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

responsibility as at present. Such cases could only arise 

exceptionally, and would not call for social antagonism. For the 

most part, Cope remarks, "the best way to deal with polygamy is 

to let it alone" (E.D. Cope, "The Marriage Problem," _Open 

Court_, Nov. 15 and 22, 1888). In England, Dr. John Chapman, the 

editor of the _Westminster Review_, and a close associate of the 

leaders of the Radical movement in the Victorian period, was 

opposed to State dictation as regards the form of marriage, and 

believed that a certain amount of sexual variation would be 

socially beneficial. Thus he wrote in 1884 (in a private letter): 

"I think that as human beings become less selfish polygamy [i.e., 

polygyny], and even polyandry, in an ennobled form, will become 

increasingly frequent." 

 

James Hinton, who, a few years earlier, had devoted much thought 

and attention to the sexual question, and regarded it as indeed 

the greatest of moral problems, was strongly in favor of a more 

vital flexibility of marriage regulations, an adaptation to human 

needs such as the early Christian Church admitted. Marriage, he 

declared, must be "subordinated to service," since marriage, like 

the Sabbath, is made for man and not man for marriage. Thus in 

case of one partner becoming insane he would permit the other 

partner to marry again, the claim of the insane partner, in case 

of recovery, still remaining valid. That would be a form of 

polygamy, but Hinton was careful to point out that by "polygamy" 

he meant "less a particular marriage-order than such an order as 

best serves good, and which therefore must be essentially 

variable. Monogamy may be good, even the only good order, if of 

free choice; but a _law_ for it is another thing. The sexual 

relationship must be a _natural_ thing. The true social life will 

not be any fixed and definite relationship, as of monogamy, 

polygamy, or anything else, but a perfect subordination of every 

sexual relationship whatever to reason and human good." 

 

Ellen Key, who is an enthusiastic advocate of monogamy, and who 

believes that the civilized development of personal love removes 

all danger of the growth of polygamy, still admits the existence 

of variations. She has in mind such solutions of difficult 

problems as Goethe had before him when he proposed at first in 

his _Stella_ to represent the force of affection and tender 

memories as too strong to admit of the rupture of an old bond in 

the presence of a new bond. The problem of sexual variation, she 

remarks, however (_Liebe und Ethik_, p. 12), has changed its form 

under modern conditions; it is no longer a struggle between the 

demand of society for a rigid marriage-order and the demand of 

the individual for sexual satisfaction, but it has become the 

problem of harmonizing the ennoblement of the race with 

heightened requirements of erotic happiness. She also points out 

that the existence of a partner who requires the other partner's 

care as a nurse or as an intellectual companion by no means 

deprives that other partner of the right to fatherhood or 

motherhood, and that such rights must be safeguarded (Ellen Key, 

_Ueber Liebe und Ehe_, pp. 166-168). 

 

A prominent and extreme advocate of polygyny, not as a simple 

rare variation, but as a marriage order superior to monogamy, is 

to be found at the present day in Professor Christian von 

Ehrenfels of Prague (see, e.g., his _Sexualethik_, 1908; "Die 


Page 2 from 6:  Back   1  [2]  3   4   5   6   Forward