Advertisement

The Sexual Insult: Medicalized Views of Singleness during the Long Nineteenth Century

  • Andrea Mansker
Part of the Genders and Sexualities in History book series (GSX)

Abstract

The last chapter highlighted Ly’s concept of the self-sufficient female body, which served as the basis of her demand for women’s active participation in the civic realm. Ly’s model of agency was partly a response to the nineteenth-century understanding of female honor as rooted in a woman’s marital status, or in her sexual and familial relationship to a man. As the Ly-Massat affair and all of the gendered conflicts over honor near the turn of the century illustrate, women’s adoption of social and sexual identities outside of marriage was the crucial factor that blurred the public and private boundaries of both the codes of sociability and republican citizenship. Whether observers accepted Ly’s idea of an “honor without sex,” or whether they defended the virtuous “honest woman” from assaults on her sexual reputation, they positioned women’s marital status as the pivot around which discussions of women’s civic capacity revolved.

Keywords

Religious Order Single Woman Unmarried Woman Sexual Abstinence Honor Code 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 3.
    For the separate spheres ideology, see Landes, Women and the Public Sphere; Bonnie G. Smith, Ladies of the Leisure Class: The Bourgeoises of Northern France in the Nineteenth Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981); Anne Martin-Fugier, La Bourgeoise: Femme au temps de Paul Bourget (Paris: Bernard Grasset, 1983).Google Scholar
  2. 4.
    Jean-Marie Mayeur and Madeleine Reberioux, The Third Republic from its Origins to the Great War, 1871–1914, trans. J. R. Foster (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 147–73; Roger Magraw, France, 1800–1914: A Social History (London: Longman, 2002), 104–11.Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    J. E. S. Hayward, “The Official Social Philosophy of the French Third Republic: Léon Bourgeois and Solidarism,” International Review of Social History 6 (1961): 19–48, cited in Offen, “Depopulation,” 664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 6.
    Silverman, Art Nouveau, 43–51; Sanford Elwitt, The Third Republic Defended: Bourgeois Reform in France, 1880–1914 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1986), ch. 5.Google Scholar
  5. 7.
    Elinor Accampo, “Gender, Social Policy, and the Formation of the Third Republic: An Introduction” and Judith F. Stone, “The Republican Brotherhood: Gender and Ideology,” both in Elinor Accampo, Rachel G. Fuchs, and Mary Lynn Stewart (eds), Gender and the Politics of Social Reform in France, 1870–1914 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995), 1–27, 28–58.Google Scholar
  6. 8.
    Joshua Cole, The Power of Large Numbers: Population, Politics, and Gender in Nineteenth-Century France (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2000), 180–97.Google Scholar
  7. 14.
    Jeffreys, The Spinster and Her Enemies, ch. 5; Kent, Sex and Suffrage, chs 3, 7; Judith Walkowitz, Prostitution and Victorian Society: Women, Class, and the State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 255–6.Google Scholar
  8. 21.
    For fin-de-siècle representations of the lesbian, see Jennifer Waelti-Walters, Damned Women: Lesbians in French Novels (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2000), chs 1, 2; Francesca Canadé Sautman, “Invisible Women: Lesbian Working-Class Culture in France, 1880–1930,” in Jeffrey Merrick and Bryant T. Ragan, Jr (eds), Homosexuality in Modern France (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 177–201; Catherine van Casselaer, Lot’s Wife: Lesbian Paris, 1890–1914 (Liverpool: Janus, 1986). While critics’ characterizations of Ly fit some aspects of the fin-de-siècle lesbian stereotype, respondents did not highlight this particular insult in any sustained or consistent way. Casalé was the only one to make the charge of sexual inversion, and he simply listed it as one symptom of degenerate behavior among many to which Ly’s pathology could give rise. This lack of specific attention to inversion does not suggest that female same-sex relationships were not hotly debated in prewar France. Rather, because Ly emphasized a highly moralistic vision of complete sexual abstinence, it was somewhat difficult for commentators to fit her into the sexualized, decadent stereotype of the lesbian, though not impossible. I focus on the female surplus because contemporaries categorized Ly as a frigid “old maid” above all other labels.Google Scholar
