This is again a bourgeois feminist belief of the early 20th century. Sex for procreation, within marriage, was a positive force. This undercuts the belief that sex was universally seen as sinful in the late Victorian/early Edwardian era; however, it must not be mistaken for modern second-wave feminist arguments for more radical sexual freedom (though there were a small minority of radical feminists at the time who advocated for that, as well.)

Discussion of hysteria in girls, making sex taboo for girls and also stating that there are "other things" that they should be taking care of. What would the view towards men's sexual development be?

This implies that women are naturally sexual creatures; this reflects the view of early feminists, which eventually became subsumed into the project of marriage.

This is a mild example of eugenicist thinking. The belief that people should make matches with the goal of passing on desirable traits to children, thus improving "the race."

This is now the era where a woman thinks past the ceremony of marriage and about the possibility of future children; because of this, it is now the woman's responsibility as the one who actually bears the children to make sure that they are not messed up genetically and educated correctly.

"Worth" here seems to be intended to refer to intrinsic/genetic qualities, but these qualities were often related to class - and, as such, often related to money.

This puts the decision to get married and to have sex firmly in the hands of individual women - not in the hands of their families or of society. However, as we will see, women are expected to consider social and familial realities when making their choice.

This is also the idea that the poor chose to be poor. If the women did not choose to marry poor men there would not be poor children.

This emphasizes the importance of traditional gender roles (mother as nurturer, mother in the private sphere) in relation to marriage.

Till that Bellona's bridegroom, lapp'd in proof, at 3106..3154