Love frustrations - a social problem millions of people suffer from love, millions are stricken by the plague of jealousy, disappointed and disgusted with their mates, unhappy in a joyless marriage, or lonely and loveless in empty solitude. This situation cannot be explained as due simply to the maladjustments of some individuals. Whenever a problem concerns a large part of the population, we must look for deeper causes, either in the structure of society, or in other unfortunate circumstances which in various degrees affect all alike.
Thus, the individual man or woman acts as representative of his sex. The marital troubles of Mr. X. and the friction between Joan and her boy friend become, by their identity with the problems of thousands of other men and women, a characteristic sign of a general conflict between the sexes. Even those who deny the existence of a so-called war between the sexes cannot avoid being involved themselves. Others who are aware of it rarely recognize the real reason for this war. Does it arise from the natural biological and psychological differences between man and woman?
Or is it caused by the general tension in our present social life?
There seems to be a “natural” antagonism between man and woman, which has caused friction and warfare where ever there have been men and women. “Lovesickness,” jealousy, and adultery are as old as the human race. But their frequency and implications vary. We have good reason to believe that in past generations, one or two hundred years ago, men and women were more satisfied and closer to each other than we find them today. Today, sexual dissatisfaction and marital maladjustment are more frequent than ever, with significant differences in the conflicts observed in various countries and nations. Superficially, it might look as if racial or geographical factors determine these differences. Marital problems in AngloSaxon countries differ from those in Latin countries, those in Europe from those in China, those among Christians from those among Mohammedans; but, on comparing these differences, we come to realize that one factor is everywhere of decisive importance in determining the nature and type of the problem: the position of woman in the respective societies. And further, any intensification or alarming increase in the frequency of marital discord coincides with a conspicuous change in the social relationship of the sexes.
Today, even while we watch, the social position of women is altering; and we must understand the nature and direction of these changes in order to evaluate properly their implications. Obviously, woman is no longer as dependent upon man as she once was, and she enjoys more rights now than ever before. Many men and even women who unwaveringly believe in masculine superiority regard this independence of women as the cause of every evil. They are convinced that happiness in marriage would be regained, peace between the sexes restored, if women were restored to their position of semi-slavery, without the social, sexual, and professional liberties which they enjoy today. The advocates of this idea believe in the biological inferiority of women and regard the present growing equality between the sexes as unnatural and disastrous. They refer to the physical shortcomings of women in stature and muscular capacity and, in particular, look upon the comparative smallness of the feminine brain as sufficient proof of the natural designation of women as subordinate beings. Moebius 1 spoke of the “physiological imbecility” of women; and “Thou goest to women? Do not forget thy whip!” is the advice of the philosopher who worshiped the “Superman” (Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra). More recently, the German anthropologist Waldeyer stated that, “A wide collation of measurements and statistics proves that she (woman) has a smaller brain, less physical strength, preserves more traits of infancy and childhood in adult life, etc. Therefore, all efforts to establish entire equality between the two sexes and to throw open to women all the avenues of activities enjoyed by men are mistaken and will prove failures.”
History, however, proves this conception of feminine inferiority to be unjustified. The advocates of this doctrine deny or do not know that women were not always the subordinate sex.