  9. 24.
    Adrien Dansette, Religious History of Modern France, vol. 2, trans. John Dingle (Edinburgh: Nelson, 1961), 192–229; Nicholas Atkin, “The Politics of Legality: The Religious Orders in France, 1901–45,” in Frank Tallett and Nicholas Atkin (eds), Religion, Society, and Politics in France since 1789 (London: Hambledon Press, 1991), 149–66.Google Scholar
  10. 25.
    Claude Langlois, Le Catholicisme au féminin: Les congrégations françaises à supérieure générale au XIXe siècle (Paris: Cerf, 1984), 319–21; Ralph Gibson, A Social History of French Catholicism, 1789–1914 (London: Routledge, 1989), 127; Jan Goldstein, Console and Classify: The French Psychiatric Profession in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 363–4.Google Scholar
  11. 27.
    Gibson, A Social History of French Catholicism, 183; Judith Stone, Sons of the Revolution: Radical Democrats in France, 1862–1914 (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1996), 330–2. For the latter league, see Odile Sarti, The Ligue patriotique des françaises, 1902–1933: A Feminine Response to the Secularization of French Society (New York: Garland, 1992).Google Scholar
  12. 34.
    Rachel G. Fuchs, Poor and Pregnant in Paris: Strategies for Survival in the Nineteenth Century (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers, 1992), 4, 36, 56–76.Google Scholar
  13. 35.
    Pezerat and Poublan, “Femmes sans maris,” 117–62; Etienne van de Walle, The Female Population of France in the Nineteenth Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974), 20–3.Google Scholar
  14. 38.
    Annuaire statistique, vol. 58 (1951), cited in Wesley Camp, Marriage and the Family in France Since the Revolution (New York: Bookman, 1961), 67.Google Scholar
  15. 40.
    Dame Pégard, report on the “Société française d’émigration des femmes,” in Pégard (ed.), 2e Congrès international des œuvres et institutions féminines tenu au Palais des Congrès de l’Exposition universelle de 1900, vol. 2 (Paris: Charles Blot, 1902), 236–44. Pégard claimed that, despite facing numerous obstacles in implementing their project, the Society facilitated several marriages and procured suitable positions for 60 women in the colonies. See Ch. 5 of this book for the multiple ways feminists made use of the female surplus statistics after the turn of the century. For the Société française d’émigration des femmes, see Claire Salinas, “‘Les Non-Classée:’ Colonial Emigration, Gender and Republican Liberalism, 1897–1900,” Proceedings of the Western Society for French History 30 (2002), 1–9; Marie-Paule Ha, “‘La Femme française aux colonies’: Promoting Colonial Female Emigration at the Turn of the Century,” French Colonial History 6 (2005), 205–24.Google Scholar
  16. 41.
    Colin Dyer, Population and Society in Twentieth-Century France (New York: Holmes & Meier, 1978), 5–6, 28; Angus Mclaren, Sexuality and the Social Order: The Debate over the Fertility of Women and Workers in France, 1770–1920 (New York: Holmes & Meier, 1983), 179.Google Scholar
  17. 55.
    See, for example, Charles Letourneau, The Evolution of Marriage and the Family (London: Walter Scott, 1904), 352–4.Google Scholar
  18. 58.
    Michel Foucault, A History of Sexuality, vol. 1 (New York: Vintage, 1990), 41. See also Sander L. Gilman, Difference and Pathology: Stereotypes of Sexuality, Race, and Madness (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1985), 21–5, 216.Google Scholar
  19. 62.
    Ibid., 102–3.Google Scholar
  20. 71.
    Jean Sédillot, “Chasteté,” Dictionnaire des sciences médicales, vol. 5 (1813), 1–3. See Juste-Louis Calmeil, “Continence,” Dictionnaire de médecine, 2nd edn, vol. 8 (Paris: Béchet Jnl, Librairie de la Faculté de Médecine, 1834) for a similar interpretation and solution.Google Scholar
  21. 72.
    Charles Chrétien-Henri Marc, “Célibat,” Dictionnaire des sciences médicales, vol. 4 (1813), 401. Marc was one of the creators of the Société médicale d’émulation as well as one of the founding editors of the Annales d’hygiène publique et de médecine légale in 1829, along with Esquirol and Parent-Duchâtelet. Marc wrote the Annales introduction, in which he elaborated the goals of public health and legal medicine. See Ann Elizabeth Fowler La Berge, Mission and Method: The Early Nineteenth-Century French Public Health Movement (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 31–2.Google Scholar
  22. 76.
