h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

No I mean to say despite being an impostor the person raised a family between both marriages and the facts rather suggest that the motive for being an impostor was not a sexual one.

You asked if it was about homosexuality - and it's not obvious that it is.

A friend of mine just mentioned that she was watching "Tipping The Velvet" on DVD and it sparked something.....

This is really risking a but is it possible that he was a she?

I'm thinking that there was a lot of "gender bending" about in that period ....

If this is all correct then possibly the reason the person got off so lightly is because there wasn't an appropriate law on the books at the time ....

Or am I just clutching at straws?

No that is quite correct Feisor +3

Colonel Barker et al., was really a woman.


Any advances on how this lead to the perjury charge?

Ok. So the motive would have likely been financial--jobs not available to women.

"An Hidden Agenda"? Should be 'An Idden Agenda'......... surely.

*Pedant? Who, me?*

Originally she ran a teashop in Warminster; after the trial, she tried her hand as a stage performance (a la Tipping The Velvet) as a Male Impersonator. As Barker she took up cricket for which she displayed a notable talent as well achieving some renown as a Welterweight boxer. She was a member of The National Fascist Party (we are, remember, between World Wars, I am unsure of just how much of a social pariah that made one); there are later charges accredited to her pseudonyms of Barker for possessing a gun without a licence, as well, when being John Hill, there were two subsequent accusations and charges for theft in 1937. Later she saw some action - finally, some might observe: she wasn't really a Colonel - when she toured with The Suffolk Home Guard under the appellation of Geoffrey Norton.

But it is her much earlier conviction, under the perjury law, that I considered the most interesting aspect of this extraordinary life to focus on and I suppose it comes down to that old adage: "you think you know someone.."

Can you now spot the clue in the subject? I wonder?

It's as thou she planned to make herself go down in history for proving women as good as men--agenda=plan, but I can't sort this out without a good deal of more thought about this thread. I'll just wait for the rest who are interested and the answer.

It's more what you might call a play or words...

Last fence to fall remember is the curious perjury charge...

or = on.

Well, "agenda" is just "gender", I presume.

Did she accidentally write "female" on the marriage certificate?

Correct have a DGI +1

No.

I'm surprised that they didn't charge her for impersonating a colonel - they probably couldn't get her for impersonating a man (it was common I believe) but "a colonel!" - what was the woman thinking of?



I am waiting to find out her name so that I can find more information - a fascinating story.

Among the Vikings, cross-dressing by either sex was grounds for divorce. There's a lovely legend involving a woman who tricks her husband into wearing one of her tunics, which had short sleeves and a low neckline, something Viking men weren't allowed. He put it on, so she was able to divorce him.

Then she goes on to accusing the wife of the man she wants to marry of wearing breeches, so *he* then divorces *his* wife. But the scorned woman gets her revenge by riding (dressed as a man) to his new house and slashing his nipples with a sword while he's lying in bed . His friend offers to go after her, but he just says it was to be expected, or something like that!

Maybe - and I'm speculating - because she wasn't a man she couldn't de facto impersonate a colonel. but It's a mystery.

but I agree - a fascinating story - I shall like our mysterious cross-dresser be revealing all, just as soon as someone solves the perjury charge.

Those Vikings! Kind of makes you look at Vicky the Viking in a whole new light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicky_the_Viking

Oh, I'm sure Bully Herbig's new film will manage to do that

Right I'm off into the garden.

Explanation is all typed up, I'm just waiting for that last final insight.

Swearing the oath in court under a false name/gender?