Lesbians in Germany 1890s-1920s edited by Lillian Faderman and Brigette Eriksson begins with a solid introduction that walks us through the condition of culture and literature for lesbians in Germany (and nearby places, such as Austria). Then we get excerpts from novels and nonfiction from the time that illustrate much of what is said in the intro. Of course some of these works would not have been accessible to the English-speaking world prior to this because of the language barrier, but more pressing is the supression of queer voices in Germany under Hitler's rule. Berlin had an incredible gay scene and even advanced medical practices and wrinting before gays became one of the early groups targeted by the regime. So, this book aims to bring into light some of lesbian culture at the turn of the century, before WWII.

Each excerpt included looks at a different experience or viewpoint common in the "lesbian" Germanaic world at the time. I put lesbian in quotes here because the understanding of lesbianism in 1890 vs that of 1980 (when this was first published) vs that of 2025 are all quite different. For many at the time, "lesbian" was more about specific acts than an identity as we see now (though differences in how people understood this are evident in this, as one of the writings makes a distinction between bisexual and lesbianism that many in here did not). And a word that was used quite a lot was "Uranian", which may have originally have been used to refer to gay men, but quite a few people used it in these works to refer to gay women as well. Additionally, several people in this anthology saw themselves as third sex or primarily masculine, and there was even someone who emphanized their intellectual and spiritual connection with women while denying any physical intimacy. Lots of words could be used to describe the people in here. Might some of them consider themselves trans, nonbinary, or asexual had the language been available? Maybe, maybe not. One of the fascinating parts about queer history is this mix. We cannot properly detangle one part of the community from another, especially when looking back when our understanding of self was so different. 

Another big thing that I pulled from this collection was just how similar some of the conversations they were having are to what would be talked about 50 or 100 years later. One of the big points of discussion was whether or not homosexuality is biologically innate (our "born this way" discourse, their discussion on Richard von Kraft-Ebbing) and the implications for policy -- a conversation that continues to be recreated. There is also a facet of what would decades later be refered to as policial lesbianism ("New Woman" then). There was also so much discussion of marriage that I could see playing out so similarly to what was said in the US even in the 80s. While there certainly was a contingency of people with internalized homophobia or ourity culture of the time, there was an insistence of pride and authentcity from others. Certainly there are stark differences in how we understand gender vs sexuality as well as some of the scientific conversation, specifics about marriage, not to mention the difference in what is a mature age. But much of these discussions were still remarkably familiar -- and opinions within the community were not (and continue to not be) a monolith