Book review: Norena Shopland,A History of Women in Mens’ Clothes: From Cross-Dressing to Empowerment

Norena Shopland’s A History of Women in Mens’ Clothes: From Cross-Dressing to Empowerment (2021) is a documentation of print media’s accounts from the United Kingdom on cis-women crossdressers of the 19th century, who, through different ways, tried to transgress social and religious conventions in order to experience the ‘privilege’ of maleness and masculinity. By drawing her content from a few supporting articles but mainly several newspaper reports in the Birmingham Daily Post, The Morning Chronicle, Pembrokeshire Herald, Bury and Norwich Post, South Wales Daily News and so on, the author shows how the written word (including several unnamed 19th century romantic novels and detective stories) aided the modes through which the ‘New Woman’ learned as well as inspired and got integrated in a society while forging a social and sexual reality of her choice. The sheer numbers (the book enumerates only 10 per cent of the excavated 3,000 stories of cross-dressed women) mentioned in the book are evidence that these women did not exist on the periphery but were instead part of the working class.

The book is divided thematically into 16 chapters, where each focuses on the different occasions that impelled working-class cis-women to cross-dress. The chapters, while narrating the experiences of the women, also demonstrate how the issue of cross-dressing cuts across areas of law, sexuality, language, tradition, religion and desire. In retrieving the narratives of women cross-dressers, Shopland has sifted through the meanings embedded in the western idea of male attire and has demonstrated the gap that occurs in the reporting of female cross-dressing incidents through the male gaze. There are several questions that the author poses subtly through the book, of which ‘what constitutes cross-dressing?’ takes on prime significance. In the Introduction, Shopland states that she has explored the narratives of women in male attire in three contexts, namely: cross-dressing, cross-working and cross-living, where cross-dressing and cross-living are time- and motive-specific, while cross-working depends on the profession that the woman undertakes.

Shopland investigates how hegemonic systems such as the state, family, church, media and law construct the category of a woman through sartorial divisions of male and female clothing. The book elucidates the response of these systems with the aim of bringing our attention to the language that is used to determine the boundaries that a woman cannot transgress. For instance, some of the newspaper reports that Shopland retrieved on cross-living homosexual women were titled ‘female-husband’ to highlight that as the woman had trespassed into a position of power reserved for men, she was a misfit in the position. The case of Elizabeth alias John Haywood is particularly interesting here because the press report stated, ‘Whatever was the gender, the animal appeared before the Court in a female habit, was rather elegant…with a voice tending to the masculine…as was rather sensible’ (p. 171). The issue of language is also evidenced in the pronouns that were used to describe these women. The author also notes that the newspapers often used the word ‘extraordinary’ to sensationalise the resistive acts of those women who chose not to wear a skirt. Furthermore, several women who were arrested and presented before the court of law for parading in male attire were asked by the judge if the woman had sought permission from the men of her family. Through an examination of the language used, the author has shown that the category of a woman is tightened through distinctive sartorial markers.

The author has also analysed cross-dressing as an act of necessity and also fancy for women. While these motives may seem fairly porous and do depend considerably on the personal truths of the women, broadly, it can be said that for women who were warriors, sports players, sailors and homosexuals, cross-dressing was an act to gain access to spaces and opportunities. In 1871, The Graphic wrote, ‘It is now a frequent thing on the battle-fields round Pans to find the bodies of women, dressed in a semi-masculine attire’ (p. 107). However, cross-dressing was also a fancy because, as described by Shopland, many women like Mary Rice, Margaret Graham and Matilda Stevens (p. 28) did it for ‘the lark!’ (p. 36). The 18th century was also known as the ‘Age of Travesti’ where people indulged in masquerading in costumes at bals masqué (masque balls). Traditional entertainments such as mummering/janneying were also known for male and female cross-dressers. In this context, the author also explores the purpose of disguise for these women. For sports players and prostitutes, the disguise was not intended to hide gender (except in the case of Caroline Winslow Hall of Boston who used sport as an excuse for cross-dressing [p. 135]). In the case of prostitutes, the disguise was intended to exhibit the female form so as to attract clients.

This draws our attention to the relationship between cross-dressing and sexuality. In the discussion on women cross-dressers in theatre, Shopland highlights how the female form, emphasised by the trousers worn by women, was exposed to the audience as a means of providing erotic pleasure. The attire that was traditionally assigned to women ensured that the female form was not exposed to the male gaze. Moreover, as women were considered to be devoid of sexual desires, cross-dressing was the best means by which they could be deemed erotic. R. Mark Benbow, who examined the Bridewell and Alderman’s Court Records of London 1565–1605, found a number of cross-dressed women accused of prostitution (p. 55). However, this also puts the nature of sexual arousal in question because, from the narratives, it is not quite clear whether the woman was viewed as essentially a man or simply as a woman in man’s clothing, the distinction indicating either homosexual or heterosexual desires. This ambiguous situation is hinted at in the cases of the prostitutes who targeted army and navy regiments.

A History of Women in Mens’ Clothes: From Cross-Dressing to Empowerment also looks at the preparation that the women had to undertake in order to successfully pass off as men. This included cutting the hair short, fixing a moustache, purchasing or borrowing an outfit, hiding the outfit when not in use and even walking to a party (women were not allowed to attend parties unless accompanied by a man) without being caught. These women were also aware that if they were discovered, they would be hit, molested, shamed, arrested and imprisoned. Yet, there is no paucity in the number of women who dared to cross-dress in order to reclaim their agency. While the intention was never activism, at least until the late 19th century, when women began to demand a reform in the dress codes, it was indeed a quest to satiate their desires of experiencing what was denied to them due to their sex. For instance, in 1854, Rose Graham went to the London masquerade in ‘youth’s clothes’ and was caught by the cab driver when she could not tell him where she was staying. At the court, she confessed that she had cross-dressed ‘just for a bit of a change, as everything in town was so dull’ (p. 25). Women also confessed that they chose to cross-dress and travel in order to have fun, escape from a cruel household or live the life of the character that they read about in fiction.

Shopland discusses how cross-dressing could be related to class, especially in the case of the differential treatment that was accorded to cross-dressing women from elite families, who were mostly dismissed with a warning, and the working-class female cross-dressers who were accused of criminality. In the second half of the book, which focuses on the professional categories of female cross-dressers, it is found that the risk and affordability to resist threats and continue to cross-dress varied between the classes.

The author also pinpoints how cross-dressing cannot merely be considered as a statement of fashion and, therefore, urges us to question what actually constitutes male attire. From the narratives given in the book, it becomes fairly clear that it is not a unified set of clothing. Consider the case of bloomers and knickerbockers, where, despite men not wearing bloomers, they were treated as male clothing. If attire varied individually, culturally and geographically, what does cross-dressing entail then? In the conclusion of the book, the author answers by implying that clothing is not related to gender; instead, it is related to power. Cross-dressing women were seen as a threat because it signified the loss of ‘male’ territories and the usurpation of opportunities that were the sole privilege of men. Moreover, it signified that masculinity merely rests on a series of performances that women could perfect in time. The book is seminal to our understanding of gender and clothing because it contains a record of events, persons and instances of cross-dressing that help in getting a panoramic view on cross-dressing. By mentioning the names of women cross-dressers, the author has attempted to document the trials, tribulations and persistence of those who battled sartorial dichotomies in clothing.