CHAPTER III.

SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS.

The Greek Attitude Towards Nakedness—­How the Romans Modified That
Attitude—­The Influence of Christianity—­Nakedness in Mediaeval
Times—­Evolution of the Horror of Nakedness—­Concomitant Change in the
Conception of Nakedness—­Prudery—­The Romantic Movement—­Rise of a New
Feeling in Regard to Nakedness—­The Hygienic Aspect of Nakedness—­How
Children May Be Accustomed to Nakedness—­Nakedness Not Inimical to
Modesty—­The Instinct of Physical Pride—­The Value of Nakedness in
Education—­The AEsthetic Value of Nakedness—­The Human Body as One of the
Prime Tonics of Life—­How Nakedness May Be Cultivated—­The Moral Value of
Nakedness.

The discussion of the value of nakedness in art leads us on to the allied question of nakedness in nature.  What is the psychological influence of familiarity with nakedness?  How far should children be made familiar with the naked body?  This is a question in regard to which different opinions have been held in different ages, and during recent years a remarkable change has begun to come over the minds of practical educationalists in regard to it.

In Sparta, in Chios, and elsewhere in Greece, women at one time practiced gymnastic feats and dances in nakedness, together with the men, or in their presence.[40] Plato in his Republic approved of such customs and said that the ridicule of those who laughed at them was but “unripe fruit plucked from the tree of knowledge.”  On many questions Plato’s opinions changed, but not on this.  In the Laws, which are the last outcome of his philosophic reflection in old age, he still advocates (Bk. viii) a similar co-education of the sexes and their cooeperation in all the works of life, in part with a view to blunt the over-keen edge of sexual appetite; with the same object he advocated the association together of youths and girls without constraint in costumes which offered no concealment to the form.

It is noteworthy that the Romans, a coarser-grained people than the Greeks and in our narrow modern sense more “moral,” showed no perception of the moralizing and refining influence of nakedness.  Nudity to them was merely a licentious indulgence, to be treated with contempt even when it was enjoyed.  It was confined to the stage, and clamored for by the populace.  In the Floralia, especially, the crowd seem to have claimed it as their right that the actors should play naked, probably, it has been thought, as a survival of a folk-ritual.  But the Romans, though they were eager to run to the theatre, felt nothing but disdain for the performers.  “Flagitii principium est, nudare inter cives corpora.”  So thought old Ennius, as reported by Cicero, and that remained the genuine Roman feeling to the last.  “Quanta perversitas!” as Tertullian exclaimed.  “Artem magnificant, artificem notant."[41] In this matter the Romans, although they aroused the horror of the Christians, were yet in reality laying the foundation of Christian morality.