What do you think?
Rate this book
Female Husbands: A Trans History
Long before people identified as transgender or lesbian, there were female husbands and the women who loved them. Female husbands - people assigned female who transed gender, lived as men, and married women - were true queer pioneers. Moving deftly from the colonial era to just before the First World War, Jen Manion uncovers the riveting and very personal stories of ordinary people who lived as men despite tremendous risk, danger, violence, and threat of punishment. Female Husbands weaves the story of their lives in relation to broader social, economic, and political developments in the United States and the United Kingdom while also exploring how attitudes towards female husbands shifted in relation to transformations in gender politics and women's rights, ultimately leading to the demise of the category of 'female husband' in the early twentieth century. Groundbreaking and influential, Female Husbands offers a dynamic, varied, and complex history of the LGBTQ past.
350 pages, Hardcover
First published February 28, 2020
About the author
Jen Manion
3 books7 followersJen Manion is a social and cultural historian, author, and professor of History and Sexuality, Women's and Gender Studies at Amherst College. Manion is the author of Female Husbands: A Trans History and Liberty's Prisoners: Carceral Culture in Early America.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 91 reviews
March 18, 2020
Jen Manion gives us a fresh and meticulous reconstruction of the lives, heartbreaks, and resistance of the group of people best known in the 18th and 19th Centuries as female husbands. Female Husbands: a Trans History follows on smoothly from the work of excellent recent trans history studies books like Emily Skidmore's True Sex: The Lives of Trans Men at the Turn of the 20th Century, Clare Sears' Arresting Dress: Cross-Dressing, Law, and Fascination in Nineteenth Century San Francisco, and C. Riley Snorton's Black On Both Sides: a Racial History of Trans Identity, which have done a huge amount of work pushing back beyond the earlier histories of trans people that situation trans as a post-1930s, largely white phenomenon.
As a trans historian, I'll be referring back to Female Husbands a great deal. My only critique is the author's choice to use they/them pronouns for all female husbands throughout the book. Manion gives detailed explanation as to why this choice was made, and in some cases it makes a lot of sense, but as a reader you're left feeling as though the book misgenders quite a number of the people studied by disregarding the male identity they fought so hard to embody. Still, this highlights how the question of pronouns with trans people backwards in time is contentious even among queer and trans scholars, and I don't think this is a reason to disregard what is otherwise a fantastic, perhaps even canonical, addition to historical trans studies.
As a trans historian, I'll be referring back to Female Husbands a great deal. My only critique is the author's choice to use they/them pronouns for all female husbands throughout the book. Manion gives detailed explanation as to why this choice was made, and in some cases it makes a lot of sense, but as a reader you're left feeling as though the book misgenders quite a number of the people studied by disregarding the male identity they fought so hard to embody. Still, this highlights how the question of pronouns with trans people backwards in time is contentious even among queer and trans scholars, and I don't think this is a reason to disregard what is otherwise a fantastic, perhaps even canonical, addition to historical trans studies.
August 2, 2022
interesting examination and overview of European and American cases of “female husbands” and the delineation of lesbian, transmasculine, and other LGBTQ identities through a specific framework. A bit too general and unspecific at certain points
November 26, 2021
In Female Husbands: A Trans History, Jen Manion explores "female husbands" in the U.S. and England between the mid-eighteenth century and the eve of the First World War. Such people were assigned female at birth, lived as men for at least part of their adult lives, and married women, and were the object of much fascination—by turns contemptuous and sympathetic—in contemporary media.
It’s important to be clear about the scope of what Manion is setting out to do in Female Husbands. The vast majority of the surviving sources about these individuals were written by others (generally speaking either cis men or mediated through the pens of cis men), and it those sources which deploy the term “female husband.” It was therefore not a category of identity but one of identification—one imposed by the gender normative on the gender outlaws. Manion is not arguing for “female husbands” as a term that necessarily had any meaning for these people themselves, but rather explores what the term’s deployment tells us about the times and places in which they lived, and the social roles they chose to play in contravention of their assigned gender.
This is not to say that Manion is uninterested in the “female husbands” themselves—Manion in fact clearly spent a lot of time in the archives pulling out as much evidence as is recoverable about these people, their relationships, and their careers—but rather that Manion is careful to stress how little we can securely recover about their own understanding of their gender or how they might identify if they were alive today—would they consider themselves trans men? Genderqueer? Agender? Trans masc? Butch lesbians? Something else? Manion uses they/them pronouns throughout to refer to the “female husbands”, resisting imposing (or refusing!) any specific modern category of identification on or for them.
I understand from some other reviews on here that others are uncomfortable with Manion’s pronoun choice here, but disagree with the argument that the use of they/them is imposing a modern non-binary identity on the “female husbands”—I think that is a reductive and highly presentist understanding that wilfully ignores how they/them has been used as a singular pronoun in English since at least the fourteenth century. I understood it more as a Schroedinger’s Cat kind of signifier of gender. True, one of the last individuals discussed, Alan Hart—who lived into the 1960s, who medically transitioned and who vehemently asserted a male identity—on balance of probability would use he/him pronouns today and would self-describe as a trans man. I feel Manion uses they/them to refer to Hart more so out of a desire to be consistent in usage than anything else—but even here, we can as conscientious historians only speak in terms of balance of probability, not in certainties! And if that’s the case with Hart, how much more so the case with Frank Dubois, a “female husband” from 1880s Wisconsin: on one occasion, when asked if they would “insist that you are a man”, Dubois responded “I do; I am. As long as my wife is satisfied, it’s nobody’s business”, but on another occasion “with inscrutable pertinacity, insists that she is a woman.”
