and vocational guidance. Every new type of school and every new subject
has been introduced before there were teachers trained for the new work.
We stumbled along. Few were greatly concerned over mistakes in the
teaching of penmanship and spelling and millinery and Latin and algebra.
Few protested against the inefficient teaching of physiology as long as
it rattled only dry bones, and had no evident relation to the physical
functions and health of the student. But the moment men proposed to teach
a subject of vital consequence, there was a cry of protest--and rightly.

Here mistakes will not do: here incompetent teachers cannot be trusted.
Ill-advised efforts to teach sex hygiene may aggravate the very evils we
are trying to assuage. Because the subject is of vital importance,
education in sexual hygiene and morals must proceed cautiously and
conservatively; according to tried methods, psychologically sound; always
under the control of men and women of maturity, who see the present
emergency in its many phases, who know how to teach, whose character is in
keeping with the highest ideals of their work, and who approach their
subject with reverence and their pupils with the joy and inspiration which
come from a large opportunity to serve mankind.

Unhappily, not all of those who have been stimulated by the new freedom of
speech to thrust themselves forward as teachers of sex hygiene, and as
social reformers, are safe leaders. Some are ignorant and unaware that
enthusiasm is not a satisfactory substitute for knowledge. Some are
hysterical. At a recent purity convention, a woman said, "I know little
about the facts, but it is wonderful how much ignorance can accomplish
when accompanied by devotion and persistence." That declaration was
applauded. Some people appear to believe that they will arrive safely if
they go rapidly enough and far enough, even though they may be going in
the wrong direction. Many retard the movement for social hygiene by making