Phase 3: Option 2

In A Reply to Miss Garrett’s Letters on the Contagious Disease Acts, Mrs. W.T Malleson shows many blunt examples and arguments which show what was customary at this time. Socially, men were considered the “higher power” over women, regardless of their class, which is explicitly shown by the Contagious Acts itself. The Contagious Disease Act solely punishes women for their sexual misconduct without even looking at the fact that men, married men even are acquiring these services from these women, or prostitutes. She spoke in a very sarcastic tone on the very first page of her book, stating things such as “if the true work of our doctors is to make people, if possible, a little healthier, treating them as animals merely…; of our teachers to spread the not very satisfactory attainments of the so-called educated classes somewhat lower in the social scale; if this were so, Miss Garrett’s widely- read letter in defense of the “Contagious Disease Acts” might be as true and faithful, as it is clear and intelligent. ” Off hand, when I read this quote, I was drawn to believe that, in actuality, she was stating how ignorant and unfair the Act was, mainly to women as a whole. These are the morals in which women of their time were accustomed to.

Malleson also talked about in their days how it was considered bad taste to allude to religion out of the pulpit or the nursery, which she thought was an even more powerful operation than the CDA itself, which she obviously did not agree with and felt strongly about opposing. Malleson also pointed out how ironic Mrs. Garrett’s arguments were in so many words. She stated that Mrs. Garrett writes “In answer to the very obvious object that a law is unjust, which, in dealing with a crime necessarily common to women and men, lays its hand upon women only, Miss Garrett says “there would be force in this objection if there were any parallel class among men.” Mrs. Garrett was clearly saying that the women who receive money for prostituting form a class; conversely, she was saying that the men who give women the money for the same purpose do not! But the whole thing on both parts is an unjust act, and the object in question was to never be sold nor bought, which shows unequal legislation and adds to injustment and whose only sanction is the right of the strong to oppress the weak, meaning that men overpowered the women. Although the men and women makes the choice, in the end, women are punished but the men aren’t. Malleson appeals to the women in this situation, in this book because back then women were considered “precious” or “superior” beings and Malleson used this a lot to make it be known in her writings. Overall, she poses the women in this situation as victims by pointing out what was moral but never showing how, in the end, men and women should have both just been seen as immoral people for the acts that were occurring.