Let us now return to the directly visible elementary phenomenon of love, to the process of coalescence of the spermatozoon and the ovum. From our study of other natural processes we feel we are justified by analogy in drawing the conclusion that the observed kinetic difference between the spermatozoon and the ovum is the expression also of different psychical processes. Georg Hirth draws attention to these remarkable =differences in respect of their modes of energy= between spermatozoa and ova.[25] He also infers from the greater variability of the spermatozoa in the different animal species, as compared with the usual spherical form of the ova, that to the spermatozoon is allotted the most important kinetic function in the process of reproduction, to which opinion its aggressive mobility would also lead us, whereas the ovum rather represents potential energy. “We can indeed hardly believe that anywhere in the entire organic world is there anything, of the same minute size, endowed with like energy and enterprise as these so-called spermatozoa (‘little sperm animals’), which are indeed not animals, and which yet prepare for us more joy and more sorrow than any animal does. There everything is busy. With what turbulence they hurry along until they attain their ardently desired goal, and having attained it, thrust themselves head first into the interior of the ovum! In this we have a drama for the gods. To doubt the energy of these structures would be preposterous.” Spermatozoa and ova are the original representatives of the respective spiritual natures of man and woman. Disregarding all further differentiation and individualization, the =fundamental lineaments= of the masculine and feminine natures harmonize with the demeanour of the reproductive cells; and we are able to recognize that for each is provided a =different= task, and yet that =the task of each is no less important than that of the other=. Quite rightly Rosa Mayreder points out, that the male sex stands biologically no higher than the female from the reproductive and procreative point of view; that in the continued reproduction of life male and female have equal share. No less true, on the other hand, is the remark of Havelock Ellis, whose position in relation to the woman question is throughout objective: “As long as women are distinguished from men by primary sexual characters--as long, that is to say, as they conceive and bear--so long will they remain unequal to man in the highest psychical processes” (“Man and Woman,” p. 21). The nature of man is aggressive, progressive, variable; that of woman is receptive, more susceptible to stimuli, simpler.