#sexism in history

[divinelycrazy]

Something I have recently discovered is that ancient Egypt was probably one of the more progressive civilizations during its time. Women were allowed to own property, initiate divorce, conduct business, and even inherit their family's wealth. Things like these were legal rights women in ancient Greece, for example, could only dream off.

Of course, we have to remember that sexism isn't just shown through legal rights. It is also societal, political, and religious, etc. So, while women were allowed to have all these things on the legal side, they were still expected to perform the roles that are still associated with female stereotypes today. To take care of the house, cook, clean, and care for the kids.

But, while women were expected to remain inside the house, there were still jobs that allowed them to work outside the house, such as being weavers, musicians, and midwives. It does remain true that most high-status jobs were male dominated.

Now, women could still obtain certain potitons of power, like becoming a high-ranking priestess, a scribe, or, in some cases, a ruler. One example I can give is Hatshepsut, who took on the title of Pharaoh even though that is a role usually reserved for men. Was she still one hell of a ruler? Yes. Did that also lead to her son trying to erase her from history? Also, yes. But I personally associate that more with an ungrateful brat thing than anything else

.....

Okay, there was also that priests had the occasional tendency to manipulate the royals towards their favor, but anyway.

The point I'm trying to make is that while ancient Egypt was quite progressive for its time, we still need to remember the flaws that were there in broad daylight, not even trying to hide.

[trash-and-trash-accessories]

I do want to note that the whole "women are allowed to dress masculine and wear trousers" thing needs to be viewed in its historical context:

People fought for generations to be allowed to dress that way. They fought hard to be allowed to wear pants. Blue jeans were a symbol of feminist revolution. Women were barred from workplaces and schools for wearing them.

This is not some a natural fact that women dressing masculine is less shocking and humiliating. That normalization was fought for and hard-won.

And yet so many people erase the struggles of those people who fought to make that happen and pretend that it's just normal and natural that people don't see women "dressed like men" as ridiculous.

The Marriage of Figaro has what's called a "breeches role" which is a woman wearing men's clothes playing am ale role. This was done partly due to the vocal range requirements, but in many cases it was done comedically. It was risque and sexualized or comic relief that a woman was dressed as a man.

Anti-suffragette posters mock women wearing pants - well they were bloomers and split skirts back then - and mocking more masculine cut styles of clothes. This was meant to portray this as ridiculous.

They mocked the "new woman" in Weimar Germany, lamenting that they were too masculine.

This is a political cartoon from the 1920s depicting a woman in masculine dress deciding which bathroom to use:

Sorry but you're erasing these struggles and flattening history when you say this shit.

Women were killed and institutionalized in the struggle to make this happen. It really fucking bothers me the way it's framed as "people just don't find it as weird when women dress masculine."

Yes they fucking did. Until women and transmasculine people fought for their right to wear what they want. It's normalized because people struggled to normalize it.

And it's not normal everywhere. There are many countries where it's still illegal for women to wear pants. Afghanistan, for example.

Even in the US, it's forbidden and considered ridiculous in groups like the FLDS, the Amish, and the Hutterites.

We are flattening and erasing the struggles of women when we say these things. I know we're trying to build theory here but you can't build solid theory on a foundation of lies.

[lionheartapothecaryx]

A Historical Deep Dive into the Founders of Black Womanism & Modern Feminism

Six African American Suffragettes Mainstream History Tried to Forget

These amazing Black American women each advanced the principles of modern feminism and Black womanism by insisting on an intersectional approach to activism. They understood that the struggles of race and gender were intertwined, and that the liberation of Black women was essential. Their writings, speeches, and actions have continued to inspire movements addressing systemic inequities, while affirming the voices of marginalized women who have shaped society. Through their amazing work, they have expanded the scope of womanism and intersectional feminism to include racial justice, making it more inclusive and transformative.

Anna Julia Cooper (1858–1964)

Quote: “The cause of freedom is not the cause of a race or a sect, a party or a class—it is the cause of humankind, the very birthright of humanity.”

