(maintains that our sex disorders are not the result of natural or physical disharmony.)

elie metchnikoff, one of the greatest of scientists, wrote a book entitled "the nature of man," in which he studied the human organism from the point of view of biology, demonstrating that in our bodies are a number of relics of past stages of evolution, no longer useful, but rather a source of danger and harm. we have, for example, in the inner corner of the eye a relic of that third eyelid whereby the eagle is enabled to look at the sun. this is a harmless relic. but we have also an appendix, a degenerate organ of digestion, or gland of secretion, which now serves as a center of infection and source of danger. we have likewise a lower bowel, a survival of our hay-eating days, and a cause of autointoxication and premature death. among the sources of trouble, metchnikoff names the fact that the human male possesses a far greater quantity of sexual energy than is required for purposes of procreation. this becomes a cause of disharmony and excess, it causes man to wreck his health and destroy himself.

manifestly, this is a serious matter; for if it is true, our efforts to find health and happiness in love are doomed to failure, and lecky is right when he describes the prostitute as the "guardian of virtue," the eternal and necessary scapegoat of humanity. but i do not believe it is true; i think that here is one more case of the endless blundering of scientists and philosophers who attempt to teach physiology, politics, religion and law, without having made a study of economics. i do not believe that the sex troubles of mankind are physiological in their nature, but have their origin in our present system of class privilege. i believe they are caused, not by the blunders of nature, but by the blunders of man as a social animal.

let us take a glimpse at primitive man. i choose the marquesas islands, because we have complete reports about them from numerous observers. here was a race of people, not interfered with by civilization, who manifested all that overplus of sexual energy to which metchnikoff calls attention. they placed no restraint whatever upon sex activity, they had no conception of such an idea. their games and dances were sex play, and so also, in great part, was their religion. yet we do not find that they wrecked themselves. physically speaking, they were one of the most perfect races of which we have record. both the men and women were beautiful; they were active and strong from childhood to old age, and—here is the significant thing—they were happy. they were a laughing, dancing, singing race. they hardly knew grief or fear at all. they knew how to live, and they enjoyed every process and aspect of their lives, just as children do, naively and simply. this included their sex life; and i think it assures us that there can be no such fundamental physical disharmony in the human organism as the great russian scientist thought he had discovered.

is it not a fact that throughout nature a superfluity of any kind of energy or product may be a source of happiness, rather than of distress? consider the singing of the birds! or consider nature's impulse to cover a field with useless plants, and how by a little cunning, we are able to turn it into a harvest for our own use! in the life of our bodies one may show the same thing again and again. we have within us the possibility of and the impulse toward more muscular activity than our survival makes necessary; but we do not regard this additional energy as a curse of nature, and a peril to our lives—we turn out and play baseball. we have an impulse to see more than is necessary, so we climb mountains, or go traveling. we have an impulse to hear more, so we go to a concert. we have an impulse to think more, so we play chess, or whist, or write books and accumulate libraries. never do we think of these activities as signs of an irrevocable blunder on the part of nature.

but about the activities of love we feel differently; and why is this? if i say that it is because we have an unwholesome and degraded attitude toward love, because, as a result of religious superstition we fear it, and dare not deal with it honestly, the reader may suspect that i am preparing to hint at some self-indulgence, some form of sex orgy such as the "turkey trot" and the "bunny hug" and the "grizzly bear," the "shimmy" and the "toddle" and the "cuddle." i hasten to explain that i do not mean any of the abnormalities and monstrosities of present-day fashionable life. neither do i mean that we should set out to emulate the happy cannibals in the south seas. in the book of the mind i set forth as carefully as i knew how, the difference between nature and man, the life of instinct and the life of reason. it is my conviction that if civilized life is to go on, there must be a far wider extension of judgment and self-control in human affairs; our lost happiness will be found, not by going "back to nature," but by going forward to a new and higher state, planned by reason and impelled by moral idealism.

but we find ourselves face to face with horrible sex disorders, and a great scientist tells us they are nature's tragic blunder, of which we are the helpless victims. manifestly, the way to decide this question is to go to nature, and see if primitive people, having the same physical organism as ours, had the same troubles and spent their lives in the same misery. if they did, then it may be that we are doomed; but if they did not, then we can say with certainty that it is not nature, but ourselves, who have blundered. our task then becomes to apply reason to the problem; to take our present sex arrangements, our field of bad-smelling weeds, and plow it thoroughly, and sow it with good seed, and raise a harvest of happiness in love. it is my belief that, admitting true love—honest and dignified and rational love—it is possible to pour into it any amount of sex energy, to invent a whole new system of beautiful and happy love play.