The Want of New Men – R.B. Kerr, 10/15/1898

Republished from our predecessor publication Lucifer the Light Bearer

Here is the text with corrected spelling, fixed typos, proper formatting (paragraph breaks, punctuation), and minor
grammatical improvements for clarity and readability while preserving the original meaning, style, and early 20th-
century tone: It is commonly assumed by men that women are the great stumbling block to progress on the sex
question. That is certainly not my experience. I have found it easier to bring ten women into the sex movement
than one man. Moreover, I have found that the chief difficulties in convincing women are difficulties arising from
the backwardness of men. I think there can be little doubt that most men are conservative on all questions relating
to the relations of the sexes. They hate the new woman and all her works. Even such things as contraceptives,
which would help poor men to live better by enabling them to reduce their families, are generally disliked by
men; and, if used at all, are used because the woman wishes it. Most men worship the Old Ideal with sincere
and superstitious veneration, little as they would dream of putting it into practice. Perhaps it is because they
have never been compelled to practice it, that they worship it so much. On the other hand, the women of the
present day are not conservative in temperament. That vague thing called the woman movement has been very
much in evidence for a whole generation, and particularly so since about 1890. Most women do not know exactly
what they are driving at, but they feel that they are driving at something. That it is the thing to be a new woman
is dimly perceived by many who could not for the life of them mention any quality or opinion which such a woman
ought to have. The instinctive radicalism of the women of our time makes it comparatively easy to approach them
on what is par excellence the sex question. Indeed, it is very easy to make a good start in discussing sex matters
with a woman. If she knows anything at all of current literature, or if she has ever gone out into the world to earn
her living, she will readily admit that the present system is bad. She will confess that a change is needed.

If she is happily married, she will perhaps say that a little change will do; but if she is a widow, a spinster, or
unhappily married, she will say that the change required must be a very great one. But then the question arises:
what is the change to be? It is here that we begin to climb the hill of difficulty. Sexual freedom is proposed.
At this point the woman who is happily married sees her monopoly threatened, and walks out of the room in
high dudgeon. You are left to have it out with the true revolutionists: the widow, the spinster, and the woman
who is unhappily married. The first great objection comes from the widow and the spinster. How can sexual
freedom be practiced without ruinous mishaps? That objection is soon disposed of. If you are in a country
where the press is free on the subject of contraceptives, there is plenty of good literature which can be carried
in the pocket and handed to the enquirer. Even in America, I suppose the earnest soul can find some way out
of the difficulty. Then comes the battle royal. Men, it is said, cannot be trusted. Let a woman give a man any
power over her and she will repent it as long as she lives. At best, the man will despise her; at worst, he will
try to make a slave of her. In any case, he is so careless that she can never consider her secrets safe in his
keeping. If anyone doubts these things, let her go out into the streets late in the evening and see the wrecks
which men have made. How profoundly men are mistrusted by women, and especially by advanced women,
most men do not realize. But it is true all the same. A few weeks ago a young lady wrote me as follows: “I really
used to think that all men were alike in their endeavors to trample on and crush the weaker sex.” Another lady
tells me that when she was a young girl she read a book in which a husband is described as feeling great agony
on account of his wife at the time of child-birth. This at once struck her as utterly unnatural, because she did
not think it possible that a man could sympathize with the sufferings of a woman.

I know a lady happily married herself, who has been a Freethinker all her life, and a tower of strength in many
movements for human freedom; but when she heard of the bill introduced last year in Kansas to emasculate men
who committed rape on women she approved of it. She also approves of its application to cases of association
with girls under eighteen, even with their own consent. Yet this lady has no more belief in the sacredness of
marriage and chastity than she has in the Tower of Babel. She merely considers them a good shelter against
a sex whose members she looks upon as wild beasts. Those who read intelligent Puritan papers like “The
Woman’s Signal” soon discover what an immense number of able and truth-loving women sincerely believe
in this view of life. George Egerton’s books are full of women who have learnt to mistrust men. Another objection
made by women is that the men who are trustworthy are too conventional to play their part in promoting sexual
freedom. Many women tell me that “nice” men cannot be brought up to the scratch without a broader hint
than most women are willing to give. An English lady, active in sex propaganda, writes as follows: “I find
less opposition in theory than I expected, though very little intention of converting theory into fact. But really
there seems to me quite as much difficulty in meeting with a sweetheart as there is to find a husband, most
men having such conventional views on this point. It is almost impossible for a woman to make the first
advance. I am sure that any man whom I liked might visit me till doomsday, unless he made the first sign.”
Mrs. Wilcox lately complained that women do not write enough for Lucifer. I hope they will come forward
in crowds to give their opinions on the questions I have raised in this article.