Welcome to my latest queer history blog post! If you enjoy this article, make sure to sign up for my newsletter and stay up to date with my blog and in-progress queer-centric Historical Fiction novel. Thanks for reading!
Content Warnings: post contains discussion of sex work and homophobia.
It might be easy for us to imagine modern London hosting at least thirty gay nightclubs; it would be much more difficult for many of us to imagine thirty such clubs in London over two-hundred years ago. But the historical record suggests that the latter scenario is, in fact, the truth.
There is a common misconception that queer communities, such that they existed in early modern Europe, were confined to shadowy, underground existences – particularly those which lacked the helpful insulation wrought by societal prestige or economic privileges. But the “Mollies” of 18th century Georgian Britain seem to challenge this notion. Despite the (very real and enforced) legal prohibitions on homosexual activity, the prevalence of British Molly subculture shows that thriving gay communities were all but an open secret during this period.
The Emergence of Mollies
Extensive research by Rictor Norton in The Georgian Underworld suggests that the emergence of this thriving British gay subculture among men can be traced to the mid-17th century, but expanded throughout the 18th century.[1] Notably, other research on France during this time period (which I have discussed in my previous post on Philippe, Duke d’Orleans) suggests that male queer subcultures were in evidence throughout Western Europe at the height of the Baroque era. In the 18th century, the term “molly” (from a Latin term suggesting effeminacy) became parlance for both gay men and female prostitutes.[2] Indeed, molly subculture would have close geographic associations with the raucous London sex work scene, although evidence suggests that many (if not most) relationships within the subculture were for pleasure and love, and never transactional. Within the broader heteronormative culture around them, “molly” men were often known for effeminate behavior, dress and mannerisms and regularly engaged in cross-dressing in permissive settings, such as the “Molly Houses”.[3]
Some of the Molly Houses could have been de facto brothels providing services to gay men, but most appear to have been typical social establishments like the salons and coffee houses that proliferated throughout the Georgian era.[4] These establishments facilitated gatherings of queer men and their courting of one another, and even offered private spaces for direct sexual contact. One source notes that “wherever they were, in these places, dozens of men would congregate to meet one another for sex or for love, and even stage performances incorporating drag, “marriage” ceremonies, and other kinds of pageantry”.[5] According to Norton, records shows that at least thirty such houses existed (and apparently thrived) in 18th century London (notably, these were the establishments that were formally investigated, and the number may have been far higher).[6]
London hosted a thriving gay subculture throughout the 1700s
The Molly Houses did not just serve a sexual purpose in the subculture; rather, they were truly communal spaces where queer men were permitted to pursue romantic, sexual, even platonic and intellectual expression that was legally prohibited beyond the Molly House walls. One such example of a “marriage ceremony” survives to us, and denotes other facets of molly culture – in this case, the adoption of feminine names for molly men in their social gatherings: Thomas Coleman and John Hyons (the latter known as “Queen Irons”) were reportedly “married” with their friends Miss Kitten (aka James Dalton) and Princess Seraphina (aka John Cooper) as their attendant bridesmaids.[7] This example suggests that friendship and comradery was as important to the mollies’ experiences as much as sexuality.
Mollies and Gender Identity
The molly subculture appears to have regularly, and flagrantly, defied notions of cisnormativity in addition to heteronormativity. The prevalence of feminine names and monikers is one piece of evidence which could suggest that some mollies may have been transgender and/or gender nonbinary. According to 18th century journalist Ned Ward, who documented the molly culture in the early part of the century, men in the molly houses adopted exclusively feminine names and pronouns when together, and called each other “sisters”.[8] He noted that these men “rather fancy themselves women,” although this could simply refer to club-specific social behaviors in addition to trans or nonbinary identities.
However, some mollies are known to have presented as feminine in both private and public contexts. A female neighbor of Princess Seraphina (aka John Cooper), for example, wrote that “Her Highness” regularly wore “Women’s Cloaths…with her Hair frizzled and curl’d all round her Forehead; and then she would so flutter her Fan, and make such fine Curt’sies, that you would not have known her from a Woman: She takes great Delight in Balls and Masquerades, and always chuses to appear at them in a Female Dress, that she may have the Satisfation of dancing with fine Gentlemen.”[9] This anecdote, and others, suggest that some mollies adopted non-cis gender presentations in a variety of settings and, indeed, as a central aspect of their lives.
