![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
This lecture was given at Treadwells a lovely occult bookshop just beneath Covent Garden. The advertisement for it stated,
You’ve heard the rumours about the Victorians and sex… now hear the truths. Did they really cover the legs of pianos? Were there really that many child prostitutes? Is it true that a ‘real woman’ was thought to be non-sexual, and if so, why all those dildos? And what about all those corsets, pantaloons and underclothes? Come find out these things and more, including more rampant and unusual tastes of the Victorians: their cross-dressing, the popular fetishes, homosexuality, the cult of ‘innocence’, and of course the dressing (and undressing).
Peter Freeman has made a lifelong study of the intimate details of sex in Victorian England, and can place these facts in their wider social context. His talk will be lively, specific, graphic and illustrated – Peter will bringing along real objects of (ahem) pleasure from his vast collection. Peter Freedman is a Hertfordshire-based writer and an aficionado of Victorian erotica.
Unfortunately many of things mentioned in the advertisement were not addressed. There was no mention of Child prostitutes, dildos, cross-dressing, or homosexuality. He did address some of the other topics, to a greater or lesser extent, the only real fetish he mentioned was flagellation. He did discuss the idealisation of women, and seemed to be obsessed with underclothes. (The only props he brought was a set of Victorian undergarments, some of which were just reproductions, that he had a young woman model, personally I was hoping for some dildos and some authentic porn). So all in all it was a bit disappointing.
The discussion started with him handing around 4 pictures of young semi-naked women, 2 women with boobies and 2 butt shots, and asked us to spot the fake. In my opinion this exercise went on for far too long, and must have taken up 15 minutes of the 50 minute lecture. In the end all 4 pictures were fake, the 2 butt shots taken by the lecturer himself. Unfortunately he didn't follow up on this with any Actual Victorian pictures, which I found terribly disappointing.
He did address the fact that the Victorian era was a long time with many changes. Though when looking at any of the social, economic, or legal reasons for the change in society he tended to dismiss such things as "boring". He also early on stated that it was impossible to know what the real sexual life of Victorians was like due to the lack of records and that most people saw in it their own biases, whether that be they all did whatever they wanted to behind closed doors, or that they were all moralistic prudes. This however doesn't bear out with what little I know of Victorian sources. It is an era where a huge amount of pornography was produced, therefore, everyone couldn't have been prudish as who would have been purchasing it? Letters, diaries and photographs survive in abundance from this era, not to mention all the literary evidence. It seems like it would be relatively straightforward to make a study of Victorian attitudes and practices and I seem to remember it coming up is several history books on the subject. He did address the fact that the Prince Albert piercing had nothing to do with the actual Prince Albert, (which I already knew), but was apparently started in the 20s, though he couldn't remember the name of the man who originated it or really when it happened.
He discussed the medical attitude towards sexuality of the Victorians. He mentioned Dr. William Ackton who was "highly influential" who wrote about the dangers of masturbation, which included imbecility! And how this led to the more extreme measures of cages, and electrical devices to restrict the would be masturbator. At the most extreme end of this was Dr. Isaac Baker-Brown, who is famously quoted for supporting female clitoris removal as a solution. However, he did point out that Dr. Baker-Brown was regarded as a quack by the other doctors of the time and kicked out of the Physicians College. Which I found to be quite interesting and new information.
He then addressed the mid-Victorian attitudes, which were one of moral concern and moderation versus the seedy. These two camps he addressed as repression vs. liberation. On the "pro-side" he listed Swinbourne, who he described as an alcoholic, but didn't mention any specific examples of his work, just that they played with dominant and submissive themes. As well as Henry Spencer Ashley, who is supposed to have written "My Secret life", a memoir of sexual excesses, which may or may not have been based on fact. Richard Burton who translated the Karma Sutra, giving rise to the rise of the exotic and erotic views of the East. He also included Amelia Bloomer, who invented bloomers so a woman could ride a bicycle. (?) He notably missed any discussion of the issue of sexuality as addressed in Victorian literature, in particular he totally failed at mentioning Thomas Hardy!
