all over with the excitement of the -dance—and she used her castanets with the innocent coquetry of a young -girl. There is something that may well give thought in this wholesome -energy, which is so abundant as to find its expression in play. - -If I have emphasised the physical qualities of the women workers of -Spain, it is because I regard these qualities as being the outward -expression of intelligence and will. It is true that Spanish women are -not educated as we count education; many of them cannot read or write. -But in no other land can women be found with a finer understanding of -all that is essential in womanhood. - -From the earliest notices we have of Spanish women we find them -possessed of a definite character of remarkable strength. Courage and -strength have throughout the centuries been common qualities among -Spanish women. The history of the _mujeres varoniles_ of this land -would fill a volume: women who would take the field and fight with a -sagacity and ferocity equal to, and often surpassing, that of men. - -We may still associate the position of women with some of the old -traditions. Women are held in honour. Many primitive customs survive, -in particular among the Basques; and one of the most interesting is -that by which in some districts a daughter takes precedence over the -sons in inheritance of land and family property. As far back as the -fourth century, Spanish women insisted on retaining their own names -after marriage, for we find the Synod of Elvira trying to limit this -freedom. The practice is still common for sons to use the name of the -mother coupled with that of the father, and even in some cases alone, -showing the absence of preference for paternal descent. Velazquez, for -instance, is known to the world only by the name of his mother: his -father’s name was de Silva. It is significant that in no country does -less stigma fall on a child born out of wedlock; and the unmarried -mother meets a recognition that is rarely accorded to her elsewhere. I -questioned a cultured Spaniard on the position of the prostitute; his -answer is worth recording, “Our women give themselves for love much -more often than for money.” This statement may have some extravagance, -but I believe it corresponds to a real fact in the position of women, -which persists from a time when their liberty was greater than it is -to-day. The introduction of modern institutions, and especially the -empty form of chivalry, has lowered the position of women. Emilia Pardo -Bazan, the great woman novelist of Spain, has said, “All the rights -belong to men, and the women have nothing but duties.” Yet there can -be no question that some features of mother-right have left their -imprint on the domestic life of Spain, and that women have in certain -directions preserved a freedom and privilege which in England have -never been established, and only of late claimed. - -The industrial side of primitive culture has always belonged to women, -and in many provinces in Spain the old custom is in active practice, -owing to a shortage of men through military service and widespread -emigration. The farms are worked by women, the ox carts driven by -women, the seed is sown and reaped by women,—indeed, all the work is -done by women. And the point to notice here is that the women have -benefited by this enforced engaging in activities, which in most -countries have been absorbed by men. The fine physical qualities of -these workers is evident. I have taken pains to gain all possible -information on this question. Statistics are not available because in -Spain they have not been kept from this point of view. It is, however, -the opinion of many eminent doctors, who were questioned by a Spanish -friend for me on this subject, that this labour does not damage the -health or beauty of the women, but the contrary, nor does it prejudice -the life and health of their children. - -I have seen many charming scenes of labour; and among my memories -a visit I paid to a sardine factory in the town of Vigo stands out -clearly. The work-rooms open directly on to the bay; here the boats -come, the fish are landed and the silver heaps are washed. The airy -rooms were scarcely redolent even of fish; and the most scrupulous -cleanliness was evident. They were filled with girls, women, men, and -boys. I learnt that both the women and men are well paid, and that -there is no separation between the tasks allotted to the two sexes. -Women and men labour together side by side, capacity alone deciding -the kind of work done. The day’s work is the eight hours, established -in Vigo by arrangement between the masters and the workers; but when a -large catch of sardines comes in it must be dealt with at once, and -the workers are then paid overtime on a higher scale than their weekly -wages. I saw many ingenious and labour-saving machines, one, which -was worked by a boy, made the keys for opening the tins at the rate -of 140 a minute. I learnt that most of the machinery is supplied by -Germany. I was interested to hear that the waste pieces of tin, left -from cutting the boxes, were shipped to that country, to be used for -making toys. It was not, however, in these things that I found my chief -interest. What I chiefly remember was the fine appearance of the women. -I was impressed with their smiling and contented faces. Many of them -are mothers, and there is an admirable créche in connection with the -sardine factory, where the children are cared for. A more industrious -and charming scene of labour it would be impossible to find. I lost no -opportunity of inquiry into local industrial conditions. The workers in -this town are in a very favourable position, and in many respects Vigo -has attained to a degree of humane development under industrial life, -which other countries are toiling to achieve. - -As workers the women are most conscientious and intelligent, apt to -learn, and ready to adopt improvements. From my personal observations -I can bear witness that their cottages, though very poor, are usually -clean, and their children are universally well cared for. Nowhere are -children happier or more loved than in Spain. The women are full of -energy and vigour even to an advanced age. They are certainly healthy. -I once witnessed an interesting episode during a motor-ride in the -country districts of the north. A robust and comely Spanish woman was -riding _a ancas_ (pillion fashion) with a young _caballero_, probably -her son. The passing of our motor frightened the steed, with the result -that both riders were unhorsed. Neither was hurt, but it was the woman -who pursued the runaway horse; she caught it without assistance and -with surpassing skill. What happened to the man I cannot say. When I -saw him he was standing in the road brushing the dust from his clothes. -I presume the woman returned with the horse to fetch him. - -Women were the world’s primitive carriers. In Spain I have seen women -bearing immense burdens, unloading boats, acting as porters and as -firemen, and removing household furniture. I saw one woman with a chest -of drawers easily poised upon her head, another woman bore a coffin, -while another, who was old, carried a small bedstead. A beautiful -woman porter in one village carried our heavy luggage, running with -it on bare feet without sign of effort. She was the mother of four -children, and her husband was at the late Cuban war. She was as upright -as a young pine, with the shapeliness that comes from perfect bodily -equipoise. I do not wish to judge from trivial incidents, but I have -found in these Spanish women a strength and beauty that has become rare -among women to-day. When a fire breaks out in a small town or village -it is the women water-carriers who act as firemen. They fetch the -water from fountains and pour it upon the flames. Just recently I have -read of three of these women who lost their lives in an attempt to -rescue a cripple girl from a burning house. - -I was never tired of looking at the Spanish water-carriers; -the fountains that are in every town are the most delightful -watching-places. The grace with which the women walk on the uneven -roads and their perfect skill in balancing their beautiful _jarras_ of -stone or copper called forth my unceasing admiration. One result of -this universal burden-carrying on the head is the perfect and dignified -character of the women’s manner of walking. These women walk like -priestesses who are bearing sacred vessels. They move erectly, but -without stiffness, with a secure and even stride, planting the foot and -heel together, light and firmly. There is something of the grace of -an animal in their movements—the alertness, the perfect balance, the -suggestion of hidden strength. I recall a conversation I had once with -an Englishman, of the not uncommon strongly patriotic and censorious -type. We were walking on the quay at La Coruna; he pointed to a group -of women-bearers, who were at work unloading a vessel, and said in his -indiscriminate British gallantry, “I can’t bear to see women doing work -that ought to be done by men.” “Look at the women!” was the answer I -made him. - -It is interesting to contrast the robust heroines of Spanish writers -with the feminine feebleness and inanity which so often are the ideal -of English novelists. In Spanish literature vigour and virility, are -qualities apart from sex and are bestowed on women equally with men. - -Again and again the thoughtful reader will be struck with this in the -works of the Spanish writers. It is a point of such interest that -one would like to linger upon it. I may mention, as one instance, -Cervantes’ heroines: the “illustre Fregona,” “beautiful, with cheeks -of rose and jessamine, and as hard as marble,” and Sancho’s daughter, -who was “tall as a lance, as fresh as an April morning, and as strong -as a porter.” Of Tirso de Molina, the great Spanish dramatist, it has -been said that he gives “all vigour to his women and all weakness to -his men.” Nor has this robust ideal of womanhood changed. We meet the -same qualities among the women depicted by the Spanish writers to-day. -Blasco Ibanez, in his “Flor de Mayo,” describes a young woman who could -meet “a stolen embrace with a superb kick, which more than once had -felled to the ground a big youth as strong and firm as the mast of -his boat.” Among the heroines of Juan Valera we find “Juanita” who, -“as a girl could throw stones with such precision that she could kill -sparrows, and leap on the back of the wildest colt or mule,” while Dona -Luz “could dance with a sylph, ride like an Amazon, and in her walk -resembled the divine huntress of Delos.” - -It may of course be argued that these are chosen types that cannot -fairly be said to represent Spanish women. Yet the Spanish writers -are realists in a much truer sense than is understood amongst English -novelists, and it must be admitted that the persistence of the same -qualities in so many heroines proves a fundamental veracity in the type -presented; and from my own experience, I can testify that the women I -have known, in their vigour and independence, show the qualities of -these portrait women. - -The fact can scarcely be passed over that these heroines almost all -belong to the country districts, sometimes even to the poorest people, -and if, as in the case of “Dona Luz,” they spring from a different -class, they are, as a rule, illegitimate, combining aristocratic -distinction with plebian vigour. This corresponds with my own -observations. I have found the women workers more robust and more -intelligent than the women of the middle and upper classes. - -Nor is the explanation far to seek. The preparation that these women -receive for life is far inferior to that of the workers, who co-operate -with men, and whose lives are as actively productive, and work as -capably performed. The women of the richer classes lead lives of -marked inferiority; without opportunity for work, and compelled to an -existence of restricted activity, it is impossible to develop their -physical and intellectual qualities. - -Most of these ladies, except when quite young, are stout, they -are less intelligent than the peasants, and few of them have ever -appealed to me as being beautiful. I hasten to add, however, that -they all have the fascination that belongs to Spanish women; a charm -not easy to define. I have spoken of this quality before, let me try -to make it clearer now. I believe it is that all these “senoras” -and “senoritas” understand that they are women, and instead of this -bringing them unhappiness and causing, as it so often does, the -indefinite unquietness that characterises so many English and American -women, you feel that they are glad that this is so. This is why they -are so attractive. Spanish women are in harmony with themselves, which -gives them something of that exquisite appeal which belongs to all -natural things. This is the reason too, why the older women are so -good-humoured, smiling and gay; they have none of them missed their -womanhood. - -Here is the real reason of the admiration which these women so -universally arouse,—as women they are so perfect. This is a question -that reaches very deeply; it is a quality so easy to see, so difficult -to explain. What I wish to make clear is that the modern English ideal -for women leaves a wide margin open to desire; the innermost forces of -life too often are left unsatisfied, while the women of Spain, with -all their restrictions, know what it is that, after all, really brings -happiness for women. Which is the wiser knowledge? - -The restrictions for women will pass with the expansion of modern life, -and then the strong personality of Spanish women, their energy and good -sense, will inevitably find expression when opportunity is given to -them. But never can they fall, in pursuit of outside things, into the -error of forgetfulness of their womanhood. There does not appear to be -any vagueness in the souls of these women: our women have so often too -much. In the composed presence of the Spanish ladies I have felt that -it is little profit to a woman if, in gaining the world, she should -lose herself. - - - - -THE DANGEROUS AGE - -A TRACT FOR THE TIMES - - -I - -Under this title the Danish writer, known as Karin Michaelis, in the -far-back years before the war—a time now marked as the terrible period -of the suffrage craze, gave to the world a remarkable and intimate -revelation of a woman. It is perhaps the most illuminating work that -has been written in recent years about women, from its rare quality of -femininity, expressed with an unconscious sincerity and biting truth. - -It is very late in the day to describe a book which, though now -forgotten, was, at the time of its publication, very widely read and -still more widely criticised and discussed in almost all European -countries. It appeared at a time of great feminist unrest, which -accounts, to some extent, for the reception it gained. - -The story matters very little, for it is not as the confession of one -woman that “The Dangerous Age” gains its importance, it is because it -affords a diagnosis of an old and a very great evil, as well it is an -acute observation of a certain type of woman’s soul or character. - -It is from this aspect that I wish to approach it, and for this reason -I have called it “A Tract for the Times.” - -Thus it is of very little importance to my present purpose that the -book is not a new one. It does not matter if the story is remembered, -or indeed, if the book itself has, or has not, been read. If the reader -will recall to his or her mind any one of the restless, unsatisfied -women they must know—women, not young but not old, they will have the -history (the variety in the details will not matter at all) of Elsie -Lindtner, the heroine of this story. - -This admirable piece of observation deals with a section of women who -have come into being through our industrial civilisation with its -wrong ideals and stupid customs. Marcel Prévost[1] in his preface to -the book, speaks of Elsie Lindtner’s confession as a revelation of -the feminine soul of all time. With the latter part of this opinion I -entirely disagree. Rather would I say that it is a revelation of the -soul of woman as that soul has been evolved through the repression of -natural instincts and the want of satisfying fields for the expression -of energy, in an atmosphere which very surely gives birth to the modern -demons of confused desires and unconscious unhappiness. - -The title of the book is not, I think, well chosen. The Dangerous -Age—Elsie Lindtner was forty-two when she wrote her confession—was -dangerous because of the life which had preceeded it. There is, -without doubt, a cleavage in life, which may be said to be marked by -the diminishing of attraction towards the opposite sex. But this is -common to men as well as to women. It belongs to no special age, and -its proportion of danger to the individual rests, first on the fulness -or poverty of experience before this period arrives, and secondly on -the power to extract from the past the joyous impulse for continuous -living. But to Elsie Lindtner, as to all women of such false and -restricted experience, it was far more than a cleavage, and because she -had never lived simply and completely, she experienced that emptiness -which strikes the soul with death when the consciousness comes that the -opportunities of life are passing. - -The terror of approaching age robbed her of all her hope of future -happiness, just because she had emptiness in her past. - -It is easy to condemn her, to speak of her selfishness, her falseness, -her colossal egoism—there are few adjectives of condemnation that I -have not heard applied to the Elsie Lindtner’s of life. Yet if we look -at the matter rightly, rather ought we to admire her for the perfect -self-sacrifice with which she pursued the one occupation. - - -II - -The question at its root is one of right functioning. For mark the real -point of Elsie Lindtner’s history is this: all her actions were based -on search for pleasure. To gain the possessions of this world was the -fixed aim for which she bartered her soul. What does she tell us in -one of her letters? She is writing of her school-days. A class mate -had said to her, “Of course, a prince will marry you, for you are the -prettiest girl here.” She carried the words home to a maid who added to -the poison: - -“That’s true enough,” she said, “a pretty face is worth a pocketful of -gold.” - -“Can one sell a pretty face, then?” the child asked. - -“Yes, to the highest bidder,” was the answer given. - -The seed thus sown gave a rich harvest. Sex-trade became the object, -which Elsie Lindtner pursued with the same unflinching purpose -which directs all those who create for themselves the false gods of -possessions. Truly, while we support with our praise the successful -financier, we cannot in justice give less esteem to the woman who -pursues the same end in the way that is the easiest and surest of -success. - -It is no part of my purpose to give a resumé of the history of Elsie -Lindtner. The details matter little; a structure of life built on a -false foundation must of necessity fall to ruin. And there is another -point I wish to make clear. The destroying penalty paid by this woman -for the gain of wealth and position was a failure of the power to -love. The real explanation of her unrest, hysteria, and manifold -symptoms of excitement was caused by the unceasing warfare within her -of two antagonistic forces—the desire for comfort and ease, partly -instinctive, but also fixed by habit, strengthened by a wish to keep -the moral dignity imposed upon women by the conditions of the society -in which she lived, fighting with the deeply instinctive desire for -satisfying sex experience to fulfil the functioning of life. - -It is necessary for women to speak plainly. You cannot deny the needs -of the body, or prostitute their use, without the soul paying its -penalty. That is what women too often forget. A false purity held Elsie -Lindtner from giving herself to her lover, Jorgen Mallthe, and kept her -faithful in the letter of the law to the husband she had married for -his wealth. She had no children. I say without any doubt that she would -have been a purer and a better, because a happier and more healthy -woman, if she had followed the cry of her heart, at the first, as she -was driven in the end to want to do—when it was too late. That she did -not do this, but chose to sacrifice her lover in the same way that -she had sacrificed her husband must, in my opinion, be counted as sin -against her. Only the falseness which had wrapped her own life in a net -of pretence could have made her fail to see the truth for herself. - -It is a fact of very special importance that Elsie Lindtner and all -the women who enter into this book belong to the Scandinavian race, -among whom chastity was extolled as the chief virtue of a woman, while -any lapse was punished with terrible severity. If the husband of an -ancient Dane discovered his wife in adultery he was allowed to kill -and castrate her lover. “There is a city,” says the Scandinavian Edda, -“remote from the sun, the gates of which face the north, poison rains -there through a thousand openings, the place is all composed of the -carcasses of serpents. There run certain torrents, in which are plunged -the bodies of the perjurers, assassins, and those who seduce married -women. A black-winged dragon flies incessantly round and devours the -bodies of the wretched who are there imprisoned.” Again, the Icelandic -Hava Maél contains this caustic apophthegm “Trust not the words of a -girl, neither to those which a woman utters, for their hearts have been -made like the wheel that turns round; levity was put into their bosoms. -Trust not to the ice on one day’s freezing, neither to the serpent -which lies asleep, nor to the caresses of her you are going to marry.” - - -III - -Now, it may be asked: What has all this to do with Elsie Lindtner? My -answer is: “Everything!” The customs of a past social life do subsist -beneath the surface of modern society; we cannot without strong effort -escape from the chains of our inheritance. In the sad nations of the -cold north, where the natural joy of the body has been regarded as -something to be fought with and denied, a perpetual confusion has -arisen at the very source of life. For the sex-passion is a force, huge -and fateful, which has to be reckoned with. Woman is more primitive, -more intuitive, more emotional than man. And the outlets allowed to her -in the past have been more restricted; thus the price she pays for any -repression of the natural rights of love is heavier. Elsie Lindtner’s -history is a sermon to all those who set up the false god of chastity -for women. - -I am aware that this statement will arouse opposition—especially in -women. To-day we hear much talk, and often among women who are working -nobly for the better life for women, of control of sex and the need of -imposing on men the same code of repression which for so long has been -imposed upon them. This is, of course, very natural, but that does not -make it wise. It is a truth realised by few women that repression is -not, and never can be, control. There seems to be a very widespread -opinion that to use the divine gift of sex even in marriage, for joy, -is wrong. One would be inclined to laugh, if the sadness of this -falsehood did not make one want to weep. - -The whole subject, wide as life itself, escapes anything like adequate -treatment. The lady—the Elsie Lindtners of society—the household drudge -and the prostitute, are the three main types of women resulting in our -so-called civilisation of to-day, from the process of the past, and it -is hard to know which is the most wretched, which is the most wronged, -the most destructive, and the furthest removed from that ideal woman -which a happier future may evolve. - -What, then, in conclusion, is the lesson to be learnt from this “Tract -for the Times?” Women must be free—free to work and free to love. -Then, and then only, can they claim to be the fitting mates of men, -then and then only, will they be able to fulfil aright their supreme -work as the mothers of the sons and daughters of the race. This is the -path along which freedom is to be found. What, then, is the individual -woman to do? This question is one which women at the present have to -answer for themselves. But one thing is certain—they must have the -courage to tear from their eyes the old and the new bandages that have -kept them, and still keep them, in the darkness of ignorance; better -even to sin and know the truth than to live in falsehood and in a -child’s world of pretence. - - - - -THE LEGAL POSITION OF THE MOTHER - - -In spite of the rapid advance that has been made, the legal -disabilities of women are still great. Especially is this so in their -relationship to their children. - -Here where they should be supreme women have really no rights at all -under our laws. - -They are not the legal parents of their own children. Only if their -child is illegitimately born, have they any rights of guardianship. -The law recognises the father as the one parent. He is entitled to the -custody of the children. He alone can say where they shall live or how -they shall be brought up: he alone has the legal right to decide how -they shall be educated or what religion they shall follow. No promise -that he makes, either before or after marriage is binding. The man may -change his mind at any time. The woman has no remedy. It is evident how -terrible a force for evil these rights may easily become in the hands -of an unscrupulous or vindictive man. If, for instance, the woman does -not choose to live where the husband directs, he may take her children -from her. Again, if there is any difference of opinion between the two -parents the opinion of the one parent—the father, must prevail. And -this is so even when the mother, and not he, is the supporter of the -family. - -And the injustice continues even after death. The father has the right -to appoint a guardian to act with the mother, but a guardian appointed -by the mother can act only after both parents are dead. The children -have to be brought up according to any wishes expressed by the father -or even which it is inferred he has intended to express. This is -especially apt to cause trouble with regard to religion. Any relation -of the father (even when he himself has been either indifferent or -irreligious) may claim to have a woman’s children trained, _against -her wishes_, in the religion professed by the father’s family on the -ground that the father was nominally a member of that church. - -Of course, when there is agreement between the parents, as happily is -the case in the great majority of marriages, the law does not matter. -Indeed very few mothers have any conception of their position under the -law. That is the only reason why these horrible and out-of-date laws -have not been repealed. - -Fortunately they are unlikely to remain a dark blot upon our statute -book. An admirable Bill has been formulated under the direction of -the National Union of Societies for Equal Citizenship, which will -remedy this long-standing injustice. It has the long title of the -Guardianship, Maintenance, Custody and Marriage of Infants Bill. Its -two great objects are:— - - (1) To make the mother as well as the father the legal parent of her - children. - - (2) To impose upon both fathers and mothers the liability to maintain - their children according to their means. - -There are many further admirable provisions, as for instance, the one -which gives both parents equal rights in appointing guardians. Where -the child is under 16 and has no property, present or expectant, the -case may be dealt with in Courts of Summary Jurisdiction (or Police -Courts). This is most important, as it makes the benefits of the equal -guardianship possible to the working classes, which would not be so, if -cases, as at present, had to be heard in High Courts or County Courts. - -I shall not trouble to answer the few determined obstructionists who -have opposed this Bill. They say that it will cause difficulty in the -home, and provide a reason for quarrel between husband and wife. I -have too high an opinion of men and women and of their love of their -children to believe this. The cases of dispute, sufficiently serious -to be brought into the courts, will always be comparatively few. And a -decision of justice will be much easier when the partners have an equal -status. Then the welfare of the children will be the decisive factor -and not as now, the desires of the parents. - -Equal guardianship laws are in operation already in many countries: and -wherever they have been established they have worked excellently and -must be regarded as a complete success. - - - - -PROBLEMS OF BIRTH CONTROL - - -It is generally admitted that there is much to be gloomy about in these -days of bad trade and post-war morals. And yet, perhaps, the poor old -world does improve in some respects. - -One of the most hopeful signs of this improvement to me is the very -widespread interest that has been taken of late in birth control. -Conferences are held, law-suits are fought and won; pamphlets are -written and in almost every town lectures are given, and everywhere -groups of earnest-minded people come together to discuss and to learn. -Our sense of responsibility has been quickened in connection with -birth and the bringing a new life into the world. In a deeper and -more practical way we have come to know that no child should be born -_unwanted_. - -Now, possibly all this suggests no very great moral advance to you. It -may be that you regard it as wrong to regulate births in any way. Yet -surely it is well for this difficult problem to be carefully considered -in open discussion. To avoid error we must have knowledge. For myself, -as I have listened to speakers or read of what is being done, though -possibly I am in sharp opposition to much that is believed and advised, -yet always I am glad when I reflect that only a little while ago the -very mention of birth control would have been impossible at any public -meeting, nor would any paper have noticed it. - -Everywhere since the war the increased interest in the question has -been astonishing. Is it, I have asked myself, that the terrible loss of -life has forced us at last to have a deeper understanding of the value -of life? Certainly all over the world women and men are beginning to -understand the right of every child to be well-born. - -The relations between the poverty of the family and its size must be -considered in connection with this question. Much stress is also -rightly laid on the injurious effect on the mother of continuous and -unwilling child-bearing, and on the resulting terrible wastage of life -in mis-carriages and still-births. Personally, I should always like to -hear more of the effect on the children unfortunate enough to live. -_For the child is unfortunate who is born into a home unwanted by its -mother._ - -To give life well it must be given gladly. There can be no deeper -tragedy than an unwilling motherhood. - -The moral and religious aspects of family limitation have to be -considered. It needs to be emphasised how more and more religion to-day -refuses to divorce the spiritual from the material necessities of man, -and how it begins to appreciate that the bread-and-butter difficulties -of life have the greatest effect on the moral character of the people. - -If a criticism on the work of those who advocate birth control may be -offered, it is that too much time is spent in saying what everyone -agrees with. Propositions, which all who think at all practically -accept, are gravely supported with elaborate arguments. More might -be accomplished if these elementary questions were left and freer -discussions given to the many grave problems which still await -investigation. There are so many questions on which far more knowledge -needs collecting before any definite conclusions of permanent value can -be accepted. - -Roughly classified, birth control needs to be studied from three -different aspects:— - -First, there is the effect upon the married couple. - -Second, there is the effect upon the child. - -And lastly, there is the effect of voluntary limitation of the -birth-rate upon society. - -In estimating the consequences to the man and the woman, it is -impossible to neglect the psychological results. - -The effect upon the mind is far stronger and more lasting than any more -direct result. I mean, it is what the individual woman or man _feels_ -about limitation that is important for them. It is their own attitude -to what they do that will mainly decide the results it will have. This -is a question of the deepest complication. And much more knowledge -is needed, and the greatest care is called for not to form hasty and -unproved opinions. It is, I must insist, an individual question that -can never be arbitrarilly decided, even by those competent to form a -decision. That is why so much that is said, even by doctors who ought -to know better, is so absurd. - -Much easier to estimate is the effect upon the child. Here we seem to -be on firmer ground. To save the unwanted child from being born or -conceived by drunken or syphilitic parents is a work of such plain -morality that there would appear to be no room for difference of -opinion. - -Yet the question is deeper and far more difficult than this; there -are, indeed, a whole group of problems connected with it. There is, -for instance, the case of the only child, who always suffers grave -disadvantages, brought up in a home with adults. - -Again the childless or one-child marriage is often not happy for those -who love children. This is felt, in particular, when one partner -desires children and the other refuses to have them born. And it must -not be forgotten that all that affects the parents, must also have its -results on any child that is born. Apart from economic necessities, the -small, limited family is, in many ways, harder to bring up than the -large family. - -With regard to the effect of birth control on society, it is now -becoming a familiar reflection that often those least fitted to carry -out parental duties, because of faults of character or misfortune of -circumstances, have the largest families. - -Here the main problem is not so much to teach the mere knowledge of how -families are to be limited as to induce that control and to stir up -such desire as will lead to limitation being practised. - -But of course, the alteration of the characters of men and women is a -task of too great difficulty to be treated as a side issue. - -Yet I would not end with any word of discouragement. As I started by -saying, the mere consideration of these difficult questions in the -broad light of day must be felt, by all of us who are old enough to -remember the attitude in the past, as a wholesome sign of the times. - -We care more, and very slowly we are growing more honest. - - - - -SECTION II - -CHILDREN - - - - -A BOY’S MISERY - - -Quite the saddest thing I have come across for some time is the account -of the suicide from remorse of a widow, who drowned herself in utter -misery; her body being found near the spot where a fortnight before -that of her son, aged eleven, had been discovered. The boy, it seems -had committed suicide after being accused of stealing money belonging -to his mother. - -Even from the bare outline of what happened there stands out stark, -like some haunting fiend of pain, the agony suffered by this boy and -mother before each sought the merciful quietness of death. - -I find myself conscious of emotion stronger and more vexing than the -strangling sense of pity. I am angry at the waste of two lives, and -especially of the fine young life so grievously destroyed. Why, I ask -myself, do we torture children by forcing on their sensitive natures -punishment for failure in right conduct, while we make no attempt to -understand the hidden struggles and unexplained emotions that almost -always are the cause? How is it we fail to remember so completely our -own growth, the mistakes we made, the undiscovered sins that now we -have forgotten? - -This boy stole from his mother. A thief you call him—a bad and -ungrateful son. - -But wait—think! Why did he steal? - -An easy question, perhaps, you will say to answer. He desired to buy -sweets, wished to visit the cinema; he had been betting with his -marbles and getting into bad habits; or he wanted to swagger as a -capitalist among his friends. Yes, that sounds probable enough; some -such were, I expect, the reasons given by the mother, probably believed -in by the boy himself. For so often we force the acceptance of our -adult stupidities upon our children. The poor boy counted himself a -thief, believed that he had sinned; he felt that he had wronged the -mother whom he loved so much. He did not know, for there was no one to -tell him, that he did not care at all for the money he stole for these -trivial reasons. No, he did not know. But underneath, hidden in the -darkness of his young soul, there was a stronger driving imperative, -unknown and unsuspected by any one, most of all by the boy himself, -which was the irresistible force that caused him to steal. - -The reason of his action is really simple and would be recognised at -once by any psychologist. It must be sought in the relation of the boy -to his mother. He was not loved enough. At least, in some way, he was -unhappy in his home relationship—at conflict in his innermost nature. -He stole money, though, he did not know it, because he wanted love. - -Of his life, through his eleven years, I lack the information that -would provide us with the necessary details of proof. It is exceedingly -improbable that the details will be forthcoming, for this boy was -unknown and his death even at the time, caused no stir. But it is a -very certain inference from the evidence of the excessive remorse that -drove him to take his own life that, sometime in his earlier years, he -had suffered some shock of jealousy or stress of misery in relation to -his mother, that initiated the trouble, which later had to force an -expression by means of his thefts. - -I hope that I make my meaning clear. The idea of “transferring” a -feeling into a quite different action may be a little strange to you. -Yet everyone knows that, if you are angry with someone and dare not -show it, you may gain relief from some kind of violent action entirely -unconnected with the cause of the angry feelings. The boy who is afraid -of his father, or is otherwise unhappy in his home, is very likely -to be a “bully,” he takes what he has suffered out of someone weaker -than himself. And it is the same process when the suppressed painful -feelings of jealousy or other unhappiness take the form of spending -money. The impulse is so powerful that if the money cannot be got in -any other way, it will be stolen. - -In many children there arises jealousy in connection with their home -relationships, often without reason, but none the less real to the -childish imagination, and this causes them to doubt the parental love -that is as necessary to them as the sun to the flower. In its mild -and practically harmless form this feeling of being neglected, which -few children quite escape, is only occasionally active and remains -unrecognised, though it is the frequent cause of irritability, of minor -sicknesses and faults in behaviour. The results in aggravated cases -are far more important, and cause, not infrequently, such a desperate -consciousness of inferiority, with an always pressing sense of wanting -something, that there arises an overpowering physical and spiritual -necessity for the liberation of the hidden trouble. This relief is -found usually in acts of violence, frequently in stealing. - -In the case we are considering we see the boy, beyond all shadow -of doubt, over-sensitive, the symptoms of the unconscious trouble -expressing themselves, on the one side, in an exaggerated feeling -of inferiority, and, on the other, in a compelling need to find -opportunity for the assertion of power. I do not know just how it -happened. Maybe, his mother, who has paid with her life in passionate -remorse, was too hindered with the troublesome details of life to be -able to cultivate and pick the flowers of love. I cannot know, but _I -do know_ that in the tender psyche or soul of that poor boy was some -terrible need for his mother’s love—a want which he did not understand, -indeed, of which he was probably wholly unaware. He may even have been -in outward rebellion, have thought he was indifferent to his mother, -but such a state would but furnish further witness to the trouble -within. Had he known what it was he wanted, he would not have done what -he did. But the ever-disturbing need, causing confusion in his soul, -drove him to steal the most obvious thing that he was without and his -mother possessed—that was money. - -I do not hesitate to state that in the great majority of cases of -boyish thieving the reasons for the act must be sought in some deeply -hidden cause, marking some inner disturbance, with a feeling of wanting -something which the boy does not understand. The taking of small -sums of money or other pilfering acts is a covering-mask, and has no -connection with crime. There is one thing further that it is necessary -to remember. Though the fault of boyish thieving is not in itself a -sign of any moral failure in the character, our treatment of such -small thefts—our adult stupidity in understanding the difficulties and -seeking out the concealed unhappiness of the young soul, often hounds -on the stealing boy into the thief. - -We make criminals of the young because we are blind and hardened with -our own failures and minor struggles. We also cause, as in the case of -this boy who killed himself, the most heart-breaking tragedies. It is -appalling even to contemplate the suffering brought quite uselessly -upon boys and girls by grown-up foolish ignorance. - -We show too little imagination in our treatment of the child who does -wrong. We rarely remember his almost terrible sensitiveness, nor do we -consider the unusual advantage (from the point of view of the child) -that we possess just in being grown-up. And nothing, as I have said -before, is to the boy plainer as a sign of this grown-up freedom than -the power we have (or rather that they think we have) to spend money -how we like and when we like. That is why the taking of money is one of -the most common symbolic acts for a boy’s wish for love or power. - -That boyish theft is often pathological is proved by the fact that the -objects stolen are often useless to the boy, that they are hidden away, -and, as a rule, forgotten, and further that the boy forgets, or almost -forgets, what he has stolen or how he took them. Some boys have a -passion for stealing certain objects which they will take over and over -again. Those who have had anything to do with delinquent children well -know these symptoms. - -In nearly all cases the thieving is repeated over long periods; -although each act may be followed by violent remorse. Parents and all -those who have to deal with these childish wrong doers, should know -that this sorrow, especially if it is emotionally excessive, serves -only to increase the tendency to a fresh repetition of the theft. For -remorse fixes the boy’s attention on his stealing, and, still more, on -the pleasurable feelings that unconsciously to himself are connected -with the act. He remembers these, though he does not know it, whenever -he thinks of his wickedness in stealing. And this fixity of attention -in itself is a kind of rehearsal of the act, that is very likely to -lead to an actual performance of it. Boyish remorse is, no doubt, -gratifying to parents, but, almost invariably, it is harmful to the boy. - -Whenever the boy thinks how bad he is, how wrong and disastrous an act -would be, he is in danger of being compelled to perform that act. Most -of us have experienced this, but we forget its application to the moral -conduct of the young. Once think how terrible it would be to fall down -the precipice, and the idea of jumping down approaches. - -Remorse is a form of temptation. And all forms of temptation should, -if possible, be avoided in dealing with the misconduct of children. If -your boy steals money do not leave money lying about. Also, even if he -has stolen money several times, express no faintest suspicion as to his -not using honourably any money entrusted to him, for some necessary -purpose, such as paying railway fares or buying a school book. Never be -suspicious over the change such a child brings you. As he steals from a -feeling of inferiority, and, in particular, because through jealousy, -whether imagined or real, he feels himself less blessed with the love -of those about him than other more confident children, any sign of your -not being able to trust him, must render him more liable to err. - -If the thieving boy were treated with sympathy and understanding, and -loved and helped, instead of being blamed and often cruelly punished, -there would be fewer grown-up thieves. - - - - -CRIMINALS MADE IN OUR NURSERIES - - -Every child suffers sometimes from a feeling of inferiority. He is so -much smaller and weaker than the grown-ups who control his play and -his work that he feels uncomfortably helpless against their authority, -which to him seems often to be exercised in an arbitrary and unkind way. - -There are times when this consciousness of being little and weak is -so overwhelming that the child is bound to do something to convince -himself of his own powerfulness. - -It is then that he becomes naughty. For the very easiest way to -command the attention of his mother, and the other adults who are -with him, is by being naughty. Good, he is left alone. The grown-ups -go on with their own occupations. He feels neglected. At most he is -mildly praised. “Johnnie is a nice quiet boy to-day.” But this is very -different from the attention he commands when he is naughty. He defies -authority. For a short time he becomes a despot, ruling the grown-ups -who usually rule him. His sensation of power is intensely enjoyable. -And the more disturbance he makes in the nursery life the deeper is -his satisfaction. Of course, he is sorry afterwards. But his sorrow is -not really for the first period of successful rebellion, but for the -following time after his power fails. - -Now, it is very important for the mother to understand this. The real -problem is to minimise as much as can be of the child’s enjoyment of -naughtiness. - -Any unwisdom on the mother’s part such as her being too emotionally -concerned, indulging in nagging or violent anger, may have very serious -results. Inevitably the child feels as he sees his mother’s tears and -want of control, “I have caused this.” Instead of being weak he is -master of his mother. That is why usually he is good after he has been -naughty. - -But this kind of nursery behaviour is disastrous to the child’s -character. - -Let me tell you a rather striking story to illustrate this. A young -boy, very naughty, was sent to bed. His mother, greatly troubled, went -some hours later to his room. He was kneeling, praying. She thought he -was asking God to forgive him. But this was what she heard: “Please, -dear God, forgive my bad mummy for being so unkind to poor little -Freddy.” The boy grew up in the most unfortunate way. I cannot give -the details and there were, of course, several causes. Yet certainly -his character suffered the first wrong in the nursery from an unwise -emphasising by his mother of his own importance. - -The naughty child is always the child over-occupied with thoughts -of himself. And his feelings are unhealthily important to him just -because he finds himself for some cause at a disadvantage. Parents, -unconsciously, but very foolishly, emphasise their children’s -inferiority; they speak of their weakness, tell them they are too -little to do this or that, never realising the danger of what they are -doing. - -Children must not be subjected to conditions of emotional stress, which -increase unnecessarily their inevitable consciousness of inferiority -in an adult world. If the parents do not find out and remedy the cause -of these feelings (which they ought to know are invariably present -whenever a child is naughty) and provide an expression by which the -desired power is gained in a right way, let me warn them that they are -dangerously limiting their children’s chance of a successful and happy -life. By connecting pleasure with bad conduct, they are certainly, -though they do not know it, making the way easy for every kind of -future bad conduct. - -The fate of all children is decided in the nursery; criminals are made -there as well as saints and heroes. - - - - -THE TYRANNY OF PARENTS - - -In the life of every girl and every boy there come times when they -must, and should, free themselves from the thraldom of the home. - -This may sound hard to parents, who desire almost always to keep their -children in tutelage, and cannot often even think of them except as -belonging to the home and to themselves. - -Yet the young must rebel, must escape from this too-closely-binding -yoke of love. They have to break away from the moorings of safety; to -adventure; to find a place for themselves; to get into the world and to -establish their own lives as women and men. - -We should hear much less of trouble between parents and children if -fathers, and especially mothers, could be made to understand that the -conflict with their growing boys and girls is not a personal conflict; -that it has nothing, or at least very little, to do with the actual -situation, and is not directly dependent on anything that either the -parents or the children may do or may not do. And this is comforting to -parents—it does not mean that their children love them less. - -No, the conflict is based on an inescapable psychological opposition. -It is the necessity of the young to escape from the tyranny of the old. - -The parent’s hand is needed to steady the child, while it is unable -to stand firmly on its own feet or to guide its own steps; but as the -child grows older, it must learn to walk alone. If the mother persists -in holding out a hand, never lets the child fall down, she destroys a -proper independence and the hand held-out-too-long is used to satisfy -the mother’s selfish desire; to give her the pleasure she gains from -the child’s dependence on herself, and not because of any need of the -child for help. - -You will see the application of this illustration. - -Many mothers prolong the years of childish helplessness and absence -of initiative because they do not want their children to grow up. -Especially they check the boy’s or the girl’s independent feelings and -impulses by persistently guiding them. - -There is an immense, but usually unrecognised, selfishness in the -apparently devoted parent. Such devotion ignores the right of the young -to discover for themselves. - -The separation between parent and child needs to be more than a -mere separation in space. Sending a boy or a girl away to school -or elsewhere does not separate it from the home ties; often such a -separation but serves to bind them more fixedly. What is needed is a -psychological separation—an emotional freedom from the too-crippling -dependence of childhood. There is the need to take the home standards -and compare them with other standards of the world; the getting rid -of the old excessive reverence for the parents. They, too, must be -criticised and judged. - -This process of liberation is difficult and very painful to the child; -that is why so often there is rebellion and unkindness. And the danger -is greater because, at this period, the boy or the girl is so easily -discouraged, turns back so readily with kindness to the old safety. -And if this is countenanced by the parents, who continue to offer a -too-protective affection, the character of the boy or the girl is -weakened so that in after years they will not be able to meet the -necessities of adult action. - -The too fond mother or father perpetuates the childhood of their sons -and daughters. They are a far more real danger to their children than -neglectful or careless parents. - -It is worthwhile considering some of the reasons why parents do too -much for their children; are too careful to keep them bound to the home -and within the protection of parental love. - -The parents who have failed in satisfying their own desires see in -their children a new opportunity. They hope for vicarious satisfaction. -And for this reason, rather than for the reasons of unselfish love -which they believe rule their conduct, they will sacrifice themselves -so that their children may achieve what they have failed in gaining. -They are to hand down and maintain _their name_, to keep in the world -_their family_, and all that seems of value _in themselves_—all that -would be lost by their approaching extinction. - -If we stop to think, we shall see how common and easy it is for parents -to use their children as instruments of satisfaction. Wherever one -or other parent is unhappy, suffering under some unsatisfied desire, -they seek to satisfy these desires through their children. Do we not -know that the wife, and sometimes also the husband, not happy in their -own marriage concentrate their hopes of a satisfying life on their -children. The mother wants her daughters to be literally, wholly -devoted to her; she loves again in her love for her sons; or the father -compensates himself with his devotion to his daughters, while he seeks -to satisfy his desire for power by completely directing the life of his -sons. - -All this is quite wrong. It breaks the power of the young; turns them -into dutiful automatons, instead of rebellious adventurers. Constantly -thwarted, too much protected, they become necessarily less capable of -effort, with a weakened power for action. The model boy or girl of -parents and schoolmasters is almost always a failure in life. - -Such parents love their children too selfishly and too possessively. -Seeking emotional relief, they drain for themselves the storehouse of -energy which their children ought to preserve for their own lives. - -The danger is deep and far reaching, a too great and unhealthy -attachment to either parent may, and often does, cause an inability to -transfer an adequate share of loyalty and affection from the parent to -the wife or husband. It may check the desire to marry. The man’s choice -of a life partner is guided by an infantile vision of his idealised -mother; and then, after marriage, he will seek from his wife the -feelings of a mother. That is, he will want to be helped and mothered -instead of wishing to guide and protect. - -This is a very frequent cause of unhappiness in marriage. - -Strange as this may seem, the true Don Juan owes his incapacity to find -satisfaction in love to the fact that he searches unconsciously for -what he can never find, the lost features of his childhood’s mother. He -is unfaithful to all women because he is faithful to one woman. - -Again the girl may feel towards her husband as she did towards her -father; she may be too obedient, too uncritical to be a true helpmate; -or, and this is much more serious, a too excessive identification with -the mother may render difficult and even impossible the right response -to love. - -It is not too much to say that, wherever there is this over-attachment -and persistence of the childhood attitude, or where the conflict to -break from the too heavy tyranny is very severe, the whole career and -the whole love-history of the adult life is settled and decided—damned -and fated to disaster from the start. Indeed the seed of failure, of -unhappiness, even of crime and vice, often is set in helpless children -by the selfishness and ignorance of over-affectionately helpful -parents, whose too much interference, too emotional solicitude, blocks -the narrow passes that lead on to open and independent life. - - - - -THE SUPERFLUOUS FATHER - - -In many homes, where there are children, the father seems a -stranger—almost an intruder. - -The central figure in the family is the mother. All the details of -her life are familiar to the children; she is seen shopping, cooking, -looking after the home. The father is a little mysterious; he goes -adventuring in the unknown world. He is picturesque and wonderful; an -exciting figure that arouses nursery admiration—but he is unnecessary. - -At first the mother occupies all the child’s attention. She supplies -food, comfort, shelter, teaching and brings happiness to the nursery. -She is the first love-object and of supreme importance; the starting -point of all those interests of the children which lie outside of -themselves. - -But the other parent—the superfluous father, comes both as interrupter -and friend into this mother-child circle. He plays with the children, -opens up new delightful ways of interest, brings the movement that -children love. But also he is a disturber. He absorbs the mother, draws -her attention and care from the children. He upsets the order and -balance of the nursery. He almost dethrones the baby. - -Thus at a very early age jealousy of the father begins to stir and -unsettle the nursery peace. Usually we either treat this childish -jealousy as a joke or refuse to admit its presence, but it is deadly -earnest to the child itself. If the mother is capricious, varying -in her attentions to her husband and to her children, or if she is -over-tender and too demonstratively affectionate, this jealousy may, -and indeed, must work great and permanent evil. - -You see, it imposes a conflict in the exquisitely responsive child, -between the emotions of hate and anger and envy born of jealousy, and -the emotions of love and admiration and obedience dependent on a sense -of the benefits conferred by the father. - -It is the duty of the mother so to balance her favours and her love -that the rights of the husband and the children are both maintained, -and neither side is tempted to be a monopolist. - -For it is not only the children who are jealous of the father. Often -the father is jealous of the children. And often he has cause. Some -women, when once the child is born, regard their husbands solely as the -person for providing money necessary for the maintenance of the home. -In any other capacity she has ceased to desire him, frankly he is in -the way. - -The mother type often ceases, after motherhood, to be the loving -mate—the wife. There is so little time for love making in a nursery -home. The man becomes a superfluity, his demands tend to be delegated -to holidays that are planned, but do not often occur. - -Nature herself seems to condemn the man in his capacity as father. So -delicate is the bond which attaches him to the child as compared with -the unbreakable bindings which hold the child to the mother; so readily -can he be pushed outside the circle of the family, where, as a member -apart, he will inevitably seek his own interests and pleasures. - -Now, whether this complete severance happens or not, some conflict -between the father and his children, especially between father and sons -is almost bound to occur. This is a war which is normal and, indeed, -inevitable—far more so than any class-war, any opposition and struggle -between the nations. - -Have we not read of the solitary polygamous father of the past, the Old -Man of the Tribe, who drove his sons out of the horde as they grew up, -because in his greed he wanted all the women to be his wives? Much time -has passed since then, but these emotions are very old and very strong. -Pity and the gentler feelings of civilisation enable the father to -accept the son as a member of the family and as a companion instead of -a rival. But echoes remain of the old instincts of jealous rivalry. - -No science is so difficult or so important as psychology. It is -because parents do not understand their own minds or the minds of -their children that they make such mistakes. They do not see that some -jealousy and opposition in family relationships are inevitable and, -in fact, useful. Else the child would never grow up, would always be -overwhelmed by its parents. - -So do not let us be too alarmed if sons oppose fathers, or if fathers -are wanting in sympathy with their sons. - -Yet it must be remembered finally, on the other side, that the -authority of the father has to be maintained. Superfluous in the -family, from one point of thought, his influence is nevertheless of -the most urgent importance. Without it a too great dependence on self -is fostered at too early an age, which sets up an intolerant and -unreasoning hatred of all authority and an inability to suffer any kind -of restraint. - -The father thus needs to preserve his rights and duties within the -home. If women have had to fight for the Vote and the open door to the -profession, the father may have to fight for the love of his children -and the key to the nursery. - -He must refuse to be regarded as superfluous. - - - - -THE PERFECT MOTHER - - -A few weeks ago a shower of sudden rain brought me for shelter into -the house of a kindly stranger, who beckoned me in from the position I -had taken under the thickly foliaged trees, bordering her garden. She -was a woman who exuded kindness. You know the type—opulent in figure, -wholesome and ripe, her face beaming in wide wrinkles of pink flesh. - -The sudden generous smile of the big mouth showed her the possessor -of a real charm. Her eyes had a blue twinkle that attracted laughter. -Quite plainly she would be delightful as a mother. For about her was -something that conjured visions of nursery fires, of warm, sweet -bread-and-milk, of sugar plums after nasty powders, and of kisses -and forgiveness given for childish wrong doing, without any unfair -bargaining for repentence. - -But this woman had no child. Nature does not always, in this matter, -act as intelligently as she might. We all know of many Betsy Trotwoods. -On the other hand, we find children lavished wastefully—yes, -children, swarming in the cold homes of mothers who do not want -them—women without understanding of children or any trace of parental -passionateness. Do you not recall many modern prototypes of Mrs. -Jellaby? - -I felt my bowels ache for this woman with her rich and wasted -motherhood. Her opulent affections were lavished not, as they should -have been, on the tender warm bodies of little children, but on dogs. - -Never have I seen so many dogs: they were placed all over the rather -small room. Both easy chairs were occupied by a canine seater. There -was a mother with new baby-pups in a lined basket before the great -fire. Another dog who was sick was in another basket, wrapped in a -shawl, on the other side of the fire. The room was stifling, and had -a sick, close, doggy smell. And though I am a lover of dogs, I felt -disgusted. I really hated those pampered toys, that snarled and snapped -and grumbled at me in the most horrible way. Believe me, I am not -exaggerating. You could not speak. The whole room was dogs. Enough! Let -us leave them and get on to something of greater value. - -It was that thought which caught and gripped my attention. This woman’s -unfilled life. I could not forget it: it stayed with me long after I -had left the house—a memory not to be obliterated. - -She was forlorn among her dogs. It was a tragedy of waste. I have had -so many dreams of the perfect mother that I was stung to anger and -impatience to find her, at last here, squandering her affections on a -canine brood. - -The situation was so plain. This woman needed children, if not of -her flesh, then adopted and made her own by the rich fullness of her -motherhood. - - - - -NOBODY’S CHILDREN - -CHILD ADOPTION: A MUCH NEEDED REFORM - - -It was a short time after I had found “the perfect mother” thus wasted, -that there came into my hands the “White Paper” which gives in full the -wise and interesting Report of the Committee on Child Adoption. I knew -that here was just the very thing that was wanted. Here was shewn the -means by which the motherly childless woman and the motherless child -could be brought together. - -The desire for child adoption has never been stronger than it is at the -present time. But I do not hesitate to say that, in the present absence -of any law to regulate and safeguard adoption, the position is so set -about with difficulties and so pressed with continuous dangers that -the practice ought to be actively discouraged. It is dangerous for the -adopter and, what matters even more, it is dangerous for the child. - -The emphatic and unanimous decision of the Committee was that there -is immediate necessity for a change in the law to make the adoption -of children legal in this country. Every one who gave evidence was -unanimously in favour of adoption in all cases where, for one reason -or another, any child could not have the care of its own parents. It -is much better for every child to be brought up in a home than in an -institution. Not only is it cheaper, but the child benefits far more. -But adoption needs to be regulated and legalised. The child is too -precious a possession to leave to anyone to do with as they desire. - -The report recommends:— - - 1. That after obtaining the consent of the real parents and the - adopting parents, as well as the consent of the child, if he - (or she) is over fourteen, all adoption shall be sanctioned by - a judicial authority. - - - 2. That confidential official inquiries shall be made from time to - time, as to the child’s progress and happiness in the adopted home. - - 3. That the child shall take the adopter’s name, and shall have, as - far as is possible, the position of a natural child. - -This Report was presented in June, 1921. Yet nothing has been done. And -what I wish to emphasize with all the power that I have, is the crime -of this delay and the urgent need there is for immediate legislation. -Children are waiting to be adopted; childless people are waiting to -adopt. Surely it ought not to be difficult to frame a simple law that -would safeguard the interests of both. - -There is little wonder that hitherto adoption has not been popular in -this country. One strong reason that has prevented the far-sighted -from attempting it is that in England there is no legal method by -which adoption can be carried out. And because of this there is, as I -have said, too much danger connected with it, as well as not enough -certainty of its continuance. For the law grants the foster-parent no -recognised control over the child. - -There is the ever present fear, increasing as the years pass and the -child grows up, lest the natural parent shall come one day and claim -the right to take the child away—an injustice specially likely to -happen as the child becomes older and is able to earn money. - -Then there is, on the other side, the possibility (often realised) of -the adoption being a commercial transaction between the parent (most -frequently an unmarried mother) and a foster-parent, by which the -latter receives a sum of money and takes over an unwanted child, who -most frequently dies. It is horrible to contemplate. - -But indeed, always, there is the dangerous position of the -adopted child, who has no settled position, no legal claim on the -foster-parents, who may adopt a child in the most solemn manner and -keep it all through the attractive years of childhood, then, when -the less attractive years of adolescence begin, or when any change -in circumstances makes the adopted child no longer wanted, they can -calmly withdraw their protection and turn the child out of their home. -Again, I say, it is horrible to contemplate. The destiny of the adopted -child is controlled throughout the unprotected years of childhood and -of youth by the whim and caprice, both of the natural parent and the -adopted-parent. - -And do not comfort yourself by believing that these are merely -imaginary troubles. They occur every day as every one knows who has -any knowledge of the practice and results of child adoption in this -country. I personally know of many cases of injustice that have brought -disaster and unhappiness to the child. Let me tell you one. A boy -was adopted by a man, unmarried, a minister of God, who was a social -worker and greatly attached to children. But later in his life the man -married. Under pressure from his mother, accounted as a religious and -good woman, the adoption was cancelled, the boy, wanted no longer, was -sent to a home for homeless children. No one troubled about him. Or -take another case where an illegitimately born child—a baby girl, was -abandoned and afterwards reclaimed _three times during the first five -years of her life_! Each time the mother took her away from a happy -home with foster-parents who loved and cared well for her. Then after a -few months of neglect the mother again abandoned her. They had no legal -remedy against the caprice of the mother. - -These unguarded children belong to nobody. Here is an amazing gap -in our law. It is worse than that—it is an amazing gap in our -consciousness and sense of social responsibility. “Nobody’s children!” -the phrase has a pitiable and stinging significance. Yet it is just -this state of things we are countenancing with our lazy and callous -indifference. There are tens of thousands of little ones for whom -to-day it is bitter truth that they belong to no one. Orphaned, or -unwanted by their natural-parents, many of them are being adopted in -the worst and most casual manner—handed out “on probation” like a cat -or a dog. - -And if you doubt the truth of this statement, listen to the judgment of -the Committee on Child Adoption as to the disgraceful carelessness with -which adoption is being carried on in this country; - - “We believe that the absence of proper control over the ‘adoption’ of - children over seven years of age and under that age unless payment - is made, results _in an undesirable traffic in child life with - which no one can interfere_, unless proceedings are taken against - the adopting parent for cruelty or neglect; children may be handed - from one person to another, with or without payment, advertised - for disposal, and even sent out of the country without any record - being kept. _Intermediaries may accept children for ‘adoption’ and - dispose of them as and when they choose._ Homes and institutions for - the reception of the children exist which are not subject to any - inspection.” (Paragraph 61, page 10 of the Report.) - -The italics in this passage are mine; will you try to think what these -conditions, _which you are permitting_, mean? Think of them with -your hearts, not with your heads! And if you have a child of your -own, passionately dear to your life, try to realise the abominable -position—the cruelty that can hardly be escaped, as if it were _your -child_, who was thus being handed callously from one person to another, -without protection, without any form of legal guardianship. - -We talk much of the nation’s care for children. Would it not then seem -a necessary step to have some just provision of our law to protect the -helpless unwanted child, who at present belongs to nobody? Humanity, -and even good sense answers, “Yes.” The Common Law of England has -hitherto always said most emphatically, “No.” _Except for a reference -to adoptions which has managed to slip into a marginal note of a -Finance Act, there is no recognition of adoption in our laws._ - -The right thing to do is the simple thing. We have on the one hand, -these homeless children, whose numbers have become much larger in these -last years and with the change and slackening in responsible conduct, -while on the other hand, we have, an increased number of women who -are childless and will never be able to marry. The problem, at its -simplest, is this: What can be done to bring together the childless -woman with a mother’s nature and the motherless child? - -I am not forgetting the Institutions that are already in existence. -There are two agencies for arranging adoption, as well as other -religious and social societies, and many homes, from which children can -be adopted. These agencies are doing admirable work, but they cannot -do a tenth part of what ought to be done. And the very worst cases, in -which the child most urgently needs protection, often cannot be reached -at all. This problem is too big to be muddled through privately. It is -the concern of the whole nation. - -_The first necessary step is to legalise adoption. Until that is done, -nothing can be done._ - -At present as I have told you, the position is one of very great -danger. The law grants the foster-parents no recognised legal control -over the child. The mother, or her relatives, unless obviously immoral -and unfit persons, may at any time claim back the child. - -Even in the most favourable circumstances there is danger, and a -never-ending uncertainty that cuts at the very root of the adopted -relationships. I repeat: neither the foster-parent or the child has -any security. And at any time, and for any reason, the child may be -taken from his home. Directly he (or she) grows up and is able to earn -money, the needy relatives, with an eye on those small earnings or on -the much larger sums squeezable from the foster-parents, may prove an -ever-threatening nuisance. If the foster-parent acts boldly and resists -such claim, the relative may apply for a writ of Habeas Corpus in -the High Court, when (under the Custody of the Children’s Act, 1891) -the case is decided at the discretion of the Court. As a rule, the -interests of the child are considered, and, in this respect, matters -have much improved of late years. But even if the decision is given in -favour of the foster-parents so that the child remains in the home in -which it has been reared and is loved, there is a period of ceaseless -anxiety; and, that the decision will be favourable is certain only when -the character of the claiming relative can be proved to be bad. - -_So curious is the law that it is safer to adopt the child of bad or -doubtful parentage (where