<h2><SPAN name="LESSON_XV" id="LESSON_XV"></SPAN><span class="lght">LESSON XV</span><br/> BIRTH CONTROL METHODS</h2>
<p>The general subject of Birth Control necessarily includes
the special subject of Birth Control Methods, viz.,
of the methods of association between husband and wife
under which offspring is conceived only at such times as
desired, and consequently only in the number desired.</p>
<p>These methods may be grouped into three general
classes, as follows:</p>
<p><b>I. Methods of Continence (total or temporary).</b> In
the practice of the methods under this class, there is an
avoidance of sexual relations between husband and wife,
either continuously or for certain periods during which
the liability to conception is great.</p>
<p><b>II. Methods of Semi-Continence.</b> In the practice of
the methods under this class, there is a partial manifestation
of the sexual relation accompanied by an absence of
the manifestation of the procreative functions.</p>
<p><b>III. Methods of Contraception.</b> In the practice of the
methods under this class, the usual manifestations of the
sexual relation are observed, accompanied by an avoidance
of the union of the male and female elements of
reproduction which result in conception.</p>
<p>The student of the subject of Birth Control, of course,
familiarizes himself or herself with each of the several
classes of methods above noted, for the purpose of understanding
the characteristic distinctions between them,
and the respective advantages and disadvantages of each
class. In the following pages each class will be briefly
considered, that the student may acquire a general understanding
thereof, and may be enabled to reason intelligently
concerning them. In this presentation there<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_204" id="Page_204">{204}</SPAN></span>
will be sought a fair statement of each class, without any
desire to influence the student for or against either of
them.</p>
<h3>Continence.</h3>
<p>Continence (which in this special sense means the
avoidance of sexual relations between husband and wife),
in the strict sense, is based upon the idea that the sexual
relation should not be exercised except for the purpose
and intent of procreation. In the restricted usage of the
term, it refers to the abstinence from sexual intercourse
during stated periods in which the liability to conception
is greatest.</p>
<p>Rev. Sylvanus Stall, the author of several widely-read
works on the subject of Sex, says of strict continence:
"One theory is that the reproductive function is not to be
exercised except for the purpose of procreation. * * *
There are some married people, more numerous than some
suppose, who have adopted the idea of uniform continence,
and who call the reproductive nature into exercise for
the purpose of procreation only, and who assert that the
maintenance of continence secures not only the greater
strength and better health, but greater happiness also.
* * * While the results of our investigations do not
enable us to assert that it is the true theory, we are yet
prepared to say that it is worthy of thoughtful consideration.
If it is possible for married people to maintain
absolute continence for a period of six months or a year,
it must be conceded that it would be possible to extend
that time to a longer period. The maintenance of this
theory would require such a degree of self-control as is
far beyond the possession of the great mass of humanity.
We fear, also, that there are but few, even if they entered
upon a life union with such thought and intention, who
would be willing to maintain their principles for any considerable
period. * * * The other theory, and that which<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_205" id="Page_205">{205}</SPAN></span>
many men and women who are eminent for their learning
and religious life hold to be the correct theory, is that
while no one has a right to enter upon the marriage relation
with the fixed purpose of evading the duty of parenthood,
yet that procreation is not the only high and holy
purpose which God has had in view in establishing the
marriage relation, but that the act of sexual congress may
be indulged in between husband and wife for the purpose
of expressing their personal endearments, and for quickening
those affections and tender feelings which are calculated
to render home the place of blessing and good which
God intended. * * * It is held by those who advocate
this theory, that while it would be possible to restrict the
exercise of the reproductive functions to the single purpose
of procreation, yet in the great majority of instances
the effort to live by that theory would generally
result in marital unhappiness. * * * Due regard is not
only to be paid to the perpetuity of the race, but to the
well-being and perpetuity of the individual."</p>
<p>The advocates of continence, except for the purpose
of procreation, advance many arguments and evidence to
justify their contention that this is the only course justified
by Nature and Morality. We need not present this
argument here, for it is outside the particular question
now under consideration. However, in all fairness and
justice, there should be presented here the general outline
of their argument that there is no rational basis for the
widely accepted idea that abstinence from sexual relations
is in any way harmful or detrimental to the health
and physical well-being of the human race.</p>
<p>The advocates of continence cite the cases of many
continent men who have been noted for their vigor and
activity; and claim that such cases also justify their claim
that continence makes for the sound mind in the sound
body of mankind. The following quotations from authorities
will give the general spirit of this contention.</p>
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_206" id="Page_206">{206}</SPAN></span></p>
<p>Dr. Kellogg says: "It has been claimed by many, even
physicians, and though with but a slight show of reason,
that absolute continence, after a full development of the
organs of reproduction, could not be maintained without
a great detriment to health. It is needless to enumerate
all the different arguments employed to support this position,
since they are, with a few exceptions, too frivolous
to mention." Dr. Mayer says: "This position is held by
men of the world, and many physicians share it. This
belief appears to us erroneous, without foundation, and
easily refuted. No peculiar disease nor any abridgement
of the duration of life can be ascribed to such continence.
