Free love is the “right of free choice in the formation of personal relationships between individuals without the limitations of marriage or other legal liabilities” (Oxford English Dictionary). Free love was a concept that was introduced heavily in the 19th Century and it evolved into a social movement which sought to promote freedom of sexuality in women. This movement came about in a time when women faced gender inequality and were given the shorter end of the stick by men. Marriage in the 19th Century was primarily based on economics rather than love and produced a class differentiation status of upper class, middle class and lower class.
During the period “where capitalism, industrial growth, democratic theory, and socialist critiques converged,” (Freedman 2), there was a shift from feudalism to capitalism which facilitated the origination of “feminist politics” (Freedman 2). Prior to capitalism, there was no economic market and no clear dissection of work in the family which meant that everyone contributed to the survival of the family through their labor. However, after the establishment of capitalism, money for labor became the primary source of the family’s survival. With this change came a division of work which appeared to be based on gender and some jobs were deemed more valuable than others. These valuable jobs were taken by men and consequently “enhanced men’s economic opportunities and defined women as their dependents.” (Freedman 2). As a domino effect to this shift in job domination a change in gender roles as well as gender relations started to take place. These changes however were defined by the class in which women belonged to. Women of the middle class and upper class society were forced to be financially dependent on their husbands and it became the woman’s job to bear children and run the household in its day to day affairs while the man’s job was to be the sole breadwinner who had to go out into the work force and earn money. Lower class women on the other hand often worked outside the home because of their socio-economic status but many of them were confined to work as domestic servants earning incredibly low wages.
Women[T1] did not have many social, political or legal rights during this era, such as the right to vote, the right to higher education or to choose when to become pregnant. In addition, they could not sue or be sued, could not testify in court, could not own property or make contracts after marriage and could not hold public office . As a consequence of not having these basic rights many women were forced into marriages where they were only seen as objects for pleasure and reproduction. In the 1800’s the dawn of a new era of “feminist politics” (Freedman 2), began where an influx of women started to advocate for the social, political and economic equality of women. One such character that surfaced during this influx was Victoria Woodhull.
Born in 1838, Victoria Woodhull was a child that seemed to have an innate desire to lecture and teach as she shouted expressions heard from revivals she attended with her mother to neighborhood children (Johnston 19). This desire later materialized into her works during her adult life. Woodhull was a very dynamic individual who attained many accomplishments as a woman of her era. In 1869 Victoria Woodhull and her sister, Tennessee Claflin opened Woodhull, Claflin & Co., Brokers and were the first female stockbrokers in New York City (Frisken vii). One year later the newspaper Woodhull and Claflin's [T2] Weekly was published with its columns open “to every reform idea at the time.” (Spurlock 211). Woodhull utilized the newspaper as an outlet to challenge the status quo of many rules and regulations that were ascribed to women as their roles and functions in society. This is clearly seen by notorious articles on issues such as women’s suffrage, licensed prostitution and free love. On April 2[T3] , about a month before the publication of the paper, Woodhull announced her candidacy for the upcoming Presidential Election. She was later nominated by the Equal Rights Party for President with Fredrick Douglas a former slave as Vice Presidential candidate in 1872. Woodhull went on to becoming the first woman in the history of the United States of America to run for president with a black man as her Vice Presidential candidate and this in itself was a radical approach to the legal system in America at that time. Not only was she a woman but her affiliation with Douglas created controversy of “whites” and “blacks” mixing. In essence the accomplishments of Woodhull helped to disprove many misconceptions about women and what they were capable of contributing to the advancement of society. Further, she proved that women were just as capable of attaining accomplishments that men attained in that century.
