the general sexual inhibitions in modern societies, our pride and joy in the use of the sexual organs can no longer find expression in the crude manner characteristic of the phallic cults of more primitive ages: but some remnants of our former attitude in this matter are still shown: positively, in the continued employment of phallic symbolism; negatively, in our somewhat morbid fear or disgust of anything that threatens the existence or activity of the sexual organs, e.g. castration or impotence. The tendencies underlying this attitude ally themselves with the motives which lead us to have confidence in a numerous population and distrust of any decrease of population or of any diminution in the rate of increase -motives which we have already studied (5 above).

That these tendencies are in reality derived from the psychic sources to which we have just referred is shown by the fact that those who extol most lavishly the benefits of a high birth rate and who exhibit most alarm at the voluntary control of births (which they are fond of designating 'race suicide') are to be found chiefly among old men and women (whose sexual power has departed or is declining), or else among confirmed bachelors, celibate priests or unmarried women. In the case of these persons there has probably occurred a projection of the primitive pride in fertility and sexual potency or of the fear resulting from sexual inhibitions or from impotence. The pride that would find a more primitive expression in the individual's own fertility or potency is displaced on to the fertility of the race or community, with resulting joy in a high national birth rate, fear of a decline in the birth rate and hatred of any doctrines or social movements calculated to bring about any such decline1.

(6 C) There is also another way in which the Narcissistic tendencies. co-operate with the reproductive trends to make the Malthusian doctrines appear unwelcome. Among the most common and important forms of displacement of the Narcissistic elements of the Libido is the transference of love from self to offspring-an individual's children being

1 In actual practice this attitude is effective in preventing a proper appreciation of the Malthusian doctrines not only by direct opposition, but especially in so far as it works with modern statistical weapons-by fostering an undue concentration of attention on birth rates to the neglect of death rates and other important factors which must be taken into account in any unbiassed consideration of the problems of population; the subject of birth rates being of course more in the direct line of displacement of interest in minds of the type here referred to. So great is the distortion thus introduced that the more violent type of 'répopulateur' seems often to be of the opinion that population depends simply upon the birth rate, as if such factors as death rate, immigration and emigration did not exist!

regarded as an extension or a re-incarnation of himself. The love of our children constitutes at once a socially more permissible and a biologically more advantageous form of Narcissistic gratification than the cruder forms of conceit or auto-erotic satisfaction; while the continuation of our own lives through those of our children and our children's children affords us at the same time the nearest possible approach to the immortality which, in virtue of our Narcissism, we so earnestly desire. It is therefore not surprising that the displaced tendencies which have found a satisfactory substitute in this way oppose everything which threatens to rob them of this substitute. Now it can scarcely be doubted that the practice of Malthusianism does bring with it a certain degree of danger to the continuance of the individual family. The process of 'peopling down' to a relatively high level of comfort entails-except under unusually favourable circumstances such a limitation of the numbers of the children born to each marriage, as to expose the family to greater danger of extinction through accident or disease. This real increase of danger to the continued existence of any given family under a Malthusian régime is apt to be exaggerated in imagination: (a) through reinforcement by unconscious psychological factors, particularly those referred to under (6 B); (b) through failure to take into account that the increased danger in question is to some considerable extent counterbalanced by the fact that a decrease in the number of children per family usually brings with it a more favourable environment for each individual child, the increase of danger to the family as a whole being thus by no means directly proportional to the decrease in the number of children, as is sometimes erroneously assumed. The fear thus engendered and exaggerated is apt to exercise a very real influence in the rejection of Malthusian ideas1.

(7) Just as the combative tendencies constitute a difficulty in the way of realising the true relations between population and subsistence,

1 It is interesting to note however that the real danger on which the fear rests (and consequently to some extent the fear itself) may be expected to diminish somewhat as the practice of Malthusianism becomes more universal. At present those who do practise family limitation are forced to 'people down,' not only to the limit required for the preservation of their own standard of living, but to the still lower limit required for the provision of a surplus devoted to the partial maintenance of the large families of those sections of the community who produce more children than they themselves are able to provide for. In so far as the latter classes in turn adopt the practice of family limitation, the burden of providing for those who cannot support themselves or be supported by their own families will become less, with the result that (other things equal) a rather larger number of children per family will become possible in the case of the upper and middle classes, upon whom this burden principally falls.

both in virtue of their positive manifestations (3 above) and their negative or reactionary manifestations (4 above), so too in the case of the sex impulses difficulties ensue not only from the fact that the theory and practice of Malthusianism is directly opposed to the unimpeded function of these impulses but also from the fact that (paradoxically enough at first sight) Malthusianism is also in some important ways opposed to the repressive forces working against the sex impulses and to the reaction formations that have resulted therefrom. Malthusianism is repellent not only because it reveals the necessity for sexual inhibition, but also because it is too intimately concerned with sexual matters, appeals too strongly to sexual interests and desires and even appears in some respects to open up greater possibilities of sexual freedom and enjoyment; so that the far-reaching and elaborate sexual repressions which have been built up in the course of the struggle between Individuation and Genesis become in their turn operative in preventing the recognition of the relevant biological and sociological truths. The objections to Malthusianism springing from sexual inhibitions are indeed so powerful and persistent that they share with the political objections the rather doubtful honour of being (to a superficial view at any rate) the most striking of all the psychological factors which oppose their influence to unbiassed discussion and consideration of the problems involved.

This influence manifests itself in the first place as a general deterrent to all direction of thought upon matters connected with the sexual life: in this respect questions concerning population suffer no more and no less than any other problems dealing with sex. The sexual repression however also affects Malthusianism in more specific ways; first, owing to the fact that the consideration of birth limitation involves an inquiry into the intimacies of married life-a sort of reserved territory which has been left relatively free of prohibitions on condition that it is not too often or too openly discussed; secondly (and this is certainly the more important factor), because Malthusianism in its most popular and practicable form of Neo-Malthusianism-revealing as it does the possibility of indulging in directly sexual pleasures without incurring the penalty of parenthood, with the resultant sacrifice of Individuationthreatens to remove one of the most deep-rooted biological foundations of sexual repression, and therefore calls up a more than usually vigorous activity on the part of this repression. Hence the very widespread fear of 'immorality' as a consequence of the general knowledge of contra

ceptive methods, the tendency to taboo these methods as degrading1 and the desire (manifested especially by the Roman Catholic Church) that marriage and sexual intercourse in general-shall not be freed from its 'natural' penalties. The widespread and powerful nature of the repressive forces here at work is illustrated not only by the published pronouncements of those numerous persons who are very seriously alarmed at the prospect of sexual pleasures being obtainable without the deterrent effect of the probable resulting conception, but also from the very remarkable (one might almost say pathological) blindness and ignorance of large sections of our population as regards the existence and obtainability of contraceptives, many city dwellers passing almost daily before shops where these articles are sold but never realising consciously the nature and purpose of the goods displayed or advertised.

This fear of sexual pleasure apart from reproduction is beyond doubt a very fundamental aspect of human sexual inhibition, being connected both generally with the repression of the various 'partial' sex impulses and their subordination to the purposes of reproduction and more specifically (as Bleuler2 has emphasised) with the repression of onanism. It finds its biological justification in the fact that (as we have seen in the earlier parts of this paper) the conflict between Individuation and Genesis manifests itself not only on the economic level through the inverse relationship between numbers and individual development necessitated by a limited food supply, but also on the physiological and psychological levels by the competition of the two antagonistic processes for the available supply of vital energy. We are however not strictly concerned at this point with the individual and racial origins of this fear of sexual pleasure when divorced from reproduction, nor with the conditions in reality to which it may be said to correspond; consideration of which will fall more appropriately into our concluding Section. It is here sufficient to have pointed out the very important part which this fear plays in producing the inability to realise the nature of the biological and psychological factors to which the present paper is devoted.

1 The method most frequently employed for this purpose at the present time is to identify, or to confuse them with the (illegal) methods of producing abortion---a result probably due largely to the co-operation of other motives, particularly those enumerated under the headings 4, 6 B and 6 C; the 'murder' of the embryo in abortion or of the spermatozoon in preventive intercourse being (unconsciously or semi-consciously) regarded either as a gratification of (repressed) death wishes (4) or else as symbolical castration (6 B and 6 C). 2 Op. cit.

VI.

The lengthy considerations brought forward in the preceding Section have, we may hope, served not only the more immediate purpose of affording some explanation of the fact that our present views on the ultimate nature of sex repression, in spite of their simplicity, have not hitherto been generally or explicitly recognised: they have also, we should like to think, helped us to realise how great are the psychological difficulties in the way of a true understanding of some of the most fundamental problems of ethics, sociology and economics with which humanity is faced and how hard it is, in consequence, for humanity to find a satisfactory solution of these problems. In so far as our analysis of these difficulties has been correct we may perhaps even hope to have contributed in some very slight degree to the great task of freeing humanity from these difficulties and of making possible the adoption of a more unbiassed and reasonable attitude in matters which so intimately concern human welfare and human destiny. Having accomplished this much by the severe and not always attractive methods of biological and psychological analysis, we may perhaps be permitted in conclusion to take a few steps along the easier and more alluring path of speculation, in order to contemplate the possibilities of future development which our considerations may have opened up.

Our discussion of the difficulties in the way of a full and general recognition of the biological facts underlying sexual repression and of their practical and theoretical bearings is certainly not calculated to make us expect that this recognition will necessarily occur very soon, very suddenly or very rapidly. Indeed the difficulties in question seem to be so formidable that it would not be altogether surprising if such recognition were postponed for a very lengthy period. On the other hand the following significant facts: (a) that unwelcome scientific views, such as those of Copernicus, Darwin and Freud, have been or are being accepted by humanity; (b) that the present general trend of psychological evolution is probably towards conscious realisation and control of difficult problems rather than towards blind repression1; (c) that the biological conditions of sexual repression are directly connected with other biological conditions that are already generally recognised; (d) that the recognition in question holds out the possibility of bringing a higher degree of satisfaction than would otherwise be possible to some of the

1 Cf. the present writer's paper on "Freudian Mechanisms as Factors in Moral Development," This Journal (General Section), 1917, vi. 475.