Contribution: Anna Julia Cooper was an educator, scholar, and advocate for Black women’s empowerment. Her book A Voice from the South by a Black Woman of the South (1892) is one of the earliest articulations of Black feminist thought. She emphasized the intellectual and cultural contributions of Black women and argued that their liberation was essential to societal progress. Cooper believed education was the key to uplifting African Americans and worked tirelessly to improve opportunities for women and girls, including founding organizations for Black women’s higher education. Her work challenged both racism and sexism, laying the intellectual foundation for modern Black womanism.

Frances Ellen Watkins Harper (1825–1911)

Quote: “We are all bound together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul.”

Contribution: Frances Ellen Watkins Harper was a poet, author, and orator whose work intertwined abolitionism, suffrage, and temperance advocacy. A prominent member of the American Equal Rights Association, she fought for universal suffrage, arguing that Black women’s voices were crucial in shaping a just society. Her 1866 speech at the National Woman’s Rights Convention emphasized the need for solidarity among marginalized groups, highlighting the racial disparities within the feminist movement. Harper’s writings, including her novel Iola Leroy, offered early depictions of Black womanhood and resilience, paving the way for Black feminist literature and thought.

Ida B. Wells (1862–1931)

Quote: “The way to right wrongs is to turn the light of truth upon them.”

Contribution: Ida B. Wells was a fearless journalist, educator, and anti-lynching activist who co-founded the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Her investigative reporting exposed the widespread violence and racism faced by African Americans, particularly lynchings. As a suffragette, Wells insisted on addressing the intersection of race and gender in the fight for women’s voting rights. At the 1913 Women’s Suffrage Parade in Washington, D.C., she famously defied instructions to march in a segregated section and joined the Illinois delegation at the front, demanding recognition for Black women in the feminist movement. Her activism laid the groundwork for modern feminisms inclusion of intersectionality, emphasizing the dual oppressions faced by Black women.

Sojourner Truth (1797–1883)

Quote: “Ain’t I a Woman?”

Contribution: Born into slavery, Sojourner Truth became a powerful voice for abolition, women's rights, and racial justice after gaining her freedom. Her famous 1851 speech, "Ain’t I a Woman?" delivered at a women's rights convention in Akron, Ohio, directly challenged the exclusion of Black women from the feminist narrative. She highlighted the unique struggles of Black women, who faced both racism and sexism, calling out the hypocrisy of a movement that often-centered white women’s experiences. Truth’s legacy lies in her insistence on equality for all, inspiring future generations to confront the intersecting oppressions of race and gender in their advocacy.

Nanny Helen Burroughs (1879–1961)

Quote: “We specialize in the wholly impossible.”

Contribution: Nanny Helen Burroughs was an educator, activist, and founder of the National Training School for Women and Girls in Washington, D.C., which emphasized self-sufficiency and vocational training for African American women. She championed the "Three B's" of her educational philosophy: Bible, bath, and broom, advocating for spiritual, personal, and professional discipline. Burroughs was also a leader in the Women's Convention Auxiliary of the National Baptist Convention, where she pushed for the inclusion of women's voices in church leadership. Her dedication to empowering Black women as agents of social change influenced both the feminist and civil rights movements, promoting a vision of racial and gender equality.

Elizabeth Piper Ensley (1847–1919)

Quote: “The ballot in the hands of a woman means power added to influence.”

Contribution: Elizabeth Piper Ensley was a suffragist and civil rights activist who played a pivotal role in securing women’s suffrage in Colorado in 1893, making it one of the first states to grant women the vote. As a Black woman operating in the predominantly white suffrage movement, Ensley worked to bridge racial and class divides, emphasizing the importance of political power for marginalized groups. She was an active member of the Colorado Non-Partisan Equal Suffrage Association and focused on voter education to ensure that women, especially women of color, could fully participate in the democratic process. Ensley’s legacy highlights the importance of coalition-building in achieving systemic change.

To honor these pioneers, we must continue to amplify Black women's voices, prioritizing intersectionality, and combat systemic inequalities in race, gender, and class.

