1
Women’s Secrets
Societal norms and societal constructs have always been a major part of culture and
society for as long as history can track it. While looking at these norms and constructs we can
see how these societies acted and treated one another based on sex, gender, social class, race, and
other variables. We can then examine these factors from the standpoint of a historian through old
documents such as letters, books, or even the laws of said cities. In the book “Women’s Secrets”
by Helen Rodnite Lemay the author analyses some texts from the late Middle Ages up through
the modern era.
The author analyses these texts and gives an in-depth explanation of the meanings of the
texts and the reasonings behind the writings in detailed commentaries of the treatise De secretis
mulerium, a popular text on the human reproduction process. The text highlights mostly how
men had viewed women and the female body in ways where men were purely superior in every
way due to multiple factors including the humors, menses, and men being “fully cooked.” The
original text is misogynistic in ways that they presented this information, but I also believe the
author that translates and analyses the text is not misogynistic but rather just being informative of
these old ways and presenting it in a way for everyone to understand. Mostly I am going to focus
on the original author, believed to be Albertus Magnus and this misogynistic text that he wrote.
This text is misogynistic, poorly, and inaccurately describes the biological differences of men
and women and what makes them evil and impure, makes them feared, and tells us why women
were treated as inferior during these times.
This text argues the differences in both men and women and the parts that they play in
the reproductive process however, the text argues that these differences are clear as to why men
are superior to women. The author does back these outlandish claims with their scientific
2
research that was believed to be accurate at those times however, they made plenty of other
outrageous claims such as a man’s penis “ought not be longer than eleven inches at most, for if it
were longer the seed would be dispersed in the womb and conception prevented. The penis
should be no shorter than one inch, because if it were any shorter it would not be able to touch
the opening of the of the womb” (p. 68) or men being able to conceive even without testicles
because semen flows from throughout the body or even that “the womb closes like a purse” (p.
66) during conception.
All the examples mean one thing, although they did a lot of scientific research and
experiments and backed it up with their medical professionals, their knowledge of the human
body was not the best even though they believed it to be cement. This does no good for their
claims during the reproductive process as it makes it easier to single out the women when they
are misinformed and have no other explanation as to why women are different besides the fact
that they are inferior. Magnus was attempting to push this agenda that men are inferior by
making it appear that men are more valuable members of society in what they can provide in
labor and more valuable in the reproductive process as without them it would be nothing.
These men in science and the medical fields firmly believed these ideologies and
believed they were backed so it is not entirely their fault that this was how the world was, like
how we believe a lot of what the scientists discover today. This is the only argument I could
think of that could state why these texts are not misogynistic. The men were poorly informed and
poorly taught, the intent of these texts was not to degrade women but instead to inform others
and teach them the reproductive ways. They saw nothing wrong with it and had what appears to
be good intentions however, that is not that case.
3
Even if the intentions were to teach and if they were poorly informed in their teachings,
regardless it is still misogynistic. Instead of taking this time to just discuss the differences
between men and women and why they are this way or why they could be equals instead they
use this scientific evidence that they have found to explain the differences and what about these
differences makes men superior to women.
The differences that men and women have are both mental and physical, both
controllable and uncontrollable, stating that men are more intelligent, “similar to God in mind”
(p. 63) more physical, more gifted and play a bigger role in the reproductive process. Not only
are men better leaders and members of society, but they almost entirely run the reproductive
process. The author argues that women are just purely a shell for the child and that the “male
seed has the same relationship to female menses as an artificer does to his work. For just as a
carpenter alone is the efficient cause, and the house is the effect” (p. 64) men are meant to create
mini versions of themselves. Using this research to say that they cannot be separate but equal but
rather if they are separate then one must be better, and it is man that the people declared is
superior to woman.
This is misogynistic because it is untrue and not only meant to boost the men and their
superiority but also has intentions to defeat the women and beat them down so that they continue
to believe that they best serve as mothers and houses for these fetuses. If men take these chances
to beat down on women, they can continue to grow that power they long desired.
Who is to blame for these outlandish remarks though is a valuable question that we must
ask. Do we blame the church for setting forth that man is better because Eve was created from
Adam? Do we blame these scientists who claim that since they’re different, one must be better
4
than the other? In all honesty, the answer is yes, we can blame both and all of society for
accepting these ideas and inheriting them into society.
Putting all this together, the texts are very misogynistic, and you can tell from the start as
they were designed for monks to read to be informed of the reproductive process, and all monks
are men. They are heavily in favor of men and weren’t even meant to be read by women. Instead
of accepting the fact that each could play an equal role, they take this opportunity to further split
men and women who were already split far enough. Women were treated as lesser because of
their biological differences from men instead of being looked at as a step to the side.
The biological differences were understood as women not being “fully cooked” or “hot”
enough which led to numerous biological differences such as the menstrual cycle, female
genitalia and reproductive organs being on the inside, and the different humors. They compare
men and women once again on this subject matter by talking about this difference must happen
because someone must be better than the other men being better. Some of these differences such
as the menstrual cycle gave belief that women were evil and impure and “in order to purge the
body” (p. 69) and to rid of these impurities once a month. He states that their “stomachs are
infected with evil humors” (p. 141) in pregnancy.
No matter what happens and what it is, men are seen as the purest and perfect individuals
on this planet, most resembling God and the ideal human. Men’s difference from women is seen
as evil, impure, and no good. This is what makes this text misogynistic in its ways. The fact that
men and women cannot be different and equal and this ideology that men are perfect, and
nothing will come close to that. This also leads to the point of how women were described in
their biological differences. They were given these biological differences because of how impure
they were, as a form to chase that purity and perfect that is of man. They were feared by men
5
because of these ideologies because of the certain times of the month where they were seen as
evil, and they were ridding that evil where they may flip at any moment. All in all, this text tells
us why women were seen as inferior during the medieval ages and how uneducated people were
on the concepts female body because of the lack of research and the varying unreliable sources,
not quite grasping the concepts and looking in the wrong areas for answers. We can see this by
acknowledging other fields where scientists were incorrect in understanding the female and male
body, first-hand evidence of women being treated as evil and impure because of natural events
such as the menstrual cycle, and pushing these differences to prove the superiority of man in this
era.