minary to the normal sexual act.

Nowadays physicians have fully confirmed the belief of Sanchez.
It is well recognized that women in whom, from whatever cause,
acute sexual excitement occurs with frequency without being
followed by the due natural relief of orgasm are liable to
various nervous and congestive symptoms which diminish their
vital effectiveness, and very possibly lead to a breakdown in
health. Kisch has described, as a cardiac neurosis of sexual
origin, a pathological tachycardia which is an exaggeration of
the physiological quick heart of sexual excitement. J. Inglis
Parsons (_British Medical Journal_, Oct. 22, 1904, p. 1062)
refers to the ovarian pain produced by strong unsatisfied sexual
excitement, often in vigorous unmarried women, and sometimes a
cause of great distress. An experienced Austrian gynaecologist
told Hirth (_Wege zur Heimat_, p. 613) that of every hundred
women who come to him with uterine troubles seventy suffered from
congestion of the womb, which he regarded as due to incomplete
coitus.

It is frequently stated that the evil of incomplete gratification
and absence of orgasm in women is chiefly due to male withdrawal,
that is to say _coitus interruptus_, in which the penis is
hastily withdrawn as soon as involuntary ejaculation is
impending; and it is sometimes said that the same widely
prevalent practice is also productive of slight or serious
results in the male (see, e.g., L.B. Bangs, _Transactions New
York Academy of Medicine_, vol. ix, 1893; D.S. Booth, "Coitus
Interruptus and Coitus Reservatus as Causes of Profound Neurosis
and Psychosis," _Alienist and Neurologist_, Nov., 1906; also,
_Alienist and Neurologist_, Oct., 1897, p. 588).

It is undoubtedly true that coitus interruptus, since it involves
sudden withdrawal on the part of the man without reference to the
stage of sexual excitation which his partner may have reached,
cannot fail to produce frequently an injurious nervous effect on
the woman, though the injurious effect on the man, who obtains
ejaculation, is little or none. But the practice is so widespread
that it cannot be regarded as necessarily involving this evil
result. There can, I am assured, be no doubt whatever that
Blumreich is justified in his statement (Senator and Kaminer,
_Health and Disease in Relation