such as was supposed by Moebius.  I am of opinion that the unquestionable fact of the intellectual inferiority of so many women is due to the inhibition of thought imposed upon them for the purpose of sexual repression.”

It is only of recent years that this problem has been realized and faced, though solitary thinkers, like Hinton, have been keenly conscious of its existence; for “sorrowing virtue,” as Mrs. Ella Wheeler Wilcox puts it, “is more ashamed of its woes than unhappy sin, because the world has tears for the latter and only ridicule for the former.”  “It is an almost cynical trait of our age,” Hellpach wrote a few years ago, “that it is constantly discussing the theme of prostitution, of police control, of the age of consent, of the ‘white slavery,’ and passes over the moral struggle of woman’s soul without an attempt to answer her burning questions.”

On the other hand we find medical writers not only asserting with much moral fervor that sexual intercourse outside marriage is always and altogether unnecessary, but declaring, moreover, the harmlessness or even the advantages of sexual abstinence.

Ribbing, the Swedish professor, in his Hygiene Sexuelle, advocates sexual abstinence outside marriage, and asserts its harmlessness.  Gilles de la Tourette, Fere, and Augagneur in France agree.  In Germany Fuerbringer (Senator and Kaminer, Health and Disease in Relation to Marriage, vol. i, p. 228) asserts that continence is possible and necessary, though admitting that it may, however, mean serious mischief in exceptional cases.  Eulenburg (Sexuale Neuropathie, p. 14) doubts whether anyone, who otherwise lived a reasonable life, ever became ill, or more precisely neurasthenic, through sexual abstinence.  Hegar, replying to the arguments of Bebel in his well-known book on women, denies that sexual abstinence can ever produce satyriasis or nymphomania.  Naecke, who has frequently discussed the problem of sexual abstinence (e.g., Archiv fuer Kriminal-Anthropologie, 1903, Heft 1, and Sexual-Probleme, June, 1908), maintains that sexual abstinence can, at most, produce rare and slight unfavorable results, and that it is no more likely to produce insanity, even in predisposed individuals, than are the opposite extremes of sexual excess and masturbation.  He adds that, so far as his own observations are concerned, the patients in asylums suffer scarcely at all from their compulsory sexual abstinence.

It is in England, however, that the virtues of sexual abstinence have been most loudly and emphatically proclaimed, sometimes indeed with considerable lack of cautious qualification.  Acton, in his Reproductive Organs, sets forth the traditional English view, as well as Beale in his Morality and the Moral Question.  A more distinguished representative of the same view was Paget, who, in his lecture on “Sexual Hypochondriasis,” coupled sexual intercourse