* * * Health does not absolutely require that there
should ever be an emission of semen, from puberty to
death, though the individual live a hundred years." Dr.
Kellogg also says: "This has been amply confirmed by
experiments upon animals, as well as by the experience of
some of the most distinguished men who have ever lived,
among whom may be mentioned Sir Isaac Newton, Kant,
Paschal, Fontenaille, and Michael Angelo. These men
never married, and lived continent lives. Some of them
lived to be a very great age, retaining to the last their
wonderful abilities. In view of this fact, there is certainly
no danger."</p>
<p>Another writer has said: "The Greek athletes training
for the great Olympic Games were compelled to observe
strict continence, the experience being that by this
course they were able to conserve their vigor and strength
much better. The prize-fighters of today are compelled
by their trainers to observe strict continence during the
period of training. Many of the former champions who
went to pieces suddenly, owe their downfall to a violation
of this rule." Another has said: "Chastity, even continence,
is the prime necessity of the successful athlete."
Dr. Kellogg forcefully says: "Breeders of stock who wish<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_207" id="Page_207">{207}</SPAN></span>
to secure sound progeny will not allow the most robust
stallion to associate with mares as many times during the
whole season as some of these salacious human males
perform a similar act within a month."</p>
<p>Dr. Warbasse has said: "Testicular fluid in the seminal
vesicles, under unexciting conditions, does not require
to be discharged at intervals. I have not been able
to find in the studies of the physiologists that its retention
is abnormal or unhygienic. * * * I do not conceive of a
man suffering from the ills of continence who has been
cast away on a desert island, with no immediate prospect
of relief, and whose mind and hands are occupied with
raising grain, catching fish for subsistence, and constructing
a boat for escape. All that has been said of men may
be said of women."</p>
<p>Dr. Talmey has said: "Continence, if long continued,
has been claimed to be the cause of impotence. But there
is no valid reason for this belief. To prove the harmfulness
of continence an analogue is brought forward between
the atrophy of a muscle in enforced idleness and
the injury to the sex organs in enforced abstinence. But
the proof is somewhat feeble. The essential organs of
generation are not muscles, but glands, and who has ever
heard of a tear gland atrophying for lack of crying.
* * * There is no valid proof of the harmfulness of total
abstinence in a healthy individual. A perfectly healthy
man is never injured by abstinence. At least there is no
sufficient proof that he ever was; but there are unmistakable
proofs that total abstinence does not harm the
individual."</p>
<p>Dr. Stockham has said: "The testes may be considered
analogous to the salivary and lachrymal glands, in
which there is no fluid secreted except at the demand of
their respective functions. The thought of food makes
the mouth water for a short time only, while the presence<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_208" id="Page_208">{208}</SPAN></span>
of food causes abundant yield of saliva. It is customary
for physicians to assume that the spermatic secretion is
analogous to bile, which, when once formed, must be expelled.
But substitute the word 'tears' for bile, and you
put before the mind an idea entirely different. Tears, as
falling drops, are not essential to life and health. A man
may be in perfect health and yet not cry once in five or
even fifty years. The lachrymal fluid is ever present, but
in such small quantities that it is unnoticed. Where are
tears while they remain unshed? They are ever ready,
waiting to spring forth when there is an adequate cause,
but they do not accumulate and distress the man because
they are not shed daily, weekly, or monthly. The component
elements of the tears are prepared in the system,
they are on hand, passing through the circulation, ready
to mix and flow whenever they are needed; but if they
mix, accumulate and flow without adequate cause, there
is a disease of the lachrymal glands. While there are no
exact analogies in the body, yet the tears and the spermatic
fluids are much more closely analogous in their
normal manner of secretion and use than are the bile and
the semen. Neither flow of tears nor of semen is essential
to life or health. Both are largely under the control of the
imagination, the emotions, and the will; and the flow of
either is liable to be arrested in a moment of sudden
mental action."</p>
<p>Parkhurst says: "The prostatic fluid, according to
Robin, is secreted at the moment of ejaculation. The remaining
element of the spermatic secretion is produced,
under normal circumstances, only as required, either for
impregnation or for the maintenance of the affectional
function. The theory that the sperm is naturally secreted
only as it is required, brings it into harmony with other
secretions. The tears, the saliva, and the perspiration,
are always required in small quantities, and the secretion<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_209" id="Page_209">{209}</SPAN></span>
is continuous; but if required in great quantities, the
secretion becomes great almost instantly. The mother's
milk is chiefly secreted just as it is required for the infant,
and when not required the secretion entirely ceases;
yet it recommences the moment the birth of another child
makes it necessary. * * * A man accustomed to abstinence
will not suffer from any accumulation of secretions,
while a man whose absorbing glands have never had
occasion to take up the secretions will be in trouble; just
as a dairy cow which has not been milked will be in
trouble, though if running wild she would never have
any necessity for milking. * * * The objection that man
needs physical relief from a continuous secretion is answered
by the admitted fact that men not deficient in
sexual vigor live for months, and probably for years, in
strict abstinence, and with no physical inconvenience
such as is often complained of by men who happen to be
deprived of their accustomed indulgence for a week or
two at a time."</p>
<p>Dr. Nystrom, the eminent Swedish writer on the subject,
however, utters the following warning to those who
would make hasty generalizations on the subject: "In
