Main  Contacts  
Table of contents
PREFACE
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.1
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.2
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.3
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.4
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.5
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.1
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.2
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.3
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.4
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.5
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.6
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.7
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.8
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.9
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.10
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.11
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.1
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.2
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.3
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.4
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.1
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.2
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.3
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.4
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.1
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.2
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.3
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.4
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.5
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.6
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.1
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.2
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.3
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.4
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.5
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.6
PROSTITUTION-7.1
PROSTITUTION-7.2
PROSTITUTION-7.3
PROSTITUTION-7.4
PROSTITUTION-7.5
PROSTITUTION-7.6
PROSTITUTION-7.7
PROSTITUTION-7.8
PROSTITUTION-7.9
PROSTITUTION-7.10
PROSTITUTION-7.11
PROSTITUTION-7.12
PROSTITUTION-7.13
PROSTITUTION-7.14
PROSTITUTION-7.15
FOOTNOTES-1
FOOTNOTES-2

manhood--the handing on of the lamp of life to future races--is carried 

on, it is true, by the same instrument that is the daily conduit of the 

bladder. It has been said in scorn that we are born between urine and 

excrement; it may be said, in reverence, that the passage through this 

channel of birth is a sacrament of Nature's more sacred and significant 

than men could ever invent. 

 

These relationships have been sometimes perceived and their meaning 

realized by a sort of mystical intuition. We catch glimpses of such an 

insight now and again, first among the poets and later among the 

physicians of the Renaissance. In 1664 Rolfincius, in his _Ordo et Methods 

Generationi Partium etc._, at the outset of the second Part devoted to the 

sexual organs of women, sets forth what ancient writers have said of the 

Eleusinian and other mysteries and the devotion and purity demanded of 

those who approached these sacred rites. It is so also with us, he 

continues, in the rites of scientific investigation. "We also operate with 

sacred things. The organs of sex are to be held among sacred things. They 

who approach these altars must come with devout minds. Let the profane 

stand without, and the doors be closed." In those days, even for science, 

faith and intuition were alone possible. It is only of recent years that 

the histologist's microscope and the physiological chemist's test-tube 

have furnished them with a rational basis. It is no longer possible to cut 

Nature in two and assert that here she is pure and there impure.[50] 

 

There thus appears to be no adequate ground for agreeing with 

those who consider that the proximity of the generative and 

excretory centres is "a stupid bungle of Nature's." An 

association which is so ancient and primitive in Nature can only 

seem repulsive to those whose feelings have become morbidly 

unnatural. It may further be remarked that the anus, which is the 

more aesthetically unattractive of the excretory centres, is 

comparatively remote from the sexual centre, and that, as R. 

Hellmann remarked many years ago in discussing this question 

(_Ueber Geschlechtsfreiheit_, p. 82): "In the first place, 

freshly voided urine has nothing specially unpleasant about it, 

and in the second place, even if it had, we might reflect that a 

rosy mouth by no means loses its charm merely because it fails to 

invite a kiss at the moment when its possessor is vomiting." 

 

A clergyman writes suggesting that we may go further and find a 

positive advantage in this proximity: "I am glad that you do not 

agree with the man who considered that Nature had bungled by 

using the genitals for urinary purposes; apart from teleological 

or theological grounds I could not follow that line of reasoning. 

I think there is no need for disgust concerning the urinary 

organs, though I feel that the anus can never be attractive to 

the normal mind; but the anus is quite separate from the 

genitals. I would suggest that the proximity serves a good end in 

making the organs more or less secret except at times of sexual 

emotion or to those in love. The result is some degree of 

repulsion at ordinary times and a strong attraction at times of 

sexual activity. Hence, the ordinary guarding of the parts, from 

fear of creating disgust, greatly increases their attractiveness 

at other times when sexual emotion is paramount. Further, the 

feeling of disgust itself is merely the result of habit and 

sentiment, however useful it may be, and according to Scripture 

everything is clean and good. The ascetic feeling of repulsion, 


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