In "Rhoda Fleming" Meredith arraigns our double standard as follows: "All these false sensations, peculiar to men, concerning the soiled purity of woman, the lost innocence, the brand of shame upon her, are commonly the foul sentimentalism of such as can be too eager in the chase of corruption when occasion suits, and are another side of pruriency, not absolutely, foreign to the best of us".
In Russia, some three years ago, a prominent writer, Artsibasheff, entered the lists in the
struggle against conventional morality with a highly sensational novel called "Sanin", which
gave rise to endless discussions and precipitated a veritable deluge of polemical literature.
Tho strongly condemned in some quarters, and received with puzzled head shakings in
others, the book made a profound and lasting impression, and has been translated into several
European languages. It is a powerfully written story, interspersed with many and well aimed
thrusts at our vicious sex conventions. Retrospective jealousy toward a woman's previous
experience in love comes in for an especially merciless excoriation, seldom paralleled in its
brutally cynical frankness, which furnishes an interesting foil to Hardy's dispassionate
treatment of the same theme.
In this altogether remarkable novel, the author, using his hero
as a mouth piece, advocates a substitute for the free motherhood of Shaw namely the
expedient of abortion. This act he does not consider criminal and equivalent to murder, but
calls it simply an interruption of a "chemical reaction", provided it is resorted to promptly
enough. The general view he takes of female chastity must be characterized as cynical, tho
purporting to be merely rational. Unrestrained sexual gratification is painted in such glowing
colors that hundreds of young readers had their heads turned, and throwing all conventions
aside, gave themselves up to veritable orgies. Young people of both sexes indulged in
unrestrained promiscuity, until brought back to their senses by the ravages of venereal
diseases and pregnancy.
In Scandinavia, the problem of chastity in its relation to the unmarried man forms the
subject matter of Björnson's masterly story called "The Glove", while Ellen Key, the
well known Swedish radical and reformer, discusses sex matters in her book on "Love and
Marriage". She preaches freedom of love and freedom of divorce. She warns, however, against
confounding her freedom of love with so called free love, which is often understood to mean
complete license.
These few examples, culled from representative writers, will suffice to indicate the drift
of liberal modern opinion on the subject of our dual standard. Bitterly opposed to these
progressive ideas are the conservative writers and speakers, who cling tenaciously to the
current code of ethics. Both parties lay claim to the truth, each freely denouncing the other
as an enemy of society. This alignment of forces on opposite sides appears to be an essential
condition of progress. The sharp division into rival camps meets us everywhere in politics,
in science, in art, even in daily comment upon trivial topics. The party of reform and the
party of resistance are both necessary for moderate advancement. To adapt a metaphor from
Meredith, one is the stream, the other the dam. Without the one, complete stagnation
would supervene; without the other, headlong changes might disrupt society. The combined
effect of both, exerting themselves in contrary directions, is a normal rate of rhythmic forward
movement.
Such being the mechanism of social evolution, the contending factions mentioned above
may be trusted to work out gradually the coming sex morality. In the meantime, it is the
course of wisdom not to interfere with progress by limiting freedom of speech. In the words
of Herbert Spencer, "there may be danger in assuming too confidently that our opinions
concerning the relations of the sexes are just what they should be. In all times and places,
people have been positive that their ideas and feelings on these matters have been right; and
yet, assuming that we are right, they must have been wrong. Restraints on free speech
concerning the relations of the sexes may possibly be hindrances to something better or
higher".
It remains for us to consider the future form of the family, and this will be done in the
following section.