Talk:Christina, Queen of Sweden/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Not transgendered?

The article says that Kristina wasn't transgendered, and that surprises me, since she tried to change sex as far as i know. What are the reason to believe that she wasn't? People usually say she was... --84.217.108.49 13:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Care to provide a reference for this? I'd be interested to know if it was true. Cristina is often inlcuded on lists of transgendered and/or transsexual icons for her documented appearances in male clothing and under a male name, but as far as I have found, there does not appear to be any explicit evidence of her desiring to become physically male, or to always be regarded as male. Chaning sex would most likely not have been an actual option in her time, beyond a mastectomy. Lucky number 49 05:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Of course you would need to have a reference to include it in the article, but I actually thought that this was such a common fact that it actually was mentioned in most of the comprehensive sources, and I actually right now don't have any better source. And, in order to be considered transgendered, she also wouldn't have needed to desire actually changing sex, but yes, of course, she would have in order to be considered transsexual. I've read in an issue of the swedish gender-study magasine, Genus, where some researcher states that "she today probably would have been considered transsexual" (wich I consider a bit speculative..), and the story goes that she actually tried to change sex via alchemestry, and that she in the beginning thought that she was about to succed when she got a prolapse. I'm not sure whether the last story actually was included in Genus, though, and the article where she is mentioned in the magazine that I now can find is [this one (in swedish)]. The last story can be found on this (http://lukas.romson.org/transhistoria.htm swedish transgender) site]]. Whether or not the story about the alchemestry can be confirmed, the first article confirms amongst other things that she at least in some sence considered herself male. --84.217.40.255 12:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC) (flinga on svwiki, same as the first post on this issue above..).

It´s a well known fact that Christina dressed in male clothing, and only because of that she classyfies as transgendered. Ohter crossdressing royalties are considered transgendered,why not Christina?

We cannot know what Christina really felt about her gender, if she today would have been transsexual, transvestite or transgendered in some other way we cannot know. What we can know is what she did. She did order a painting of herself, sitting on a warhorse in the same pose as Alexander the Great, a man she is wellknown for admiering.(Sebastién Bourdons "Queen Christina at horse", 1653)

She did wrote "The female sex is much troublesome and a great obstacle for virtue and worth. Its the greates natures mistake to own. Its almost incorrigble and few people have hounorablerescuedthemeselves from it." (Pentées de Christine,p 229 no 340) and in a questioned (love)letter to lady Diane de Joanniste the queen wrote about a waiting for a metamorphos nad how she wanted to be a man and adore Diane as a man.(Lettres secretes de Christine, reine deSuede(Genevé 1761)).Abbé Servient wrote to Colbert de Croissy 1680 about Chrsitinas cervix prolapse,which she thugt was the growing of a penis. That letter is a part of french diplomatmail and most likely very authentic.

These indications of Christinas feelings about her gender is presented in a book,"Kung Krisitina" (King Chrisitina) written by Kjell Lekeby,swedish author. His book is questioned,but he points out a very important question: Maybe Christina was not only victim of patriarchy and therfor slanderd as "man" when she was not"female"enough? Maybe she actually felt as a man and herself acted as man,not only because of neccesity (as awoman wiht power in a sociaty were most woman had no power) but out of her feelings of her gender?--Godfellow 12:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I have not read a Christina biography nor her autobiography, but from what I see in this article, Godfellow makes a good point about her being judged for not fitting into society's idea of how a woman should express femininity. I did look her up in A History of Their Own: Women in Europe From Prehistory to the Present, Volume II, by Bonnie S. Anderson and Judith P. Zinsser (pages 54-58), though. They wrote that Christina had even a more masculine upbringing than Elizabeth I of England. Her father, Adolphus II, raised her like a prince, teaching her riding, shooting, sword fighting, etc, no "woman's work and occupations". When she was fifteen, Oxenstrierna reported to the legislature, "I observe with satisfaction . . . that . . . Her Majesty is not like other members of her sex. She is full of heart and good sense, to such an extent that, if she does not allow herself to be corrupted, she raises the highest hopes."

The authors write that while Elizabeth I cultivated femininity, Christina cultivated masculinity, picturing herself as the heroine in the classical age of Greece and Rome, "a Queen of the Amazons . . . who hunted and acted like a man, the "virile" spirit in a female body." However, her countrymen expected her to marry her cousin, Karl Gustavus, then fade into his background. Christina had no plan to bow to a husband's authority. And like every woman of the times with half a brain, she was fearful of childbirth. Instead of settling into domesticity, she was determined to convey the impression that "she was the daughter of her great father, accustomed to victory and triumph", able to ride horseback for ten hours, receive diplomatic delegations, discuss philosophy, etc. In 1653, she received the English ambassador wearing a simple gray skirt and a man's jacket. She wore her hair shoulder-length (like men did), either braided or held back with a ribbon.