Modern black womanism and feminist activism can expand upon these little-known founders of woman's rights by continuously working on an addressing the disparities in education, healthcare, and economic opportunities for marginalized communities. Supporting Black Woman-led organizations, fostering inclusive black femme leadership, and embracing allyship will always be vital.

Additionally, when we continuously elevate their contributions in social media or multi-media art through various platforms, and academic curriculum we ensure their legacies continuously inspire future generations. By integrating their principles into feminism and advocating for collective liberation, women and feminine allies can continue their fight for justice, equity, and feminine empowerment, hand forging a society, by blood, sweat, bones and tears where all women can thrive, free from oppression.

[profeminist]

"how u gonna be on the wrong side of history while it's repeating itself like bro ur failing an open note test"

- @_hiphoptalk (account currently suspended)

[krissiefox]

image source

tumblr is the gay website and it has lots of nice gay blogs! You can view the list under the read more link below.

https://www.tumblr.com/transportation-signalboost Fundraiser blog helping trans people escape from dangerous living situations.

https://plannedparenthood.tumblr.com/ Planned Parenthood official blog.

https://upandoutcomic.tumblr.com/ Trans-positive web comic and art.

https://www.tumblr.com/lesbiancoupleoftheday Small blog about lesbian cartoon couples.

https://unnecessarilygenderedproducts.tumblr.com/ Blog poking fun at absurdly sexist products and marketing.

https://humanrightscampaign.tumblr.com/ Human Rights Campaign Blog.

https://www.tumblr.com/transgenderproblems Comics about shit trans people have to put up with.

https://www.tumblr.com/pridesite The official tumblr page of PRIDE.com

https://genderequalityallies.tumblr.com/ A student group dedicated to tackling gender issues

https://assigned-at-birth-comic.tumblr.com/ Webcomic about trans issues.

https://www.tumblr.com/mattymatt Blog of Youtuber Matt Baume!

https://outyouth.tumblr.com/ A Texas group for LGBTQ youth.

https://www.tumblr.com/ur-fav-is-at-the-pride-parade Cute blog that puts various characters in a pride parade.

https://gaywebcorenostalgia.tumblr.com/ Old queer web sites.

https://www.tumblr.com/transgender-history A blog documenting and posting transgender history

https://www.tumblr.com/gay-crossing-animals\ LGBTQ+ Animal Crossing images.

https://www.tumblr.com/fucknovideogames A blog raising awareness about bigoted people in the gaming industry/community.

https://gaygamer.tumblr.com/ A gay perspective on video games.

https://lgbt.co/ LGBT news & photos.

https://www.tumblr.com/georgetakei George & Brad Takei's blog

https://glsen.tumblr.com/ GLSEN strives to assure that each member of every school community is valued and respected regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.

https://gaywrites.org/ LGBTQ news, media, culture & more.

https://intersex-support.tumblr.com/ Support blog for intersex people.

https://zebracoalition.tumblr.com/ Providing support, services, programs, groups & workshops for LGBT youth in Central Florida.

https://love-rainbows.tumblr.com/ Colorful Pride art!

https://tdorunite.tumblr.com/ Transgender Day of Remembrance blog

https://tdor-rally-new-haven-blog.tumblr.com/ Another Transgender Day of Remembrance blog

https://lgbt-history-archive.tumblr.com/ Blog about LGBT history.

https://thetrevorproject.tumblr.com/ Official blog of The Trevor Project.

https://theadvocatemag.tumblr.com/ LGBT news.

https://quixol.net/ LGBT+ Minecraft server. No longer actively maintained, but still online as of the last time I checked on 10/20/2024.

https://prismparty.tumblr.com/ Another LGBT+ Minecraft server! Thankfully, this one seems to be still be maintained and more active as well (as of my last check on 10/20/2024)

https://prideknights.tumblr.com/ Knights who fight for Pride!

https://trevorprojectawareness-blog.tumblr.com/ Blog about the Trevor Project.

https://care-for-trevor.tumblr.com/ Another Trevor Project blog.

https://queergraffiti.tumblr.com/ LGBTQ graffiti.

https://www.tumblr.com/poniesaregaay Gay ponies!

https://outofficial.tumblr.com/ Official blog of Out Magazine.

https://www.tumblr.com/assignedmale LGBTQ webcomic with a focus on trans issues

[redditreceipts]

Random thought but have you ever noticed that breadtube is...misogynistic? Idk, as someone who used to watch a lot of breadtube (still a leftist, but as I've learned more about leftist politics and movements I find that breadtube often lacks substance - just seems like a lot of rambling without critical thinking/analysis).