On the "con-side" he mentioned only one person. William Stead, who was the editor of the Pall Mall Gazette. He "invented" the story of white slavery as he thought their needed to be more scandals. He claimed that women were being bought from the lower classes and sold into slavery, perhaps in Belgium, again Freeman seemed unclear on the precise details. In the end the fakery was exposed when the father that Stead witnessed selling his daughter sued him for liable as the arrangement had been a set-up.
There was very little discussion of actual Victorian porn. He did mention that most of the stories fell along the lines of a "pornotopia" where pretty much everyone was up for everything after a little persuasion.
It soon became clear (he even stated as much in the Q&A) that his interest in the period stemmed from the Victorian underwear. Underwear originally came from brothels and gradually made its way into respectable society. There were two main forms of Victorian knickers, "Splitters" knee length with a split for toileting and "panel-backs" the more expensive version. He gave an interesting, yet brief, overview of the change in Victorian fashions. The fascination with conspicuous consumption where women's styles focused on more and more petticoats and then going to a svelte(?) line, and repeating with bustles etc, in cycles throughout the era. A cycle that ended because of WWI.
He talked briefly about prostitutes and the large number of women that were reported as prostitutes during the time. He argued that these great numbers were due to the fact that any woman who did not have a male guardian was thought to have been a prostitute, a woman running a successful market stall would have been included as a prostitute, for example. These figures rate 3 percent of the population as prostitutes, where he claims the actual figure would more likely have been one tenth that. He did however totally fail to mention male prostitution.
In the question and answer section someone asked why people were so interested in the Victorian age. He said it was all about the clothes and that fetishisation. An audience member, very intelligently, pointed out that the Elizabethans were also fascinatingly dressed and had very interesting views on sexuality, however they were not idolised in such ways. The audience member pointed out that perhaps this was because photography was invented in the Victorian era and we have so many visual images surviving. Which Freeman agreed was a very good point.
In the end I was a little disappointed by the lecture, it seemed like not enough was covered in the discussion. When Freeman brought up things he was unclear on the precise details of facts relating to them. However, I did walk away having learned some interesting things. When he talked about his own particular area of expertise he seemed much more knowledgeable and perhaps should not have tried to tackle such a broad topic in such a short lecture. I'm sure if he'd stuck to fashion for 50 minutes it would have been perfectly fine. I would have also liked to have seen any authentic examples of Victorian porn and more props...
You’ve heard the rumours about the Victorians and sex… now hear the truths. Did they really cover the legs of pianos? Were there really that many child prostitutes? Is it true that a ‘real woman’ was thought to be non-sexual, and if so, why all those dildos? And what about all those corsets, pantaloons and underclothes? Come find out these things and more, including more rampant and unusual tastes of the Victorians: their cross-dressing, the popular fetishes, homosexuality, the cult of ‘innocence’, and of course the dressing (and undressing).
Peter Freeman has made a lifelong study of the intimate details of sex in Victorian England, and can place these facts in their wider social context. His talk will be lively, specific, graphic and illustrated – Peter will bringing along real objects of (ahem) pleasure from his vast collection. Peter Freedman is a Hertfordshire-based writer and an aficionado of Victorian erotica.
Unfortunately many of things mentioned in the advertisement were not addressed. There was no mention of Child prostitutes, dildos, cross-dressing, or homosexuality. He did address some of the other topics, to a greater or lesser extent, the only real fetish he mentioned was flagellation. He did discuss the idealisation of women, and seemed to be obsessed with underclothes. (The only props he brought was a set of Victorian undergarments, some of which were just reproductions, that he had a young woman model, personally I was hoping for some dildos and some authentic porn). So all in all it was a bit disappointing.
The discussion started with him handing around 4 pictures of young semi-naked women, 2 women with boobies and 2 butt shots, and asked us to spot the fake. In my opinion this exercise went on for far too long, and must have taken up 15 minutes of the 50 minute lecture. In the end all 4 pictures were fake, the 2 butt shots taken by the lecturer himself. Unfortunately he didn't follow up on this with any Actual Victorian pictures, which I found terribly disappointing.
He did address the fact that the Victorian era was a long time with many changes. Though when looking at any of the social, economic, or legal reasons for the change in society he tended to dismiss such things as "boring". He also early on stated that it was impossible to know what the real sexual life of Victorians was like due to the lack of records and that most people saw in it their own biases, whether that be they all did whatever they wanted to behind closed doors, or that they were all moralistic prudes. This however doesn't bear out with what little I know of Victorian sources. It is an era where a huge amount of pornography was produced, therefore, everyone couldn't have been prudish as who would have been purchasing it? Letters, diaries and photographs survive in abundance from this era, not to mention all the literary evidence. It seems like it would be relatively straightforward to make a study of Victorian attitudes and practices and I seem to remember it coming up is several history books on the subject. He did address the fact that the Prince Albert piercing had nothing to do with the actual Prince Albert, (which I already knew), but was apparently started in the 20s, though he couldn't remember the name of the man who originated it or really when it happened.
He discussed the medical attitude towards sexuality of the Victorians. He mentioned Dr. William Ackton who was "highly influential" who wrote about the dangers of masturbation, which included imbecility! And how this led to the more extreme measures of cages, and electrical devices to restrict the would be masturbator. At the most extreme end of this was Dr. Isaac Baker-Brown, who is famously quoted for supporting female clitoris removal as a solution. However, he did point out that Dr. Baker-Brown was regarded as a quack by the other doctors of the time and kicked out of the Physicians College. Which I found to be quite interesting and new information.
He then addressed the mid-Victorian attitudes, which were one of moral concern and moderation versus the seedy. These two camps he addressed as repression vs. liberation. On the "pro-side" he listed Swinbourne, who he described as an alcoholic, but didn't mention any specific examples of his work, just that they played with dominant and submissive themes. As well as Henry Spencer Ashley, who is supposed to have written "My Secret life", a memoir of sexual excesses, which may or may not have been based on fact. Richard Burton who translated the Karma Sutra, giving rise to the rise of the exotic and erotic views of the East. He also included Amelia Bloomer, who invented bloomers so a woman could ride a bicycle. (?) He notably missed any discussion of the issue of sexuality as addressed in Victorian literature, in particular he totally failed at mentioning Thomas Hardy!
On the "con-side" he mentioned only one person. William Stead, who was the editor of the Pall Mall Gazette. He "invented" the story of white slavery as he thought their needed to be more scandals. He claimed that women were being bought from the lower classes and sold into slavery, perhaps in Belgium, again Freeman seemed unclear on the precise details. In the end the fakery was exposed when the father that Stead witnessed selling his daughter sued him for liable as the arrangement had been a set-up.
There was very little discussion of actual Victorian porn. He did mention that most of the stories fell along the lines of a "pornotopia" where pretty much everyone was up for everything after a little persuasion.
It soon became clear (he even stated as much in the Q&A) that his interest in the period stemmed from the Victorian underwear. Underwear originally came from brothels and gradually made its way into respectable society. There were two main forms of Victorian knickers, "Splitters" knee length with a split for toileting and "panel-backs" the more expensive version. He gave an interesting, yet brief, overview of the change in Victorian fashions. The fascination with conspicuous consumption where women's styles focused on more and more petticoats and then going to a svelte(?) line, and repeating with bustles etc, in cycles throughout the era. A cycle that ended because of WWI.
He talked briefly about prostitutes and the large number of women that were reported as prostitutes during the time. He argued that these great numbers were due to the fact that any woman who did not have a male guardian was thought to have been a prostitute, a woman running a successful market stall would have been included as a prostitute, for example. These figures rate 3 percent of the population as prostitutes, where he claims the actual figure would more likely have been one tenth that. He did however totally fail to mention male prostitution.
In the question and answer section someone asked why people were so interested in the Victorian age. He said it was all about the clothes and that fetishisation. An audience member, very intelligently, pointed out that the Elizabethans were also fascinatingly dressed and had very interesting views on sexuality, however they were not idolised in such ways. The audience member pointed out that perhaps this was because photography was invented in the Victorian era and we have so many visual images surviving. Which Freeman agreed was a very good point.
In the end I was a little disappointed by the lecture, it seemed like not enough was covered in the discussion. When Freeman brought up things he was unclear on the precise details of facts relating to them. However, I did walk away having learned some interesting things. When he talked about his own particular area of expertise he seemed much more knowledgeable and perhaps should not have tried to tackle such a broad topic in such a short lecture. I'm sure if he'd stuck to fashion for 50 minutes it would have been perfectly fine. I would have also liked to have seen any authentic examples of Victorian porn and more props...