g., the description of the
operation by J.G. Garson, _Medical Press_, February 21, 1894),
but this is very doubtful, and E.C. Stirling found that
subincised natives often had large families. (_Intercolonial
Quarterly Journal of Medicine and Surgery_, 1894.)
A passage in the _Mainz Chronicle_ for 1367 (as quoted by
Schultz, _Das Hoefische Leben_, p. 297) shows that at that time
the tunics of the men were so made that it was always possible
for the sexual organs to be seen in walking or sitting.
This insistence on the naked sexual organs as objects of attraction is,
however, comparatively rare, and confined to peoples in a low state of
culture. Very much more widespread is the attempt to beautify and call
attention to the sexual organs by tattooing,[135] by adornment and by
striking peculiarities of clothing. The tendency for beauty of clothing to
be accepted as a substitute for beauty of body appears early in the
history of mankind, and, as we know, tends to be absolutely accepted in
civilization.[136] "We exclaim," as Goethe remarks, "'What a beautiful
little foot!' when we have merely seen a pretty shoe; we admire the lovely
waist when nothing has met out eyes but an elegant girdle.
Pages:
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322