1871 was a very immense year for Victoria Woodhull and on November 7; Woodhull attempted to vote even though women did not receive the right to vote until 1920. Although she was unsuccessful in her attempt, her actions unequivocally advocated the right of women to vote and motivated more women to join her in the fight to liberate women. In this year she also appeared with Elizabeth Cady Stanton and spoke before the National Women’s Suffrage Association advocating suffrage. During this year, Woodhull’s newspaper “Woodhull & Claflin’s Weekly” published Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto a piece ultimately supporting a classless society. It was the first American periodical to publish Marx’s controversial work (Johnston 122). Later that month on Monday Nov 20, at Steinway Hall, Victoria Woodhull made her very famous speech “The Principles of Social Freedom” which discussed the “Question of Free Love, Marriage, Divorce and Prostitution (Sachs 129). This speech challenged women to rebel against the wishes of men and demand freedom of both their bodies and lives from “the demoralizing influence of sexual relations that are not founded in and maintained by love” (Sachs 136). Woodhull suggested in her speech that this rebellion should continue until free love is fully attained and this would ultimately lead to social freedom. In her quest to challenge social order Victoria openly stated to the audience of about three thousand people that she was indeed a free lover, “Yes! I am a free lover! I have the alienable, constitutional, and natural right to love whom I may, to love as long or as short a period as I can, to change that love everyday if I please!” (Sachs 135). By making such a bold revelation she showed that she not only “talked the talk” but she “walked the walk” and thus demonstrating her unwavering belief and dedication to everything she wrote in her newspaper or said in her speeches. The “Free Love” speech was reported in the Herald, the same paper that Woodhull had used to announce her candidacy, and although this was a respected paper the speech was not accepted well by many in society.
Soon after the speech and its appearance in the Herald Woodhull faced many challenges which were seen as attempts to destabilize her efforts. She was notified that her family could no longer reside at the “palatial mansion” and they moved to a boarding house. She was condemned for her demoralizing views which she “publically proclaimed” (Johnston 134), and many people disassociated from her. She had lost many customers and supporters of the brokerage and as a result her income began to decline (Johnston 134). Ironically despite the fact that most of society rejected her free love theory, it still sparked a peculiar interest in individuals who requested to hear the dreadful speech themselves and people seemed to have an uneasy curiosity about her opinions on free love. It was almost as if it were an unattainable goal that they despised but still wanted to hear about. Some saw it as an attack on the middle-class ideal of marriage, (Spurlock 164), while others thought that it was promoting sexual promiscuity and immorality, and many felt that her notion of free love encouraged a woman to have free sexual relations outside the bounds of marriage, thus allowing a woman to have as many sexual partners as she desired.
Woodhull and her sister Tennessee were even accused of prostitution because of their views. Woodhull, however, clearly stated that she did not promote promiscuity but instead felt that once free love was attained promiscuity would not even exist (Johnston 133). In spite of her numerous explanations of her views, those against free love and even those who secretly practiced it still continued to condemn Woodhull and dismissed free love as a morally outrageous and demeaning act. Even after attention on free love had subsided, approximately three months after her speech a cartoon portraying Victoria as the devil holding a tablet that stated “Be Saved by Free Love” (qtd. in Johnston 141), was issued and underneath the cartoon was the title, “Get thee behind me, (Mrs.) Satan.” (qtd. in Johnston 141). This cartoon seemed to have resurrected Victoria and free love in the minds of people in society by suggesting that Woodhull was a deceptive woman whose beliefs were evil. A few months after the publication of this cartoon Woodhull fought back and exercised her free love beliefs on equal standards for both men and women by exposing adultery of prominent Congregationalist clergyman Henry Ward Beecher. This incident became one of the most defining and controversial moments in her life.
Henry Beecher was an influential preacher of his times and held a strong but not radical political view on slavery, helping in the anti slavery cause. On the topic of Woodhull and her sister, Beecher expressed his opinion that they were not very helpful to the women’s cause (Johnston 96). Woodhull was able to set up a meeting with Beecher in which she strived to convince him of her doctrines. Beecher also utilized the meeting as a channel to convince Woodhull of his beliefs and in the end the two held their grounds. Interestingly, according to Woodhull, Beecher confessed that he shared many of her beliefs and he thought “marriage was the grave of love.” (Johnston 124). Woodhull thought that if a man of such great stature could step forward and support her beliefs it would make her points more credible and accepted and urged Beecher to publicly state this, but he refused. Woodhull claimed that there were several meetings after this, which was denied by Beecher. The night before Victoria Woodhull’s famous free love speech she requested that Beecher introduce her at Steinway Hall because she felt that this would make a great statement to the public and have a mammoth impact. She stated that he did not have to support her beliefs publicly, but rather it was a way to show the public that he supported the right for her to speak of those beliefs (Johnston 128). Beecher never showed up to introduce Woodhull; she was understandably disappointed and seemed to never forget his desertion. With revenge as one of her motives Woodhull on November 2, 1872 published an issue in the Weekly exposing Beecher as an adulterer and therefore a free lover. She noted in an apology letter under the article that she did not attack him as an individual but rather as a “representative man” (Johnston 159). Woodhull went on to state that there was a clear double standard for men and women in relations to their sexuality. She felt that Beecher did not practice what he preached and exposing him would prove further her claims about the double standard as well as reveal that free love was practiced even by the most honorable. Woodhull paid a severe price for such an exposé as a warrant for her arrest under the 1872 postal law was issued (Frisken viii). The diffusion of lewd materials through the mail was a breech of the law and as a result Woodhull’s paper was deemed as profane and inappropriate for public debouchments. An ongoing trial and multiple re-arrests followed this initial arrest and during the course of the proceedings, Woodhull’s life was threatened. She was tipped off on several occasions at attempts made to kill her and her family, While in jail there was even an attempt to poison her through meals and rumors circulated that the prison that she was to be sent to would be set on fire (Johnston 174). In jail Woodhull wrote a letter to the Herald which stated, “I write these lines to ask if, because I am a woman, I am to have no justice, no fair play, no chance through the press to reach public opinion…” (Johnston 169). Woodhull directly addressed the maltreatment directed to her because of her views on free love and also made a statement for women to be able to voice their opinions freely and fairly. She stated through use of her personal experience that 19th Century women did not have any social freedom or freedom over their bodies, minds and voices. These freedoms were all controlled by men and it was Woodhull’s idea that through the principal of free love there would be a social revolution in which women would ultimately gain control of themselves. Woodhull was found not guilty in the federal obscenity trial on June 27, 1873 almost eight months after her initial arrest. After this she went on to conduct lectures around the country and later departed for England in 1877. In England Victoria and her third husband John Martin made history as the first people to sue the British Museum for libel (Johnston 289). Sadly after fighting for the rights of women and promoting her “free love” philosophy on June 9, 1927 Victoria Woodhull passed away (Johnston 302).
Victoria Woodhull was an iconic individual of her times and is presently still an inspiration to many. Her fight for free love was not deemed as important as many other struggles of women at that time but it was the platform and catalyst that women many years later would use in their struggle. Many never termed their struggles as advocating free love but the basic principles of free love and the social revolution for women were incorporated into several movements as the foundation of their struggle. The movements for the rights of women to choose when to get pregnant materialized from Woodhull’s concept and women today now have the option of utilizing various forms of birth control. Even though Woodhull did not support abortion, her advocacy of free love can unmistakably be linked to it. A woman today in America is now able to choose what happens to her body. If her social freedom is forcibly taken away through rape, she still has the final and ultimate control over her body. Under the circumstances of becoming pregnant by this vile act she can choose to have an abortion if she so desires. Any married woman who is abused physically, mentally or emotionally also has the choice of whether she wants to endure such harsh treatments from her husband or whether she wants to be free of him through divorce. Most importantly the institution of marriage is not forced on women and those who choose not to get married because of their personal beliefs are not ridiculed to the extent as in the 19th Century. An enormous advancement of society’s thinking is demonstrated in the acceptance of women being able to choose their lovers and having many relationships before getting married. This allows a woman is she so desires, to engage with several partners on various levels until she deems someone suitable for her. For the most part women no longer need to depend on men economically and as a result they are afforded more freedom and choice in their lives. They are not confined to marriage and even if they do get married they do not have to give up their jobs and become domestic. Women now have the constitutional and natural right to choose who they love without being legally obligated to that individual or socially ostracized.
Works Cited
Freeman, Estelle B. No Turning Back: The History of Feminism and the Future of Women. NewYork: Ballantine, 2002.
Frisken, Amanda. Victoria Woodhull's Sexual Revolution: Political Theater and the Popular Press in Nineteenth Century America. New York: University of Pennsylvania P, 2004.
Johnston, Johanna. Mrs. Satan: The Incredible Saga of Victoria C. Woodhull. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Son, 1967.
Sachs, Emanie. The Terrible Siren: Victoria Woodhull 1838-1927. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1928.
Spurlock, John C. Free Love: Marriage and Middle Class Radicalism in America 1825-1860. New York and London: New York University Press, 1988.
Oxford English Dictionary: Free Love. 10 October 2008
[T1]I started a new paragraph here. I am not sure how many you wanted to have but the paragraph was to me too long. You can change it back if you want.
[T2]Is it “Claflin’s” or Claflin”?
[T3]Insert the year here.
No comments:
Post a Comment