Like, I can't help but notice that the lot of them shy away from topics around sex based oppression, male/female socialization, sexploitation etc (and if they're not ignoring it, they're saying that none of it is real and that those are just conservative talking points).

Idk. I just feel like a lot of people would rather watch transwomen talk about how important feminist works are actually bigoted to justify violent, misogynistic feelings toward radical feminists who discuss these things. It feels like they want to intellectualize misogyny and uphold a strawman of radical feminism so that they can validate telling women to shut the fuck up about our oppression. Am I making sense?

yes, you're totally making sense, and I decided to look into that. so I made an Excel list with the most prominent Bread Tubers, the number of their subscribers, their biological sexes and their gender identities:

if you just look at gender identity, the subscribers seem to be quite evenly distributed between men, women and non-binary people:

looks kinda fair, right?

but if we look into biological sex...

it's suddenly clear that biological males gather about 77 percent of the total subscribers, while biological females gather only about 24 percent.

doesn't seem that fair anymore, right?

but it gets even worse when you take into account the male's gender identities...

there are more subscribers to biological males with female or non-binary gender identities than subscribers to biological females???

I guess there is your answer on why bread tube does not cover issues of sexism and sex-based oppression.

...and that is why an analysis based on biological sex is important and trying to erase it will let us believe that we are closer to equality between the sexes than we actually are

[1500swhore]

”A woman’s first blood doesn’t come from between her legs, but from biting her tongue.”

-Meggie Royer

[cyarsk52-20]

[viciouslyrobotic]

Radical feminism buys into white supremacist cisheteropatriarchy and requires gender essentialism and exorsexist ideals to work. That's why it operates under the "man vs woman" framework we already live under. That's why Rowling and other radfems are called trans exclusionary, why they're so often racist, and why their communities are so often white, and why the attempt to rebrand it as trans inclusive will never work.

It functionally can't be trans or even gnc inclusive without ignoring several intersections of oppression.

[write-the-room]

Bunny wtf

[miryum]

I had a thought—

So Hogwarts was founded around 990 CE, right? Up to when Harry attended, that gives us about 1000 years that Rowling didn't cover or explore. And that means 1000 year of troubles that I have questions about

1000-1300 CE: Okay, so like, medieval times. Can we talk about the sexism that would be here? How did the professors handle that? The girls would have to wear these horrid clothes and expect to have flying lessons? Or were flying lessons only for the boys? How much of Hogwarts was gender segregated? And the Holy Roman Empire was all the rage. That means ultra-Christianity. What if a kid from upper Scotland came in and worshipped polytheism? What then? Would the other kids have burned them or killed them?

1400 CE: This was when witch burnings/huntings were getting popular. I'm assuming that the kids were safe when they got to Hogwarts, but what about Muggleborns? If a guy dressed in robes came to this peasant's mudhut and said "your daughter's a witch!" you're telling me that those parents wouldn't burn their daughter at the stake? And yes, wizards/witches could easily hide their abilities once they graduated, but what if they had a kid that came out magical? How would you explain that your baby is levitating to the townsfolk? Or what if you married a muggle? Would you have to hide your identity your entire marriage? Would you have to hope your kids weren't magical like you? And what if you're a woman who then marries an awful muggle man and you know you're stronger than him and can kill him extremely easily in his sleep, but you can't because it's 1400 CE?!?!