speaking of relative abstinence or regulation and command
of the sexual instinct, I warn against absolutism in
this regard, and especially against the generalizing of
abstinence as possible for everybody. Although abstinence
during an entire lifetime does not injure certain
individuals, it cannot be endured by others for some
length of time without undesirable consequences. I therefore
oppose the principle of absolute continence as in the
main false. It may possibly be applied to a few deeply
religious or philosophical persons, but not to the majority
of normal people, despite good resolutions and
habits. * * * We must consider the different bodily
constitutions and passions—why some people without<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_210" id="Page_210">{210}</SPAN></span>
difficulty, others with the greatest difficulty, can master
their feelings regarding sexual relations. * * * May
those who try to better humanity in sexual respects first
give their attention to the subject when well prepared
with a rich experience and deep study, for otherwise they
cannot give advice which can be followed, and their
work should fail as being contrary to human nature."</p>
<p><b>Temporary Continence.</b> Many married couples who
are desirous of preventing too-frequent conception, or
conception following too soon after the birth of the
youngest child, practice the method of refraining from
the marital sexual relations during certain periods in
which conception is most likely to occur. This custom is
said to be favored by those acting under the advice of
their religious instructors, and who regard all methods
of birth-control other than continence as sinful. Even
the most orthodox objectors to birth-control as a general
principle seem to regard this particular method as free
from objection, providing that the married couple do not
seek to entirely escape parenthood in this manner.</p>
<p>This plan is based upon the well-known, and well-established
physiological principle that <b>the time immediately
before the menstrual period, and still more, immediately
after the period is the most favorable to conception</b>.
Impregnation is most likely to occur just after
the menstrual period; while from about two weeks after
the beginning of the period, to a few days before the beginning
of the next period, is the time of comparative
sterility when impregnation and conception are the least
likely to occur. Consequently, the authorities hold that
the period of from ten to fifteen days after the <b>end</b> of the
menstruation is one peculiarly free from the probability
of impregnation and conception.</p>
<p>This plan of temporary continence, continuing during
the period in which conception is most probable, and terminating
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_211" id="Page_211">{211}</SPAN></span>when that period has passed each month, until
the new period approaches, is followed by many married
couples with the full approval of the conscience and their
religious guides. In many cases the result fulfills the
expectations, though as there is a considerable variation
observed among different women there is no absolute certainty
to the plan considered as a birth-control method—at
the best it is but taking advantage of the law of probabilities,
the chances being in favor of the result sought.</p>
<h3>Semi-Continence.</h3>
<p>Semi-Continence (in the sense in which the term is
employed herein) consists of the abstinence from the
exercise of the procreative functions, while there is a
partial manifestation of the sexual relation. Under various
fanciful names, backed by as many curious theories,
this birth-control method is practiced by very many
married couples in this and other countries.</p>
<p>Among the earlier advocates of this general class of
birth-control methods was Noyes, the founder of the one-time
famous Oneida Community, who taught the doctrine
of what he called "Male Continence." The gist of his
teaching was as follows: That the sexual relation (in its
entirety) should be exercised solely for the purpose of reproduction,
all else being contrary to nature. But, he
held, notwithstanding this, there was possible and proper
a certain degree of such physical relation which, while
not opposing Nature's laws of reproduction, yet was sufficient
to afford a complete manifestation of the "affectional
desire and function." In other words, as a writer
has expressed it, "that one might manifest a marked
degree of sexual gratification and still remain continent,
while feeling none of the irksome restraints of
continence."</p>
<p>Noyes claimed that his community followed this plan
with satisfactory results, the ordinary sexual relations<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_212" id="Page_212">{212}</SPAN></span>
being manifested only when reproduction was specially
desired and deliberately decided upon. Noyes claimed
that in this way there was no secretion of the seminal
fluid, and therefore no waste of the same, and no unnatural
practices such attached to the common custom of
"tricking Nature" by methods of preventing impregnation
and conception. Parkhurst (who, as we shall see
presently, followed Noyes) objected to the Noyes plan,
claiming that "it necessarily stimulates into activity the
generative functions of the sexual batteries, and this not
only causes a wasteful use of sperm, but diverts the
sexual batteries from their affectional function, diminishing
amative attraction."</p>
<p>In the year 1896, Dr. Alice B. Stockham, of Chicago,
published a book called "Karezza" which has since attained
an enormous sale, the leading principle of which
seems to have been almost similar to that of Noyes, as
above stated. The book was built around the idea previously
announced by the same author in an earlier
book, which she stated as follows: "By some a theory
called 'secular absorption' is advanced. This involves
intercourse without culmination." In her book "Karezza"
this author further stated: "Karezza so consummates
marriage that through the power of will, and loving
thoughts, the crisis is not reached, but a complete
control by both husband and wife is maintained throughout
the entire relation, a conscious conservation of the
creative energy. * * * It is both a union on the affectional
plane, and a preparation for the best possible conditions
for procreation."</p>
<p>About 1882, Henry M. Parkhurst published a booklet
called "Diana," which since that time has passed through
several editions, and has had a large number of readers.