Equally, I understand the desire to find LGBT forebears in the past, but Manion’s goal isn’t to simply find people who can be placed into particular boxes but rather to understand their experiences. Still less is it to find Heroic Ancestors—the masculinity of the “female husbands” was often expressed through marriages in which normative gendered segregation of labour was rigorously maintained, and sometimes through physical abuse or other forms of coercive control over their wives.
I appreciated that Manion was also careful to spend some time considering the wives of the “female husbands”, women who were often mocked by their contemporaries or overlooked by later historians but who also have a right to be included within a consideration of queer history. Equally, Manion is attentive to issues of class and race. Working-class “female husbands” had differing experiences from wealthier ones, while the intersection of racism and misogyny meant that Black “female husbands” in the U.S. were treated very differently to white ones.
There are points where I had issues with Manion’s approach—some quibbles, some more significant. On the quibble side of things, Manion more than once uses the phrase “throughout history”, one which never fails to have me reaching for the red pen when I’m reading an undergraduate paper.
Even more often, Manion refers to the “female husbands” as being “legally married” to their wives. This doesn’t sit right with me. Do I think that morally their marriages were as valid as any other? Yes! But as we have frequent proof these days, the law is an ass—morality and legality are not identical things. The fact that many of these marriages were annulled once the AFAB status of the “female husband” became publicly known is proof that in the legal systems of the time, they weren’t seen as legally valid and binding. That in cases of separation or widowhood, a wife of a “female husband” might be awarded a financial settlement does not to me seem to necessarily indicate a historical acceptance of trans or same-sex marriage so much as it points to people sometimes being willing to be inconsistent in their reasoning if it was the charitable thing to do and lessened the likelihood of a woman ending up in the poorhouse.
There were also a couple of places where a turn of phrase or similar told me that Manion has perhaps not deeply engaged with the work of early modernists or medievalists on gender and women’s history. While of course no one can be an expert in everything, there were a couple of erronenous conclusions that the eye of a pre-modernist could have caught pre-publication. For instance, at one point Manion asserts that the fact that the obituaries of 18th-century businessman James Howe referred to them not just by their birth name of “Mary East” but as “Mrs Mary East” shows the sheer force of heteronormative assumptions—while legally a spinister, Howe/East is referred to as a Mrs. Manion writes that “The phrase Mrs. Mary East creates an impossible relationship whereby the female Mary East marries male James Howe — except they are the same person.” This would seem to be a paradox indeed! Except that from the late Middle Ages right through to the 18th century, Mistress/Missus/Mrs. was a term that did not necessarily imply marital status. It was used as a term of respect for a mature woman who generally speaking was the head of a household or was being accorded a certain degree of social respect for a skill—the obituary writer was more likely trying to signify Howe/East’s social standing than making a commentary about their marital status.
All that said, though, Manion has written an important book, and one grounded in an impressively wide trawl of the archives; it may not be the last word on these trans and queer forebears, but it’s one that’s sure to help shape the historiographical conversation for some time to come.
It’s important to be clear about the scope of what Manion is setting out to do in Female Husbands. The vast majority of the surviving sources about these individuals were written by others (generally speaking either cis men or mediated through the pens of cis men), and it those sources which deploy the term “female husband.” It was therefore not a category of identity but one of identification—one imposed by the gender normative on the gender outlaws. Manion is not arguing for “female husbands” as a term that necessarily had any meaning for these people themselves, but rather explores what the term’s deployment tells us about the times and places in which they lived, and the social roles they chose to play in contravention of their assigned gender.
This is not to say that Manion is uninterested in the “female husbands” themselves—Manion in fact clearly spent a lot of time in the archives pulling out as much evidence as is recoverable about these people, their relationships, and their careers—but rather that Manion is careful to stress how little we can securely recover about their own understanding of their gender or how they might identify if they were alive today—would they consider themselves trans men? Genderqueer? Agender? Trans masc? Butch lesbians? Something else? Manion uses they/them pronouns throughout to refer to the “female husbands”, resisting imposing (or refusing!) any specific modern category of identification on or for them.
I understand from some other reviews on here that others are uncomfortable with Manion’s pronoun choice here, but disagree with the argument that the use of they/them is imposing a modern non-binary identity on the “female husbands”—I think that is a reductive and highly presentist understanding that wilfully ignores how they/them has been used as a singular pronoun in English since at least the fourteenth century. I understood it more as a Schroedinger’s Cat kind of signifier of gender. True, one of the last individuals discussed, Alan Hart—who lived into the 1960s, who medically transitioned and who vehemently asserted a male identity—on balance of probability would use he/him pronouns today and would self-describe as a trans man. I feel Manion uses they/them to refer to Hart more so out of a desire to be consistent in usage than anything else—but even here, we can as conscientious historians only speak in terms of balance of probability, not in certainties! And if that’s the case with Hart, how much more so the case with Frank Dubois, a “female husband” from 1880s Wisconsin: on one occasion, when asked if they would “insist that you are a man”, Dubois responded “I do; I am. As long as my wife is satisfied, it’s nobody’s business”, but on another occasion “with inscrutable pertinacity, insists that she is a woman.”
Equally, I understand the desire to find LGBT forebears in the past, but Manion’s goal isn’t to simply find people who can be placed into particular boxes but rather to understand their experiences. Still less is it to find Heroic Ancestors—the masculinity of the “female husbands” was often expressed through marriages in which normative gendered segregation of labour was rigorously maintained, and sometimes through physical abuse or other forms of coercive control over their wives.
