II. SEXUAL ETHICS
Everything that we have up to the present said of ethics and the social
sense in general applies also to sexual ethics in particular. The
only essential thing is to discuss the matter without prejudice, and
to put aside the ancient traditions of mystagogy, dogma, and custom.
This should be comparatively easy when we consider our present-day
conventions, hypocritical as they are to the point of nausea, and the
manner in which they support the right of the stronger and other rank
abuses under the false cloak of morality.
In itself the sexual desire is neither moral nor immoral. It is simply
an instinct adapted to the reproduction of the species. The common
confusion of sexuality with immorality is, I repeat, entirely erroneous.
A man without sexual feeling must of course be extraordinarily “moral”
in his sex relationships, and yet he can be the greatest scoundrel
imaginable. His sexual coldness and indifference have not the smallest
ethical value.
According to the definition given above, we may classify every sexual
desire as ethically positive if it is of benefit to individuals,
to society, and especially to the race (that is, to posterity); as
ethically negative if it does injury to any or all of these; and as
ethically indifferent if it neither does injury nor is of any service.
At the same time we must observe the ethical gradation: (1) _the race_,
(2) _society_, (3) _the more intimate surroundings or family_, and (4)
the _individual self_.
When we come to examine the concrete cases more closely we find that
the circumstances attendant upon the gratification of the sexual
desire, and the consequences of this gratification, lead to conflicts
with morality far more frequently than does the sexual act itself.
In the first place even the normal reproduction of human beings
may become immoral, in that it may do injury to the race or to
individuals. Malthus pointed out this fact. Habitable space upon the
earth is limited, while, on the other hand, the procreative capacity
of mankind is unlimited. If unlimited reproduction is permitted, it
is possible that the existing space may be insufficient to meet the
needs of the enormous multitudes of men which must result. The latter
may then fall victims to famine and distress, as in the case of the
Chinese, or the rabbits of Australia; and only disease, starvation, or
slaughter can bring about a return to the normal condition. It must
be obvious to every unbiassed person that this is not _moral_. And
as there are harmless methods of regulating the number of births and
to some extent the quality of the offspring, the just and proper use
of these methods must be described as ethically positive. Everything
is moral which makes for the happiness and well-being of society;
everything immoral which prejudices or endangers it.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account