the early Victorian mind-set, the entire subject of sexuality was sothing to be repressed. It was only in this manner that the "dangeropolicy of coeducation could even be contemplated by school leadersthe 19th century (Rury & Harper, 1986).Sexuality and Equity in Education:The Scientists Attack CoeducationIn the decades following the Civil War a new set of issues emerregarding sexuality and sex equity in education. Medical doctors published treatises arguing that higher education was potentially harmfuwomen, and other scientists maintained that coeducation posed a potial danger in "feminizing" young men. New curricula were devisedprotect women and to promote masculine behavior among the bPhysical education and vocational courses started to become prominin these years. Each of these changes, however, was perfectly consistwith the Victorian conception of superior morality and passivitfemale virtues. The latter 19th century was a period of rapid urbanizaand industrial development in the United States. As a popular isssexuality in education continued to reflect widespread anxiety aboutnew role that women would play in a fast changing social context.Many popular Victorian assumptions about sexuality found their winto scientific discourse during the 19th century. This appears to hbeen especially true of the years following the Civil War, as Ameriscientists turned their attention to a growing number of populaissues. In particular, American physicians devoted a great deal of efto explaining what they believed to be fundamental differences inphysiology of men and women, many of them grounded to one extPEABODY JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONSex Equity and Sexuality in EducationDespite these concerns, however, coeducation eventually became thprevailing mode of school organization in the United States, even atsecondary level. Single sex schools were simply too expensive aexclusionary for most communities to consider (Rury, 1987). Incontext, concern about the moral environment for young women wmanifest in a policy of desexualizing the school, excluding all referencmatters of sexuality while arguing that young women and men coucompete fairly in intellectual matters. This formulation was well suto the schools' largely middle class Victorian clientele. The model weducators used for this approach was the family. They postulated thboys and girls would treat one another like "sisters and brothersschool, and that questions of morality would not arise in such a con(Tyack & Hansot, 1988). This policy, of course, excluded the possibilitmaking sexuality itself something to be included in the curriculumthe early Victorian mind-set, the entire subject of sexuality was sothing to be repressed. It was only in this manner that the "dangeropolicy of coeducation could even be contemplated by school leadersthe 19th century (Rury & Harper, 1986).
