It seems likely, though this is surely speculative, that what might be regarded as the “darker” elements of the human mind, its inclination to cruelty, and its willingness to inflict, and, in cases, its willingness to accept inflicted suffering, are indeed products of evolution, either in its simple survival aspect or in its more complex survival-cum-sexual aspects. If man had to fight for survival, had to hunt and hurt and make war, it seems likely that finding pleasure in such activities, and thus having a built-in reinforcement device, would be of survival value to him. If he did not enjoy stalking game and making the kill he would be less willing to hunt. Similarly, he may well have sought mates who were to him like game, sleek, beautiful and desirable, frightened of him, who could be caught and owned, and tamed, and who, in his snare, would writhe and cry out. Man, probably the sexual aggressor, has doubtless formed the biological character of woman, and, in so doing, through her, his own. I am assuming that a woman has a biological character. I am assuming she is not merely a hollow body, a tabula rasa, an emptiness, waiting to be filled with culture and molded by conditioning. It is true that a human being must be acculturated and is, in fact, subject to fantastic conditionings. It is my supposition, however, that there exists something which is conditioned, a body and a brain which is the result of several million years of survival-selected and sexually selected genetic transmissions. The “hollow body” theory does not seem plausible. On the other hand, even in our own century, we do not yet know what a woman is, or a man, or why.

We have already suggested a possible explanation for certain aggressive, exploitative, sadistic, cruel elements in man, an explanation connected with his evolutional ascent as an ever more complex predator. We have similarly suggested that such an animal might tend to choose women who, at least in part, would be to him as object, as quarry, as game. Surely an ugly, large, dangerous, threatening woman would be less likely to be sought than one who was beautiful, smaller, less dangerous and less threatening. This is not to make a value judgment. There is probably much to be said for large, ugly, dangerous, threatening women. It is to observe that women, as sexually aggressive men have inadvertently bred them, are now seldom large, ugly, threatening or dangerous. They tend to be fantastically exciting, sexually desirable creatures. This is not just a coincidence. If men would tend to choose women who would be to them as game, they would be, in effect, breeding a certain amount of masochism into the human female. Simultaneously, of course, they would be breeding it into themselves.