I appreciated that Manion was also careful to spend some time considering the wives of the “female husbands”, women who were often mocked by their contemporaries or overlooked by later historians but who also have a right to be included within a consideration of queer history. Equally, Manion is attentive to issues of class and race. Working-class “female husbands” had differing experiences from wealthier ones, while the intersection of racism and misogyny meant that Black “female husbands” in the U.S. were treated very differently to white ones.
There are points where I had issues with Manion’s approach—some quibbles, some more significant. On the quibble side of things, Manion more than once uses the phrase “throughout history”, one which never fails to have me reaching for the red pen when I’m reading an undergraduate paper.
Even more often, Manion refers to the “female husbands” as being “legally married” to their wives. This doesn’t sit right with me. Do I think that morally their marriages were as valid as any other? Yes! But as we have frequent proof these days, the law is an ass—morality and legality are not identical things. The fact that many of these marriages were annulled once the AFAB status of the “female husband” became publicly known is proof that in the legal systems of the time, they weren’t seen as legally valid and binding. That in cases of separation or widowhood, a wife of a “female husband” might be awarded a financial settlement does not to me seem to necessarily indicate a historical acceptance of trans or same-sex marriage so much as it points to people sometimes being willing to be inconsistent in their reasoning if it was the charitable thing to do and lessened the likelihood of a woman ending up in the poorhouse.
There were also a couple of places where a turn of phrase or similar told me that Manion has perhaps not deeply engaged with the work of early modernists or medievalists on gender and women’s history. While of course no one can be an expert in everything, there were a couple of erronenous conclusions that the eye of a pre-modernist could have caught pre-publication. For instance, at one point Manion asserts that the fact that the obituaries of 18th-century businessman James Howe referred to them not just by their birth name of “Mary East” but as “Mrs Mary East” shows the sheer force of heteronormative assumptions—while legally a spinister, Howe/East is referred to as a Mrs. Manion writes that “The phrase Mrs. Mary East creates an impossible relationship whereby the female Mary East marries male James Howe — except they are the same person.” This would seem to be a paradox indeed! Except that from the late Middle Ages right through to the 18th century, Mistress/Missus/Mrs. was a term that did not necessarily imply marital status. It was used as a term of respect for a mature woman who generally speaking was the head of a household or was being accorded a certain degree of social respect for a skill—the obituary writer was more likely trying to signify Howe/East’s social standing than making a commentary about their marital status.
All that said, though, Manion has written an important book, and one grounded in an impressively wide trawl of the archives; it may not be the last word on these trans and queer forebears, but it’s one that’s sure to help shape the historiographical conversation for some time to come.
October 11, 2020
Jen Manion’s Female Husbands: A Trans History is truly a great piece of research on a too underexplored part of history. Focusing on cases of individuals who were born as women and then lived as men in England and the United States throughout the 1700s to the early 1900s, there is a great deal of content to unpack.
Expressions of gender and sexuality in the 1700s were something altogether different from gender and sexuality in each subsequent century. This reality in and of itself makes it challenging to ascertain motivations for trans-ing gender, let alone what past individuals’ identities actually were. A woman (or someone assigned as a woman at birth) could dress and live as a man for so many reasons beyond gender affirmation. This includes seeking economic autonomy and mobility, wanting to marry a woman in peace, and even simply not wanting to marry a man. For so much of history, a woman’s entire livelihood was linked to the man she was married to, and the circumstances of a marriage were more often an imposition than a clear choice that women were privileged enough to get to make on their own. So for so many reasons, you could see women living as men.
Manion does great work that is respectful of these vague circumstances, delves into the complicated context of these choices, and does not rely on baseless speculation. Overall, this is a great book filled with fascinating stories, and I definitely recommend it if this is a topic you want to know more about.
Expressions of gender and sexuality in the 1700s were something altogether different from gender and sexuality in each subsequent century. This reality in and of itself makes it challenging to ascertain motivations for trans-ing gender, let alone what past individuals’ identities actually were. A woman (or someone assigned as a woman at birth) could dress and live as a man for so many reasons beyond gender affirmation. This includes seeking economic autonomy and mobility, wanting to marry a woman in peace, and even simply not wanting to marry a man. For so much of history, a woman’s entire livelihood was linked to the man she was married to, and the circumstances of a marriage were more often an imposition than a clear choice that women were privileged enough to get to make on their own. So for so many reasons, you could see women living as men.
Manion does great work that is respectful of these vague circumstances, delves into the complicated context of these choices, and does not rely on baseless speculation. Overall, this is a great book filled with fascinating stories, and I definitely recommend it if this is a topic you want to know more about.
January 2, 2021
To be honest... I didn’t finish. I got about 30 pages in and then skipped ahead to see if it got any better and realized it didn’t.
The title is misleading. Maybe “Female Husband: A Queer History” or “Female Husband: What women had to do to get ahead” or “Female Husband: History of Breaking gender norms”
The use of They/Them pronouns is only because the author cannot assume how these people preferred as there seems to be nothing she found from the perspective of her topic of research. It seems she only found outsider (wives, in laws, courts, media) but nothing directly from a “female husband”. Which.... is a term that makes my blood boil as a trans man (and husband). I understand it was a term coined in THE LATE 1700s but.... we are centuries past that time now... there’s got to be something better.
This read like a college thesis: a lot of “in this book/section/chapter I will discuss ....”
“here’s kind of a thing but we’ll get to that later in the book/I’ll discuss further later” so if you like that sort of thing, dig in, college lectures were not my cup of tea.