1500 CE: We're getting to the Renaissance right now, okay? So all these kids are beginning to explore literal magic and you're telling me they didn't mix that with the new inventions of the era? Was Galileo or Michelangelo really a wizard? And if all these inventors/thinkers were wizards, who else? Magic has spanned all of time, apparently, so were the pyramids built with magic? (sorry, that was a small side tangent.) And then the Reformation came along and split everyone into different religions. Were there tensions among Catholic/Lutheran students? What about the teachers? What if a Lutheran fell in love with a Catholic at school? What then?

1600-1700 CE: Now lemme ask about social classes. How big of a problem was that? And I think we all know that this problem spanned much longer than just the two centuries I'm giving it. Imagine if a Dutch aristocrat's daughter was admitted to Hogwarts and "oh, it's just a fancy boarding school?" you tell the parents, "great! she can go" so then she gets there, all dressed to the nines with the ballgowns and big wigs and finds out she has to room with a peasant girl and an artist's daughter. Can you imagine?! And yes, maybe they would've become friends, but realistically, probably not. The daughter would demand her own room, but the headmaster couldn't do that, so what would happen? Would she order her new roommates to help her get dressed each morning? Would she look down her nose at them? Would there be different tables in the Great Hall for the upper class? I'm assuming that the professors would have different viewpoints concerning what their background was, so would the Dutch daughter be aghast when her professor (who used to be a blacksmith's apprentice) takes her down a notch and hits her in front of the whole class? And what would recreational activities be like? Yes, everyone would have the same uniforms during class, but can you imagine a guy walking up to you on a lazy Sunday dressed in his powdered wig and golden coattails with their weirdly high white socks and buckled shoes?

1800 CE: Slavery. We know that had to have been racial segregation, right? And even if Europe was all progressive and abolished slavery starting in the 1400s, some countries definitely still had slavery. And don't even get me started on America and Ilvermorny. Being a Southern belle and then having to take classes and eat in the same room from the same plates as someone that looks like the slaves your father owns? (What about the fucking Civil War?! Confederates and unionists in the same school?!) And I'm sure the same thing happened in Hogwarts! And I didn't even mention the Transatlantic Slave Trade in the 1500-1800s!! How did Hogwarts handle racism? If they just banned all non-whites from the premise, then they lost a large chunk of the next generation of wizards and witches. And those poor boys and girls they banned. Imagine having all these strange phenomenons happen your entire life and have no idea why or trying to hide them because you didn't go to Hogwarts and learned what they were or how to channel them!

1900-2000 CE: Oh my fucking god. Where to begin? The style is drastically different from the 1600s. Now students are coming in with flappers dresses and their hair slicked back and everything and professors are like, "what the fuck?" Did the Yule Ball have different types of dancing? I'm assuming so. Were their more dances because the students loved it? And then the fucking Great Depression hits and now most students can't even buy the necessary textbooks to come to school. Most are needed by their families for work (AND ALSO!!! I didn't mention, but in medieval times, did parents even let their kids go to Hogwarts? They needed them to work the fields or stuff.) Then, growing anti-semitism starts up and some of the students are discriminated against because of their religion, just like back in 1000-1300 CE. The World Wars happen and what if a German kid (who's being indoctrinated and I can go on a whole other rant about children in Germany I swear, don't get me started because I will defend the kids until my last breath) is proudly wearing a swastika just like his daddy and then sees a Jewish kid and starts yelling slurs, just like his dad does? How many kids did Hogwarts save from concentration camps? Did the magical kids beg for the muggle siblings to come and stay at Hogwarts to save them from Auschwitz? Then there were hardly any boys for a generation because they were all off fighting a goddamn war! Things started to chill out for a while until kids came into Hogwarts wearing bell bottoms and tye-die and the girls were burning their bras and were the boys cheering them on or was there serious backlash? How much fucking weed was passed around in the 70s? (This is the marauder era btw.) Did the gay wizards/witches finally feel safe enough about coming out? Or were there too many people against them still? OR, did the homophobic people learn to be more accepting because they had to be? Because they were in the same classes, same dorms, same everything as gays? What about magic birth control? Or, was everyone too worried about Voldemort to burn their bras and come out as gay? How much did Voldemort truly influence the Wizarding World? And then Harry fucking Potter came along, the 90s happened and now, his kids have just graduated! I'm assuming Hogwarts has to have changed with technology, but how much? Do professors think magic is losing the battle to technology or are Muggleborns actually still more fascinated by magic than their phones (I'm assuming if you saw someone change from a human to a cat, that'd be more cool than a TikTok, but who knows?!) Does Hogwarts have WiFi and outlets? Or are kids forbidden from technology? And how did kids from the 80s-90s keep up with technology? Did they all just trapse down to a small town by Hogsmead and have to catch up with all the blockbuster movies there?

