of Bonn,
was skeptical of the advantage of any propaganda of abstinence:
"if all the authorities in the world declared the harmlessness of
abstinence that would have no influence on youth. Forces are here
in play that break through all obstacles." The harmlessness of
abstinence was affirmed by Kraepelin, Cramer, Gaertner, Tuczek,
Schottelius, Gaffky, Finkler, Selenew, Lassar, Seifert, Gruber;
the last, however, added that he knew very few abstinent young
men, and himself only considered abstinence good before full
development, and intercourse not dangerous in moderation even
before then. Brieger knew cases of abstinence without harmful
results, but himself thought that no general opinion could be
given. Juergensen said that abstinence _in itself_ is not harmful,
but that in some cases intercourse exerts a more beneficial
influence. Hoffmann said that abstinence is harmless, adding that
though it certainly leads to masturbation, that is better than
gonorrhoea, to say nothing of syphilis, and is easily kept within
bounds. Struempell replied that sexual abstinence is harmless, and
indirectly useful as preserving from the risk of venereal
disease, but that sexual intercourse, being normal, is always
more desirable. Hensen said that abstinence is not to be
unconditionally approved. Rumpf replied that abstinence was not
harmful for most before the age of thirty, but after that age
there was a tendency to mental obsessions, and marriage should
take place at twenty-five. Leyden also considered abstinence
harmless until towards thirty, when it leads to psychic
anomalies, especially states of anxiety, and a certain
affectation. Hein replied that abstinence is harmless for most,
but in some leads to hysterical manifestations and indirectly to
bad results from masturbation, while for the normal man
abstinence cannot be directly beneficial, since intercourse is
natural. Gruetzner thought that abstinence is almost never
harmful. Nescheda said it is harmless in itself, but harmful in
so far as it leads to unnatural modes of gratification. Neisser
believes that more prolonged abstinence than is now usual would
be beneficial, but admitted the sexual excitations of our
civilization; he added that of course he saw no harm for healthy
men in intercourse. Hoche replied that abstinence is quite