Was Lewis Carroll a pedophile?

Back to Lewis Carroll/Charles Dodgson

He was an inveterate puzzler.

He delighted in inventing puzzles for others to solve, and solving puzzles set by others. He was also the author of a book of chess problems.

When considering his poem, we should bear in mind that he didn't always say what he meant, or mean what he said.

He was a very complex person. The simple explanation of anything he did or wrote is probably the least likely.

Og
 
oggbashan said:
The simple explanation of anything he did or wrote is probably the least likely.
Og
Agreed. Occam's Bludgeon should point the way.
 
oggbashan said:
He was an inveterate puzzler.

He delighted in inventing puzzles for others to solve, and solving puzzles set by others. He was also the author of a book of chess problems.

When considering his poem, we should bear in mind that he didn't always say what he meant, or mean what he said.

He was a very complex person. The simple explanation of anything he did or wrote is probably the least likely.

Og

I responded in different words, but exactly. :D (perfect place humour, but cant muster it right now, Og.)

:rose:
 
devoted lilgirl said:
This aspect of women's history and history in general has always intrigued me, but it seems I can only find information in bits and pieces...even down to the facts about how doctors would masturbate women for medicinal reasons to cure hysteria
You bet! In fact, the electric vibrator was invented for that purpose in the late 1800's, probably to alleviate repetitive motion injury among the more popular ladies' physicians.

Imagine being diagnosed with melancholia instead of hysteria. Women who were midly melancholy must have plunged head-first into the depths of despair when they learned that hysteria would have qualified them to receive orgasms. Drat!

One might have been tempted to bone up on the symptoms, as it were.

What became known as "mood swings" may originally have been attempts to appear just hysterical enough to require medical attention, but not so hysterical as to qualify for a straitjacket and a rest retreat at Bedlam Hospital.

What a thrill for Victorian women when some angel of mercy made a healthful vibrating massage device in a portable size, for home use. How eagerly the ladies would have awaited the after-dinner hour when their husbands headed off to Whites. How confused the nannies must have been when their mistresses announced, without explanation, that bedtime in the nursery would be an hour earlier from now on. All of London would have been abuzz with anticipation.

In thousands of well-off households, the tension must have built to a fever pitch; thousands of melancholy, hysterical women were about to discover, all at once, that there are never enough electrical outlets in the bed chamber.

I participated in a roleplay thread on this very topic, so naturally the treatment of Female Hysteria remains dear to my heart.


[/threadjack]
 
Last edited:
shereads said:
You bet! In fact, the electric vibrator was invented for that purpose in the late 1800's
In truth, wasn’t the first vibrator an attachment one could get for her treadle sewing machine?

I mean, what other reason would a woman have for singing while doing her mending?

Unfortunately for Singer, it was just about then that vacationing ladies, bicycling over the cobblestone streets of historically important locations, became all the vogue.
 
Victorian times

AS an *idea*, I find them very appealing. There are similarities with the present, in the US.

There was great idealization, and the pictures of girls and women definitely attempt to 'elevate' them (as angels, goddesses,etc.)

At the same time, your proper Victorian elite male had his whores. He had access to the servant maids and their daughters (and sons). London teemed with prostitutes. Gay activities ran along well, under the facade.

Children, esp. girls, lacked many protections, and seem to be considered expendable (at least the poor ones).

Indeed, iirc, in Victorian times--and at other times in history-- a child *young* enough--say less than 5-- could not be raped, in legal terms. (IOW, since the child was not a sexual being, there cannot be a 'sexual act' involving one.)

These times make great setting for porn novels, and are wonderfully illustrative of human hypocrisy and wanton idealism.

---

By the way, it's worth noting that Victorian life, is something that happened in England, Canada, and American. If women were punished for buttering the muffin, in those countries--committed, castrated, etc-- this was not necessarily the case in the rest of Europe (save Germany) or the rest of the world. From a world perspective, jilling off continued unabated in many regions.
 
