THE END OF PRUDERY

Evening Star, Issue 20510, 14 June 1930, Page 29

THE END OF PRUDERY

The Archbishop of Canterbury, speaking at a meeting of the Loudon .Diocesan Council for Rescue Work, appropriately discussed tho problem ot youth and sex, and, although ho saul in this subject only what reflecting persons must already have assumed him to believe, his words marked such a formal ecclesiastical break with an old tradition that they stand out like a milestone on the road along which wo travel (observes the ‘Spectator’). “ I would rather,” ho exclaimed with emphasis, “ have all the risks which come from free discussion of sex than tho great risks we run by a conspiracy of silence.” Ho explained tho extent of the change which has come in little more than twenty years;— I notice how silence has given place to complete and free discussion. In my judgment this is a great improvement. In tho old days silence drove on.j of tho_ necessarily natural instincts within. Nowadays people recognise sex as one of the great fundamental questions of human society, and all thoughtful Christians and citizens ought to take their part in discussing the great problems with which it deals. . . . We want to liberate tho sox impulse from the impression that it is always to bo surrounded by negative warnings and restraints, and to place it in its . rightful place among the great creative and formative things. Looking backward, every thinking person who stands in any responsible relation to children must" bo appalled at the thought of tho dangers which used wrong-headedly to bo accepted. Boys and girls, becoming aware of the most powerful instincts and impulses of human nature, were left in a cruel position of loneliness. It was as though they were shut up alone in a room to

fight all the ghosts aml bogys with which their nurses had frightened them. They had no sense of support. Perhaps they communicated their thouglits to companions of their own age—who were as dangerously ignorant as themselves—hut they knew from many inti root or tacit admonitions that their i ers wished to regard the whole subject of sex as unmentionable. It was the greatest of our social taboos. If the preceptors of that time had maliciously tried to invent a system for compolling morbid introspection, with all its debasing results, they could hardly have contrived more cleverly than to think out the prudery of mid-Victor-lanjsm. Of course, in this matter, as in most other matters of delicacy, there is a danger of going to the other extreme. If the Victorian parent thought that safety was only to he obtained by flight—the parent fleeing and leaving the child exposed to the enemy—bo, at all events, erred from want of imagination, and not quite so much as is generally assumed from want of courage. Tc-day the preceptor may have only too much imagination. Ho is so convinced that it is his duty to explain, to warn, and again to warn and explain, without ceasing, that he sometimes creates an obsession whore there need bo none. Many teachers will probably admit that they have experienced shame or humiliation when rhey discovered that statements which caused them a miserable embarrassment were received by the pupils with a startling composure. facts which continually drop out of the mind of the child obviously cannot have produced a painful impression. 'Hie forgetfulness of the child on such subjects—ought really to be regarded as a charming encouragement, and a reassuring warning against the tendency of older people to assume that their thoughts are reproduced in the child Every child who, in the oldfashioned phrase, has been “ well brought up 1 ’ is protected by a certain

natural modesty. Some teachers seem to be quite unaware of this. It would bo better if they did not protest too much and thus create the very atmosphere of morbidness which it is their intention to dissipate. The appearance z ll ' of being ill at case is easily detected by a child; it is a manifestation of a mental state as communicable as fear. The boy who, when discussing these subjects, is at ease with his elders and tools that his elders are at ease with him, is not merely put in possession of a decalogue of prohibitions; ho is fortified by a positive understanding of what will beautify and ennoble his iite

In such happy circumstances there will l>e little need for his parents to assure themselves beyond doubt that tho school ho goes to has a “ good tone ” —as though such a thing could be guaranteed in any place filled with fugitive generations! Come what may, ho will bo safe. The greater his temptation the stronger will he become. .We entirely agree with the Archbishop of Canterbury that the trust which is now placed in boys and girls to associate together with a freedom hitherto unknown is a groat gain, it may_ be that for developing tho special qualities of both sexes education in separate schools is psychologically right; but the principle which underlies co-education at all events comprehends an important consideration. The uncontrolled companionship of boys and girls is disposing of a silly mystery. A glorious new country lias been opened up where honour, loyalty, responsibility, and common-sense aro tho qualities which earn and deserve respect. Our fathers regarded this unmapped world as a barbarous, dangerous, and diabolical place which lay beyond tho Gates of Hercules, it is now discovered. Tho loss was theirs; the gain is ours.