[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

the man.[19] In the nature of things that could not be. Such emotion is
required for properly playing the part of the pursued; it is by no means
an added attraction on the part of the pursuer. There is, however, an
allied and corresponding desire which is very often clearly or latently
present in the woman: a longing for pleasure that is stolen or forbidden.
It is a mistake to suppose that this is an indication of viciousness or
perversity. It appears to be an impulse that occurs quite naturally in
altogether innocent women. The exciting charm of the risky and dangerous
naturally arises on a background of feminine shyness and timidity. We may
trace its recognition at a very early stage of history in the story of Eve
and the forbidden fruit that has so often been the symbol of the masculine
organs of sex. It is on this ground that many have argued the folly of
laying external restrictions on women in matters of love. Thus in quoting
the great Italian writer who afterwards became Pope Pius II, Robert Burton
remarked: "I am of Æneas Sylvius' mind, 'Those jealous Italians do very
ill to lock up their wives; for women are of such a disposition they will
mostly covet that which is denied most, and offend least when they have
free liberty to trespass.'"[20]
It is the spontaneous and natural instinct of the lover to desire modesty
in his mistress, and by no means any calculated opinion on his part that
modesty is the sign of sexual emotion. It remains true, however, that
modesty is an expression of feminine erotic impulse. We have here one of
the instances, of which there, are so many, of that curious and
instinctive harmony by which Nature has sought the more effectively to
bring about the ends of courtship. As to the fact itself there can be
little doubt. It constantly forces itself on the notice of careful
observers, and has long been decided in the affirmative by those who have
discussed the matter. Venette, one of the earliest writers on the
psychology of sex, after discussing the question at length, decided that
the timid woman is a more ardent lover than the bold woman.[21] "It is the
most pudent girl," remarked Restif de la Bretonne whose experience of
women was so extensive, "the girl who blushes most, who is most disposed
to the pleasures of love," he adds that, in girls and boys alike, shyness
is a premature consciousness of sex.[22] This observation has even become
embodied in popular proverbs. "Do as the lasses do--say no, but take it,"
is a Scotch saying, to which corresponds the Welsh saying, "The more
prudish the more unchaste."[23]
It is not, at first, quite clear why an excessively shy and
modest woman should be the most apt for intimate relationships
with a man, and in such a case the woman is often charged with
hypocrisy. There is, however, no hypocrisy in the matter. The shy
and reserved woman holds herself aloof from intimacy in ordinary
friendship, because she is acutely sensitive to the judgments of
others, and fears that any seemingly immodest action may make an
unfavorable opinion. With a lover, however, in whose eyes she
feels assured that her actions can not be viewed unfavorably,
these barriers of modesty fall down, and the resulting intimacy
becomes all the more fascinating to the woman because of its
contrast with the extreme reserve she is impelled to maintain in
other relationships. It thus happens that many modest women who,
in non-sexual relationships with their own sex, are not able to
act with the physical unreserve not uncommon with women among
themselves, yet feel no such reserve with a man, when they are
 once confident of his good opinion. Much the same is true of
modest and sensitive men in their relations with women.
This fundamental animal factor of modesty, rooted in the natural facts of
the sexual life of the higher mammals, and especially man, obviously will
not explain all the phenomena of modesty. We must turn to the other great
primary element of modesty, the social factor.
We cannot doubt that one of the most primitive and universal of the social
characteristics of man is an aptitude for disgust, founded, as it is, on a
yet more primitive and animal aptitude for disgust, which has little or no
social significance. In nearly all races, even the most savage, we seem
to find distinct traces of this aptitude for disgust in the presence of
certain actions of others, an emotion naturally reflected in the
individual's own actions, and hence a guide to conduct. Notwithstanding
our gastric community of disgust with lower animals, it is only in man
that this disgust seems to become transformed and developed, to possess a
distinctly social character, and to serve as a guide to social
conduct.[24] The objects of disgust vary infinitely according to the
circumstances and habits of particular races, but the reaction of disgust
is fundamental throughout.
The best study of the phenomena of disgust known to me is, without doubt,
Professor Richet's.[25] Richet concludes that it is the _dangerous_ and
the _useless_ which evoke disgust. The digestive and sexual excretions and
secretions, being either useless or, in accordance with widespread
primitive ideas, highly dangerous, the genito-anal region became a
concentrated focus of disgust.[26] It is largely for this reason, no
doubt, that savage men exhibit modesty, not only toward women, but toward
their own sex, and that so many of the lowest savages take great
precautions in obtaining seclusion for the fulfillment of natural
functions. The statement, now so often made, that the primary object of
clothes is to accentuate, rather than to conceal, has in it--as I shall
point out later--a large element of truth, but it is by no means a
complete account of the matter. It seems difficult not to admit that,
alongside the impulse to accentuate sexual differences, there is also in
both men and women a genuine impulse to concealment among the most
primitive peoples, and the invincible repugnance often felt by savages to
remove the girdle or apron, is scarcely accounted for by the theory that
it is solely a sexual lure.
In this connection it seems to me instructive to consider a special form
of modesty very strongly marked among savages in some parts of the world.
I refer to the feeling of immodesty in eating. Where this feeling exists,
modesty is offended when one eats in public; the modest man retires to
eat. Indecency, said Cook, was utterly unknown among the Tahitians; but
they would not eat together; even brothers and sisters had their separate
baskets of provisions, and generally sat some yards apart, with their
backs to each other, when they ate.[27] The Warrua of Central Africa,
Cameron found, when offered a drink, put up a cloth before their faces
while they swallowed it, and would not allow anyone to see them eat or
drink; so that every man or woman must have his own fire and cook for [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]