The principle advocated is radically different from that
of Noyes or Dr. Stockham, above mentioned, although<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_213" id="Page_213">{213}</SPAN></span>
some of the writings of Dr. Stockham seem to favor the
Parkhurst idea as much as the one advanced by herself.
Parkhurst, as we may see by reference to a quotation
from him in connection with the Noyes' idea, did not approve
of the "male continence" as taught by the latter,
although he seems to have considered it a step in the
right direction.</p>
<p>The gist of the Parkhurst idea is expressed in the
following quotations from his booklet, "Diana": "In
order to secure proper and durable relations between
the sexes, it is necessary to live in harmony with the law
of Alphism, that is <b>abstinence except for procreation</b>.
But if that principle is adopted alone, no means being
taken to provide for the due exercise of the sexual faculties,
it will likely be abandoned or lead to a life of asceticism.
In order to make Alphism practicable for
ordinary men and women, another law has to be observed,
that is, the law of <b>sexual satisfaction from sexual contact</b>;
understanding by the term 'contact' not merely
physical external contact, but using the term in its more
general sense to include sexual companionship, or even
correspondence, bringing the minds into mental contact.
The observance of this law will lead to complete and
enduring satisfaction in abstinence.</p>
<p>"It is an observed fact that contact incites to activity
the affectional action, * * * extending over the
whole frame, and by their activities satisfies them, without
calling into action the special generative function
of the generative organs. And it is also an observed fact
that the repression of this affectional activity naturally
creates a desire for the exercise of the other; so that a
true remedy for sexual intemperance is the full satisfaction
of the affectional mode of activity by frequent and
free sexual contact. Sexual satisfaction may be obtained
by personal presence, conversation, a clasp of the hands,<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_214" id="Page_214">{214}</SPAN></span>
kissing, caressing, embracing, personal contact with or
without the intervention of dress.</p>
<p>"The exercise of the affectional function tends to
satiety and exhaustion in the same way as all other physical
or mental exercise; but if it is not carried to excess
it is a permanent benefit. * * * The principle of Alphism
will tend to diminish prostitution, not only by diminishing
sexual intemperance, even if the principle is
not at once accepted in practice to the full extent, thus
diminishing the temptation of the present generation,
and the hereditary temptation of future generations; but
also by correcting the physiological error which has led
astray so many, i. e., that total abstinence is not conducive
to health, or to the highest physical pleasure, but
that the ordinary physical relation is an essential feature
in male existence.</p>
<p>"To avoid misapprehension, these two theories should
be clearly defined and the distinction between them explained.
The doctrine of Alphism is confined to one
principle, i. e., <b>the law of abstinence except for procreation</b>.
Those who believe in this doctrine may be divided
into different classes. Some believe in it as a matter of
duty, to be enforced by precept and self-denial; and
some believe in it as a matter of right, requiring no self-denial.
In the latter is included the doctrine of 'Diana,'
which may be defined as <b>the law of sexual satisfaction
from sexual contact</b>. In other words, Dianism is Alphism
as the result of sexual equilibration."</p>
<p>The general idea of Parkhurst, and those who have
followed his teachings in some modified or adapted form,
may be said to be based upon the following general proposition:
That there is a dual function in the sexual relations,
which may be stated as follows: (1) the function
exercised from purely physiological causes, and which
expresses the desire for the relation resulting in procreation;
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_215" id="Page_215">{215}</SPAN></span>and (2) the function exercised from emotional
causes, and which expresses what may be called the
"affectional desire," i. e., the desire for the embrace,
caress, fondling, and general companionship with the
loved one of the other sex.</p>
<p>The first one of these phases, i. e., the reproductive
function, is manifested by the lower animals as well as by
man, and is elemental and primitive in character. It is
often manifested by man without the accompaniment of
the affectional function, and at times seems to be almost
entirely divorced from the idea of high human affection.
The second one of these phases, i. e., the affectional function,
usually accompanied the procreative function in
the human sexual relation, at least in the highest forms
of that relation. But also, it may be and often is manifested
independently of the procreative function by men
and women of refinement. In fact, it would seem to be
the form of physical attraction accompanying the very
highest phase of love, particularly in women.</p>
<p>It is this affectional function which is manifested by
betrothed lovers in their beautiful period of mutual understanding,
sympathy, and affection. It is that characteristic
of the courting days which is so precious to the
woman, but which is too often sadly missed by the wife
after the honeymoon. It exists often before the fires of
passion are kindled, and it persists often after the flame
of passion has died away. It is the expression of the purest
love of youth, and of the tenderest affection of age. It
is this form of sexual relation, physical though it may be,
that is the outgrowth of evolution in man. May it not be
that in this way man has "improved upon the sexual
habits of the animals"; and that when man violates the
natural restrictions held sacred by animal life, and indulges
in excessive sexual relations in and out of season,
that he is really manifesting a degenerative tendency<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_216" id="Page_216">{216}</SPAN></span>
instead of taking an upward step on the evolutionary
scale.</p>
<p>There have been many excellent authorities who have
held that this affectional function, and its manifestation,
is far better calculated to satisfy the sexual instincts of
advanced men and women than is the ordinary physical
sexual relation. They claim that in the higher form of
this affectional relation is to be found the secret of the
joy, bliss, and happiness of the betrothed lovers, which
alas! too often disappear when the other form of the
relation is manifested, particularly when manifested to
excess in the manner customary to so many married men.