this can be proved) than the child of good -and respectable people._ - -The other side of the position has also to be considered. As is -evident, the foster-parents may be bad. This we have seen. And what I -want to emphasise further is that here too the danger threatens the -unprotected child. Just as the law gives no recognised protection to -the good foster-parents, so it affords no protection to the child -against a bad foster-parent. - -All the time I am trying to drive into your consciousness the terrible -position of the child that has no legal claims; no kind of safeguard. -He (or, of course, she, and the girl babies are adopted much oftener -than boys) may be adopted simply as playthings, or to satisfy deeply -unconscious instincts of cruelty, or as an investment for the time when -they can earn money. Also they can be cast off at the caprice of their -adopters. - -A further and permanent injustice, operative even under happy -conditions and in a good home, arises from the fact that the adopted -child is without rights of inheritance. If his foster parents, however -rich, die intestate, he has no share in the family property. At any -time in his life he may be left penniless and friendless, without -recognition that he belongs to anyone. - -Such uncertainty is awful. Try to realise the suffering which it must -bring to the child, ever dogging his footsteps like a menacing shadow. - -Our sluggard imaginations must surely be stirred now our attention has -been directed to this gap in our law. I wish that my pen had greater -power to bring home to everyone concerned—and _everyone who cares -or professes to care for the welfare of children is concerned_—the -iniquity of allowing the continuance of conditions that must bring -nothing less than tragedy into the lives of these unfortunate and -unprotected little ones. - -This is almost the only country which does not recognise and legalise -adoption: all that needs to be done is to bring our law up to the -standard which prevails in other lands. We alone are neglectful. It -is one of the many social matters concerning children on which Great -Britain has seriously fallen behind the example of its own daughter -States. The United States, Australia and New Zealand have all gone -far ahead of the Mother Country in their legislation in regard to -child adoption. All the forty-eight States of the Union have now Acts -regulating adoption. But perhaps the Model Act is that of Western -Australia, passed in 1891. It provides for the complete and careful -guardianship of all adopted children. The Act has worked admirably, -and with a very few alterations could be adopted to the needs of this -country. - -And it must not be thought that all this recognition and protection -of adoption is a new thing, and, as such, possible to dismiss as -unnecessary, belonging to an over-protective and grandmotherly -system of law. Such a belief would be far from the truth. Students -of history know how almost universal was the practice of adoption in -older civilisations. Roman law recognised the custom and adoption -was extremely common. I could give many other examples. Especially -interesting is the custom in India, where among the Hindoos, when a -child is adopted into a new family, it goes through the religious -ceremonies belonging to death before quitting the home in which it was -born, and afterwards goes through the religious ceremonies belonging to -birth on reaching the new home. The old bond is completely severed and -a new social, religious and legal bond created. - -I would ask your attention to this wise provision made by one of the -oldest civilisations, which often understood so much more practically -and simply the needs of a social situation. - -If the full necessary security is to be given to the practice of -adoption there must clearly be a complete passing over of the duties -and rights of the natural-parents to the adopting parents. Adoption -ought to be undertaken only solemnly and with due understanding of all -the difficulties, and the necessary precautions. The closest enquiries, -in every case, need to be made as to the bona fide intentions and -complete suitability of the adopting parents: guarantees must be given -of their intentions and ability to bring up and care for the child. -It would also be equally necessary, except in exceptional cases of -proved cruelty and unfit parentage, to ascertain the reasons why the -parents—or parent in the case of an illegitimately born child—desired -to give up their rights of guardianship. But when once this has been -done, and any order of adoption made, the parental relationship ought -to be transferred completely from the natural to the adopting parents. - -And in the interests of the child, I would have this transference -carried out with the severest restrictions. I would not allow a parent, -or parents, who once gave up the guardianship of the child any rights -of visitation. Such visits, even under the happiest circumstances cause -disturbance, remind the child unceasingly of its difficult position -as an adopted child. They tend to create confusion, with feelings of -dissatisfaction and jealousy; comparison between the old home and the -new home; conflicts between the affection for the adopted-parents -and the very possible drawing back of natural affection for the -real parents. - -All ways adoption must be difficult. - -Science has shewn us how terribly the future of the child depends on -its early relationships in the home; its relation to its mother, on -whom it depends for the first childish satisfactions, its relations -to its father, to its brothers and sisters. The adopted relationships -can never be quite the same as the natural relationships. We now know -how easily jealousy and unhappiness can arise in the heart of even the -youngest child, and what havoc to the after life these feelings may -bring. If we remember this, we shall realise better the disturbing -emotions likely to be aroused when one parent is lost and replaced by -another. That is why everything possible needs to be done to give to -adopted parenthood the strongest stability. The adoption of a child -ought never to be undertaken lightly. It is, perhaps, the most binding -and the most solemn, and the most fatefully responsible of any human -relationship. - -A righteous law of adoption needs to guard the adopted child so that -the voluntary relationship is as binding in every way and as permanent -as the natural relationship. For this reason the adopted child should, -in my opinion, have the same rights of inheritance as all other -children. Nothing short of this can do justice to the adopted child. - -We talk a great deal to-day about children and their rights, but -very few of us realise at all practically and fully the change -of attitude, in particular in connection with property and the -rights of inheritances, that are likely to be necessary, if, in all -circumstances, our theories are to be expressed in our daily conduct. - -The whole question is complicated and very difficult, there is, indeed, -no easy way out. - - - - -LET US PENSION THE MOTHERS. - - -I was attending a conference to consider the best steps to be taken -to aid mothers and to stop the sacrifice of the lives and health of -little children. All kinds of suggestions were made. We talked much, we -proposed and discussed, but none of us seemed able to agree what ought -to be done. - -Then a strong man, an observant lawyer, rose. He spoke with the biting -American twang. His words were few: “Why don’t you pay poor mothers?” - -The brilliant simplicity of this question stirred at once our powers of -understanding. - -It was Judge Neil who spoke. In brief phrases he told us what had been -done in America. Mother’s pensions, which are in reality children’s -pensions, have been established in most of the forty-eight States of -the Union. They are granted until the children are fourteen, or, in the -case of delicate children, until sixteen. State-appointed supervisors -watch over the welfare of the children to ensure that the money given -is well spent by the mother. - -As Judge Neil placed the facts before us, this plan of paying mothers -instead of forcing them to go out as workers, possibly at “sweated” -wages, and then paying other people in an institution to do their work, -seemed so simple that I was filled with wonder that we had not long ago -thought of so easy and obvious a reform. It is strange that it is so -often the most simple things that we never think of doing. I believe it -is because we think of reforms intellectually; we are not human enough -to feel. - -Now, it is just Judge Neil’s humanity that set his feet upon the right -way. Listen to the story of how first he came to think of mother’s -pensions:— - -In 1911, a poor widow, broken by the burden of supporting her family, -was condemned to have all her five children taken from her. - -“Better to shoot her than take away her children.” said Judge Neil. He -then asked how much it would cost to maintain the children in a State -institution. - -“The country pays the institution 10 dollars a month for each child,” -was the answer. - -“Why not give the 10 dollars to the mother and let her keep her -children?” - -Such was Judge Neil’s humane and practical solution of the problem. -Thus the scheme for pensioning mothers was born. - -The responsibility of the State for children ill-cared-for is admitted -in most countries. It is, therefore, a question of ways and means, not -a question of high principle, how best to carry out this intention and -prevent child poverty. - -Surely grants to good mothers are better than grants to institutions. -Even the best Poor Law schools must have the faults that are inherent -in institutions. - -I can hardly express too strongly my own want of faith in “expert -child-trainers.” I have found always that they regard the child mainly, -if not entirely, as something to be improved and instructed on a -definite plan. The “expert” is never human, and a child has need of all -the human treatment it can get. - -Every child has absolute need of its mother. All experience shows us -that the home, with its sympathetic relationships of mother and child, -sisters and brothers, cannot be replaced. We must insist on reforms -that will make home life possible. - -The child has to accept the arrangements we make; that is why this -question is of such immense importance. If the matter could be fixed by -the will of the children I should have no fear. The child has not lost -the true values of life. - -There is another fact to consider—one that will appeal to ratepayers. -Grants to mothers are cheaper than grants to institutions. In the -United States the payment made to a mother works out at about one-third -the cost of maintaining a child in an institution. So we can do the -best thing for the child and its mother and at the same time save our -pockets. - - - - -BOY AND GIRL OFFENDERS, AND ADULT MISUNDERSTANDING - - -Much disturbing evidence on such a grave question as the bad behaviour -and consequent punishment of boys and girls, in institutions, and in -prisons, is made public, from time to time, to rouse the consciousness -of all those who have concern for the welfare of the young. Sometimes -the events recorded are of a more serious character. The attempted -suicides and continued escapes of young prisoners certainly afford a -rather tragic witness of some failure in our reformative efforts. Even -under the Borstal system of prison life—a system that is primarily -intended to be humane and educative, and not brutal and primitive, the -results obtained are far from being satisfactory. We cannot feel that -we are achieving anything like what ought to be done in the difficult, -but necessary, duty of reclaiming these young lives that, for one cause -or another, have fallen to disaster. - -If we believe, as believe we must, that the old are responsible for the -young—that the one generation must stand as guardian to the next—this -problem of delinquency is one that we may not thrust aside. It is -bigger than its immediate application in connection with reclaiming the -individual boy or the individual girl: it touches the very deepest of -our duties—our duty to the future. It is for us to ask many questions -of ourselves, and of all those who are in any way connected with the -young; questions to which it is not easy always to find satisfactory -answers. - -It is obvious that something is wrong. - -I do not wish to harrow you with painful statistics, or by reminding -you of unfortunate incidents in connection with young prisoners that -_you ought not to have forgotten. You would not have forgotten if you -had cared as you ought to care._ - -I do not deny that “much is being done; that conditions are better -far than they were in the past.” But this does not cover our failures -or lessen our responsibilities. I plead for greater attention to, and -more understanding of, the delinquent child. It is not, and never can -be, a question that can be fixed or finally decided: the child is an -individual; and, in each case, the problem of dealing with him must be -a separate problem. This is certain—only by understanding the child -who fails, _his own difficulties and his own failure_—can we advance. -By this way only can we give aid to these young offenders, who, with -a burden of ancient instincts and uncontrolled impulses, come into -a world filled with undesirable examples, where they have to face -manifold temptations. - -Let us try, then, to consider the delinquent boy and girl, bearing -these truths in our thoughts. And first we must acknowledge the -complexity and terrible difficulty of the problem. Delinquency in -the young cannot be explained by obvious superficial causes. The -motivating impulse to naughtiness and bad conduct always lies outside -of consciousness. I mean that the boy or girl who continuously does -wrong, fails altogether in good conduct, whether in a reformatory, in -a prison, or a Borstal institution is acting in this way from a reason -which is deeply hidden, and which they do not themselves understand; -while further, the present misbehaviour is connected with some -experience of the past that now they have forgotten. _They are driven -by this inward urge into rebellion and insubordinate conduct._ And the -help they ought to have is one of re-education, by clearing up what was -wrong in the past, and this help must be given to them by those who are -specially trained to understand. - -They cannot, unaided, help themselves. The things they do wrong—the -breaking of rules, the failures in work, the violent conduct, the -attempted escapes—in the vast majority of cases, are a defence against -unhappiness that stalks as a deadly shadow, following their young lives. - -_Their treatment is a medical as well as a social and ethical problem. -The young do wrong because their souls are sick._ Such a statement -is not fantastic, it is seriously true. To understand the meaning of -the present bad conduct of anyone, but especially of the delinquent -boy or girl, it is absolutely necessary to find out the motive which -makes them want to behave badly. Always we have to search to find “a -reason why.” To discover, as far as we are able, what it is causing the -rebellion or the bad conduct, we must have wisdom to give up the old -ignorant ideas as to its being possible to cure bad conduct, in any -way that matters, by scoldings, by punishments or, indeed, any kind of -direct attack. - -The fault that distresses those in authority in the present must be -regarded as the sign of a hidden conflict that has distressed the child -in the past. It is this conflict, then, that must be discovered and -dealt with. Never in any case can the lazy adult view be accepted that -the delinquent child does wrong because of original sin. - -The young do wrong when they suffer, usually through the blunders of -those who are supposed to train them; their faults in behaviour are a -relief for pain they find too intolerable to bear. If the boy or girl -is happy in harmony with his or her world, then that boy or girl is -good. - -To find the real cure for this unhappiness of soul is, of course, a -most difficult task. It can be accomplished completely only by those -specially trained in understanding and analysing the child mind. But -much good, and a return to healthy happiness can often be gained, by a -little helpful understanding of the special problems of the individual -boy or girl. It is the educator’s duty to try to pour daylight on the -hidden plague spots of the soul. - -This can never be done by cruelty or any form of coercive treatment -which arouses fear—the most deadly enemy to right conduct. The way to -educate the abnormal, the difficult boy or girl, is not to be shocked -or to punish them, but to show them sympathy, directed by knowledge. - -Teach these girls and boys that they have failed in good conduct, not -because they are bad or different really from other more fortunate -young people, but because they have been unhappy—ill with feelings of -insecurity, of deficiency, of loneliness, of failure; help them to -understand the causes that have brought about this condition, why they -have felt inferior, been unhappy; and then build up their characters -by giving them new opportunities of finding happiness in their work -and in their play, providing new interests and creating opportunities -for new responsibilities. These young people want kindness and to be -taught to be sociable. Moral conduct is never easy. We all want what we -do want. We surrender our wishes only because we find we satisfy other -desires by so doing. We are praised and rewarded for good conduct and -for preferring to give up to others what we want to do ourselves. And a -very practical lesson in our training of delinquents depends upon this. -The educators must take the greatest possible care that bad conduct -does not give greater pleasure than good conduct. Doing wrong so often -opens for the young the widest and easiest door to gain excitement. If -boys and girls in Borstal institutions and in reformatories are left -unnoticed and never praised when good they quickly feel neglected. -And though they do not recognise these disappointed feelings they act -very strongly in setting them to seek for some kind of relief. And if -allowed to enjoy power when they become rebellious, through the notice -that is bestowed upon them and the upsetting of the usual regime of the -school or the prison workshop, they will continue to indulge in bad -conduct whenever they are bored or, for any reason, crave some form of -emotional relief. - -Bad conduct is primitive, infantile conduct, and one of its strongest -characteristics is the tendency to proceed more directly, more -unthinkingly, and more selfishly to the goal of the wishes than is -usually done by the reasonable adult. - -The little child wants something, grabs at it, and when it does not at -once get it, screams and breaks into a passion. - -Now this is just what is done by the delinquent boy or girl, whose -conduct must be regarded as infantile, frankly selfish, and regulated -only by doing what one wants and getting what one wants. Such conduct -points to a condition of retarded growth; and usually can be traced -back to some mistake in the early training, which has prevented an -adaptation of the character to grown-up conditions, so that the boy or -girl of seventeen or eighteen acts still like the young child of four -or five years of age. - -Every child, who is to grow into a successful and happy adult, has to -grow out of this primitive behaviour and to learn social standards -of conduct—to think what other people want and to measure their own -conduct in its relation to others. - -Thus the real problem of the education of the delinquent boy or girl -is to help them to grow up. And the very first step is to teach them -to stop thinking about themselves. They have to learn to turn outwards -towards others and away from their own wishes and hidden desires, that -are the real cause of their unhappiness and bad conduct. - -And for this reason, even if for no other, there could be no possible -form of treatment as harmful, and also I may add so silly, as that -adopted (as still so often it is) in reformatory institutions of -placing insubordinate prisoners in solitary confinement, even sometimes -with the use of irons. No other form of punishment could be more -disastrous to a boy or girl. To permit this cruelty is assuredly to -increase the faults of character that are the cause of the bad conduct. -By such insane punishment the young offenders are separated from their -companions, perhaps bound, and left without occupation to sit alone, -brooding over their unhappiness; their thoughts necessarily fixed upon -themselves. They cannot fail by means of this unhealthy process to be -sent more backwards into childish and bad behaviour—driven further away -from adult and social conduct. - -Few of us, I think, understand sufficiently how continuous and almost -unspeakably hard, are the efforts that the delinquent has to make in -order to achieve re-education. He is overwhelmingly conscious (however -much he may seem to be indifferent) of his own inferiority. All such -boys or girls, who frequently become aggressive and insubordinate, -need to be treated in such a way as will increase their confidence -in themselves. This may seem contradictory, but it is true. If the -young offenders are punished and discouraged the trouble from which -they suffer is sure to increase by making stronger the sense of -self-depreciation. Too often the devastating feelings are driven back -into the obscure places of the mind—the unseen office of the directing -forces that in secret issue the supreme commands that control conduct. -It is in order the better to overcome the truths that would stab him -about himself if he recognised them, that such a wrong-doer becomes -aggressively self-assertive, indulges in foolish acts and marked -insubordination. Such boys and girls are without courage, and all their -pride boils up behind a maimed and timid character. - -The important thing to remember is that, though bad conduct comes from -what seems insubordination, “the characteristics of bad conduct” arise -from the state of the boy’s or girl’s mind, and that state depends very -much on the treatment he (or she) receives. - -If you cure the particular fault for which the punishment was -inflicted, and the boy or girl loses his (or her) soul, you have done -more harm than good. But the real position is worse than that, for -if you hurt the young soul, you give up for ever the opportunity of -re-educating the boy or girl for good conduct. - - - - -NEW WAYS OF TEACHING CHILDREN - -UNBOUNDED FREEDOM AND SOME DRAWBACKS - - -I remember once seeing in “Punch” a picture that has always retained -in my memory the vividness of the first impression. It is a long time -ago, yet I can see it now exactly as I saw it then. A father, at a -children’s Christmas party, was personating a bear. Filled with the -adult’s joy of being allowed to be a child, he was roaring loudly, as -he crawled upon the floor covered with a woolly hearth-rug. So much for -the father. Certainly he was enjoying it. But what about the children. -What was their view of this performance? - -They were all looking bored. Even the tiny ones shewed no enthusiasm. -In the corner of the room as far withdraw as space permitted was a -group of young school boys, very stiffly correct in Etons and immense -white collars. They were disgusted. One, who had ostentatiously turned -his back on the performing father, was plainly angry. Even his back -was eloquent of disapproval and gloom surrounded him. His companion, -standing next to him, attempted to cheer him in this way: “Never mind, -Brown major, you know its not _your_ fault if your pater is a blooming -fool!” - -It is, indeed, a different aspect of the situation. The son ashamed of -the father! The young generation condemning the old! It is fitting that -we should take notice and remember the lesson that is taught. - -For this picture of appraising youth carries a very real moral that -should be considered by those modern educational enthusiasts, who are -always talking about amusing the child—as if that were the one thing -which mattered. There is no subject, I believe, on which greater -nonsense is talked than on this one of interesting children. Personally -I am sceptical whether children are ever greatly interested in the -entertainments that the adult provides for their amusement. What they -find interesting are the things they provide for themselves. That is -one reason why there must be so great an element of falsity in modern -educational theories, which aim at making lessons so interesting that -they become like play. - -It cannot be done. - -Much of this kind of talk sounds admirable from the point of view of -the adult, but what I always want to know is the view taken by the -child—by the boy or the girl. I do not think they are quite _so fond -of being amused_ as we are apt to believe. Nor do I think they can -be, or indeed, ought to be, _interested_ (which is the same really as -being amused) _to adult orders_. I _mean_ that to be truly effective -and liberating to the child, this interest must be dependent on what he -has to do for himself. The work cannot be done for him. That is why I -am afraid of the incursion into the schoolroom of the too anxious and -amusement-providing spirit of the home. It causes too much indirect -interference. It supplies too many appliances. It is over-occupied with -arrangements and the smoothing away of difficulties. In a word it does -not leave the child sufficiently to himself to learn his own lessons, -to satisfy his own needs in his own way. - -_It proposes, of course, to do this, but it is just here that enormous -mistakes occur._ - -I can fancy a group of boys and girls who, if they said what they -really felt about their own education and our ceaseless experiments and -efforts to make their lessons interesting and more acceptable to them, -would pity us as fools. - -The point of view of the child (also of the boy and the girl, but -especially, I think, of the boy) is always so utterly different from -the point of view of the adult. You see they are judging the situation -personally, while we are judging it vicariously and ethically. - -The ever-pressing idea of the educationalist to-day is to give the -child freedom. But what is freedom? That is a question to which we -have not yet found an answer. Do we consider sufficiently, if what -means freedom to us, really gives freedom to the young? And a second -question—Are we not, perhaps, in our nervous over-anxiety, imposing -upon them something they do not want? - -There is a great deal said about self-development and the necessity of -the teacher respecting the child’s individuality. We are continually -hearing of interesting experiments made in free schools and are told of -children who, even when quite young, if left to choose their own tasks, -will be so interested in writing, in reading, and also in arithmetic, -that they will not want to give up their work even when school-hours -are over! - -Still I am unconvinced. I would rather have the boy or the girl waiting -in eagerness for the bell to ring to free them from the school. - -We are apt to over-estimate our grown-up power. We do this because we -like to do it. It flatters adult egotism. We find a delicious sense of -power in realising ourselves in so many new ways as potters to mould -the clay of the child’s mind. I often feel that we worry about this -question of education much more to please ourselves than to help the -young. - -But this continuous occupation with the child is bad for the child, -however gratifying it is to ourselves. By the provision of too many -appliances and “helps to learn,” and by continual experiments that are -too often changed, we tend to check creative originality, and thereby -we destroy the interest we are labouring to stimulate. It is better -for the child if we are less occupied with his needs. If we do not -provide him with interests he will find them for himself. In this case -they will mean more to him—do more for him. I dislike exceedingly all -contrivances that make things easy. I believe the child dislikes them -too. That is one reason why he tires so soon of all the appliances -you provide. They do not stimulate interest and effort, except quite -temporarily, indeed, they destroy both. - -This applies to children’s play quite as much as to their schoolwork. -Most children to-day are given too many and too elaborate toys. Perhaps -nothing is more mentally destructive. The child will invent his own -amusements. He wants to fight giant lamp-posts and to go to sea in an -inverted table. To fasten his imagination to your adult suggestions is -to destroy his vigour. - -Know then this truth. You can teach the child lessons and you can -discipline him by your grown up authority, _but you cannot by your -ready-made devices successfully interest him or give him freedom_. -That he must find for himself. He cannot develop fully and be reliant, -unless by himself, and very often _against your will_, he travels on -his own road. - -There is the very greatest delusion about this idea of freedom in the -school room. And it is open to question whether the children in the -free school, left mainly to choose their own tasks and take their own -time in performing them, are really freer, in any true sense, than the -disciplined and directed children in the master-ruled schools who have, -in my experience, much better opportunities in the out-of-school hours -of developing personality. The discipline of the school does help them -by giving them more rest. I think they are less influenced by their -teacher. For always there is, and must be, whatever the educational -plan and however free from apparent compulsions, behind the pupil the -will of the teacher indirectly, if not directly, guiding. And I am not -sure if this indirect coercion of suggestion is not worse, from the -point of view of the child, than the old-fashioned methods of direct -command. I will even go further and state my belief that its claims are -heavier, and bind the boy or girl more permanently in the prison of -obedience. - -For one thing, such indirect coercion does close for the pupils the -splendid liberating door of being rebellious. - -I can still remember the excitement and real health-giving joy I -obtained when, as a child, I once out-witted my instructor and escaped -from my lessons, which I heartily detested, to go to a fair we had all -been forbidden to visit. There was a glorious fat woman, and a man who -swallowed swords! Wonderful! And there was a delicious sweet in a long -roll of twisted pink and white, with inside a picture of Roger, the -Claimant. It was the time of the Tichbourne trial. If you could find -one tiny piece of the sweet without the picture, a whole immense bar, -much bigger than those which were ordinarily sold, was to be forfeited -and given to you free! Think of it! The possibility! The excitement! -Every penny I had was spent—and it was worth it! Yes, a thousand times -worth it! Of course, what I did brought punishment. For I had to -confess my misdeeds. Those sweets made me very sick. What did that -matter? I did gain the joy and liberty I was seeking. This was one of -the really educating experiences of my childhood. - -Seriously, I am deeply afraid that to-day in our very eagerness to help -children, we may often be acting in an exactly opposite direction as a -hinderance to their self-development, and future happiness. I believe -we are trying to achieve something that is impossible. - -One thing I am certain we ought to accept. It is the inescapable -barrier between the generations—between the parents and the children, -the teachers and the pupils. The young ought to be separated from the -old. I think this biological fact is forgotten by many advocates of -freedom and new ideals in education. - -I believe also that the young want—and by “want” I mean both desire and -need—the direction of the old. They want the authority that marks the -division between the two generations, for this opens up opportunities -to rebel. Instinctively they know they can find more liberty under -authority, than when left with the pressing burden, often too heavy for -their young inexperience, of deciding at school, as well as at home, -almost everything for themselves. - -Nor do I very much believe in the over-worrying conscientiousness of -the modern teachers. Again I must insist upon this. The increasing -pre-occupation with the child; the constant trying of different -educational experiments, is almost certain to exercise an adverse -influence. There may be a tyranny of solicitude and kindness that is -harder to bear than scoldings and punishments. To me there is something -mournful in this chorus of uncertainty, in which it is not difficult -to detect the poverty of our faith. It tells a tale of infirmity both -of life and purpose. So small a thing staggers us. We are without -confidence in ourselves or in life. Why is this? - -Do we, I often ask myself, know at all, what the child wants to find -the freedom that gives liberty to the young soul—the only freedom that -matters? How can we give the gifts of life unless we have ourselves -firmer confidence? If anything can destroy the soul of a child, it is -want of security. Our irresolution is our great danger. That is why so -often our efforts are barren. It is a sign of a nervous disorder of the -soul. We seek to gain from outside things what we should find within -ourselves. And the child must suffer. For the child is so helplessly -dependent, so inarticulate, so unable to express his own feelings and -deeper needs. - -There is still the most amazing blindness in regard to the effect of -adult conduct on the child. I know of one small boy who was taught in -a free school, where the idea of authority was held in abhorrence. -Yet this boy of eight was found one night sobbing bitterly. His -mother questioned him. It appeared he had been idle at school, rude, -and generally naughty. He had not been scolded, and, of course, not -punished. He had been reasoned with and told the foolishness of -behaving in this way. Apparently all ought to have been well. Yet it -was just in this reasonable gentleness of his headmaster that his -trouble rested. He knew he had been naughty. He _wanted_ the punishment -that would have wiped out his own consciousness of wrong doing. He -sobbed out his complaint to his mother, “if only he (his teacher) had -punished me or been cross and nasty I could have forgotten. It would -have been all over. But now I keep on thinking about it, and I feel -_all twisted up inside_.” - -Now this young boy understood his own needs much better than did his -master, who was making the very common mistake of judging the child by -himself. The needs of the child are entirely different from the needs -of the adult. The child wants security, he wants firmness, he desires -authority, he even wants punishment. - -Let me tell you another story to help to bring home these forgotten -truths. This time it was a little girl of the tender age of six years, -who had done wrong, was rude and very unkind to her governess. The -occasion was a birthday party. Over-excitement was the outside cause -of her bad behaviour. No one minded the rude remarks except the child -herself. We all, including the insulted governess, understood the -reason. Our mistake was, we understood too well, or rather, we judged -from the outside and from our grown-up point of view, forgetting that -it was not that of the child. We all tried to comfort the little one’s -distress, assuring her we understood and knew she did not mean what she -had said. In vain. The child would not be comforted. I can never forget -the fatalism of her remark, “It does not matter that Miss —— and all of -you forgive me, what matters is that I _did_ it.” - -Again it was the child, not we—the grown-ups, who understood the -situation as it really was. And what I want to impress upon you, is -the suffering unwittingly imposed on both these children. If they -had been punished they would not have felt this paralysing sense of -wrong doing—a suffering of the soul, fitting perhaps for the adult, -but not for the child. With punishment or even with scolding, the -penalty would have been paid, and the relief would have been gained of -self-forgiveness—a relief so much more necessary to happiness than the -forgiveness of others. - -Of course, it may be argued that morally such self-accusation which -does follow from this method of adult forgiveness, with its sentimental -treatment of wrong doing, is good for children. I do not think so. -Certainly it makes them suffer—suffer intolerably and to an extent -that few adults are sufficiently discerning to realise. But the burden -placed on the untried, unhardened and sensitive child-soul is, I am -certain, too heavy for them to bear safely at this stage of their -psychic growth. Punishment would, in almost all cases, be far easier -and more acceptable. It would also be far healthier. There is always -the gravest danger in placing the immature child in any position that -forces an emotional response in advance of the stage of development -which has been reached. We have to see these problems as the child -feels them, not as we think about them with our grown-up experience and -adult deadness. - - - - -DIFFICULTIES AND MISTAKES IN SEX EDUCATION - - -To the theoretical teacher or parent eager to reform the world on -paper, it may seem easy to introduce sex education into the nursery -training of the home, and into the curriculum of our schools. It -appears a comparatively easy matter to tell the little child the truth -about its own body, and as it grows older, to give carefully prepared -lessons about plants and animals, which shall lead it slowly and -beautifully into the way of knowledge. - -Text books have been written, pamphlets officially issued, schemes -drawn up for home and school instruction, and rules laid down—new -finger-posts to right conduct, whereby the younger generation may -be enlightened and (as we hope) by this means saved from making the -mistakes that we ourselves have made. - -I wish it were as simple as this. That sex instruction could be taken -from books. - -Of late various attempts have been made to focus attention on this -aspect of the question or on that; we have been told how this teaching -should be given, and with still greater assurance how it should not -be given; this must be done and that must not be done; this said and -that left unsaid. And groups of earnest-minded parents and teachers, in -almost every town, have met together to discuss and decide debatable -points; lecturers have been applied for, and their utterances have -been listened to as a new gospel; yet I venture to think that, as in -all other experimental and debatable questions, the very multitude of -counsel and the earnestness that is expended, indicates the uncertainty -of our knowledge and the doubtful value of many of our affirmations. - -I find a tendency amongst most grown-ups, and especially teachers -and advanced parents who ought to know better, to place too firm a -reliance on their own power to educate the young in sex. I myself -have done this. Like those drowning in deep water where they cannot -swim, we have clutched at any plank of hope. You see so many of the -old planks—religion, social barriers, chaperones, home restrictions, -and so many more, on which our parents used to rely, have failed us; -been broken in our hands by the vigorous destroying grasp of the young -generation; and, therefore, we have clutched with frantic fingers at -this new fair-looking life-raft, in pursuit of the one aim, to protect -our children. - -But will it save them? I doubt if it will except in a limited and very -different way from what is usually accepted. We cannot help the young -very far or deeply by any of our teaching. Not only do they want their -own experience, not ours, but it is right for them to have it. The urge -of adolescence carries them away out of our detaining hands. And I -think it may be well that at once we realize and acknowledge the very -narrow limits of our power. - -Thus I have nothing new or very striking to bring to the solution -of this difficult problem. I shall endeavour, however, to look at -the matter broadly and practically, and attempt to indicate in what -direction, as it seems to me, further progress may be made at the -present stage of our very faulty knowledge. - -One of the most disturbing features that we have to recognise in -relation to the child is the very early age at which sex manifests -itself. It was formerly supposed that the sex-life began at the age of -puberty. Nothing is more untrue. Every child is born with instincts -and desires—feelings of love, of hate, of jealousy, which furnish the -motives of conduct, and are accompanied by physical manifestations of -pleasure or discomfort which express themselves, often in a veiled way, -as wishes and cravings, that find relief in action, and must therefore -be yoked either to some burden of utility or to some car of vanity. - -It should be noted, however, that the word sexual is somewhat -ambiguous, because I want to stretch it to include the very germs that -afterwards blossom into the adult sex-life. The little girl with her -doll is maternal, and the boy with a tin sword is showing the crudest -manifestation of the male protective instinct. - -The baby whenever it enjoys the satisfaction of realising its infantile -wants gurgles with delight. “Every nurse, and every mother who tends -her child herself knows this, and recognises as a necessary task in the -training of the child, almost from the day of its birth, the winning of -it away from this egocentric concentration on its own body.”