• Marriage and motherhood were the primary career options for women. Upper-class women had servants to help with this labor, while the lower-class women performed most of the labor themselves. (McDonald 254)
• ​Women and men’s behaviors and presentations of self were thought to align with the four elements (Air, Fire, Earth, and Water) and the  four humours (sanguine-blood, phlegmatic-phlegm, choleric-choler, and melancholic-black bile). Masculinity was associated with warmer elements and women were believed to be less capable of keeping the elements and humours in “balance.” (McDonald 254)
• Women were placed in a subordinate position to men, which was justified physiologically and psychologically based on the humours and elements, morally based on the hierarchy of the church (Christ is the head of the church, as a man is the head of the household, Adam is closer to God because created first, and Eve is second and thus further from God), and biologically (what Foucault might call Biopower) based on the lack of contraception and ability to control one’s body.  (McDonald 255)
• This subordination was resisted! Mary Frith (Moll Cutpurse) “wore men’s clothes, carried a sword, and smoked a pipe. She attracted enough attention to become the subject of a play by Thomas Middleton and Thomas Dekker known as The Roaring Girl” (McDonald 256). Other women also moved through London in Men’s clothing, but attempts were made to curb the behavior through sartorial laws. (McDonald 256)
• Women became involved in the business of the day despite being prohibited from owning property: Widows took over their husband's businesses, Helped run the books, and even established businesses in laundry, cloth, and food services. (McDonald 256)
• Less than 50% of men could read and write. Men were educated at higher rates than women, but literacy was exploding during the period and there are many examples of educated women in the upper-classes: Lady Mary Wroth wrote poetry, Elizabeth Cary wrote a play (The Tragedy of Mariam), Lady Anne Southwell wrote a form literary criticism, and Isabella Whitmey (a member of upper-middle class, the gentry) was the first women to write and publish original verse in 1567. Aemilia Lanyer (1569-45) is likely the most famous of women authors of the period and interacted with not only Queen Elizabeth, but it is speculated that she was perhaps Shakespeare’s “Dark Lady” of the sonnets.  (McDonald 256-57). 
• Educated women were attacked for the anxiety and disruption they might represent in the social order. Indeed “eloquence” in women came to be equated with “promiscuity.” There are countless examples in Shakespeare of women being attacked for their witty tongues and intelligence, including Kate, Beatrice, and Volumnia. (McDonald 258-59)
• The origins of the nuclear family, it can be argued, developed in 16th and 17th century England, with the father installed at the head of each family unit (McDonald 259). 
• While there was a clear acceptance of men as the head of household, there was also an accepted wisdom based in the Protestant religion: the principle of companionate marriage (the notion that women and men bring equal strengths, talents, wealth, etc. into a marriage). This contestation over women being equal or subordinate was new and well trod in the early modern period. (McDonald 261-63)
• Primogeniture was the prevailing law of the land. Put simply, it means the eldest son inherits his father’s property and authority. Some results of the practice of primogeniture: 
  • Daughters had to be provided a dowry to ensure a good marriage. 
  • Younger sons had to be provided for with either a living of some sort, education to become clergy, etc. 
  • Because of the switch to Protestantism, daughters could no longer be disposed of cheaply in convents. 
  • Conflict was created between fathers and sons and brothers. 
  • Inheritance via primogeniture was a problem for the Monarchy as Queen Elizabeth had no heir. (McDonald 263-64)
• Many scholars argue that love and personal choice that dictate our current understanding of marriage were not necessarily at play in the early modern period. Rather, marriage, for the landed class, is a collective choice of a family not an individual choice for love. (McDonald 265-66). 
• Marriage, especially for the upper-class, was an economic, political, social contract that included a dowry from the bride’s family, a dower from the groom’s family (a sum the bride would inherit if her husband died), and even a jointure that “protected the bride in case her husband’s property was seized.” All these financial arrangements were about stability for the couple as well as the family’s social, economic, and political stability. Middle and lower class families attempted to mirror these arrangements as best they could. (Mcdonald 265-67)
• Love still mattered and many families took into consideration the emotions of the young couple. (McDonald 267)
• Whether love or money dominated the considerations of marriage was dependent on the amount of money, land, and property involved. If high, love mattered less. If low, love mattered more. (McDonald 267-68)
• The upper-classes often married in their teens while the majority of people in England married in their mid-to-late twenties. (McDonald 268). 
• Wet nurses (as in Romeo and Juliet) were the rule for the upper-class in England, however, many times families would place their child in the home of the wet nurse, visiting on occasion until the child was weaned (McDonald 269). 
• There was a consistent practice of placing children in other homes and locations away from the family, especially for the upper-class. This includes apprenticeships, dame schools, being placed as a companion in another aristocrat's home (perhaps like Maria in Twelfth Night), etc. (McDonald 270). 
• Privacy was virtually non-existent as interior spaces were small and at a premium. It was very common for large families to share a home with only a couple of rooms. (McDonald 270-71)
• Premarital sex was common due to the relatively late age of most marriages and the lack of ability to marry without dowry or financial resources. (McDonald 271)
• There were several forms of “irregular” marriages: a couple who promised to marry before a witness and then consummated the relationship (marriage contract per verba de futuro) and couples that stated before witnesses “I hereby take you as husband/wife” were considered married. These various arrangements are sometimes called spousals, handfasts, and precontracts. This is why Olivia claims Sebastian as a “husband,” She and Sebastian verbally agreed to marry in front of a priest, before any religious ceremony has taken place.  (McDonald 272)
• From 1550-1600 one in five brides were pregnant at the altar. (McDonald 272)    
• Homosexuality in the time period did not exist in the same social structures that we have today. Of course, folks were having sex with members of their own sex, but the social concept was not the same. Sex with a member of the same sex was illegal and punishable with death (only enforced in extreme circumstances). Homosocial behavior for lesbian and gay men was commonplace and a standard way of expressing these identities. Specifically, military or naval service was connected to this tradition. Antonio and Sebastian in Twelfth Night serve as an excellent example.  (McDonald 272-73)
• The social order and classes began to become more permeable during the early modern period. Shakespeare being an example of social mobility, many young men were able to move up socially through apprenticeship, business, and other means. Women gained economic if not social mobility through advantageous marriage. (McDonald 276)

Sources and Additional Readings

Charles, Casey. "Gender Trouble in 'Twelfth Night.'" Theatre Journal, May 1997 (49.2): 121-141

McDonald, Russ. "Chapter 8: Men and Women: Gender, Family, and Society." The Bedford Companion to Shakespeare: An Introduction with Documents, 2nd edition (Bedford, St. Martin's, 2001) 253--277. 

Smith, Bruce R. "Clothing and Disguise: Gender" in Twelfth Night: Texts and Contexts. Bedford/St. Martin's, Boston MA, 2001. Pg 262-178.