The Influence of Sewing Machines on the Health and Morality of Workwomen

Nineteenth-century doctors worried that because sewing machines "produced such an excessive excitement of the sexual organs" they might have an immoral effect upon working women. Text from The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal (Aug 23, 1866):

The article is entitled "The Influence of Sewing Machines on the Health and Morality of Workwomen." It is an analysis of a paper read to the Societe Medicale des Hopitaux of Paris, at the meeting of May 9th, by M. Guibout. He begins with the recital of a case.

A young woman, whom he had known as the very picture of vigorous health, presented herself at his office in such a condition of emaciation, and with such a change of countenance, that he was greatly shocked at her appearance. The explanation which she gave was as follows.

For seven months, from morning till night, she had worked at a sewing machine, known as the "American machine." The constant motion of the lower extremities in propelling it had produced such an excessive excitement of the sexual organs that she was often compelled to suspend her work; and to the frequency of this effect and the fatigue resulting from it, she attributed the leucorrhoea and attendant loss of flesh and strength from which she was suffering.

The effect seemed to be naturally enough explained by the cause alleged, especially as in some of the machines at which she had worked the pedals were depressed alternately with one food and the other. This case, so serious in its nature, was regarded by M. Guibout as probably the result of a peculiar susceptibility on the part of the patient, and so very exceptional at the time as only worthy of record as a curiosity. But during the past year, he goes on to say, he found in the hospital Saint-Louis, three similar cases; and during the present year he had already found five in the same hospital.

He also adds that within a month "two females, entirely unknown to each other, and working in different shops, called upon him on the same day, to consult him for similar symptoms. The first of these, a blonde, in the most vigorous health when she began to work at the machine, in seven or eight months has become enfeebled, her embonpoint was gone, her general health had declined, and she had become the subject of a profuse leucorrhoea, which was daily increasing.

She said also that many of the girls in the same establishment were affected in the same way, by the same cause, "the continual movement of the lower limbs, the jar and the swaying of the body." She denied, however, that she had been troubled by the special symptoms mentioned by the first patient, but said that many of her companions had been. Many of them had been so annoyed as to be obliged frequently to suspend their work and leave the shop for the purpose of bathing with cold water.

The second of these two patients was a brunette, of entirely different temperament from the other. She had been obliged to give up her place after working at the machine for a year, on account of the same symptoms. To the inquiry as to any local excitement produced by it, she answered in the affirmative. To translate her own words: "Among 500 women who worked with me, there were at least 200 who, to my knowledge, suffered as I did; so that the operatives were constantly changing, none of them being able to stay long. It is a constant going and coming of women, who enter strong and well, and who go out weak and emaciated."

M. Guibout went on to recite other instances equally serious, but it is not necessary to quote them. The subject is one of very grave moment and worthy of the consideration of every physician. In the discussion which followed the reading of his paper, some of the members of the Society were disposed to question the frequency of the peculiar symptoms which he reported. He, however, maintained his position, urging that it was very difficult to get a confession from many of the victims of the machine, so that when directly interrogated, a negative response should not always be received as the truth. The large number of cases which had come under his own observation had led him to lay this painful subject before the Society.

I asked Microsoft's AI image creator to produce an image based on the article's title, and this is what it came up with:

     Posted By: Alex - Wed May 17, 2023
     Category: Health | Medicine | Nineteenth Century





Comments
This looks like a treatment for a movie proposal. Can't come up with a catchy title though.
Posted by KDP on 05/17/23 at 05:39 PM
Puh-lease . . . I don't think doctors ever found a physical activity that didn't arouse women (unless it also involved men, then they were clueless).

In Victorian times, ladies weren't supposed to ride bicycles because it provoked wanton thoughts, and many clergy were aghast when nubile young vixens chose to ride around and around on the cobblestone paths circling their churches.

There were railroad lines, particularly in rural parts of England, where no maiden was to ride without an older female chaperone because the clickity-clacks were so rhythmic, and the vibrations so intense because of the short and ill-maintained rails, that many a fair and innocent damsel would swoon. (And then buy three more tickets for that route.)

And for generations, no country squire was to know, or question, why his daughters of a certain age became addicted to horseback riding, preferring to gallop over rolling fields out of sight of others, sometimes three or four times each and every day until they married.
Posted by Phideaux on 05/17/23 at 06:16 PM
To clarify, the sewing machines of that time were treadle-operated, hence the rhythmic motion of the legs that allegedly aroused their operators.
Posted by ges on 05/17/23 at 11:03 PM
OK, now I understand why there is smoke; it's not from the machine. Her ever faster leg movements are about to set her pants on fire. (She long ago quit paying attention to the sewing.)
Posted by Virtual in Carnate on 05/18/23 at 06:58 AM
Pants, Virtual? Pants!? How dare you! No lady - no, not even a wanton lower-class tart - would dare wear pantaloons! No, it was her petticoats that frotted themselves into a frenzy. (Or so I have heard. Obviously, I would never actually look at any part of a female below her neckline. It would be most unseemly.)
Posted by Richard Bos on 05/20/23 at 10:31 AM
" (...) a negative response should not always be received as the truth." Seems like M. Guibout is another man who doesn't take no for an answer.
Posted by Yudith on 05/20/23 at 06:22 PM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.