Sexuality in the 1890s: The Role of the Gentleman in Society
by Hailey Y. and Stephanie T.
In the 1890s, gender roles served as an integral part of a functioning society. Women were expected to be pious, submissive and loyal to their husbands, caring and nurturing for their children, and well-bred, catering hostesses. If a woman were to overstep such boundaries, she would be considered un-ladylike, scandalous, or even immoral. Similarly, the boundaries for men, as far as their societal roles were concerned, proved to be just as rigid. The “ideal” socially-acceptable male was the “gentleman,” a Victorian version of today’s iconic “knight in shining armor,” the epitome of a present day “perfect man” (Gentleman 1). If a male were to overstep the boundaries of this definition, he would also be socially sanctioned, and find himself suffering various consequences.
The Gentleman figure of the 19th century is man who, by nature, avoids conflict and removes “obstacles” or unnecessary contention from his life and the lives of others; he does not argue unnecessarily, is considerate, and he encourages others to be the same (Gentleman 1). Because his intentions are non-abrasive, and because he desires to be so even-tempered, he then develops the skills of a dedicated listener, and is fair in his assessment of other’s opinions (Gentleman 1). Finally, although he possesses all of these fine qualities, the Victorian gentleman is always humble, and never betrays his actual confidence (Gentleman 2).
These characteristics were important in defining both a man’s internal constitution, and his actions within various situations. Even during the simplest daily tasks, like afternoon tea, there were strict guidelines for the man that wanted to be considered a gentleman. He was required to partake in what he was served, regardless of his actual taste, was expected to produce intelligible, appropriate conversation when necessary, and always take out a cigar for himself and his guests at the conclusion of tea (19th Century 1). Other important 19th century events like dining, attending a ball, sport or leisure event, engaging in business, politics and the public sphere, or promoting education, each had similarly structured societal “rules” (19th Century 1).
Such rules meant that there was little room for self expression. A gentleman wore clothing that had been deemed suitable for the occasion, in the colors that were fashionable, despite his personal inclination. The “sack suit,” or business suit was considered the “leisure wear” of the day (American 1). For the majority of Americans, the sack suit was a gentleman’s “best clothes;” a banker or a man of middle class would wear it to a picnic, whereas a man of lower class would only wear a sack suit to church (American 1). Gentleman wore primarily black or gray, and his trousers or upper garments were “required” to match (American 1).
Appropriateness ranged from the minute detail of proper wardrobe and dress to situations regarding personal relationships, such as that of marriage and right to possessions. One of the major characteristics of a gentleman was that he respect others, and that the same respect extend into his relationship with his wife and his possessions. A “true gentleman” gave his wife “equal right to all [of his] worldly possessions” and thus “a certain sum of money” (Whisper 1). He considered his property to be more than his own, and recognized that his family had equal right to that property.
The way that a man treated women in the Victorian age extended from issues of courtesy, like the previously mentioned role of money and expenditures within a marriage, to more controversial, socially weighted issues of sexual boundaries. During the 19th Century, there was a debate between whether or not it was considered apropos to engage in physical activities with one’s close familiar relations, i.e. cousins. The meaning of kissing had evolved during this time from a form of common courtesy, like handshaking, that could be exchanged with a common acquaintance, to a form of special endearment only proper if exchanged between “husband and wife, brother and sister, father and daughter, lover and betrothed” (Familiarities 1). In an article that engages this subject, “an estimable gentleman and an eminently useful member of society” is shunned for his blatant ignorance of this value, describing in detail how the man forces his daughters’ schoolmates to kiss him upon arriving, and upon leaving his household. The article seems to suggest that although the young females are neither “prudish nor ill-bred,” that the man being discussed, by virtue of his behavior, is “no real gentleman” (Familiarities 2).
The importance of being a gentleman in the Victorian age was more than a matter of dressing the part, or acting according to social guidelines. Becoming a gentleman was a way of measuring one’s internal constitution, and determining the value of one’s self. The consequences of rebelling against gentlemanly ideals meant tarnishing one’s reputation amongst outsiders, amongst family and friends. But perhaps more importantly, that rebellion meant a loss of self value and honor that, during this time, could only be attained through the title of “gentleman.”
Bibliography
A Gentleman
A Whisper to a Newly-Married Pair: A Whisper to The Husband On Expenditure
American Men’s Attire: 1860-1900
Familiarities Between Relations
The 19th Century Gentleman
In the 1890s, gender roles served as an integral part of a functioning society. Women were expected to be pious, submissive and loyal to their husbands, caring and nurturing for their children, and well-bred, catering hostesses. If a woman were to overstep such boundaries, she would be considered un-ladylike, scandalous, or even immoral. Similarly, the boundaries for men, as far as their societal roles were concerned, proved to be just as rigid. The “ideal” socially-acceptable male was the “gentleman,” a Victorian version of today’s iconic “knight in shining armor,” the epitome of a present day “perfect man” (Gentleman 1). If a male were to overstep the boundaries of this definition, he would also be socially sanctioned, and find himself suffering various consequences.
The Gentleman figure of the 19th century is man who, by nature, avoids conflict and removes “obstacles” or unnecessary contention from his life and the lives of others; he does not argue unnecessarily, is considerate, and he encourages others to be the same (Gentleman 1). Because his intentions are non-abrasive, and because he desires to be so even-tempered, he then develops the skills of a dedicated listener, and is fair in his assessment of other’s opinions (Gentleman 1). Finally, although he possesses all of these fine qualities, the Victorian gentleman is always humble, and never betrays his actual confidence (Gentleman 2).
These characteristics were important in defining both a man’s internal constitution, and his actions within various situations. Even during the simplest daily tasks, like afternoon tea, there were strict guidelines for the man that wanted to be considered a gentleman. He was required to partake in what he was served, regardless of his actual taste, was expected to produce intelligible, appropriate conversation when necessary, and always take out a cigar for himself and his guests at the conclusion of tea (19th Century 1). Other important 19th century events like dining, attending a ball, sport or leisure event, engaging in business, politics and the public sphere, or promoting education, each had similarly structured societal “rules” (19th Century 1).
Such rules meant that there was little room for self expression. A gentleman wore clothing that had been deemed suitable for the occasion, in the colors that were fashionable, despite his personal inclination. The “sack suit,” or business suit was considered the “leisure wear” of the day (American 1). For the majority of Americans, the sack suit was a gentleman’s “best clothes;” a banker or a man of middle class would wear it to a picnic, whereas a man of lower class would only wear a sack suit to church (American 1). Gentleman wore primarily black or gray, and his trousers or upper garments were “required” to match (American 1).
Appropriateness ranged from the minute detail of proper wardrobe and dress to situations regarding personal relationships, such as that of marriage and right to possessions. One of the major characteristics of a gentleman was that he respect others, and that the same respect extend into his relationship with his wife and his possessions. A “true gentleman” gave his wife “equal right to all [of his] worldly possessions” and thus “a certain sum of money” (Whisper 1). He considered his property to be more than his own, and recognized that his family had equal right to that property.
The way that a man treated women in the Victorian age extended from issues of courtesy, like the previously mentioned role of money and expenditures within a marriage, to more controversial, socially weighted issues of sexual boundaries. During the 19th Century, there was a debate between whether or not it was considered apropos to engage in physical activities with one’s close familiar relations, i.e. cousins. The meaning of kissing had evolved during this time from a form of common courtesy, like handshaking, that could be exchanged with a common acquaintance, to a form of special endearment only proper if exchanged between “husband and wife, brother and sister, father and daughter, lover and betrothed” (Familiarities 1). In an article that engages this subject, “an estimable gentleman and an eminently useful member of society” is shunned for his blatant ignorance of this value, describing in detail how the man forces his daughters’ schoolmates to kiss him upon arriving, and upon leaving his household. The article seems to suggest that although the young females are neither “prudish nor ill-bred,” that the man being discussed, by virtue of his behavior, is “no real gentleman” (Familiarities 2).
The importance of being a gentleman in the Victorian age was more than a matter of dressing the part, or acting according to social guidelines. Becoming a gentleman was a way of measuring one’s internal constitution, and determining the value of one’s self. The consequences of rebelling against gentlemanly ideals meant tarnishing one’s reputation amongst outsiders, amongst family and friends. But perhaps more importantly, that rebellion meant a loss of self value and honor that, during this time, could only be attained through the title of “gentleman.”
Bibliography
A Gentleman
A Whisper to a Newly-Married Pair: A Whisper to The Husband On Expenditure
American Men’s Attire: 1860-1900
Familiarities Between Relations
The 19th Century Gentleman
posted by Leslie Madsen-Brooks at 9:40 AM
4 Comments:
Good post. I found the defination of a gentleman interesting. Also, it was interesting to see how social status depended on ones reputation as a gentleman. Esentially, every public (and even private) move determined ones social status and value. These values seemed to be practiced and honored by all of high society, but I wonder how men personally felt tabout this. It was mentioned that that self worth depended on ones status as a gentlemen, do you think men ever felt bound by these values?
Angela, I am sure that men felt bound to these high expectations similar to how women felt they were bound to expectations put on them. Though it seems that a lot of middle class men during this time had the "good life" since they had freedom in terms of the social and political spheres, economically they were not free. It was a man's job to be the bread winner. If cannot afford food for his family then what? High suicide rates today in men are typically from financial issues. Aside from money, men like "ladies" would be considered immoral and outcasts of society if they were not "gentlemen".
Nice Post. I found it interesting that men were susceptible in properly portraying themselves, like women. As you mention, the Gilded Age society seemed to exhibit a very monogomous lifestyle. The idea of being expected to wear a certain colored suit and to act a specific way seems boring. However the idea of men acting sophisticated and respectful is something that our society has seemed to stray from.
Good post. I read it with a sense of humor pending i was watching "Married with Children" on television. I wonder what happened? Perhaps it was the industrial age that took toll on how a man was supposed to conduct himself as a 19th C Victorian gentlemen. As a young man myself, I think we [gentlemen] still exist, however, a change in the times call for a change in gender conventions as well.
Post a Comment
<< Home