    Auguste Debay, Hygiène et physiologie du mariage, 153rd edn (Paris, 1880), in Erna Olafson Hellerstein, Leslie Parker Hume, and Karen Offen (eds), Victorian Women: A Documentary Account of Women’s Lives in Nineteenth-Century England, France, and the United States (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1981), 175.Google Scholar
  23. 78.
    Dr P. Garnier, Célibat et célibataires. Caractères, dangers et hygiène chez les deux sexes (Paris: Garnier frères, 1887), 480–1.Google Scholar
  24. 81.
    Sinéty, “Stérilité,” DESM, 3rd series, vol. 11 (Paris: G. Masson, 1864–89), 709.Google Scholar
  25. 89.
    T. J. Clark, The Painting of Modern Life (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), 3–78; Walkowitz, City of Dreadful Delight, 15–80.Google Scholar
  26. 90.
    Alain Corbin, Women for Hire: Prostitution and Sexuality in France after 1850, trans. Alan Sheridan (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990), 141–213.Google Scholar
  27. 3.
    Whereas the annual number of divorces pronounced in France averaged 15,426 between 1910 and 1913, in Germany it averaged 13,008 for this same period. The US had reached an annual mean of 83,045 divorces by 1910. The statistics in all countries indicated unprecedented increases in divorce rates in the prewar decades, but scholars point out that these rates are not that striking by our late-twentieth-century standards. Crude divorce rates in 1910 were 0.36 per 1,000 population in France, 0.41 in Switzerland, 0.30 in Denmark, 0.11 in Austria and 0.9 in the US. See Roderick Phillips, Putting Asunder: A History of Divorce in Western Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 462–5, 517.Google Scholar
  28. 5.
    For scholarly work on the legislative and popular debates under the Third Republic, see Theresa McBride, “Divorce and the Republican Family,” in Accampo, Fuchs, and Stewart, Gender and the Politics of Social Reform, 59–81, and McBride, “Public Authority and Private Lives: Divorce after the French Revolution,” French Historical Studies 17: 3 (Spring 1992), 747–68; Berenson, Trial of Madame Caillaux, 133–68; Jean E. Pedersen, Legislating the French Family: Feminism, Theater and Republican Politics, 1870–1920 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2003), chs 1–3; Antony Copley, Sexual Moralities in France, 1780–1980: New Ideas on the Family, Divorce and Homosexuality (London: Routledge, 1989), ch. 5; Phillips, Putting Asunder, 424–8 and 479–515.Google Scholar
  29. 6.
    Francis Ronsin, Les Divorciaires: Affrontements politiques et conceptions du marriage dans la France du XIXe siècle (Paris: Aubier, 1992), esp. ch. 6. Anne-Marie Sohn examines some Third Republic divorce records from departmental archives in her more general study of private life, Du Premier baiser à l’alcôve: La sexualité des Français au quotidien, 1850–1950 (Paris: Aubier, 1996), ch. 9.Google Scholar
  30. 9.
    The 1886 legislation stipulated that enquêtes would no longer take place at the court hearing, but in the private chambers of a judge assigned for this purpose (juge commissaire). See Léon Barbié, Guide pratique du divorce (Paris: Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence, 1927), 99–100; Henri Lalou, Le Divorce en France (aperçu historique) (Paris: Librairie Dalloz, 1923), 28; Charles Morizot-Thibault, “La Femme et le divorce,” speech given at annual meeting of the 20th Congrès de la Société d’Economie Sociale of June 3, 1901, on the topic “La Condition de la femme,” in La Réforme sociale, July 16, 1901, 210–11. However, enquêtes were not opened in all cases. See Alfred Valensi, L’Application de la loi du divorce en France: Tendance générale de la jurisprudence, résultats sociaux, projets de réforme, doctoral thesis (Paris: Librairie de la société du recueil général des lois et des arrêts, 1905), 8–12.Google Scholar
  31. 14.
    Reddy, “Marriage, Honor, and the Public Sphere in Postrevolutionary France: Séparations de Corps, 1815–1848,” Journal of Modern History 65: 3 (September 1993): 437–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 16.
    Bernard Schnapper, “La Séparation de corps de 1837 à 1914,” Revue historique 259: 2 (1978): 453–66.Google Scholar
  33. 18.
    McBride, “Public Authority and Private Lives,” 766–8; Philip Nord, The Republican Moment: Struggles for Democracy in Nineteenth-Century France (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995), 218–32; Accampo, “Gender, Social Policy, and the Formation of the Third Republic,” 1–27.Google Scholar
  34. 24.