Last edited:
Pure said:
By the way, it's worth noting that Victorian life, is something that happened in England, Canada, and American. If women were punished for buttering the muffin, in those countries--committed, castrated, etc-- this was not necessarily the case in the rest of Europe (save Germany) or the rest of the world. From a world perspective, jilling off continued unabated in many regions.

How, exactly, does one go about castrating a woman?
 
female castration

http://www.sexuality.org/l/sex/sexdict.html

ovariectomy: surgical removal of the ovaries; female castration.

-----

I would also argue that, in a loose sense, removing the clitoris or cauterizing it, constitutes de facto castration, although the menstrual cycle and pregnancy would be unaffected.
 
Female Genital Mutilation

One of my friends, now deceased, was an active campaigner against this practice in the Third World.

She represented the UK on several organisations trying to persuade mainly Sub-Saharan nations against the practice which is still prevalent in some rural communities.

The task is still a long way from completion.

Og
 
Purple Sage said:
Very loose. In both cases.

How would you figure that?

A woman who's been mutilated so that she can't enjoy sex, can't give birth, only have a tiny hole for urine and menstruation blood to drip out of, or she's mutilated so that she can't get pregnant...

apart from "mutilated", can you think of any better expression for what's been done to her other than "castrated"?
 
Svenskaflicka said:
How would you figure that?

A woman who's been mutilated so that she can't enjoy sex, can't give birth, only have a tiny hole for urine and menstruation blood to drip out of, or she's mutilated so that she can't get pregnant...

apart from "mutilated", can you think of any better expression for what's been done to her other than "castrated"?

I think 'mutilated' covers it nicely, actually. Do you consider women who have had tubal ligations or hysterectomies 'castrated'? I 'figure' that using a term metophorically is 'looser' than using it literally.
 
Purple,
Thought you might be interested in this reference from the National Institute of Health [US] website:

Gynecol Oncol. 1991 Jan;40(1):42-5. Related Articles, Links


Reproductive hormone levels in gynecologic oncology patients undergoing surgical castration after spontaneous menopause.

Hughes CL Jr, Wall LL, Creasman WT.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710.


As to your questions

//Do you consider women who have had tubal ligations or hysterectomies 'castrated'?//

No, in the first case (same as for vasectomies).

Yes. If the hysterectomy was 'complete', involving the ovaries--as was quite common--then yes it is 'castration.'

The is a perfectly normal term referring to removal of gonads.
 
Yesterday whilst book browsing I came upon an intriguing work: Child Loving: The Erotic Child and Victorian Culture by James R. Kincaid, who holds an endowed chair in the English department at USC and seems a widely recognized authority on Victorian literature and culture.

I did not buy the book (always having to make judgments re. time to read) but I was curious enough to try and find out more about the author. Even as I perused the book I wondered if it were an academic apologia for pedophilia, but was reassured in my research today that though the matter has come up in some criticism of the work, overall it seems judged an excellent 'cultural' study.

I thought I'd share the info, not only for this thread's author but anyone with more interest or time than I own.

Perdita

Blurbs / Review
 
Last edited:
Pure said:
supposedly there are only four girl nudes of Carroll around (in one particular museum, i think in Philly). maybe that last is one? they don't seem to be on the 'net.
Yes. That and the other three are in Morton Cohen's brilliant Biography.
 
perdita said:
Yesterday whilst book browsing I came upon an intriguing work: Child Loving: The Erotic Child and Victorian Culture by James R. Kincaid, who holds an endowed chair in the English department at USC and seems a widely recognized authority on Victorian literature and culture.

I did not buy the book (always having to make judgments re. time to read) but I was curious enough to try and find out more about the author. Even as I perused the book I wondered if it were an academic apologia for pedophilia, but was reassured in my research today that though the matter has come up in some criticism of the work, overall it seems judged an excellent 'cultural' study.

I thought I'd share the info, not only for this thread's author but anyone with more interest or time than I own.

Perdita

Blurbs / Review

The link Pure posted has an interesting perspective on the eroticism of Carroll's nudes - that it isn't necessarily the poses of the children that make us uncomfortable with the images but the placement of the camera. It "intrudes - penetrates - the innocence of childhood."
 
Back
Top