I was pretty intrigued to learn that Assassin's Creed (Syndicate) had a trans character, so I googled him to scope some of the reactions. They seemed to fall into one of two camps: "having a trans character in 19th century London is unrealistic wtf" or "sure it's unrealistic but it's inclusive so who cares it's not a big deal". Plus the occasional "okay, maybe trans people existed but that no one misgendered him is weird".

As someone who's done some reading about trans men in this time period, I thought I'd weigh in. First thing I'll say is I get it because I was also pretty surprised by what I learned.

Albert Cashier, born in 1843, was a trans man who served in the US civil war. Never medically transitioned, obviously. He was stealth (lived as a man, but not openly trans) among his comrades and also to his employer, later in his life. He got discovered in old age after going to the hospital, where he was then forced to wear women's clothes. His army mates backed him and protested this. He was buried in 1915 in uniform.

Eugene Falleni, born in 1875, was an Italian trans man who (again) obviously never medically transitioned. After leaving his husband in 1895 he lived as a man, taking up odd buliding jobs. He was stealth, including to his wife, until 1920 when he got convicted of murdering her. (It was after he was arrested and examined, that he was discovered). He obviously wasn't a good guy. Not trying to glorify him. Just saying he existed and was stealth i.e. wholly accepted as a man, before being found out.

You've also got people like Amelio Robles Avlia, born in 1889, who was openly trans but accepted as a man, potentially cos he'd point a gun at anyone who called him a woman. Served in the Mexican revolution and was accepted as male by the Mexican government. Harry Allen) who was called she/her by newspapers but backed by his family and hid his trans status from his lovers (not condoning this. Just reporting the facts). James Barry), born in 1789, who socially transitioned and kept his sex / trans status secret throughout his life.

I think these cases highlight two points: 1) people could transition in secret even before medical care was a thing, and 2) people sometimes accepted trans people as their genders. Even in this time period.

It might seem strange, but it's worth remembering gender was regarded differently then. It was so tied up with how you dressed, spoke, acted, and men/women had such different roles and rights, that the idea a woman could act like a man was incomprehensible to many.

Yes, this created a hostile and regressive environment for women (and trans men too), but it may have meant a couple of things: 1) when someone saw you speaking like a man, dressing like a man, acting like a man and doing manly things, they were less likely to question it even if you lacked male sex characteristics. And 2) when confronted with 'women' who did all of these things, it was so outside their perception of reality that they only could reconcile it with a 'male soul in female body' narrative. That idea may have actually been less ridiculous to them than the idea that men and women are equals.

Anyway, sorry for the length. Just wanted to get into the necessary nuances. I hope it's clear that nothing I've said here implies being trans is 'sexist' or 'regressive', just because I'm speculating about how victorians may have handled it. Bottom line is people like Ned Wynert who lived their lives as men did actually exist during this time period, and I think the game is richer (and more accurate) for having them in it. If you'd like to learn more about trans men of history, then I recommend the book True Sex.