They claim that in the recognition of this fact of human
life and love is to be found the secret of married happiness
between wedded advanced and cultured individuals.
They assert that the experience of the race, rightly considered
and understood, full proves this contention.</p>
<p>Edward Carpenter has the following to say on this
point: "It is a matter of common experience that the
unrestrained outlet of the purely physical desire leaves
the nature drained of its higher love-forces. * * *
There are grounds for believing in the transmutability of
the various forms of the passion, and grounds for thinking
that the sacrifice of a lower phase may sometimes be
the only condition on which a higher and more durable
phase can be attained; and that, therefore, restraint
(which is absolutely necessary at times) has its compensation.
Anyone who has once realized how glorious
a thing love is in its essence, and how indestructible, will
hardly need to call anything that leads to it a sacrifice;
and he is indeed a master of life who, accepting the
grosser desires as they come to his body, and not refusing
them, knows how to transform them at will into the
most rare and fragrant flowers of human emotion
* * * Between lovers, then, a kind of hardy temperance<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_217" id="Page_217">{217}</SPAN></span>
is to be recommended—for all reasons, but especially because
it lifts their satisfaction and delight in each other
out of the regions of ephemeralities (which too often
turn into dull indifference and satiety) into the region
of more lasting things—one step nearer at any rate to
the eternal kingdom.</p>
<p>"How intoxicating, indeed, how penetrating—like a
most precious wine—is that love which is the sexual
transformed by the magic of the will into the emotional
and spiritual! And what a loss, on the merest ground
of prudence and the economy of pleasure, is the unbridled
waste along physical channels! So nothing is so
much dreaded between lovers as just this—the vulgarization
of love—and this is the rock upon which marriage
so often splits. There is a kind of illusion about physical
desire similar to that which a child suffers from when,
seeing a beautiful flower, it instantly snatches the same
and destroys in a few moments the form and fragrance
which attracted it. He only gets the full glory who
holds back a little, and he only truly possesses who is
willing if need be not to possess. * * * It must be
remembered, however, that in order for a perfect intimacy
between two people their physical endearment must
by the nature of the case be free to each other. The
physical endearment may not be the object for which
they come together; but, if it is denied, its denial will bar
any real sense of repose and affiance, and make their
mutual association restless, vague, tentative and unsatisfied.
I think, from various considerations, that, generally,
even without the actual physical sex-act, there is
an interchange of vital and ethereal elements—so that it
may be said that there is a kind of generation taking
place within each of the persons concerned, through their
mutual influence on each other, as well as that more specialized
generation which consists in the propagation of
the race."</p>
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_218" id="Page_218">{218}</SPAN></span></p>
<p>Count Tolstoi said on this subject: "The difference
in organization between man and woman is not only
physiological but extends also into other and moral characteristics,
such as go to make manhood in man, and
womanhood (or femininity) in woman. The attraction between
the sexes is based not merely upon the yearning
for physical union, but likewise upon that reciprocal
attraction exerted by the contrasting qualities of the
sexes each upon the other, manhood upon womanhood,
and womanhood upon manhood. The one sex endeavors
to complement itself with the other, and therefore
the attraction between the sexes demands a union of spirit
precisely identical with the physical union.</p>
<p>"The tendency toward physical and spiritual union
forms two phases of manifestation of one and the same
fountain-head of desire, and they bear such intimate relations
to each other that the gratification of the one inclination
inevitably weakens the other. So far as the
yearning for spiritual union is satisfied, to that extent
the yearning for physical union is diminished or entirely
destroyed; and, vice versa, the gratification of the physical
desire weakens or destroys the spiritual. And, consequently,
the attraction between the sexes is not only
physical affinity leading to procreation, but is also the
attraction of opposites for one another, capable of assuming
the form of the most spiritual union in thought only,
or of the most animal union, causing the propagation of
children, and all those varied degrees of relationship
between the one and the other. The question of upon
which footing the relation between the sexes is to be
established and maintained, is settled by deciding what
method of union is regarded at any given time, or for
all time, as good, proper, and therefore desirable. * * *</p>
<p>"The nearer the union approaches the extreme physical
boundary, the more it kindles the physical passions<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_219" id="Page_219">{219}</SPAN></span>
and desires, and the less satisfaction it gets; the nearer it
approaches the opposite extreme spiritual boundary, the
less new passions are excited and the greater is the satisfaction.