[2] - -We are always trying not to admit that we have to recognise in relation -to sex the very early age at which it manifests itself. We do not -believe this, because we dislike to believe it. Our fear causes us to -neglect in a quite wrong way the deeply affective results of the early -childish emotions. - -To the uninstructed eye, early desires and feelings connected with sex -are often so unlike their final form that they pass unrecognised. But -the mother who has eyes to see and knowledge to understand knows that -the child can hide no secret. When the lips speak not, the faces in -twitching mouth and blinking eyes; the hands, in telling gestures; the -biting nails; the sucking thumb; the shuffling feet; the toes that are -played with and sucked—all these utter the truth; and betrayal escapes -out of every nervous movement of hands, and feet, and face. - -We will not see and acknowledge the presence of these early emotions -because we want to see the child an angel. We cannot surrender the -picture of childhood as a period of delightful ignorance and innocence. - -The very reverse is the truth. The child has brought with it much from -more primitive times; just in the same way as its body still shows -traces of earlier developments in life, so its emotions, its instincts, -its wishes and desires, revert back, in many particulars, to lower -stages of growth. Always the child has to fight its way upwards, and -indeed, it has no easy task to find and keep the right path, in its -short journey of discovery to reach from the savagery of the babe to -the level of a civilised social man or woman. If we do not help it, the -way becomes doubly hard and often the path is lost or, in other words, -the savage triumphs. - -We are now in a better position to answer the question, so much -debated, as to the age at which the sex education of the child should -begin. Instead of this being a matter that can be put off until the -child is older, and the angel innocence has been sullied by contact -with an evil and ugly world, it becomes overwhelmingly important that -_no time whatever should be lost_. Every effort must be made to educate -from the very hour of birth these primitive instincts, which, though -permissible in the savage and the little child, are wholly wrong if -allowed to remain active in the later adult years. Delay is fatal. Time -lost now never can be regained: mistakes made cannot be put right. A -wrong direction may most easily be given by a careless act. I cannot -emphasise this too strongly, or too often. _The character, the life -history and the entire fate of every child is fixed in the nursery._ - -The mistake we have been making for so long is in regarding this -instruction in sex as something we can impart to children or with-hold -from them; a subject we may teach or not teach; enlightenment we may -give to them or conceal from them. This view is entirely erroneous. -In one sense, the whole matter really lies outside of our wills. Sex -education cannot be omitted by any parent or any teacher from the -training of any child, for it is given _by not being given_, just as -surely as the other way about. There is no escape for anyone who has to -do with a child. - -You will see what I mean. It is not the good and wise lessons you may -give, of nicely arranged explanations, with flower illustrations or -stories of the mating of birds and animals; still less is it warnings -or goody-goody talks about purity; nor is it any kind of formal or even -conscious instruction that will have the true moulding influence on the -character and emotional state of the child; but what most influences -him, or in other words, teaches him, and helps or hinders him, is -the peculiarly affective state—I mean, the emotional attitude—which -usually is totally unknown to the parents and educators, and is also -quite incomprehensible to the child himself. It is all the things -that the grown-ups are trying hardest to hide from the children and -perhaps also covering away from themselves that are the real directing -forces in their character. The concealed enmity, or even small -disharmonies between the parents, the repressed tempers, the strangled -temptations, the secret longing of one or other parent, the miseries -that are hidden—all these inevitably arouse a response in the children, -which acting continuously and unconsciously bring them to a state -corresponding with that of the parents. Their shame and want of joy in -sex will become the children’s shame and want of joy; their unhappiness -in love will be the children’s unhappiness; their most hidden wishes -will escape to create disharmonies in these young and tender souls. - -The parents, and especially the mother, impress deeply into the -child’s being the seal of their characters, and the more sensitive and -mouldable the child the deeper is the impression. Take, for instance, -the only or favourite child, who suffers under an anxious excess of -tenderness, so that his love is so fixed on the mother, that not only -does he become restless with too heavy a burden of emotional stress, -and often really ill, but in later life he has the greatest difficulty -in establishing his own character, freeing himself from the mother’s -influence, or finding his own love-mate. Again, in the exact opposite -position, there is the neglected and unwanted child, who, missing his -rightful possession of love, suffers from a sense of inferiority, which -dark and hindering shadow dogs his footsteps through life, finding a -positive expression in shyness and incapacity for action, or a negative -expression in bombastic and disagreeable self-assertion. So I might -continue with countless examples. Adult traits can, in almost all -cases, be traced back to the child’s early experiences in connection -with its parents and in its home. - -The child is like a flower, and the banks where it grows are its -world—its home and the friends with whom it comes in contact; the sky -above is the surrounding love on which it is dependent, and to which -it looks up as the flower to the sun for gladness and for life. What -I mean is this: the child has desires and impulses of its own, but -it reflects the changing needs and atmosphere of the small world in -which it lives, and is terribly dependent on that world. It is forming -and selecting a character. It very largely tries what the effect is -of different kinds of conduct—different characters. The child does -not itself know what it is or would wish to be. Whenever there is, as -often there must be, a mistake made, a wrong step taken—a conflict -inevitably occurs, and must find some quick response in childish -naughtiness; otherwise dullness and unhappiness will arise; and this, -if continued, will tend to bring the dangerous condition of the -repressed and introverted child. - -We have established now that the love-life of the child starts at -a very early age; it begins in the home, and I want to investigate -this love-life. To do this we must examine with some care the child’s -emotional relationships to the members of his family. - -These relationships are not as amicable or peaceful as at first sight -would appear. At a very early age jealousy as well as love stirs in -the baby’s soul. This may surprise you. But I would ask you for a -moment to consider the baby’s position. The child is in a small shut-up -world with its mother. At first she occupies all its life. She is -the earliest love object and of supreme importance in the infantile -constellation. Everything starts from her. She is the source of -nutrition and as such the first object towards which the hunger-wish is -directed. She is also the supplier of warmth, of comfort, of rest—the -personification of shelter and happiness—the starting point of all -those interests of the child which lie outside its own body. Who can -wonder at the child’s possessive feelings in relation to its mother. -But we have seen already, in an earlier essay, how the superfluous -father comes as an intruder into this mother-child circle. And it -is in this way jealousy begins to awaken, at a very early age, and -sometimes is almost unbelievably active in the baby soul. For these -feelings will increase if the baby is a boy, and the love of the mother -may grow to great intensity, which coupled with the jealousy of the -father may work great evil, especially if the mother is unwise, too -tenderly solicitous, too possessive in her love, herself neurotic. -In the case of the girl the position is different. The baby fixation -upon the mother is, as a rule, relieved with growth, as a part of the -love-fund is transferred to the father. Sometimes this does not happen, -especially when the jealousy of the little girl is roused, usually by a -brother or sister more loved by the mother than herself. Then, indeed, -a fixation happens, either in a too passionate tenderness for the -mother, which, persisting acts as an insurmountable hindrance in the -later life in preventing the normal out-going of love to a member of -the opposite sex. I know of one such case and it may make my meaning -plainer if I tell it to you. A little girl was born in a home where -there was already a brother, passionately loved by a too good mother. -The little girl soon felt, for no one feels so quickly as a little -child, that the brother had a place of greater importance than herself. -She did not hate outwardly this brother, had she done this all might -have been well, as she would have gained relief in expression. She -developed the usual device of the unhappily jealous child and took to -phantasy making—pretending that she had another mother, or, at other -times, that she was doing some wonderful deed, being very clever, very -good, very beautiful, so as to gain the love and admiration of her -mother. This was the inner life of make-believe. The outer life was one -of continuous nervous trouble, which culminated in St. Vitus’s Dance. -What is, however most interesting, is the later love-life and the -startling way it reflects this early emotional conflict. This child is -now a woman nearing thirty, very charming, very nice-looking; but she -is utterly unable to settle on her love-mate. Engagement has followed -engagement, in each case the lover has been discarded for no adequate -reason. In all other connections of life capable and good, she behaves -in her love affairs with a capricious unkindness, very difficult to -pardon if one did not understand. - -It may be worth while to refer to another case known to me. Two -daughters, with a mother and father between whom there was trouble, -the father having an affection for another woman. Though the trouble -was most carefully hidden from the little girls it formed the decisive -factor in their lives. It is not clear to me whether the love-object -was the father, though I think that this was so. It was, however, -the mother who was, as, indeed, usually she is, the central figure -in this nursery drama. Both children suffered jealousy, probably of -the lady loved by the father, transferred to the mother. The effect -was directly opposite on each daughter. The elder, stronger and more -forceful charactered girl developed a passionate rebellion against the -mother, a specially sweet and long-suffering woman, of so violent and -unreasonable character that she could not live at home; while the other -child was the absolute type of the perfect daughter, self-sacrificing -and passionately loving. But why this case is interesting is that it -was the good child who suffered while the bad child triumphed. The -rebellious daughter was able to establish her own adult life, to work -successfully and to marry happily; the dutiful daughter lost her own -power to live and to love, and was not liberated even by the death -of the mother. I would ask you to note this very specially as it is -exceedingly important. A too great devotion and anxious excess of -tenderness on the part of any one, but especially on the part of a -child to a parent, covers always, and even under the most improbable -circumstances, as when it appears that there is the closest sympathy -and harmony of will, an intense hostile tendency. And because vice -will not be choked by virtue, this over submissive state is much more -dangerous and likely to destroy the springs of life than open hostility. - -We have much less need to be afraid of the future for the rebellious, -even the unkind and ungrateful child, than for the good and devoted -child who apparently knows no will but ours, and lives in outward -perfect submission. Every parent who is wise will recognise such a -state as one of the greatest danger, and at any cost to herself will -separate herself from the child. Mind, I do not mean send the child -away. That plan may, indeed, be tried, but often, especially with -sensitive children, the absence will but forge the fetters firmer. -Something like this happens whenever a child who goes to school, is -continuously homesick and becomes ill, not necessarily with a specified -illness, but grows nervous, fails in work and in play. Such a mother -has before her, perhaps the hardest task in parenthood. She has to take -the child home and dissipate and send from herself the over-tender -love, accepting in its place the rebellious hatred that it covers. Does -she fail in this task of sacrifice, made necessary, remember, by some -early mistake in the management of the child, she is simply using up -for herself the energy of love, which her child ought to have to use -for its own life. - -I trust these two cases will have made plainer to you the kind of -difficult problems that have to be met by parents. I do not think there -is any family where they are not present. There are many variations, -and the strength of the difficulty as well as the permanent nature of -the harm suffered by the child, depends almost wholly on the wisdom -and the knowledge of the mother, and, even more, on the extent to -which she has been able to understand her concealed wishes and her -own love-history from her childhood’s days and free herself from its -heritage. You will see, I think, without my waiting to point out how -complex the position is, and how hard is the task of the mother to -guide the early emotional life of her children. It is obvious how -easily mistakes may be made. - -Hardly less difficult is the position of the father, who is at once -the intruder in the family and the supporter of it. To the child, in -the ordinary home, he is the final authority. He occupies the position -of a god or a ruler. He is feared and rebelled against, also he is -reverenced. Any omission of these qualities, and especially the last, -is fatal to the child. Without this father reverence, and in absence -of his needed authority, there arises an arrogant disposition that -controls all the later character. As has been recognised by all modern -psychologists, there is much of the childish attitude of the boy to -his father in the later relations of the follower to his ruler, of the -worshipper to his god, of the schoolboy to his school-master. - -Every boy looks forward to the day when he can escape the rule of the -father and himself usurp his power. I think you will find here the -secret spring of all later rebellion against authority, either in the -boy or in the man. I must give another warning. Again, it is when these -childish feelings of rebellion, jealousy and hate are hidden, and work -in the child’s soul without his knowledge, that the greatest harm is -done. - -In this connection, I may recount the case of a boy who grew out of -babyhood shewing unusual affection for his step-father. He was also too -much attached to his mother—being in that most unfortunate position -of an only and too-much-considered child—and in consequence suffered -from strongly jealous feelings towards the step-father. In this way -a conflict was aroused between love and hate, and serious nervous -symptoms arose. The origin of the trouble was first discovered at about -ten years, when the boy developed a very passionate hatred against God. -He was overheard one day swearing on his toy sword to devote his life -to killing God. As he had not been brought up in an over-religious -home, and had hardly ever been taken to Church, this vehement hatred, -which continued for some time, was noticed as unusual. Now the -specialist consulted about the nervous symptoms at once found in this -God-hatred a projection of the very common boyish hatred to the father. -The parents learnt that this was a sign of health, an effort the boy -was making to rid himself of an unbearable inward trouble. - -I would emphasise the necessity of parents having the right knowledge -and the love that will enable them to recognise what is important in -the development of character. Too little attention is given by parents -to the spontaneous utterances of children: it is these that will give -the clue to what is troubling the child. Questions never get direct -and real answers. It is what the child brings out unconsciously that -should be noted; his wishes hidden, as a rule, under some symbol, -that the parent unaided, may find very difficult to interpret. We are -too apt—and in this mothers are the worst sinners—to consider their -children as unthinking beings. Always, I believe, children know more -than we credit to them. This is true, in particular, of all emotional -states. As I have tried to make plain, it is these emotions acting -and interacting in connection with the home relations which are of -lasting importance. Mothers who even in the nursery overforce the -emotional growth of their little ones, with the unceasing demands of an -over-demonstrative and unhealthy tenderness; fathers, who, themselves -too arrogant for power, allow their boys and girls no independent -possession of their own lives—such parents are the destroyers of their -children. Their thoughtlessness and ignorance create problems that are -tragedies of pain to children, and leave them marred, and often maimed, -for their conflict with life. - -I am prepared for an objection. You may some of you be thinking that -this picture I have drawn for you of nursery tragedies is coloured -from my imagination and without sufficient relation to truth. “Little -children,” you may be saying, “cannot feel these devastating adult -passions. You are projecting on to them evils created by your own -diseased mind.” And you turn back to your “angel innocence” belief, -which must be true, at any rate, you are convinced in the case of your -own child. - -But may I tell you this: you must not come to these problems of the -child with an already fixed conviction that they do not exist; because -this may well be, not because they are not there—active even in your -own nursery—but because you shut your eyes determined not to see them. -You think this about their not being present, because you want to think -it, not because it is true. Also it is very easy even for the wisest -parent to be led astray; for the child is the most accomplished actor, -and is always hiding its real self from you. - -You see the child has truly a very hard part to play, a part it can lay -down only when no grown-ups are by. In surroundings very opposed to its -own desires or its primitive needs, while still a savage in emotions, -it has to pretend to be what you think it is, to do what you think it -ought to do, and like what you think it ought to like. It has filled -me often with wonder and admiration to see the really brilliant way -in which even the youngest children play up to the angel-role forced -upon them by grown-ups. Much naughtiness and many violent unexplained -tempers are really a breakdown in this part. The right cue is forgotten -at the right moment, or the correct entrance is missed. And I feel it -very necessary to emphasise to you that the naughty child is not so -much being naughty as being himself. He rushes at you with a knife, not -because he is in a temper, but rather the temper is the liberating key -which allows his real desire to kill you to break through the barricade -of civilised desires that you are building around him. And it is very -necessary for the grown-up to understand the intense satisfaction of -creative strength which the child gains by this breaking out of his -real self—a satisfaction that is greatly marred, it is true, and even -turned to pain, by the consciousness of knowing he has broken adult -rules of behaviour, been a naughty boy and grieved you. Always there -is this conflict going on between his primitive egocentric desires and -the demands of the adult world in which he has to learn to live. It is -this conflict, and his success and failure in it, which determines his -growth. More and more he has to learn to give up his own desires and -subordinate his own will. Yet, I am not sure if his repentence, when he -fails, is altogether good for him. Certainly, if it is excessive, and -if it occurs too frequently, it weakens the force of life. And it is -most urgent of all to remember that the parent, or nurse, or teacher, -by constantly requiring from the uncivilised child the standard of -conduct right for the civilised adult may, and most frequently does, -produce a strain which turns the creative force of life back upon -itself. It is ever thus in life when we draw back too hastily or too -much coerced, from any spontaneous expression of emotion; the energy -gathered for the direct expression flows back impotent. I believe that -many a creative artist is destroyed in the civilising process of the -child being turned into the good boy or girl. - -And this brings me to a question of the most urgent importance to all -parents and teachers who attempt to guide the emotional development -of a child; to go slowly, and never to force an outward practice of -virtue from the child, if that particular stage of virtue has not been -reached. We do not expect the child to read until it has learnt to -read, nor to calculate and work sums before it understands the use of -figures; we do not expect it to walk until it has stumbled and fallen -many times, nor to use its tiny hands with precision until it has -broken many objects. Why then should we expect it to be good without -learning to be good? And especially, I ask, why should we demand a -standard of emotional behaviour much in advance of anything to which we -ourselves have attained? - -For in truth every child has a twisted and most difficult path to -travel in order to reach the standard of conduct expected by the adult -world. Few parents realise at all the harm that so readily may be done, -from any over-hastening on the road to virtue, to the child, sensitive, -responsive to every suggestion, most liable to injury; who is always -balanced between the desire to be a dirty, little savage, like himself, -or a clean well-behaved person, like a grown-up. For what gives every -adult so tremendous a hold over the child is his never ceasing desire -to push forward to a stage above what he is at. Always he is pulled in -two directions, forward to effort and good conduct and the real world -of action and of grown-ups, and backward towards ease and self-pleasing -and the dream-world of the child, in which he thinks only of what he -wants himself. If we hurry him too much there will be a regression: -the uncivilised trait that has not been got rid of by experience of -its uselessness and voluntarily been cast aside, will be thrust down -deep into the psyche, where its unrealised power sends up primitive and -uncivilised wishes, which will certainly mar the adult life, even if -they do not wreck it. - -It is not from sheer “contrariness” or “nastiness” that children -develop “bad habits,” that they pick noses, bite nails, stammer, and -other much worse things, or later are too shy or too boisterously -self-assertive, or develop illness and morbid fears.[3] Such symptoms -may be replacements of infantile curiosities and interests which were -denied their satisfaction by the mother’s warning, often harmful, -however gently given, “that is not nice, darling.” In particular harm -is caused by a too early checking of the child’s delight in messy -things, making mud pies, playing with water, using hands instead of -knife and fork, and other nasty messy habits. The particular habit may, -and usually does, disappear, but the checked and thwarted energy is -still potent and at any time in after life may re-appear clothed in a -fresh dress of concealment. - -All that can be done with the bad habit is to turn it into new -directions of rightful energy. As, for instance, the messy child should -be given heaps of plasticine or wax, and sand to play with. Similarly -with the desire to play with water: this is a symbolic action by which -the young child frees itself from some inner hidden trouble. I know -of one case where a child until quite an advanced age, always after a -relapse into bad and primitive behaviour, had a curious way of blowing -water through long tubes. The result was highly satisfactory and never -failed to bring the child back to good and social behaviour. As an -example of the terrible harm that may be done by an over fastidious -niceness of behaviour, I may cite a rather curious case I happen to -know, where a mother, was so afraid of nakedness, and disliking the -sight of her own body, that she actually put on a bathing dress when -she had a bath even in the privacy of her own bath room. This mother -had a son whose adult life was rendered miserable and his happiness to -a great extent injured, by horrible and haunting obscene visions. Here, -in very truth, the cleanness of the mother became the uncleanness of -the son. - -I must hasten on. I am bound to leave out much that might well be -noticed, for the subject is very difficult and very wide. I hope, -however, I have made clear to you the following truths:— - -(1) That any education of children in sex that is to result in success -in the after life cannot be fulfilled by the imparting of set and -fixed lessons on sex-enlightenment, given either in the home or in the -school. (2) That this education is concerned with the entire emotional -life of the child. (3) That it is continuous and unceasing. (4) And -that it is a work of such complexity that for even the wisest mistakes -are certain and success uncertain. - -Above all else, I am sure we have to avoid an easy and lazy optimism. - -And with such perils awaiting the incautious, is it any wonder that the -chief element of safety often is a negative one—non-interference? By -non-interference the two chief factors leading to emotional disturbance -and ill-health may almost certainly be avoided; thwarted wishes are not -thrust back, and repressed to work harm in the psyche, causing mental -and bodily ill-health which often does not manifest itself for many -years; development is not hurried on too rapidly, so that necessary -primitive stages of growth are omitted or hastened over too quickly, -causing, not infrequently, in the later years of life, a regression -backwards to primitive and uncivilised conduct. - -When interference becomes necessary it must be given wisely and with -due understanding of the child’s position. I mean it must be the right -instruction for the special child at that stage of its growth—not at -all what the adult thinks it ought to be taught or would like to teach -it. There can be no fixed rules as to sex teaching; no maxims laid down -that can safely be always followed. - -Take, for instance, the one apparently simple matter of satisfying -the child’s certain and right curiosity at the different stages of -its growth, by telling it the facts of birth, and, as it grows older, -explaining the difficulties that most certainly will arise in the mind -of every boy and girl in regard to these questions. So far I have said -little about this matter because most people say much; holding it as -the one thing implied by sex education, whereas I regard it, as I have -tried to make plain, as a limited, though certainly important duty in -connection with that education, which should be fulfilled by parents, -and within certain limitations, by teachers in the schools. - -But here, again, I am bound to utter warnings. There must be no -over-forcing of knowledge not sought for by the child, this is at -least as injurious to the emotional growth as over-forcing is to -the intellectual growth. Any one who has read Jung’s account of his -analysis of little Anna, will know what I mean. Little Anna became -troubled and nervous, worried about the birth of a little brother or -sister (I forget which). Telling her the truth did not help her, and it -took Professor Jung many months of patient work with the child to get -to the bottom of exactly what was troubling her. The most urgent rule -for the mother in this matter is this: never to arouse sexual curiosity -but to watch for its spontaneous expression and always satisfy it when -it is present. This of course is the same as saying, always tell the -child all the truth it wants to know. The difficulty here, of course, -is that so rarely is the child able to ask for the knowledge he (or -she) wants. - -What above all else it is necessary is for the mother to watch for the -child’s unconscious betrayal of its own curiosity. I mean by this, that -some unconsidered remark or act is the surest hope of finding just what -part of the problem is troubling him (or her) at that time; in almost -all cases there is a personal element of jealousy, unknown to the child -or carefully hidden, which is directed against one or other parent, -usually the father, or against some brother or sister. This is why the -intellectual teaching of the facts of birth, though necessary, does not -help very much and often disastrously fails. - -As I am trying all the time to force upon you, the real sex education -is an emotional education, that is why it is so difficult. I may make -this plainer by means of an illustration which I give in my book -on “Sex Education and National Health.” It was told me by a very -wise mother of her way of dealing with her son, who was, I think, -about fourteen years old. This son showed he was thinking, and was -evidently worried, about the very small families of one or at the most -two children, or the childless marriages, common among his mother’s -friends. He did not, however, speak of his trouble directly; instead -he beat round the question, somewhat in the manner of a shying horse. -After this had gone on for some time, he one day asked his mother if -her friends were more delicate (meaning, of course, more refined) than -other people. His mother was aware of what was troubling him; she -knew what he really wanted to know was whether married people lived -in celibacy when they had not children. She wisely told him the plain -facts and for him at that time curiosity was quieted. - -A boy of nine had a dream which he told his parents. His mother was -in a shop, and a man on a bicycle, dressed as an officer came along -the road; he, the little boy, rushed to the bicycle, stopped it, -flung the man off, and killed him. In telling the dream the boy said, -“I prevented him getting to mother.” This dream is so clear that I -need not wait to interpret it beyond saying that the father of the -boy was an officer. It will cause no surprise to anyone, with even a -rudimentary knowledge of the emotional troubles of children, to know -that this boy developed serious nervous symptoms. - -It has seemed worth while to record these two instructive little -stories, as a means of illustrating the kind of incident which -furnishes the guide with regard to the nature of the trouble to be -looked for, and shows in the first case as well the kind of help -a watchful and instructed parent can give to relieve the trouble -prevailing in the minds of the young. Dreams should always be noted, -they throw the sharpest light on the child’s emotional conflicts. -I must again urge the necessity of the parent paying the closest -attention to the child’s prattle, to watching carefully his games and -his behaviour, for in this way only can the clue be found to make it -possible to give the kind of instruction or treatment that is wanted. I -may give a few instances. Such things as the frequent childish desire -to sit up with father and mother, the calling for the mother at night -under the plea of fear are very certain signs of active jealousy. -Again the very usual unwillingness of the child to grow