I found it to be more about how females felt the only way they could get ahead was to “pretend” to be male. There is no evidence in the sections I read (and I skipped around quite a bit to check) that says any of these people were actually transgender (as would be implied by the title of the book). Just, as the author says, “transing genders” to get what they want, which is not the same and paints a very bad picture for real transgender people.
If you want to learn about actual transgender history... look elsewhere.
The title is misleading. Maybe “Female Husband: A Queer History” or “Female Husband: What women had to do to get ahead” or “Female Husband: History of Breaking gender norms”
The use of They/Them pronouns is only because the author cannot assume how these people preferred as there seems to be nothing she found from the perspective of her topic of research. It seems she only found outsider (wives, in laws, courts, media) but nothing directly from a “female husband”. Which.... is a term that makes my blood boil as a trans man (and husband). I understand it was a term coined in THE LATE 1700s but.... we are centuries past that time now... there’s got to be something better.
This read like a college thesis: a lot of “in this book/section/chapter I will discuss ....”
“here’s kind of a thing but we’ll get to that later in the book/I’ll discuss further later” so if you like that sort of thing, dig in, college lectures were not my cup of tea.
I found it to be more about how females felt the only way they could get ahead was to “pretend” to be male. There is no evidence in the sections I read (and I skipped around quite a bit to check) that says any of these people were actually transgender (as would be implied by the title of the book). Just, as the author says, “transing genders” to get what they want, which is not the same and paints a very bad picture for real transgender people.
If you want to learn about actual transgender history... look elsewhere.
November 18, 2021
When I saw the title of the book, I was reminded of an incident in my state, here in India, where a young woman transitioned to a man so that they can be with their lover.
I found the book very sometimes dragged which hindered my reading experience. Otherwise, it was an informative read.
I found the book very sometimes dragged which hindered my reading experience. Otherwise, it was an informative read.
September 5, 2022
This is a thorough document of a number of historical cases of people assigned female at birth (AFAB) who chose to live as men. The author relies mostly on news articles and court records, and a few instances where the "female husband" wrote a book about his/her/their experience "transing gender."
The subject is complex -- while we don't necessarily get strong insights into whether the "female husbands" experienced gender dysphoria or how they felt about gender, it's clear from their behavior after exposure in many cases. For example, the punishment for transing gender was often to require the offender to resume the clothing and roles of the gender assigned at birth.
In many cases -- the "female husbands" went right back to their assumed gender identity, clothing, life, business and community. In some cases, the "female husbands" made multiple transitions.
Manion analyzes the strategies for defense utilized by both the female husbands and their wives when death, divorce or other incidents exposed the anatomy of the female husband to official, medical or juridical scrutiny. In some cases, the wives claimed "ignorance" as a way to reestablish their reputation -- but in at least one case, the female husband, possibly with support of community, ensured that the wife was granted her share of their accumulated wealth/savings. In many cases, yes, going to war or work as a man granted people more financial opportunity and personal freedom -- but if it was as simple as wearing men's clothing to earn more money, more people would have done it.
The "female husband" permitted the pursuit of a specifically white male privilege -- AFAB people of color who transed gender often received much different treatment by the press, law and medical establishment.
Manion's work is an important review of mostly "non primary" resources -- that's to say, the inner thoughts and feelings of the "female husbands" are not available for review and therefore not included. Manion can't possibly know what these men believed or felt. The reactions of the press in the US and UK seem to have alternated and shifted as much as the tides of public opinion. As you will learn, gender, however, was not entirely determined based on anatomy as many of the female husbands were viewed as "male" due to the external factors of work, marriage (legal marriages), and clothing.
Early in the book, Manion states a decision to utilize "they/them" pronouns for the female husbands as a way of encompassing many aspects of gender -- presentation by the female husbands, as referred by the community / law / media which would use "she/her" in some cases but not in others.
Overall, I'm given the impression that the solidification of gender along a male/female binary was part of the growing dominance of a white, male overclass in the US & UK. As we face the challenges of white supremacy as a culture -- those arbitrary structures of gender are also being cast in a critical light. I've personally been confused by the way many people cling to gender as something important. As an AFAB person -- I cannot truly claim to feel strongly about any particular gender, but I know when I am being misgendered as a method of insulting and undermining who I am. Personally, I would prefer to not have to choose any gender and just ignore it altogether. A lot of people don't have that choice and many people don't question the choice. This book offers a lens on historical attitudes and perceptions of gender and provides a well researched number of subjects and their experiences, as best as the author can gather.
The subject is complex -- while we don't necessarily get strong insights into whether the "female husbands" experienced gender dysphoria or how they felt about gender, it's clear from their behavior after exposure in many cases. For example, the punishment for transing gender was often to require the offender to resume the clothing and roles of the gender assigned at birth.
In many cases -- the "female husbands" went right back to their assumed gender identity, clothing, life, business and community. In some cases, the "female husbands" made multiple transitions.
Manion analyzes the strategies for defense utilized by both the female husbands and their wives when death, divorce or other incidents exposed the anatomy of the female husband to official, medical or juridical scrutiny. In some cases, the wives claimed "ignorance" as a way to reestablish their reputation -- but in at least one case, the female husband, possibly with support of community, ensured that the wife was granted her share of their accumulated wealth/savings. In many cases, yes, going to war or work as a man granted people more financial opportunity and personal freedom -- but if it was as simple as wearing men's clothing to earn more money, more people would have done it.
The "female husband" permitted the pursuit of a specifically white male privilege -- AFAB people of color who transed gender often received much different treatment by the press, law and medical establishment.
