Scan barcode
arinheck's review against another edition
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
slow-paced
3.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Misogyny, Transphobia, Homophobia, and Sexism
Moderate: Classism
Minor: Medical content, Death, and Colonisation
woolfinbooks's review
informative
5.0
Genuinely one of the best books I've read about "female husbands" and queer/sapphic/trans life before the 1900s.
"Female Husbands" talks about the history of trans men, afab nonbinary, bisexual, intersex, lesbian, butch, and other sapphic leaning identities before the turn of the 20th century. While the term "female husbands" is very outdated, its usage having been replaced well over a century ago, it's important to note that terms like transgender and lesbian didn't exist yet. Yes, the idea and feelings of them did, but not the actual words. FH was a personal, social, and sometimes political identity for many people in the US and UK. Such as "transing genders" is very outdated now, it's relevant to discuss in this book due to the specific topics being discussed.
Using era-specific labels when discussing queer history is okay when used in an educational context. Of course, a book talking about this specific time period is going to use historically accurate labels. We don't know what modern labels any of the people covered in this book would use. We can make assumptions, we can guess, we can relate it to our own queer experiences, but either way, it's not the label they used. There are over 200 modern gender labels. To think we can firmly state who anyone would be is quite silly, to be honest. The most respectful thing we can do is honor their identities the way they existed in them at the time.
"They" is used as the default pronoun as we don't know what they would have wanted to be called if they were alive now. We can't know if someone who died nearly 300 years ago would have identified as a trans man, butch, stud, transmac nonbinary, or any other modern identity. It's not erasing them or their identities, it's admitting we don't know and can't know. What does erase them is the calls to ban this book from libraries, and modern people wanting to insert modern labels onto people who didn't use them. It's okay to use the terms people in the past used to describe them. Hell, even queer identity terms used 30 years ago are outdated now. We should be able to say "This isn't okay to use now, but this is still important in a historical context"
Our culture is constantly changing. Our community seeks out better and more inclusive words. Language changes and adapts. This book is important because it's discussing us historically. It's given us proof of the existence we already knew existed. It's not suggesting this be used now. In fact, it makes it explicitly queer that this is an outdated term that isn't used now. And THAT'S OKAY! Wanting trans, lesbian, sapphic, nonbinary, queer, etc. history means we need to look into all parts of it from a historic lens. We need to acknowledge that, even though some things are viewed as problematic now, they were once powerful. They were once inclusive. We have to be able to acknowledge actual queer history instead of wanting to write it. Once you rewrite us you erase us. You make us more palatable to cishets. You deny who we were. You deny the history of how we got from "female husbands" to trans men. You deny the history of our language and culture and the importance of us, all of us.
"Female Husbands" talks about the history of trans men, afab nonbinary, bisexual, intersex, lesbian, butch, and other sapphic leaning identities before the turn of the 20th century. While the term "female husbands" is very outdated, its usage having been replaced well over a century ago, it's important to note that terms like transgender and lesbian didn't exist yet. Yes, the idea and feelings of them did, but not the actual words. FH was a personal, social, and sometimes political identity for many people in the US and UK. Such as "transing genders" is very outdated now, it's relevant to discuss in this book due to the specific topics being discussed.
Using era-specific labels when discussing queer history is okay when used in an educational context. Of course, a book talking about this specific time period is going to use historically accurate labels. We don't know what modern labels any of the people covered in this book would use. We can make assumptions, we can guess, we can relate it to our own queer experiences, but either way, it's not the label they used. There are over 200 modern gender labels. To think we can firmly state who anyone would be is quite silly, to be honest. The most respectful thing we can do is honor their identities the way they existed in them at the time.
"They" is used as the default pronoun as we don't know what they would have wanted to be called if they were alive now. We can't know if someone who died nearly 300 years ago would have identified as a trans man, butch, stud, transmac nonbinary, or any other modern identity. It's not erasing them or their identities, it's admitting we don't know and can't know. What does erase them is the calls to ban this book from libraries, and modern people wanting to insert modern labels onto people who didn't use them. It's okay to use the terms people in the past used to describe them. Hell, even queer identity terms used 30 years ago are outdated now. We should be able to say "This isn't okay to use now, but this is still important in a historical context"
Our culture is constantly changing. Our community seeks out better and more inclusive words. Language changes and adapts. This book is important because it's discussing us historically. It's given us proof of the existence we already knew existed. It's not suggesting this be used now. In fact, it makes it explicitly queer that this is an outdated term that isn't used now. And THAT'S OKAY! Wanting trans, lesbian, sapphic, nonbinary, queer, etc. history means we need to look into all parts of it from a historic lens. We need to acknowledge that, even though some things are viewed as problematic now, they were once powerful. They were once inclusive. We have to be able to acknowledge actual queer history instead of wanting to write it. Once you rewrite us you erase us. You make us more palatable to cishets. You deny who we were. You deny the history of how we got from "female husbands" to trans men. You deny the history of our language and culture and the importance of us, all of us.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Homophobia and Transphobia
arsenic_'s review
challenging
informative
reflective
4.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Outing, Transphobia, and Homophobia
serendipitysbooks's review
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.75
Female Husbands looks at those who were assigned female at birth, raised as girls, but were later found to be living as men. The focus is on the UK and USA from the middle of the eighteenth century until just before World War I. Despite the relatively slim number of cases and the limitations of the records, looking at them through a careful modern lens was quite revealing about the conceptions and realities of sex and gender at the time. I found the details of each person’s life interesting - how they lived, if they married, how and why they came to public attention, their stated motivations, if any were given, for trans-ing their gender, and how they were treated as a result. I also appreciated seeing those who transed gender placed in the wider, and changing, political, economic and social context of the time. Personally though I found the book a little repetitive, almost trying too hard to stress it’s message. It’s length could have been reduced with nothing substantial lost.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Lesbophobia, Homophobia, and Transphobia
Moderate: Forced institutionalization
Minor: Classism
sarah_speaks's review against another edition
challenging
informative
slow-paced
3.5
Well-researched and provides a much-needed account of trans folks in history. Unfortunately I was not a fan of the author’s writing style, so I didn’t enjoy this as much as I had hoped.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Transphobia, Outing, Homophobia, Lesbophobia, and Sexism
Moderate: Racism, Classism, and Sexual content
Minor: Forced institutionalization
More...