00:04:04.300She treated the past like a crime scene.
00:04:06.360She gathered doctrine, laws, trial records, cultural patterns, and built a case that women's
00:04:11.700oppression wasn't natural, it wasn't accidental, it was produced, maintained, and enforced.
00:04:17.780And then, because she was too honest about that system, even for the movement she helped
00:04:22.240build, she became politically inconvenient.
00:04:25.500Which brings us to the central idea of this episode.
00:04:28.460The most unforgivable thing a woman can be is unrespectable.
00:04:32.200Not sinful. That can be managed. Not scandalous. That can be sensationalized and sold. Not even rebellious in a cute, marketable way that lets society pretend it admires strong women. No. Unrespectable is different.
00:04:46.660Unrespectable is when you refuse to make your politics palatable.
00:04:50.260Unrespectable is when you won't let church and state off the hook.
00:04:53.900Unrespectable is when you insist that women's freedom isn't just about access to the ballot,
00:04:58.440but about bodily autonomy, intellectual authority, and the right to exist outside the roles you've
00:05:03.440been assigned. Unrespectable is when you start saying the quiet part out loud.
00:05:08.480So today we're going to do something very simple. We're going to treat Matilda Jocelyn
00:05:12.540gauge the way she treated history. We're going to look closely at what she wrote. We're going to
00:05:16.980take her argument seriously as research, not just rhetoric. We're going to ask why those arguments
00:05:22.120scared people enough to summon a national censor. And then we're going to ask the question that
00:05:26.900keeps hovering over her whole legacy like a ghost at the margins of a textbook. If she mattered this
00:05:32.020much, if she was this central, this prolific, this intellectually foundational, why do so many people
00:05:37.840know the suffrage story without ever learning her name. I'm Professor Meredith, this is Bitchy
00:05:42.820History, and today's episode is Matilda Jocelyn Gage and the Politics of Being Unrespectable.
00:05:49.020Let's start with the book they tried to keep off the shelf.
00:05:52.800Something that's, you know, kind of bitchy.
00:16:51.480When you substitute women for witches, you understand the cruelty more clearly.
00:16:55.900She is telling the reader not to take witch as a supernatural category,
00:16:59.220but to treat it as a social label applied to a targeted group.
00:17:02.660Once you do that, witch hunting stops looking like random hysteria and starts looking like governance.
00:17:08.160Gage strengthens that argument with what she calls three striking points about how witchcraft accusations operated.
00:17:14.700First, the accused were overwhelmingly women,
00:17:16.700which should immediately make you suspicious of any claim that the category is neutral.
00:17:20.980Second, women's so-called peculiarities could be treated as evidence. That word matters because it
00:17:26.220points to what is really being policed, not sorcery, but non-conformity. A woman who is
00:17:31.340too independent, too sharp, too old, too poor, too socially awkward, too angry, too competent,
00:17:37.320too unwilling to perform the expected version of femininity becomes peculiar, and once peculiarity
00:17:43.220counts as proof, guilt is a matter of interpretation. Third, the clergy supplies the ideology that makes
00:17:49.440women's bodies and minds suspect in the first place. Religious teaching does not merely comment
00:17:54.320on the persecution, and Gage is telling, it creates the moral climate in which persecution feels
00:17:59.300righteous. What makes this section so powerful is that it shows the end of the pipeline. Theology
00:18:04.740produces suspicion, culture normalizes that suspicion, and then, when necessary, institutions
00:18:10.340convert suspicion into violence. Big Age is not only writing about witch trials, she's mapping
00:18:15.580what it means historically for women to step out of line. In her system, women step out of line
00:18:20.480when they possess knowledge that makes them less dependent, especially knowledge of bodies and
00:18:24.840healing. They step out of line when they refuse the expected performance of femininity, when they
00:18:29.760do not cooperate with their own containment. They step out of line when they are vulnerable enough
00:18:34.320to be scapegoated easily, as older or poorer women often were. They step out of line when they speak,
00:18:39.920when they dissent in public, when they refuse to be quiet enough to disappear.