up arises out -of the inability to meet the necessity of separating the self from -the protective tenderness of the mother. The child is always tending -to turn back to safety, and, if this is encouraged by the mother, the -child in after life will be unable to meet the necessities of adult -action. The too fond mother perpetuates the childhood of her son or her -daughter. - -What the parents can do is to watch the child, and to learn themselves, -in order to have the knowledge to clear up difficulties as these -appear, and then it may be possible to remove obstructions to growth. -Further, they can place within the child’s reach the materials—the sand -and clean messy things to play with—machines to pull to pieces, swords -to fight with, dolls to play with—every child will need different -materials, by which, to a certain extent, liberation can be found -from their primitive instincts, by giving them a free and harmless -expression. In fact the real work of the parent may be likened to that -of the stage scene-shifter and property manager. - -Parental power guides the early years of the child like a higher -controlling fate. But when the boy or girl begins to grow up there -begins also the conflict between the home attachments and the need to -break away in order to free the growing soul from the spell of the -family. It is the war between the generations. The frequent and often -very deep depression of puberty arises from this struggle. And there -are the many other, and often very disturbing, symptoms, which are -rooted in the difficulty of the new adjustments. The boy or girl tries -often to separate himself (or herself) as much as possible from his -family; he (or she) may even estrange themselves from their parents -but inwardly this only binds them more firmly to the family ties. -The outward break must be regarded as a dangerous sign of the inner -conflict which the unselfish wisdom of the parents ought to be able to -aid. - -I cannot follow this important matter further. But I would wish to -say that this is the time for the teacher to step forward and take up -the work begun by the parent. The parents at this period are often -hindrances to the child, they must push their children away from them -in order to help the growing souls to gain their liberation. - -The uncertain and, as I fear they may seem, unsatisfactory conclusions -that must result from any honest inquiry into this difficult question -of helping the young at the start of their life’s journey, is due in -part to the fact that, even yet, and in spite of all the new knowledge -that has been gained in the last few years, we know very little about -the child’s emotional processes. Unfortunately our knowledge is not -sufficient to make it possible for any dogmatic statements to be -placed even tentatively before parents. There can be no ready-made -prescriptions, no certain cures. We do not even know where the greatest -trouble lies, whether it is in the parents and the teachers—the adults -who fail to understand the child; or in the child, who fights away from -the understanding that those who love and train him are able to offer. -We do know, however, that the difficulties on the part of the child -are very great—much greater than most of us (whether we are parents -or teachers)—satisfied in an easy grown-up optimism, have cared to -realise. In many ways we—the adults—the parents and the teachers, we -who are a generation behind the children and already have been through -the long, struggling, upward journey, by which they are now travelling, -ought to manage our love and our training for them more carefully, more -sympathetically, and more intelligently. I say intelligently, because -the sins committed in love against children are more lastingly harmful -than many of the sins committed under neglect or even under unkindness. - -Thus, the final word I have to say to parents in regard to their -children is this: - -_Do not love your children too possessively._ - -Try to understand and respect them—realise their existence as -individuals with interests and needs apart from yourself. If -necessary send them from you. Do not love your children for your own -satisfaction, but for their good, and to help them to establish, with -as little disaster as possible, their own lives. - - - - -SEX INSTRUCTION - -THE AGE AT WHICH KNOWLEDGE SHOULD BE GIVEN - - -A story is recorded of a father and mother in ancient Greece, who, -being concerned for the welfare of their only son, went to a renowned -teacher and asked him to educate and take full charge of their child. -“How old is your son?” questioned the teacher. - -“Just three!” - -The sage shook his head. “I am sorry but you have come to me too late: -the boy’s character is decided already.” - -I was reminded of this most instructive story as I read the account of -the evidence given by the Rev. the Hon. Ed. Lyttelton, before the Birth -Rate Commission of the National Council of Public Morals. For while I -agree wholeheartedly with the late headmaster of Eton College as to the -necessity of instructing the young in the facts of sex, I disagree, -with his view as to the method of the teaching and, even more I -disagree emphatically, as to the age at which instruction should begin. - -Dr. Lyttelton holds that the first lessons should be given at the age -of nine years, when the boy ought to be taught the facts of maternity, -this knowledge to be supplemented by further teaching at the age of -twelve or thirteen explaining the even more important (for the boy) -facts of paternity. - -Now it is here that I venture to disagree, and think that Dr. Lyttelton -has fallen into the very common error of underestimating the child’s -intelligence and boundless curiosity. It is in the very early nursery -days that sex education is most urgently needed. To wait until the age -of nine years has been reached is often to wait too late. In a vast -number of cases, it is locking the stable door after the horse has been -stolen. - -In all children the activity of the intelligence begins to work at a -very early age, and parents, who are not willfully blind, must know -that this activity tends to manifest itself in an inquisitive desire to -know many elementary facts of life, which are dependent upon sex. The -primary and most universal of these desires is the desire to know where -“the new baby comes from.” A child of four or even younger, may begin -to ask questions on this matter quite simply and spontaneously. The -degree of curiosity, as also the frankness with which it is expressed, -will differ, of course, in different children, but I am certain this -curiosity is present and at times active in all children. If they do -not question their elders, they will certainly puzzle over the matter -themselves; often they will talk with older companions, and gain the -information they are seeking in the worst possible way. - -Thus the first teacher of the child must be the mother, the one who is -most constantly with the child, tending him in washing, undressing, and -in all the daily needs of his little body. It is the mother who ought -to be the child’s supreme trainer. - -Few of us understand the confusion and hurt that may be caused by a -mother’s stupid silence and even more stupid hints and evasions and -made-up fables. The false stories of babies brought by the doctor or -the stork, or a little sister or brother found under the gooseberry -bush are never believed. While the fantastic ideas of birth, that the -child makes up for himself, fix their untruth into the immature minds. -And afterwards they cannot be checked, owing to childish concealments, -which always spring up so rapidly to meet any expression of adult -reticence. These birth-fantasies, though the child seems to out-grow -them, are not really forgotten but remain active in the unconscious -mind. In this way, trouble is often started that will be determinative -of the gravest evils in the later adult life. - -Parents are greatly to blame for not answering the questions of their -children, and being blind to their natural curiosity. And I would -emphasise again that this curiosity is present even when no questions -are asked. There need be no spoken words to make the child feel that -its questions are discouraged. All adults are surprisingly ignorant -of the affectability of children—their quick response to every kind of -influence. - -In the case of the birth of another child—an usurper who takes the -older child’s place—this affectability is exceedingly acute on account -of the emotional disturbance, in excitement and possible jealousy. -And by means of the adult attitude, the very certain interest and -investigation of the child into what is happening may so easily become -confused and connected with what is shameful and wrong; and the trouble -is aided, and usually in the worst possible manner, by the sharpest -observations and deductions made by the child _from unconsidered -actions and overheard remarks_ of parents, and of servants and other -adults—none of whom have any idea of the child’s watchfulness or his -curiosity in this matter. - -_We think little children are not interested in birth because we do not -want them to be interested._ And they, with the almost uncanny sagacity -which children show, understand this desire only too well and too -quickly. - -I had a striking illustration of this curious adult blindness quite -recently. Two mothers, who were sisters, were pregnant at the same -time. Each mother told me privately that _her children_ were not -interested in the event or in any way curious, but that _her sister’s -children_ were curious and wanting to find out what was happening. It -would have been useless to tell these mothers the truth. Yet both of -them were intelligent. They believed that their own children had no -curiosity because _they wished to believe this, not because it was -true_. - -Thwarted curiosity is one of the most frequent causes of emotional -disturbance in the first years of life. Do we not all know children who -as they get older exhibit an unreasoning curiosity about everything, -opening drawers, looking into the envelopes of other people’s letters, -searching excitedly for what they do not want. We want to ask the -question: Why does the child do this? What is it that urges him to act -like a “Peeping Tom?” For he is urged. You will find this habit of -needless prying almost impossible to check. It may persist into adult -life. Do not we all know grown-ups who cannot refrain from prying, -always curious, they are, on all occasions, seeking for knowledge they -do not want. - -This seeking action is symbolic. It implies that the search for the -thing that is not wanted, the curiosity over something of no interest -at all, is a substitute action for something that at one time was -wanted—something about which knowledge _was desired_, and desired so -much that it _would not be denied_. It was a curiosity so real that the -thwarting of it has started emotional trouble of which these searching -acts and persisting curiosity are the symbol or sign. - -This substitute formation is one of the commonest emotional processes -in children. The child pries, open drawers and letters, collects -useless objects, aimlessly searches for knowledge he does not want -_because there is some knowledge he wants tremendously badly, but -cannot speak about_. That is why he persists in his habits of peeping -and prying in spite of your scoldings and punishments. He must persist, -unless you deaden his character so terribly by your ill-judged -repression that even this substitute relief is closed. Your child -will then, probably, find some other make-believe comfort; he will -bite his nails, pick his nose, or other much worse habits may begin, -or again the emotional disturbance may be so acute that it becomes -impossible for the child to face, so that he fails in achieving any -kind of symbolic replacement. The thwarted and emotionally over-charged -curiosity is thrust back into the psyche where it remains a cause of -ill-health of body and uncleanness of mind, until that time in the -adult years, when the harvest of tares is reaped from the bad seed that -has been sown. - -The parents have the greatest responsibility, as I have said already. A -child of four or even younger may begin to ask questions of its mother, -simply and spontaneously. _It is the child who must guide the parent._ -But again I would give warning. The mother must not be over-eager, or -she will fall easily into the error of stimulating instead of quieting -the child’s restless inquiring mind. The child at the age when such -questions will first be asked and should be answered, will very quickly -tire of any information that may be given to it. It will break off to -run away and play and will interrupt the most beautiful and carefully -prepared lessons. And if the mother is wise she will never go beyond -the interest of the child, or the satisfying _and nothing further_, -of the special curiosity which at that special time is occupying the -child. If this course is pursued the child will probably continue -to ask for information—though there can be no certainty that this -desirable result will follow. But where such opportunities arise the -right kind of sex instruction can be attempted. For the mother will -be able to give answers in natural conversation, which will not force -information not sought for by the child. When so treated, it will be -found that children are not over-burdened by the subject, they will -interrupt and break away from the answer to the question they have -asked to speak about toy soldiers or dolls. This, to me, is the immense -value of this form of teaching: the child has the information, and yet -does not trouble about it when it is not to the point. Such a result -can never be gained by means of set talks or fixed lessons, especially -if these are mixed up with warnings, and much vague talk of things that -the child neither cares for or understands. - -I should, however, be giving a wrong impression if I left the matter -here, so that this answering of children’s questions seemed to be a -simple matter. It is not simple. For each child, as for each adult the -problems of sex are personal problems. And the child whose problem -is the hardest—who most urgently needs help, will hardly ever ask -questions. Instruction in sex is not _and never can be_ like teaching -the child about other things. That is what so many of the modern -advocates of sex education so entirely forget. - -In every child, as I have tried to show you there are hidden conflicts -of jealousy, of love, of hate, which determine beforehand its response -to the teaching that is given by the parents. - -I cannot here treat at all adequately this difficult question; it is -one on which I have written elsewhere (_Mother and Son_, _Sex Education -and National Health_, _The Mind of the Naughty Child_) I can say -only what I have emphasised already that from the start to the end, -_sex education is an emotional education_. That, of course, is why it -is so difficult. - -There is, in my opinion, too firm a belief in the efficacy of formal -instruction. The way is not so easy as this to discharge our debt to -the young. And sometimes I fear that parental talks about sex, in -particular when such talks are delayed until the boy or the girl is -reaching puberty, or until the time when the dangers of school life -have to be met, involving, as it must, a sudden breaking through of the -silence of years, may work for harm instead of for good. That this is -so in the case of some boys and girls I know to be true. You see you -cannot grow flowers in a soil choked already with weeds. - - - - -THE MYTH OF THE VIRTUOUS SEX - - -A day or two ago I was passing one of the great London schools at the -afternoon hour when the boys were released. I write “boys,” but among -them were many of sixteen, seventeen, or even eighteen years who looked -almost men. - -On the street side, two flappers, quite young—not more, I should judge, -than fifteen, stood with their faces pressed between the iron rails and -watched the exit of the boys. Certainly they were not nice girls; they -invited with smiles, they giggled, they ogled, they gestured. There -could, I think, be no mistake as to the purpose of the girls. - -I am glad to record that no single boy took the slightest notice of -them. - -Now this very unpleasant incident has set me thinking. I am oppressed -with feelings of responsibility; yes—and also of shame. If I am to be -honest I must accept here, as in all relations between the two sexes, -the validity of the mans’ plea that rings—yes, and will continue to -ring—through the centuries: “The woman tempted me!” - -Now, though we may accept this responsibility in theory, most often -we repudiate it in practice. From time to time—and the intervals are -not long apart—efforts are made to pass new laws which are supported -by many virtuous people—laws, whose one purpose is to increase the -punishments of men for offences against young girls. - -I am in whole-hearted sympathy with any changes in our law that will -afford greater protection to young girls. I cannot, however, refuse to -see the reverse side of the question. It is proposed to raise the age -of consent for girls, while at the same time a woman is not to be held -responsible for seducing a boy who is much younger than herself. This -is unjust. - -Why should we afford a period of protection longer for the girl than -for the boy? - -It may, of course, be argued that the boy is better able to look after -himself. This is not true. - -The girl grows up more quickly always than the boy; emotionally she -is far more developed, and, therefore, should be more, and not less, -responsible than he is. I have no doubt about this at all. - -No boy knows very much about love until some girl or woman has taught -him. - -Of course, the view of the evil nature of men, and of women as always -the victim, is one that can hardly fail to be pleasing to women, -depending, as it does, on their moral superiority, which stamps them -as Amazons of Purity, on the glorious mountain heights of virtue, from -where they must send down climbing ropes and ladders, in the form of -prohibitions and regulations and new laws, to pull men up out of the -deep valleys of vice. - -But if we inquire more honestly into this question of men’s sins, we -shall find that it is not they who are wholly responsible. There is -little difference between men’s virtue and women’s virtue. - -Almost unceasingly in our streets women are tempting men. - -Always there is the invitation near: “Come and make love to me.” To -be provocative is the one simple rule of many women’s lives. Men’s -admiration is a necessity to their very existence. - -True, in the after results, the woman may be, and, indeed, often is, -the victim—has to pay the heavier price; but at the start she is the -leader of the assault. - -The essential fact in every relationship of the sexes is the woman’s -power over the man, and it is the misuse of this power that is the -beginning of sin. - -Do not think I am unfair. Most men, I know, are not only tolerant of -women’s wiles; they like them. But most men succumb, I believe, against -their will, and often against their inclination, to the tyranny of -their own aroused passions. - -Men’s chivalry, as well as their pride, has woven a cloak of silence on -this question of the temptation they are so frequently called upon to -resist and this silence has protected women—even the worst. - -Let us alter our laws to help girls by all means. Yet, let us be just. -There is such a thing as too much temptation for a boy—temptation that -a woman has no right to give. - - - - -SENTIMENTAL TAMPERING WITH DIFFICULT PROBLEMS: WITH SOME REMARKS ON -SEX FAVOURITISM - - -It is sometimes difficult to have patience with the proposals that -are brought forward, so frequently and with such persistent zeal, -to amend our Criminal Law. One cannot doubt the sincerity of these -efforts to improve our disordered moral conditions. But something more -than good-will is required. There is such a thing as over-haste in -righteousness. - -Besides, the attitude taken by these scavengers of conduct is almost -always sentimental and one-sided. It is also dishonest. I say so, -because almost without exception, they fail entirely to meet the true -facts of the evils they attempt to cure. As reformers they seem to -have but one idea; if they have more, they keep them secret, for they -agitate but for one object. - -Morality is a word that has been wrested from its true meaning of the -whole duty of man in his social character and limited to the one narrow -application of sexual conduct. It is curious and significant. It is -as if we transferred to others some judgment which unconsciously was -imposed from within. - -Yet obviously the strongest impediment against effective reform lies -just here—in this blindness to reality; this separation from the truth. -I need not wait to enlarge upon this further, it is impossible to -contradict. To judge blindly is to judge upon a lie. - -Would you ask me to give you examples? - -There is, to take one illuminative instance, the long continued and -still unsettled agitation for raising the age of consent for girls. -Those who are chiefly eager for this reform invariably evince frenzied -zeal, combined with the most curious and deplorable ignorance of the -real facts. I cannot for a moment believe that they are in the least -degree, consciously blind. But that does not alter the fact that they -are blind. Instead of facing the situation squarely with knowledge and -due consideration of all the complicated conditions, they ignore every -thing they do not want to see. They wallow in sex-righteousness. - -Consider again the controversy that raged now sometime back, with -regard to the White Slave Traffic. The sudden frenzy. The unproved -stories of the trapping of girls! The clamour for legislative measures! -Every moral reformer became obsessed. - -The instinctive attitude of the one-ideaed reformer had a unique -chance of displaying itself, and one marvelled at the almost -curious enthusiasm, mated to inexperience, with which the subject -was approached. While the most offensive feature of the agitation -was the sex-obsession, which gave rise to the silly notion of the -helpless perfection of women and the dangerous opposite view of the -indescribable imperfections of men. It is no exaggeration to say that -every sense of reality was lost in white clouds of virtue. - -I would wish to make it plain that I am not judging these questions -either on one side or the other. What I desire to show is the danger of -a prejudiced view. And the danger is particularly active in connection -with all these attempts at changing the law, in order to give greater -protection to women and girls, while, at the same time, boys are left -unprotected. - -This unpopular view of the need to protect the boy from the girl—the -man from woman—the temptress of man—is not usually brought forward. -Yet, it is a view of the situation, seen from a different side, that -cannot be neglected. The evidence is overwhelming of girls of sixteen -years and even younger tempting boys of the same age as well as those -older than themselves. If in such cases the boy is to be punished and -the girl treated as a wronged and helpless victim, not only will a -great unjustice be done, but there will be a very certain danger of -graver demoralisations. - -This truth of the woman’s power, which depends upon Nature and not -upon law, the supporters of a one-sided alteration of our criminal law -too often fail to face. - -I am reminded here of a little incident that happened many years ago. -I had quarrelled seriously with a man, who before I had always liked -and respected, for what I then considered was his light treatment of a -certain girl who was my friend. She had written and told me her side of -this occurrence. - -Very well I recall what he said: “You don’t understand. She asked for -it.” Then, when I pressed him further, he went on. “A man always treats -a girl in the way she wants him to do.” - -Now, one of the greatest troubles in connection with all -sex-legislation to-day arises from this fact that _women do not -understand_. They are inexperienced and in too great a hurry. They -think they can cure old evils with quick penny-in-the slot reforms. -There is still a chivalry that protects women and shields their -ignorance. These illusions are maintained, even by men of the world, -who are acquainted with all the complex difficulties. It is the -romantic view, a kind of male blindness that nothing seems to cure. -Women must be protected from men, who are the great offenders in all -sexual sins. Often I have marvelled at the acceptance by men of a view -of the sex-conflict so highly untrue, though flattering to women, -depending as it does on their entirely unproved moral superiority. - -And here I wish to ask your attention to a consideration of the -question that is very rarely appreciated. I regard it as exceedingly -important. Those who are possessed with a frenzy for protecting girls -ought to remember that there is still greater necessity to protect -boys. It is forgotten that the young girl is not usually in constant -close relations with other men than her father and brothers. She has to -be guarded only from the _outside lover_, whom _in the first beginning -of intimacy she could, if she wished, easily repel_. - -The reverse is the case with boys. In a sense, they cannot escape from -situations of danger. At school, in lodgings, even at home, in sickness -and also in health; on every occasion opportunities are provided that -make abuse exceedingly easy. The part played in the sexual initiation -of boys by servants, by lodging and boarding-house keepers, and by -other women who have to tend, and feed and mend for them is much larger -than is credited. It is folly to close our eyes to the evils that so -often arise. _Probably every man who is a seducer of women was himself -first seduced by a woman._ - -In spite of the emancipation upon which women pride themselves, in -spite of much theoretical knowledge, yes, in spite of social and rescue -work—where, it should be noted, they hear the woman’s story but only -in the rarest cases the man’s story—almost all women lead a shielded -life. Much that happens is outside their experience—as long as they are -virtuous. This sets definite limits to their knowledge and their power -of comprehension. And this again explains the continued belief in the -woman’s notion that, _in all cases_, the girl is the victim of the man. - -It would be nearer the truth to reverse the position. Girls need to -be taught their great and unavoidable responsibility. They should be -trained to be protectors rather than to seek protection. _Men will -treat them as they want to be treated._ - -Let us now, for a moment, be practical and consider if there is any -reason we can discover, which will explain why we hear so much more -about the seduction of girls and the sins of men than we ever do about -the other side—the tempting by women and girls, and the seduction of -boys. The answer is simple. The boy will not talk about what happens to -him if he is led into a sexual offence at an early age. This is true -also to a large extent of the man. But the boy especially considers -he ought to have known: also he is much more self-conscious. Then he -expects to be blamed for not resisting, whatever the circumstances. He -will probably not tell anyone, unless the girl does so, until years -afterwards. - -I know a schoolboy who was seduced by a woman relation years older than -himself, in a very shameful way. This boy was of high character and -very sensitive; he suffered in ways impossible to relate here, but he -never told anyone until about ten years afterwards, when he told the -woman he was to marry. - -Now, if this case had been reversed and a young schoolgirl had been the -victim of a male relative, I am fairly confident the fact would not -have been concealed. Girls, even if not wholly innocent, almost always -will tell, because it has at all times been allowed to them to blame -the man. They thus can count on sympathy. This means much more than -usually is reckoned with. - -Let me give a less tragic instance of a different and humourous -character. A schoolboy, about seventeen years old, was waiting for a -motor-bus in which he was going home. He was a dreamy boy and a bus -came up and, lost in his thoughts, he did not take it. He was brought -back to reality by a girl accosting him. “I waited, too,” she said. -“You, are glad arn’t you? You would like me to go in the bus with you.” - -She smiled up at him: but he was not to be caught. - -“I don’t care, the hell, what you do as long as you don’t expect me to -pay your fare!” - -That silenced her and sent her away. But how easily, had the boy been a -less confident type, the incident might have taken a different course. -And then, if disaster had followed, the boy would be blamed, the girl -would be pitied. There is an enormous amount of sex unfairness. - -I could recount many further cases in proof of how almost always it -is the girl (or the woman) who takes the first steps in forming these -friendships. Men, at least, will know that I speak the truth. And -yet this fiction of the greater virtue of the woman is persistently -maintained: while the man is condemned as being nearer the devil and -the beast. - -I know that the many horrible cases of criminal assault upon children -will be quoted against me, in proof of the justice of this heavy -condemnation of men. Please do not think that I am in any way unaware -of the awfulness of these crimes. The protection of little children -is the one matter on which I feel most deeply. But there can be no -fair comparison between this class of crime and the ordinary cases of -seduction, whether we believe it is the man who seduces the woman, -or the other way round, the woman who tempts and excites the boy -or the man. In the one case an unhappy and terrible degenerate is -passion-driven into the commission of an atrocity, in the other there -is, and, indeed, must be to some extent, a mutual purpose, usually with -some calculation and a certain deliberate choice. - -That is why it is so false to reality to regard the one partner as -a helpless victim. It is really a position that is impossible and -ridiculous. Are we to believe that all women are impotent and imbecile -weaklings incapable of resisting men? The truth is that in slandering -men we only slander women with the backward swing of the same blow. - - - - -THE SEDUCTION OF MEN - - -Quite recently an action has been brought in the High Courts by a wife -against a woman for the seduction of her husband. It is the first -time a charge of this kind has been heard in an English court of law, -though, I believe, such actions are not unknown in the newer lands of -America and Canada. - -The case is one of very special interest, and opens up many questions -that go right down to the deepest problems of the relationships of men -and women. - -As we should expect, the action failed. It was held that the man had -not been seduced. He was not enticed away from his wife by “the other -woman,” rather, it was the other way round. The man, not the woman, -must be held responsible; she had yielded to him only at his desire, -after persuasion and against her will. - -But is this true? - -As already in the two previous essays I have emphasised, perhaps -over-emphasised, the accepted, very sentimental and peculiar judgment -in all these cases. The woman the victim: the man the seducer. He the -active sinner: she the passive sufferer. All the blame to be heaped on -to him: all the pity to be given to her. - -Really it is difficult, as so frequently I have stated, to have -patience at this shelving of the real facts. It seems to be forgotten -entirely how tremendous is the power of the woman in all love -relationships. Why a man under the influence of a woman he loves is as -easily led and as devoid of all will-power as a young child. Indeed, -he becomes the child of the woman, as soon as, and for as long as, -he loves her. He is her’s to make or to destroy. She strengthens him -enormously or irreparably injures and weakens his resistance. She can -hold him to the hardest duty and keep him in the fine path of right -doing. It is she leads him, not he who leads her, into the easier ways -of love. - -Yes, it is women who shape the souls of men as it is women who gave -them birth. - -That is why this view of the man’s responsibility in love being -greater than the woman’s is so singularly untrue. If we inquire at all -truthfully into this question of seduction, it is obvious that not the -man but the woman is the more responsible. For one thing, she knows so -much more about love, from the beginning, and _without being taught_, -than a man ever knows. Most often it is the woman who takes the first -step, breaks down the first barrier. Always there is the invitation -which unceasingly she gives, whether consciously or unconsciously -expressed—“Come and love me.” - -Her dress, her movements—all invite love. To be provocative is however, -little she knows it, the one fixed simple rule of her life. In the end, -and indeed, sometimes very soon the position may be reversed, but at -the start assuredly the woman holds the cards and can make the first -move in the love-game. She is the pursuer, far more often and far more -truly, than the pursued. Too often she directs a continuous attack. - -Her relation to the man is comparable to that of a magnet to a heap of -iron filings. - -Love to a woman so often, when she is young, is less an affair of -passion than of excitement. It gratifies her insatiable desire for -power. The boy or the man more certainly is driven by love. This is -his principal motive. While the girl often starts on the adventure for -the sake of experiment and because she wants amusement. She pursues -love almost as a game. Passion plays a part only in the second degree. -Not infrequently, in the midst of love, the coldness of her heart is -plainly apparent. - -This may seem a hard saying. I believe it is true. - -Seduction as the crime of the man alone cannot, I am convinced, be -accepted, in any case without great caution. It is, as I have said -several times already, so comfortable to place the sins of sex on men. -But I doubt very much if any woman _can be seduced against her will_. - -I must insist again that excitement and escape from dullness, as -also the joy in receiving presents and having “a good time,” are the -principal motives that first lead girls into illegal relations. - -Sometimes it is worse than this. - -Many women, seducers of men—women who draw men from their wives and -their homes, and their duty, are nothing but cold experimentors. They -are speculators in love. They do this for delight of power, in the same -way as men are speculators in business. - -Perhaps the position is unavoidable. - -The subjection of man is a necessity to some women’s existence. Love -is to them a similar feeling to love of the chase. They cannot keep -from pursuing men. It is, as I have said, an expression of the ever -increasing demand for excitement. Conquest in love gives to women the -opportunities for the fulfilment of themselves, which men gain in many -different departments of life. - -But no man, I think, could satisfy completely the craving for -dominion, which the delusive humility of his desire awakens in this -type of woman. Then when she commits the error, from a womanly point -of view, of hunting down her man; leading him on by helping him too -much—seducing him, instead of waiting for him and drawing him slowly -and unconsciously by her love, she awakens the same instinct for -dominion and thirst for excitement in the man. It is then that the man -becomes a seducer of other women. It is the lust to devour, to crush, -quickened into being by suggestion. It explains, I believe, the cruelty -of all wild love. - - - - -PLAYING WITH LOVE - - -Many girls to-day try deliberately to keep love light. Shrewd enough -to understand the heavy claims of serious love affairs that lead to -marriage, they prefer flirtations of weeks only—episodes that are a -secret and, as it were, detachable part of their lives. - -It is a dangerous state. - -Emotional power and the enjoyment of the simple pleasures of life are -dried up by such constant stimulation. A new diet of excitement must -always be provided. The object of life is to cheat time and to crowd -out boredom. Whatever is going on they must be in it from a jazz dance -or river picnic to a church bazaar. - -In the old days it used to be only duties for girls—now it is rights -and pleasure with the demand to be left to make their own lives. There -is a turning away from duty; a hatred of anything dull. - -Girls as I have just shown you want love as an experience and to -provide the always desired excitement. They do not want to marry and to -settle down. - -Thus while condescending to fascinate men, while deliberately seeking -attention these young women still hold