sex and marriage

Chapter 28 Conclusion (1)
From the above discussion, we can draw a number of historical and moral conclusions.Historically, we believe that the sexual morality as it exists in civilized societies arises from two diametrically opposed starting points: the desire to establish fatherhood on the one hand, and the ascetic idea that sex is sinful, Although it is essential for the reproduction of offspring.The morality of pre-Christian times and the morality of the Far East to date are products of the desire to establish fatherhood as their point of departure, with the exception of India and Persia, since these two places were the centers of the spread of asceticism.Of course, the desire to establish fatherhood is absent in culturally backward peoples who are ignorant of the male role in reproduction.Among these people, although male jealousy also limits female indulgence to some extent.But in general, women are still much freer than in the early patriarchal society.It is conceivable that in this age of transition there must have been violent conflicts, for men concerned with their fatherhood would no doubt feel that women's liberty must be curtailed.During this period, sexual morality existed only for women.A man may not commit adultery with a married woman, but he is free to commit adultery with an unmarried woman.

Then, a new motivation to avoid sin arose with the advent of Christianity.In theory, the moral standard is exactly the same for men and women, but in practice, this moral standard is difficult for men to implement, so people are more likely to see men violating this moral standard than women violating it This moral standard can take a more tolerant attitude.Early sexual morality has a purely biological purpose, namely, that the child should be protected by both parents, and not by only one, when he is young.This purpose is absent in Christian theory, although it is not.

It is not until modern times that we discover that Christian and pre-Christian sexual morality has been in constant flux.Christian sexual morality is no longer as deeply rooted as it once was.Because orthodox religion has weakened, even the faithful are less committed to it. Men and women born in the 20th century, although their subconsciousness still maintains the original attitude, but in general, they no longer believe in their consciousness that fornication is a crime.As for the pre-Christian elements of sexual morality, for some reason they have changed and are still changing.The first reason is the use of contraception, which has made intercourse without pregnancy more and more possible.Thus it keeps unmarried women from becoming pregnant, and married women from having children only from their own husbands.In conclusion, chastity is not indispensable in either case.This method has not yet been perfected, for it is not infallible, but I think it will not be long before the method of contraception becomes infallible.At that time, although we cannot assert that women will not have sexual relations outside of marriage, the identity of the father is absolutely guaranteed.It may be said that women cheat their husbands on this point, but women were not allowed to cheat their husbands before.If our questions were only about who the father is, rather than whether we should have sex with a loved one, the incentive to cheat would be much weaker.From this we may surmise that a man may be deceitful about paternity to some extent, but much less than he was deceitful about adultery.Husband's jealousy is also entirely possible due to adaptation to new situations by new customs, and it occurs only when the wife is ready to choose another man as the father of the child.In the East, men have always acquiesced to the eunuch's privilege, while most European men are very dissatisfied with it.The reason why Eastern men acquiesce in the eunuch's privilege is that the eunuch will not cause trouble to confirm the identity of the child's father.This tacit attitude will develop more widely as contraceptive laws become more widespread.

therefore.In the future, even if we no longer require women to restrain their sexual desires as in the past, families with both parents may still exist.However, a second factor driving changes in sexual morality may have more far-reaching consequences.This is the increasing involvement of the state in raising and educating children.This factor has hitherto been more at work in Europe than in America, and mainly in the wage-earner classes.After all, wage earners account for the vast majority of the population, so the state will replace fathers (this has gradually begun in the wage labor class), and eventually it will pervade all mankind.In animals or humans, the father's role is to provide protection and upbringing for his children.But in a civilized society protection is provided by the police, and maintenance may be provided entirely by the state, at least among the poorest of the population.If this point is actually reached, the father ceases to have any appreciable role.As for the status of the mother, there would be two possibilities.She may be able to continue her original job and leave the child in the care of the state.Or, when the child is young, the state pays the mother all costs of raising the child.Of course, this must be based on the premise that there are such provisions in the law.If the second method is realized, it can be temporarily used to maintain traditional morality, which is that an unchaste woman may be denied the right to receive payment.But if she doesn't get paid, she won't be able to support her children unless she goes to work and puts them in kindergarten.From this point of view, financial ability can replace the father, and to a large extent, the mother in the matter of raising children, that is to say, those parents who have no money do not have to take care of their children.Of course, this is for poor parents.At that time, all traditional reasons for traditional morality will disappear, and new reasons for new morality will appear.

I don't think the reality of family disintegration is a pleasant one.Parental affection is very important to children, and if the scale of the kindergarten is large, it must be extremely orthodox and extremely strict.If the different influences of different family circumstances ceased to exist, there would be a terrible sameness.and.Unless an international government is first established, children in various countries will be taught a cruel patriotic education which will inevitably lead them to kill each other when they grow up.As far as population is concerned, we also need an international government, otherwise those nationalists will definitely cause the population to grow much more than it should, and because of the continuous development of medical care, the only solution to the problem of overpopulation is war .

Sociological questions are often difficult and complex, but personal questions, it seems to me, are quite simple.The doctrine that sex is the root of all evil does great damage to the character of the individual, beginning in childhood and continuing throughout life.Conventional morality puts sexual love in a prison, so it also greatly destroys all friendship, and makes people mean, judgmental and cruel.In short, no matter what kind of sexual morality we accept, it must be non-superstitious, recognized and evidence-based.Sex cannot be without morality, any more than business, sport, scientific research, and other human activities cannot be without morality.But sex does not require traditional morality based on ancient prohibitions imposed by ignorant people who live in a society very different from today's.In sexual matters, as in economic and political ones, our morality has hitherto been governed by fear.The existence of these fears has been disproved by modern discoveries.However, we lose out on the benefits of these new discoveries because we cannot psychologically adjust to it.

It is true that, like all reforms, many difficulties will inevitably be encountered in the transition from the old system to the new system.Like Socrates, those who advocate reforming morality are invariably accused of poisoning the youth.This accusation is not unfounded, even if the new morality they advocate, when fully accepted, will produce a better life than the old morality they are trying to reform.Every Oriental who knows Islam says that those who think it unnecessary to pray five times a day must also not respect other moral precepts which we regard as more important.I am aware that what I have said may be misinterpreted by the reader, as an advocate of sexual moral reform is extremely susceptible to such misunderstandings.

Human instinct should be guided rather than suppressed, which is the main principle that distinguishes the new morality from the Puritan-style traditional morality.As long as we put forward this principle, we will soon win the general approval of modern men and women.However, if this principle is to be fully effective, its implications must be fully understood and put into practice as soon as possible.If in childhood instincts are repressed instead of being properly directed, they will be repressed to some degree throughout life, because repression in childhood can cause them to take forms which they should not have expressed.

(End of this chapter)