The nearer it is to the first, the more destructive
it is to animal energy; the nearer it approaches the second,
the spiritual, the more serene, the more enjoyable
and forceful is the general condition. * * * Taking
into consideration the varying conditions of temperament,
and above all what the contracting parties regard as
good, proper, and desirable, marriage for some will approach
the spiritual union, and for others the physical;
but the nearer the union approaches the spiritual the
more complete will be the satisfaction. The substance
of what has been said is this: that the relation between
the sexes have two functions, i. e., the reproductive, and
the affectional; and that the sexual energy, if only it
have no conscious desire to beget children, must be always
directed in the way of affection and love. The
manifestation which this energy assumes depends upon
custom or reason; the gradual bringing of the reason into
accord with the principles herein expounded, and a gradual
reorganization of customs consonant with them, results
in saving men from many of their passions, and
giving them satisfaction for their higher sexual instincts
and desires."</p>
<p>Some capable writers on the subject have held that
in the practice of the methods of semi-continence, such
as have been referred to in the foregoing pages of this
part of the book, there may lie the danger of excessive
stimulation of the sexual centres, without the safety-valve
of the physical and nervous relief which follows
as a natural sequence in the ordinary sexual relations.
The advocates of these methods, however, reply that such
objections while valid in the case of persons who practice
the same only because opportunity prevents the performance
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_220" id="Page_220">{220}</SPAN></span>of the usual physical relation, still have no
true application to those who adopt these methods in a
conscientious and honest manner, and who maintain <b>the
proper mental attitude</b> toward the whole question.</p>
<p>These advocates say that the <b>mental effect</b> upon the
secretions of the body must be taken into account in all
considerations of the question. They say that just as
the gastric juice will begin to flow in response to the
mental image or idea of food, and the mother's milk in
response to the cry of the child for food, so do the sexual
secretions, direction of the circulation, and other physiological
activities result from the mental pictures or idea
of sexual congress. They hold that if the mind of the
husband be filled with mental images of sexual congress,
then there is set into operation the process of secretion
of seminal fluids, and the consequent engorgement of the
blood-vessels concerned therewith, which are denied the
normal physiological relief, and accordingly produce bad
effects upon the nervous system. But they likewise claim
that if the mind of the husband entertains ideas merely
of physical endearment and caress as "an end to itself,"
then there is no mental incentive toward the secretion
of the seminal fluids, and the constant engorgement of
the blood-vessels, and no nerve force is generated—and
therefore no nerve-shock is experienced by reason of frustrated
manifestation and expression.</p>
<p>Parkhurst says regarding the point just mentioned:
"In the relations between the sexes, the question of how
the association of the husband and the wife shall stimulate
the affectional or generative action or sexual batteries
must depend greatly upon their habits of association.
We have only to accustom ourselves to associating the
relation with the affectional action, by repeated repetition
when the affectional action is all that is felt or
thought of, in order to cultivate such habits and associations
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_221" id="Page_221">{221}</SPAN></span>as will make the association tend to <b>repress</b> passional
desires, by the direction of the sexual forces into
the channel of affectional attraction and functioning.
* * * The form of the sexual manifestation will be
largely influenced, by the mind, and largely by force with
these principles, and the gradual formation of habits
consistent therewith, will make more and more evident
their beneficial operation."</p>
<p>There is much interest now being taken by thinking
people in some phases of the general subject of semi-continence,
and many thoughtful and conscientious persons
find in it at least the promise of a worthy and honest
solution of the problem of Continence as applied to Birth
Control. Such persons claim to find in this general class
of Birth Control methods a happy medium between the
rigid practice of absolute Continence in the marriage
relations, on the one hand, and the more popular methods
of Contraception, on the other hand.</p>
<h3>Contraception.</h3>
<p>We now come to the consideration of the subject of
Contraception, pure and simple, the methods of which
contemplate the manifestation of the usual physical sexual
relations between husband and wife, accompanied by
an avoidance of the union of the male and female elements
of reproduction which result in conception.</p>
<p>It should once more be positively emphasized that <b>by
Contraception is NOT meant Abortion</b>. <b>Abortion</b> means
"the premature expulsion of the human embryo or foetus;
miscarriage." <b>Contraception</b>, on the other hand,
means simply the prevention of the union of the male and
female elements of reproduction, and consequently, the
preventing of the process which evolves the foetus or
embryo. <b>Contraception is prevention; abortion is destruction.</b>
There is here a difference as wide as the poles.
As Dr. William J. Robinson says, in a paragraph previously
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_222" id="Page_222">{222}</SPAN></span>quoted in this book: "In inducing abortion, one
destroys something already formed—a foetus, or an embryo,
a fertilized ovum, a potential human being. In
prevention, however, one merely prevents chemically or
mechanically the spermatozoa from coming in contact
with the ovum. There is no greater sin or crime in this
than there is in simple abstinence, in refraining from
sexual intercourse."</p>
<p>Unfortunately for the cause of scientific Birth Control
in America, the laws of the United States (and of
most of the separate States) at present prevent the public
dissemination by written or printed words, or by
public teaching of information concerning the contraceptive
methods known to all intelligent physicians and
others who have made a scientific study of the subject.
The conveyal of such information, in the manner stated,
is made a criminal offence, subject to heavy fines and
imprisonment. Though there is a strong movement underway
on the part of many intelligent and earnest citizens
of this country, having for its object the repeal of
such prohibitive laws, and the passage of careful legislation
designed to give the dissemination of such instruction
a legal and certain status, under the restrictions
imposed by common sense, intellectual honesty, and the
best interests of the race—to place it upon the same footing
as in certain advanced European countries—the fact
remains that at the present time no person may give such
information without subjecting himself to indictment and
probable conviction as a law-breaker and enemy of society.
