On June 9 there were two programs at the Marcus Public Library Good Women and Bad Girls and The Man Who Reinvented Christmas with Kathy Wilson presenting both programs.
Good Women and Bad Girls was given at 2:30 p.m. This program was for us to better understand Victorian attitudes toward women and health. Kathy used power point presentation for most of this presentation. She had three women on the screen with their faces blackened out. Each of the women had an image whether it was good or bad. “What do we mean when we talk about “good women and bad girls”? Does the clothing they are wearing, her skin color, or her behavior, determine if she is good or bad?
She exposed one of the women’s faces and asked if the color of her skin determined if she was good or bad? It shouldn’t make a difference what color her skin was. The second face she exposed was that of a woman holding a cigarette. Did this determine if she was good or bad? The third face exposed was that of a woman wearing a long dress with a slit exposing a bare leg. Did this determine if she was good or bad?
Could any of these women have “loose morals” by the way we saw them?
Before 1800, society said ALL women were naturally wicked and morally inferior to men AND believed would corrupt them if given the chance! But, why? Most churches believed Eve caused Adam to sin.
The American Revolution (1759-1789) and the Industrial Revolution (1790-1830’s) was when there was a constant change. Men saw women now working out of the home. The second great awakening was 1790-1830’s when women attended Methodist camp meetings that at earlier years would have not been the place for women.
The new view of women was that women were naturally wicked, a corrupting influence, and easily led astray. Expectations for women were to marry, have children, raise a good family and providing a sanctuary from an increasingly bad world. Home, Sweet home meant tasteful, elegant, not gaudy but rather a haven from the world.
The new view of women classified them as “Sinful Eve” or “Angel of the House”. If you were considered sinful, you were naturally wicked, a corruptible influence and easily led astray. If you were considered an Angel of the House you were pure, virtuous, and having good morals.
By the 1830’s, the angel face was embodied with a specific image. Women, as a whole, were passive, modest, graceful, self-sufficient, sympathetic, and dedicated, but still powerless and submissive.
Let’s go back to “Gone With The Wind”. Why did Scarlett detest Melanie so much? Melanie was soft spoken and Scarlett was out-spoken. Melanie was compassionate while Scarlett didn’t care about anyone but herself. Melanie was generous and Scarlett was stingy. Melanie was delicate and Scarlett was selfish.
Social expectation was to have children but don’t raise other people’s children. Girls were prepared from an early age for the eventful duty of being a wife and mother. Even the proper underwear was to be_a corset! (She showed us some corsets from that era.)
Setting the standard for this social expectancy was about appearance how one dresses and behaves.
Women should behave, do charitable works like volunteering in the library, hospitals, etc. They should have tea with ladies and have calling cards. They should also put together an investment group. Maybe she would become rich!
“Good girls go to heaven but bad girls go everywhere and most time seen with men. Mae West was one example.
By 1837, Queen Victoria took to medical programs and had women getting a better understanding of reproduction and female reproduction organs. After all, they were the weaker sex and there were many superstitions that went with women there should be no sex until after the baby arrived as before could have an effect on the baby. The doctor never made an internal examination_just reached under a woman’s skirt and felt. A mother-to-be should try and do her best to avoid “mother’s marks” (stork track) if she followed directions on what to do or not to do while expecting a baby. She should avoid stretching that could cause the umbilical cord to wrap around the baby’s neck.
Mothers were cautioned by what happened in 1901 to another mother. She was frightened and shouldn’t have immediately afterwards nursed the baby. Her milk could act as a poison. She shouldn’t have nursed for 10-12 hours after a frightening scare.
An inflammation of female organs could be caused by a miscarriage, strain of too much work, or even tight clothing. A girl could get rid of pimples and black heads by a regular bowel movement.
We were shown patent medicines for women: obesity soap, orange blossom tablets and Pinkdom tablets to take care of anything that a woman might have wrong with her. There was shown a stomach-back belt that could take care of any problem in that area.
As for change you wanted to know about SEX, but during the Victorian era, women were afraid to ask. Young women were under a great deal of pressure to express their sexuality, like if they were in “need”. They were advised that if passion came up,
they should walk as far and fast as they could to curb their passion. They should avoid custard of eggs and milk or beefsteak smothered in onion. If that doesn’t work, then fast for 12-48 hours_no food or water and that would clarify the blood. They shouldn’t read novels or stories that could cause a bad habit and hurt many girls. If you persist, guilt will show on your face and everyone will know your crime.
There were many more things on sex that I feel is too risque to put in print. To bring up these issues was fine in a presentation but for print where many different ages could read about it, I feel it was not right to print.
In the 21st century, we still face challenges created by our Victorian ancestors. Women are still unequal in the labor force as well as what they get paid. There is still the thought that women should be at home and only they can raise the children. (Some men have proved they can do child raising, also.) Women’s health issues are still questioned such as Roe vs. Wade. (This program was before the U.S. Supreme Court handed down their decision on Roe vs. Wade.)
So, can you really tell by looking at a woman/girl if she is “good” or “bad”? The woman/girl pictured at the beginning of her presentation had more skin showing (leg) than dress material. If you have gone to a school prom, this is what you would see. Does that make that girl “bad” that she has a long slit in the dress and exposes her leg?
What about the woman/girl pictured with brown skin? How could skin color make her good or bad? What about the girl that goes to the tanning booth to have a darker color instead of her “white” color? Does that make her good or bad? And, about the woman/girl that had a cigarette ready to smoke_I would think that was her own business if she wanted to probably eventually come down with cancer. I have had many friends that smoked, but I didn’t think of them as bad_just wished they would kick the habit.
It just isn’t “today’s” women that does what the presenter was talking about that could classify them as “good” or “bad”. Some of our ancestors probably did some of the same things, but we were not aware of them doing.