{"id":32122,"date":"2024-10-03T11:00:25","date_gmt":"2024-10-03T15:00:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/circulatingnow.nlm.nih.gov\/?p=32122"},"modified":"2024-10-01T15:39:04","modified_gmt":"2024-10-01T19:39:04","slug":"gendering-the-non-binary-1763-part-ii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/circulatingnow.nlm.nih.gov\/2024\/10\/03\/gendering-the-non-binary-1763-part-ii\/","title":{"rendered":"Gendering the Non-Binary, 1763, Part II"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Allison Hill-Edgar<\/em> ~<\/p>\n

As described in Gendering the Non-binary, 1763<\/a>, Part I<\/em>,<\/span><\/span> finding two unsigned engravings of intersex individuals bound in the back of Charles Nicholas Jenty\u2019s Demonstration de la matrice d’une femme grosse et de son enfant a terme<\/em><\/a> (Demonstrations of a pregnant uterus of a woman at her full time<\/em>) from 1763\u20131764 in the collection of the NLM was both surprising and thought provoking. The juxtaposition of anatomical images illuminated the longstanding struggle between defining an idealized norm and recognizing the reality of human diversity. Furthermore, it highlighted the medical community\u2019s interest in understanding sex and gender and how they associated non-binary bodies with a binary, functional construct of the female womb.<\/p>\n

\"A<\/a>
“Human Uterus” in Antropologium de Hoi\u0303s Dignitate, Natura, et Prietatibus, de Elementis, Partibus et Me\u0303bris Humani Corporis<\/em>, 1501
National Library of Medicine #2254050R<\/em><\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Throughout much of history, the womb has been an enigmatic and mystifying site containing both the secrets and problems of reproduction. Intersex bodies in particular elicited questions about generation, both how such bodies came to be and how they would reproduce. Before the era of surgical \u201cnormalization\u201d of intersex genitalia as promoted by Dr. John Money<\/a> in the mid 20th century, diverse bodies were an evident fact of life and efforts were made to understand and explain individuals\u2019 particular anatomy.<\/p>\n

\"A<\/a>
The cardiovascular system and principal organs of a woman c.1509-10 by Leonardo da Vinci
RCIN 912281<\/em><\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

An early example of their relationship to the womb was the concept of the seven-celled uterus that was established by Galen<\/a> (131\u2013201 CE) and that persisted into the Renaissance. In The Wandering Womb<\/em><\/a>, Lana Thompson explains the theory that the uterus contained seven compartments\u2014three for males, three for females, and one in the middle for hermaphrodites. Illustrated examples of this can be seen in medieval manuscripts<\/a>, early Renaissance depictions such as Magnus Hundt\u2019s 1501 \u201cHuman Uterus<\/em><\/a>,\u201d<\/em> and Leonardo da Vinci\u2019s famous anatomical drawing of a female body in 1510. After performing many of his own human and bovine dissections, da Vinci became the first person to document in 1511 that the uterus has only one compartment. These examples reveal that intersex presentations were not only known and accepted, but also were affiliated with the uterus as a site where they were produced, accommodated, or both. From this time onward, \u201cindividual lives and deaths appeared in obstetrics, so did personal witnessing and the practical aspect of extraordinary births\u201d (Exceptional bodies in early modern culture: concepts of monstrosity before the advent of the normal<\/em><\/a>). <\/em><\/p>\n