Manion's work is an important review of mostly "non primary" resources -- that's to say, the inner thoughts and feelings of the "female husbands" are not available for review and therefore not included. Manion can't possibly know what these men believed or felt. The reactions of the press in the US and UK seem to have alternated and shifted as much as the tides of public opinion. As you will learn, gender, however, was not entirely determined based on anatomy as many of the female husbands were viewed as "male" due to the external factors of work, marriage (legal marriages), and clothing.
Early in the book, Manion states a decision to utilize "they/them" pronouns for the female husbands as a way of encompassing many aspects of gender -- presentation by the female husbands, as referred by the community / law / media which would use "she/her" in some cases but not in others.
Overall, I'm given the impression that the solidification of gender along a male/female binary was part of the growing dominance of a white, male overclass in the US & UK. As we face the challenges of white supremacy as a culture -- those arbitrary structures of gender are also being cast in a critical light. I've personally been confused by the way many people cling to gender as something important. As an AFAB person -- I cannot truly claim to feel strongly about any particular gender, but I know when I am being misgendered as a method of insulting and undermining who I am. Personally, I would prefer to not have to choose any gender and just ignore it altogether. A lot of people don't have that choice and many people don't question the choice. This book offers a lens on historical attitudes and perceptions of gender and provides a well researched number of subjects and their experiences, as best as the author can gather.
February 8, 2020
I received this ARC from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
A fascinating look at a certain part of LGBTQIA+ history. It's easy in the Tumblr age to read short posts about certain historical figures and say "well they must've been trans" or "they must've been gay", but it's actually a lot more complicated than that. Manion delves into the relationship between gender and sexuality in an era when the terminology was very different - and a lot more restrictive.
The writing is quite academic, but Manion makes it easy to connect with each "female husband" by following their lives and making them feel very real. The chronological set-up also allows Manion to easily link the past to the present. A dense book, but well worth reading.
A fascinating look at a certain part of LGBTQIA+ history. It's easy in the Tumblr age to read short posts about certain historical figures and say "well they must've been trans" or "they must've been gay", but it's actually a lot more complicated than that. Manion delves into the relationship between gender and sexuality in an era when the terminology was very different - and a lot more restrictive.
The writing is quite academic, but Manion makes it easy to connect with each "female husband" by following their lives and making them feel very real. The chronological set-up also allows Manion to easily link the past to the present. A dense book, but well worth reading.
April 4, 2020
I was disappointed by this book. Yes, it is a history of female husbands; however, I had hoped for more insight into the husbands themselves instead of second hand external views of them. Story after story were about how they were viewed in court trials, by newspapers, and sometimes by individuals around them. Never by the female husband themselves. The author states at one point that "We are left to read between the lines and draw conclusions." Later she states that she chose to focus "on the perceptions and views of others" regarding female husbands. Ms. Manion states she did that because gender is constituted by those around them. I disagree. I would rather have empowered them and known how they felt and their motivation. Additionally, I finished the book feeling that these people assigned as females at birth but presenting as males were doing so more for economic reasons rather than a gender disparity. I can not recall anyone in the book stating they were born the wrong gender. A lot of assumptions were made in this book like a lot of assumptions are made now. I was hoping for something more.
Thanks to NetGalley and Cambridge University Press for a copy of the book. This review is my own opinion.
Thanks to NetGalley and Cambridge University Press for a copy of the book. This review is my own opinion.
May 23, 2022
Well researched and goes into a lot of detail regarding the subjects of the book, but I was uncomfortable with some of the stylistic choices the author made.
The author is a non-binary butch lesbian, which was originally one of the things that drew me to this book, but after reading it’s clear that the author’s own gender identity results in a bias regarding the way they present the historical figures. The author chose to exusively use they/them pronouns for all the subjects, which may be a good choice in cases where we’re looking at historical figures from the 1800s and our only sources are fragmented third person accounts of their lives, but the author also uses they/them for people who were very clearly trans men. Among others the author misgenders Alan Hart who died in the 60s and was the first trans man to have a hysterectomy, or the Czechoslovak athlete Zdenek Koubek who was one of the more famous czech trans people and died in 1984. And the author dares to cite Leslie Feinberg to support this choice!
Also, a minor point, but the constant repetition of the phrase “transing gender” drove me slightly up the wall. To rely on this phrase so heavily felt quite lazy.
I recently read another book on transmasc people in the 1800s called True Sex by Emily Skidmore who took a different approach to the subjects of her book, refering to them all with he/him pronouns which were their pronouns of choice, but noting that of course in the present day they might have chosen to identify with a different gender. True Sex was written by a cis woman but honestly felt more respectful and less awkwardly worded than Female Husbands.
The author is a non-binary butch lesbian, which was originally one of the things that drew me to this book, but after reading it’s clear that the author’s own gender identity results in a bias regarding the way they present the historical figures. The author chose to exusively use they/them pronouns for all the subjects, which may be a good choice in cases where we’re looking at historical figures from the 1800s and our only sources are fragmented third person accounts of their lives, but the author also uses they/them for people who were very clearly trans men. Among others the author misgenders Alan Hart who died in the 60s and was the first trans man to have a hysterectomy, or the Czechoslovak athlete Zdenek Koubek who was one of the more famous czech trans people and died in 1984. And the author dares to cite Leslie Feinberg to support this choice!
Also, a minor point, but the constant repetition of the phrase “transing gender” drove me slightly up the wall. To rely on this phrase so heavily felt quite lazy.
