Letters to 'The Times'
On January 7, 1862 The Times published an angry letter from 'Paterfamilias from the Provinces'. The correspondent explained that his daughter had been harassed by an unknown gentleman while she had been walking and shopping in the streets of London. It was an outrage, he fumed, that innocent young girls could not walk unaccompanied in the city without being bothered by the stares and comments of scoundrels masquerading as gentlemen.
'... girls go out in the city and are ... flirtatious and Paterfamilias had better come to terms with this. '
The publication of this letter stimulated excited responses in the columns of The Times and elsewhere. The first to reply to Paterfamilias was 'Puella', who declared that she walked alone in the city on many occasions and had never received any incivility. Perhaps the provincial girls had invited attention by their dress and manner.
Paterfamilias sprang to the defence of his daughter and her companion and the doubt cast by Puella on her behaviour. A few days later 'M', a female teacher, wrote to The Times supporting the fears of Paterfamilias about female safety on the city streets. 'M' walked between the residences of her pupils and was often bothered by 'middle-aged and older men'. She recommended any time before 10.30am as likely to be free from unwanted harassment.
A third correspondent offered another interpretation of the incident - girls go out in the city and are deliberately flirtatious and Paterfamilias had better come to terms with this. 'Common Sense' - the assumed name of the correspondent - claimed that fashionable girls '...take a good deal of notice of the young men in a quiet way when they walk out alone, and are not at all displeased of being taken notice of themselves.'
Published: 2004-11-04
