The Sexual Life of Our Time in Its Relations to Modern Civilization: Translated from the Sixth German EditionBloch, Iwan
Philosophy
The Sexual Life of Our Time in Its Relations to Modern Civilization: Translated from the Sixth German Edition
Bloch, Iwan
Sex; Sexual ethics
Waldeyer, in his notable address on the somatic differences between the
sexes, delivered in 1895 at the Anthropological Congress in Kassel, drew
attention to the fact that the higher development of any particular
species is notably characterized by the increasing differentiation of
the sexes. The further we advance in the animal and vegetable world from
the lower to the higher forms, the more markedly are the male and the
female individuals distinguished one from another. In the human species
also, in the course of phylogenetic development, this sexual
differentiation increases in extent.
In the development of these sexual differences, the antagonism first
shown by Herbert Spencer to exist between reproduction and the higher
evolutionary tendency plays an important part. Among the higher species
of animals the males exhibit a stronger evolutionary tendency than the
females, owing to the fact that their share in the work of reproduction
has become less important. The more extensive organic expenditure
demanded by the reproductive functions limits the feminine development
to a notably greater extent than the masculine. In the human species
this retardation of growth in the female is especially increased in
consequence of menstruation, and this affords a striking example of the
truth of Spencer’s law. I quote also in this connexion the remarks of
the Würzburg anatomist Oskar Schultze, in his recently published
valuable monograph on “Woman from an Anthropological Point of View,” pp.
55, 56 (Würzburg, 1906);
“The undulatory periodicity of the principal functions of the feminine
organism, which depends on the processes of ovulation and
menstruation, and is invariable in the females of the human species,
does not occur in the other mammalia (with the exception of apes). In
these latter, as far as we have been able to observe, the secondary
sexual characters, in the matter of differences in muscular
development and in strength, are not so developed, or sometimes are
not so developed, as in the human species. We must in this connexion
exclude the differences which appear in domestic animals as a result
of domestication (for example, the difference between the cow and the
bull). In the human female, the periodicity, which begins to act even
on the youthful, still undeveloped body, has during thousands of years
increased the secondary sexual differences. Periodicity is, in my
opinion, an important cause of the fact that woman is inferior to man,
more especially in the development of the muscular system and in
strength, and that her organs, for the most part, are more closely
approximated to the infantile type.
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