This is my first blog. I'd like to introduce a discovery.

blissed's picture
Submitted by blissed on
Printer-friendly version

This is my first blog. I'd like to introduce a discovery.

I recently found in my papers a chapter I had photocopied many years ago
from the book Sex & Culture by J.D. Unwin. After reading a few pages I set
out to find a PDF on the internet if possible -- since the main premise of the
book seemed like it might correlate with Cupid's Poisoned Arrow. I did read
a few book reviews on google and I did find a PDF of Sex and Culture, and
have read enough of it to think that anyone who has read Cupid's Poisoned
Arrow, and who has a grasp on it's far-reaching implications, may also have
an interest in Unwin's book.

Below is the link to a PDF download Sex and Culture.



Thanks for posting this link

I had a look at the book (published in the 1930s) and it's a challenge wading through all the random...erudition. Basically, the author looked carefully at dozens of cultures with an eye to whether or not they regulated sexual relations between the genders...and then drew the conclusion that strict monogamy led to more energetic societies (measured in terms of their accomplishments...according to his perception).

He wasn't looking at "continence" in the sense that karezza uses it. He assumed that within a monogamous marriage, sperm were free to fly. Smile However, as many of us have observed, habituation sets in, which can make sperm donor (and recipient) less enthusiastic over time. The the net effect probably *was* greater continence. And not necessarily more loving relationships...although, if you know you can have only one sex partner per lifetime, you might be inclined to overcome your differences a bit more readily. Wink

Here are a few tidbits:

So far as we can judge, the human organism does
not tend to be promiscuous; usually a pair continue to consort
for so long as they are attracted to one another.

[Absolute monogamy creates the most energy.] No
group of human beings, however, has ever been able, or at any rate has ever
consented, to tolerate a state of absolute monogamy for very long. This is
not surprising, for it is [or has been] an unequal bargain for the women; and in the end
they have always been freed from their legal disadvantages. To express
the matter in popular language, they have been 'emancipated'. This has
happened regularly and unfailingly in every recorded example of absolute,
monogamy, except one; in that case special circumstances prevailed. The
Sumerians, Babylonians, Athenians, Romans, and Teutons began their
historical careers in a condition of absolute monogamy; in each case the
women were legal nonentities. After a time the laws were altered; a woman
became a legal entity, the equal of a man.

Any human society is free to choose
either to display great energy or to enjoy sexual freedom; the evidence is
that it cannot do both- for more than one generation.

It seems to me
that it was the unequal fate of the women, not the compulsory continence,
that caused the downfall of absolute monogamy. No society has yet
succeeded in regulating the relations between the sexes in such a way as
to enable sexual opportunity to remain at a minimum for an extended
period. The inference I draw from the historical evidence is that, if ever
such a result should be desired, the sexes must first be placed on a footing
of complete legal equality.

If any society should desire
to control its cultural destiny, it may do so by decreasing or increasing
the amount of its energy. Such decrease or increase will appear in the
third generation after the sexual opportunity has been extended or reduced.
A lesser energy is easily- secured, for the force of life seems to flow backwards,
and the members of the society will not be slow to take advantage
of any relaxation in the regulations. If, on the other hand, a vigorous
society wishes to display its productive energy for a long time, and even
for ever, it must re=create itself, I think, first, by placing the sexes on a level
of complete legal equality, and then by altering its economic and social.
organization in such a way as to render it both possible and tolerable for
sexual opportunity to remain at a minimum for an extended period, and
even •for ever. In such a case the face of the society• would be set in the
Direction of the Cultural Process-; its inherited tradition would be continually'
enriched ; it would achieve a. higher culture than has yet been attained

It would have been fun to sit down and chat with this guy about "continence" as we explore it here, and whether karezza could be the missing link that will permit voluntary monogamy, loving relationships...and energetic societies.