This is an old revision of the document!
Introduction:
J. Marion’s text examines the history of female husbands in 18th and 19th-century America and the United Kingdom. As part of her analysis, the author emphasizes the unique position of the wives of female husbands. According to Marion, they have been understudied and underrepresented, as most accounts have focused primarily on female husbands themselves. However, the lack of sufficient representation is not justified, as wives played a crucial role in the social perception of the female husbands as well as in their husbands’ identity. Moreover, wives were capable of altering the public gender status of female husbands through divorce, exposure, and engagement with the media. For this reason, Marion convincingly argues that the wives of female husbands should be given equal consideration in gender history. - Nikolai Kotkov
Manion explains in the introduction that, rather than imposing an anachronistic identity (transgender, transsexual, lesbian, etc.) onto the historical figures featured in the book, Manion will instead be using the term “transing gender” to signify the specific processes and practices that these people partook in that crossed gender and sex boundaries. Additionally, they/them pronouns have been used not to imply a specific identity but rather to refer to these figures in a gender neutral way. Manion asserts that the “actual” gender identities of the people in the book are irrelevant and beyond classification, and instead opts to focus on the ways that they transed gender and the reactions of others to them. (Noah Rutkowski)
Stories of female husbands were used to sell newspapers and they led to the increased emphasis on sex rather than gender. However it was unknown what to do with them as they were not inherently illegal and even part of the women's rights movement in 19th century America. But the history of female husbands gives us insight into how important it was to them to differentiate between sex in order to uphold social systems between 1746 and 1913 in the UK and US. (Katherine Hamilton)
This excerpt by Manion identifies the “female husband” as individuals who were assigned female at birth but live as men and choose women as their marital spouses. The concept of “female husbands” went against gender and marriage norms, which helped to showcase how gender had strong affiliations with characteristics like class and social authority. She makes that augment that gender is not fixed, nor does it rely on labels of identity. She explains how the topic and expression of gender is something that is historically fluid and is conveyed via roles in society, the workforce, and relationships with others. In addition, she highlights that the experiences and stories of transgender individuals are conveyed via the media like newspapers and even in court cases. Both of these outlets worked as factors that cultivated the exposure of these identities publicly. Because these stories were so public, Manion argues that the experiences of these individuals were casted into the shadows while the fear and opinions of society were highlighted. (Reiley Gibson)
Chapter 1:
According to Marion, the circulation of various texts about female husbands appears to have been the primary means of disseminating information on this topic from local communities to a broader, global media market. In this context, she emphasizes the role of newspapers, printers, and publishers, who actively sought out these “scandalous” stories for profit. In particular, the author examines the case of the writer Henry Fielding, who published a pamphlet on female husbands and significantly popularized the term. In this work, Fielding retold the story of the female husband Charles Hamilton, but he also introduced several substantial modifications to emphasize Hamilton’s gender transgressions. For example, Fielding claimed that Hamilton had fourteen wives, whereas in reality there was only one. Moreover, he placed particular emphasis on emotions as the primary motivation for gender change. The case with these narrative contributions became highly popular and resulted in over 2,000 copies sold in November 1746. The success of the pamphlet as well as its broader cultural influence suggests that Fielding’s case can be seen as indicative of the wider impact of the news media on gender relations. - Nikolai Kotkov
Charles Hamilton was a “female husband” who began presenting as male from the age of 14 and later married their wife Mary Price in 1746. Shortly after their marriage, Price seemingly decided she no longer wanted to be a part of the union and reported Hamilton as not being an “actual” man, leading to an investigation and trial against them. During this trial, Hamilton was cast as an immoral, dangerous trickster who had not only traversed the rigid gender boundaries of the time but had also tricked a respectable woman into marrying them. This supposed seduction, rather than Hamilton's gender itself, appeared to be the main thing that the public and the court were disturbed by, indicating that they may have been able to live without punishment had they not became a female husband specifically. Unfortunately, because of the court case, Hamilton was charged under the Vagrancy Act and was given a harsh punishment that included whipping, public humiliation, and hard labor. (Noah Rutkowski)
The English courts felt they had to make an example of Hamilton because in being able to seduce a woman and imitate heterosexual penetrative sex, they were a danger to the social order. There was an absence of a stable biological concept of sexual difference rather law, religion, and custom governed the difference in gender roles but Hamilton challenged this. Their crime was also significant because it endangered a respectable woman's honor and no one wanted this to happen to their daughters, nieces, sisters, etc. There was also an emphasis on policing intimate acts to prevent social and moral corruption. (Katherine Hamilton)
Fielding claimed that Hamilton had been a woman who's female lover cheated on them with a man which led Hamilton to begin to present as a man. Manion explains that this implies that in order to be with a woman one must be a man. Hamilton must conform, but in this case not their sexuality from desiring women to men but their gender expression from as a woman to as a man. This means that although Fielding's narrative is mostly false, it implies that in this historical setting gender expression was secondary to sexuality. It was not possible for two feminine women to be together, one always had to be the opposite gender regardless of their sex. However while this transing gender may have been presented as the solution to homosexuality, it was not accepted and people who transed their gender faced persecution once they were found out. (Katherine Hamilton)
Chapter 2:
James Howe was the female husband of Mary Howe who had first began presenting as a man at the age of 16 and was able to live without detection for more than 30 years. Howe's story presents the ways in which defying gender norms can lead to dangerous situations and punishments in a very different realm to those punishments given to Charles Hamilton. A woman named Mrs. Bentley recognized James from their childhood and, in 1750, threatened them with being “outed” if they didn't agree to pay her 10 pounds. Mrs. Bentley returned after 15 years demanding another payoff, and then again shortly after. Unfortunately, at this third attempt at extortion, Howe was unable to pay more than 5 pounds, so Mrs. Bentley then sent men to impersonate a constable and policeman who threatened Howe with committing highway robbery unless they paid 100 pounds. In order to take away the power of these threats, Howe was forced to publicly reclaim the category of woman, and from then on used the name Mary East in legal documents. (Noah Rutkowski)
Chapter 3:
Chapter 4:
In this chapter, Coroner Shelton was perplexed by the nature of James Allen's life. One one hand, upon arrival to the hospital after a fatal head injury, the examiner saw that he had female anatomy. And on the other however, Allen had lived in the role as a man, having a wife while working and providing for his family. These two contradicting descriptions left Allen's gender in a state of legal limbo. (Henry Prior)
Adding on further to the case of James Allen, Coroner Shelton decided to designate him as man despite the physical contradictions due to his masculine life made up of working and providing for his family while being married to a woman. This clashed with the opinions of many medical examiners who saw his gender as female due to his physical anatomy. Additionally, the perception of Allen in the eyes of his co-workers is interesting because they noticed slight differences like lack of facial hair and a uniquely different voice and still saw him as man due to his long lasting marriage with a woman. (Henry Prior)
James Allen seemed to be jealous when Abigail interacted with other women and is suspected to have been this way due to the fact that Allen might have been insecure of his masculinity because he had female anatomy. Additionally, this jealousy making Allen possessive of her might also have been a away for him to exercise his masculinity because possessiveness over ones wife was seen as masculine. However, despite this conflict they stayed together. (Henry Prior)