I recently read another book on transmasc people in the 1800s called True Sex by Emily Skidmore who took a different approach to the subjects of her book, refering to them all with he/him pronouns which were their pronouns of choice, but noting that of course in the present day they might have chosen to identify with a different gender. True Sex was written by a cis woman but honestly felt more respectful and less awkwardly worded than Female Husbands.
May 24, 2020
I enjoyed this book more than I had anticipated. I wanted to read it for the education, not because I thought it would be entertaining, but I was pleasantly surprised. This is the history of people who were assigned the female gender at birth but lived their lives as men and married women. "Female husbands" was the term that was used in the 18th and 19th centuries that pre-dated the labels "transgender" and even "lesbian." Manion is a historian by profession and has an interesting take on gender and its relationship to sexuality. The book is very academic, but if you have an interest in LGBTQ+ history, this would be a great addition to your library. *Advance copy provided by the publisher in exchange for my honest review.
November 1, 2021
A truly incredible work of queer history, written with great academic rigor and a deep compassion for the historical figures discussed. I have a great respect for Manion's refusal to apply contemporary understandings/terminology to people of the past who transed gender. We simply don't know how these people would identify now, and the author's use of neutral pronouns throughout allowed for a respectful retelling of their stories. I am so glad the crucial work of queer history is being done by such a wonderful writer and researcher. A truly moving piece of writing.
Shelved as 'didn-t-finish'
January 18, 2020Unfortunately, I am DNF'in this at about 50%. While I find this subject fascinated and something I will certainly research more, I couldn't really connect with this particular book. It could be because the author's style doesn't work for me or because it was a badly formatted e-ARC.
August 9, 2020
A most important piece of historical research
March 14, 2022
Extremely interesting perspectives of history!
December 28, 2020
loved this book. i especially loved prof. manion's decisions re: pronouns, names, and historical praxis.
July 2, 2021
This book was an incredible uncovering of stories that it's easy to assume never existed. While trans people and those who don't conform to gender norms are shamed, murdered, and have their humanity debated today, this book makes clear that these people are not "new" or unheard of. It also reinforces that gender can't be seen and isn't fixed, but is performed. A fascinating and informing book .
January 17, 2020
Fantastic!! I learned so much from this book and history in what women had to go through to be together and conform to the society of the times.
Very informative and truly recommend this book.
Very informative and truly recommend this book.
April 11, 2022
Non solo nei film e nei libri: la storia ci insegna che un bel numero di persone AFAB (assigned female at birth) hanno indossato panni maschili per vivere come uomini, prendendo moglie, svolgendo attività tipicamente maschili e godendo di maggiori libertà... eppure di loro si è sempre parlato come donne in cerca di più libertà o donne queer che volevano amare altre donne senza problemi, cancellando la possibilità che tra loro ci potessero essere uomini transgender o persone non binarie.
L'autrice di questo libro restituisce quindi la storia in maniera più inclusiva cercando di restituire la vita di queste figure storiche che sfidarono il binarismo di genere, dando da pensare a cosa volesse davvero dire essere uomo o donna (avere i genitali associati a un dato genere? Essere sposati con una donna? Ricoprire una data posizione sociale e venir percepiti come uomini esemplari dalla società?), ma allo stesso tempo portando le prime femministe a prendere le distanze da chi rigettava la propria femminilità accusando di non favorire la ricerca della parità (le prime terf della storia insomma).
Non so se il libro verrà mai portato in Italia, ma nel caso siate in cerca di libri sulla storia queer veramente inclusivi, questo è sicuramente da recuperare
L'autrice di questo libro restituisce quindi la storia in maniera più inclusiva cercando di restituire la vita di queste figure storiche che sfidarono il binarismo di genere, dando da pensare a cosa volesse davvero dire essere uomo o donna (avere i genitali associati a un dato genere? Essere sposati con una donna? Ricoprire una data posizione sociale e venir percepiti come uomini esemplari dalla società?), ma allo stesso tempo portando le prime femministe a prendere le distanze da chi rigettava la propria femminilità accusando di non favorire la ricerca della parità (le prime terf della storia insomma).
Non so se il libro verrà mai portato in Italia, ma nel caso siate in cerca di libri sulla storia queer veramente inclusivi, questo è sicuramente da recuperare
June 24, 2020
An excellent, well researched history of the early trans pioneers. This is their story of life as men, and the women who loved them.
Told with raw emotion from archival materials, and from horrid newspaper articles back in the day, author Jen Manion weaves their stories into a timeline collection for today's reader.
Many female husbands became "outed" unfortunately when they fell ill or became injured, their wives and widows receiving the brunt of ignorant persecution by societal norms of the times.
Unbiased and non- judgmental, these stories are emotional and tragic, many without their happy ever after...
4⭐
Thank you NetGalley, Cambridge University Press and the author, Ms. Jen Manion, for the opportunity to read this Advanced Readers Copy of "Female Husbands". The opinions expressed in this review are mine alone.
Told with raw emotion from archival materials, and from horrid newspaper articles back in the day, author Jen Manion weaves their stories into a timeline collection for today's reader.
Many female husbands became "outed" unfortunately when they fell ill or became injured, their wives and widows receiving the brunt of ignorant persecution by societal norms of the times.
Unbiased and non- judgmental, these stories are emotional and tragic, many without their happy ever after...
4⭐
Thank you NetGalley, Cambridge University Press and the author, Ms. Jen Manion, for the opportunity to read this Advanced Readers Copy of "Female Husbands". The opinions expressed in this review are mine alone.
