The choice of a mate.

  • Anthony Ludovici
Date:
[1935]
Catalogue details
    61/546 page 31
    CHRISTIAN KALOPHOBIA In men it also leads to a preference for the girl “ who has no nonsense about her ”, i.e. who can stand an unlimited amount of the stimulation of male companionship without becoming inflamed. This means that she is probably below par sexually. In girls it also leads to a preference for the male who “ does not remind them that they are women ”, or, as I recently heard a misguided girl declare, “ who does not look upon me as a woman.” This means an oblique bias in favour of low sexuality in mating, which necessarily causes great unhappiness in marriage, quite apart from its deleterious affect on the race. The same bias also creates a phobia against beauty ; because, since sexual intercourse with a healthy, good-looking specimen is, of course, known to be more enjoyable than with an ugly, unhealthy specimen, it is felt to be more sinful. Hence the slanders flung at beauty by all Christian fanatics l 1 Listen to one of the fathers of English Puritanism inveighing against physical beauty ! “ The Graces of the Minde and the Soul . . . this is the only comlinesse and Beautie, which makes us Beautiful, and Resplen dent in the Sight of God, of men and Angels,” it is “ the only culture and Beautie which the Lord respects.” 2 “ A studious . . . and eager Affection of Beautie . . . must needs be sinful and abominable . . . because it proceeds most commonly from an Adulterous, unchast, and lustful Hart.” 3 “ Those who have continent and chast affections,” Prynne continues, “ as they deeme this corporall and outside Beautie a needlesse and superfluous thing . . . they would rather obscure “ There was a look of immaculate sexless purity about Gerda, she might have stood for the angel Gabriel, wide-eyed and young and grave.” See also Three Came Unarmed, by E. Arnot Robinson (London, 1933), where the heroine is described thus : “In Nonie, narrow of hip and thigh and light of build, Nature had for once forgotten to over-emphasize the utilitarian design of the normal female figure. . . . But Nonie’s body was exquisite enough to be judged fairly outside the canons of sex. . . . Such loveliness does not depend on suitability for any particular func tion.” Elsewhere Nonie’s figure is said to be glorious “ as that of a young ath lete’s ”, For a full appreciation of all the popular errors in this portrayal see Part II, Chap. Ill, infra, where other examples are given, particularly pp. 373-374. 1 We must always bear in mind that what most disturbs the sleep of the Christian sex-phobic is the thought that his neighbour may be having a good time sexually. He covers this envy up by pretending that he is anxious only to suppress “ exces sive ” sexual indulgence. But those who know him, appreciate that he does not possess that love of humanity which makes a man solicitous about another’s health. What he cannot endure is that another is having pleasure. See on this point, S.L.S.E. p. 123. 3 Prynne’s Unlovlinesse of Lovelocks (1628, p. 51). 3 Ibid., pp. 55, 36. See also pp. 182-184 infra.
    No text description is available for this image
    No text description is available for this image
    No text description is available for this image