en by men, and which has
led on and on into social and political complications of gravest
significance. The very nature of the feminist revolt from masculine
domination made plain speaking on sex matters inevitable.

[Sidenote: Reaction against sensational frankness.]

Neither of these sources of plain speech need give us cause for alarm,
for a great reaction is already coming. The sensationalism of sexual
revelations has had its day, and the intelligent public is recovering
its balance. A lurid novel or play resembling "Damaged Goods" or "The
House of Bondage" or certain vice-commission reports would not now be
accepted by some prominent publishers who recently would not have
hesitated to seize a first-class commercial opportunity in this line.
The fact is that sexual sensationalism has ceased to pay because the
intelligent public knows the main facts and has become disgusted with
crude frankness that amounts to lasciviousness. On the side of feminism
there is hope in the widespread disgust with Cristabel Pankhurst's
"Plain Facts on a Great Evil" as compared with the very general
approval of Louise Creighton's polished masterpiece, "The Social Evil
and How to Fight It." This represents exactly the present attitude of
numerous men and women who calmly discuss together the great problems
of life fearlessly and without any elements of lasciviousness such as
some people seem to think is necessarily associated with either
unsexual or bisexual discussion of sex problems.

[Sidenote: Not a typical case.]

Miss Repplier's description of her own lack of youthful interest in
things sexual is of value simply as applied to a limited number of
extra-protected girls. Her experience teaches us nothing regarding boys
or even girls under average conditions. We know beyond any doubt that
average children in or near adolescence do seek the kind of information
that Miss Repplier denies having thought about. It is not "pressed
relentlessly upon their attention" by teachers, but by instinct and by
environment. Playground and swimming pools and religious influence and
work are all helpful in our dealings with young people, but all
together they are inadequate without some information concerning sex.

[Sidenote: Conclusion.]

Finally, Miss Repplier, like so many other critics of sex-instruction,
has in mind only the physical consequences of wrong-doing. Here again
is the influence of the pioneer sex-hygiene. However, she pleads for
the