April 5, 2020
"Female husband" is a historical term used to describe AFAB people who lived as men and married women. This nonfiction book explores - through personalized histories steeped in broader context - the presence and lives of female husbands in the United States and the UK. Long before we had the language of transgender, these people existed. This book adds valuable insight into the pre-20th century LGBTQ history.
**I received this book via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.**
**I received this book via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.**
June 14, 2020
I really enjoyed this book. Manion did a nice job of breaking down their approach to research and reasons behind word choice while presenting different stories throughout the 18th and 19th C. There were moments where as an educator, I have failed a lot of people by incorrectly recapping the stories of some of the historical figures covered in this book. But hey that means I can only get better especially as I start to consider future content for a project in working on.
October 18, 2022
Silly people think transing gender is a new concept but there are plenty of publicly documented cases in history. I am so grateful to have read this and been exposed to that history. It isn't new, people have always fought to be who they interally feel they are. Well written and incredibly interesting!
October 30, 2022
a really great book for so many reasons. it’s quite well written and not overly complicated. it has such a fascinating approach to the archives but is not too loose in its interpretation. and it’s just a fantastic argument for understanding gender as an always-shifting category.
March 22, 2020
This book is engrossing. It is a fascinating academic work on queer pioneers in the UK and US from the 18th to early 20th century. For a brief moment upon finishing, I had to remind myself I am in the 21st century.
Female Husbands reconstructed the life stories of female husbands, their wives, and others who were assigned female at birth and donned male attire without imposing modern terminologies or assumptions. The particular use of 'them/them' pronouns for these remarkable pioneers has made space for ambiguity since no modern person could ever be sure of their gender identity.
In addition to the life stories of Charles Hamilton, James Howe, James Allen, Albert Guelph, Joseph Lobdell, etc., the book supplied backgrounds of laws, social systems, and political aspects during the time. These details certainly helped paint a more complete picture of what it was like back then.
Though the structure could be more streamlined at times for a smoother read and clearer theme connections between consecutive chapters, Manion has done a wonderful job of piecing together the history. It is a book I did not know I needed.
Since all the iconic people mentioned have been outed at some point of their lives so as to fall under public scrutiny, I would like to think that there were a fair amount of female husbands and their wives who lived in relative peace and happiness until their deaths. I really hope there were. If not, at least we have fictional stories of Backwards to Oregon and Hidden Truths from Jae.
I received an e-ARC from Cambridge University Press via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
Female Husbands reconstructed the life stories of female husbands, their wives, and others who were assigned female at birth and donned male attire without imposing modern terminologies or assumptions. The particular use of 'them/them' pronouns for these remarkable pioneers has made space for ambiguity since no modern person could ever be sure of their gender identity.
In addition to the life stories of Charles Hamilton, James Howe, James Allen, Albert Guelph, Joseph Lobdell, etc., the book supplied backgrounds of laws, social systems, and political aspects during the time. These details certainly helped paint a more complete picture of what it was like back then.
Though the structure could be more streamlined at times for a smoother read and clearer theme connections between consecutive chapters, Manion has done a wonderful job of piecing together the history. It is a book I did not know I needed.
The transgression of a gender norm always opened the door to the threat of a sexual transgression.
Since all the iconic people mentioned have been outed at some point of their lives so as to fall under public scrutiny, I would like to think that there were a fair amount of female husbands and their wives who lived in relative peace and happiness until their deaths. I really hope there were. If not, at least we have fictional stories of Backwards to Oregon and Hidden Truths from Jae.
I received an e-ARC from Cambridge University Press via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
May 27, 2021
readingwomen #23
Interesting look at a history of trans men and societies treatment of them as well as the marriages they entered into and the women they married.
It is easy to imagine that trans gendering is a new modern thing, a social occurrence of the now only, when really it has existed probably forever and provably (in this book) since the mid 1800s.
I found this book very interesting but I do think that if you are going to have a book set largely in England be narrated, the narrator should be able to pronounce English words correctly - the 'shire' in so many of the place names beat the narrator entirely.
Interesting look at a history of trans men and societies treatment of them as well as the marriages they entered into and the women they married.
It is easy to imagine that trans gendering is a new modern thing, a social occurrence of the now only, when really it has existed probably forever and provably (in this book) since the mid 1800s.
I found this book very interesting but I do think that if you are going to have a book set largely in England be narrated, the narrator should be able to pronounce English words correctly - the 'shire' in so many of the place names beat the narrator entirely.
July 18, 2021
An interesting look at Trans history, specifically in the UK and US between the mid 18th and early 20th centuries. This book looks at the term female husband and how it was used at that time. It shares the lives,loves, and tribulations of the people who transed gender.
May 6, 2021
The format of the book - being a series of case studies was a little bland for me. I liked certain pieces more than others. Glad I read it, but also glad I’m done with it too.
June 30, 2022
"Female Husbands" was a really interesting read, but some chapters felt somewhat repetitive. Still, I loved learning more about female husbands and how the concept changed over time.
January 7, 2022
To see more reviews check out MI Book Reviews.
I got an ARC of this book.
I have studied gender both professionally and personally for most of my life. Gender and sexuality are my two biggest research loves. I have never hidden this and I never will. This book sounded perfect for me. The title promises a TRANS history of something that has always been talked about as a lesbian history in the LGBTQ focused classes I was able to take and in the text books those classes assigned. Lesbian and trans are not mutual exclusive, but there has been friction in the communities for various reasons for decades. So I was interested to see this. I thought it would be a lot like True Sex.