    Dalloz, Jurisprudence générale: Troisième table alphabétique de dix années du recueil périodique, 1887 à 1897 (Paris: Bureau de la Jurisprudence générale, 1897), #228–9 (p. 423). Police investigations for adultery were among some of the most frequently cited types of cases listed in the Gazette des tribunaux for these years. See, for example, Gazette’s “Chronique” column, May 28, 1887 and “Tribunal Civil de la Seine (4e ch.),” January 19, 1896.Google Scholar
  35. 42.
    Jacques Desforges, Le Divorce en France: Étude démographique (Paris: Éditions familiales de France, 1947), 38–40. Desforges notes that, if one adds the requests for separation to those for divorce, the percentage of requests by wives rises to 73.6 percent in 1884, compared to only 23.6 percent of suits filed by husbands.Google Scholar
  36. 43.
    Gail L. Savage, “Divorce and the Law in England and France Prior to the First World War,” Journal of Social History 21: 3 (Spring 1988), 499–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 54.
    See Martha Hildreth, Doctors, Bureaucrats, and Public Health in France, 1888–1902 (New York: Garland, 1987), ch. 2.Google Scholar
  38. 62.
    See Auguste Rol, L’Evolution du divorce (jurisprudence et sociologie), préface du Dr Toulouse (Paris: Librairie Nouvelle de Droit et de Jurisprudence, 1905), 161–3. Rol argues that the question of venereal disease communication as a cause for divorce arose since the promulgation of the Civil Code. In two initial rulings, in 1806 and 1808, French courts held that sexual disease transmission could not serve as grounds for marital rupture. However, magistrates soon began accepting the idea that it could be introduced as a cause for both separation and divorce under the injure grave heading. Rol maintains that, especially since the Naquet Law, the courts indisputably accepted this principle, which had attained the authority of law in jurisprudence. Rol cites cases in which positive rulings were achieved in France from 1818. See also A. D. Carpentier, Divorce et séparation de corps: Doctrine et jurisprudence, vol. 1 (Paris: Librairie de la Société du Recueil Général des lois et des arrêts, 1899), 145–50. Carpentier notes that venereal disease could be used in divorce cases either as proof of adultery or as an injure grave. Most of his examples come from the 1880s and ’90s. Divorce and premarital screening based on the existence of venereal disease also became central concerns of eugenicists by the 1920s in France. See William Schneider, “Toward the Improvement of the Human Race: The History of Eugenics in France,” Journal of Modern History 54 (1982): 284–5, cited in Phillips, Putting Asunder, 508.Google Scholar
  39. 64.
    For the abolitionist campaigns, see Anne-Marie Käppeli, Sublime croisade: Ethique et politique du féminisme protestant, 1875–1928 (Carouge-Geneva: Éditions Zoé, 1990); Geneviève Poujol, Un Féminisme sous tutelle: Les protestantes françaises, 1810–1960 (Paris: Les Éditions de Paris, 2003); Corbin, Women for Hire; Karen Offen, “Intrepid Crusader: Ghénia Avril de Sainte-Croix Takes on the Prostitution Issue,” Proceedings of the Western Society for French History 33 (2005), 352–74; Steven Hause, “Social Control in Late Nineteenth-Century France: Protestant Campaigns for Strict Public Morality,” in Confronting Modernity, ch. 6. For the abolitionist proposal to criminalize the transmission of venereal disease, see Dr Louis Fiaux, Le Délit pénal de contamination intersexuelle (Paris: Félix Alcan, 1907).Google Scholar
  40. 81.
    Dalloz, Jurisprudence générale: Quatrième table alphabétique de dix années du recueil périodique, 1897 à 1907 (Paris: Bureau de la Jurisprudence générale, 1907), #37–40 (p. 519).Google Scholar
  41. 94.
    For the creation of the welfare state during the Third Republic, see Accampo, Fuchs, and Stewart, Gender and the Politics of Social Reform; Anne Cova, “French Feminism and Maternity: Theories and Policies, 1890–1918,” in Gisela Bock and Pat Thane (eds), Maternity and Gender Policies: Women and the Rise of the European Welfare States, 1880s–1950s (New York: Routledge, 1991), 119–37; Mary Lynn Stewart, Women, Work and the French State: Labour Protection and Social Patriarchy, 1879–1919 (Kingston, ON: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1989); Susan Pedersen, Family, Dependence and the Origins of the Welfare State: Britain and France, 1914–1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Andrea Mansker 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Mansker
    • 1
  1. 1.Sewanee: The University of the SouthUSA

Personalised recommendations