To me, Queen Christina of Sweden sounds like a complex woman of practicality, self-realization, and determination. Without firmer evidence than is provided in this article, I think the transgender/bisexual/lesbian labels are a leap. Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 19:11, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Gay icons?

Why was she in category:gay icons? I removed the category. /81.170.235.234 15:58, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

She is considered a Gay icon for a variety of reasons - read the article. She is suspected to have been born intersexed (meaning not entirely female or male but somehwere in between), was teated as a boy by her father and dressed as a man. She was bisexual as an adult. She refused to marry and pursued an independent life that women of her time could scarce consider. Only her postion and wealth permitted her to live that way. She as portrayed on screen y anohter Gay icon, Greta Garbo. So you see, the LGTB has many reasons to claim her as an icon.Lisapollison 17:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Not getting married is not the same thing as being bisexual... Are there any written sources that indicate her bisexuality? Considering the taboos of her time, I'd guess it would be impossible to find such sources. And we should not speculate. Also, Greta Garbo is not a gay icon and wether she has portrayed Kristina on film or not is irrelevant. /81.170.235.234 22:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Weather or not she was bisexual is not important, she's still a popular figure in the gay community, hence a gay icon. And likewise Greta Garbo, as far as i know. --84.217.108.49 13:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

The existens of at least five loveletters to three different women might be a good reason for beliving Christina wasn´t altogheter straight.Her most wellknown relation was with Ebba Sparre, the three loveletters to her are publiched in Sven Stolpes "Christina - Brev från sex decennier".They Ebba and Christina were very close, and there was gossip already at that time about the relation. (letter from count Magnus 1654, publiched in Sven Stolpes book)--Godfellow 16:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Godfellow, the article itself currently says: "When Christina left Sweden she continued to write passionate letters to Sparre, in which she told her that she would always love her. Christina, though, used the same emotional style when writing to men and women she had never met (those whose writings she admired) and there is conjecture as to the context of her letters to Sparre.[22]" Therefore, your argument about her sexual orientation based solely on her letter-writing style is weakened. Yours, Wordreader (talk) 19:20, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

King or Queen

Actually she was bearing the title King, not Queen. May be it needs to be worked out more precisely.Taksen (talk) 13:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

From the little that I've read, she is referred to as "Queen Christina". Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 04:13, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, we'd definitely need a source for a claim like that. And please take into consideration that many translation tools mistranslate non-English equivalents for non-gender-specific terms like "monarch" to "King", though they can mean both. St★lwart¹¹¹ 06:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Feminism

Although there are some lengthy debates here regarding this woman's sexual orientation, a moot point at present, I am surprised that not one poster has mentioned feminism. I have not read her written works, so I do not know if she included feminist topics among them, but her actions were certainly those of a feminist. Bonnie S. Anderson and Judith P. Zinssein, in their book, A History of Their Own: Women in Europe From Prehistory to the Present, Volume II (pages 34 and 54-58), seem to think that she was. She's also included here: List of feminists. I think that she should be included in the Feminism category https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Feminism, but she is not. Oversight? Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 22:43, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

She would likely be considered a feminist in today's terms, were she alive today. Contemporaries simply viewed her as having characteristics normally thought of as masculine - she was headstrong, was considered an intellectual equal by many men, was interested in physical and "outdoor" pursuits (at which she excelled from all accounts). She was the 17th century high-society version of an Anne Bonny or Amelia Earhart in many ways. But there were also many ways in which she followed established protocols and "kept her place" as it were and there are a few interesting accounts in that regard. St★lwart¹¹¹ 06:17, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

"Hairy"

Regarding: "There was much excitement when the baby was born and was first thought to be a boy as it was hairy and screamed, "with a strong, hoarse voice".[5]"

Since there's no explanation about what "hairy" means (thick scalp hair as opposed to being born bald, lanugo, or something else entirely), I put it in quotation marks like the other quote. As an aside, as a former pediatric nurse, I can assure you that in real life, females babies can and do scream "with a strong, hoarse voice" all the time! It sounds like little Christina was spoken of judgmentally from her first breath. Yours, Wordreader (talk) 16:30, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

She most certainly was. There was previously a reference to her having been "raised as a boy" - I can't remember the back-and-forth on that one. She certainly seems to have been offered a broader education than other girls of her era, but then she was royalty so that may just as adequately explain that. We need to be careful to differentiate between responses to her being a girl when she was born and later-life decisions she took herself to pursue "masculine" activities. Taken together, they paint her in a particular way that isn't necessarily supported by the sources. St★lwart¹¹¹ 06:21, 15 October 2014 (UTC)