I couldn't agree more, Lathyrus.
Oh, I've just realised I've got 'green adults' in my previous post 
. I meant 'grown ones', of course, but I don't care whether or not they are green too.
Gransnet forums
News & politics
Elizabeth I may have been non-binary, claims Shakespeare’s Globe
(386 Posts)“I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman,” Elizabeth I once said to rally her troops to face the Spanish Armada, “but I have the heart and stomach of a king”.
And was a non-binary person too, according to academics working for Shakespeare’s Globe, who have cast doubt on the gender identity of one of England’s greatest queens.
Elizabeth I has been presented as possibly non-binary in an essay published by the theatre, which refers to the female monarch with the gender-neutral “they/them” pronouns.
The essay was written by a “transgender awareness trainer” in defence of the Globe’s decision to stage a new play featuring a non-binary Joan of Arc, but both the play and the essay have raised concerns that famous females are being written out of history.
The essay claims: “Elizabeth I… described themself regularly in speeches as ‘king’, ‘queen’ and ‘prince’, choosing strategically to emphasise their female identity or their male monarchical role at different points.”
This appears to reference the most famous speech attributed to Elizabeth, her 1588 address at Tilbury in which she braced the nation for battle with the Spanish, saying she had the “heart and stomach of king” and “a king of England too”.
‘Historical women adopted a male identity’
The essay on the Shakespeare’s Globe website, written by Dr Kit Heyam, suggests that historical women were not only rebels for performing what were considered typically male tasks, but also in some sense adopted a male identity.
Dr Hayem writes in regard to Elizabeth I as an armour-wearing military leader: “Inhabiting that social role and dressing in the clothes associated with it, while living and working among men, may not just have felt like gendered defiance: it may have had a profound impact on their sense of self.”
The essay defends Shakespeare’s Globe announcing a new play titled I, Joan, in which Joan of Arc is represented as non-binary. The teenage warrior, famed for leading the French against the English in the 100 Years War despite being a woman in a patriarchal society, has been given the pronouns “they/them” in Globe promotional material for the production.
Dr Hayem’s essay for the theatre argues that while historians have stated that Joan wore male armour out of “practicality” during her campings, “they” may have had “deeper motivations” related to “their” identity.
Author JK Rowling signalled her bemusement that Shakespeare’s Globe would be portraying Joan of Arc as non-binary by liking a Twitter post which read: “Coming next: Napoleon was a woman because he was defeated at Waterloo.”
‘Famous females will be written out of history’
Feminist thinkers have raised concerns that casting doubts on the womanhood of prominent women because they defied gender norms, and did supposedly “manly” things, will effectively write many famous females out of history.
Philosopher Dr Jane Clare Jones said: “This is a really great example of the inherent gender conservatism in gender identity ideology. Traditional gender conservatism says that men must do ‘manly’ things, and women must do ‘womanly’ things.
“Gender identity ideology reverses that and then we end up with the idea that anyone who does ‘manly’ things must be a man, and anyone who does ‘womanly’ things must be a woman.
“This is how we end up in a situation in which historical women who have performed traditionally ‘masculine’ roles end up being re-categorised as ‘trans men’ or ‘non-binary’ or ‘not-women’ in some way.
“This is a really regressive message to be sending out, especially to young women.”
‘A regressive ideology’
Joan Smith, author of the feminist volume Misogynies, said: “Women and girls are entitled to reject stereotypes without losing our sex.
“We didn’t have enough female role models to start with, we have spent decades rediscovering women artists, authors, leaders. And now a regressive ideology is trying to take them away.”
Born in 1533, Elizabeth I became England’s longest-serving female monarch until Queen Victoria, and was famed for overseeing the emergence of the country as an international power during her 44-year reign.
Named the Virgin Queen, she never married or had children despite this being the expectations of her contemporaries.
uk.news.yahoo.com/elizabeth-may-non-binary-claims-171338852.html
I already explained what OK means as well
Can I go now?
There isn't any room for possibilities or open minds here and so there is no point
Everybody has a viewpoint.
We should be able to argue a point without needing to sneer .
Which wrong comment was that, VS.
I asked what I had said that you agreed with, in response to you saying 'ok Doodledog', and then asked about your grouping trans and non-binary people together when telling FN that 'they' didn't agree with her.
What is confusing about that?
Oh, and which 'green adults' are you talking about? Are they the same as 'some people'?
Why are people still questioning, making assumptions and ignoring my answer?
Oh, you quoted the wrong comment doodledog that explains it
Honestly.... these discussions are so funny sometimes, the way grown adults behave
It’s art I’m interested in, not political art.
Good luck with that hollysteers; TRA's are rewriting history to make it conform with their ideology; it's seeping into everything.
There’s a definite question mark over Morecambe and Wise, always in bed together. Why was that?
On a serious note, I adore live theatre, but might not be going as regularly if I’m going to be preached at.
It’s art I’m interested in, not political art.
