There’s always the 21st-century feminist character inserted into historical fiction, who’s clearly not been socialized in the time she’s supposed to live.

The typical: ‘Oh Victoria Fanny Jane Eliza Cecily dear, why must we wear these ghastly, oppressive, things?’

In 19th-century literature, a slight form of this character often exists—like Jane Eyre, Helen Graham, Elizabeth Bennet or Jo March. But we watched these women navigate their progressive ideas using the language and ideals of her time, and it was so much more fascinating.

Many women challenged Victorian ideals, but 19th century feminism simply isn’t 21st century feminism.

For women of the time, their reality was normal. A woman might find corsets uncomfortable, but she’s more likely to think, “I want a more comfortable corset” than “corsets are a tool of the patriarchy and all women should be free of them”.

I don’t see the point of sanitising or erasing history. Why can’t we view how society progressed, and how progression itself progressed? That’s the beauty of society: it evolves.

If you’re going to attempt to create authentic Victorian or Medieval characters—write them accurately. I’m tired of watching period dramas centred around a 2010s-esque, third-wave feminist worldview. These movies are modern women in crinolines, rather than genuine period dramas.

These horribly frustrating characters only really exist to assure modern audiences that there’s a voice of reason.