How common were sexless marriages in the Victorian era? (Cary, museum)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyone wanting to learn about "English Marriages" especially of the upper classes I invite them to read "The Pursuit of Love" and "Love In A Cold Climate".
Both books were written by Nancy Mitford ( one of the famous or infamous Mitford sisters) and is a hilarious but rather accurate look at marriage among the British upper classes during the between war era.
They had bunches of kids in most families so my guess is that the common class didn't know what a sexless marriage was. Children often died and they still had a half dozen survive. I just discovered two more siblings of my grandmother...one lived 2 days and another lived 24 days. Five reached adulthood but three or four didn't.
They had bunches of kids in most families so my guess is that the common class didn't know what a sexless marriage was. Children often died and they still had a half dozen survive. I just discovered two more siblings of my grandmother...one lived 2 days and another lived 24 days. Five reached adulthood but three or four didn't.
More like husbands didn't know what a "sexless" marriage was you mean.
Until really rather recently a wife was the legal property of her husband. As such by law and custom a wife was supposed to grant her husband "reasonable" access to her body. It is also rather recently that a husband could be charged with rape. After all a wife was "his" property thus how could a man commit a crime in "taking" something that belonged to him?
Failure by a wife to give grant a husband "access" (absent illness or something major) was grounds for divorce in most all European, North and South American and pretty much all countries. In Europe, North America and Commonwealth it would b referred to as "constructive abandonment" or words to similar affect.
When Scarlett O'Hara tells her husband she has decided not to have any more babies, he is happy enough at first. But when she spells out that this also means her bed is off limits; that is another matter. Rhett Butler correctly points out that he could divorce her on those grounds. Subsequently Rhett does "take" Scarlett anyway.
In GB at least part of the old divorce process when initiated by a wife was she first had the humiliating experience of filing a petition in court to regain her conjugal rights ( in short the right to refuse her husband sex). Legal Consequences of Marriage: Conjugal Rights and Remedies |
In both high and low circles this all was rather moot; a man used his wife as he saw fit. The woman who refused often got the boot, belt or fist *and* still was taken anyway.
Margaret Sanger was a public health nurse who became an advocate for family planning and birth control after witnessing so many women die from repeated childbirth and or driving to back alley abortions which pretty much always resulted in deaths.
What got Ms. Sanger was that both doctors and nurses did know about how to prevent pregnancy (contraceptives) and of course there was abortion. But thanks to various laws (which the wealthy broke routinely) it was usually poor women who suffered from repeated unwanted pregnancies. Many husbands treated relations with their wives as rather like an after dinner mint. Simply part and parcel of how they relaxed after a day's work.
Equally horrible was all the women who went to their marriage beds as virgins only to be promptly infected with VD by their husbands. This or it occurred during the course of their marriage. Isabella Beeton supposedly was infected with VD from her husband.
In order for a "sexless" marriage to work both sides must agree. Women simply were by custom and law powerless. As wives they were then the unique and sole property of their husbands. To be used, controlled and whatever as he saw fit. Long as the man violated any known laws both civil or religious he had a pretty wide berth. Thus wife beating was fine, long as a man didn't kill. Raping a strange woman was a crime, but not his wife. Even the former varied by how, when and where the act took place.
Also none of this even touches the fact some marriages were "sexless" because the wife couldn't or shouldn't have babies.
Ashley Wilkes was fictional, but there were plenty of men during Victorian/Edwardian times who were sat down after their wives had a difficult confinement and told to leave their wives in peace. This was because like poor Melanie Wilkes another pregnancy could (and did in her case) result in death of both mother and or infant.
Since abstinence was the only sure method of family planning, that often was that. A man had to take his pleasures elsewhere or confine himself to "other things" instead. Only a brute would force himself upon a "frail" wife against physician's orders/advice.
You only have to look back as late as the 1950's or so many married couples had separate bedrooms. Indeed today at least in NYC the idea of husband and wife master bedroom "suites" has come back into fashion. Many wives saying they've "paid their dues" and want to sleep in peace.
Long story short men have never had a shortage of where to take their pleasures outside of the marriage bed. Long as they were discrete and kept clear of disease no one was shocked or offended. Thanks to the miracle of modern antibiotics (begun with penicillin), modern safe birth control and or even abortion much of the downside of taking a mistress and or seeking out prostitutes has waned.
No separate beds in Glasgow. never has been, there wasnt enough room haha.. no seriously, wasnt that only the posh and on telly, as it wasnt allowed at one time to see a couple in bed together, horror of horrors .... I always remember American films especially had single beds. always made me smile.. wouldnt mind one myself now, was thinking rather of bunk beds for him and me.. but who would climb to the top.. haha. The thing was though that back in the day men did take diseases back to their wives in the upper classes.... Churchills own father did just this and by what I read his mother was given a hysterectomy by the family doctor to stop her having any more children because of the fathers infidelites with women of disrepute...or so its said...
Last edited by dizzybint; 07-05-2017 at 02:02 AM..
I am guessing they weren't all that different from today, it just wasn't talked about like now. Sex was kept quiet, what went on or didn't is a bedroom stayed there.
