Beard, Thomas. Theatre of God's Ivdgements. London, 1632. EEBO. Web. 30 Apr. 2015.
Thomas Beard, an outspoken advocate against moral corruption, delineated the moral sins of going against the word of God. In his delineation of the sins rampantly occurring during the time, Beard speaks out against men dressing as women specifically going against the grand divine of God. Beard’s final judgement against men dressing in women’s garb remained that these men became “lascivious and effeminate… monstrous… dishonest and ignominious”. While this specifically addresses men cross-dressing, it speaks out against the female gender and the negative connotations associated with women during the time. The fact that taking on the female persona through dress creates the perfect man as a monster due to the unfinished nature of the female gender or simply the spectacle of taking on womanly appearance altogether troubles Beard and other contemporaries of his during the time such as John Rainolds and Adam Hill. Beard spoke out against multiple counts of sinful and morally corrupt actions in his literature, which was produced three times during this period. His feelings of the moral corruption of going against the divine nature of what God ordained as fit and perfect reflected King James and many moralist preachers during the time, calling into question what was more appalling: women challenging the patriarchy through their masculine dress and attempting to become more than their “lesser” creation or men choosing to take on a “lesser” role through female attire and personification?
Haec Vir or The Womanish-Man. London, 1620. EEBO. Web. 16 Apr. 2015.
Along with Hic Mulier, Haec-Vir describes the womanish man in comparison with a manlike woman. While Hic Mulier writes as a denotation of the transvestisism movement, Haec Vir attempts to create an active dialogue to unravel the implications behind cross-dressing and what it means for both males and females. Through conversation, it becomes established that the pair’s attire refuses to adhere to the sumptuary laws of the times. While both Haec Vir and Hic Mulier agree to return to their respectable clothing and refine their identity once again to set gender constructs, this pamphlet shows the desire to stray from these strict limitations of gender. The pamphlet attempts to challenge the female social identity at the time in terms of transvestism, but both characters return to their predetermined gender roles to coincide with the Renaissance beliefs. It would appear that while the pamphlet recognizes the oppression of women in a dominant patriarchal society, it alone cannot change years of concrete gender roles and social implications. The interesting opening dialogue still presents Hic Mulier the Man-Woman as the servant to Haec Vir the Womanish-Man which still coincides with the gender hierarchy of the time. However, Hic Mulier’s dialogue continues by presenting an argument to remove the constrictive gender roles of the time simply due to the biological tendencies inherit to each member. However, by removing their cross-dressing facades, both members return to their expected gender constructs regardless of the attention brought to women’s rights and what limitations truly enslave them during the period.
Hic Mulier or The Man-Woman. London, 1620. EEBO. Web. 16 Apr. 2015.
This pamphlet was mass produced and shared throughout London to ensure women and men dressed accordingly. In this pamphlet, women wearing men’s clothing were described as “monstrous” by exhibiting their deformity in loose fitting male attire. By utilizing the male pronoun of the Latin noun used for women, the pamphlet unravels the social and moral dilemma of women taking on more masculine characteristics in terms of their dress and their appearance. By calling into question the garb and the facial appearance of women from their hats to their hair, women’s appearance and standing in society remanded in conjecture with the placement of men. By women moving to take on more masculine attire and personas, men became threatened and could not ultimately see the true reasons women began to challenge patriarchal norms.The monstrosity that cross-dressing was known for was due to the idea that women were giving up their modesty by not showing their true body form and wearing ill-fitting male clothes. Preachers, moralists, and pamphleteers made it their mission to show that cross-dressing went against religious laws at the time. However, King James outrage against the transvestitism movement ultimately sparked the composition of both Hic Mulier as well as the companion pamphlet Haec Vir. These pamphlets delineate the social and moral dilemma of a woman challenging the somewhat shaky male patriarchy by removing the female gendered charactersitics in appearance and action at the time. The movement of women cross-dressing went against the sumptuary laws implemented at the time to ensure the social and gender hierarchy during the Renaissance. Hic Mulier attempts to challenge women cross-dressing and ultimately achieve to shut down the phenomenon and restore social order.
No comments:
Post a Comment