The Science of Character and the Science of Form
In view of the admitted close correspondence between matter and mind, we may
expect to find that the conception of sexually intermediate forms, if applied
to mental facts, will yield a rich crop of results. The existence of a female
mental type and a male mental type can readily be imagined (and the quest of
these types has been made by many investigators), but such perfect types never
occur as actual individuals, simply because in the mind, as in the body, all
sorts of sexually intermediate conditions exist.
My conception will also be of great service in helping us to discriminate between the
different mental qualities, and to throw some light into what has always been a dark
corner for psychologists - the differences between different individuals. A great step
will be made if we are able to supply graded categories for the mental
diathesis of individuals; if it shall cease to be scientific to say that the
character of an individual is merely male or female; but if we can make a
measured judgment and say that such and such an one is so many parts male and
so many parts female. Which element in any particular individual has done,
said, or thought this or the other? By making the answer to such a question
possible, we shall have done much towards the definite description of the
individual, and the new method will determine the direction of future
investigation. The knowledge of the past, which sets out from the conceptions
which were really confused averages, has been equally far from reaching the
broadest truths as from searching out the most intimate, detailed knowledge.
This failure of past methods gives us hope that the principle of sexually
intermediate forms may serve as the foundation of a scientific study of
character and justifies the attempt to make of it an illuminating principle
for the psychology of individual differences. Its application to the science
of character, which, so far, has been in the hands of merely literary authors,
and is from the scientific point of view an untouched field, is to be greeted
more warmly as it is capable of being used quantitatively, so that we venture
to estimate the percentage of maleness and femaleness which an individual
possesses even in the mental qualities. The answer to this question is not
given even if we know the exact anatomical position of an organism on the
scale stretching from male to female, although as a matter of fact congruity
between bodily and mental sexuality is more common than incongruity. But we
must remember what was stated in chap. ii. as to the uneven distribution of
sexuality over the body.
The proportion of the male to the female principle in the same human being
must not be assumed to be a constant quantity. An important new conclusion
must be taken into account, a conclusion which is necessary to the right
application of the principle which clears up in a striking fashion earlier
psychological work. The fact is that every human being varies or oscillates
between the maleness and the femaleness of his constitution. In some cases
these oscillations are abnormally large, in other cases so small as to escape
observation, but they are always present, and when they are great they may
even reveal themselves in the outward aspect of the body. Like the variations
in the magnetism of the earth, these sexual oscillations are either regular or
irregular. The regular forms are sometimes minute; for instance, many men feel
more male at night. The large and regular oscillations correspond to the great
divisions of organic life to which attention is only now being directed, and
they may throw light upon many puzzling phenomena. The irregular oscillations
probably depend chiefly upon the environment, as for instance on the sexuality
of surrounding human beings. They may help to explain some curious points in
the psychology of a crowd which have not yet received sufficient attention.
In short, bi-sexuality cannot be properly observed in a single moment, but
must be studied through successive periods of time. This time-element in
psychological differences of sexuality may be regularly periodic or not. The
swing towards one pole of sexuality may be greater than the following swing to
the other side. Although theoretically possible, it seems to be extremely rare
for the swing to the male side to be exactly equal to the swing towards the
female side.
. . . In the first or biological part of my work, I give little attention to
the extreme types, but devote myself to the fullest investigation of the
intermediate stages. In the second part, I shall endeavour to make as full a
psychological analysis as possible of the characters of the male and female
types, and will touch only lightly on concrete instances.
I shall first mention, without laying too much stress on them, some of the
more obvious mental characteristics of the intermediate conditions.
Womanish men are usually extremely anxious to marry, at least (I mention this
to prevent misconception) if a sufficiently brilliant opportunity offers
itself. When it is possible, they nearly always marry whilst they are still
quite young. It is especially gratifying to them to get as wives famous women,
artists or poets, or singers and actresses.
Womanish men are physically lazier than other men in proportion to the degree
of their womanishness. There are "men" who go out walking with the sole object
of displaying their faces like the faces of women, hoping that they will be
admired, after which they return contentedly home. The ancient "Narcissus" was
a prototype of such persons. These people are naturally fastidious about the
dressing of their hair, their apparel, shoes, and linen; they are concerned as
to their personal appearance at all times, and about the minutest details of
their toilet. They are conscious of every glance thrown on them by other men,
and because of the female element in them, they are coquettish in gait and
demeanour. Viragoes, on the other hand, frequently are careless about their
toilet, and even about the personal care of their bodies; they take less time
in dressing than many womanish men. The dandyism of men on the one hand, and
much of what is called the emancipation of women, are due to the increase in
the numbers of these epicene creatures, and not merely to a passing fashion.