Oops. The formatting went wrong there, but the gist is clear.
VioletSky
Lol
Trans and non binary people all have very individual opinions on things.
Why are you answering for FarNorth doodledog? I'm confused
I wasn't answering for FN, I was asking what you meant by 'OK Doodledog*.
Of course trans and non-binary people have different opinions on things, which is why I was questioning your post where you said I don't think trans or non binary people agree with you, as whether it was addressed to FN or not, was very definitely *not implying that you see them as individuals.
lol.
FarNorth
VS said-
Trans and non binary people all have very individual opinions on things.
Why, then, did you claim that trans & non-binary people don't agree with me if you understand they don't all think alike?
Stop confusing the issue FarNorth!?.
I get the impression that although
trans and non binary people all have very individual opinions
All those individual opinions only support one person’s point of point of view, and it’s not yours (and I can almost guarantee I’d be told they wouldn’t agree with mine).
For God's sake, will they ever give it a bloody rest!!!!!!!
I am absloutely sick and tired of it.
Ah Allsorts, I’ve got a little theory (absolutely no research just a personal theory) that she was actually wreaking the ultimate vengeance on her father in deliberately not continuing the Tudor Dynasty. Bringing it to its end to avenge its murder of her mother. What a master stroke!
What do you think? Will it run?
Apologies for typos.
I have studied Tudor fir many many years. This is pure fantasy. She was a successful tactician and monarch, capable of acts of kindness but also cruelty, felt what happened to her mother, kept all that hidden, just a locket with her hair. It doesn’t matter
what her sexuality was, her business. Wives gave up fortunes and power once married to their husbands, loads died in childbirth, I think I would have said it was a good move, she kept control.
What are you going to say if society does away with gender norms completely and gender dysphoria still exists?
How would gender dysphoria be defined, without gender norms aka stereotypes?
Quite frankly what I actually think would get me banned!
Bullsh1t will do!
I think we should leave people from the past alone, not enlist them to a pet cause
And your post too MaizieD ???
Chewbacca
^It’s a great way to deny women exist and erase us from public life^
Isn't it just? Like no way could a woman be a strong leader just because she's female.
Historical women adopted a male identity
Of course they did! It was the only way they could be heard and recognised; women were expected to be quiet, have no opinions or voice worth listening to. In the same way that any woman wanting to go on stage had to choose between being typecast as a harlot or disguise herself as a man.
Excellent post Chewbacca!
It sums it all up very well.
We really haven't learnt to know our place and be subservient to men over centuries, have we.
FarNorth because gender dysporia is the feeling that your body is the wrong one
As I have said to you many times
What are you going to say if society does away with gender norms completely and gender dysphoria still exists?
VS said-
Trans and non binary people all have very individual opinions on things.
Why, then, did you claim that trans & non-binary people don't agree with me if you understand they don't all think alike?
doodledog this is why these conversations are impossible.
I don't think what you just assigned to me, I simply am open minded to a possibility
If that means you must shut down my views by any means necessary, maybe you should take a step back and ask yourself why I can't be allowed an open mind to an idea?
Also why you wouldn't call out the use of the word "cis" as long as the person using it agrees with you?
I just don't think that way
But you don't have to do that
In which case, OK
I am/think/feel whatever it is you need me too so you can feel right or feel better about yourself
Disengages
In theatre, which is art is precisely the place that women had to present as men in order to be seen and heard; did you not know that vs? The stage was deemed to be "too dangerous for a woman; it was an abomination" and so, any woman who wanted to act, was forced to present as a man and faced ostracism if she persisted. For a woman to be published writer, she had to submit her bodies of work to a publisher under a pseudonym; the Bronte sisters actually submitted their manuscripts as Currer, Acton and Ellis Bell because females were dismissed as talentless, feeble and too hysterical to be taken seriously. When Mary Ann Evans wrote Middlemarch, her manuscript was returned to her many times. But it was published under her pseudonym George Eliot.
All of these have nothing to do with being transgender and everything to do with males telling females what was, and was not, acceptable behaviour for a woman. So whilst you don't feel threatened by a strong historical figure being a woman or a man or nonbinary that's because the women who have gone before you fought for you to have the right to voice your own opinions, live your life as you wish to and you owe them a debt of gratitude for that.
MaisieD I think we should leave people from the past alone, not enlist them to a pet cause. I believe you're absolutely right.
VioletSky
I don't think trans or non binary people agree with you FarNorth
Why do you think that is?
If those people believe they have changed sex, or have no sex at all, I'd say it's because they are deluding themselves.
Many trans people do acknowledge that it's impossible to change sex - as already mentioned re Jan Morris.
Lol
Trans and non binary people all have very individual opinions on things.
Why are you answering for FarNorth doodledog? I'm confused
VioletSky
Thank you Lathyrus that's all I wanted
All you wanted is the bit that agrees with your revisionist view of history, and you are prepared to ignore the rest of Lathyrus's post?
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »