estimated that 200 Indigenous women from the islands of the Pacific would ‘suffice as companions for the men’ - by ‘the men’ he meant the free settlers, not the convicts. Despite their evident pomposity in these primary sources, the ruling classes were happy to appease their sexual appetites by stooping to the level of these ‘harlots’.Additionally, whilst they condemned these women, it was these same women who were the mothers of the nation, part of a generation that transformed a prison settlement into a democratic community. Gender equality conclusion: convicts responsible for developments The evidence clearly shows that it was the convicts and emancipated men and women that were principally responsible for the success and development of Australia in terms of gender equality.The upper-middle class ruling officials were increasingly more blinkered in their vision concerning women’s rights and authority in the home, since that was what had been instilled into their way of thinking from a pretentious upbringing in Great Britain. Given the British Government’s initial concern, (whilst planning the first fleet regarding the lack of women in the colony), it was inconceivable that the British administration did not consider that the transported convict women would be predominantly regarded as sexual companions, rather than laundry women or maids. However, amongst the working-class convict community, women faced much less gender discrimination due to the economic theory of supply and demand, and their unanticipated relative power due to their shortage of numbers.This unexpected benefit fed through generations of emancipated convicts and meant that Australia became one of the most advanced communities for women’s opportunities, starting with their equal right to the vote. Convict actions regarding ethnic equality When the first fleet arrived in Botany Bay in 1788, they found the land was already populated by the Aboriginal Australians.When the British settlers began colonising Australia in 1788, between 750,000 – 1,250,000 Aboriginal Australians are estimated to have lived there (Blakemore, 2019).Though some resisted, up to 20,000 Indigenous people died in violent conflict on the colony’s frontiers – most subjugated by massacres and the impoverishment of their communities as British settlers seized their lands (Blakemore, 2019).This figure is a clear indication that ethnic equality was not quite as developed as gender equality in the colonies. The concept of racial equality to convicts was, however, perhaps more accepted amongst high members of colonial society. Interracial marriages were far from regular occurrences,
which was significantly more developed in terms of gender equality than any other nation of the time. Compared to 18th and 19th century Britain, women living in Australia could exercise many more rights. For example, the women’s suffrage bill - the right to vote in political elections - was officially made law in 1895 when signed by Queen Victoria. South Australian women then became the first in the world who could not only vote, but also stand for parliament. In Britain, women only received the right to vote in parliamentary elections in 1918 - 23 years later. Gender equality amongst the ruling classes Despite this apparent equality amongst the convict classes, descriptions of convict women often differed hugely when being described by the bureaucrats of New South Wales. Interpretations of convict women by male superiors were not flattering. If not already perceived immoral when convicted, many pointed to sexual intercourse between the women and the sailors during the great voyage to Australia as confirmation of these views (Grocott, 1980). Historians have since recognised that these comments were made by reputedly respectable middle-class men: government officials, clergymen and employers, shocked by the drinking, smoking, foul language, recalcitrant behaviour and perceived loose morals of these working-class women. ‘Perceived’ is the key word in this phrase, as in reality less than 20% of women transported were known to have been convicted prostitutes, the majority were convicted for larceny or crimes of poverty (Williams, n.d). However, the accounts are about the representation of women rather than their reality. From the perspective of the ruling men, the women clearly failed to meet nineteenth century expectations of femininity and violated biological norms of women as the nurturing sex. Nowadays, we only really see negative depictions of convict women and it is clear to understand why, as most primary sources published could only have been written by the educated individuals in the colony – the male ruling class. Therefore, female convicts are often misrepresented, only seen from the moral high ground of colonial officials, rather than from the perspective of their male counterparts – who would have been uneducated and consequently unable to document their opinions, (and perhaps represent the true character of these women, rather than tarnishing all with a brush of harlotry). Governors even went as far as to encourage the objectification and sexual liberty of women, and continued to claim there was a place for the unmarried woman in the colony. Lord Sydney, recognised as the ‘Originator of the Plan of the colonisation for New South Wales’, had
38
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software