themselves in hand. Intending to -exploit life to the uttermost they find love amusing, but they fight -always against its being a vocation. - -There is calculation and dangerous hardiness in their attitude to their -lovers. - -Their transitory love affairs are, indeed, regarded in very much the -same way as formerly they were regarded by the average young men—as -enjoyable and thrilling incidents of which they are ashamed only when -they are talked about and blamed. - -With no sex conscience, these wantons of excitement have no -consciousness of womanly responsibility. Each new affair affords an -eagerly snatched tribute to a colossal and restless vanity. - -This is one type of woman who to-day plays with love. - -There are as well other girls of a different character, less concerned -with pleasure, less consciously vain, more emotional, and to men more -interesting. They are incessantly thinking of their own personalities; -and, for this reason, they are equally, even if not more, harmfully -destructive in the utter misery they often create. - -These are the girls who are always emotion hunting. - -Impossible to tell what are their pseudo-feelings. A sort of sterile -passion, which expends itself in their failure to know, and find, what -they want. - -They do not wish consciously to escape the responsibilities of -marriage; indeed they seek unceasingly the perfect man to whom they may -surrender their freedom. But they suffer from a formless discontent -that rots into every love and prevents them finding satisfaction. - -Consumed with haggard restlessness, such girls pass their days in a -dangerous state of expectancy and nervous tiredness. Eternally they are -unsatisfied without knowing why. - -Born spiritual adventurers, these worshippers of emotionalism, -attitudinising and thinking perpetually of themselves, desire at all -cost a position in the limelight. They love romantically, but rarely -are they strong enough to obey their inclinations. Such girls are out -on an eternal quest; and, every now and again, they believe they have -found the ideal man they are seeking. Then they discover they have -not found him, so their search is taken up anew. While often their -insistent egoism, which causes them to ignore the rights of others and -all social obligations, drives them into dangerous corners; does not -give them a chance; turns them to use mean weapons of deceit; forces -them into false situations that too often close around them like a trap. - -Many other nobler types, besides these two, have been playing with love. - -Girls of profound and steadfast emotional nature are rare. The great -majority of girls certainly are not entirely light-minded, but they -are less serious, more noisily determined to do what they want, to -get what they can both out of men and out of life. They are very like -children, playing at desperate rebels, who take up weapons to use far -more deadly than they know. - -All this playing with love is detestable—all of it. It bears witness to -a poverty of emotion and a shameful shirking of responsibility. - -Women are the custodians of manners in love. The future rests -with them. And this responsibility cannot safely be set aside, -dependent as it is on forces active long before human relations were -established—forces which press on women back and back through the ages. - -Yes, woman has laid upon her the sacred necessity of seriousness in all -that is connected with Love. It is a duty imposed upon her by Nature, -and one that she cannot escape. That is why there is so much danger -in these restless neurotic years, when girls are too excited to be -serious. - - - - -SECTION III - -MARRIAGE AND OTHER RELATIONSHIPS - - - - -IS PASSIONATE LOVE THE SUREST FOUNDATION FOR MARRIAGE? - - -“There is no subject,” says Bernard Shaw in the preface to _Getting -Married_, “on which more dangerous nonsense is talked and thought than -marriage.” And though I disagree rather violently with Mr. Shaw’s -views about marriage, he is right here. We do talk dangerous nonsense, -which need not matter very much, if we did not think absurdly, and so -inevitably have to pay the fruit in wrong action. This explains, I -think, our curious levity, our unhappiness, and fierce refusal to face -facts. - -We have infested our ideals with the poison of pleasure and turned away -from essential things. Marriage is not a religion to us—it is a sport. - -I say this quite deliberately. I am sure we know better how to engage -a servant, how to buy a house, how to set up in business—how, indeed, -to do every unimportant thing in life, than we know how to choose -a partner in marriage. We require a character with our cook or our -butler, we engage an expert to test the drains of our house, we study -and work to prepare ourselves for business, but in marriage we take no -such sensible precautions; we even pride ourselves that we do not take -them. We speak of _falling in love_, and we _do fall_. - -The conventions of to-day are false; they are bound up with -concealments or with an equally untruthful openness. It does not, -however, follow from this that mere destruction will be enough, that -everyone’s unguided ignorance will lead to success and freedom. The -_laisser faire_ system is as false in the realm of marriage as it -is in industry and economics. While equally false, though this is -rarely recognised, is the modern spiritual view of marriage that love -can be found only in perfect harmony of character between the wife -and the husband, _and is independent of duty_. It is true that love -differs from lust in its deeper insight into the personality, deeper -interest in character, as opposed to the inexpressive smooth outline -and “untrained” physical beauty of the body. But the character and -intellect may be studied and loved as self-centeredly, as much with a -view to the enjoyment of mental excitement, as the body itself. - -Of all of which what is the moral? This: - -In marriage, as in other things, we fasten our chains about our own -necks. We do not find what we desire because we do not know what we -want. - -The very word love is used in so general and indiscriminate a way to -denote sometimes the most transitory impulse and sometimes the most -intense feeling, that a mass of misunderstanding arises. The emotion -which most often passes under the name of love is a maudlin, sickly -sentiment or passion founded on hypocrisy, which means nothing at -bottom but the desired enjoyment of a passion which is felt but not -understood, and which professes to be everything but that which it is -in reality. - -With more courage to face truth, we should have a surer ideal; there -would be much less sentimentality, but much deeper feeling about -marriage. Our romance is slightly vulgar. Vulgarity is a sign of -weakness of spirit, that spirit which is “the life that carves out -life” as Nietzsche says. - -We associate romance with courtship and not with marriage. “Thank God -our love-time is ended!” cried a north country bride on the day that -marriage ended her long engagement. - -Now, I do not know whether this delightful story is true, but it does -illustrate the attitude of many ordinary couples, whose love adventure -ends at the very hour it should begin. - -Every marriage ought to be a succession of courtships. - -A very slight knowledge of existing marriages is sufficient to convince -even the most optimistic believer that true mating is hard. I do not -believe that most marriages are unhappy, but I do know that only the -very few are happy. With many perhaps, and even with those who are -passionate lovers, the attraction of sex always seems to fall short of -its end; it draws the two together in a momentary self-forgetfulness, -but for the rest it seems rather to widen their separateness. They are -secret to one another in everything; united only in the sexual embrace. - -Can we, then, ever find perfect love? Is it not like exercise of the -body? You can develop it to a certain point, but not beyond, without -danger; and very slowly, with continued patient effort. Do we not need -exercise of the soul? I do not know. Often I feel I know nothing. To -some men and women it is all simple enough, a woman is just a woman -and a man is a man. The trouble begins when any woman becomes the one -desired woman and any man the one desired man. - -There is gain and development in this selective tendency of Love—and -yet, if I am right, there is terrible danger lurking in the application -of this egoistic spiritual view. - -We may not safely ask too much or too little from marriage or take too -high or too low a view of it. - -I am not very hopeful of improvement. At least, not for a long time, -and never unless we learn to be more honest about ourselves and about -love. - -In fear, we have tried to keep the blinds down so that love may be -decently obscured. Yet how can we ever begin to understand and deal -with these problems of sex unless we will admit all the instincts and -tendencies which ever lead us backwards to the more elemental phases of -life? The deepest of the emotions is sex, and its actions, like all the -emotions that are fundamental, may be traced into a thousand bye-paths -of the ordinary experience of each one of us; it exercises its -influence on every period of our development, and works subconsciously -to control our actions in endless ways that we refuse to acknowledge. - -Hence the conflicts which manifest themselves so strangely and so -fiercely in our lives. The emotional-self refuses, at times, to be -controlled by the reason-self. Restraint cannot do much, and indeed, -often brings deeper evils. For our unconscious selves are stronger than -all the pretenses and guards we have set up by our conscious wills, -either as individuals to encourage our own conceit and egoism, or -collectively as a so-called civilized people in the hope of controlling -conduct. - -That is why so much that is said to-day about sexual conduct is so -foolish. The real question is not what _people ought to do_, but what -they _actually do_ and _want to do_, and, therefore, are likely _to -go on doing_. It is these facts that the reformers of marriage almost -always fail to face. - -To me, one thing, at least, is certain, the romantic view of marriage -has failed us. - -But we cannot change the ideal of to-day unless we have ready a new -ideal to inspire our conduct. We cannot destroy a sanctuary unless we -first build a sanctuary. - -There is a strange idea among some young people to-day that sexual -happiness can be gained by breaking away from all the traditional -bonds, it is the visible sign of our confusion as a people, and the -want of happiness in our lives. The new generation should not set at -naught the experience of the ages. - -The individual household where both parents share in the common -interest of bringing up the children, is the foundation on which -marriage has been built up, and on which it must stand. If the -conditions of the home are seriously changed, and the bearing and -caring for children is no longer considered an essential part of -marriage, a change in marriage itself will follow. I do not think you -can hold the one if you let the other go. For Westermark is right, and -children should not be regarded as the result of marriage, but marriage -as the result of children. And love between men and women implies -duties and responsibilities that go out beyond themselves; without -this, even love of the most passionate kind, loses its quality and -tends to become an ephemeral or even a corrupt thing. - -There is much stupidity in the view of many reformers of marriage -who fail to see that, however hard it is to live faithfully to the -obligation, and unchecked responsibilities of love, the old ideal of -marriage does so appeal to our emotional nature, that men and women are -seriously unhappy in trying to destroy it. - -Not all who cry “It is useless,” can do without the limiting safeguards -of children and of legal marriage. We still feel the serpent’s sting of -jealousy and the old questions, “Where do you come from?” “What have -you been doing to-night?” “Who handled your body till daytime, while I -watched and wept?” “In what bed did you lie and whom did you gladden -with your smile?” are still felt, even if not uttered by the lips, of -the most emancipated husbands and wives. For our sex-judgments are not -intellectual, nor are they merely moral; they are not just questions of -understanding and forgiving, but they are also physical, of the nerves, -of the blood, of the fiercest instinct. - -Fortunately it is easier to talk of love’s freedom, than it is to act -as if it ever could be free. And in spite of what advanced people say, -some feeling of duty in sex will always exist as long as it hurts us -at all to hurt others. The immorality that says, “Do what you desire -irrespective of others,” is as yet beyond most of us. - -Attempts to solve these problems quickly are bound to fail. -Intellectual revolutionists are, I think too hopeful with regard to -what may be done to produce a harmony of sexual needs. The optimism -that once prevailed in regard to economics is being transformed to -sexual matters. Once people supposed that if every one followed his own -interests a harmony would automatically establish itself in the economy -of society. Now they tend to say the same about sex. - -Intellectual views of life and what is right and wrong always act -to break people into groups, each struggling to explain everything -according to one theory, built on a single principle. And as the result -of caring so much for one thing, people seem quite unable to grasp -any facts that do not refer to their own particular reform; they are -not able even to consider it as part of a world in which there is -anything else. All the evil in marriage? is due to too large families -and populations pressing upon the food supply, we are told by one -class of enthusiasts, while others point to men’s tyranny over women. -Emancipation for women, with an equal moral standard, would have a -magical effect: men are all bad say some. The father is a parasite, -unnecessary except for his share in begetting the child; the mother is -the one parent. All would be well if legal marriage were abolished and -motherhood made free, is the view common among one class of reformers. -Eugenical breeding and sterilisation of the unfit is the remedy brought -forward by others. Many suggest economic changes and the endowment of -motherhood. - -But the matter is not so simple as these reformers seem to believe. -And I doubt if any outward change is really capable of producing the -prompt kind of penny-in-the-slot results that its supporters claim that -it can. The complexity of marriage (in particular, the occurrence of -sexual disharmonies so present and active for misery to-day) is ignored -by all intellectual reformers. It is because they have no emotional -hold on life as a whole that they find it easy to squeeze all life into -their magic theories. For myself I can see no sure remedy—though in a -later essay I shall try to suggest a palliative: but were I asked to -state my deepest belief, I could say only “A few thousand years more of -development, a growth towards consciousness and a fuller understanding -of the meaning of life.” - - - - -MARRIAGE REFORM - - -Many people seem to be in fear that any change in the marriage laws -will destroy marriage. “Hands off! No tinkering with marriage!” they -cry in a panic of timidity and moral anger. - -I marvel at this want of faith. Do they, indeed, believe that the -institution of marriage rests on a trembling quicksand, so that its -supporters are compelled to build a scaffolding of lies to sustain its -foundations? - -The laws of marriage are only the register of what marriage is: they -do not control marriage. There are no laws, for instance, to regulate -the perfect love-unions of birds, whose faithfulness and family life -present a beautiful and high standard of conduct. - -Let there be no mistake here. I have been told that I wish to destroy -permanent marriage, that I do not consider the welfare of children and -the best interests of the race. I deny these charges; they are untrue. - -My ideal of marriage is one that many will call old-fashioned. It -demands the consecration of the mother in service to her husband, to -their children, and the home. That is why I advocate the recognition -and regulation of other forms of union, not because I have a low ideal, -but to prevent the degradation of marriage by forcing into it those who -do not desire, and, therefore, are unsuited for, its binding duties. - -The immense failure of marriage to-day arises from the confusion of -our desires and our ceaseless search for individual happiness. We -have no firm ideal, no fixed standard of conduct either for women -or for men. And the existence of many standards of what ought to be -done; the liberty permitted to the man, the liberty permitted to the -woman; if the wife shall continue her work or profession or remain -at home dependent on the husband’s earnings; whether the marriage -shall be fruitful or sterile—these are but a few of the questions -left undecided. And thus to leave men and women unguided, with their -own ideas of what is good to do and what is evil, is the dry-rot very -surely destroying the ideal of marriage. - -Every couple starts anew and alone, and the way is too difficult for -solitary experiments. - -This modern delusion of looking at marriage as an individual affair is -of course, the essence of the selfish, egocentric habit of life—it -focuses desire on personal adventure and personal needs. With more -courage to face the realities of love we should have a surer ideal. -There would be less sentimentality, but much deeper feeling about -marriage. - -This, then, is what I would teach: No longer must marriage be regarded -solely as a personal relationship. Marriage is a religious duty. - -“To be mothers were women created, and to be fathers, men.” - -This was the ideal which gave the breath of life to marriage among the -men and women in our earlier England, who were more fixed in character -and less selfish than we are to-day. - -It is this ideal we have lost. - - - - -TO-DAY’S IDEAS ON MARRIAGE - -ARE WE SEEKING VAINLY AFTER HAPPINESS? - - -The love-story of to-day differs in one essential way from the -love-story of yesterday. Yesterday’s love-story always had a youthful -hero and heroine, and ended with the marriage bells. To-day’s, which -is a far harder love-story to write, begins with marriage. Moreover, -the bride and bridegroom are rarely young, nor are they ravishingly -beautiful. - -Earlier authors in short, shirked the real problem of marriage. They -ended where they should have begun. For the main difficulties, in that -always difficult adventure of the two learning to live as one, do -not lie in youth, the period of quick adaptation, of easy falling in -love. The trouble does not often begin in the courtship or honeymoon -days; but it comes later in the struggle to harmonise and bend the -character to the demands and lessons of marriage, and in the continued -effort of maintaining love _after knowledge of love has come_. There -is the difficulty. The preservation of love when all the passionate -preliminaries are over. - -Love is not walking round a rose garden in the sunshine; it is living -together, working together. And the honeymoon is as trifling as the -hors d’oeuvre in comparison with wedded life, and as unable to satisfy -the deep needs of women and men. And the greatest difficulty rests in -the fact that very few of us understand what our deeper needs are. -Even to ourselves we are strangers. That is one reason why marriage is -always difficult. - -You see so often the partner one falls in love with does not make a -good life companion. It’s all very well to moralise, but you can hardly -ever be certain beforehand how these relations will turn out. There is -physical attraction and passion, and there is affection—just being pals -with each other. Who is to know which is the more necessary—the better -for happiness of these two? You ought to have both, but few couples are -so fortunate as that. We are almost all of us divided in our desires -and our wills as also in our love. - -The boys or girls to-day are, I think, more natural. There is much -greater openness and less pretence. Even our novelists frankly say that -every woman looks with special interest on a well formed man. There -is no convention marking this as improper, “the baser side of love.” -We Victorians were everlasting children in an everlasting nursery; we -did not play with love, but we fiercely refused seriousness towards -the fundamental emotions. Perhaps that is why we lost the old firm -tradition of marriage and its duties, and why we have succeeded in -putting nothing in its place. - -The disease of our wills and the sickness of our souls has rust-eaten -into marriage. We are doing nothing because we are too frightened to be -serious. We have sought to drown our unhappiness and the exhaustion of -our souls, to fill emptiness with pleasure; to place the personal good -in marriage above the racial duty; to forget responsibility, and, in so -doing, inevitably we have turned aside from essential things. - -We have missed happiness in trying to grab at it. - -Cannot you see what is wrong? We are so terribly tired of this search -for something that we never find. We are like little lost children, we -run, this way and that, we cry and make much noise, in fear, seeking -for our mothers. Yes, our adventures are the tricks of the child who -fantasies so as to pretend that everything is right when in reality -everything is wrong. - -Love is a dream to those who think but a terrible reality to those who -feel. - -The frequent and tragic failure of so many marriages arises from a -confusion of our values and our undisciplined wills. In one way we -expect too much from love, while in another we expect too little. What -we have lost is any fixed standard of duty. I have said this before: I -must say it again. - -Marriage has ceased to be a discipline, it has become an adventure. - -It is, little as we may believe it, the search for deeper and more -perfect love that so often endangers love. Seeking, always for the one -satisfying mate, we must find a partner corresponding in every respect -to our ideal. The man in Mr. Hardy’s novel, “The Well-Beloved,” spent -forty years in trying to do this, and his ultimate failure is typical -of the experience of most of us. - -Fools and blind, we neither understand nor seek the cause of our -failure. - -We need a new consciousness of our social spirit and racial -responsibilities in marriage: the idea of handing down, at least as -much as we have received. We are the guardians of the Life Force. Let -us honour ideals of self-dedication; of fixed obligations of the one -sex to the other, of duties to our children long before they are born, -and let us spread the New Romance of Love’s Responsibility to Life; -then there will be in society in general and not in a mere fraction of -it, happiness in marriage and passionate parenthood. - - - - -WHY MEN ARE UNFAITHFUL - - -There is a question I would ask all wives, whose husbands having left -them, are to-day seeking relief in the divorce courts. What was it that -first sent your man away from you? What was it that first turned him -from the safe happiness of marriage to seek the restless unhappiness of -unregulated love? - -It will not do to dismiss this question with the old unreasoning -condemnation of men; nor will it serve to talk of their polygamous -nature and uncontrolled passions. Let us look at the matter a little -more closely, and with greater regard to truth. - -In marriage the woman dominates more often than usually is known. For -one thing she has the children on her side. I think marriage is more of -a duel than usually is acknowledged. One partner wins, kills the other, -kills all that makes joy and life—makes the one who conquers a captain; -the other—the conquered one, a servant, slave—what you will. It is so -always, more or less. And in this marital duel there is no quarter; -and, nine times out of every ten, it is the woman who holds the cards; -she who wins. If she is clever, she knows this—knows the game is in her -hands. But the dice she has to throw is her sex, and she has only been -allowed one throw! And when she has thrown wastefully—Yes, it is here -that disaster enters into marriage and makes tragedy of the game of -life. - -But there is another side—and a side that is of immense importance to -women. - -Undeniably the greatest function of any man in the life of the average -woman is to be the father of her child. All other things he means to -her are secondary to this. For this reason, after the birth of her -first child, she frequently ceases, though she does not know it, to -love her husband as a man, and for himself. - -The feeling of a child against a woman’s bosom is more to her than -the kiss of a lover or the devotion of a husband. What is it that she -feels? It is a liberating power; a sensation of unaccustomed unity—like -a strong tide that carries her over everything, makes her unconscious -of the worry of the days. It is life itself. It irradiates all the -world about her, all that belongs to her—her very soul. She has become -one with life—a creator, as a god. - -That is why so often the man—the husband and the father, finds himself -left outside this charmed circle of life. - -And even when the marriage is childless (as happens most frequently in -the marriages that come to the divorce courts), this same passionate, -grasping maternity acts—indeed, acts sometimes with added fierceness -and even more disastrously. She mothers her man, but she does not love -him. She gives him the protection that she should have given to her -children but she holds back the inspiration and the spur that he most -needs from her. - -The woman’s life so often is filled with attending her children or her -husband, whom she loves (I must press this home again), where she has -no children, not as a mate, but as a child. She ceases to consider him -as a man—to belong to him as completely as he belongs to her. - -She holds back more and more of herself—the vital part that he wants, -while, at the same time, she demands more and more from him. The man -feels that he is losing, giving up his individuality with all that he -cares for most, and, after a period of loneliness and unhappiness, -broken, probably, with some bluster and conflict, he gives in and -begins not to care. - -The result in the end is almost certain. The lower types of husband -from time to time, will break away and find compensation in wild -love. Some will seek distraction in work, or will develop a temper -and nerves. Other men of more refinement will suffer much more, till -they too break away at last; they will turn from the reality of life -to dreams, unless they too seek and find love and sympathy with some -woman, who, without the binding security of marriage, is more careful -to understand them and to love them for themselves. - -Most wives have yet to learn the deeper responsibilities of love; and -this not at all in regard to their duties to their husbands, which most -often are too perfectly fulfilled, but in the more intimate and far -more exacting task of giving them spiritual freedom as well as sympathy -and understanding. - -I believe that this failure on the part of so many wives, in holding -back just what the man most craves and seeks for, is the real cause, -to which all other causes are subsidiary, of that failure in the -continuance of the husband’s love, which brings so many marriages, -which started in happiness, to the disaster of the divorce courts. - -In my opinion, the greatest cause of error is in women’s limited -experience which makes their judgments hard. While another cause arises -from the tendency, and already I have emphasised more than once (a -tendency due to a deep inner cause of sex difference) to throw the -whole blame for sexual sins upon men. Some women carry sex antagonism -like a flag, which they flourish in every wind. These are, of course, -a small minority, but the majority of women fail to take a wide, sane -view both on this question of the unfaithfulness of husbands and that -of the whole physical relationship of marriage. - -And the remedy? Yes, that is the difficult matter. We cannot alter -these inharmonies of love by any cut-and-dried reforms. The expression -of sex is a question largely of understanding. Its regeneration must -begin with a movement, in particular, on the part of women, towards a -truer acknowledgment of their own natures and an acceptance of men’s -needs. - -I dare to think of such a regeneration of Love, but it must come -through education in consciousness and a fuller understanding of life. -And by education must be understood all that influences the unconscious -as well as the conscious self, so that our full life may be lived in -harmony, and not with one half of ourself in enmity with the other -half. - - - - -WHY WIVES ARE UNFAITHFUL - - -It may, and I expect will, be said that I am looking at this question -of faithfulness in marriage from the man’s side only. This is not -because I do not see and sympathise with the woman’s position. I am -thinking really just as much of one partner as of the other. What I -wish to do is to focus attention. For this reason, I am insisting upon -the fact, of the wife’s coldness as being most often the first cause -which drives the husband from his affection and his duty. I do this -because it is just the real cause that is almost always neglected, -unrealised, in particular, by women themselves. - -Women have been taught to believe, and do really feel, that by sexual -unfaithfulness a husband does them the cruellest possible wrong that a -man can do to a woman. - -It is rare to find a woman who is not sexually jealous. To possess -and to hold, even when she has ceased to desire the possession, is a -quality that is exceedingly common in wives. And our iniquitous divorce -laws, with their obsession with sexual offences, help to maintain this -view of marriage. - -But is the man ever wholly to blame? It is so easy to talk -self-righteously of the unfaithfulness of men—of their polygamous -nature and their attraction to wild love. - -I never heard such nonsense. Men are the most faithful creatures alive. -After all, almost in every case, the man has given away only what -his wife has shown him she does not want for herself. As long as she -desires him, indeed, often, _as long as she will put up with him_, her -man will stick to her—yes, _stick with the closeness of the proverbial -burr_. - -Most English wives always are acquiescent, rather than passionate -in the sexual embrace. Even when in love, they are shy and often -unresponsive. Hiding what they feel, rarely showing their husbands -that they want them with any real desire. Then, after a few years of -marriage, his embraces are either evaded or repulsed, if not, they are -_suffered as a duty_. - -Everyone who does not blink facts, knows that the vast majority of -marriages are unhappy owing to the coldness of the wife. Very often -this starts from the beginning of marriage. The wife is disappointed: -she finds the husband different from the lover of her dreams. - -In the story of _Beauty and the Beast_ we have material out of which -part of the great sex difficulty can be explained. In the fairy story, -the husband, who before marriage looks like a beast, after marriage, -becomes a prince. In real life the story is inverted. There is a -deluding force in the mere skin and limbs of those of the opposite sex -at the time when maturity is reached which may give princely attributes -to those who would be seen as beasts at other times. The prince seen as -a beast after marriage is a tragedy into which the romantic, ignorant -girl must beware of drifting. The man who most boldly plays up to the -romantic part expected of him, reciprocating to the perhaps unconscious -encouragement of the girl—is not the man who will be most agreeable -to live with. I believe there is real danger in the sentimental view -of love that is common to most girls. They do not know the poverty of -feeling that loudly expressed sentiment may hide. The defect of many -unfaithful lovers is not sensuality, but sentimentality. The lower -types of lovers are strangely, almost incredibly sentimental. - -It cannot, I think, be denied that sexual anaesthesia is present in -many women and there would seem to be evidence that even where it is -not present before experience of love, it arises _after marriage_. Any -number of wives are unable to give themselves up to the sexual act in -such a way as to derive from it real satisfaction and the gladness -and health that it should give. This is a very grave matter. The evil -would be less if these frigid women did not marry, but as a rule they -do marry. It is a curious fact that women who sexually are cold, are -sought as wives with greater frequency than are more passionate women, -probably because their easily maintained reserve acts as a stimulus to -the man’s desire. Men are persistently blind in these matters. They -want response to their own love in their wives, but most of them are -very much afraid of any woman who possesses the strong passion to -enable her to give such response. - -In short, as we found in the previous essay on unfaithful husbands, -woman gains her fulfilment from the man when he gives her his child. -But when she turns from him, she leaves him unsatisfied. The drama -and the novel are burdened with this problem, which, indeed, intrudes -itself on every hand. - -We have, by our wrong ideals, for long been inducing an entirely -perverted view, which regards physical desire as something of which -women should be ashamed, and the sex act as a thing in itself degrading -and even disgusting—the nasty side of love and of marriage, something -to be submitted to, indeed, in order to bear children or for the sake -of the loved man whose passions must be allowed, but not a thing for -health and desire—for the delight and perfection of the woman herself. - -This false view, I affirm again, is the blight that has been, and still -is, the destroyer of sexual happiness and health. And this fear and -denial of love; this separation between the passion allowed to the man -and not allowed to the woman, is the serious side of this problem of -marriage. For the hideous disguises and constant lying, too often made -necessary to both the partners, owing to the wife’s entire failure -to realise the physical necessities of love, makes domestic life an -organised hypocrisy. - -We fight and fight to be free. Yet ever the concealed antagonism lays -fresh hold, upon both the husband and the wife. It crops up in many -and curious ways, imposing its poison and destroying life—the deep, -deep-hidden rage of unsatisfied love. - -The need for love will not often allow itself to be inhibited without -claiming payment. And if desire so frequently manifests itself in -abnormal forms of the coarsest and commonest dissipation, this is -almost always to be explained by some hindrance opposed to its normal -expression. When women face facts and realise this truth, many things -in the conduct of husbands will be clear that hitherto have been hidden -from them. - -There is, however, another aspect of this question which now must -be considered. For to leave the matter here would be the greatest -injustice. A further question must first be asked. Why is this coldness -in women so prevalent? Why does the desire of even the loving wife so -often cease towards her husband? It is a difficult question to answer. -One reason has been given already. We have noted women’s false attitude -to love; an attitude which, in so many cases, makes her ashamed of -expressing openly the passions she feels. Yet there is, I think another -and much deeper part of the truth that is fairly clear. Love is a more -difficult thing for women than it is for men. Each man is able to -enforce his sexual desire upon his wife _at a time when she feels no -desire, whereas she cannot gain her desire unless he gain his_. We may, -perhaps, trace back to this cause, many of the feelings of disharmony -and waning of desire which injures the woman’s power to love. - -I must follow this a little further. In marriage the husband, usually -exercises his marital privileges _when he wishes_. He does not think -sufficiently of, or understand sufficiently as he should, the wishes of -his wife. For what _she says_ must never be accepted as representing -really what she wishes. It is very hard for any man to understand how -almost impossible it is for a woman, if she is good, to be frank about -sexual desire. Both our laws, and opinion and custom have strengthened -the view—not usually openly acknowledged but usually felt—that the -husband has the right to approach his wife when he desires. Her right -is not equally considered, too often it is taken for granted that -she has no desires or real sex-needs to be considered. The result -is inescapable. The man’s passion finds relief while she remains -unsatisfied. She is in just the same position as someone who is forced -to eat a meal without appetite. - -And inevitably this leaves her unresponsive, makes her irritable, -capricious, and quite incomprehensible to her husband. - -Of course, this disharmony, is not always conscious even to the woman -herself, who usually fails quite to understand what is the matter or to -connect her restless unhappiness with the stirrings of her unsatisfied -love. The dyspeptic does not know that he wants food: he turns away -from it. In the same way the woman turns away from love. She gives in -to the inhibiting influences and accepts the abysmal misconception into -which one sex has fallen in regard to the other. - -This difference in the power for sexual sacrifice between the two sexes -is, I have frequently thought, one of the gravest causes of misery in -marriage. It will take very long to over come it. Only as we advance -in refinement and knowledge of love can this antagonism in the sex act -lessen, as the woman gains in frankness and the man comes to know how -to arouse and keep aflame her desire. - -For woman is passionate. There is no greater lie than the so often -reiterated assumption that she “_is naturally and organically -frigid._”[4] We must remember that this view of woman’s coldness in -love is of comparatively modern growth. Yet it is a lie that will -take a real revolution in our moral ideas to uproot. It is, in large -measure, at least, the result of our pretences—the horrible, grasping, -destroying, back-wash of shams. It is the result of the way in which -women have lived, with blinds drawn down on most of the unruly -disturbance and elemental forces in love. - -The wife whose love is turned away from her husband finds substitute -satisfaction in her home and her children, if she has them, or, failing -these, in dress and amusement and other outside interests; or in a -lover, who gives her new hope of finding satisfaction in love. And the -poor bewildered husband is quite unaware of the cause of this coldness. -He cannot understand his wife’s unfaithfulness. He does not know that -his unthinking acceptance of her subordination to his desire, however -gladly given, is what has, and indeed must, exhaust the passion in her. - -For I do not deny, as already I have stated, that sexual coldness is -exceedingly common on the part of the wife to-day. What I do deny -is that this is a natural condition; rather is it a symptom of the -mistakes of our civilisation that have cheated women and men alike of -health and happiness in love. - -I affirm again, that this idea of coldness in love being natural -to women is entirely false. Complete absence of satisfaction in -love cannot be borne, especially when living in the close intimacy -of married life, by any woman, through a period of years, without -producing serious results on the body and the mind. It is in the -blighting effects of this pseudo-celibacy that we must seek the cause -of the sterility of so many married women’s lives. - -Do I put this other side of the problem of marital-celibacy—the woman’s -side—in a strong light. Yes I do, but I put it faithfully as I have -come to know it from the facts I see daily around me. - -It is hard to say how often, and how many wives have put from them -the temptation to seek happiness in love _at any price_; no less hard -is it to compute to what extent the transformation of this suppressed -sexual passion is expended in passion in other channels. We see it in -a hundred cases to-day. In every instance where passion is called for -woman tends by her nature to be carried further than man. - -There is, of course, no exact measuring in these matters, but who among -us can dare to say that the harm done by the deprivation of love is -greater in the lives of men than of women? I doubt not it is the other -way. We hear so much of the sex-needs of husbands that we have become a -little wearied. We accept so much for them as being right and natural, -but who shall calculate the number of equally right and natural -impulses that women have resisted?—resisted until the very instinct to -love tends in time to become dulled and blighted. - -I am willing to grant, indeed, that few women experience that obsessing -longing of the man to grasp the woman of his desire, nor do they, as a -rule, I think suffer the same terrible physical depression that causes -incapacity for control. I am not certain here: women are less open -about these matters than men are, and one hesitates to judge other -women by oneself. We are dealing with a question very difficult to -solve. We may find some explanation in the fact that many passionate -women have had to learn how the energy of the sexual impulse may be -diverted into other activities. It is a lesson that possibly men will -have to learn. Yet I do not know, the price women have had to pay has -been heavy and the results gained very poor. And does not this denial -of love entail a waste of life?—that is what really matters. It is very -hard to know the truth. - -Here, then, is the question I would put to men who are suffering to-day -from the unfaithfulness of women. I would ask them. Have they taken -sufficient trouble to understand, both on the physical and psychical -side, the sexual nature of woman, which is much more complex than -their own? The art of love is not understood by men. If they paid more -attention to this subject marriage would be freed from the strongest -and most frequently operating cause that brings it to disaster. -But this will never be done until we have ruled out from our moral -conscience the idea of “the body as the prison of the soul.” - -I have often asked myself if this misconception is not the real cause -of all sex trouble? - - - - -SHOULD DOCTORS TELL? - - -Of the many differing opinions concerning the question whether doctors -should reveal medical secrets, none that I know have been more -interesting, in particular to women, than that of a local practitioner -(whose name I have forgotten) who spoke at a Conference of doctors -met to consider this question. In opposing with admirable frankness a -resolution for the continuance of the practice of professional secrecy, -he asked the straight question, whether “a bounder” should be allowed -to live and his wife and child to die? - -For here we touch at once the grave difficulty of the position. The -discussion, as is evident, was concerned more particularly with the -position in regard to venereal diseases. - -The whole question has, indeed, been brought before public attention -in connection with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on -Venereal Diseases that a communication made by a medical practitioner -with regard to these diseases and to guard the innocent from infection -should be regarded as a privileged communication, and the law of libel -be so modified as to give this safeguard. - -Now, on the face of it, this would seem a simple matter. And the -question I want to ask is, why the professional medical voice of this -country has pronounced so emphatically against it? I know, of course, -the reason that is given, that the divulging of a patient’s secret, -without his or her consent, and even if for a good reason, must weaken -confidence—not only the patient’s confidence in the particular doctor -who “told,” but the confidence of the public in the whole medical -profession. - -I do not think this reason bears any close investigation. Confidence -is destroyed quite as surely, though probably not so quickly, by -suppression of truth as by revealing it. - -No, I believe we have to look deeper for the reason to explain this -attitude of medical hiding. - -These diseases are set apart from all other sicknesses of our bodies. -For this reason, in considering them, moral considerations become -confused with practical values. And I do not see quite how this is to -be avoided. There is however, the gravest danger from such an attitude -which rests upon hidden personal prejudices, and is not dependent on -the facts of the case. Such an attitude leads inevitably to concealment -of truth, which is specially disastrous here, because it is absolutely -essential that these diseases, if they are to be cured, should be met -in the open and grappled with methodically and thoroughly. - -For greater clearness, I may state the matter thus: There are three -attitudes that may be adopted towards sexual disease. First, that of -the pure moralist, who says only “This is a sin to be punished.” On -the opposite side is the purely utilitarian, who says, “This is only a -disease to be cured.” But both attitudes may be alike wrong or, more -correctly, the truth lies midway between the two. The disease, as a -disease, needs to be cured. This is the first step with which nothing -should interfere. But far different and much more complex is the -treatment required to alter the actions that lead to the disease. - -As a first step, public opinion ought to condemn too late marriage, -instead of recommending it on economic grounds. The mania for making -economics the deciding factor in conduct should surely cease: the -falsity of this view has been exposed by many great writers, but much -stronger is the condemnation that must be given here by all who can -understand the evils that it has wrought in our sexual lives. Late -marriages must be one of the causes contributing to men’s use of -prostitutes before marriage. - -We have to find a way out, to silence our shrieks of blame, and to give -up many of our old pretences. You can never get things right until you -honestly face them. - -Women are the worst sinners. And I say, without hesitation, that it is -men’s fear of women, especially the husband’s fear of his wife, that is -the greatest hindrance to openness in this connection. It is women’s -attitude which holds us back in progress towards health. - -Let me give an illustration. I attended recently a meeting where a -paper was read on the morals of men, in connection with the alarming -increase of venereal diseases since the war. The reader of the paper, -being a woman doctor as well as a feminist, took the wise view that the -most urgent question was not the reform of the men, but staying the -spread of the diseases. In the discussion that followed it was plainly -evident that few of the audience—all women—agreed with her. These were -women workers, who had read about, and to some limited extent, at any -rate, thought and studied, these questions. Yet the general view was -that men ought to be punished. One speaker, who stated that she was -married, said that no true woman could or ought to forgive a husband -who had become infected with a contagious disease. - -Now, it is this view, here so crudely expressed, that has done so much -harm in the past. It explains also the continuance of the medical -secrecy that has acted so strongly against the stamping out of this -scourge of civilisation. Such an attitude of blame and unforgiveness on -the part of women has to be changed before the truth can be told safely. - -Women are mainly responsible for the secrecy of these diseases. And -what is the result? Because these infectious diseases are secret they -are largely uncured. - -It is, of course, easy to understand the attitude taken up by women. -Blame of men is not easily avoided; yet is there not confusion in -women’s minds? - -The sin that a husband commits against his wife, a man against the girl -he is to marry—yes, and a son against the trust of his mother—is in -being unfaithful. Having caught the disease is a misfortune. The effect -must not be blamed by itself. - -Let me illustrate this point of view by considering a different case. -Your child gets scarlet fever by an act of direct disobedience—the sin -of his age. He stays from school, without leave of absence, and goes to -play at a house he has been forbidden to enter. Would you, because of -his disobedience, refuse to pity and nurse him? Rather, would you not -forget his sin and desire only to help and heal him? - -Do you see what I mean now? It is not that I would condone immoral -conduct in the husband or the lover that I plead for pity and -understanding on the part of women who love them. - -Few men are intentionally evil. They do not even always act foolishly -in this question of infectious diseases because they are wantonly -careless. Often they are fully alive to the danger that may result to -their wives, or the girl they wish to make their wife, from their own -infection. - -I repeat, they are not necessarily bad men, and they love their wives -and children; but they are cowards. All men are cowards when it comes -to facing the blame and misunderstanding of the woman they love. - -If they cannot rely on the woman’s pity and help, few men will dare to -tell the truth; nor will they be willing to let the doctor tell the -facts for them. And if the truth cannot be told, it is very unlikely -that the infection will not be spread to others. This may lead to the -birth of diseased children, and who may say that in this case the crime -is the man’s alone? - -Why can’t we face the situation now, when we are trying to tidy up our -social life? Concealments that may have been necessary in the old time -of ignorance are surely impossible now. - -Is the evil to remain hidden, uncorrected, from one generation to -another? Hidden evil multiplies itself, and the sum is national -deterioration. - -The mistake has been the muddleheaded thinking that has obscured the -plain and comparatively simple question of cure with the entirely -opposed problem of moral appraisement and punishment: a confusion and -losing of the way that has led us all inevitably into a forest-tangle -of difficulty, of lies and silences, and unanswerable questions. - -And this heritage of wrong thinking is still compassing our feet, -binding them and throwing us down, as soon as we try to move a step -onwards: and until that entanglement is broken through, by bringing the -whole complicated position into the light of understanding and honest -thinking, the evil will go on, unchecked by our futile tearings here -and there at withered branches. The supporting stem of concealments and -dishonesty will flourish, and the devastating evil will continue to -spread. - - - - -THE MODERN WIFE AND THE OLD-FASHIONED HUSBAND - - -The old-fashioned husband is always older than his wife. If he is not -old in years, he is old in character. His desires and instincts are -aged. She is young because she is alive. - -He wants to give her advice, but she will not listen. He desires to -guide her, or he must think that he does so. He protects her. Thinks -of her as young and precious and tender. He does not speak of certain -things before her. He caresses her, he pays her bills, gives her -presents, and treats her in the way, in which she has learnt not to -treat her children. - -For the old-fashioned husband is conservative and hopelessly romantic. - -The fact is he ever seeks in his wife the image of his mother, the -first woman whom he worshipped, and whose virtues remain as an -unforgettable pattern, ever to be repeated. He sees her darning -socks (horrible and useful occupation), making beds, dusting the -china, arranging flowers, brushing her husband’s overcoat and -smoothing his hat, fussing needlessly over everything. These -pictures are always interfering with the image of his wife—the new -woman of to-day, with her restless and noisy movements, her slang -and violence, her knowledge, capable management and clearness of -vision-that-look-you-straight-in-the-eyes air that belongs now to wives. - -Why have women altered so greatly? Why have women gone on and left -their husbands behind? - -It is common to refer everything back to the war. Certainly the war did -this—it sent both women and men into difficult schools but the men’s -school was harder and quite different from that of the women. - -If the war had a devastating effect, the peace has likewise had for -women its revolutionary consequences. We all know what the war did. It -took women out of their homes. The feminists rejoiced to see women in -munition factories, on the platforms of trams, squeezed into government -offices, hoeing and driving the plough. Then the peace threw them -back; closed the open doors, cut off the day of financial prosperity, -re-introduced them to their children, if they had any, and to their -husbands. - -And now what happened? What effect had this on the desires of women and -men? - -Why, the husbands yearned for the old order of home and wife and -children. For the men had fought, they had experienced the uttermost -bitterness of life. Their petrified imagination had had no new ideals. -They wanted nothing changed. For them a terrible interlude was over, a -nightmare passed, that must be forgotten. But the non-combatant women -had not experienced war; they had only looked on. For many of them a -glamour of patriotic achievement in various kinds of work, which they -much preferred to the old domestic duties, added to the lure of high -wages, had thrown a cloak of romance over the war-period. They had -nothing to forget. The last thing they wanted was to go back, all their -desire was set on going forward. - -Here then, is the reason why to-day there are so many modern wives with -old-fashioned husbands. - -These war-trained women are very efficient; they impose their will on -everyone; they are attractive and very honest, but sometimes rather -aggressive with their assurance and massed information. They go to and -fro from their homes, when they like and how they like. The husband -knows almost nothing of his wife’s friends. He supposes it is all -right. But he understands that he cannot stop her, cannot control -her interests. She makes his house her home, is his friend and dear -companion, but she does not stay in his charge. Often he feels like a -stranger, helpless, not knowing what to do. - -Wives are now almost more independent than husbands used to be. “I want -to do it, therefore, I must do it,” is their acknowledged cry. They -are on such good terms with life and with themselves that they cannot -imagine another view—the old view of the woman sacrificing herself. -There are quite a lot of things they won’t do; they are very simple -and straightforward about them. - -Nowadays it is not fashionable for even young unmarried girls to -remain in the guarded shelter of the home. Old-fashioned fathers -and brothers, are sometimes alarmed at the freedom of friendship -allowed—the light-hearted pairing off. Life is a game, a dance, like -the figure in the lancers where you “visit” and waltz away, but then -come back to do the same thing with another partner. Yet these girls -are not without hearts; but they realise that they must know men before -they can choose the one man to whom they may give themselves. They -have almost nothing in common with the boneless emotional heroines -of the past. They are very practical and know that love will not pay -the baker’s bills, and after realising all this, they have schooled -themselves not to fall in love carelessly. - -They look all life squarely in the face, understand their duties, -what they will do and will not do, in a way that may be hard, but is -admirably sane and admirably honest. - -Here is an incident. An exceedingly modern girl was engaged by some -ill-chance to an old-fashioned man. She came once to talk with him of -her future and his. She was not fond of children and therefore, thought -she ought not to have any. Gently he placed his hand over hers, “That -will be as God wills, my darling.” She sprang from him, “It won’t, -Ronald, that’s not true, it will be as I arrange.” - -It used to be so different. The old-fashioned girl could never have -spoken with such frankness. Wife or maid she was always younger than -the man she loved. She studied him, listened to him, quoted him. She -lived only in and through him. _At least that is what he thought._ -He did not know that she did not really listen, was tired of his -stories, not interested in his business or his friends. All her seeming -submission and acceptance were used to hold him. - -The opinions of the old-fashioned woman were quotations from authority; -her motto was obedience, but her practice was sweet rebellion. Very -rarely was she honest. Her eyes were so blinkered that she saw nothing -that she did not wish to see. - -No, I am not sorry for old-fashioned men. They remain so childishly -blind. Let them grow up, or at least, conceal their paleolithic ideas. - -The new types of modern women face the future with laughter and the -present with quickly responsive feeling. They give still to the -world the essential gift of the eternal feminine, though they are -cutting away the worn-out unreasonable exaggerations of perverted -femininity—the coldness of the vicious woman, the unkindness of the -grabbing woman, the ignorance and submission of the old-fashioned good -woman. They are able to see everything and to help in everything, -without being deceitful, without being dulled. - - - - -THE TEMPORARY GENTLEMAN AND HIS YOUNG WIFE - - -Everyone is busily trying to explain why there are so many unhappy -marriages at the present time, but few people seem to realise that one -of the most prolific causes has been the comparatively recent tendency -of women to marry out of their class. We all know that all social -distinctions were in abeyance during the war, and even afterwards. -Normal class separations, conventional standards, old careful habits of -conduct have been largely broken through at a time of great uncertainty -and many changes. - -Some of us hoped that this new co-operation which seemed to be -springing up between men and women of different social classes would -lead to permanent changes. We forgot that excitement is the most potent -intoxicant, and that after excitement there is usually a falling back -into dullness and apathy. But certainly for a time there was quite -a new loosening of the guiding-rein of reason, that has allowed the -horses of impulse and instinct freer than ever before to pull the car -of ourselves and our fates in this direction and in that, just as they -chose. - -The many misfit marriages bear witness to the excited condition of -women. - -And it ought not to be difficult to realise, with the least gift of -imagination, the conflict and the unhappiness, almost necessarily -resulting, from such unions, entered into during that period of -topsy-turvy conditions, between the man who had “risen” and the -more complicated type of modern girl—the girl of brains and nerves, -passionate, intellectually emancipated and delighting in her new-gained -freedom; yet, at the same time, fastidious, ruled by traditions and -inherited habits, which crop up unexpectedly, with a conservatism that -is neither acknowledged nor reckoned with. - -The men who in commerce or in war had a meteoric success have, in many -cases, fallen back; they are but clerks, shop-assistants, artisans. -They themselves, and everything belonging to them seem different. While -they were accepted as gentlemen, because of what they had done or the -money they had made, they married “above them” as the phrase is. And -now when the money is spent and what they did no longer remembered, -they cannot find work that will enable them to maintain the outward -show of being a gentleman. The intoxication of excitement is over, and -their wives complain, not only of their position, but of them. - -The temporary gentleman and his young wife, in many cases, are finding -that it needs a lot of grit and a lot of duty to keep in love. For -the rose-coloured glasses of courtship have been replaced by the blue -goggles of matrimony. They are already unhappy, though they expected -happiness. You see, their love has been tested by the love-destroying -test of poverty. And these difficult days have cast their homes into -disorder. - -We have all felt the world’s wave of trade depression: the world’s -difficulties have dealt a blow, causing a leak to spring in many a -frail boat of domestic happiness, so that its inexperienced navigators -no longer can exercise control over the journey. - -Now it is customary to blame the wife. Always it is the woman’s fault. -She is, or ought to be, the home-maker. While no one seems to consider -how much depends on the character, or conditions, of the home she is -asked to make. - -The boarding-school-educated and college girl has never been trained -to perform or to endure the difficult, necessary duties of the poor -man’s home. In their girlhood’s homes and luxurious schools, everything -was done for them. That was in the old, almost-forgotten days of cheap -domestic service. - -In no other direction, perhaps, has there been so great and so -far reaching changes as in the homes of the so-called upper classes. -In a sense, to-day we have no homes, only places in which we sleep, -and sometimes eat. For the domestic work of preparing the food and -keeping the home as a place to live in and not to escape from has, in -great measure, ended; duties which once it was every woman’s pride -to do well, have been allowed to slip, as far as possible, into the -hands of hired experts. In the old days cooking and housekeeping, and -even house-cleaning, were known to all women. Every wife was expected -to enter into competition with other wives in the important matters of -making bread and cakes, and in making jams and jellies and puddings. - -But the home, with its old full activities, has passed out of the hands -of the mistress. So to-day a girl often finds herself forced to learn -the very elements of the routine day of the wage-earner’s wife. And the -duties that have to be learnt are many of them disagreeable as well as -immensely tiring and monotonous to unaccustomed hands. - -I do not, however, believe that the knife-and-fork aspect of these -marriages is the fundamental aspect. It is love itself that is at -fault. The strain and the jar of daily living under these difficult -restless conditions have been too great, especially for the women. - -The passing from one way of living, from one station of society to -another, is always a hard and unpleasant process. We do not always know -it or admit it, even if we _do know_, but the small, almost unnoticed -differences in habits and manners are harder to tolerate than many a -more fundamental cleavage. - -I want to labour this point. The most frequent causes of trouble in -those marriages where there is poverty and a restricted life, are born, -I am certain, out of the daily fret of uncomfortable and cheap living -together, out of small ugly minor habits of omissions, and stupidities. - -Romantics may deny this, but what most wears and frays the love of -wives are just trifles so small that very rarely is their adverse -action directly noticed. But they give an escape for the concealed -hostility, and set up an almost indecent and fearfully intolerant -irritation. Dirty finger nails, the murdering of words, or making -a noise when you eat soup, may be much harder to bear than real -unkindness and anger. The failure to rise and give up a chair or to -open a closed door may seem greater neglect to a wife than the absence -of money to buy presents. The roughness of the “rough diamond” becomes -unbearable. Things that once did not seem to matter, now matter -tremendously. - -Of course this is illogical, but then love is illogical. - -And month by month as it passes makes the marriage more broken. The -disappointment goes deeper though the irritation may, perhaps, be -less frankly expressed. This is the time of the real danger. It is -the wife’s own love that is failing her, much more than anything her -husband may do or not do. - -The difficulty of finding suitable work, the differences in friends and -in the accustomed spheres of life, could be overcome were it not for -the _unconscious want of will to overcome them_. The man may feel that -he would do better farming in Canada than here. It is a very certain -indication that the woman has ceased to love him wholeheartedly if -she objects to accompany him on the ground that all her friends are in -England. - -Love does not hesitate: it delights to give up and to sacrifice. - -You will see what this means: It is rather the _hidden feelings that -make conscious social difference_, that act and are far stronger than -the difference itself. - -The unacknowledged failure in Love, not anything that happens -outwardly, is the real trouble that gnaws at the root of content in -their marriages, and rots and breaks the bond. - -Yet there is a bright side to these marriages even when they fail. The -socially adventurous, the breakers of conventions, must expect trouble; -but they may console themselves by reflecting that they are pioneers in -opposing dead traditions. Only the tall trees sway in the breeze, the -dwarf plants are ingloriously safe. - - - - -IS MARRIAGE TOO EASY? - - -On the subject of marriage I have written again and again, not alone -in these essays, but in many of my other books. I would, however, wish -to say now, and with all the power I have, that in England, marriage -is made too easy. If some of the restrictions which are placed against -the breaking of the marriage bond were transferred to the time when the -bond is made it would be well. - -We prevent too late. Always we run to shut the stable door after the -horse is stolen. - -Many amazing marriages are made, in particular, by the very young who -to-day refuse, more fiercely than even before, any guidance from the -old; reckless marriages, entered into by those who have known each -other for a few days only before marrying for life. - -An ever-increasing freedom and independence for the young has certainly -had rather a startling moral result. It has been shewn that for all -ordinary young men and women intimate association with each other in -college, in business, in workshops, and factories, and in play, turns -them with extreme readiness to love making. Now I am very far indeed -from wishing to apportion blame, but I do hold that new conditions -demand—not only changes in our thoughts and judgment, but revision of -the laws formulated to restrict conduct. - -A minister of religion stated publicly, not very long ago, “I have had -to marry many couples who admitted to me they knew little about each -other. I could do nothing. I was not allowed to refuse marriage.” - -The many marriages made in haste and under the pressure of sudden -emotional urgencies, are a sign of the nervous condition of the -times. The customary criticisms of reason are not heard, or not until -the emotional storm has subsided. This is, of course, a condition -not infrequent in love, but in these rushing and exciting days of -dancing-partners and jazz courtships, it is greatly exaggerated, such -marriages may not unfortunately bear the scrutiny of minds restored to -reason. Living together is found to be a different and far harder thing -than dancing together. And this has led to the unprecedented demand for -divorce which should cause no surprise or lamentation, but should urge -us forward to face the situation, like spurs in the flesh of a tired -horse. For the disgrace is, not that these marriages should end, but -that they should ever have begun. - -We English are too afraid of preventative interference: we wait until -something is very wrong indeed and then we punish. - -It would be salutary for us to consider the more careful regulations of -other lands. In France, for instance, and in Belgium no encouragement -is given for hurried marriages such as we permit. Official enquiries -and the consent of parents and guardians are considered necessary. From -the start the greatest care is exercised. _Fiançailles_ (engagements) -are regarded as serious family events, more binding and more sacred -than anything to which we are accustomed. Both the engagement -and the marriage are affairs of the utmost importance to the two -families concerned as well as to the young people themselves. There -are discussions and careful arrangements, and months of testing of -suitability for life-partnership, during which the future husband and -wife get to know one another before being tied by marriage. Perhaps, -this is why the crime of bigamy is very rare in France, and there is no -such thing known as cases for breach of promise of marriage. - -I know, of course, the many and great evils that are attendant on the -French system, but to me it seems that these could easily be avoided -as they arise entirely out of property considerations and the wife’s -dowry—considerations which so inevitably act disastrously on moral -conduct. - -It would, I am certain, lessen the chance of endless unhappiness in -marriage and prevent many divorces if some more fixed inquiries, -with—in the case of any one (shall I say, under twenty-five?) the -consent of one parent of either party, if living, if not, that of a -guardian, were obligatory before the marriage could be entered into. Or -if the young will not accept this parental authority, marriage could be -made conditional, except under very special reasons, on the betrothal -months having lasted for a fixed and sufficiently long period: at least -inquiry should be made as to the amount of knowledge the partners have -gained of each other. I would recommend these reforms to all who are -concerned for the future of marriage. - -Nor need the change be difficult or would it entail any great -alterations in the machinery of the law. We appoint a King’s Proctor -to inquire into domestic details to prevent unsuitable marriages being -broken, why not change his duties to prevent unsuitable marriages being -made? - -I would urge also that Commandments of Marriage are formulated to be -read to every couple at their betrothal and again before the wedding -ceremony takes place, as is done to some limited extent in France and -Belgium and in one or two other countries. This is another duty which -might be undertaken by the department of the King’s Proctor. - -Here, then, is a practical way in which we might wisely copy other -civilisations whose customs are more carefully planned to safeguard -marriage and help the young in right living. - -I must press home this question of the dangers of too easy marriage, -though I risk wearying my readers by repetition. The facilities we -give the young for marrying in haste, is, I affirm again, the cause -mainly responsible in the greater number of marriages that come to -the disaster of the Divorce Courts. This I have proved already. It is -responsible also for many cases of bigamy, a crime which has increased -alarmingly in the last years. Our law of breaches of marriage promises, -with its frequent misuse and extortion of hushmoney, is another cause -dependent on our stupid neglect to regulate marriage. It leads to many -unsuitable marriages being made, which very often have their fatal -sequel of separation or divorce. - -Nor does the disaster end here. Our present careless laws are certainly -acting to bring marriage itself to discredit. We hurry young people -within its bonds, freeing them from all obligations to their families -or to society in this matter of choosing their life’s partner, and then -later, if disaster overtakes them, with callous irony we say, “you have -made your bed, you must lie on it.” - -If we desire really to preserve marriage, let us treat marriage with -seriousness. As I have said in another of these essays—Marriage is not -considered a vocation: it has become a game. I would urge practical -and prompt action. We are, I think, bound to realise that if we are -to succeed in freeing our society from the evils which all of us are -deploring, our attention must shift from attempts to _punish after -wrong has been done_, to removing the causes that _lead certainly to -wrong being done_. - -In other words we have to formulate more practical and helpful laws. -Even more important is to change public thought, cleansing men and -women from their desire to punish and replacing instead the desire to -help and to understand. Nothing else, in my opinion, can avert even -greater disasters of license in the future than those we are facing. - - - - -PASSIONATE FRIENDSHIPS - - -I had wished to write these essays without too frequent mention of the -war. I find, however, that such avoidance is almost impossible. For the -war has, in the most effective way, made prominent all the problems of -sexual conduct with which I am dealing, has done this so effectively -that some way out must be found. New and even startling changes have -come and are coming, and have to be faced. Certainly our judgments -can never be the same. Many who never before thought about these -things have been made to think. All of us have seen more plainly the -ineffectiveness of much that always before we had accepted. No longer -can we cover our eyes with the comfortable mid-Victorian bandages. -There has ended for every one of us our blind-man’s-buff game with life. - -We are caught: and it is well. The unwritten commandment of sexual -conduct, that anything may be done as long as the doing of it may be -hidden, can never, I think, again be accepted, unless, indeed, by -the very good, whose