true that there are thousands of such men, perfectly decent, humane
persons, who despise a woman if they think or know that she experiences
any sexual pleasure. And then they wonder vaguely why women are
shrewish and discontented....
All this will sound very elementary to some people and very
reprehensible to others. I am simply trying to explain these people.
Of course, there is always the superior person who veils puritanism by
saying: “I’m so bored with all this talk about sex. Why can’t people
go to bed with the person they want to, and stop talking about it?”
Well, why shouldn’t we talk about what interests us, and what, after
all, is extremely important to adult life and happiness? Maybe we can
learn something from the adulteries of others. It seems to me that the
error of the Elizabeth and George generation was that they were far
too absolute, too general, too dogmatic in their “ideas” about sex.
They _would_ let the Social Reform bunk distort their view. They had
seen in their own homes the dreadful unhappiness and suffering caused
by Victorian, and indeed Edwardian, ignorance and domestic dennery
and swarming infants, and they reacted violently against it. So far,
good. But they failed to see that in the way they went about it, they
were merely setting up another tyranny—the tyranny of free love. Why
shouldn’t people be monogamous if they want to be? Maybe it suits them.
Don’t be dragooned into it, of course, but don’t be frightened out of
it if you’re made that way. There are certain elementary precepts which
always hold good—for instance, Balzac’s “Never begin marriage with
a rape”—but this is a wholly personal and very complex and delicate
relation which people must work out for themselves. All one asks is
that they shall not be interfered with by law and busybodies. It is
an interesting comment on the sadism latent in communities that the
cruelty and misery of the Victorian home are legally protected and held
up as shining examples of behaviour, whereas any attempt to make people
a little more natural and happy and tolerant is supposed to be wicked.
How men destroy their own happiness! How they hate happiness and
pleasure! Think of the insane delusion of female chastity which holds
that any woman who has “had” more than one man is “impure,” whereas
in fact many women soon come to dislike profoundly their first lover,
and most are only really happy and satisfied with a fourth or sixth or
tenth.
Alas! “with human nature what it is,” the love-lives of most people
will always alternate between brief periods of happiness and long
periods of suffering. The “sexual problem” will only be solved with the
millennium which produces a perfect humanity. Until then we can only
look on and sigh at the ruined lives; and reflect that men and women
might be to each other the great consolation, while in fact they do
little but torment each other....
* * * * *
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account