Women and free love

There is generally a very erroneous idea about this point of the libertarian ideal, which it would be useful to clarify.

Currently, free love cannot, or is very difficult to, develop all the conditions under which a woman’s life unfolds. To bring this act to a successful conclusion, it requires that the economic emancipation of women be on the same terms as that of men and that she not, in general, have to submit to his whims.

We often hear, when it comes to a capitalist with many lovers, in a humorous tone, that he is a supporter of free love. Nothing could be more absurd than this idea, for it encompasses prostitution and adultery, both of which play no role in free love, since they cannot exist, because from the moment either of these two things occurs, it ceases to be free love.

The union of two beings must be instinctive; It must respond to a feeling of affection, of friendship, engendered by interaction or sympathy; it is a rapport, a juxtaposition of two beings who unite spontaneously without any pacts or ties other than those imposed by natural law, and that same natural law can bring about separation when one of the two individuals feels the need to change their lives.

Acting in this way, there is no room for deception by one person or the other; deception can only occur in a civil or canonical marriage, which imposes a yoke and the need to mutually endure those faults that they have tried to carefully conceal while dating; things that are never done in good faith, giving rise to internal disagreements that almost always end in adultery.

When this extreme has been reached, the man—the usual moralists say—can afford to obtain a wife for money, in any other house, without the dignity of his own wife suffering any damage other than material damage; but for her, it is different, for she is subject to the man’s will because he supports her, and therefore has the absolute right to deny her the enjoyment of life.

But since the force of nature is more consistent and more powerful than the conventional authority of the husband, she rebels and by every means tries to provide herself with the pleasures that the marriage she has entered into denies her.

This is the first step toward adultery, which can end, for a woman lacking resources, pecuniary or intellectual assets, in prostitution.

As a result, we frequently see entire columns in the newspapers dedicated to the narration of acts that are called criminal and that have been called passionate and honorable, and which, in my opinion, are nothing more than logical outcomes of the putrid and infected atmosphere of this society that grants rights to some to the detriment of others.

If these evils are felt by everyone, why not remedy them by casting aside all the prejudices and conventionalisms that lead to nothing but the misfortune of the majority of people?

Are we lovers and defenders of free unions? For this to happen without obstacles, we must place women in economic conditions equal to those enjoyed by men, and free love will prevail by itself, since it is a nameless folly for an individual, man or woman, to condemn themselves to live eternally disgruntled or in perpetual discord with their chosen partner.

The union of two beings without any pacts or ties other than those of love signifies the uselessness of civil and religious institutions and is a great step toward anarchy.