\"A<\/a>
The fetus in the womb; sketches and notes on reproduction c.1511 by Leonardo da Vinci
RCIN 919102<\/em><\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Another longstanding theory that connected the womb to anomalous bodies was that the maternal imagination had the power to affect and alter the physical outcome of the fetus. This concept originated with Hippocrates<\/a> (c. 460\u2013370 BCE) but endured into the 19th century, when it was replaced by the science of teratology developed by Etienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire. Several examples of the power of the maternal imagination in medical literature can be seen in the works of Ambroise Par\u00e9<\/a>, a 16th century French surgeon. His writings on women\u2019s health depicted the female body as defective, dysfunctional, unstable, and when pregnant, capable of mentally conjuring “monstrosities.” Par\u00e9 provides multiple illustrations of \u201cwitnessed\u201d monstrosities, including conjoined twins, chimeras, intersex individuals, and people with missing or displaced appendages.
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"A <\/a>
Les oeuures d’Ambroise Pare\u0301, 1585 National Library of Medicine #2274003R <\/div> <\/div> <\/div>
\"A <\/a>
Les oeuures d’Ambroise Pare\u0301, 1585 National Library of Medicine #2274003R <\/div> <\/div> <\/div>
\"A <\/a>
Les oeuures d’Ambroise Pare\u0301, 1585 National Library of Medicine #2274003R <\/div> <\/div> <\/div> <\/div> <\/div>\n

According to Daston and Park in Wonders and the Order of Nature, 1150-1750<\/em><\/a>, \u201cwomen sometimes bore children with horns and tails not because they had slept with demons but because their overwrought imaginations had importuned a diabolical shape upon the soft matter of the fetus.\u201d One of Par\u00e9\u2019s most copied images was that of a hairy woman accompanied by a black child. The image appears in multiple subsequent medical texts by other authors, including “probably the most widely reprinted book on a medical subject in the 18th and early 19th century,\u201d Aristotle\u2019s Masterpiece<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"Photograph<\/a>
Aristoteles Master-Piece<\/em>, 1684
National Library of Medicine #2303017R<\/em><\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

First published in London in 1684<\/a> under the pseudonym of Aristotle, it elaborated upon the mysteries of sex, female anatomy, marriage, pregnancy, and midwifery. Multiple iterations continued to be sold until the 1930s. The image of the hairy woman and black child feature prominently in each edition, accompanied by the explanation that during intercourse, their mothers had contemplated St. John in his camel-haired garment and Ethiopia, respectively. This concept is also evident in the words of John Maubray, an 18th century Scottish physician and teacher of midwives in London who wrote a book called The Female Physician<\/em><\/a>. In it, he stated that pregnant women, \u201cought discreetly to suppress all Anger, Passion, and other Perturbations of the Mind, and avoid entertaining too serious or melancholic Thoughts; since all such tend to impress a Depravity of Nature upon the Infants\u2019 Mind, and deformity on its Body.\u201d In other words, a mother\u2019s mental state has the power to affect the form and function of the fetus. Although the theory of the damaging maternal imagination is no longer accepted in medicine, the idea that a woman\u2019s mental issues might impact the outcome of the fetus persists. Julia Epstein argues in The Pregnant Imagination, Fetal Rights, and Women\u2019s Bodies: A Historical Inquiry<\/em><\/a>, that society continues to attribute the birth of a defective infant to \u201cthe secret passions\u201d or \u201csecret failure of its mother,\u201d particularly in the context of substance use, which in some cases criminalizes pregnancy.<\/p>\n

The binding of the intersex images into the Jenty female reproductive atlas, intentional or not, highlights a longstanding association between exceptional bodies and female reproduction. From antiquity to the present, the womb has been regarded as a complex, mysterious, powerful, and dangerous place, containing both the secrets and challenges of generation. Thus, any atypical physical presentation that did not match up to the norm of the average sized, adult, healthy, European man, was seen as a consequence of both the female body and mind. Investigating this perspective provides insight into the construction of gender and sex assignments in anatomical history.<\/p>\n

\"A<\/a>
Xanthe Elbrick Photography<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Allison Hill-Edgar<\/a>, MD, MFA, is an Artist and Independent Scholar and a Lecturer at the New York Academy of Art, NY, NY, Saint Lawrence University, Canton, NY, and the Fenimore Art Museum, Cooperstown, NY and a 2020 NLM Michael E. DeBakey Fellow in the History of Medicine<\/a>.
\n<\/em><\/p>\n