Main  Contacts  
Table of contents
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.1
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.2
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.3
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.4
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.5
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.6
FOOTNOTES
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.1
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.2
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.3
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.4
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.5
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.6
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.7
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.8
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.9
MARRIAGE-10.1
MARRIAGE-10.2
MARRIAGE-10.3
MARRIAGE-10.4
MARRIAGE-10.5
MARRIAGE-10.6
MARRIAGE-10.7
MARRIAGE-10.8
MARRIAGE-10.9
MARRIAGE-10.10
MARRIAGE-10.11
MARRIAGE-10.12
FOOTNOTES
THE ART OF LOVE-11.1
THE ART OF LOVE-11.2
THE ART OF LOVE-11.3
THE ART OF LOVE-11.4
THE ART OF LOVE-11.5
THE ART OF LOVE-11.6
THE ART OF LOVE-11.7
THE ART OF LOVE-11.8
THE ART OF LOVE-11.9
THE ART OF LOVE-11.10
THE ART OF LOVE-11.11
FOOTNOTES
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.1
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.2
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.3
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.4
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.5
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.6
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.7
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.8
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.9
FOOTNOTES
INDEX OF AUTHORS

of divorce. Marriage, it is said, is for the protection of women; 

facilitate divorce and women are robbed of that protection. It is obvious 

that this argument has little application as against divorce by mutual 

consent. Certainly it is necessary that divorce should only be arranged 

under conditions which in each individual case have received the approval 

of the law as just. But it must always be remembered that the essential 

fact of marriage is not naturally, and should never artificially be made, 

an economic question. It is possible--that is a question which society 

will have to consider--that a woman should be paid for being a mother on 

the ground that she is rearing new citizens for the State. But neither the 

State nor her husband nor anyone else ought to pay her for exercising 

conjugal rights. The fact that such an argument can be brought forward 

shows how far we are from the sound biological attitude towards sexual 

relationships. Equally unsound is the notion that the virgin bride brings 

her husband at marriage an important capital which is consumed in the 

first act of intercourse and can never be recovered. That is a notion 

which has survived into civilization, but it belongs to barbarism and not 

to civilization. So far as it has any validity it lies within a sphere of 

erotic perversity which cannot be taken into consideration in an 

estimation of moral values. For most men, however, in any case, whether 

they realize it or not, the woman who has been initiated into the 

mysteries of love has a higher erotic value than the virgin, and there 

need be no anxiety on this ground concerning the wife who has lost her 

virginity. It is probably a significant fact that this anxiety for the 

protection of women by the limitation of divorce is chiefly brought 

forward by men and not by women themselves. A woman at marriage is 

deprived by society and the law of her own name. She has been deprived 

until recently of the right to her own earnings. She is deprived of the 

most intimate rights in her own person. She is deprived under some 

circumstances of her own child, against whom she may have committed no 

offence whatever. It is perhaps scarcely surprising that she is not 

greatly appreciative of the protection afforded her by the withholding of 

the right to divorce her husband. "Ah, no, no protection!" a brilliant 

French woman has written. "We have been protected long enough. The only 

protection to grant women is to cease protecting them."[354] As a matter 

of fact the divorce movement appears to develop, on the whole, with that 

development of woman's moral responsibility traced in the previous 

chapter, and where divorce is freest women occupy the highest position. 

 

We cannot fail to realize as we grasp the nature and direction of the 

modern movement of divorce that the final tendency of that movement is to 

efface itself. Necessary as the Divorce Court has been as the inevitable 

corollary of an impossible ecclesiastical conception of marriage, no 

institution is now more hideous, more alien to the instinctive feelings 

generated by a fine civilization, and more opposed to the dignity of 

womanhood.[355] Its disappearance and its substitution by private 

arrangements, effected on their contractive sides, especially if there are 

children to provide for, under legal and if necessary judicial 

supervision, is, and always has been, the natural result of the attainment 

of a reasonably high stage of civilization. The Divorce Court has merely 

been a phase in the history of modern marriage, and a phase that has 

really been repugnant to all concerned in it. There is no need to view the 


Page 3 from 5:  Back   1   2  [3]  4   5   Forward