Letter:When England was a woman's paradise

Mr Barry Haisman
Wednesday 21 December 1994 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

From Mr Barry Haisman Sir: I was surprised to read in Geoff Nicholson's article "Pleasure in store" (12 December) that "from the mid-19th century onwards [department stores] were places where for the first time women could circulate freely, without having to account to anyone".

I would date such freedom much earlier, by at least 250 years, to the playhouses and taverns of the Tudor period. While the Victorians decided that respectable women did not attend plays, assuming the Puritan view that "few women came from plays with safe and chaste minds", the wives of London citizens in fact paid no attention to such strictures. It is now clear that London women had always done as they pleased and expected to go on doing so.

To Europeans, England was known as a "paradise for women" (Marchette Chute); foreigners were startled by the freedom they took, a Russian visitor commenting "the womenfolk of England wish to be in at everything". Another foreigner noted women went into taverns alone or with other women.

And even 200 years earlier than this we have Chaucer's belligerently liberated Wife of Bath. An unreal figure of pure fantasy?

I think it might be truer to say that the Victorians, in spite of their new department stores, put the brakes on female emancipation.

Yours faithfully, BARRY HAISMAN Stainsacre, North Yorkshire 13 December

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in