Actually, interestingly, some Victorian prudishness was encouraged by Victorian feminists, weirdly enough. Old-timey sexism said that women were too lustful and oozed temptation, hence why they should be excluded from the cool-headed realms of men (Arthurian legend is FULL of this shit, especially if Sir Gallahad is involved). Victorian feminists actually encouraged the view of women as quasi-asexual, to show that no, having women in your university was not akin to inviting a gang of succubi to turn the school into an orgy pit (this was also useful, as back then, there were questions on the morality of women).
Note that neither you nor the Victorian feminists appear at all interested in the truth-status of the claims involved, merely their implications for the social status of women.
Note that neither you nor the Victorian feminists appear at all interested in the truth-status of the claims involved, merely their implications for the social status of women.
Yes, when a statement is clearly intended as a boo light its factual accuracy is not the most relevant thing.