00:18:44.300The witch hunt chapter of the book is famous because it's dramatic, but its real value is
00:18:49.120methodological. It teaches the reader how to read accusations as tools. It teaches the reader to
00:18:54.200ask what social work a label is doing, and once you learn that trick, you can apply it far beyond
00:18:59.320witchcraft. Once you see how she reads witches, you can see how she reads everything. If Woman,
00:19:05.600Church, and State is the book that make people clutch their pearls and call the censor,
00:19:09.460woman as inventor is the piece that reveals another side of Jocelyn Gage's mind,
00:19:14.540not only her willingness to interrogate religion and law,
00:19:17.420but her obsession with the practical mechanics of how women's work gets made invisible.
00:19:22.560Because Gage isn't only asking why are women oppressed,
00:19:25.380she's also asking with the impatience of someone who has watched the same lie circulate for generations,
00:19:31.080why do people keep insisting that women haven't created anything?
00:19:34.960The essay begins from a cultural myth that was treated like a scientific fact in her era,
00:19:39.980that women lack the capacity for invention, for mechanical genius, for original thought.
00:19:45.220Gage treats that claim as both insulting and strategically useful to patriarchy.
00:19:50.100If you can convince society that women didn't invent, then you can justify excluding women
00:19:54.640from education, from trades, from professional recognition, from the rewards that follow
00:19:59.260creative work. You can keep women dependent and then call that dependency proof of their
00:20:03.920inferiority. So she goes straight at the myth. Her method is quite satisfying. She piles examples.
00:20:10.380She lists women's innovations. She points to women's contributions across many fields.
00:20:15.060The goal isn't just to celebrate women. The goal is to break the spell of inevitability.
00:20:19.480She wants the reader to feel the weight of evidence women have always created. You simply
00:20:24.780weren't trained to notice. But Gage doesn't stop at the look women did things level. That would be
00:20:30.240too easy and, frankly, too optimistic. She's not writing a hallmark story about hidden heroines.
00:20:35.780She's writing an analysis of how recognition works and why it fails women on purpose.
00:20:41.140So after she's established that women can and do invent, she turns to the harder question.
00:20:46.000If women are inventing, why does the culture keep insisting that they aren't? Her answer is
00:20:51.160structural, not psychological, not women lack confidence, not women didn't put themselves out
00:20:56.360there, Gage is blunt about the real constraints, legal dependency, property rules, marriage law,
00:21:02.120economic exploitation, and cultural ridicule that makes women's creativity appear either trivial
00:21:07.280or impossible. This is where her legal analysis becomes the engine of the essay. Gage understands
00:21:13.140that invention is not just a spark of genius. Invention, in a capitalist society, is also
00:21:17.620ownership. It is the ability to claim credit, to control a patent, to profit from labor,
00:21:22.360to be recognized as the author of an idea rather than the helper of someone else's brilliance.
00:21:28.120And she points out, with a kind of grim clarity,
00:21:30.380that women were systematically blocked from these forms of ownership.
00:21:34.000A married woman could create something and still have no independent claim to what she produced
00:21:38.240because her legal identity was entangled with her husband's.
00:21:41.660In Gage's framing, the problem isn't simply that men stole women's ideas
00:21:45.540in a dramatic, mustache-twirling kind of way, though that does happen.
00:21:50.080The deeper problem is that the legal structure of marriage and property made it easy for women's work to be absorbed into someone else's name.
00:21:58.160She emphasizes how easily a woman's invention could end up patented, sold, or controlled by a husband, leaving her without remedy.
00:22:05.160This isn't a side note, it's the whole point.
00:22:07.380You can't talk about women's lack of recognition as if it's a mere cultural oversight when the law itself has been designed to prevent women from owning the fruits of their mind.
00:22:15.780So the essay becomes a kind of blueprint for how erasure happens.
00:22:19.900First, you restrict women's access to education and professional spaces.
00:38:25.840She helped build the movement and then watched that movement decide it needed a cleaner public face.
00:38:30.640She wrote the research and then watched institutions try to keep it out of libraries.
00:38:34.480She insisted women's oppression was structural and then watched herself become inconvenient to the official narrative of suffrage progress.
00:38:41.660And this is why the Comstock story is the perfect echo to close on,
00:38:44.500because a censored book is not just a censored object.
00:38:47.080It's a warning about what kind of knowledge society thinks girls should not have.
00:38:51.260And I'll leave you with the simplest version of what Matilda Jocelyn Gage was up to,