<b>Under the circumstances, of course, there has been,
and will be, no attempts to furnish such forbidden information
in this book.</b> So long as these laws stand unrepealed
on the statute books, they must be observed by
all law abiding citizens.</p>
<p>Dr. Wm. J. Robinson, an authority on the subject,<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_223" id="Page_223">{223}</SPAN></span>
says: "We believe that under any conditions, and particularly
under our present economic conditions, human
beings should be able to control the number of their
offspring. They should be able to decide how many
children they want to have, and when they want to have
them. And to accomplish this result we demand that the
knowledge of controlling the number of offspring, in
other and plainer words, the knowledge of preventing
undesirable conception, should not be considered a criminal
offence punishable by hard labor in Federal prisons,
but that it should be considered knowledge useful and
necessary to the welfare of the race and of the individual;
and that its dissemination should be as permissible as
is the dissemination of any hygienic, sanitary or eugenic
knowledge."</p>
<p><b>The only possible relief from the present condition is
seen by careful thinkers to be in the education of the
public as to the needs of the case, and the presentation
of the scientific argument in favor of rational and proper
Birth Control, to the end that public opinion, once seeing
the truth in the case, may be sufficiently strong as to
bring about a change in the present antiquated and bigoted
laws. But, so long as the laws remain on the statute
books, they must be observed and obeyed. Education, not
Anarchy, is the true remedy.</b></p>
<p>The following general remarks on the subject of Contraception,
by Havelock Ellis, the well-known English
authority of the subject of Sex in Modern Society, may
perhaps prove interesting to students of the general subject:
Ellis says: "Many ways of preventing conception
have been devised since the method which is still the
commonest was first introduced, so far as our certainly
imperfect knowledge extends, by a clever Jew, Onan
(Genesis, Chap. XXXVIII) whose name has since been
wrongly attached to another practice with which the<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_224" id="Page_224">{224}</SPAN></span>
Mosaic record in no way associates him. There are now
many contraceptive methods, some dependent on precautions
adopted by the man, others dependent upon the
woman, others again which take the form of an operation
permanently preventing conception, and, therefore,
not to be adopted save by couples who already have as
many children as they desire, or else who ought never
to have children at all and thus wisely adopt a method of
sterilization. It is unnecessary here, even if it were otherwise
desirable, to discuss these various methods in detail.
It is even useless to do so, for we must bear in mind that
no method can be absolutely approved or absolutely condemned.
Each may be suitable under certain conditions
and for certain couples, and it is not easy to recommend
any method indiscriminately. We need to know the intimate
circumstances of individual cases. For the most
part, experience is the final test.</p>
<p>"Forel compared the use of contraceptive devices to
the use of eyeglasses, and it is obvious that, without expert
advice, the results in either case may sometimes be
mischievous or at all events ineffective. Personal advice
and instruction are always desirable. In Holland nurses
are medically trained in a practical knowledge of contraceptive
methods, and are thus enabled to enlighten
the women of the community. This is an admirable plan.
Considering that the use of contraceptive measures is now
almost universal, it is astonishing that there are yet so
many 'civilized' countries in which this method of enlightenment
is not everywhere adopted. Until it is adopted,
and a necessary knowledge of the most fundamental
facts of sexual life brought into every home, the physician
must be regarded as the proper adviser. It is true that
until recently he was generally in these matters a blind
leader of the blind. Nowadays it is beginning to be
recognized that the physician has no more serious and<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_225" id="Page_225">{225}</SPAN></span>
responsible duty than that of giving help in the difficult
path of sexual life. Very frequently, indeed, even yet,
he has not risen to a sense of his responsibilities in this
matter. It is well to remember, however, that a physician
who is unable or unwilling to give frank and sound advice
in this most important department of life, is unlikely
to be reliable in any other department. If he is not up to
date here, he is probably not up to date anywhere.</p>
<p>"Whatever may be the method adopted, there are
certain conditions which it must fulfill, even apart from
its effectiveness as a contraceptive, in order to be satisfactory.
Most of these conditions may be summed up in
one: the most satisfactory method is that which least
interferes with the normal process in the act of intercourse.