In short, I HAVE SO MANY QUESTIONS

[hyacinthsgrimoire]

text by @fairymischief and @unebeguine

[horizon-verizon]

Reasons Why the Westerosi Houses Didn't Overthrow the Targs After they Lost their Dragons

feudal oaths and ideology of loyalty to one's monarch...yes it matters, even though lords have also been known to break oaths or press for their own interests, this is still something considered relatively taboo (remember Ned's hatred for Jaime killing Aerys).....this is still a feudal society, guys.

(if you have in mind that they should have ousted the Targs out of some idea the Targs caused too much havoc or misery to the lords and peasants) #1, the Targs actually provided more years of sustained peace [ozymalek/PheonixAshes] than when the houses were all leaders of kingdoms pre-Conquest [list of a lot of warring across Westerosi relams pre-Conquest], inclu the years AFTER the Dance -- the Targs were "dramatic" but also most of their issues stem from patriarhcal abuses adopted from pre-conquest Westerosi leading into inevitable succession crises...if there ha dbeen no Targs and a Westerosi lord somehow "unifed" the realms through Conquest (even Dorne), you can't tell me there wouldn't be any wars or crises of succession...come on! The War of the Five Kings occurred even without any Targ tomfoolery, bc by then they were long (1 and a half generation away) gone by then.

The Targs were pretty and pragmatically tolerant of nonTarg Westerosi customs and never tried to stop them from practicing MOST (right of first night to be excluded); plus the Widow's Law was pretty beneficial as well.

some houses actually got to become Great Houses or Paramount Houses BECAUSE the Targs made them so: the tullys, the Baratheons, the Tyrells.

Post Dance, Rhaenyra's sons Aegon III and Viserys II were more or less pretty good at keeping things together...Viserys esp so before and during his own reign. And esp by keeping the women of their family out of politics or practicing enough autonomy and authority, since some felt the Dance happened bc they had authoritative and powerful queens (F&B tries to convince use female rulership was a disorderly and dangerous thing) so that the lords or any possible rivals couldn't or had not much to protest, etc.

[balkanradfem]

"Growing flax to make linen was one of the oldest human activities in Europe, particularly in the Rhineland. Archeologists have found linen textiles among the settlements of Neolithic cultivators along the shores of Lake Neuchâtel in the Jura Mountains west of Bern, Switzerland. These were elaborate pieces: Stone Age clothmakers of the Swiss lakeshores sewed pierced fruit pits in a careful line into a fabric with woven stripes. The culture spread down the Rhine and into the lowland regions.

The Roman author Pliny observed in the first century AD that German women wove and wore linen sheets. By the ninth century flax had spread through Germany. By the sixteenth century, flax was produced in many parts of Europe, but the corridor from western Switzerland to the mouth of the Rhine contained the oldest region of large-scale commercial flax and linen production. In the late Middle Ages the linen of Germany was sold nearly everywhere in Europe, and Germany produced more linen than any other region in the world.

At this juncture, linen weavers became victims of an odd prejudice. “Better skinner than linen weaver,” ran one cryptic medieval German taunt. Another macabre popular saying had it that linen weavers were worse than those who “carried the ladders to the gallows.” The reason why linen weavers were slandered in this way, historians suspect, was that although linen weavers had professionalized and organized themselves into guilds, they had been unable to prevent homemade linen from getting onto the market. Guilds appeared across Europe between the twelfth and fifteenth centuries but many of the items they produced for exchange, like textiles and soap, were also produced at home right up through the nineteenth century. The intricate regulations of the guilds—determining who could join, how they would be trained, what goods they would produce, and how these could be exchanged—were mainly designed to distinguish guild work from this homely labor. That linen making continued to be carried out inside of households—a liability for guilds in general—lent a taint to the linen guild in particular.

In the seventeenth century, guilds came under pressure from a new, protocapitalist mode of production. Looking for cheaper cloth to sell on foreign markets, entrepreneurs cased the Central European countryside offering to pay cash to home producers for goods. Rural households became export manufacturing centers and a major source of competition with the guilds. These producers could undercut the prices of urban craftsmen because they could use the unregulated labor of their family members, and because their own agricultural production allowed them to sell their goods for less than their subsistence costs.

The uneasiness between guild and household production in the countryside erupted into open hostility. In the 1620s, linen guildsmen marched on villages, attacking competitors, and burning their looms. In February 1627 Zittau guild masters smashed looms and seized the yarn of home weavers in the villages of Oderwitz, Olbersdorf, and Herwigsdorf.

Guilds had long worked to keep homemade products from getting on the market. In their death throes, they hit upon a new and potent weapon: gender. Although women in medieval Europe wove at home for domestic consumption, many had also been guild artisans. Women were freely admitted as masters into

the earliest medieval guilds, and statutes from Silesia and the Oberlausitz show that women were master weavers. Thirteenth-century Paris had eighty mixed craft guilds of men and women and fifteen female-dominated guilds for such trades as gold thread, yarn, silk, and dress manufacturing. Up until the mid-seventeenth century, guilds had belittled home production because it was unregulated, nonprofessional, and competitive. In the mid-seventeenth century this work was identified as women’s work, and guildsmen unable to compete against cheaper household production tried to eject women from the market entirely. Single women were barred from independent participation in the guilds. Women were restricted to working as domestic servants, farmhands, spinners, knitters, embroiderers, hawkers, wet nurses. They lost ground even where the jobs had been traditionally their own, such as ale brewing and midwifery, by the end of the seventeenth century.

The wholesale ejection of women from the market during this period was achieved not only through guild statute, but through legal, literary, and cultural means. Throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries women lost the legal right to conduct economic activity as femes soles. In France they were declared legal “imbeciles,” and lost the right to make contracts or represent themselves in court. In Italy, they began to appear in court less frequently to denounce abuses against them. In Germany, when middle-class women were widowed it became customary to appoint a tutor to manage their affairs. As the medieval historian Martha Howell writes, “Comedies and satires of this period…often portrayed market women and trades women as shrews, with characterizations that not only ridiculed or scolded them for taking on roles in market production but frequently even charged them with sexual aggression.” This was a period rich in literature about the correction of errant women: Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew (1590–94), John Ford’s ’Tis Pity She’s a Whore (1629–33), Joseph Swetnam’s “The Araignment of Lewde, Idle, Froward, and Unconstant Women” (1615). Meanwhile, Protestant reformers and Counter-Reformation Catholics established doctrinally that women were inherently inferior to men.

This period, called the European Age of Reason, successfully banished women from the market and transformed them into the sweet and passive beings that emerged in Victorian literature. Women accused of being scolds were paraded in the streets wearing a new device called a “branks,” an iron muzzle that depressed the tongue. Prostitutes were subjected to fake drowning, whipped, and caged. Women convicted of adultery were sentenced to capital punishment.

As a cultural project, this was not merely recreational sadism. Rather, it was an ideological achievement that would have lasting and massive economic consequences. Political philosopher Silvia Federici has argued this expulsion was an intervention so massive, it ought to be included as one of a triptych of violent seizures, along with the Enclosure Acts and imperialism, that allowed capitalism to launch itself.

Part of why women resisted enclosure so fiercely was because they had the most to lose. The end of subsistence meant that households needed to rely on money rather than the production of agricultural goods like cloth, and women had successfully been excluded from ways to earn. As labor historian Alice Kessler-Harris has argued, “In pre-industrial societies, nearly everybody worked, and almost nobody worked for wages.” During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, monetary relations began to dominate economic life in Europe. Barred from most wage work just as the wage became essential, women were shunted into a position of chronic poverty and financial dependence. This was the dominant socioeconomic reality when the first modern factory, a cotton-spinning mill, opened in 1771 in Derbyshire, England, an event destined to upend still further the pattern of daily life."

- Sofi Thanhauser, Worn: A People's History of Clothing

[queerbauten]

To describe Anne Boleyn as a feminist would be an anachronism - and not nearly as appropriate an anachronism as in the case of Marguerite de Navarre and others who openly championed female equality. Marguerite did not have the word, but she was conscious of a women's "cause." There's no evidence that Anne felt similarly. But she had learned to value her body and her ideas, and she ultimately recognized that there was something unsettling about this for Henry and understood that this played a role in her downfall.

"A Perfect Storm", The Creation of Anne Boleyn, Susan Bordo

[nesiacha]

To put an end to the cliché of Simone Evrard’s jealousy towards Charlotte Corday (and at the same time the demonization of women concerning the assassination of Marat by Charlotte Corday):

In a horrible movie whose name I won’t mention (it's taboo, it never existed for me, ideally to preserve my mental health), Marat’s companion, Simone Evrard, is portrayed as a jealous woman, and, if possible, ugly, dressed in shabby clothing compared to the "magnificent Charlotte Corday." There’s no need to explain which side the film takes, not to mention that Marat torments Simone Evrard in the film (how horrible, considering that he was one of those revolutionaries fighting against domestic violence—he would have been furious at this depiction). Simone Evrard, a highly intelligent political figure, without whom Marat would have been far less effective, was considered a worthy figure by many revolutionaries. In short, the film is full of sexism and classism (because, of course, women who dress modestly must be depicted as evil compared to women who dress elegantly, even though Simone Evrard always dressed elegantly, according to Stefania Di Pasquale).

Anyway, here’s an excerpt from “La violence évitée : citoyens ordinaires face à l’assassinat de Marat” by Guillaume Mazeau. What made Simone Evrard (or her sister Catherine Evrard) suspicious of Charlotte Corday from the start wasn’t jealousy (and jealousy of what, anyway?) but her suspicious behavior: “The women around Marat scrutinized the intruder. Despite the neighborhood’s relative social mix, a woman of standing like Corday was certainly not part of the regular crowd and quickly drew attention. Her attire clashed with the modest clothing of the neighbors. Her demeanor gave her away: climbing and descending the stairs ‘too’ quickly, Corday disrupted the household’s usual pace. She immediately aroused suspicion. From sociability to politics, it’s just a small step: as a stranger, Corday was quickly viewed as suspicious.” So, as you can see, it wasn’t jealousy at all that made her suspicious. Marat should have listened to the women around him; he might never have been assassinated (yes, he would probably have died months later from illness, but honestly, he would have been more valuable alive than as a martyr).

By the way, even Marat’s enemies could visit him without any problem, so the idea that visitors were carefully selected to flatter him can be dismissed.

In fact, when Charlotte Corday killed Marat, it was a man, Laurent Le Bas, a commissioner who was helping with packaging, who first struck out at her. He grabbed a chair, hit Charlotte Corday, and continued beating her. Simone Evrard then joined him, as did Catherine Evrard. (Of course, I condemn all forms of lynching on principle, even against the most despicable people, but without excusing Simone Evrard, I think most of us would have done the same if one of our loved ones had just been murdered by this person). The insults thrown at Corday weren’t aimed at someone perceived as counter-revolutionary, but at someone seen as a murderer like Charlotte Corday.

Yet, it was a woman, Marie Barbe Aublain, the doorkeeper and a close person of Marat, who put an end to the violence against Charlotte Corday. She helped subdue Charlotte Corday and, without a word, acted as a mediator to ensure that Corday was handed over to the authorities.

So, there was no jealousy or pettiness from Marat’s female companions towards Charlotte Corday. In fact, it was a woman who saved Corday from being lynched, far from the image of bloodthirsty revolutionary women.