/r/Books is pissed off that historical female authors who were forced to publish under male pen-names are having their work republished under their real names, because apparently it's evil to assume they weren't trans

submitted by marmorsymphata from (reddit.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]thrownawaycan 64 insightful - 9 fun64 insightful - 8 fun65 insightful - 9 fun -  (4 children)

In the comments people argue that wearing men's clothing and not behaving as proper women of the era were expected is point proof that these women were trans.

[–]MezozoicGay 68 insightful - 1 fun68 insightful - 0 fun69 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If those women were publishing under their women's name, they would not be published in the first place. And in many countries they would be put in prison for doing that.

Women just had no rights at all, there were no way for woman to do ANYTHING as woman, so the only way was is to pretend that they are a man. Those TRA are so blind in their midle class straight men privileges, that they can't even imagine what "not having rights" can possibly be, and they are thinking that women back then lived like men living right now.

Hey, even JK Rowling was publishing under men's name. Is she a trans now? All this anti-JKR movement is transphobic then!

George Eliot continued to publish as George Eliot even after her identity became known

I wonder, if that has something to do with publishers not allowing any women books to be published or not?

And "even after her identity became known" - are they thinking there was internet back then? Only few academics and aristocracy did know that. And even if with some miracle publisher decided to publish first book written by woman, I can imagine her loosing all customers if she publish under her real name.

By the way, I needed to google about George Eliot to know who it is, because in our schools, since USSR times we were studying her as Mary Ann Evans.

[–]thrownawaycan 31 insightful - 8 fun31 insightful - 7 fun32 insightful - 8 fun -  (2 children)

Funny, I have seen them suggest that JKR is trans-in-denial as reason for her "sudden extreme transphobia".

Women in say, the Victorian era, did get published, but only in very specific genre (like romance) and they were considered little more than pulpy garbage. To be taken seriously by both publisher and audience, a male pen name was needed.

Their arguments of "but these people were trans!" is a long way about of saying "since they did not write pulpy garbage romance like other women, clearly they were men!"

[–]terfy_delight 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Funny, I have seen them suggest that JKR is trans-in-denial as reason for her "sudden extreme transphobia".

They say this about us also bc we don't act like women. I'm not joking.

[–]thrownawaycan 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh I know. I'm very GNC, I get mistaken for a man by non-TRAs. This means that when I was in university, there were a lot of people trying to recruit me to be trans. If I had been younger, when I was 18 when I was mistaking my hatred for the gendered expectations of women for a hatred of women, I may have listened and decided I didn't want to be a woman. Even now, I get messages from random trans persons and groups about how I look, and I've seen things I've said or posted on egg_irl. I guess I'm a prime mark.