Persecution
Unfortunately, much of the information available to us about molly culture comes as a result of their suppression. Then as now, queerphobic persecution usually targeted men of low means or social status, and these men often endured the harshest punishments for their “crimes”.[10] Even if a wealthy man were caught in flagrante, he could likely afford skilled lawyers and bribes as 18th century “get out of jail free” cards, or perhaps get away with paying a fine. A working class individual had no such recourse, and could only hope that they would avoid the worst consequences in a legal system where homosexual acts constituted a capital offense. Trials of men (and some women) accused of engaging in or facilitating sodomy were evident throughout British legal records during the 18th century (an extensive list is available here).
Molly Houses were often targeted by local police units and subsequently raided; the 1720s saw a particularly harsh series of assaults on London’s clubs. The famous Mother Clap house, for example, was a London house run by a woman, Margaret Clap. It was raided in the summer of 1726, resulting in the arrest of forty men. Three of these, Gabriel Lawrence, William Griffin and Thomas Wright, were summarily executed for the crime of sodomy. Ms. Clap was less harshly sentenced, but was still forced to stand for hours in the pillory for running a “disorderly house”.[11] The full text of her trial is available here.
Another such raid targeted the White Swan house in 1810. In this instance, two captured men were sentenced to death, but the remaining two dozen arrested during the course of the raid were consigned to the public pillory. These men were met with violence by enraged locals, who took full advantage of the opportunity to insult, assault and pelt them with garbage from the streets.[12]
Penalties for homosexual behavior among men remained severe throughout the subsequent Victorian era. While the death penalty for sodomy was revoked in 1861, gay men continued to suffer public disgrace and horrific consequences for their sexual orientation if discovered (the sensational trial of Oscar Wilde, in 1895, as the prime example). It would not be until the late 1960s that homosexuality was formally decriminalized in Britain, and not until the 2010s was gay marriage legalized throughout the United Kingdom.[13]
But queer communities of men (and women) persisted throughout all of these decades, even if they were less publicly visible than the flagrant, boisterous era of the 18th century mollies. The mollies hardly enjoyed safety or security in their pursuit of authentic lives and full expression of their varied identities, let alone public support. Moreover, the fight for LGBTQIA+ rights and acceptance in the UK continues even today, to say nothing of the rest of the world. But the stories of the mollies, the Molly Houses, and this well-documented queer subculture of the past reaffirms that queer joy could often be found even in the darkest places.
[1] Rictor Norton, The Georgian Underworld: A Study of Criminal Subcultures in Eighteenth-Century England, updated January 28, 2012, http://rictornorton.co.uk/gu00.htm.
[2] East End Women’s Museum, “Miss Muff’s Molly House in White Chapel,” November 20, 2016, https://eastendwomensmuseum.org/blog/miss-muffs-molly-house-in-whitechapel.
[3] Mary McKee, “18th Century Molly Houses – London’s Gay Subculture,” British Newspaper Archives, June 19, 2020, https://blog.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/2020/06/19/18th-century-molly-houses-londons-gay-subculture/.
[4] Rictor Norton, “Mother Clap’s Molly House & Deputy Marshall Hitchin,” in The Georgian Underworld: A Study of Criminal Subcultures in Eighteenth-Century England, http://rictornorton.co.uk/gu00.htm.
[5] Natasha Frost, “How the 18th-Century Gay Bar Survived and Thrived in a Deadly Environment,” Atlas Obscura, December 8, 2017, https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/regency-gay-bar-molly-houses.
[6] Norton, ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Mary McKee, ibid.
[9] East End Women’s Museum, ibid.
[10] Rictor Norton, “The Gay Subculture in Early Eighteenth-Century London”, http://rictornorton.co.uk/eighteen/molly2.htm.
[11] McKee, ibid.
[12] Frost, ibid.
[13] Steve Dryden, “A short history of LGBT rights in the UK,” The British Library, https://www.bl.uk/lgbtq-histories/articles/a-short-history-of-lgbt-rights-in-the-uk.