Instead, the author took every chance to make this about lesbian history. If this were titled “Female Husbands: A Lesbian History” I would be ALL OVER IT. It would be a great lesbian history. The author even goes a step further and talks about the wives of female husbands which I have never seen before. This was so cool. Instead I was left thinking the author had no idea what she was talking about quite often since the title is not represented in the book whatsoever. The author self identified in the middle of a history book by saying she was a butch lesbian, which 100% cool. I get that having an identity that is relevant can be important, so now I must say I am a trans man. I have an identity that according to the title is more closely aligned with the book’s content. This book is not a trans history. This is a lesbian history that often has places where it could and should be a trans history, but it is not a trans history.
The author uses trans as a verb, which didn’t sit right with me for various reasons. She explained this away by citing someone else who came up with the idea, but it still did not sit well with me. I am asked by cis people if I am transing when they mean transitioning. So the term is already loaded for me as a trans person. To then have it applied to gender role non-conformity for what the author repeatedly implies and flat out says are lesbians makes me even less comfortable with the world choice.
Pronouns in the book were also a bit weird. The author explains the use of they/them which I can really get behind, but then in the chapter that is about a trans man in a more modern time who explicitly said they were a man and lived stealth for many years, continues to use they/them felt a bit disrespectful. I did some digging and the author also says that asking for someone’s pronouns is harmful in a piece they published in 2018. She mentions how it is harmful to trans people to misgender them, but then says that asking for pronouns and making it safe for someone to say their pronouns should not happen. The more I read the less I want to know.
This book could have been amazing. It could have been a great history, instead is just read as transphobic. Yes, there is no way to know for sure if the female husbands reported are trans or lesbian or bi or whatever else they possibly identified as. But saying a book is a trans history then repeatedly denying the chance that there is trans in the history doesn’t sit right. The epilogue literally uses outdated language to refer to a trans man. The author repeatedly refers to the wives of the female husbands as being the hidden lesbian history that no one talks about. Some of the female husbands were very probably not binary in their gender, but the majority of the ones mentioned appeared based on reading the source materiel as binary. So there is no reason to keep insisting that the wives of these very potentially trans men are lesbians, except to erase the possibility of trans men. If trans was ever really allowed as an option for these female husbands, I could overlook so much of this. The idea that they could be trans comes up a few times, but then the author doubles down on the idea of lesbian for everyone involved.
This would be a one star book, but the history and the depth that the history of the female husbands’ stories are told is impressive. The two stars is literally just for the gathering of information of a biographer. The rest of the book is just awful. I feel bad even giving it two stars.
I got an ARC of this book.
I have studied gender both professionally and personally for most of my life. Gender and sexuality are my two biggest research loves. I have never hidden this and I never will. This book sounded perfect for me. The title promises a TRANS history of something that has always been talked about as a lesbian history in the LGBTQ focused classes I was able to take and in the text books those classes assigned. Lesbian and trans are not mutual exclusive, but there has been friction in the communities for various reasons for decades. So I was interested to see this. I thought it would be a lot like True Sex.
Instead, the author took every chance to make this about lesbian history. If this were titled “Female Husbands: A Lesbian History” I would be ALL OVER IT. It would be a great lesbian history. The author even goes a step further and talks about the wives of female husbands which I have never seen before. This was so cool. Instead I was left thinking the author had no idea what she was talking about quite often since the title is not represented in the book whatsoever. The author self identified in the middle of a history book by saying she was a butch lesbian, which 100% cool. I get that having an identity that is relevant can be important, so now I must say I am a trans man. I have an identity that according to the title is more closely aligned with the book’s content. This book is not a trans history. This is a lesbian history that often has places where it could and should be a trans history, but it is not a trans history.
The author uses trans as a verb, which didn’t sit right with me for various reasons. She explained this away by citing someone else who came up with the idea, but it still did not sit well with me. I am asked by cis people if I am transing when they mean transitioning. So the term is already loaded for me as a trans person. To then have it applied to gender role non-conformity for what the author repeatedly implies and flat out says are lesbians makes me even less comfortable with the world choice.
Pronouns in the book were also a bit weird. The author explains the use of they/them which I can really get behind, but then in the chapter that is about a trans man in a more modern time who explicitly said they were a man and lived stealth for many years, continues to use they/them felt a bit disrespectful. I did some digging and the author also says that asking for someone’s pronouns is harmful in a piece they published in 2018. She mentions how it is harmful to trans people to misgender them, but then says that asking for pronouns and making it safe for someone to say their pronouns should not happen. The more I read the less I want to know.
This book could have been amazing. It could have been a great history, instead is just read as transphobic. Yes, there is no way to know for sure if the female husbands reported are trans or lesbian or bi or whatever else they possibly identified as. But saying a book is a trans history then repeatedly denying the chance that there is trans in the history doesn’t sit right. The epilogue literally uses outdated language to refer to a trans man. The author repeatedly refers to the wives of the female husbands as being the hidden lesbian history that no one talks about. Some of the female husbands were very probably not binary in their gender, but the majority of the ones mentioned appeared based on reading the source materiel as binary. So there is no reason to keep insisting that the wives of these very potentially trans men are lesbians, except to erase the possibility of trans men. If trans was ever really allowed as an option for these female husbands, I could overlook so much of this. The idea that they could be trans comes up a few times, but then the author doubles down on the idea of lesbian for everyone involved.
This would be a one star book, but the history and the depth that the history of the female husbands’ stories are told is impressive. The two stars is literally just for the gathering of information of a biographer. The rest of the book is just awful. I feel bad even giving it two stars.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 91 reviews