nl_e17

Campbell, "Why an Age of Consent?" April 1895
laws. It is urged by the conservative ones, those upon whose lips false
modesty and false ideas of propriety have set the seal of silence, that
"It is not womanly to speak of those things; it will not do for our
daughters to hear about them: If we speak plainly on this subject we
shall suggest the very evil we wish to cure, and thus do more harm
than good." Do those who urge this objection (and they are far too
numerous) ever think of the harm that has been done because we
have been silent on these vital questions? Do they ever think of the
thousands of young women and of young men who have gone astray,
who have fallen into the awful vortex of destruction, because of their
ignorance of these things, because some one who knew did not point
out to them the pitfalls that awaited their unsuspecting feet? Fully onehalf
of the girls who fall into that life that is worse than death, fall
because of their ignorance of the laws of their being and of the penalty
that results from a disregard of those laws. Can we longer remain
silent and be guiltless ourselves? Have we not a responsibility in this
matter that we cannot afford to shirk?
It is time for the great search-light of God's eternal truth to be
turned on these dark places; it is time for the seal to be removed from
the lips that have so long been silent; it is time for the plain speaking to
reveal to innocent, unsuspecting girlhood the snares that are set to
entangle her feet. This long continued silence is the tribute which
unbridled lust has demanded of us; and that we have, without
remonstrance, paid it too long, the increasing army of unwarned,
unfortunate, helpless victims will bear witness. Whatever may be our
shortcomings in the future, let us never be guilty of the sin of silence!
Our laws are shamelessly unequal when they make the
punishment for stealing away a woman's honor no greater than for the
purloining of her wardrobe, or when they give the man who robs her of
her character a lighter sentence than he who steals her purse would
incur; but what terms are strong enough to use in their condemnation
when they make little girls, ten and twelve years of age, the lawful prey
of lecherous villainy? Has American fatherhood fallen so low that it is
willing to have laws stand upon our statute books that protect
libertines, but do not protect our little girls? Is there a man, worthy of
being called a man, who believes that a little girl twelve years of age is
so well versed in the world's villainies that she is able to protect herself
against the wiles of designing and unscrupulous lust? And if it was his
own daughter whose purity had been sullied by some wretch who had
taken advantage of her innocent ignorance and had compassed her
ruin, would he consider it an adequate defense if the villain should
http://womhist.binghamton.edu/aoc/doc15.htm (2 of 5) [6/5/2005 8:51:56 PM]