This essay argues that U.S. judicial decisions in obscenity cases at the beginning of the twentieth century reveal a systematic social process of emotion management that supported, in ways not previously recognized, the emotional culture of the middle class and, through it, middle-class status policy. Using a grounded theory analysis on a sample of 256 U.S. federal judicial opinions between 1873 and 1956, the analysis shows how the evidentiary rules developed by judges in anti-obscenity cases at the turn of the twentieth century were actually "feeling rules" meant to penalize lust, assert social control over women via normative shame, and define normalcy as self-control over inner life.