that a fever would soon break, and it was also believed that women menstruated less in summer tha... more that a fever would soon break, and it was also believed that women menstruated less in summer than in winter. Like blood, milk was also thought to be the result of coolness, and Aristotle stated that some men did produce small amounts of milk, and could produce more if milked frequently and consistently (Laqueur 36). Every bodily difference stemmed from how much heat a body had, and since heat was thought to fluctuate, such as during a fever, the level of warmth within a body was never stable. By extension, the unstable nature of heat meant an inherent instability of sex and allowed for slippage between male and female functions and behavior. The one-sex theory that dominated early modern thought distinguishes far less between men and women than later sex/gender systems and allows for a higher potential for movement between male and female, and thus, Shakespeare's time was one in which "at least two genders correspond to but one sex, where the boundaries between male and female are of degree and not of kind" (Laqueur 25). These differences of degree, different from later beliefs in differences of kind, were fairly easy breached, as is evidenced by the fact that the solely female task of producing milk was thought to be open to men. Therefore, gender difference in early modern England was not firmly rooted in biological difference. According to Jean Howard, "Because male-female difference was. .. less grounded in ideas of absolute bodily difference than is typical today, much emphasis was placed on behavioral differences and on distinctions of dress" ("Introduction" 1595). Because of the emphasis on socially constructed gender difference, crossdressing and the adoption of behaviors primarily associated with the opposite gender undo gender at its most potent level-that is, the level of social discernment rather than biological difference. Bearing in mind the one-sex mentality of Shakespeare and his early modern audience allows us, as contemporary readers and audience members, to accept perhaps more readily that the characters' physical bodies do not tie them to the gender they have been ascribed. In fact, the
that a fever would soon break, and it was also believed that women menstruated less in summer tha... more that a fever would soon break, and it was also believed that women menstruated less in summer than in winter. Like blood, milk was also thought to be the result of coolness, and Aristotle stated that some men did produce small amounts of milk, and could produce more if milked frequently and consistently (Laqueur 36). Every bodily difference stemmed from how much heat a body had, and since heat was thought to fluctuate, such as during a fever, the level of warmth within a body was never stable. By extension, the unstable nature of heat meant an inherent instability of sex and allowed for slippage between male and female functions and behavior. The one-sex theory that dominated early modern thought distinguishes far less between men and women than later sex/gender systems and allows for a higher potential for movement between male and female, and thus, Shakespeare's time was one in which "at least two genders correspond to but one sex, where the boundaries between male and female are of degree and not of kind" (Laqueur 25). These differences of degree, different from later beliefs in differences of kind, were fairly easy breached, as is evidenced by the fact that the solely female task of producing milk was thought to be open to men. Therefore, gender difference in early modern England was not firmly rooted in biological difference. According to Jean Howard, "Because male-female difference was. .. less grounded in ideas of absolute bodily difference than is typical today, much emphasis was placed on behavioral differences and on distinctions of dress" ("Introduction" 1595). Because of the emphasis on socially constructed gender difference, crossdressing and the adoption of behaviors primarily associated with the opposite gender undo gender at its most potent level-that is, the level of social discernment rather than biological difference. Bearing in mind the one-sex mentality of Shakespeare and his early modern audience allows us, as contemporary readers and audience members, to accept perhaps more readily that the characters' physical bodies do not tie them to the gender they have been ascribed. In fact, the
Uploads
Papers by Heron Kennedy