4 ms·
> To me it seems disrespectful to publish someone's book under a different name from the one they chose to publish it under. It's an interesting situation bec
by 2038AD 6y ago
> To me it seems disrespectful to publish someone's book under a different name from the one they chose to publish it under.
It's an interesting situation because it's obviously meant to honour the authors but in doing so it's speaking for them. It relies on the idea that these authors were women who took pseudonyms because of the society they were in rather than fully by choice.
The description of George Sand stood out to me
> Amantine Aurore Dupin, the 19th-century author better known as George Sand, who famously scandalised society by wearing male clothing and smoking cigars in public.
Wouldn't using a masculine name and wearing masculine clothing be grounds to consider her in fact a him, a transgender man? Today, Marsha P. Johnson is considered to be a trans woman rather than a gay man yet she never used the term. Admittedly, Johnson also used feminine pronouns but so have many other gay men.
It reminds me of Foone's Don’t Deadname the Dead
https://foone.wordpress.com/2019/04/27/dont-deadname-the-dead/ https://foone.wordpress.com/2019/04/27/dont-deadname-the-dea...
- watwut 6y ago> It relies on the idea that these authors were women who took pseudonyms because of the society they were in rather than fully by choice. There is zero dichotomy between the two. Of course peoples choices are dependent on society they are in - both unconsciously and consciously as they weight consequences of their decisions. "Fully by choice" does not mean "you have to act like autistic person with no knowledge of society you operate in". > Wouldn't using a masculine name and wearing masculine clothing be grounds to consider her in fact a him, a transgender man? Not necessary. You cant translate our society into them that straightforwardly. Quoting wikipedia: "Sand was one of many notable 19th-century women who chose to wear male attire in public." The reasons varied from practical to basically expression of radical feminism. It also allowed her to go to places she could not go to otherwise. She might or might not be trans, but you cant judge it from this that easily.
- chownie 6y ago> "you have to act like autistic person with no knowledge of society you operate in". Don't disagree with anything you've written, but could you not do this? Autistic people have trouble with theory of mind (attributing thoughts and desires to others) we don't lack the capability to learn social norms. They're just not automatic to us.
- jrimbault 6y agoIf I remember correctly George Sand had a long relationship with Frederic Chopin. So more of a social provocatrice than anything ?
- blahbhthrow3748 6y agoOr gay and trans? You can be both
- jrimbault 6y agoOne of my closest friend is a gender sociologist (and I'm talking with them _now_)... And don't consider Sand as trans. They cite other names as historically trans (Violette Morris, and for fun Jeanne D'Arc). Sand was definitely on the queer spectrum but I (and my friend) don't think she was trans. She had relationship with both women and men, dressed as often in men and women clothes.
- cafard 6y agoAccording to the best (or worst) authorities, George Sand slept around with quite a few men.
- spinach 6y agoThere is a video where Marsha P. Johnson literally says he is a boy. You can't 'trans' historical people, the concept is a modern one, and 'trans' isn't even well defined - some people who simply don't conform to gender stereotypes (whatever those are), are considered 'trans'. The trans community likes to trans all sorts of people, including those like Joan of Arc (which if you've read any book about her, you know that's ridiculous). George Eliot might not have suffered anything like gender dysphoria. She might have been a woman, who was perfectly fine being a woman, but just wanted to dress like a man, or wanted what society gave to men - status, certain rights, etc. Gender labels and the huge umbrella of 'trans' is extremely regressive and harmful.
- TeaDrunk 6y agoI think not conforming to gender stereotypes is very difficult in any society and has the same sort of conflicts that exist today. Several of the authors listed were outed as their assigned genders against their will, even though they may have also insisted on being referred to with male pronouns or performed the dress and behavior of a male. I don’t know how else we are to evaluate that gender and conformations(or refusal to conform) to the societal definitions of gender except partially through our current and contemporary notions of gender- which is the analysis of non-binary, cis, and trans identities. (I think this is not unlike the often criticized notion that extremely close and intimate interactions between two people of the same gender identity is often glossed over in history as being just really good, lifelong companions.) I don’t understand how that is regressive or harmful. Who is it harming and how does this harm them?
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago> ... but so have many other gay men [used feminine pronouns] I have never met a gay guy who preferred to be called 'she'. > Wouldn't using a masculine name and wearing masculine clothing be grounds to consider her in fact a him, a transgender man? This is all moot. The only one who is to decide is the person themselves. Trying to work out the correct backpatched term is a waste of time as it's trying to read a dead person's mind.
- carlinmack 6y agoyour experience is not universal :)
- rsynnott 6y ago> Wouldn't using a masculine name and wearing masculine clothing be grounds to consider her in fact a him, a transgender man? I don't think Dupin used a masculine name day to day; just as a pen name (very common for female authors at the time). The wearing mens' clothes was also a Thing at the time (though very controversial; some jurisdictions actually banned it!) But yeah, there are probably arguments either way here.