![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I finished reading this book over a month ago and have not had enough time to write it up properly, This book was very very good and quite thought provoking.. It was a great look at gender, detailing the construction of both male and female ideals and interactions and how and why these changed over time. He took in philosophical, religious, medical, educational and legal arguments. Fletcher also made very good use of the source material, using different types of sources to address different issues of his argument. I found I learned a lot about men and women during the 1500s-1800 but also his arguments inspired me to wonder how such arguments could be addressed in Chinese history. In particular how education, and its contribution to the formation of gender roles within a society as well as to the formation of culture.
One of the most interesting things for me to start with in this book was the fashion among women in the late 16th early 17th century of cross-dressing. A trend that was eventually stopped with James I in 1620 (121). I had never come across this before and found it intriguing. It was heavily criticised at the time as it was seen as stepping over the gender divide, "Our Apparel was given us as a sign distinctive to discern betwixt sex and sex therefore one to wear the apparel of another sex is to participate with the same and to adulturate the verity of his own kind. Wherefore these women may not improperly be called hermaphrodites, that is monsters of both kinds, half women, half men." (Stubbes, 1583: 23). Preachers spoke out against it in sermons. Women wore doublets, and are said to have had short hair, and carried arms (24). (Though it was unclear just how popular such fashions became, but it was done enough to be criticised).
Ideas of the differences between men and women at this time were discussed, as well as how those ideas were formed. It was interesting to look at the change in views over time, from religious ideas to philosophical ones and "scientific" ideas. One of the most striking differences with later views was that gender was not rigorously set but could be changed, or threatened. There was an interesting example of a French woman who had in her early twenties started dressing as a man, changed her name and married a woman. She was tried for being a lesbian. The question was whether women could or could not produce semen, the doctor believed that she had indeed become a man (41). Though not all cases went so well, there was another example of a woman who was tried and hung for being a transvestite. It is important to note however, that these examples all come from France and not England. The example of a woman, who became famous after a play was written about her, and a woman who dressed as a man and served in the army for 20 years, (84), assume far less extreme than the French episodes. I would have liked to have seen Fletcher address the differences between France and England a little more, than just looking at both cultures as representative of ideas of the time.
Fletcher then addressed the "working of the patriarchy" which looked at gentry ideals, case studies of individual men and women, and relationships between husbands and wives, including violence and the division of work along gender lines. It struck me that there was great similarities between gender relations in China at this time, women (at least upper class women) were considered to belong within the home and were tasked with effectively managing all the households affairs. To me this seems a long way from the later 19th and 20th century ideals of what a "housewife" should be. For this part of the book
The educational differences between boys and girls were quite striking. Fletcher refers to Latin between 1600 and 1800 as "the male elite's secret language… a language that could be displayed as a mark of learning, of superiority, of class and gender difference" (302). For me as a reader who knows little about the time period the difference in educational standards, and how this reflected gender attitudes, was very interesting. As I mentioned earlier, this was one of the most interesting parts of the book that I felt could most easily be related to Chinese history studies. I think a cross cultural study about the place of education in cultural and gender construction would be very fascinating research.
Fletcher also addresses the religious role of women. He looks at the idealisation of the "godly" woman in sermons and how this ideal is reflected in women's own writing from the time. (349) This is an interesting example of gender as you not only have sources written about women but also by women. Fletcher addresses how women were given a different religious stereotype, that of the godly woman as opposed to the weaker vessel.
One of the things that did make me quite angry while reading through this book, was the belief in the inferiority of women's minds compared to that of men. Girls could not be taught to reason as boys could (364). Thus the difference in education was quite startling. It contrasted rather sharply with arguments that had been made in favour of girls' education in Imperial China. Here the example of Mencius' mother is always quoted as she was responsible for teaching her son, women were also seen as needing to be educated so they could also educate their sons. This argument was used again and again for two thousand years, one wonder how without this example the argument would have changed.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book and found it very thought provoking and insightful and would definitely recommend it to anyone interested in either women's history or gender studies.
One of the most interesting things for me to start with in this book was the fashion among women in the late 16th early 17th century of cross-dressing. A trend that was eventually stopped with James I in 1620 (121). I had never come across this before and found it intriguing. It was heavily criticised at the time as it was seen as stepping over the gender divide, "Our Apparel was given us as a sign distinctive to discern betwixt sex and sex therefore one to wear the apparel of another sex is to participate with the same and to adulturate the verity of his own kind. Wherefore these women may not improperly be called hermaphrodites, that is monsters of both kinds, half women, half men." (Stubbes, 1583: 23). Preachers spoke out against it in sermons. Women wore doublets, and are said to have had short hair, and carried arms (24). (Though it was unclear just how popular such fashions became, but it was done enough to be criticised).
Ideas of the differences between men and women at this time were discussed, as well as how those ideas were formed. It was interesting to look at the change in views over time, from religious ideas to philosophical ones and "scientific" ideas. One of the most striking differences with later views was that gender was not rigorously set but could be changed, or threatened. There was an interesting example of a French woman who had in her early twenties started dressing as a man, changed her name and married a woman. She was tried for being a lesbian. The question was whether women could or could not produce semen, the doctor believed that she had indeed become a man (41). Though not all cases went so well, there was another example of a woman who was tried and hung for being a transvestite. It is important to note however, that these examples all come from France and not England. The example of a woman, who became famous after a play was written about her, and a woman who dressed as a man and served in the army for 20 years, (84), assume far less extreme than the French episodes. I would have liked to have seen Fletcher address the differences between France and England a little more, than just looking at both cultures as representative of ideas of the time.
Fletcher then addressed the "working of the patriarchy" which looked at gentry ideals, case studies of individual men and women, and relationships between husbands and wives, including violence and the division of work along gender lines. It struck me that there was great similarities between gender relations in China at this time, women (at least upper class women) were considered to belong within the home and were tasked with effectively managing all the households affairs. To me this seems a long way from the later 19th and 20th century ideals of what a "housewife" should be. For this part of the book
The educational differences between boys and girls were quite striking. Fletcher refers to Latin between 1600 and 1800 as "the male elite's secret language… a language that could be displayed as a mark of learning, of superiority, of class and gender difference" (302). For me as a reader who knows little about the time period the difference in educational standards, and how this reflected gender attitudes, was very interesting. As I mentioned earlier, this was one of the most interesting parts of the book that I felt could most easily be related to Chinese history studies. I think a cross cultural study about the place of education in cultural and gender construction would be very fascinating research.
Fletcher also addresses the religious role of women. He looks at the idealisation of the "godly" woman in sermons and how this ideal is reflected in women's own writing from the time. (349) This is an interesting example of gender as you not only have sources written about women but also by women. Fletcher addresses how women were given a different religious stereotype, that of the godly woman as opposed to the weaker vessel.
One of the things that did make me quite angry while reading through this book, was the belief in the inferiority of women's minds compared to that of men. Girls could not be taught to reason as boys could (364). Thus the difference in education was quite startling. It contrasted rather sharply with arguments that had been made in favour of girls' education in Imperial China. Here the example of Mencius' mother is always quoted as she was responsible for teaching her son, women were also seen as needing to be educated so they could also educate their sons. This argument was used again and again for two thousand years, one wonder how without this example the argument would have changed.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book and found it very thought provoking and insightful and would definitely recommend it to anyone interested in either women's history or gender studies.