I can comment of now, btw. I am shocked at the number of couples we know, that as we age do not share a bed or spend part of the night in the same bed and the rest in another. More than just as we age, many of these couples have been sleeping in separate beds or rooms for year, but still enjoying sex as my one friend put it. We sometimes sleep together for an hour or 2 but of course we are not sleeping. This particular couples actually have separate living quarters or almost. He spends most of the time in the lower level of their house with his own office, living space and bedroom. She has the main level with the same plus the guest room and kitchen. And yet, they are very happy or appear to be.
Hubby and I, now that we have hit 80, sleep in separate rooms. but the interesting thing is: I still start out in our bedroom and our bed. For me, it just doesn't seem right. Part of the reason for separate rooms for us: I am always too warm and need the fan on even in the winter, he is always cold. I go to bed early and get up early. He stays up and reads, but sleeps about an hour later than I do. Our plan has nothing to do with sex or lack of same.
Think at least in Victorian and Edwardian times there was great stress on every room having a specific function. Rooms also served to separate classes (servants from their masters), and ages (children from their parents).
An English home or estate at that time would have rooms for children (day and night nurseries), rooms for servants (kitchen, scullery, pantries,) and even rooms for different sexes (men had their studies, libraries, etc..) ladies had drawing and sitting rooms, etc...
When it came to bedrooms the sexes were often segregated even if married. When the couple did share a bed often the husband at least had his own dressing room (complete with bed). Those who watched Downton Abbey know the Earl and Countess shared a bed, but when the Countess got ticked off at her husband (forgot what the quarrel was about) he was banished to sleep in his dressing room.
Of course this only applied to the upper classes who had homes with enough space for all those rooms. Most middle class homes (two up and two down) didn't have luxury of many extra bedrooms. Unless the couple were childless husband and wife had one bedroom, and the children in another. In a home with girls and boys at some point something would likely need to be worked out to keep one well away from the other.
There is also what was called "keeping the mystery in a marriage".
Then as one assumes perhaps even still today there are women who do not leave their boudoir without putting on their face. They don't put their face to bed at night unless or until they are sure it won't be needed. This includes being seen by their husbands as in marital bed duty.
While not so much today as in past females used to require all sort of "gear" under their clothing and took ages to get dressed. Many had elaborate morning and evening toilettes that had them going to bed looking like something out of a horror show. Hair in curlers covered by nets or caps, faces slathered in cream, hands and feet equally greased up but covered in gloves and socks.
Unlike today where couples often live together long before marriage, back then a man might not get to see his wife without any slap on her face or other artifice until his wedding night or the morning after. It thus shouldn't be surprising some women would rather keep that façade up as it were.
Another reason for separate bedrooms was it allowed husband and wife to have room or rooms decorated to suite their own tastes. A wife could have a very feminine bed and even bathroom with laces, frou-frou, satins, etc.. While the husband something a bit more severe.
I thought it was amusing to learn that some social historians have come up with the hypothesis that the electro/mechanical vibrator was invented in the late 19th century for doctors to "treat" their adult female patients who suffered from "hysteria'.
Supposedly the doctors used genital massage as a treatment for whatever ailed the lady, but it was not considered sexual because there was no penetration involved. (A former US President would certainly approve that message )
The Victorian era in the West must've been overwhelmed with frustration in the "polite" society.
You only have to look back as late as the 1950's or so many married couples had separate bedrooms. Indeed today at least in NYC the idea of husband and wife master bedroom "suites" has come back into fashion. Many wives saying they've "paid their dues" and want to sleep in peace.
Long story short men have never had a shortage of where to take their pleasures outside of the marriage bed. Long as they were discrete and kept clear of disease no one was shocked or offended. Thanks to the miracle of modern antibiotics (begun with penicillin), modern safe birth control and or even abortion much of the downside of taking a mistress and or seeking out prostitutes has waned.
The bold made me smile and remember my great grandmother told me that the key to a long marriage was "separate bedroom" lol.
She was married to my great grandfather for over 60 years.
I didn't talk to her about sex specifically but she said that after a certain amount of time you just don't even want to be around your spouse any more. You get "sick and tired" of them lol. She did mention you can "come together" for things in any room lol. I think she was talking about sex.
That made me decide to ensure I get a separate room or space in my house as my husband and I grow old together. It's not because I don't want to have sex but because I just want to have some quiet time away from him. I think most women (and probably most men, I'm a woman so won't comment on men's feelings in this regard) like sex but just don't want to be around their spouse all the time because the spouse gets on their nerves.
I honestly would rather sleep by myself. I'm sure my husband would rather not sleep with me every night either. We still have sex though. You don't have to sleep in the same room to have sex on a regular basis.
I do understand though about being abstinent in the past due to health concerns from pregnancies since there weren't many options for birth control. And I agree that many men cheated and brought home VD to their wives. One of my other great grandmother's I found out had been infected with syphillis by her husband. She didn't know of it until she gave birth to their first child who died of complications related to congenital syphillis. She had 3 other children die of the same thing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)