Indeed, if one inquires why anything becomes the fashion it will be found that
there is a true cause for it.
The more femaleness a woman possesses the less will she understand a man, and
the sexual characters of a man will have the greater influence on her. This is
more than a mere application of the law of sexual attraction, as I have
already stated it. So also the more manly a man is the less will he understand
women, but the more readily be influenced by them as women. Those men who
claim to understand women are themselves very nearly women. Womanish men often
know how to treat women much better than manly men. Manly men, except in most
rare cases, learn how to deal with women only after long experience, and even
then most imperfectly.
Although I have been touching here in a most superficial way on what are no
more than tertiary sexual characters, I wish to point out an application of my
conclusions to pedagogy. I am convinced that the more these views are
understood the more certainly will they lead to an individual treatment in
education. At the present time shoe-makers, who make shoes to measure, deal
more rationally with individuals than our teachers and schoolmasters in their
application of moral principles. At present the sexually intermediate forms of
individuals (especially on the female side) are treated exactly as if they
were good examples of the ideal male or female types. There is wanted an
"orthopaedic" treatment of the soul instead of the torture caused by the
application of ready-made conventional shapes. The present system stamps out
much that is original, uproots much that is truly natural, and distorts much
into artificial and unnatural forms.
From time immemorial there have been only two systems of education; one for
those who come into the world designated by one set of characters as males,
and another for those who are similarly assumed to be females. Almost at once
the "boys" and the "girls" are dressed differently, learn to play different
games, go through different courses of instruction, the girls being put to
stitching and so forth. The intermediate individuals are placed at a great
disadvantage. And yet the instincts natural to their condition reveal
themselves quickly enough, often even before puberty. There are boys who like
to play with dolls, who learn to knit and sew with their sisters, and who are
pleased to be given girls' names. There are girls who delight in the noisier
sports of their brothers, and who make chums and playmates of them. After
puberty, there is a still stronger display of the innate differences. Manlike
women wear their hair short, affect manly dress, study, drink, smoke, are fond
of mountaineering, or devote themselves passionately to sport. Womanish men
grow their hair long, wear corsets, are experts in the toilet devices of
women, and show the greatest readiness to become friendly and intimate with
them, preferring their society to that of men.
Later on, the different laws and customs to which the so-called sexes are
subjected press them as by a vice into distinctive moulds. The proposals which
should follow from my conclusions will encounter more passive resistance, I
fear, in the case of girls than in that of boys. I must here contradict, in
the most positive fashion, a dogma that is authoritatively and widely
maintained at the present time, the idea that all women are alike, that no
individuals exist amongst women. It is true that amongst those individuals
whose constitutions lie nearer the female side than the male side, the
differences and possibilities are not so great as amongst those on the male
side; the greater variability of males is true not only for the human race but
for the living world, and is related to the principles established by Darwin.
None the less, there are plenty of differences amongst women. The
psychological origin of this common error depends chiefly on a fact that I
explained in chap. iii., the fact that every man in his life becomes intimate
only with a group of women defined by his own constitution, and so naturally
he finds them much alike. For the same reason, and in the same way, one may
often hear a woman say that all men are alike. And the narrow uniform view
about men, displayed by most of the leaders of the women's rights movement
depends on precisely the same cause.
It is clear that the principle of the existence of innumerable individual
proportions of the male and female principles is a basis of the study of
character which must be applied in any rational scheme of pedagogy.
. . . It will be long before official science ceases to regard the study of
physiognomy as illegitimate. Although people will still believe in the
parallelism of mind and body, they will continue to treat the physiognomist as
as much of a charlatan as until quite recently the hypnotist was thought to
be. None the less, all mankind at least unconsciously, and intelligent persons
consciously, will continue to be physiognomists, people will continue to judge
character from the nose, although they will not admit the existence of a
science of physiognomy, and the portraits of celebrated men and of murderers
will continue to interest every one. . . .
|
|
