Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: July 6, 2025
As to the relation between sex-hygiene and sex-ethics as phases of the larger sex-education, there has been much discussion. Several writers have contended that there is some conflict between sanitary and moral ends, but have failed to convince most readers that hygiene and ethics should not be associated in teaching.
Summarizing, I have in this lecture aimed to warn the school administrator, and others who must select teachers of classes, against the kinds of teachers who ought not be chosen for presenting the special problems of sex-education, especially those of sex-hygiene and sex-ethics.
In other words, these doubting ones believe that sexual instincts are so firmly fixed in the nature of many men and some women that there is no hope of radical change through education. There is something in this point of view. It is probably true that even the most radical advocates of sex-education do not hope to secure universal monogamy and consequent disappearance of social diseases.
Look at the problems of sex outlined in the earlier lectures from whatever angle we will, and it appears that, in the final analysis, education offers the only key to a possible solution. Therefore, I assert that sex-education the larger sex-education is an absolutely fundamental factor in every phase of the social-hygiene and sex-ethical movement.
Hence, there is no hope that the hygienic task of sex-education will be finished soon after instruction becomes an established part of general education in homes and schools. At the very best there will be incomplete returns for the social-hygienic aspect of sex-instruction, but already we know for a certainty that enough young men will be influenced to make the teaching justifiable.
This lecture, in fact this entire series of lectures on sex-education, is based on the fundamental proposition that sexual morality demands that sexual union be restricted to monogamic marriage, and conversely, that such sexual relation outside of marriage is immoral. Such a definition of sexual morality is accepted by church and state and the chief citizens in every civilized country.
His neglected sex-education makes him far more susceptible to physical attractions than to those qualities which make a wife a good companion, a good housekeeper, and a good mother; and but too often, as a result, the beneficent influence of marriage is transient; the domestic atmosphere ceases to be congenial; both husband and wife become susceptible to other attachments, and the old struggle begins all over again.
Since the revelations concerning the disastrous physical effects of sexual immorality, especially as it exists in the commercialized conditions of the social evil, have had the chief influence in awakening intelligent people from their age-long ignorance and indifference concerning the great sex problems, it was natural that those who first proposed special instruction should have emphasized the social evil and its diseases so much as to create the widespread but erroneous impression that the great aim of sex-education is to teach the distressing facts concerning the pathological consequences of immorality.
Hence, the one essential task of sex-education in its broadest outlook is to guide natural human beings to recognition and choice of the best in the sexual sphere of life.
I am perfectly well aware that many good people will be horrified by the very suggestion that young women should be taught their responsibility for their men associates. Some will declare that the advocates of sex-education propose to destroy the innocence and romance in young women's lives.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking