19th Century surgeon deemed "transgender"

[NoLoveofMine]

I've just posted about this in another thread so apologises if this doesn't warrant its own but I'm amazed and enraged in equal measure by this: www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/25/secret-transgender-victorian-surgeon-feted-by-heritage-england

A woman who was forced to pretend to be a man as women were barred from education and professions has been deemed "transgender" now. Never mind that were it not for this oppression of women, she'd never have had to in the first place - she was forced into this pretence due to misogyny. How insulting to her.

"In 1809... a young Irishwoman set out on a course of deception which would fool the brightest and highest in the British Empire; dreading the confined life of a woman, she had decided to transform herself into a man."

She was an Irishwoman, not an English transman. Better article about her here

I'll try again

I really disagree with this coopting of historical figures. I've seen the same said about Joan of Arc. We have absolutely no evidence that James Barry had any intention of anything other than PRETENDING to be a man, in order to have a career in medicine. We have no evidence that she had any knowledge of the concept of being transgender.

She is not a well known figure and it's a shame that her story isn't being told.

FFS

Joan of Arc never even pretended to be a man, for all I know. Just wore practical clothes. And armour, which at the time was only made for men, so she couldn't have worn women's armour.

I know, Vestal - I mean, she was bloody called Joan! It's bonkers.

It's infuriating and insulting. It also adds to the regressive view which is in my opinion inherent in a lot of this trend towards "transgender" if that's the right way of putting it - that there's such a thing of "feeling like a woman/man" and certain traits must be associated with one sex, so anyone displaying those which aren't ascribed to theirs is "trans". I'm struggling to articulate this well in the context of this article but it suggests to me the conclusion of it is that all women and girls will be oppressed - even naturally accept this oppression - those who don't are actually male so will identify as such whilst the oppression of women is natural.

"I can't believe I live in a society which prefers to tell itself that these women were trans rather than dealing with the actual problem."

Agree

I've seen lots of examples of women retrospective identified as trans, but never historical examples of men being transed. I can't begin to think why that would be ...

How useful; women who achieved so much and had to hide who they were due to society's misogyny were actually being who they really were: men. Of course a woman who actually felt like a real woman wouldn't have even had such thoughts in her lady brain.

FFS indeed. Loads of women in history pretended to be men for the privilege. Mulan pretended to be a man to fight in the war in place of her father, George Elliot, of Middlemarch fame, was really Mary Anne Evans. They were not fucking trans.

FFS indeed. Loads of women in history pretended to be men for the privilege. Mulan pretended to be a man to fight in the war in place of her father, George Elliot, of Middlemarch fame, was really Mary Anne Evans. They were not fucking trans.

We've always been at war with Eurasia.

Bigdeskbob I saw a couple of attempts to trans David Bowie when he died. Presumably because he wore a dress a couple of times and a bit of slap as part of a stage persona. That is how batshit some of these people are.
I expect Boy George will also be historically transed when he dies, even though he has always said he is a proud gay man.

See if only you change your gender you are no longer oppressed. So females you only have yourselves to blame. It wasn't biology holding you back just your lady brain.

WTF!

In a world where transwomen are held to be real women and presumably transmen are held to be real men, transing women pioneers moves them from the role of "women doing something ground-breaking and exceptional" to "men, just doing what men naturally do".

I honestly despair.

The article, almost risibly, links to another Guardian article; a book review titled "Dr James Barry; A Woman Ahead of Her Time". The blurb being "the remarkable story of the extraordinary woman who defied her times by living as a man". It actually links to academic researched material concluding that "Du Preez and Dronfield dismiss this notion [that she was intersex] and argue Barry’s decision to live as a man was “motivated more by ambition than identity”.

An interesting article at Barry using the above book as a reference: www.atlasobscura.com/articles/the-first-female-doctor-in-britain-spent-56-years-disguised-as-a-man

"Margaret Ann Bulkley found a means to pursue her ambitions despite the gender restrictions of 19th century society. The globe-trotting doctor worked to advance the field of medicine half a century before Elizabeth Garrett became the first known female to qualify as a doctor in Britain, in 1865—the same year Barry died.

While Dr. James Barry was “pernickety, bad-tempered, frail, fastidious,” one acquaintance recalled, “this small, curious person raised the standards of medicine and touched the public conscience about the condition of the most degraded members of society…wherever she went."

This is female erasure. I feel just so despondent that these achievements are being taken away from these important women.

The school I teach in put posters up last year, celebrating LGBT stuff.

One of them has 'James Barry, transgender man'. Not “James Barry, oppressed woman who had to hide her true sex in order to do a job".

Another has a dancer from the 20s. There's was a paragraph about her dancing, then a separate, one word paragraph: "Lesbian".

I'm glad I'm out of teaching because I don't think I could have let that go, and it would probably have got me into trouble for not toeing the party line on the trans agenda. But it's astonishing to realise that people fear for their reputations and their jobs if they dare question this.

The ironic thing is though, they're actually misgendering these people, seeing as none of them actually identified themselves as transgender. Isn't misgendering a person supposed to be the ultimate insult, literally as bad as murder?
This reminds me of the mormons who 'convert' their dead ancestors.

JK Rowling deliberately used initials instead of her name because she was told parents wouldn't buy her books for their boys otherwise. Is she going to be declared trans next too? The world has gone mad!

writersblock I think some people really do think that anyone who puts a foot outside the stereotype of male/female is trans. It's the adult equivalent of saying 'ooh, she likes playing football, she must be trans'. 'ooh, he likes dolls, he must be trans'.
There does seem to be a momentum to erase women generally and downplay women's achievements, lesbians who present masculine and gay men who present feminine. It's just absolute rubbish.

It's also incredibly regressive in that it suggests "gender" is innate, the default is "cis" (which you can't object to being labelled) and that anyone who doesn't conform to the gender ascribe to their sex is probably (or just is) "trans".

This is seriously bonkers!

I'm so fucking furious about this. So fucking furious.

When I was little I took a male name so I could do the things that boys were allowed to do. My middle sister did the same. We were following in an old, old tradition of women and girls trying to hide their being female in order to have the same opportunities as boys and men.

And James Barry did it - navigated a hostile world and succeeded, even though everything was against her as she was a woman and had to hide it. But that means nothing, because she's apparently now a man.

Fuck that.

Next up:

Currer, Ellis and Acton Bell, the three famous novelist brothers.

Fuck this.