Every sexual act is, or should be, a miniature
courtship, however long marriage may have lasted. No
outside mental tension or nervous apprehension must be
allowed to intrude. Any contraceptive proceeding which
hastily enters the atmosphere of love immediately before
or immediately after the moment of union is unsatisfactory
and may be injurious. It even risks the total loss
of the contraceptive result, for at such moments the intended
method may be ineffectively carried out, or neglected
altogether. No method can be regarded as desirable
which interferes with the sense of satisfaction and
relief which should follow the supreme act of loving
union. No method which produces a nervous jar in one
of the parties, even though it may be satisfactory to the
other, should be tolerated. Such considerations must for
some couples rule out certain methods. We cannot, however,
lay down absolute rules, because methods some
couples may find satisfactory prove unsatisfactory in
other cases. Experience, aided by expert advice, is the
only final criterion.</p>
<p>"When a contraceptive method is adopted under satisfactory
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_226" id="Page_226">{226}</SPAN></span>conditions, with a due regard to the requirements
of the individual couple, there is little room to fear that
any injurious results will be occasioned. It is quite true
that many physicians speak emphatically concerning the
injurious results to husband or to wife of contraceptive
devices. Although there has been exaggeration,
and prejudice has often been imported into this question,
and although most of the injurious results could have
been avoided had trained medical help been at hand to
advise better methods, there can be no doubt that much
that has been said under this head is true. Considering
how widespread is the use of these methods, and how
ignorantly they have often been carried out, it would be
surprising indeed if it were not true. But even supposing
that the nervously injurious effects which have been
traced to contraceptive practices were a thousandfold
greater than they have been reported to be—instead of,
as we are justified in believing, considerably less than
they are reported—shall we therefore condemn contraceptive
methods? To do so would be to ignore all the
vastly greater evils which have followed in the past from
unchecked reproduction. It would be a condemnation
which, if we exercised it consistently, would destroy the
whole of civilization and place us back in savagery. For
what device of man, ever since man had any history at
all, has not proved sometimes injurious?</p>
<p>"Every one of even the most useful and beneficial
of human inventions has either exercised subtle injuries
or produced appalling catastrophes. This is not only
true of man's devices, it is true of Nature's in general.
Let us take, for instance, the elevation of man's ancestors
from the quadrupedal to the bipedal position. The
experiment of making a series of four-footed animals
walk on their hind-legs was very evolutionary and risky;
it was far more beset by dangers than is the introduction<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_227" id="Page_227">{227}</SPAN></span>
of contraceptives; we are still suffering all sorts of serious
evils in consequence of Nature's action in placing our
remote ancestors in the erect position. Yet we feel that
it was worth while; even those physicians who most emphasize
the evil results of the erect position do not advise
that we should go on all-fours. It is just the same with
a great human device, the introduction of clothes. They
have led to all sorts of new susceptibilities to disease
and even tendencies to direct injury of many kinds. Yet
no one advocates the complete disuse of all clothing on
the ground that corsets have sometimes proved harmful.
It would be just as absurd to advocate the complete
abandonment of contraceptives on the ground that some
of them have been misused. If it were not, indeed, that
we are familiar with the lengths to which ignorance and
prejudice may go we should question the sanity of anyone
who put forward so foolish a proposition. Every great
step which Nature and man have taken in the path of
progress has been beset by dangers which are gladly
risked because of the advantages involved. We must
never loose sight of the immense advantages which Man
has gained in acquiring a conscious and deliberate control
of reproduction."</p>
<p class="center">THE END.</p>
<div id="tn">
<h2>Transcriber's Note:</h2>
<p>Numerous minor typographical errors have been corrected without note.
Variations in spelling (e.g. fetus/foetus), capitalization, and
hyphenation have not been standardized. Where a misspelling was used
five or more times (e.g. umbillical), no correction has been made. No
attempt has been made to correct factual errors or poorly constructed
sentences.</p>
<p>The following corrections were also made to the text:</p>
<ul>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_11"></SPAN>: femininists to feminists (modern feminists)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_12"></SPAN>: phenomena to phenomenon (phenomenon of pregnancy)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_27"></SPAN>: laceration to lactation (lactation or nursing)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_27"></SPAN>: is to are (there are found severe cramps)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_36"></SPAN>: "of" added (period of gestation)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_73"></SPAN>: degeration to degeneration (degeneration and actual Race Suicide)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_84"></SPAN>: "in" added (in men in general)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_85"></SPAN>: "for" added (for inebriety)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_92"></SPAN>: strongly to strong (the woman most strong sexually)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_104"></SPAN>: "the" added (the best ability and capacity)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_110"></SPAN>: "are" added (there are unavoidable fallacies)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_113"></SPAN>: grandparents to great-grandparents (eight great-grandparents)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_135"></SPAN>: individualation to individuation (greater individuation)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_139"></SPAN>: "is" added (This is because)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_143"></SPAN>: below to above (shows a birth-rate of above 30)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_154"></SPAN>: "of" added (who of all Europeans)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_170"></SPAN>: preventitives to preventives (use preventives recommended)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_190"></SPAN>: weaking to weakening (consequent weakening)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_192"></SPAN>: passi paru to pari passu (goes down pari passu)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_196"></SPAN>: furnish to furnishes (furnishes us with evidence)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_198"></SPAN>: "of" added (general question of Eugenics)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_200"></SPAN>: "not" added (we can not see a cause)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_203"></SPAN>: <b>Semi-Conception.</b> to <b>Semi-Continence.</b> (<b>Methods of Semi-Continence.</b>)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_209"></SPAN>: "are" removed ("some people are without" to "some people without")</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_217"></SPAN>: "be" removed ("must be by the nature" to "must by the nature")</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_222"></SPAN>: potention to potential (potential human being)</li>
<li><SPAN href="#Page_226"></SPAN>: "both" removed ("to both husband or to wife" to "to husband or to wife")</li>
</ul></div>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />