Social conditions of childhood changed.—The social conditions of childhood have changed much in the last fifty years. Just as our children have opportunities and possibilities far greater than had we when we were children; so they are exposed to temptations and dangers greater than were we, when we were children. The suggestive, and oft-times positively obscene pictures on post cards, in books and on billboards; the viciously immoral literature; the cheap moving picture shows of to-day, were not social problems threatening the purity of our childhood.
Knowledge of self important.—There were ethical, biological and vital truths that our parents, because of mock modesty and a false and inadequate education, failed to give us in our childhood. This was a serious defect in our early education. We met with temptations, were often overcome by them and we are not what we might have been had we been safeguarded by a better knowledge of ourselves. But, because of the better social conditions of our childhood, we were better able to grow up without this information and with less injury to ourselves, than our children can, without this information, under present social conditions. If we would safeguard the character of the children of to-day and the youths of to-morrow and the manhood and the womanhood of the succeeding day we must give our children a correct knowledge of themselves.
The confidence of childhood.—When children are born, they have a capacity for learning how to stand alone, crawl, walk, love and hate, speak and read, to judge of what is right and wrong. All they may come to know in the future, true or false, good or evil, they must learn. Coming into our homes without knowledge and utterly helpless, they naturally come to recognize their parents as their rightful teachers and to have absolute confidence in them. Ask a child from three to ten years old who he thinks is the best man in the world. The reply will be, “my papa.” Ask him who he thinks is the best woman in the world. The instinctive reply will be, “my mamma.” The answer may be true or false, but we do not question the sincerity of the child. The greatest calamity that can come to that child, comes when he is compelled by convincing evidence to reverse in his judgment this sincereand implicit faith in the goodness of his parents. No greater misfortune than this, can come to the parents. This natural and complete confidence and dependence of the child gives the parents a very decided advantage over all other teachers in the future training of the child.
Inquisitiveness of childhood.—It is because of this natural confidence that the child goes to the parents with his many questions. The almost ceaseless activity and playfulness of a child, are in response to nature’s call for exercise in the natural and healthful development of every organ of the body. The many questions of a child are in response to nature’s call for exercise in the development of every faculty of the mind. The unfolding, growing, developing mind of a child naturally asks questions. It is for this reason that a child is said to be an animated interrogation point. Some of the questions of a child may perplex a philosopher, tax the patience of a Job, or embarrass a brass monkey; but the naturalness and sincerity of the child demand honesty, frankness and wisdom on the part of parents.
How did I get into this world?—At the age of three, four and five the child will begin to ask questions as, “Where does the rain come from? Where does the snow come from? Where do the clouds come from?” When kittens, pups, pigs, a calf, a colt are born, the child very naturally asks about their origin. The child is told repeatedly that he is four, five or six years old; that he has had that number of birthdays and has seen that number of Christmases. He remembers only half of them. He listens with interest to his parents as they relate some thrilling event of years gone by. A bright inquiring child will naturally ask, “Mamma, was I in the world at that time?” The mamma replies, “No, darling, that happened six months before you were born.” How very natural it was for the child to ask, “Well, mamma, where was I at that time? How did I get into the world?” An angel could not be more sincere, or ask a purer question. This was no evidence of the child’s depravity. When I find a child of seven or eight years old who has not asked about his origin, I know that one of three conditions will explain this unusual mental state of the child. (1) The parents have not encouraged the child’s mental development by permitting him to be free in asking questions. (2) The child has heard the story of life told by vicious companions, in half truths, clothed in vulgar language and is keeping his information a secret from his parents. (3) The child is not developing quite as fast as I would like for my child to develop.
The unsatisfied mind.—When the inquiring mind of a child has once become interested in this question, it is not possible for him to be satisfied until a plausible answer has been received. The child’s future, physical, mental and moral life more largely depends upon the answer given to this question, than to any other question of his childhood.
The most vital part of a child’s education neglected.—In the past, parents, teachers, reformers and ministers have very largely held to the old theory, that, if children are to be kept pure and innocent, they must be kept ignorant of all information pertaining to sex. We have them learn the physiology, anatomy and hygiene of their brain, heart, lungs, digestive and nervous systems as if their very lives depended upon a correct knowledge of these parts; but we have allowed them to grow up in total ignorance concerning the sacred sanctuary and function of human reproduction, upon which so much of health, happiness and success in life depends.
Mistakes of the past.—In the past all faithful parents have loved their children as much as we have loved our children. They were as much interested in safeguarding the virtue of their children as are the parents of to-day. They endeavored to train their children in harmony with their ideals of right. Our parents, in their childhood, got the idea that all language and information concerning sex was essentially impure. All their information was received from vicious, ignorant sources. In matured life, they came to see that all the words and language they had heard pertaining to sex and all the mental and moral impressions they had received, had done them great harm. Their experience led them unwisely to conclude that all information of this kind is injurious to a child. They failed to see the difference between receiving only half-truths, expressed in vulgar words and phrases, taught by the vicious and ignorant; and in receiving the pure truth, in chaste language from the lips of a wise teacher, a noble father or a pure mother. A nugget of gold may be pure gold, whether found in a mud hole, a slop bucket, a tar bucket, or a clear stream of water. But, if you come in contact with the surroundings of the gold, your remaining clean, becoming cleaner, or becoming soiled, will depend on the place where you find the gold. The effects, good or bad, of sex knowledge, upon a child are largely determined by where and how he gets his information. If he gets this information from a careful and wise teacher no harm can come from it. If he gets the information from the misinformed and the impure, only harm will follow.
To teach sex truths, two qualifications necessary.—You would not think of having your child taught mathematics by one, who, himself, was never properly taught, or who knew only half-truths about mathematics. You might not demand of him a moral qualification, if he possessed the intellectual equipment. But, in the teaching of sex, a moral qualification is even more necessary than the intellectual. But few adults are prepared to tell the story of life to a child, and fewer still are prepared to give additional instruction as the child grows older. For one to do this work successfully two qualifications are absolutely necessary. (1) Parents and teachers must have a moral qualification. They must regard the organs of sex and their functions as pure and sacred. If they have the taint of lasciviousness in their thoughts of the creative function, it would be a dangerous experiment for them to attempt to teach their children about the origin of life, or to give other instruction to those more advanced in years. The misinformation and false education they received in childhood and the consequent mock modesty, are the greatest difficulties in the way of their performing this sacred duty to their children. For this reason the adult classes are as much in need of correct instruction in sex as are the children. (2) Parents and teachers must have a mental qualification. One-fifth of the names referring to the organs of sex, their functions and their abuse, that adults are forced to use when they try to express their thoughts about sex, could not be found in the dictionary, and, one-half of those that could be found in the dictionary would not refer in their meaning, even remotely, to the sexual system. They picked up these words in childhood from ignorant schoolmates and companions whose minds were tainted with debasing thoughts of sex. The use of these vulgar words, in the presence of a boy who has heard them before, suggests to his mind that which is lascivious. Those who would teach these things, to the young or old, should be able to command a chaste, clean, plain, language.
How a father failed.—During one of my courses of lectures, a cultured lawyer invited me to his office for an interview. He reproduced, in language and gesture as best he could, a speech he had made to his twelve-year old boy warning him of the dangers of the secret sin. I saw the lawyer was deeply interested in his boy. He loved him and was deeply concerned about his future. The language he used was the same he had learned when a boy and the same his boy had evidently heard on the playground. I question whether the father’s advice did his son much good. Here was a case where good service was neutralized by suggestive language.
How a teacher failed.—A few months ago I lectured in a city where immorality was appalling. The superintendent of schools called into the chapel about six hundred boys, from ten to eighteen, and attempted to lecture them on social purity. He soon became embarrassed, used some street terms, excited lascivious thoughts, looks, smiles and laughter among the boys and utterly failed in his efforts. If this lawyer and teacher failed with the advantages and solicitude they must have had, would not the great mass of parents, teachers and ministers fail for the same reasons.
Parents not wholly responsible.—A few editors, doctors and reformers have censured parents severely for not teaching their children the truth on these subjects. They should remember that ten years ago a very few parents had read a sane book or listened to an intelligent lecture on these subjects. Their only information had been gained from the playground and street on the sly. Courses of lectures, adapted to age and sex, should be given in every community. Ministers, teachers, physicians, merchants, parents, young and old, educated and uneducated, all should hear them. A few standard books on sex-hygiene and social purity should be put in every home. Jesus said, “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” More people are in physical, mental and moral slavery because of ignorance concerning the laws of sex, than all other causes combined. It follows that those who have learned the truth should impart it to those who have it not.
How children have been treated in the past.—We have seen how parents have been led in the past to conclude that all information as to the origin of life is injurious to a child. For a child to inquire, “Where was I before I was born? How did I get into this world?” was a sure sign of his depravity. As a result of these traditionary ideas some parents have slapped a child for asking about his origin. Still, others have scolded and ordered the child from the room, commanding him never to ask such ugly questions again. What must be the feelings of a child treated in such an unappreciative and heartless way! Such treatment has never satisfied the inquiring mind of any child. Under such treatment a child will go off alone, pained and puzzled to know what was wrong in that simple, natural, honest question. In most cases the child’s question has been evaded by some one of a hundred falsehoods about “swamps,” “sinkholes,” “hollow logs and stumps,” “bird nests,” “storks,” “old women,” “doctor’s satchel,” and “under a cabbage head.” When only a small boy, I was called from my bed early one spring morning to see a beautiful colt the mare had found. For awhile I looked at the colt with admiration and wonder. Then I very naturally inquired, “Where did the mare find her colt?” I was told that she found it in a nearby brush pile. For the next six months no brush pile escaped my eager eyes.
An example.—On my second lecture trip through Canada, a father told me how he answered his little girl’s question, “Papa, how did I get into this world?” His answer was as follows: “Daughter, God dropped you out of heaven one day while it was raining. Papa saw you falling from a cloud and ran out and caught you in his arms and brought you into the house.” That father was boasting of his tact and wisdom.
Another example.—A mother in the South, in reply to a similar question asked by her five-year-old boy, said: “Son, God sent you into this town on the Cotton Belt train, about three o’clock one afternoon. The doctor was at the depot and saw you. He knew that we wanted a little boy, so he put you in his satchel and brought you to mamma.” When this mother related this to me, her boy was nine years old and had not asked her another word about his origin. At the close of my lecture, with tears in her eyes, she said: “Professor, do you suppose that my little boy has been hearing vulgar stories and is keeping his information a secret from mamma?” “Yes, nine times out of ten, if you have a bright boy,” was my reply. Upon investigation she found that her boy had been hearing vulgar talk for about three years. How long do you suppose it will take that boy to eradicate from his mind and heart the evil effects of such training? It is not a question whether your child and mine shall get this information or not. That question is settled. The child will get the information. The questions for us to settle are: When shall this information be given? Who shall give it? What shall be given? How shall it be given?
Results of the old method.—I shall not call in question the love, sincerity and honesty of these parents. In most cases they were sincere and did the best they knew how. I am concerned about the results of this time-honored method. Did the old method of deception, misleading and false replies ever satisfy the inquiring mind of a child? Did the old method ever make a child wiser? Did it ever lead a child to regard human reproduction as delicate, sacred and pure? Did it ever lead a child to greater love and faith in its parents? Only negative answers can be given to all these questions.
How the child finds out.—As a rule, it is not long after a child becomes interested in his origin until some older child, a playmate or servant will say, “I know something that you do not know. You would like to know it. It is how little children come into this world. I will tell you all about it, if you will not tell your mamma and papa about it.” I do not care how good the child may be, how well trained, or how obedient: such is the intense interest of a child in the mystery of his life that he will agree to keep the story a secret. Now the child listens eagerly to the half-truths, couched in impure language and gets a perverted vision of the origin of life.
What are some of the results?—Five very sad misfortunes have come to the child. (1) The child has learned that his parents evaded his question; in most cases, he discovers the answer to have been a falsehood. (2) To the extent that the child comprehends the falsehood, does he lose confidence in his parents. (3) He has learned to keep these vital matters a secret from his parents. (4) The child cannot think of his parents’ relation to the initial of his life, except in terms of vulgarity. Early images do not easily leave the mind of a child. Ugly words, impure pictures, obscene language, with all their vile suggestiveness, ofttimes remain through life. (5) He regards the organs of sex and their functions as vile and sinful. God never planned that any human being should entertain any such degrading and demoralizing views of the divinely created organs and function of human reproduction. It is impossible to estimate the evil effects of this false training. Yet, there are many people, often very religious, who estimate their modesty, refinement and culture by the degree of conscious shame they have when questions of sex are referred to. Just to the extent that we fail to see that God is the author of sex, that sex is sacred and pure, our glory and not our shame, has a false training degraded us.
Boys lose confidence in their parents.—You ask, does a child lose confidence in his parents when he has discovered that they have told him a falsehood about his origin? Certainly he does. In the past three years not fewer than seven hundred and fifty young men from eighteen to thirty-five have written me for advice in regard to their youthful indiscretions. One question I have invariably asked those young men, “Did your father ever warn you of your sexual dangers?” Only two have replied in the affirmative. Those young men were once as innocent and pure as your little boy. They first went to their parents for information about these delicate matters. They were treated as I have described. They received their information from sources and in a way that led to sexual abuse.
Girls lose confidence in mother.—While on a seven thousand-mile lecture trip, in company with twenty other lecturers, conducting purity conventions in many of the large cities in the United States and Canada, after the evening sessions were over, in company with one or two detectives and other parties of our crowd, we visited the “red light” districts and saw several thousand erring girls from twelve to twenty years old. Those girls were once as innocent, pure and sweet as yours or mine. They first went to their mothers and asked about the origin of their lives. Those were golden opportunities for safeguarding the virtue of those girls. More easily than at any other time in life could those girls have been impressed with the sacredness of sex. At no other time in life is it so true that “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Much more of Christian effort is put forth to rescue the fallen than to prevent the youths from falling. More churches are open to lectures on rescue work than on preventive work. More money can be raised for rescue work than can be raised to prevent youths from falling.
Boys and girls want to know the real truth.—One morning a number of high school boys requested that I give them a lecture more advanced than the one I had given. While passing through the hall, at the close of this special lecture to the young men, I was approached by the lady principal with the request from the high school girls for a special lecture. She told me that fourteen had made the request and that several added: “We wish that Prof. Shannon was a lady lecturer. There are so many things we would like to know, but would hesitate to ask a gentleman lecturer.” Then the lady teacher added, “I said, girls, why do you not ask your mamma for such information?” With hands uplifted, a look of surprise, a gasp for breath, those girls replied: “I would not think of asking mamma such questions.” Why not? Let me tell you why. When they were little innocent girls they went to their mothers with their first questions of sex. They were treated as already indicated. Their inquiring minds and unsatisfied interests in the mysteries of life led them to go elsewhere for this information. It was at this point in their lives that a chasm started to form between themselves and their mothers. There is not one boy in twenty-five who will go voluntarily to his father for information or advice about his sex-nature. The same statement is almost as true about girls and their mothers.
1,000,000 children adrift.—1,500,000 children are born annually in this Christian nation. One-third of this number die before they are ten years old. Annually one million children inquire, “How did I get into this world?” Not more than one in twenty receive a kind, truthful and intelligent reply. More than nine-tenths are treated in one of the following ways: (1) Told some one of fifty falsehoods. (2) A slap, with orders to clear out. (3) Some form of ridicule, such as “shame on you.” “Don’t let me hear you ask such an ugly question again.” “I am disgusted with you.” That settles it. The golden cords of confidence and influence are severed. Never again will those children go to their parents for information pertaining to sex. Elsewhere, they will find friends who will gladly give them the information. These children, one million strong, are now adrift on the storm-tossed sea of passion, without chart or compass; drifting, drifting, drifting for years toward ports, to them, unknown.
Danger!
The virtue of a quarter of a million of boys sacrificed.—Time passes. The boys are now sixteen to twenty-five. They have boon and base companions. Their imaginations are at fever heat with morbid interest and their ambitions are aflame with daring. One quarter of a million young men annually sacrifice the priceless gem of manhood’s virtue just here. Now, they are nearing the fearful rapids of vice where most of this number annually become diseased and many perish as sex-maniacs in the awful maelstrom of lust.
60,000 girls annually.—With the passing of time, the girls from twelve to seventeen, many without the safeguard of knowledge, are associating freely, gayly with their boon male companions, exposed to all the temptations and dangers incident to young womanhood. Many, many thousand young women annually sacrifice the priceless gem of womanhood’s virtue just here. Owing to the double standard of morals, sixty thousand of this number are forced against their own wills into the public maelstroms of immorality.
Who is to blame.—Thousands of poor prudish parents line the shores, and, with broken, bleeding hearts are crying out in anguish, “My God, my God, why has this awful blow fallen on us?” The poor, ignorant, diseased, exiled, passion-ridden children, in many cases beyond the reach of the home, society and the church, exclaim, “Oh, if I had only been told of these dangers!”
All along the almost socially inaccessible rock-bound shores of this sea of human passion, the churches and philanthropists are building and maintaining rescue and foundling homes at an outlay of millions in money. They are not, and cannot, rescue one in twenty. The foundling homes are crowded to a dangerous, unsanitary overflowing with illegitimate children, whose mothers are out in the rapids of vice, or entirely lost in the maelstrom of immorality. Too long have the churches been satisfied with snatching, here and there, a piece of human wreckage from the waves of vice, instead of erecting a lighthouse system of properly warning and informing the childhood of the land.
The new way.—We have seen the results of the old way of dealing with children in matters of sex. Is there a new and better way? We shall see. “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” The new and better way is to tell the truth to the child.
How shall a child be told.—One day when our little girls were four and six, wife said, “Husband, I am in trouble about our little girls. They are asking where they were before they were born and how they got into this world. How am I to answer them?” “Tell them the truth,” was my reply. “But, they are not old enough to be told the whole truth,” was her reply. We talked over the problem and arrived at the following solution of the problem: Since I had been a teacher of biology for years, and it was presumed that I was familiar with the stories of life among the plants and animals, it was agreed that I should at once tell them a nice little story about God’s beautiful plan of bringing all the little plants into the world. Six months later I was to tell them the story of life about the oysters and fish. Every six months to a year I was to tell them a more advanced story. As they were girls, wife reserved the right to tell them the last story to be told when they were nine and ten.
These stories were all told in the order given. Our girls are now twelve and fourteen. We have never had an occasion to regret that we have followed this natural method of instructing them. They seem to have no morbid curiosity about questions of sex. They look upon the facts as being natural, sacred and pure. Wife and I can approach them on these subjects without embarrassment to them or us.
When should a child be told?—The average boy should be told all these stories by the time he is eight, not later than nine. The average girl should be told all these stories by the time she is nine, not later than ten. The developing mind of the average child and the social influences to which he is exposed, demand that he be safeguarded by the whole truth, this early in life. While the girl and boy develop alike until they are ten or eleven, the boy being exposed to vicious companions more than is his sister, he should be told the story of life earlier than she. At the age of seven, boys know more about these things than the girls do at ten and twelve. You had better tell the child the truth at six, than to have him told by the vicious at the age of seven. If a child could understand the story of life at three, and was properly trained afterward, this information could not do him one particle of harm. This statement is either absolutely true, or God is the author of a plan of human increase, the knowledge of which is essentially sinful. Personally, I decline to believe the latter.
If the child has been informed by vicious playmates or servants and his mind has been tainted, the only sane and safe method is to tell him the full truth as quickly as possible, regardless of his age.
If the child has been allowed to grow up to the age of nine or ten, ignorant of the story of life, I would tell him all the stories, beginning with the first story, telling them only a few days apart. Where parents are not prepared to do this, I would advise them to place a suitable book, presenting these stories in a clear, chaste and interesting way, in the hands of the child, saying, “Here is a very interesting little book telling you just what you will be interested in knowing and what I would like for you to understand.”
The ideal way.—The ideal way would be to start with the child when he first inquires about his origin, telling him the first story about the plants. Promise to tell him other stories about the oysters, fish, insects, birds, animals and man as he grows older and can understand them. Where a child is naturally very inquisitive and insists on knowing more, I would not hold him off too long for the next story.
How to introduce each new story.—I would introduce each new story by reviewing the story of the plants and flowers. There are at least three reasons for this. (1) You can go into all the details of reproduction in the flower without danger of awakening the sex consciousness of the child. (2) It saves going into the detail when you have come to the higher animals and man. The child’s mind usually comprehends more than we give it credit for. If he understands the details of reproduction in the flower, his innocent fancy will fill in the details when he hears the other stories. (3) If he has been so unfortunate as to fall in with bad company at any time and his mind has been tainted with their stories, there is no means you can use in ridding his mind of impurity, quite so effectively, as by telling him the story of life in the flower.
Teaching these truths in the public schools.—The violation of the laws of sex is the chief cause of physical, mental and moral degeneracy. The degenerate classes are increasing at an appalling rate. Correct sex-instruction in childhood is the most important and effective step in the solution of this problem. There is a growing conviction among the students of sociology that sex-hygiene should be taught in the public schools. There are some teachers in all departments of school work, who, in morals at least, are not fitted for this delicate work. At present, an extremely few have the educational qualification for this delicate work. When teachers are required to take a course of training in these subjects, there will still be but few who are possessed of the natural talent for effectively and wisely presenting these subjects to children of the different grades.
Already colleges and universities and even a few high schools have begun to teach sex hygiene in a limited scientific way. This work will first be introduced into the high school work and later, gradually be introduced into the lower grades. Definite instruction will not be given, for many years at least, and possibly never, to boys under eight, and girls under ten or eleven. If this statement is true, it will be seen that the schools will have left the first and most important part of this training to be done in the home. The teaching of morals in the public school can never be substituted for the teaching of morals in the home. The present great awakening on these subjects will shortly result in three-fourths of the parents teaching these truths in their homes. Since one-fourth of the children do not get any moral instruction in the home and they do not go to Sunday school or church, the public school is the only place where they can be given moral training for citizenship.
How this can be done.—In my opinion, the safest and most effective method of dealing with these questions in the public schools, for the present at least, would be for the school boards in two or three counties to select and employ a gentleman and a lady lecturer, having natural gifts, moral and educational qualifications, whose duty it shall be to lecture to all the boys and girls; the male lecturer, lecturing to the boys and the lady lecturer, lecturing to the girls. All other teachers should be required to be sufficiently versed in these matters to enable them to solve any individual problems that may arise in their social relations to the pupils in school.