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

other additional partners and so introduce an unnatural polygamy. There 

will always be variations from the monogamic order and civilization is 

certainly not hostile to sexual variation. Whether we reckon these 

variations as legitimate or illegitimate, they will still take place; of 

that we may be certain. The path of social wisdom seems to lie on the one 

hand in making the marriage relationship flexible enough to reduce to a 

minimum these deviations--not because such deviations are intrinsically 

bad but because they ought not to be forced into existence--and on the 

other hand in according to these deviations when they occur such a measure 

of recognition as will deprive them of injurious influence and enable 

justice to be done to all the parties concerned. We too often forget that 

our failure to recognize such variations merely means that we accord in 

such cases an illegitimate permission to perpetrate injustice. In those 

parts of the world in which polygyny is recognized as a permissible 

variation a man is legally held to his natural obligations towards all his 

sexual mates and towards the children he has by those mates. In no part of 

the world is polygyny so prevalent as in Christendom; in no part of the 

world is it so easy for a man to escape the obligations incurred by 

polygyny. We imagine that if we refuse to recognize the fact of polygyny, 

we may refuse to recognize any obligations incurred by polygyny. By 

enabling a man to escape so easily from the obligations of his polygamous 

relationships we encourage him, if he is unscrupulous, to enter into them; 

we place a premium on the immorality we loftily condemn.[373] Our polygyny 

has no legal existence, and therefore its obligations can have no legal 

existence. The ostrich, it was once imagined, hides its head in the sand 

and attempts to annihilate facts by refusing to look at them; but there is 

only one known animal which adopts this course of action, and it is called 

Man. 

 

Monogamy, in the fundamental biological sense, represents the natural 

order into which the majority of sexual facts will always naturally fall 

because it is the relationship which most adequately corresponds to all 

the physical and spiritual facts involved. But if we realize that sexual 

relationships primarily concern only the persons who enter into those 

relationships, and if we further realize that the interest of society in 

such relationships is confined to the children which they produce, we 

shall also realize that to fix by law the number of women with whom a man 

shall have sexual relationships, and the number of men with whom a woman 

shall unite herself, is more unreasonable than it would be to fix by law 

the number of children they shall produce. The State has a right to 

declare whether it needs few citizens or many; but in attempting to 

regulate the sexual relationships of its members the State attempts an 

impossible task and is at the same time guilty of an impertinence. 


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