A Consideration Of The Co-Education Of The Sexes

Let us quote the authority of such an acute and sagacious observer asDr. Maudsley, in support of the physiological and pathological viewsthat have been here presented. Referring to the physiologicalcondition and phenomena of the first critical epoch, he says, "In thegreat mental revolution caused by the development of the sexual systemat puberty, we have the most striking example of the intimate andessential sympathy between the brain, as a mental organ, and otherorgans of the body. The change of character at this period is not byany means _limited to the appearance of the sexual feelings_, andtheir sympathetic ideas, but, when traced to its ultimate reach, willbe found to extend to the highest feelings of mankind, social, moral,and even religious."[21] He points out the fact that it is very easyby improper training and forced work, during this susceptible period,to turn a physiological into a pathological state. "The great mentalrevolution which occurs at puberty may go beyond its physiologicallimits in some instances, and become pathological." "The time of thismental revolution is at best a trying period for youth." "The monthlyactivity of the ovaries, which marks the advent of puberty in women,has a notable effect upon the mind and body; wherefore it may becomean important cause of mental and physical derangement."[22] Withregard to the physiological effects of arrested development of thereproductive apparatus in women, Dr. Maudsley uses the following plainand emphatic language: "The forms and habits of mutilated men approachthose of women; and women, whose ovaries and uterus remain for somecause in a state of complete inaction, approach the forms and habitsof men. It is said, too, that, in hermaphrodites, the mentalcharacter, like the physical, participates equally in that of bothsexes. While woman preserves her sex, she will necessarily be feeblerthan man, and, having her special bodily and mental characters, willhave, to a certain extent, her own sphere of activity; where she hasbecome thoroughly masculine in nature, or hermaphrodite inmind,--when, in fact, she has pretty well divested herself of hersex,--then she may take his ground, and do his work; but she will havelost her feminine attractions, and probably also her chief femininefunctions."[23] It has been reserved for our age and country, by itsmethods of female education, to demonstrate that it is possible insome cases to divest a woman of her chief feminine functions; inothers, to produce grave and even fatal disease of the brain andnervous system; in others, to engender torturing derangements andimperfections of the reproductive apparatus that imbitter a lifetime.Such, we know, is not the object of a liberal female education. Suchis not the consummation which the progress of the age demands.Fortunately, it is only necessary to point out and prove the existenceof such erroneous methods and evil results to have them avoided. Thatthey can be avoided, and that woman can have a liberal education thatshall develop all her powers, without mutilation or disease, up to theloftiest ideal of womanhood, is alike the teaching of physiology andthe hope of the race.
In concluding this part of our subject, it is well to remember thestatement made at the beginning of our discussion, to the followingeffect, viz., that it is not asserted here, that improper methods ofstudy and a disregard of the reproductive apparatus and its functions,during the educational life of girls, are the _sole_ causes of femalediseases; neither is it asserted that _all_ the female graduates ofour schools and colleges are pathological specimens. But it isasserted that the number of these graduates who have been permanentlydisabled to a greater or less degree, or fatally injured, by thesecauses, is such as to excite the _gravest alarm_, and to demand theserious attention of the community.
The preceding physiological and pathological data naturally open theway to a consideration of the co-education of the sexes.