entire lack of humour makes them able to accept -anything. - -Whether we like it or not most of us have got now to muck-rake into the -dark bye-paths of conduct. - -Now, it is easy to say that this urgent concern with sexual questions -arises from decadence. I do not believe it. To me it has always seemed -that this growing demand for inquiry affords the surest hope for the -future. Much is being thrown on to the scrap-heap of life. This is -done only when there is need for it. We, who have come to see and in -some measure to understand, have got to be concerned with sex and its -problems, until some of its wrongs are righted. - -Here I must digress to make a necessary explanation. The special -problem of sexual conduct which now I wish to consider—the very -difficult problem of passionate friendships between men and women who, -for one reason or another, are unable or do not wish to marry, is a -question to which my interest has for very long been directed. I was -first asked to write about it in 1913 (how remote that time now seems) -in answer to two articles that had appeared in the _English Review_, in -July and August of that year, _Women and Morals_ and _Men and Morals_, -supposed to have been written, the one by “A Mother,” and the other -by “A Father;” but which, as later transpired, were thought out and -transcribed in the office, by the Editor and sub-Editor of that then -courageous journal. - -But to whatever journalistic trickery they owed their origin, the -interest of those articles remained unchanged. I need not wait to -describe them; their importance rested in the courage and truth with -which they faced the difficult problem, at that time almost always -hidden or sentimentalised over, of the sex-needs of men and women apart -from marriage. - -I was asked to answer—I had, as it were, to sum up, sift out, weigh and -judge, what was said in both articles. I did not then know anything of -their bastard authorship, and I accepted. My answer appeared in the -September number of the Review. At the time it gained some attention. -In America the three articles were republished together. The little -book, called “Women and Morals” had an exceedingly attractive cover and -an excellent preface: I believe it sold widely. More amusing and also, -I think, more witness to the power of my work, was a very different -kind of notoriety which, in one quarter at least, it achieved in this -country. It aroused anger. The number of the _English Review_ in which -it appeared was, I believe, burnt publicly in an Advanced Club for -women by order of the ladies who then formed the committee. For their -intense virtue considered my views too horrible to remain uncleansed -by fire. (Excuse my laughing, but the fact is I always do laugh when I -picture this incident—those splendidly blinkered women holding solemnly -in extended fire-tongs that burning review!) - -My work was immoral! - -Immoral! What is it that people mean? I do not know. I am for morality -and always shall be. That is, indeed, why I offend. I am always wanting -to turn out dirty places and to spring-clean life. And I have to show -things as I find them, not as I would like them to be. It is so easy if -you drug your soul and place blinkers over your intelligence. But you -cannot be moral if you are over-occupied with being nice. - -It is the young, not the old, who are thinking and writing to-day. -Let me give you an example that exactly fits this question we are -considering. - -By a somewhat suggestive coincidence there appeared an article on -“Youth and Marriage” in the _English Review_ for May, 1923—the last -number issued under the editorship of Mr. Austin Harrison—which very -strikingly repeats, but more openly and with cruder emphasis, almost -everything that was said in the three articles published in 1913. -It treats the same difficult and still unsettled question of sexual -relationships outside of marriage. The article gives the answer of -youth to the old, who are criticising and condemning the friendships -and new freedom of sex intimacy between young women and young men: they -are told frankly that they fail to realise the changed conditions of -present-day life. The name of the writer of this interesting article, -Vera M. Garrell, is unknown to me, but I take this opportunity of -thanking her. Her article has given me the greatest pleasure. All the -facts are considered in a refreshingly candid, if not always entirely -adequate way. (1) The increased enormous disparity between the numbers -of the sexes, which the writer comments upon as “an outstanding tragedy -of the war;” leading as it must do, to “an unhealthy competition to -attract men,” under the urge of which girls are drawn “to use coarser -measures and act on bolder lines,” if they are to escape “the dark -dread that haunts the average girl of being ‘left on the shelf.’” (2) -The economic factors, which cause marriage to become increasingly -difficult, and thus act in lowering the marriage ideal by making a -permanent union so remote that it comes to be regarded as “practically -impossible.” “The young people of to-day are very much realists. They -intensely dislike poverty.” A great deal is said about this “economic -blockade against marriage,” and the writer maintains that “much of the -laxity in sexual morals is the direct outcome of this position.” (3) -Yet, even deeper in their action are the inner reasons. War has left -the youth of to-day “with a kind of sexual neurosis.” For years it kept -life “entirely physical;” “morality was at a discount,” the inescapable -result has been that “youth has been lured into sexual compromise.” The -old code of morality has failed: it does not meet the new demands. - -I have been impressed and sharply hurt at the bitterness and fatalism -underneath what is written. Let me quote one or two sentences. “The -charge against youth is correct. He is in revolt against conventional -morality. _Young men and young women are sex conscious, not on the old -lines of retiring from intimacy, but rather in the opposite direction -of intimacy._” And again, “Every sex companionship is born of _mutual -recognition of social grievances_. Where it is possible for men and -women to come together and form friendships they do so, _without any -regard for the commital convention that marriage must be the object_.” -(The italics in the passages are mine.) - -It is insisted upon that every normal person has a right to -self-expression in the sex-function, while further frank -acknowledgement is made that when sex-friendship “_is unregulated it -ends in vice_.” “_We shall not marry so why not enjoy ourselves_,” is -the prevailing philosophy of those who have ceased to regard the sexual -act as immoral. (Again the italics are mine). - -Now, all this has set me thinking that it is worth while to restate -certain propositions in connection with these friendships of passion, -which I made first in the article I wrote in 1913. I do this for two -reasons. First I would like to assure the young, who to-day are more -than ever impatient of, and condemnatory of, the old, that the old are -not always ignorant and that some of them, too, have tried honestly -to face this difficult problem of sexual conduct. The second reason -is deeper. A sickness of soul cries out from so much that the young -say to-day. I want to end this. And the only way in which I know to do -this in connection with these unregulated friendships is to _have them -regulated_. - -It is ridiculous to say as so many of the young do to-day that sexual -relationships between two people affect no one but themselves, unless a -child is born. It is not true. The partners in even the strongest and -purest union have no right to say to society, “This is our business and -none of yours.” The consequences may be so grave and wide-reaching for -society that the sex-deed can never be confined to the pair concerned. - -And I would go further even than this. For the sexual partnership that -is kept secret, almost of necessity, will work anti-socially. Just in -the same way as in any other secret partnership, opportunity will be -given to those who desire to escape from the responsibilities of the -partnership. This inevitably leads to the commital of sin, by those -who are weak and unfixed in character. While other men and women of -higher conscience, who wish to, and would act honourably, often find -the way so difficult that they fail in their endeavours—lose themselves -in the dark and tangled ways of concealment. Many unions that now are -shameful, would not have been shameful, if the partners had not been -drawn into deceitful concealments, that cannot fail to act in a way -disastrous to love. - -This problem of Passionate Friendships, like all problems of sexual -conduct, demands something more than emotional treatment; it requires -the most careful consideration of many different sets of facts, that -often rise up in what seem to be direct opposition. - -I must follow this a little further. The sex-needs are almost always -dealt with as though they stood apart and lay out of line with any -other need or faculty of our bodies. This is, in part, due to secrecy -which has kept sex as something mysterious. We have most of us been -trained from our childhood into indecent secretiveness. There is as -well deeper trouble, and it will be a long time before we can change -it. Sex is so powerful in most of us, and occupies really so large -a part of our attention, that we are afraid of ourselves, and this -re-acts in fear of any open acknowledgement of our sex-needs. - -It is necessary before we can even begin to judge this question of -passionate friendships, to face very frankly this tremendous force -of the sex-impulses, for the most part veiled in discussion. Next to -hunger this is the most imperative of our needs, and, indeed, to-day -sex enters more into conscious thought than hunger. For the hunger -needs of most of us are satisfied, while the sex-needs are thwarted and -restrained in all kinds of ways, and thus insist themselves the more -insistently in our thoughts. Here is some slight explanation why so -many of our judgments about sex are so arbitrary and so unforgiving. -In penalising the sexual misconduct of others we are really passing -judgment, though we do not know it, on our ourselves in blaming them we -gain a curious kind of vicarious salvation, which brings the peace of -self-forgiveness. In devising punishments for others, we are fixing a -compensatory sacrifice for our deeply buried wishes, which never having -found relief, either in direct expression or by sublimation, remain to -torment us with ceaseless conflicts in our unconscious life. - -I must not follow this further. Anyone with knowledge of the new -psychology will understand what I mean. - -Now, what I want to emphasise is that, to some limited extent at any -rate, this system of self-concealments and lies is being broken, -or if that view is too hopeful, at least the point of view has -shifted. Indeed it is the acceptance of the imperative force of sex -hunger, and the frank recognition of the present position—a fearless -acknowledgment of the natural right of every adult woman as well as man -to sex experience, that renders so noteworthy the change in outlook -between this generation and the last. The youth of to-day have been -fearless enough to cry aloud desires that the men and women of my -generation, either denied or whispered about. Within its limits (and -I am bound to say that, in my opinion, these limits are badly fixed -and very narrow), this is the most truthful generation that yet has -existed. I am glad to have lived to know it. - -It is true that the many difficult problems of sexual conduct, of -which we hear so much and so continuously, in almost every case are -approached from one side only—the personal-pleasure side. That is why -there is so much waste and foolishness. It explains too, why there -is no consistent and united movement; no attempt at trying to find -for everyone some possible decent way out—an escape from the terrible -conditions which we are all agreed exist under the difficulties and -strain of our under-controlled and over-civilised life. - -A new conception of morality is, indeed, called for, but we have to -be clearer as to what it is to be and where it is taking us. You will -see at once what I mean. Until new safeguards are established, the old -restriction cannot safely be loosened. It is too dangerous. The brief -passionate partnership must entail disaster, in particular for the -woman. She must still pay the heavier price of love. For what do these -partnerships really mean? There can be no glossing with talk about -freedom here. It is the old solution, the giving by the woman _without -security_, what is given by the woman who is married under security and -permanence. - -I do not believe this can be accepted as an established and permitted -thing as soon as we come to consider the lasting results. - -It is an essential part of sexual morality, as I conceive it, that in -any relation between the two sexes—I care not whether the association -be legal or illegal, recognised or unrecognised—the position of the -woman, _as the potential mother_ must be made secure. This is a social, -not a private matter. As such it has always been accepted by a wise -State: it is the disgrace of our lax civilisation that too often to-day -it is forgotten or ignored. - -We come then to this—How can provision be made for honourable -partnerships with _security for the woman_ outside of marriage? For -I am altogether persuaded that this provision must be made in order -to harmonise our sexual life, and meet the desires of a large and -increasing number of young people, whose exceptional needs our existing -institutions and customs ignore or crush. - -We must all of us know from our experience of life that many women -as well as men are by their temperaments unsuited for monagonious -marriage—the living permanently with one partner for life. Often, -I would even say as a rule, these individuals are strongly sexual. -They will not, because with the character they have, they cannot, -live for any long period celibate. They will marry to gain permanent -sexual relief or, if they are men, they will buy temporary relief from -prostitutes, unless they are able to seek satisfaction in an irregular -union. - -Now, I affirm it as my conviction that the first and second of these -courses are likely to lead to greater misery and sin than the third -course; and of the three, the first, in my opinion, is the worst. I -have, no doubt at all on this matter. No one, who is not blind to the -facts of life, can close their eyes to the evil and suffering that -certainly follows, when permanent marriage is entered into by those -people who are unfitted _and do not desire_ to fulfil the obligations -and duties of living faithfully with one partner. And I would ask all -those who stand in fear of change or reform, and cannot contemplate -any open toleration of wider opportunities for sexual friendships to -consider this fact: the discredit which has fallen upon marriage arises -largely from the demoralising lives lived under its cover by those -unsuited for enduring mating. - -It is commonly taken for granted that love and passion in men is quite -different from love and passion in women. I am sure this is not true. -It is very necessary to break down the idea that for the impulses of -sex, with their immense complications and differences, there is one -general rule. Nor is it possible, I am sure, to make any for arbitrary -judgments. To me the man or woman who is able to live in faithful love -with one partner is not necessarily better than the man or woman who -is not so able. I may prefer the one type, and dislike the other, but -that again is a matter of personal judgment. We cannot safely class -those who differ from ourselves as wrong, and set them down as fit only -for suppression and education. We have to put aside the old shrieks of -blame that are possible only to the ignorant. - -It is all very well to preach the ideal of complete sexual abstinence -until marriage, but there are the clear, hard conditions of -contemporary circumstances for all but the really rich, who can marry -when they want to do so without other considerations, and the very poor -who marry young because they have nothing at all to consider. We have -to face the presence among us to-day of an amount of suffering through -enforced celibacy, which is acting in many directions in degrading our -sexual lives. Any number of these sufferers, both the unmarried and -the married who are ill-mated, are everywhere amongst us. I need not -wait to prove this: the facts face us all, unless, indeed, we are too -wilfully blind and too prejudiced to see what is happening. - -I would propose as a first step towards honesty and health, that we -ought to claim an open declaration of the existence of any form of -sexual relationship between a woman and a man. We shall, I believe, -have to do it, if not now, then later, because we are finding out the -evils that must ensue, both to the individuals concerned and to the -society of which they are members, by forcing men and women into the -dark, immoral way of concealments. - -I believe if there were some open recognition of these partnerships -outside of marriage, not necessarily permanent, with proper provision -for the woman and her children, should there be any, a provision not -dependent on the generosity of the man and made after the love which -sanctioned the union had waned, but decided upon by the man and woman -in the form of a contract before the relationships were entered upon, -there would be many women ready to undertake such unions gladly; there -would even be some women as well as men, who, I believe, would prefer -them to permanent marriage, which binds them to one partner for life -and as a rule entails mutual living together and the giving up by the -woman of her work or profession. In this way many marriages would be -prevented which inevitably come to disaster. It is also possible that -such friendship-contracts might, under present disastrous conditions, -be made by those who are unsuitably mated and yet are unable or do -not wish to entirely sever the bond between them, with some other -partner they could love. Such contracts would open up possibilities of -honourable partnership to many who must suffer from enforced sexual -abstinence or be driven into hateful concealed intimacies. - -I do not think we need fear to do this. My own faith in monogamous -marriage, the living together of one man and one woman for the life of -both, as the most practical, the best, and the happiest form of union -for the great majority of people, is so strongly rooted that I do not -wish, because I hold it unnecessary, to force anyone either to enter or -stay within its bonds. I want them to do this because they themselves -want to be bound. We get further and further away from real monogamy -by allowing no other form of honourable partnerships. - -Under present conditions and the prejudice of social opinion, the -penalties that have to be paid in particular by women, for any sexual -relationship outside of marriage are too heavy. This is manifest as -I have, to some extent, pointed out already. Indeed when we consider -the difficulties faced in these unions, that so many do take the risks -is another proof, if one were needed of the elemental strength of the -sex-impulse. But mark this: it is only those whose social conscience -is for some reason unawakened who can enter into these irregular -relationships except under special and very exceptional circumstances, -until some steps have been taken to regulate them. They may be willing -to take the risk for themselves, but they know, or perhaps I had better -say _ought to know_, that the payment may fall also on the child of -their love. You may say—there need be no children. This is true. It -makes the conditions of such love much easier. It is not, however, a -solution and can never, I think, be accepted as such by women. The -woman who loves a man wants to be the mother of a child by him. I shall -be told that there are women of whom this is not true. I know this. But -that does not make it less true that the great majority of women can -find the completion of their love only in the child. - -It would, of course, be easy to raise any number of objections against -these contract-partnerships, some of which might well prove true. -It may be said, for instance, that the economic difficulties that -now prevent marriage would not be lessened, but increased, by these -extra-conjugal relationships. This is a question on which so much ought -to be said that I feel compelled to say almost nothing, as I cannot now -treat it adequately. I can only say that I have in my mind some scheme -of insurance, which might easily be contributed to by both partners of -the contract, but which would go to the woman for her own provision, -and that of any children of the union in case of separation. If this -once became established as a custom (a kind of marriage settlement, -but without the marriage) necessary between all entering into such -partnerships, the practice would gain the support of public opinion. It -is done frequently now, but secretly. What I want is that it should -be done openly, as a right and not a favour. It would then be possible -to take another step in the form of State endowment for parenthood; -this might be an extension of endowment for legal motherhood and -mother’s pensions, and by doing this would follow another and, perhaps, -even greater gain. The recognition of these contract-partnerships -would prevent the ostracism which even to-day falls on the discarded -mistress. There are many women who dread this much more than poverty. -The whole question of any sexual relationships outside of marriage in -the past has been left in the gutter, so to speak. Everything has been -blotted in darkness and made disgraceful by concealment. This would be -changed. - -May not something be done now, when in so many directions we are -being forced to consider these questions, to establish sanction to -meet new needs? Partnerships other than marriage have had a place as -a recognised and guarded institution in many older and more primitive -societies, and it may be that the conditions brought upon us may act in -forcing upon us a similar acceptance. - -We have got to recognise that our form of monogamous marriage cannot -meet the sex-needs of all people. To assert that it can do this is -to close our eyes to the known facts. Something has got to be done. -The extending of the opportunities of honourable love must be faced -before we can hope for more moral conditions of life. It is the results -that have almost always followed these irregular unions that have -branded them as anti-social acts. But the desertion of women with the -inevitable resulting evils, which has arisen so frequently from the -conditions of secrecy under which they now exist, would be put an end -to. One reason why extra-conjugal relationships are discredited is -because it is often almost impossible to avoid disaster. Make these -partnerships honourable and there will be much greater chances of -honourable conduct. I spoke just now of the sacrifice of women. But in -love there is no such thing as sacrifice for a woman; there is the joy -of giving. The sacrifice arises out of the conditions of concealment -and blame under which the duties and joys of love so often have had to -be fulfilled. - -I do not see how we can forbid or treat with contempt any partnership -that is openly entered into and in which the duties undertaken are -faithfully fulfilled. It is our attitude of blame that has, in -the past, so often made this honourable fulfilment of obligations -impossible. - -I have sought to put these matters as plainly as may be in the -conviction that nothing can be gained by concealment. Anyone who writes -on the subject of sexual conduct is very open to misconceptions. It is -not realised that the effort of the reformer is not to lessen at all -the bonds in any sexual partnership, rather the desire is to strengthen -them. But the forms of the partnership will have to be more varied; -unless, indeed, we prefer to accept unregulated and secret vice. We -shall, I do most sincerely believe, have more morality in too much -wideness than in too little. - -I can anticipate a further objection that will certainly be raised. -Why, I shall be asked, if sexual relationships are to be acknowledged -and protected outside of marriage, preserve marriage at all? I have -answered this question already. _Monogamous marriage will be maintained -because the great majority of women and men want it to be maintained._ -I affirm again my own belief in the monogamic union: the ideal marriage -is that of the man and woman who have dedicated themselves to each -other for the life of both, faithfully together to fulfil the duties -of family life. This is the true monogony: this is the marriage which -I regard as sanctified. But, I, regarding it as a holy state, would -preserve it for those suited for the binding duties of the individual -home so intimately connected with it. - -The contract-partnerships I have suggested will do nothing to change -the sanctity of any true marriages. There will always remain a penalty -to those who seek variety in love, in that unrest which is the other -side of variety. And the answer I would give to those who fear an -increase of immorality from any provision for sexual partnerships -outside of permanent marriage is, that no deliberate change in our -sexual conduct can conceivably make moral conditions worse than they -are at present. As a matter of fact every form of irregular union -exists to-day, but shamefully and hidden. The only logical moral -objection that I can think of being advanced against an honourable -recognition of these partnerships is that, by doing away with all -necessity for concealments their number is likely to be larger than if -the old penalties are maintained. This is undoubtedly true: it is also -true that it is the only possible way in which they can cease to be -shamefull. Prohibitions and laws, however stringent, can do nothing. -The past has proved their failure; they will fail still worse in the -future. - -Nor is the change really so great or so startling as at first it -may appear to be. Our marriage in its present form is primarily an -arrangement for the protection of the woman and the family. What I want -is that some measure, at least, of the protection now given to the -legal wife, shall be afforded to all women who fulfil the same duties. -I am not seeking to make immorality easier; as I have before insisted, -that is very far from my purpose. These changes for which I am pleading -will make immorality much harder, for it will not be so easy as now it -is to escape from the responsibilities of love. - -No one can suppose, of course, that this change can be other than -gradual. There will be no stage at which a large section of society -will give up the accepted custom and stand perplexed as to how they -shall readjust their sexual conduct. Any movement towards openness and -honesty must be gradual. The process of change will be in the future, -what has always happened in the past, the slow abandonment of worn-out -conventions, and a trial of new paths, first by the few, to be followed -by an ever-increasing number. When the need for a change arises then -does a change come. - -I assert again there need be no fear. - -It is one of the deepest and healthiest instincts of men and women that -they have always fought for liberty to love, and have rebelled whenever -the restrictions and conditions of society have borne too hardly -upon them. There is first a period of dull acquiescence, followed -certainly by a reaction towards pleasure and sin—the grabbing to take -what has been withheld by any means and in any form; but afterwards -comes rebellion—the true movement towards purity; the deep desire of a -return to health, necessitating always the breaking through from all -hindering barriers, so that the intolerable burden of sin may be cast; -a glad imperative effort to gain liberty, to live rightly and joyously. - -It is the young who to-day have a new consciousness of the right of -freedom. They will never again accept the ancient restrictions. And it -is well. We, who are older, whose steps are faltering and whose eyes -grow dim with waiting for the vision we have seen, look to them to gain -liberty, to re-establish the sanctity of love, which we have tried to -do and failed. - -But the young must shake off every symptom of the prevalent and -contagious anaemia of fatalism that limits everything to the personal -issues, before they can formulate and carry through any really -constructive work of reform. They must learn to distinguish more -clearly between cause and effect, the means and the end. At present -they place the horse after the cart and mistake the power for the -product. We are all apt to suppose conduct and feelings are the outcome -of conditions and laws. They are not: they are the origin of them. When -we have all got the desire for right and honourable conduct and honest -conduct and honest feelings both about marriage and every form of -sexual partnership, we shall get living and helpful laws. - -What is the use of tinkering with what is moribund? A great teacher has -said, “Let the dead bury their dead; come and preach the good and the -new thing.” - - - - -CONCLUSION - -REGENERATION - - -I have dared to think of a regeneration of our sexual lives through -education and a fuller understanding of the meaning of love. But by -education must be understood all that influences the desires and -imagination, so that in every direction we shall be turned to seek -health and clean living. - -Our supine acceptance of so many things that are wrong ought to arouse -us to shame. What are we going to do? - -Are we content to go on in the muddles that so long we have accepted -without much consideration? Are we satisfied to allow all the evil to -continue because we are too lazy and too dishonest to face them in -truth and demand a clearance? We are all responsible; you, my readers, -and I. If we demand saner and more practical conditions we shall get -them. - -But do we care—I mean care sufficiently to seek and to find the way of -escape? Ah, that is the question! - -Fear has been the hot-bed wherein have been forced rank plants of -shame, dishonesty and trickery, of uncleanness, of concealments, of -persecution and punishments—plants of persistent but unhealthy growth, -that insistently and riotously spring up to hinder the workers, who -strive ever to clear the soil of the fair Garden of Love, from the rank -and choking growths. - -What wonder, indeed, that we have lost our way so that still we are -wandering in the jungle, unable to steer a straight course through the -rough and tortuous paths left to us as a legacy from the past. It is -this confusion that is hindering us to-day. And our real task is to -cut through the jungle, and force clear paths, so that again we may -have good roads in an open country on which we may walk gladly and -fearlessly. - -Yet, it were unwise to be too hopeful. We cannot be architects of life. -Each generation will make new mistakes, even do they escape the follies -that are old. We can see a very short way along the path of life, and -often we are confused. The wisest amongst us are only bricklayers, and -the best can but lay two or three bricks in a lifetime. Our work is to -do that if we can. We can guess very feebly at the whole design. Many -mistakes must be made by us, as they have been by those before us, and -often it may be the duty of a new generation to pull down the work that -in sorrow we have toiled to build up. - - - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[1] The English Edition was translated from the French Edition. - -[2] See a most instructive pamphlet, “The Conflicts of the Child,” by -Edith and Dr. Eder, reprinted from “Child Study,” 1917. - -[3] See the pamphlet to which already reference has been made. - -[4] This frequently quoted statement was made by Lombroso and not by -Krafft-Ebing as almost everyone seems to think. It is significant that -the women on the study of whose sexuality this judgment was founded -were of the prostitute class. See _La Donna Delinquente_, etc., p.p. -54-56. - - - - -INDEX - - - A - - Adoption of Children 61; - law needed 61 _et seq._; - fears and dangers in 62 _et seq._ - - - B - - Birth control 37 _et seq._, 163. - - Boys, seduction of 113 _et seq._, 119 _et seq._ - - - C - - Cats, 15; - their qualities compared with those of women 16 _et seq._ - - Child, effect of birth control on 39; - feeling of inferiority in 49; - inferiority and crime in 49; - must rebel 51 _et seq._ 82, 94, 103; - adoption of, law of needed 61; - faults and crimes of 73 _et seq._ 99; - in prison 73 _et seq._; - at modern school 79 _et seq._; - at play 81; - sex education of 87 _et seq._, 107 _et seq._; - early manifestation of sex in 88 _et seq._; - savagery of 97; - marriage founded on 136 _et seq._ - - Concealment, evils of 178 _et seq._ - - Curiosity, 101, 109 _et seq._ - - - D - - Dangerous Age, the 29 _et seq._ - - Doctors and Patients’ secrets 157 _et seq._ - - Dogs, 59, 60. - - - E - - Economics, mania for, 158 _et seq._ - - Education, sex 87 _et seq._ - - - F - - Father, daughter’s feeling for 54; - the intruder 55 _et seq._, 95; - after birth of child 56; - conflict with son 56; - authority of, necessary 57; - effect on child 91 _et seq._ 93; - danger of being too fond of child 104. - - Faults of children 43 _et seq._, 73 _et seq._ 99. - - Freedom for children 80 _et seq._ - - - G - - Gentleman, the temporary 165 _et seq._ - - Girls, and seduction of boys 113, 118; - playing with love 127 _et seq._ - _See also_ Child. - - Garrell, Vera M. (on “Youth and Marriage”) 175. - - - H - - Husband, the old-fashioned 161 _et seq._ - - - J - - Jealousy, 44, 55, 68, 93, 95, 103, 109, 136. - - - L - - Law, reform in relation to parentage 35 _et seq._; - reform in relation to adoption 61 _et seq._; - of adoption in other countries 67 _et seq._; - in relation to mothers’ pensions 71; - in relation to seduction 113 _et seq._; - in relation to age of consent 117 _et seq._; - White Slave Traffic 118 _et. seq._; - marriage law in other countries 170. - - Lyttelton, Dr. (on sex instruction) 107. - - - M - - Marriage, joy in 33; 133 _et seq._ - result of children 136 _et seq._; - causes of failure in 139; - altered views on 141 _et seq._; - unfaithfulness of men in 145 _et seq._; - of women 149 _et seq._; - too easy 169 _et seq._; - problem of unions outside 174 _et seq._ - _See also_ Birth Control. - - Michaelis, Karin 29 _et. seq._ - - Mother, and child who steals 43 _et seq._; - danger of being too fond of child 52 _et. seq._ 104; - supreme with child 55, 72, 92; - perfect and (childless) 59; - difficulty of adoptions for 61 _et seq._; - love, effect on child 91; - and sex instruction 108 _et seq._; - after birth of child 145 _et seq._; - image of, sought in wife 161. - - - N - - Neil, Judge 71 _et seq._ - - - O - - Old-fashioned husband 161 _et seq._ - - - P - - Pensions for mothers 71 _et seq._ - - Play 81; - love in 127 _et seq._ - - Pleasure, search for 31, 133. - - Punishment of children 73 _et seq._, 84 _et seq._ - - Parent, _See_ Father and Mother. - - - R - - Racial types, best seen in women 20. - - Rebellion of children, necessary 51 _et seq._; 82; 94. - - Remorse, as temptation 46; - not necessarily good 98. - - - S - - Schools, poor law 72; - for delinquent 77; - modern and their errors 79 _et seq._ - - Sex, education 87 _et seq._; - early manifestation of 88; - right age for 107 _et seq._ - - Solitary confinement condemned 77. - - Son, who steals 43 _et seq._ - _See also_ Child. - - Spain 19 _et seq._; - dancing in 21; - workers (women) in 23 _et seq._ - - - W - - Wife, the modern 161 _et seq._ - - Wife, the young 163 _et seq._ - - Women, their qualities compared with those of cats 16 _et seq._; - in Spain 19 _et seq._; - racial types best seen in 20; - as workers in Spain 23 _et seq._; - approaching age, in terror of 30; - search for pleasure in 31; - false purity in 32; - repression in 33; - legal position of 35; - childless 59; - difficulties in adopting children by _et seq._ 61; - seduction of men by 113 _et seq._, 118, 123; - myth of superior purity 113 _et seq._; - child more than husband to 145 _et seq._; - attitude to sexual disease of 158 _et seq._ - - Women, _See also_ Birth Control, Marriages, Mother, Wife, the modern, - Gentleman, the temporary. - - - _Clements Bros., Printers, Meeting House Lane, Chatham_ - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Women, Children, Love, and Marriage, by -Catherine Gasquoine Hartley - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WOMEN, CHILDREN, LOVE, MARRIAGE *** - -***** This file should be named 63898-0.txt or 63898-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/6/3/8/9/63898/ - -Produced by Turgut Dincer and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |