Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ApiMain::$mCommit is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/api/ApiMain.php on line 195
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::current() should either be compatible with Iterator::current(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 571
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::next() should either be compatible with Iterator::next(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 585
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::key() should either be compatible with Iterator::key(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 578
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::valid() should either be compatible with Iterator::valid(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 603
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::rewind() should either be compatible with Iterator::rewind(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 553
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property LoadBalancer::$mWriteIndex is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/LoadBalancer.php on line 59
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::current() should either be compatible with Iterator::current(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 186
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::next() should either be compatible with Iterator::next(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 203
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::key() should either be compatible with Iterator::key(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 196
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::valid() should either be compatible with Iterator::valid(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 212
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::rewind() should either be compatible with Iterator::rewind(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 175
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property MessageCache::$mMemc is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/cache/MessageCache.php on line 135
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property LoadBalancer::$mWriteIndex is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/LoadBalancer.php on line 59
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Parser::$mPreprocessorClass is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/parser/Parser.php on line 234
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property RequestContext::$recursion is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/context/RequestContext.php on line 292
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property PPDStack::$accum is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/parser/Preprocessor_DOM.php on line 755
Warning: preg_match(): Compilation failed: subpattern name must start with a non-digit at offset 8 in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/MagicWord.php on line 907
Deprecated: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Pager.php on line 908
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$contribs is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 627
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$tagFilter is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 629
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$nsInvert is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 630
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$associated is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 631
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$deletedOnly is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 633
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$topOnly is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 634
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContentHandler::$mModelName is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/ContentHandler.php on line 402
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38 https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=199.111.74.68McClurken Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-09-18T23:17:12ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.22.0https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_15_Questions/CommentsWeek 15 Questions/Comments2007-12-06T04:27:21Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>One of the things that stood out to me during these readings was in "The Office Clerk" when the office manager was listing all of the reasons women were superior towards men for these positions. Among these reasons were that they almost always present for the work day and not making up silly excuses for an absence and the precision that they conducted their work in. I found it surprising that this man had such high praise for women. Could he have been saying this to the interviewer (Clara Lanza) to appease the female crowd who would be reading her article? Or did he really feel this way towards his female workers? Did the fact that companies could get away with paying women less than men factor into this appreciation for women clerks? - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I found the article "Objections to Domestic Service" in that Lucy Salmon polled servants and their employers and from that managed to come up with a list of disadvantages. These disadvantages were an effort to dissuade young, American born women from entering this type of service. Such "industrial disadvantages" include "lack of all opportunity for promotion," "lack of organization in the service," "irregularity in working hours," "competition with the foreign born and the negro element," and "the interference with work often by those less skilled than the workers themselves." I can understand Salmon's reasoning for wanting to keep women from working as domestic servants. However, I'm slightly confused when she comments on how with the professions of seamstresses, clerks, trained nurses, and teachers can lead to promotions in the working environment. So in that sense, Salmon is urging women to pursue jobs other than domestic servitude. But is she at all encouraging them to return to the home? -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I think, in response to Vanessa's question, that Lucy Salmon felt that she was encouraging women to return to the home. Where else would they be if not in the work place? They would be at home with their housework and their families. By expressing the disadvantages of the working world she was able to show women what they would be missing from their home if they joined the workforce, without listing all the things to be done at home and the need to be at home. For some that would probably encourage them to work. Also I think that Lucy Salmon was well aware that the majority of women in the workforce were working because they had to to support their families and they would return to the home if it was possible. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I liked the interview contained in Lucy Maynard Salmon’s piece called "Objections to Domestic Service". I thought it was interesting that the girl answering the question “Why do girls dislike domestic service?” says that factory workers are smarter, make better wives, and have cleaner homes while domestic workers that get married become careless and lazy with their housework even though that was their job before marriage and they should probably know how to do it well. I don’t think she really has any proof of this, it’s more about reassuring herself and everyone else that she is in fact a good candidate for marriage. She probably saw marriage as a way out of factory work.-- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
In Julia Ward Howe's writing under "The Joys of Activism," whether this is intended as propaganda or not, it certainly could be and nicely done. I love how she describes the moment she realized that women could and should do better than where they were. "During the first two thirds of my life I looked to the masculine ideal of character as the only true one... In an unexpected hour a new light came to me... The new domain now made clear to me was that of true womanhood - woman no longer in her ancillary relation to her opposite, man, but in her direct relation to the divine plan and purpose, as a free agent, fully sharing with man every human right and every human responsibility." She's certainly encouraging any that read this that she 'saw the light' you could say and the reader can have these realizations too. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I found "Working Women Debate Woman Suffrage" very interesting, especially the entries from "Americus". The person writing these seemed to be extremely bitter towards men. She states that "we won't stay at home any more and cook and wash dishes either; we've done it long enough; let 'him' do it a little while."(Woloch 366) It just seems like she's extremely bitter that women do so much work with raising children and keeping the house clean, but men appear to go out have a good time with their friends and thats it. -Elizabeth frank<br />
<br />
When reading "We Are All Bound up Together," I found it telling when Frances Ellen Harper related her story of life after losing her husband. She was left with four children and no money. Someone even took her to court over a bed. She then discusses how if she had been a man, she would have been remarried by now and would not be facing economic hardship. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Isabel Eaton really exemplifies the challenge black men and women faced in finding jobs. There was no guarentee that they would get a job and often times they settled for domestic service. Even if they were educated, "white help" was always preferred. Many people gave up trying to find work outside of the domestic service branch because of this ideology. Black men and women were also refused domestic jobs because of the color of their skin in many cases. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Going along with the comment above me, I thought Isabel Eaton's survey of black servant workers was really interesting. The fact that she learned black men and women stuck with domestic servitude regardless of how terrible the job was because they feared rejection is just heartbreaking. I also was intrigued by how one of the reasons they gave to themselves about rejection for domestic servitude was because "if the mistresses has bad luck with one colored girl they won't never have another." It's just a terrible understanding and way of living and it really shows how, even though they were emancipated and technically free, it was like they were still slaves, except this time they were being paid a very minimal amount of money. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found Leonora Barry's piece on the Knights of Labor to be very interesting. I thought that it showed many of the characteristics mentioned by some of the other readings, the fact that she was a widow with three children for example. She seemed however, to be a very strong woman, one who embrassed her work and her position as master workman. What I found really interesting was that she and others went around educating the children in the factories and such and pushing for the children who are working to be educated in an effort to erase the social and economic situation that causes the circumstances that drive mothers into the workplace. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I also thought the "Office Clerk" by Clara Lanza was an interesting document. I thought it was particularly intersting how it said that women never complained about things like "...the temperature of the building [being] too hot or too cold or that the light is not properly adjusted." Women might not have complained about things like the temperature or light, because they were happy to be able to have a job period that was outside of the home. Men however, could complain about those things and easily get a new job if their current job didn't suit them. ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
One trait that I found interesting in “The Office Clerk” was the insistence that office work did not make women unfit for marriage. In fact, the author claims that employment offers these young women the opportunities to meet and wed eligible bachelors, and these working girls often make particularly fine wives. I particularly enjoyed the claim that “men have outgrown their admiration for feminine helplessness and have come to look upon independence as something worth having.” I have to wonder how much of that was actually true and how much was simply the hope of the female author. Unfortunately, we still have women today who fake ignorance or weakness to attract men; how common would it have been in the 19th century? --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I also noticed the focus on marriage in "The Office Clerk." In my opinion, the author insisted on this point because she wanted to emphasize that a woman could work as an office clerk and still be a part of the domestic sphere. It showed that, as single woman, it was okay for them to work. It even helped them find a good husband to support them. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
<br />
What really struck me about "A Sweatshop Girl's Story" was how Sadie Frowne felt about injuries sustained on the job in factories. From the way she was talking, she made it seem like these injuries were no big deal. If you hurt your finger, you just wrap it with a bit of cotton, if the injury is worse than that, you may have to have that finger amputated, but, you just accept it and go on with your life. Maybe injuries like that were so common in those factories, that it truely was no big deal. ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
The excerpt I enjoyed the most was Sadie Frowne's tale, A Sweatshop Girl's Story. Quite a few things stuck out to me. First, I always assumed that women hated working in the factories because all you hear is how back breaking and boring the work is but she seems to take it in stride. She even talks about how nice it was when the union fought and won for them to "only work nine and half hours." She understood that if she worked hard sooner or later she would fulfill her own American Dream (did that concept exist then?). I was wondering when she says, on page 309 that "Harry has seen me home every night for a long time and makes love to me," if she meant pre-marital sex because she says it so non-chalantly. I agree with K. Stinson that I found it very strange how she described getting hurt in the work place as no big deal. Basically the vibe I got from her account was that while she was proud of her independence, her whole life was based around trying to become the accepted middle class girl. She talks about reading and educating herself, saving money, how ignorant people are low, and how a girl needs to have nice clothes in order to get into high society. -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
In response to Emily's comment on "A Sweatshop Girl's Story," I've read works where "making love" simply referred to wooing or courtship, not necessarily pre-marital sex, so I think it's quite possible that Frowne is using this meaning here. Additionally, I liked this piece for its depiction of a complete life which included work, school, a boyfriend, and entertainment such as dancing and theater. The lives of these women were difficult, but they were not all drudgery. Frowne remarks, "at the end of the day one feels so weak that there is a great temptation to lie right down and sleep. But you must go out and get air, and have some pleasure." I wonder if this attitude was common among the working women, or if this is an unusual example of girlish optimism and enthusiasm for life. --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I found the letter written by Americus from "Working Women Debate Suffrage" quite intriguing. She mocked equality by chosing to point out the most grotesque male qualities and declaring that now women could partake in them since they were equal. For instance, spitting tobacco, talking in slang, and snoring were all characteristics she declared women could now mimic. Reading this in the sarcastic manner for which it was intended, it can serve as an example of how some working class women saw suffrage as a threat to the familiar. Although many working class women supported equal wages, it did not necessarily mean they wanted the right to vote. In the introduction, Woloch points out that many working class women identified themselves more with their class than their gender, and some of these women felt suffrage only threatened class unity.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I also found the Americus letter interesting, since I've had a hard time understanding arguments (beyond the ones from women who preferred to stay at home and were happy with the lives they led) against female-male equality. I've heard arguments about the potential problems with true equality (nursing mothers being drafted, etc)made in a modern sense, but this was one of the first real accounts I'd read of the problems with true equality and suffrage. --A. Meyer<br />
<br />
In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's "The Ills of the Home", she makes a profound observation when she says, "The permanent error of the housewife lies in the assumption that her love for her family makes her service satisfactorily." A mother washes the clothes, fixes the meals, and cleans the house because she loves her family, but that's not saying if she didn't do those things she would love them less. Gilman makes a great point here when she suggests that one of the reasons mothers have so much difficulty entering the workforce is because they are met with such guilt from society; a society which does not comprehend that mothers may interpret these chores as duties and may need to look elsewhere for personal fulfillment.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
Reading "We Are All Bound up Together" reminded me of the very first readings we did in this class, which stated that one could not simply study "women's history," because it was a complex topic that had a lot different aspects. This text shows that much, by pointing out that indeed the position of black women was much different than the position of white women. Harper points out an example using the street cars. She notes that white women speak of "rights," but that she is speaking of the wrongs done to her race and gender -that everybody is against her. The article "An Anti-Speaks Out" had an interesting tidbit, saying: "While more practical and sensible women are tyring to put their kitchens...in order.." This makes me wonder what the ration of married to unmarried women are in the suffragist movement compared to the anti-suffragist movement. If I had to guess, it would be that anti-suffragists are more often in a marriage. <br />
-Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
I liked the piece "Political Lessons" by Stanton and Anthony. Both of these women were great and persuasive writers. I know we had talked about how the NWSA did not accept male members, but I was surprised that they explicitly said that men could not join. This piece really shows that that the NWSA was much more militant and aggressive than the AWSA. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
I was surprised when Barry wrote about child labor in "A Labor Organizer." She mentions that Pennsylvania had 125,00 children under the age of 15 working in workshops, factories and mines. I was surprised their were so many, and what made PA so bad in this respect? I'm glad the Knights of Labor worked to elevate women and put them in the classroom to be educated. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
In "A Sweatshops Girl's Story" I was surprised about how calm she was about all the injuries that took place. She mentions needles going through the nail or finger and sometimes splintering the bone yet doesn't seem to upset by it. Was she just used to it? Did she assume she couldn't do better? Or was it really not all that bad? --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_15_Questions/CommentsWeek 15 Questions/Comments2007-12-06T04:21:13Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>One of the things that stood out to me during these readings was in "The Office Clerk" when the office manager was listing all of the reasons women were superior towards men for these positions. Among these reasons were that they almost always present for the work day and not making up silly excuses for an absence and the precision that they conducted their work in. I found it surprising that this man had such high praise for women. Could he have been saying this to the interviewer (Clara Lanza) to appease the female crowd who would be reading her article? Or did he really feel this way towards his female workers? Did the fact that companies could get away with paying women less than men factor into this appreciation for women clerks? - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I found the article "Objections to Domestic Service" in that Lucy Salmon polled servants and their employers and from that managed to come up with a list of disadvantages. These disadvantages were an effort to dissuade young, American born women from entering this type of service. Such "industrial disadvantages" include "lack of all opportunity for promotion," "lack of organization in the service," "irregularity in working hours," "competition with the foreign born and the negro element," and "the interference with work often by those less skilled than the workers themselves." I can understand Salmon's reasoning for wanting to keep women from working as domestic servants. However, I'm slightly confused when she comments on how with the professions of seamstresses, clerks, trained nurses, and teachers can lead to promotions in the working environment. So in that sense, Salmon is urging women to pursue jobs other than domestic servitude. But is she at all encouraging them to return to the home? -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I think, in response to Vanessa's question, that Lucy Salmon felt that she was encouraging women to return to the home. Where else would they be if not in the work place? They would be at home with their housework and their families. By expressing the disadvantages of the working world she was able to show women what they would be missing from their home if they joined the workforce, without listing all the things to be done at home and the need to be at home. For some that would probably encourage them to work. Also I think that Lucy Salmon was well aware that the majority of women in the workforce were working because they had to to support their families and they would return to the home if it was possible. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I liked the interview contained in Lucy Maynard Salmon’s piece called "Objections to Domestic Service". I thought it was interesting that the girl answering the question “Why do girls dislike domestic service?” says that factory workers are smarter, make better wives, and have cleaner homes while domestic workers that get married become careless and lazy with their housework even though that was their job before marriage and they should probably know how to do it well. I don’t think she really has any proof of this, it’s more about reassuring herself and everyone else that she is in fact a good candidate for marriage. She probably saw marriage as a way out of factory work.-- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
In Julia Ward Howe's writing under "The Joys of Activism," whether this is intended as propaganda or not, it certainly could be and nicely done. I love how she describes the moment she realized that women could and should do better than where they were. "During the first two thirds of my life I looked to the masculine ideal of character as the only true one... In an unexpected hour a new light came to me... The new domain now made clear to me was that of true womanhood - woman no longer in her ancillary relation to her opposite, man, but in her direct relation to the divine plan and purpose, as a free agent, fully sharing with man every human right and every human responsibility." She's certainly encouraging any that read this that she 'saw the light' you could say and the reader can have these realizations too. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I found "Working Women Debate Woman Suffrage" very interesting, especially the entries from "Americus". The person writing these seemed to be extremely bitter towards men. She states that "we won't stay at home any more and cook and wash dishes either; we've done it long enough; let 'him' do it a little while."(Woloch 366) It just seems like she's extremely bitter that women do so much work with raising children and keeping the house clean, but men appear to go out have a good time with their friends and thats it. -Elizabeth frank<br />
<br />
When reading "We Are All Bound up Together," I found it telling when Frances Ellen Harper related her story of life after losing her husband. She was left with four children and no money. Someone even took her to court over a bed. She then discusses how if she had been a man, she would have been remarried by now and would not be facing economic hardship. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Isabel Eaton really exemplifies the challenge black men and women faced in finding jobs. There was no guarentee that they would get a job and often times they settled for domestic service. Even if they were educated, "white help" was always preferred. Many people gave up trying to find work outside of the domestic service branch because of this ideology. Black men and women were also refused domestic jobs because of the color of their skin in many cases. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Going along with the comment above me, I thought Isabel Eaton's survey of black servant workers was really interesting. The fact that she learned black men and women stuck with domestic servitude regardless of how terrible the job was because they feared rejection is just heartbreaking. I also was intrigued by how one of the reasons they gave to themselves about rejection for domestic servitude was because "if the mistresses has bad luck with one colored girl they won't never have another." It's just a terrible understanding and way of living and it really shows how, even though they were emancipated and technically free, it was like they were still slaves, except this time they were being paid a very minimal amount of money. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found Leonora Barry's piece on the Knights of Labor to be very interesting. I thought that it showed many of the characteristics mentioned by some of the other readings, the fact that she was a widow with three children for example. She seemed however, to be a very strong woman, one who embrassed her work and her position as master workman. What I found really interesting was that she and others went around educating the children in the factories and such and pushing for the children who are working to be educated in an effort to erase the social and economic situation that causes the circumstances that drive mothers into the workplace. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I also thought the "Office Clerk" by Clara Lanza was an interesting document. I thought it was particularly intersting how it said that women never complained about things like "...the temperature of the building [being] too hot or too cold or that the light is not properly adjusted." Women might not have complained about things like the temperature or light, because they were happy to be able to have a job period that was outside of the home. Men however, could complain about those things and easily get a new job if their current job didn't suit them. ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
One trait that I found interesting in “The Office Clerk” was the insistence that office work did not make women unfit for marriage. In fact, the author claims that employment offers these young women the opportunities to meet and wed eligible bachelors, and these working girls often make particularly fine wives. I particularly enjoyed the claim that “men have outgrown their admiration for feminine helplessness and have come to look upon independence as something worth having.” I have to wonder how much of that was actually true and how much was simply the hope of the female author. Unfortunately, we still have women today who fake ignorance or weakness to attract men; how common would it have been in the 19th century? --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I also noticed the focus on marriage in "The Office Clerk." In my opinion, the author insisted on this point because she wanted to emphasize that a woman could work as an office clerk and still be a part of the domestic sphere. It showed that, as single woman, it was okay for them to work. It even helped them find a good husband to support them. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
<br />
What really struck me about "A Sweatshop Girl's Story" was how Sadie Frowne felt about injuries sustained on the job in factories. From the way she was talking, she made it seem like these injuries were no big deal. If you hurt your finger, you just wrap it with a bit of cotton, if the injury is worse than that, you may have to have that finger amputated, but, you just accept it and go on with your life. Maybe injuries like that were so common in those factories, that it truely was no big deal. ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
The excerpt I enjoyed the most was Sadie Frowne's tale, A Sweatshop Girl's Story. Quite a few things stuck out to me. First, I always assumed that women hated working in the factories because all you hear is how back breaking and boring the work is but she seems to take it in stride. She even talks about how nice it was when the union fought and won for them to "only work nine and half hours." She understood that if she worked hard sooner or later she would fulfill her own American Dream (did that concept exist then?). I was wondering when she says, on page 309 that "Harry has seen me home every night for a long time and makes love to me," if she meant pre-marital sex because she says it so non-chalantly. I agree with K. Stinson that I found it very strange how she described getting hurt in the work place as no big deal. Basically the vibe I got from her account was that while she was proud of her independence, her whole life was based around trying to become the accepted middle class girl. She talks about reading and educating herself, saving money, how ignorant people are low, and how a girl needs to have nice clothes in order to get into high society. -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
In response to Emily's comment on "A Sweatshop Girl's Story," I've read works where "making love" simply referred to wooing or courtship, not necessarily pre-marital sex, so I think it's quite possible that Frowne is using this meaning here. Additionally, I liked this piece for its depiction of a complete life which included work, school, a boyfriend, and entertainment such as dancing and theater. The lives of these women were difficult, but they were not all drudgery. Frowne remarks, "at the end of the day one feels so weak that there is a great temptation to lie right down and sleep. But you must go out and get air, and have some pleasure." I wonder if this attitude was common among the working women, or if this is an unusual example of girlish optimism and enthusiasm for life. --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I found the letter written by Americus from "Working Women Debate Suffrage" quite intriguing. She mocked equality by chosing to point out the most grotesque male qualities and declaring that now women could partake in them since they were equal. For instance, spitting tobacco, talking in slang, and snoring were all characteristics she declared women could now mimic. Reading this in the sarcastic manner for which it was intended, it can serve as an example of how some working class women saw suffrage as a threat to the familiar. Although many working class women supported equal wages, it did not necessarily mean they wanted the right to vote. In the introduction, Woloch points out that many working class women identified themselves more with their class than their gender, and some of these women felt suffrage only threatened class unity.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's "The Ills of the Home", she makes a profound observation when she says, "The permanent error of the housewife lies in the assumption that her love for her family makes her service satisfactorily." A mother washes the clothes, fixes the meals, and cleans the house because she loves her family, but that's not saying if she didn't do those things she would love them less. Gilman makes a great point here when she suggests that one of the reasons mothers have so much difficulty entering the workforce is because they are met with such guilt from society; a society which does not comprehend that mothers may interpret these chores as duties and may need to look elsewhere for personal fulfillment.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
Reading "We Are All Bound up Together" reminded me of the very first readings we did in this class, which stated that one could not simply study "women's history," because it was a complex topic that had a lot different aspects. This text shows that much, by pointing out that indeed the position of black women was much different than the position of white women. Harper points out an example using the street cars. She notes that white women speak of "rights," but that she is speaking of the wrongs done to her race and gender -that everybody is against her. The article "An Anti-Speaks Out" had an interesting tidbit, saying: "While more practical and sensible women are tyring to put their kitchens...in order.." This makes me wonder what the ration of married to unmarried women are in the suffragist movement compared to the anti-suffragist movement. If I had to guess, it would be that anti-suffragists are more often in a marriage. <br />
-Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
I liked the piece "Political Lessons" by Stanton and Anthony. Both of these women were great and persuasive writers. I know we had talked about how the NWSA did not accept male members, but I was surprised that they explicitly said that men could not join. This piece really shows that that the NWSA was much more militant and aggressive than the AWSA. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
I was surprised when Barry wrote about child labor in "A Labor Organizer." She mentions that Pennsylvania had 125,00 children under the age of 15 working in workshops, factories and mines. I was surprised their were so many, and what made PA so bad in this respect? I'm glad the Knights of Labor worked to elevate women and put them in the classroom to be educated. --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_15_Questions/CommentsWeek 15 Questions/Comments2007-12-06T04:01:47Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>One of the things that stood out to me during these readings was in "The Office Clerk" when the office manager was listing all of the reasons women were superior towards men for these positions. Among these reasons were that they almost always present for the work day and not making up silly excuses for an absence and the precision that they conducted their work in. I found it surprising that this man had such high praise for women. Could he have been saying this to the interviewer (Clara Lanza) to appease the female crowd who would be reading her article? Or did he really feel this way towards his female workers? Did the fact that companies could get away with paying women less than men factor into this appreciation for women clerks? - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I found the article "Objections to Domestic Service" in that Lucy Salmon polled servants and their employers and from that managed to come up with a list of disadvantages. These disadvantages were an effort to dissuade young, American born women from entering this type of service. Such "industrial disadvantages" include "lack of all opportunity for promotion," "lack of organization in the service," "irregularity in working hours," "competition with the foreign born and the negro element," and "the interference with work often by those less skilled than the workers themselves." I can understand Salmon's reasoning for wanting to keep women from working as domestic servants. However, I'm slightly confused when she comments on how with the professions of seamstresses, clerks, trained nurses, and teachers can lead to promotions in the working environment. So in that sense, Salmon is urging women to pursue jobs other than domestic servitude. But is she at all encouraging them to return to the home? -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I think, in response to Vanessa's question, that Lucy Salmon felt that she was encouraging women to return to the home. Where else would they be if not in the work place? They would be at home with their housework and their families. By expressing the disadvantages of the working world she was able to show women what they would be missing from their home if they joined the workforce, without listing all the things to be done at home and the need to be at home. For some that would probably encourage them to work. Also I think that Lucy Salmon was well aware that the majority of women in the workforce were working because they had to to support their families and they would return to the home if it was possible. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I liked the interview contained in Lucy Maynard Salmon’s piece called "Objections to Domestic Service". I thought it was interesting that the girl answering the question “Why do girls dislike domestic service?” says that factory workers are smarter, make better wives, and have cleaner homes while domestic workers that get married become careless and lazy with their housework even though that was their job before marriage and they should probably know how to do it well. I don’t think she really has any proof of this, it’s more about reassuring herself and everyone else that she is in fact a good candidate for marriage. She probably saw marriage as a way out of factory work.-- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
In Julia Ward Howe's writing under "The Joys of Activism," whether this is intended as propaganda or not, it certainly could be and nicely done. I love how she describes the moment she realized that women could and should do better than where they were. "During the first two thirds of my life I looked to the masculine ideal of character as the only true one... In an unexpected hour a new light came to me... The new domain now made clear to me was that of true womanhood - woman no longer in her ancillary relation to her opposite, man, but in her direct relation to the divine plan and purpose, as a free agent, fully sharing with man every human right and every human responsibility." She's certainly encouraging any that read this that she 'saw the light' you could say and the reader can have these realizations too. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I found "Working Women Debate Woman Suffrage" very interesting, especially the entries from "Americus". The person writing these seemed to be extremely bitter towards men. She states that "we won't stay at home any more and cook and wash dishes either; we've done it long enough; let 'him' do it a little while."(Woloch 366) It just seems like she's extremely bitter that women do so much work with raising children and keeping the house clean, but men appear to go out have a good time with their friends and thats it. -Elizabeth frank<br />
<br />
When reading "We Are All Bound up Together," I found it telling when Frances Ellen Harper related her story of life after losing her husband. She was left with four children and no money. Someone even took her to court over a bed. She then discusses how if she had been a man, she would have been remarried by now and would not be facing economic hardship. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Isabel Eaton really exemplifies the challenge black men and women faced in finding jobs. There was no guarentee that they would get a job and often times they settled for domestic service. Even if they were educated, "white help" was always preferred. Many people gave up trying to find work outside of the domestic service branch because of this ideology. Black men and women were also refused domestic jobs because of the color of their skin in many cases. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I found Leonora Barry's piece on the Knights of Labor to be very interesting. I thought that it showed many of the characteristics mentioned by some of the other readings, the fact that she was a widow with three children for example. She seemed however, to be a very strong woman, one who embrassed her work and her position as master workman. What I found really interesting was that she and others went around educating the children in the factories and such and pushing for the children who are working to be educated in an effort to erase the social and economic situation that causes the circumstances that drive mothers into the workplace. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I also thought the "Office Clerk" by Clara Lanza was an interesting document. I thought it was particularly intersting how it said that women never complained about things like "...the temperature of the building [being] too hot or too cold or that the light is not properly adjusted." Women might not have complained about things like the temperature or light, because they were happy to be able to have a job period that was outside of the home. Men however, could complain about those things and easily get a new job if their current job didn't suit them. ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
One trait that I found interesting in “The Office Clerk” was the insistence that office work did not make women unfit for marriage. In fact, the author claims that employment offers these young women the opportunities to meet and wed eligible bachelors, and these working girls often make particularly fine wives. I particularly enjoyed the claim that “men have outgrown their admiration for feminine helplessness and have come to look upon independence as something worth having.” I have to wonder how much of that was actually true and how much was simply the hope of the female author. Unfortunately, we still have women today who fake ignorance or weakness to attract men; how common would it have been in the 19th century? --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I also noticed the focus on marriage in "The Office Clerk." In my opinion, the author insisted on this point because she wanted to emphasize that a woman could work as an office clerk and still be a part of the domestic sphere. It showed that, as single woman, it was okay for them to work. It even helped them find a good husband to support them. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
<br />
What really struck me about "A Sweatshop Girl's Story" was how Sadie Frowne felt about injuries sustained on the job in factories. From the way she was talking, she made it seem like these injuries were no big deal. If you hurt your finger, you just wrap it with a bit of cotton, if the injury is worse than that, you may have to have that finger amputated, but, you just accept it and go on with your life. Maybe injuries like that were so common in those factories, that it truely was no big deal. ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
The excerpt I enjoyed the most was Sadie Frowne's tale, A Sweatshop Girl's Story. Quite a few things stuck out to me. First, I always assumed that women hated working in the factories because all you hear is how back breaking and boring the work is but she seems to take it in stride. She even talks about how nice it was when the union fought and won for them to "only work nine and half hours." She understood that if she worked hard sooner or later she would fulfill her own American Dream (did that concept exist then?). I was wondering when she says, on page 309 that "Harry has seen me home every night for a long time and makes love to me," if she meant pre-marital sex because she says it so non-chalantly. I agree with K. Stinson that I found it very strange how she described getting hurt in the work place as no big deal. Basically the vibe I got from her account was that while she was proud of her independence, her whole life was based around trying to become the accepted middle class girl. She talks about reading and educating herself, saving money, how ignorant people are low, and how a girl needs to have nice clothes in order to get into high society. -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
In response to Emily's comment on "A Sweatshop Girl's Story," I've read works where "making love" simply referred to wooing or courtship, not necessarily pre-marital sex, so I think it's quite possible that Frowne is using this meaning here. Additionally, I liked this piece for its depiction of a complete life which included work, school, a boyfriend, and entertainment such as dancing and theater. The lives of these women were difficult, but they were not all drudgery. Frowne remarks, "at the end of the day one feels so weak that there is a great temptation to lie right down and sleep. But you must go out and get air, and have some pleasure." I wonder if this attitude was common among the working women, or if this is an unusual example of girlish optimism and enthusiasm for life. --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I found the letter written by Americus from "Working Women Debate Suffrage" quite intriguing. She mocked equality by chosing to point out the most grotesque male qualities and declaring that now women could partake in them since they were equal. For instance, spitting tobacco, talking in slang, and snoring were all characteristics she declared women could now mimic. Reading this in the sarcastic manner for which it was intended, it can serve as an example of how some working class women saw suffrage as a threat to the familiar. Although many working class women supported equal wages, it did not necessarily mean they wanted the right to vote. In the introduction, Woloch points out that many working class women identified themselves more with their class than their gender, and some of these women felt suffrage only threatened class unity.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's "The Ills of the Home", she makes a profound observation when she says, "The permanent error of the housewife lies in the assumption that her love for her family makes her service satisfactorily." A mother washes the clothes, fixes the meals, and cleans the house because she loves her family, but that's not saying if she didn't do those things she would love them less. Gilman makes a great point here when she suggests that one of the reasons mothers have so much difficulty entering the workforce is because they are met with such guilt from society; a society which does not comprehend that mothers may interpret these chores as duties and may need to look elsewhere for personal fulfillment.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
Reading "We Are All Bound up Together" reminded me of the very first readings we did in this class, which stated that one could not simply study "women's history," because it was a complex topic that had a lot different aspects. This text shows that much, by pointing out that indeed the position of black women was much different than the position of white women. Harper points out an example using the street cars. She notes that white women speak of "rights," but that she is speaking of the wrongs done to her race and gender -that everybody is against her. The article "An Anti-Speaks Out" had an interesting tidbit, saying: "While more practical and sensible women are tyring to put their kitchens...in order.." This makes me wonder what the ration of married to unmarried women are in the suffragist movement compared to the anti-suffragist movement. If I had to guess, it would be that anti-suffragists are more often in a marriage. <br />
-Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
I liked the piece "Political Lessons" by Stanton and Anthony. Both of these women were great and persuasive writers. I know we had talked about how the NWSA did not accept male members, but I was surprised that they explicitly said that men could not join. This piece really shows that that the NWSA was much more militant and aggressive than the AWSA. - F. Cobb</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_15_Questions/CommentsWeek 15 Questions/Comments2007-12-06T03:53:22Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>One of the things that stood out to me during these readings was in "The Office Clerk" when the office manager was listing all of the reasons women were superior towards men for these positions. Among these reasons were that they almost always present for the work day and not making up silly excuses for an absence and the precision that they conducted their work in. I found it surprising that this man had such high praise for women. Could he have been saying this to the interviewer (Clara Lanza) to appease the female crowd who would be reading her article? Or did he really feel this way towards his female workers? Did the fact that companies could get away with paying women less than men factor into this appreciation for women clerks? - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I found the article "Objections to Domestic Service" in that Lucy Salmon polled servants and their employers and from that managed to come up with a list of disadvantages. These disadvantages were an effort to dissuade young, American born women from entering this type of service. Such "industrial disadvantages" include "lack of all opportunity for promotion," "lack of organization in the service," "irregularity in working hours," "competition with the foreign born and the negro element," and "the interference with work often by those less skilled than the workers themselves." I can understand Salmon's reasoning for wanting to keep women from working as domestic servants. However, I'm slightly confused when she comments on how with the professions of seamstresses, clerks, trained nurses, and teachers can lead to promotions in the working environment. So in that sense, Salmon is urging women to pursue jobs other than domestic servitude. But is she at all encouraging them to return to the home? -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I think, in response to Vanessa's question, that Lucy Salmon felt that she was encouraging women to return to the home. Where else would they be if not in the work place? They would be at home with their housework and their families. By expressing the disadvantages of the working world she was able to show women what they would be missing from their home if they joined the workforce, without listing all the things to be done at home and the need to be at home. For some that would probably encourage them to work. Also I think that Lucy Salmon was well aware that the majority of women in the workforce were working because they had to to support their families and they would return to the home if it was possible. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I liked the interview contained in Lucy Maynard Salmon’s piece called "Objections to Domestic Service". I thought it was interesting that the girl answering the question “Why do girls dislike domestic service?” says that factory workers are smarter, make better wives, and have cleaner homes while domestic workers that get married become careless and lazy with their housework even though that was their job before marriage and they should probably know how to do it well. I don’t think she really has any proof of this, it’s more about reassuring herself and everyone else that she is in fact a good candidate for marriage. She probably saw marriage as a way out of factory work.-- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
In Julia Ward Howe's writing under "The Joys of Activism," whether this is intended as propaganda or not, it certainly could be and nicely done. I love how she describes the moment she realized that women could and should do better than where they were. "During the first two thirds of my life I looked to the masculine ideal of character as the only true one... In an unexpected hour a new light came to me... The new domain now made clear to me was that of true womanhood - woman no longer in her ancillary relation to her opposite, man, but in her direct relation to the divine plan and purpose, as a free agent, fully sharing with man every human right and every human responsibility." She's certainly encouraging any that read this that she 'saw the light' you could say and the reader can have these realizations too. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I found "Working Women Debate Woman Suffrage" very interesting, especially the entries from "Americus". The person writing these seemed to be extremely bitter towards men. She states that "we won't stay at home any more and cook and wash dishes either; we've done it long enough; let 'him' do it a little while."(Woloch 366) It just seems like she's extremely bitter that women do so much work with raising children and keeping the house clean, but men appear to go out have a good time with their friends and thats it. -Elizabeth frank<br />
<br />
When reading "We Are All Bound up Together," I found it telling when Frances Ellen Harper related her story of life after losing her husband. She was left with four children and no money. Someone even took her to court over a bed. She then discusses how if she had been a man, she would have been remarried by now and would not be facing economic hardship. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Isabel Eaton really exemplifies the challenge black men and women faced in finding jobs. There was no guarentee that they would get a job and often times they settled for domestic service. Even if they were educated, "white help" was always preferred. Many people gave up trying to find work outside of the domestic service branch because of this ideology. Black men and women were also refused domestic jobs because of the color of their skin in many cases. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I found Leonora Barry's piece on the Knights of Labor to be very interesting. I thought that it showed many of the characteristics mentioned by some of the other readings, the fact that she was a widow with three children for example. She seemed however, to be a very strong woman, one who embrassed her work and her position as master workman. What I found really interesting was that she and others went around educating the children in the factories and such and pushing for the children who are working to be educated in an effort to erase the social and economic situation that causes the circumstances that drive mothers into the workplace. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I also thought the "Office Clerk" by Clara Lanza was an interesting document. I thought it was particularly intersting how it said that women never complained about things like "...the temperature of the building [being] too hot or too cold or that the light is not properly adjusted." Women might not have complained about things like the temperature or light, because they were happy to be able to have a job period that was outside of the home. Men however, could complain about those things and easily get a new job if their current job didn't suit them. ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
One trait that I found interesting in “The Office Clerk” was the insistence that office work did not make women unfit for marriage. In fact, the author claims that employment offers these young women the opportunities to meet and wed eligible bachelors, and these working girls often make particularly fine wives. I particularly enjoyed the claim that “men have outgrown their admiration for feminine helplessness and have come to look upon independence as something worth having.” I have to wonder how much of that was actually true and how much was simply the hope of the female author. Unfortunately, we still have women today who fake ignorance or weakness to attract men; how common would it have been in the 19th century? --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I also noticed the focus on marriage in "The Office Clerk." In my opinion, the author insisted on this point because she wanted to emphasize that a woman could work as an office clerk and still be a part of the domestic sphere. It showed that, as single woman, it was okay for them to work. It even helped them find a good husband to support them. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
<br />
What really struck me about "A Sweatshop Girl's Story" was how Sadie Frowne felt about injuries sustained on the job in factories. From the way she was talking, she made it seem like these injuries were no big deal. If you hurt your finger, you just wrap it with a bit of cotton, if the injury is worse than that, you may have to have that finger amputated, but, you just accept it and go on with your life. Maybe injuries like that were so common in those factories, that it truely was no big deal. ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
The excerpt I enjoyed the most was Sadie Frowne's tale, A Sweatshop Girl's Story. Quite a few things stuck out to me. First, I always assumed that women hated working in the factories because all you hear is how back breaking and boring the work is but she seems to take it in stride. She even talks about how nice it was when the union fought and won for them to "only work nine and half hours." She understood that if she worked hard sooner or later she would fulfill her own American Dream (did that concept exist then?). I was wondering when she says, on page 309 that "Harry has seen me home every night for a long time and makes love to me," if she meant pre-marital sex because she says it so non-chalantly. I agree with K. Stinson that I found it very strange how she described getting hurt in the work place as no big deal. Basically the vibe I got from her account was that while she was proud of her independence, her whole life was based around trying to become the accepted middle class girl. She talks about reading and educating herself, saving money, how ignorant people are low, and how a girl needs to have nice clothes in order to get into high society. -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
In response to Emily's comment on "A Sweatshop Girl's Story," I've read works where "making love" simply referred to wooing or courtship, not necessarily pre-marital sex, so I think it's quite possible that Frowne is using this meaning here. Additionally, I liked this piece for its depiction of a complete life which included work, school, a boyfriend, and entertainment such as dancing and theater. The lives of these women were difficult, but they were not all drudgery. Frowne remarks, "at the end of the day one feels so weak that there is a great temptation to lie right down and sleep. But you must go out and get air, and have some pleasure." I wonder if this attitude was common among the working women, or if this is an unusual example of girlish optimism and enthusiasm for life. --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I found the letter written by Americus from "Working Women Debate Suffrage" quite intriguing. She mocked equality by chosing to point out the most grotesque male qualities and declaring that now women could partake in them since they were equal. For instance, spitting tobacco, talking in slang, and snoring were all characteristics she declared women could now mimic. Reading this in the sarcastic manner for which it was intended, it can serve as an example of how some working class women saw suffrage as a threat to the familiar. Although many working class women supported equal wages, it did not necessarily mean they wanted the right to vote. In the introduction, Woloch points out that many working class women identified themselves more with their class than their gender, and some of these women felt suffrage only threatened class unity.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's "The Ills of the Home", she makes a profound observation when she says, "The permanent error of the housewife lies in the assumption that her love for her family makes her service satisfactorily." A mother washes the clothes, fixes the meals, and cleans the house because she loves her family, but that's not saying if she didn't do those things she would love them less. Gilman makes a great point here when she suggests that one of the reasons mothers have so much difficulty entering the workforce is because they are met with such guilt from society; a society which does not comprehend that mothers may interpret these chores as duties and may need to look elsewhere for personal fulfillment.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
Reading "We Are All Bound up Together" reminded me of the very first readings we did in this class, which stated that one could not simply study "women's history," because it was a complex topic that had a lot different aspects. This text shows that much, by pointing out that indeed the position of black women was much different than the position of white women. Harper points out an example using the street cars. She notes that white women speak of "rights," but that she is speaking of the wrongs done to her race and gender -that everybody is against her. The article "An Anti-Speaks Out" had an interesting tidbit, saying: "While more practical and sensible women are tyring to put their kitchens...in order.." This makes me wonder what the ration of married to unmarried women are in the suffragist movement compared to the anti-suffragist movement. If I had to guess, it would be that anti-suffragists are more often in a marriage. <br />
-Christopher Plummer</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_14_Questions/CommentsWeek 14 Questions/Comments2007-11-29T04:58:09Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>I enjoyed reading the account of Louisa May Alcott in Woloch when she was describing her period of nursing in the hospital. I knew that the conditions were bad but reading that account really made it clearer what they had to deal with, such as the lack of ventilation, which of course would not have helped the wounded and sick heal.- Elizabeth Lynn Frank<br />
<br />
I also found Alcott's journal interesting because she seems to be a woman looking for opportunity. She writes of "pent up energy" and a want of "new experiences." She seemed to have personal hopes the exceed what was allowed for women in the doctrine of separate spheres. Alcott took advantage of the war to gain new experiences.--Kelly Martin <br />
<br />
Alcott's journal seems to shed light on who these women nurses actually were. I typically find myself going along with the static ideas we may have about what they thought and felt, but this really shows their character behind the facade of who they are, as well as give insight as to what they were going through, why they were, and what kept them going. "Though often homesick, heartsick, and worn out, I like it, find real pleasure in comforting, tending, and cheering these poor souls who seem to love me..." and "Up at six, dress by gaslight, run through my ward and throw up windows... poke the fire, add blankets, joke, coax, and command." She also shows the affection nurses grew to have for their patients, at one point calling them her "big babies" and "my boys" which I thought was cute and funny. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Alcott's piece also shows how a certain type of women were attracted to the nursing profession: young, single, and adventurous. -- F. Cobb<br />
<br />
Having long been an admirer of Louisa May Alcott's writings I was thrilled and fascinated to read her journal about her time as a nurse. Her writing style was such that you can almost see what she was seeing and feel what she felt. It was also an example of what we talked about in class, women taking opportunities to go and do something that they otherwise would not have and that they were just as susceptible to illness as their patients. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
Alcott's journal was so interesting. What a great view into why a woman would become a nurse. Its so interesting that she saw this not only as a way to help her country, but also as a way to help her family (by giving them one less mouth to feed). It is also interesting that she sees becoming a nurse as "taking my life in my hand." Obviously the women saw themselves as making just as much of a sacrifice as male soldiers. -- Allison Johnson <br />
<br />
Since the men have left/ Women take over the farm/ We do what we must. (Inspired by "Northern Women on Farms"; he did say we could do haikus). I liked reading this account because to me it shows how much women were willing to change in some cases in order to adjust to the men leaving for war and in order to make the farm continue to succeed. These women were great motivators, or could have been if they had encouraged others to do the same.- Elizabeth Lynn Frank<br />
<br />
After reading Clarissa Burdett's affidavit, I was surprised that Burdett would run away and leave her children behind, potentially to suffer the same abuse she endured. Because Burdett's torture was the punishment for her husband and niece's running away, wouldn't Burdett's running away cause the master to be especially cruel to her children?-- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I can only imagine the pain and anguish that Clarissa Burdett experienced. That said, I would think that she had to make a descision at that moment, to run away to to be potentialy beaten to death. If her master beats her to death there is still no one there to protect her children. She knew that she could not take them with her, so she made the desicion to leave them and sought help from the Union army to help her remove her children from the situation. I wish that we could know from the readings what became of her and her children, but in my opinion she choose the only option that she thought was available to her that was in the potential best interest of her and her children. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
In Eva Jones' letters, there was one thing she said that seemed to emphasize what we discussed in class as to the shock of some southerns that their slaves were not in fact happy and left. "Adelline, Grace, and Polly have all departed in search of freedom, without bidding any of us an affectionate adieu." -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I found Eva Jones's letters interesting because they presented a perspective I had never considered before: that of the wealthy Southern white woman. I would not usually think of these women as victims, but, as was mentioned in class, they experienced dramatic changes after the end of the war. I even pitied Jones when she wrote, "I expect before long to become a very efficient chambermaid and seamstress, though the latter comes very hard to my poor unused fingers." It must have been a difficult transition for women used to commanding slaves rather than doing their own domestic labor. -- Ashley H. <br />
<br />
I found Eva Jones' entry quite insightful. She mentions some of her slaves voluntarily stayed after the War, which brings about a question I have always pondered and hope that perhaps someone can shed some light on, why did slaves remain on plantations with their masters and mistresses? How often did this occur? Is it mainly a phenomenon seen with elderly slaves who could not travel or start fresh?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I was surprised by the women who strongly criticized other women following the Civil War, did they do this only because they were unable to directly attack men? - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
In Mary Anderson's story, I'm surprised to hear of how many slaves actually returned to their former masters' homes. She said that once she and a large portion of her family moved back, she got married and had several kids, but she doesn't mention what life was like or how they lived. I assume that this was maybe a sharecropping arrangement? -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I know I've commented a lot already, but I was just so struck by Ada Bacot's comments that I had to comment at least one more time. She vehemently hates the two Yankee soldiers that were wounded and placed in her ward. "It will be hard to treat them as I do the other men but I know it is my duty." So despite her hatred, she does what she has to do as a nurse. But the last line emphasizes that hatred when she says, "I have never inquired there names nor do I intend to." Ouch. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I found Ada Bacot's Comments on Two Wounded Yankees interesting. She comments that it is her duty to care for the wounded Yankee soldiers though it troubles her to do so. This just reaffirms the concept that women came to the front during the war and embraced a sense of duty--for some this was caring for men despite their Yankee or Confederate affiliation. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I was surprised to read Sarah Morgan's account especially when she said, "But if I can't fight, being unfortunately a woman, which I now regret for the first time in my life...." I found this to be quite a radical statment considering the societal ideology of a woman's place. How many other women felt this way at the time of war? --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I too found Sarah Morgan's statement, "But if I can't fight, being unfortunately a woman, which I now regret for the first time in my life....", a bit radical considering a woman's place in society at the time.-Katie D.<br />
<br />
I thought Cornelia Hancock's account in Major Problems was intersting. What I thought was particularly interesting was how Hancock could handle the sight of blood and watch amputations take place, but when she had to write home for a soldier, she couldn't do so without crying. I guess she had seen so many amputation take place that they no longer bothered her. I also want to know what kind of qualifications that a man needed to be a surgeon. To be a surgeon would a man have to already be a practicing doctor or could a surgeon be anyone willing to do the job? ~Katherine Stinson~<br />
<br />
I really liked the accounts written by the nurses during the Civil War, particularly the account written by Maria Daly who was a New Yorker. Her details of the Southern nurses really emphasizes how little they wanted to be there and how different cultures were between the north and the south. One thing that really stuck out to me was the line, "I lose all patience when I think of these demonic Southern women, whose pride and arrogance have had so much to do with this fearful state of things." It just makes it so much clearer the difference between northern women and southern women. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
Sarah Morgan's declaration of being a rebel also intrigued me quite a bit. I remember during the lecture how women in the South practically (totally) forced their male relatives to fight in the war, and this declaration just seemed to be the epitome of that. She seems so enthusiastic to be a Southerner that I wouldn't be surprised if she ended up dressing like a man to go fight or threw her male relatives onto the fields. Although she mentions that she was hesitant about the war at first, he attitude seems completely changed and it makes me wonder if this was a result of propaganda and public opinion, or if she was trying to boost moral for other southerners? -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I enjoyed Lincoln's comments on the contributions of women: "I have never studied the art of paying compliments to women. But I must say that if all that has been said by orators and poets since the creation of the world in praise of women, was applied to the women of America, it would not do them justice for their conduct during this war. I will close by saying, God bless the women of America!" I'm not sure I have anything to say about it; I just thought it was a pretty fantastic quote. -Ashley H.<br />
<br />
Mary Livermore's writing in Major Problems was interesting because she believes that the heroism and unity of women during the Civil War was comparable to that of the men that were center stage doing the fighting. I think it was meant to be uplifting for women at the time. She wanted to show that women did play an important role as caretakers in the Civil War. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
Ada was not uncommon in her feelings towards the Yankee soldiers. Newspapers in the South tended to portray Yankees as “The Northern serpent, who has penetrated the Southern Eden… proposes to harm no one--to disturb nobody's private rights....” The newspapers insinuated how no one will forget “the cruelties practised [sic] upon our loyal and true citizens, the brutal treatment of women….” The quotes were taken from Virginia Center for Digital History, “Staunton Spectator,” The Valley of the Shadow, http://valley.vcdh.virginia.edu/newspapersp2.html. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
There seems to be a sense of fear in Louticia Jackson's letter about her slave Willes continual disobedience. Her last line reads: "He does seem so wicked [that] if any one was to come upon him about his conduct I do not know what he would do afterwards." When I consider how black male slaves were viewed by people as ready to commit any terrible crime, such as raping a helpless white woman, her fear does really seem really deeply felt. There really doesn't seem like there is anything she can do...its not like she could easily go get her neighbors to come and help. In a way, power has shifted to the slaves in a sort of hidden way. -Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
In "Teaching the Freedmen", Sarah Chase claims to have 140 pupils. This seems like an outrageously high number. Was such a large student:teacher ratio common in these post-war schools?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I wrote my paper on Louisa May Alcott so I was familiar with her diary describing her experience as an army nurse during the Civil War. Alcott fell very ill while working and it took her almost three months to recuperate after she returned home. Even though her work almost killed her Louisa continued to help in the war effort in any way that she could. For instance she rallied other women in Concord to sew for the soldiers. –Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
I found the division between the women of the North and the women of the South completely fascinating. When Sarah Morgan stated, “Yes! I am glad we are two distinct tribes,” in combination with the piece by Caroline Kirkland, made it clear how prideful each side was. I think when we talked in class about sectional pride and the role of women in recruiting and setting the standards of men being soldiers I did not truly grasp the almost competition-like atmosphere created. Are there other examples of women or groups taking such passionate sides of soldiers? Can anyone think of modern-day examples of women standing so passionately next to their men for a cause? -Mary Beth D.<br />
<br />
Hancock's letter to her mother surprised me because it was so different from the others to her cousin and sister. To her sister she wrote of all the suffering and terrible conditions the men faced. To her mother though she spoke of being "waited upon like a princess," that sleeps and eats well and that she loves what she is doing. Could it be that she didn't want to worry her mother? --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I found Ella Gertrude's comments to Sherman's wife really harsh. It reminded me of cady high school girls when she was purposely trying to make his wife feel bad by telling her of the Mulatto girl he had been seen with (insinuating an affair). --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_14_Questions/CommentsWeek 14 Questions/Comments2007-11-29T04:33:18Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>I enjoyed reading the account of Louisa May Alcott in Woloch when she was describing her period of nursing in the hospital. I knew that the conditions were bad but reading that account really made it clearer what they had to deal with, such as the lack of ventilation, which of course would not have helped the wounded and sick heal.- Elizabeth Lynn Frank<br />
<br />
I also found Alcott's journal interesting because she seems to be a woman looking for opportunity. She writes of "pent up energy" and a want of "new experiences." She seemed to have personal hopes the exceed what was allowed for women in the doctrine of separate spheres. Alcott took advantage of the war to gain new experiences.--Kelly Martin <br />
<br />
Alcott's journal seems to shed light on who these women nurses actually were. I typically find myself going along with the static ideas we may have about what they thought and felt, but this really shows their character behind the facade of who they are, as well as give insight as to what they were going through, why they were, and what kept them going. "Though often homesick, heartsick, and worn out, I like it, find real pleasure in comforting, tending, and cheering these poor souls who seem to love me..." and "Up at six, dress by gaslight, run through my ward and throw up windows... poke the fire, add blankets, joke, coax, and command." She also shows the affection nurses grew to have for their patients, at one point calling them her "big babies" and "my boys" which I thought was cute and funny. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Alcott's piece also shows how a certain type of women were attracted to the nursing profession: young, single, and adventurous. -- F. Cobb<br />
<br />
Having long been an admirer of Louisa May Alcott's writings I was thrilled and fascinated to read her journal about her time as a nurse. Her writing style was such that you can almost see what she was seeing and feel what she felt. It was also an example of what we talked about in class, women taking opportunities to go and do something that they otherwise would not have and that they were just as susceptible to illness as their patients. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
Alcott's journal was so interesting. What a great view into why a woman would become a nurse. Its so interesting that she saw this not only as a way to help her country, but also as a way to help her family (by giving them one less mouth to feed). It is also interesting that she sees becoming a nurse as "taking my life in my hand." Obviously the women saw themselves as making just as much of a sacrifice as male soldiers. -- Allison Johnson <br />
<br />
Since the men have left/ Women take over the farm/ We do what we must. (Inspired by "Northern Women on Farms"; he did say we could do haikus). I liked reading this account because to me it shows how much women were willing to change in some cases in order to adjust to the men leaving for war and in order to make the farm continue to succeed. These women were great motivators, or could have been if they had encouraged others to do the same.- Elizabeth Lynn Frank<br />
<br />
After reading Clarissa Burdett's affidavit, I was surprised that Burdett would run away and leave her children behind, potentially to suffer the same abuse she endured. Because Burdett's torture was the punishment for her husband and niece's running away, wouldn't Burdett's running away cause the master to be especially cruel to her children?-- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I can only imagine the pain and anguish that Clarissa Burdett experienced. That said, I would think that she had to make a descision at that moment, to run away to to be potentialy beaten to death. If her master beats her to death there is still no one there to protect her children. She knew that she could not take them with her, so she made the desicion to leave them and sought help from the Union army to help her remove her children from the situation. I wish that we could know from the readings what became of her and her children, but in my opinion she choose the only option that she thought was available to her that was in the potential best interest of her and her children. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
In Eva Jones' letters, there was one thing she said that seemed to emphasize what we discussed in class as to the shock of some southerns that their slaves were not in fact happy and left. "Adelline, Grace, and Polly have all departed in search of freedom, without bidding any of us an affectionate adieu." -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I found Eva Jones's letters interesting because they presented a perspective I had never considered before: that of the wealthy Southern white woman. I would not usually think of these women as victims, but, as was mentioned in class, they experienced dramatic changes after the end of the war. I even pitied Jones when she wrote, "I expect before long to become a very efficient chambermaid and seamstress, though the latter comes very hard to my poor unused fingers." It must have been a difficult transition for women used to commanding slaves rather than doing their own domestic labor. -- Ashley H. <br />
<br />
I found Eva Jones' entry quite insightful. She mentions some of her slaves voluntarily stayed after the War, which brings about a question I have always pondered and hope that perhaps someone can shed some light on, why did slaves remain on plantations with their masters and mistresses? How often did this occur? Is it mainly a phenomenon seen with elderly slaves who could not travel or start fresh?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I was surprised by the women who strongly criticized other women following the Civil War, did they do this only because they were unable to directly attack men? - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
In Mary Anderson's story, I'm surprised to hear of how many slaves actually returned to their former masters' homes. She said that once she and a large portion of her family moved back, she got married and had several kids, but she doesn't mention what life was like or how they lived. I assume that this was maybe a sharecropping arrangement? -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I know I've commented a lot already, but I was just so struck by Ada Bacot's comments that I had to comment at least one more time. She vehemently hates the two Yankee soldiers that were wounded and placed in her ward. "It will be hard to treat them as I do the other men but I know it is my duty." So despite her hatred, she does what she has to do as a nurse. But the last line emphasizes that hatred when she says, "I have never inquired there names nor do I intend to." Ouch. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I found Ada Bacot's Comments on Two Wounded Yankees interesting. She comments that it is her duty to care for the wounded Yankee soldiers though it troubles her to do so. This just reaffirms the concept that women came to the front during the war and embraced a sense of duty--for some this was caring for men despite their Yankee or Confederate affiliation. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I was surprised to read Sarah Morgan's account especially when she said, "But if I can't fight, being unfortunately a woman, which I now regret for the first time in my life...." I found this to be quite a radical statment considering the societal ideology of a woman's place. How many other women felt this way at the time of war? --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I too found Sarah Morgan's statement, "But if I can't fight, being unfortunately a woman, which I now regret for the first time in my life....", a bit radical considering a woman's place in society at the time.-Katie D.<br />
<br />
I thought Cornelia Hancock's account in Major Problems was intersting. What I thought was particularly interesting was how Hancock could handle the sight of blood and watch amputations take place, but when she had to write home for a soldier, she couldn't do so without crying. I guess she had seen so many amputation take place that they no longer bothered her. I also want to know what kind of qualifications that a man needed to be a surgeon. To be a surgeon would a man have to already be a practicing doctor or could a surgeon be anyone willing to do the job? ~Katherine Stinson~<br />
<br />
I really liked the accounts written by the nurses during the Civil War, particularly the account written by Maria Daly who was a New Yorker. Her details of the Southern nurses really emphasizes how little they wanted to be there and how different cultures were between the north and the south. One thing that really stuck out to me was the line, "I lose all patience when I think of these demonic Southern women, whose pride and arrogance have had so much to do with this fearful state of things." It just makes it so much clearer the difference between northern women and southern women. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
Sarah Morgan's declaration of being a rebel also intrigued me quite a bit. I remember during the lecture how women in the South practically (totally) forced their male relatives to fight in the war, and this declaration just seemed to be the epitome of that. She seems so enthusiastic to be a Southerner that I wouldn't be surprised if she ended up dressing like a man to go fight or threw her male relatives onto the fields. Although she mentions that she was hesitant about the war at first, he attitude seems completely changed and it makes me wonder if this was a result of propaganda and public opinion, or if she was trying to boost moral for other southerners? -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I enjoyed Lincoln's comments on the contributions of women: "I have never studied the art of paying compliments to women. But I must say that if all that has been said by orators and poets since the creation of the world in praise of women, was applied to the women of America, it would not do them justice for their conduct during this war. I will close by saying, God bless the women of America!" I'm not sure I have anything to say about it; I just thought it was a pretty fantastic quote. -Ashley H.<br />
<br />
Mary Livermore's writing in Major Problems was interesting because she believes that the heroism and unity of women during the Civil War was comparable to that of the men that were center stage doing the fighting. I think it was meant to be uplifting for women at the time. She wanted to show that women did play an important role as caretakers in the Civil War. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
Ada was not uncommon in her feelings towards the Yankee soldiers. Newspapers in the South tended to portray Yankees as “The Northern serpent, who has penetrated the Southern Eden… proposes to harm no one--to disturb nobody's private rights....” The newspapers insinuated how no one will forget “the cruelties practised [sic] upon our loyal and true citizens, the brutal treatment of women….” The quotes were taken from Virginia Center for Digital History, “Staunton Spectator,” The Valley of the Shadow, http://valley.vcdh.virginia.edu/newspapersp2.html. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
There seems to be a sense of fear in Louticia Jackson's letter about her slave Willes continual disobedience. Her last line reads: "He does seem so wicked [that] if any one was to come upon him about his conduct I do not know what he would do afterwards." When I consider how black male slaves were viewed by people as ready to commit any terrible crime, such as raping a helpless white woman, her fear does really seem really deeply felt. There really doesn't seem like there is anything she can do...its not like she could easily go get her neighbors to come and help. In a way, power has shifted to the slaves in a sort of hidden way. -Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
In "Teaching the Freedmen", Sarah Chase claims to have 140 pupils. This seems like an outrageously high number. Was such a large student:teacher ratio common in these post-war schools?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I wrote my paper on Louisa May Alcott so I was familiar with her diary describing her experience as an army nurse during the Civil War. Alcott fell very ill while working and it took her almost three months to recuperate after she returned home. Even though her work almost killed her Louisa continued to help in the war effort in any way that she could. For instance she rallied other women in Concord to sew for the soldiers. –Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
I found the division between the women of the North and the women of the South completely fascinating. When Sarah Morgan stated, “Yes! I am glad we are two distinct tribes,” in combination with the piece by Caroline Kirkland, made it clear how prideful each side was. I think when we talked in class about sectional pride and the role of women in recruiting and setting the standards of men being soldiers I did not truly grasp the almost competition-like atmosphere created. Are there other examples of women or groups taking such passionate sides of soldiers? Can anyone think of modern-day examples of women standing so passionately next to their men for a cause? -Mary Beth D.<br />
<br />
Hancock's letter to her mother surprised me because it was so different from the others to her cousin and sister. To her sister she wrote of all the suffering and terrible conditions the men faced. To her mother though she spoke of being "waited upon like a princess," that sleeps and eats well and that she loves what she is doing. Could it be that she didn't want to worry her mother? --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_12_Questions/CommentsWeek 12 Questions/Comments2007-11-15T04:54:10Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>In Woloch's reading, (O, Ye Daughters of Africa, Awake!), Maria Stewart, a black Bostonian, played a special role in public life and women's history. When the abolitionist movement began, William Lloyd Garrison published some of her essays in his antislavery journal. In her essays, I really liked how Stewart urged women to pursue self-improvement and assert their rights. A lot of her message was aimed at African American women. -Katie D.<br />
<br />
I agree with Katie but I'd also like to point something else out about the piece "O, Ye Daughters of Africa, Awake!" All throughout Maria Stewart's account, she used revolutionary rhetoric, more often than not using the word "liberty." She also consistently brought up freedoms such as the freedom of the press and the freedom of speech, and it just emphasizes what we learned in class that this revolutionary rhetoric was coming back to haunt the upper and middle class white men that the rhetoric was supposed to apply to. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
The reading by Maria Stewart is steeped with rhetoric which was used during the American Revolution. Stewart talks about "this land of freedom" that "all the nations of the earth are crying out for liberty and equality" ect. This piece also sounds like a sermon, and therefore, might have been influenced by the great awakening. For stewart, education plays an important role in the raising of black women's status in society and seems to imply that it is their right for education as much as it is their right to freedom. However, I'm wondering who her audience was exactly because that can change the way her speech is interpreted or recieved. --K. Vance<br />
<br />
When reading Lucy Stone's Marriage Protest, in Woloch's book, I found it interesting that when the couple took their vows, each partner signed a unique marriage "protest". This protest was also read as part of their ceremony! -Katie D.<br />
<br />
I really feel that Lucy Stone epitomizes the definition of a feminist, the one that will lead to our modern day definition/perception. She kept her own name, she "refused to 'obey', and challenged the system..." The protest itself is riddled with a woman's absolute independence. It takes away any traditional patriarchal "laws" and demands equality from both man and woman. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I was also interested by Lucy Stone's marriage protest, probably because it was so not what one would expect from a woman from the mid 1800s, at least I assume this was irregular. The things that she was protesting we take for advantage that we dont have to worry about them. For instance women today dont have to worry about their legal existence disappearing with marriage. But for her the things that many women seemed to just accept as their fate she rebelled against. I was also intreged that she kept her own name. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I was equally intrigued by the marriage of Lucy Stone and was curious if we know anything about how Henry Blackwell was treated after agreeing to this marriage protest. Was he ridiculed by men for not being able to "control" his wife? Was he embraced by woman for being the ideal husband for letting his wife have rights? Or was he simply ignored, as if this case was not out of the ordinary in any way?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
The fact that Henry Blackwell actually agreed to sign the Marriage Protest was what surprised me. We don't see a lot of men willing to give up that kind of power over their wives before and during this time period. Was he a women's rights activist? -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I too was interested in Henry Blackwell's signing of the protest and the omission of his own social fate. It seems to me that he would be an even greater target among the men of the community. I would believe he would be seen as unable to control his wife, a crucial role in the ideal. I also wonder how their marriage was recognized. Lucy Stone and Henry Blackwell's protest has obvious parallels with one of today's greatest issues. --Robert Kopp<br />
<br />
When I read the piece, "Seduced and Abandoned," in the Woloch book, I could not help but start laughing. I understand that it is not a laughing matter that girl was abandoned by her "fiance" and had to become a prostitute, but the way in which it was written screamed propaganda. The way the innocent girl from the country was persuaded to elope by a villain from the city and then was decoyed into becoming a prostitute only until meeting up with a wholesome man from her hometown is just too unreal. It is amazing how this scenario is consistently used and tweaked to support different causes. But it really shows how the moral reform movement was determined to deliver people to the side of God and how women were at the forefront since the piece was obviously written by a woman. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I agree with Kelly about "Seduced and Abandoned" being so blantantly propagandistic. I have read many similar stories in literature of the day. I wonder, however, how common a story this really was. I realize that it's not exactly something we can get statistics on. I'm sure that it happened quite a bit. However, it seems likely that at least some of these tales are either altered for effect or completely made up. I'm curious as to how the public perception of danger to their daughters compared with reality. --Ashley H. <br />
<br />
While reading "seduced and abandoned" all i could think about was the correlations between this piece of propaganda and the novel Charolette Temple. Each have elements of "good girls" being convinced / tricked into leaving their parents behind, traveling to a new place they'd never been and being left destitute. I find it interesting that even though there around 100+ years between the publication of the novel and this piece of propaganda, the authors are still telling the same story. What makes this story so popular? So powerful? Since the same story is being told over and over again, what does it say about the states of society?--K. Vance<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting that at the end of the "Seduced and Abandoned" piece, the author pretty much blames the parents for not teaching their children about the dangers of the world. I may be mistaken, but to me this seems to contrast what we talked about on Tuesday about how "proper" women were supposed to be sheltered and were not even supposed to know that prostitution existed. - F. Cobb <br />
<br />
I was very intrigued by the Declaration of Sentiments drafted by Elizabeth Cady Stanton. The way she manipulated the Declaration of Independence is the perfect example of women using revolutionary rhetoric to get what they want. If you placed the two next to one another and asked someone to tell the difference, I think it would take quite a bit of reading (probably up until she starts blaming men for everything) before they could figure it out. Stanton proved to be very clever and I just hope there were many more women like her fighting for what they believed. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
In the Declaration of Sentiments I liked how they included that women need "to wise up" basically. They wrote that they need to no longer declare themselves satisfied with their present position or assert that they have all the rights they want. Basically, stop accepting their lot just because that's how things are and start fighting it. I don't think they realized though that some women didn't see a problem with how things were. In Sarah Josepha Hale's piece, for example, she says she is fine to not vote herself and is proud to vote by her proxies. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
In Woloch, the "Letter to the Liberator" piece really seemed to strike at the heart of women and their role in reform. and specifically this letter addresses slavery. "Woman has a place, for she forms a part in God's created intelligent instrumentality to reform the world. God never made her to be inactive - nor in all cases to follow in the wake of man... We believe God gave woman a heart to feel - an eye to weep - a hand to work - a tongue to speak. Now let her use that tongue to speak on slavery." Those words state that is every woman's right and responsibility and duty to play an active role in reform. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I enjoyed the rhetoric of liberty and patriotism used in the "Letter to the Liberator." Emery writes, "Is not woman abused--woman trampled upon---woman spoiled of her virtue . . . and this, not in India---not in China---not in Turkey---not in Africa---but in America . . . in the birthplace of Washington, the father of freedom, the protector of women, the friend of equality and human rights!" Emery reminds Americans of their own fight for freedom, and she calls for America to become a morally superior nation. Even the use of the phrase, "On such a creed, we base the constitution, which binds us together," feels reminiscent of the writings of the founding fathers. ---Ashley H. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting to read about Sojourner Truth and how she felt about the situtation and the rehtoric that she used. Up until this point the majority of women we have heard from have been white, middle-upper class women with very good educations. But here is a woman who was a slave, who cannot read or write. She was also deeply religious and I thought it was very interesting to read her speach and reading the various Biblical references that she makes to prove her point, as well as using her life story to express her belief in women's rights. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I also enjoyed Sojourner Truth's piece. It was interesting to see how different the two version were. The one recollection written twelve years after the actual speech is the more famous one, though the first one is probably the most accurate. Why do you think the second author made these changes? - F. Cobb <br />
<br />
It was interesting to read that when Elizabeth Cady Stanton urged women to secure the vote in the “Declaration of Sentiments” other women’s rights supporters felt it would make the “whole movement ridiculous.” I am sure that none of them could imagine that <br />
the right of suffrage would end up becoming the cornerstone of the women’s rights movement. <br />
It was really interesting that Lucy Stone decided to get married and at the same time challenged the institution of marriage which had forced women to give up their rights. I found it remarkable that she even had her husband sign a “marriage protest” and the document was published in a newspaper. We’ve read about other women who have refused to get married because they did not want to lose their rights but Mrs. Stone was the first one who challenged the marriage system of her day.-Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
I also thought it was interesting that securing the vote for women almost didn't appear in the Seneca Falls Convention's Declaration of Sentiments because of support issues. Now it's really the first thing anyone thinks about when they hear the word Seneca Falls Convention. Maybe people though that women would be asking for too much in too short of a time period if they included voting. Or maybe they though that it would overshadow some of the other things they were trying to accomplish. -- Jennifer Feldhaus <br />
<br />
It amazes me that almost every arguement used for or against Women's rights involved biblical references. Women arguesd God made them just as intelligent and capable as men and men, like the editor of Harper's Magazine, argued that the Women's rights movements were "opposed as it was to divine revelation, time-honored proprieties, and biblical authority." (158) I wonder what the arguements would be if God, The Creator, or religion weren't allowed to be invovled. Even though during this period the Great Awakening was peaking, I wonder what women who did not follow that movement and were less-religious thought. What were their arguements? "The American Femal More Refore Society Warns Mothers About "Solitary Vice" was to me a hysterical piece. I found it particularly funny that they called it a "body and ''soul-destroying'' sin." -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
I thought the article on Sojourner Truth was very interesting. It was great to get her perspective on women't rights. I agree with Mary P that her use of Biblical references were a great way to make her point and the fact that as a slave she probably worked harder everyday than a lot of white men did at the time just proved that women could do anything the men could do. <br />
I also found the Marriage Protest by Lucy Stone interesting to say the least. That is definately extreme feminism for that time. I can see why she was "ridiculed and persecuted" but if you are that against the ideas of marriage at that time why go through a marriage at all? Why not stay single and just live together? Although I don't know how radical that idea would have been at the time but at least you kept your identity. ~~ Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
I found the first 2 documents in MP pages 141- 143 a bit too flowery. The woman who is addressing the other ladies paints a lovely picture of all the good that they have accomplished for the poor. It makes me wonder if they spent most of their time patting their selves on the back rather than doing foot work on the street helping out the poor. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
The two documents by Isabella Graham were a bit flowery, but it is interesting to note that she says "the men could not allow our sex the steadiness and perserverance necessary to establish such an undertaking." It is so interesting how women are really beginning to use the 'us vs. them' approach when talking about women and men. Girl Power! -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I, too, enjoyed the speech by Sojourner Truth, but what I found most interesting was the inclusion of southern dialect by Frances Gage. Obviously, being that Sojourner was from a Dutch-speaking New York family, her accent would have been anything but Southern. Perhaps by making Sojourner sound like a Southern slave, Gage was trying to appeal to Southern slaveowners. When Gage wrote this version of Sojourner's speech, it was during the Civil War and at the height of the Abolitionist movement. This context obviously influenced how/what she chose to emphasize from Sojourner's speech.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed the essay on Sojourner Truth. She spoke well on equal rights. Her comparisons of physical strengths and intelligence as qualifiers for equal rights should have been an eye opener for all there. She showed that women could be physically strong, intelligent and take a great amount of pain. I like when she spoke how someone had said women can’t have equal rights because Jesus wasn’t a women. I have heard similar musing before in women’s groups how all men come from women. She is a very inspiring speaker.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
One of the things that stood out to me about Sojourner Truth Speaks was that not only did she use biblical references in a way she seemed to be challenging the traditional held views of the church, especially when she talks about how since Eve did sin first men should stop holding women back but instead allow them a chance to make up for what "they" did. -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In the essay "Free Black Women in the Abolitionist Movement" I found all the different factors that made it more acceptable for black women to speak publicly very interesting. While female speakers are still not fully accepted by all, the need that black men saw for the abolition cause seems to temporarily out weigh gender stereotypes. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I also enjoyed the "Free Black Women in the Abolitionist Movement" piece. The three sources of hostility (anti-black feelings, anti-abolitionist sentiments, and hatred of "public" women) were interesting. There were so many obstacles they had to overcome in order to be heard and taken seriously. In addition to these obstacles, they also had several conditions to make sure not to piss people off. For example, black male leaders applauded black women speakers until they began to criticize black men, black women they were more acceptable for audiences if they exuded "feminine qualities," women writers generally only found an audience when they wrote on "feminine" subjects and black women poets and essayists were able publish works mainly only with the aid of prominent abolitionists. They had a lot working against them. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
The "Seduced and Abandoned" article portrayed the young girl in the story as kinda mindless. She is just an innocent young girl swept up by the objective evil that causes her to fall into bad things. Her rescue, is kinda odd, since the business man from her village just happened to go to the circus that one time, as a grand exception. Of course, he saves her. Such a story is in direct contrast with the other articles, such as "O, Ye Daughters of Africa, Awake!" and "Reply to the Massachusetts Clergy." I certainly don't think that some girls did end up in terrible situations that they could not forsee, but I do get the sense that these grand moral reform ideas implicitly included female mindlessness. I suppose it all relates to women being the passionless, moral barometer of society who only have experience in the pure household. Of course, Sarah Grimke made the exact opposite statement when she wrote that womens displacement from equality has "introduced confusion into the world." pg 239 For her, inequality is the problem, for the minister she is responding to, it is equality. Its such a polarized mindset. I wonder if Lucy and Henry's marriage was deemed null if they signed agreements that were in direct contrast with the law regarding marriage at the time... -Chris Plummer<br />
<br />
<br />
The piece “Free Black Women in the Abolitionist Movement” touched briefly on the gender and race expectations of the time and how women reformers rebelled against these stereotypes. I know some of the pieces touched upon the idea of solidarity under the title “women,” yet pieces in both Woloch and Norton touched upon the idea of white reformers vs. black reformers. I was wondering how clear a divide there was between white and black reformers? White and black abolitionists? White and black suffragists? I know in the 1960s women’s movement, there was a great division among various ethnic lines; I’m wondering whether anyone knows if a similar race divide existed? Were black abolitionists/suffragists seeking rights different or separate from white women? Were there issues they both agreed on and fought for? --Mary Beth Dilla<br />
<br />
My question is in regards to Sojourner Truth. What I want to know is if she faced double the amount of prejudice that other women's rights activists faced since she was African American as well as a woman. ~Katherine Stinson~</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_12_Questions/CommentsWeek 12 Questions/Comments2007-11-15T04:37:34Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>In Woloch's reading, (O, Ye Daughters of Africa, Awake!), Maria Stewart, a black Bostonian, played a special role in public life and women's history. When the abolitionist movement began, William Lloyd Garrison published some of her essays in his antislavery journal. In her essays, I really liked how Stewart urged women to pursue self-improvement and assert their rights. A lot of her message was aimed at African American women. -Katie D.<br />
<br />
I agree with Katie but I'd also like to point something else out about the piece "O, Ye Daughters of Africa, Awake!" All throughout Maria Stewart's account, she used revolutionary rhetoric, more often than not using the word "liberty." She also consistently brought up freedoms such as the freedom of the press and the freedom of speech, and it just emphasizes what we learned in class that this revolutionary rhetoric was coming back to haunt the upper and middle class white men that the rhetoric was supposed to apply to. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
When reading Lucy Stone's Marriage Protest, in Woloch's book, I found it interesting that when the couple took their vows, each partner signed a unique marriage "protest". This protest was also read as part of their ceremony! -Katie D.<br />
<br />
I really feel that Lucy Stone epitomizes the definition of a feminist, the one that will lead to our modern day definition/perception. She kept her own name, she "refused to 'obey', and challenged the system..." The protest itself is riddled with a woman's absolute independence. It takes away any traditional patriarchal "laws" and demands equality from both man and woman. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I was also interested by Lucy Stone's marriage protest, probably because it was so not what one would expect from a woman from the mid 1800s, at least I assume this was irregular. The things that she was protesting we take for advantage that we dont have to worry about them. For instance women today dont have to worry about their legal existence disappearing with marriage. But for her the things that many women seemed to just accept as their fate she rebelled against. I was also intreged that she kept her own name. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I was equally intrigued by the marriage of Lucy Stone and was curious if we know anything about how Henry Blackwell was treated after agreeing to this marriage protest. Was he ridiculed by men for not being able to "control" his wife? Was he embraced by woman for being the ideal husband for letting his wife have rights? Or was he simply ignored, as if this case was not out of the ordinary in any way?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
The fact that Henry Blackwell actually agreed to sign the Marriage Protest was what surprised me. We don't see a lot of men willing to give up that kind of power over their wives before and during this time period. Was he a women's rights activist? -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I too was interested in Henry Blackwell's signing of the protest and the omission of his own social fate. It seems to me that he would be an even greater target among the men of the community. I would believe he would be seen as unable to control his wife, a crucial role in the ideal. I also wonder how their marriage was recognized. Lucy Stone and Henry Blackwell's protest has obvious parallels with one of today's greatest issues. --Robert Kopp<br />
<br />
When I read the piece, "Seduced and Abandoned," in the Woloch book, I could not help but start laughing. I understand that it is not a laughing matter that girl was abandoned by her "fiance" and had to become a prostitute, but the way in which it was written screamed propaganda. The way the innocent girl from the country was persuaded to elope by a villain from the city and then was decoyed into becoming a prostitute only until meeting up with a wholesome man from her hometown is just too unreal. It is amazing how this scenario is consistently used and tweaked to support different causes. But it really shows how the moral reform movement was determined to deliver people to the side of God and how women were at the forefront since the piece was obviously written by a woman. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I agree with Kelly about "Seduced and Abandoned" being so blantantly propagandistic. I have read many similar stories in literature of the day. I wonder, however, how common a story this really was. I realize that it's not exactly something we can get statistics on. I'm sure that it happened quite a bit. However, it seems likely that at least some of these tales are either altered for effect or completely made up. I'm curious as to how the public perception of danger to their daughters compared with reality. --Ashley H. <br />
<br />
While reading "seduced and abandoned" all i could think about was the correlations between this piece of propaganda and the novel Charolette Temple. Each have elements of "good girls" being convinced / tricked into leaving their parents behind, traveling to a new place they'd never been and being left destitute. I find it interesting that even though there around 100+ years between the publication of the novel and this piece of propaganda, the authors are still telling the same story. What makes this story so popular? So powerful? Since the same story is being told over and over again, what does it say about the states of society?--K. Vance<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting that at the end of the "Seduced and Abandoned" piece, the author pretty much blames the parents for not teaching their children about the dangers of the world. I may be mistaken, but to me this seems to constrast what we talked about on Tuesday about how "proper" women were supposed to be sheltered and were not even supposed to know that prostitution existed. - F. Cobb <br />
<br />
I was very intrigued by the Declaration of Sentiments drafted by Elizabeth Cady Stanton. The way she manipulated the Declaration of Independence is the perfect example of women using revolutionary rhetoric to get what they want. If you placed the two next to one another and asked someone to tell the difference, I think it would take quite a bit of reading (probably up until she starts blaming men for everything) before they could figure it out. Stanton proved to be very clever and I just hope there were many more women like her fighting for what they believed. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
In the Declaration of Sentiments I liked how they included that women need "to wise up" basically. They wrote that they need to no longer declare themselves satisfied with their present position or assert that they have all the rights they want. Basically, stop accepting their lot just because that's how things are and start fighting it. I don't think they realized though that some women didn't see a problem with how things were. In Sarah Josepha Hale's piece, for example, she says she is fine to not vote herself and is proud to vote by her proxies. --Alex<br />
<br />
In Woloch, the "Letter to the Liberator" piece really seemed to strike at the heart of women and their role in reform. and specifically this letter addresses slavery. "Woman has a place, for she forms a part in God's created intelligent instrumentality to reform the world. God never made her to be inactive - nor in all cases to follow in the wake of man... We believe God gave woman a heart to feel - an eye to weep - a hand to work - a tongue to speak. Now let her use that tongue to speak on slavery." Those words state that is every woman's right and responsibility and duty to play an active role in reform. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I enjoyed the rhetoric of liberty and patriotism used in the "Letter to the Liberator." Emery writes, "Is not woman abused--woman trampled upon---woman spoiled of her virtue . . . and this, not in India---not in China---not in Turkey---not in Africa---but in America . . . in the birthplace of Washington, the father of freedom, the protector of women, the friend of equality and human rights!" Emery reminds Americans of their own fight for freedom, and she calls for America to become a morally superior nation. Even the use of the phrase, "On such a creed, we base the constitution, which binds us together," feels reminiscent of the writings of the founding fathers. ---Ashley H. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting to read about Sojourner Truth and how she felt about the situtation and the rehtoric that she used. Up until this point the majority of women we have heard from have been white, middle-upper class women with very good educations. But here is a woman who was a slave, who cannot read or write. She was also deeply religious and I thought it was very interesting to read her speach and reading the various Biblical references that she makes to prove her point, as well as using her life story to express her belief in women's rights. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I also enjoyed Sojourner Truth's piece. It was interesting to see how different the two version were. The one recollection written twelve years after the actual speech is the more famous one, though the first one is probably the most accurate. Why do you think the second author made these changes? - F. Cobb <br />
<br />
It was interesting to read that when Elizabeth Cady Stanton urged women to secure the vote in the “Declaration of Sentiments” other women’s rights supporters felt it would make the “whole movement ridiculous.” I am sure that none of them could imagine that <br />
the right of suffrage would end up becoming the cornerstone of the women’s rights movement. <br />
It was really interesting that Lucy Stone decided to get married and at the same time challenged the institution of marriage which had forced women to give up their rights. I found it remarkable that she even had her husband sign a “marriage protest” and the document was published in a newspaper. We’ve read about other women who have refused to get married because they did not want to lose their rights but Mrs. Stone was the first one who challenged the marriage system of her day.-Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
I also thought it was interesting that securing the vote for women almost didn't appear in the Seneca Falls Convention's Declaration of Sentiments because of support issues. Now it's really the first thing anyone thinks about when they hear the word Seneca Falls Convention. Maybe people though that women would be asking for too much in too short of a time period if they included voting. Or maybe they though that it would overshadow some of the other things they were trying to accomplish. -- Jennifer Feldhaus <br />
<br />
It amazes me that almost every arguement used for or against Women's rights involved biblical references. Women arguesd God made them just as intelligent and capable as men and men, like the editor of Harper's Magazine, argued that the Women's rights movements were "opposed as it was to divine revelation, time-honored proprieties, and biblical authority." (158) I wonder what the arguements would be if God, The Creator, or religion weren't allowed to be invovled. Even though during this period the Great Awakening was peaking, I wonder what women who did not follow that movement and were less-religious thought. What were their arguements? "The American Femal More Refore Society Warns Mothers About "Solitary Vice" was to me a hysterical piece. I found it particularly funny that they called it a "body and ''soul-destroying'' sin." -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
I thought the article on Sojourner Truth was very interesting. It was great to get her perspective on women't rights. I agree with Mary P that her use of Biblical references were a great way to make her point and the fact that as a slave she probably worked harder everyday than a lot of white men did at the time just proved that women could do anything the men could do. <br />
I also found the Marriage Protest by Lucy Stone interesting to say the least. That is definately extreme feminism for that time. I can see why she was "ridiculed and persecuted" but if you are that against the ideas of marriage at that time why go through a marriage at all? Why not stay single and just live together? Although I don't know how radical that idea would have been at the time but at least you kept your identity. ~~ Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
I found the first 2 documents in MP pages 141- 143 a bit too flowery. The woman who is addressing the other ladies paints a lovely picture of all the good that they have accomplished for the poor. It makes me wonder if they spent most of their time patting their selves on the back rather than doing foot work on the street helping out the poor. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
The two documents by Isabella Graham were a bit flowery, but it is interesting to note that she says "the men could not allow our sex the steadiness and perserverance necessary to establish such an undertaking." It is so interesting how women are really beginning to use the 'us vs. them' approach when talking about women and men. Girl Power! -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I, too, enjoyed the speech by Sojourner Truth, but what I found most interesting was the inclusion of southern dialect by Frances Gage. Obviously, being that Sojourner was from a Dutch-speaking New York family, her accent would have been anything but Southern. Perhaps by making Sojourner sound like a Southern slave, Gage was trying to appeal to Southern slaveowners. When Gage wrote this version of Sojourner's speech, it was during the Civil War and at the height of the Abolitionist movement. This context obviously influenced how/what she chose to emphasize from Sojourner's speech.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed the essay on Sojourner Truth. She spoke well on equal rights. Her comparisons of physical strengths and intelligence as qualifiers for equal rights should have been an eye opener for all there. She showed that women could be physically strong, intelligent and take a great amount of pain. I like when she spoke how someone had said women can’t have equal rights because Jesus wasn’t a women. I have heard similar musing before in women’s groups how all men come from women. She is a very inspiring speaker.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
One of the things that stood out to me about Sojourner Truth Speaks was that not only did she use biblical references in a way she seemed to be challenging the traditional held views of the church, especially when she talks about how since Eve did sin first men should stop holding women back but instead allow them a chance to make up for what "they" did. -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In the essay "Free Black Women in the Abolitionist Movement" I found all the different factors that made it more acceptable for black women to speak publicly very interesting. While female speakers are still not fully accepted by all, the need that black men saw for the abolition cause seems to temporarily out weigh gender stereotypes. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
<br />
The "Seduced and Abandoned" article portrayed the young girl in the story as kinda mindless. She is just an innocent young girl swept up by the objective evil that causes her to fall into bad things. Her rescue, is kinda odd, since the business man from her village just happened to go to the circus that one time, as a grand exception. Of course, he saves her. Such a story is in direct contrast with the other articles, such as "O, Ye Daughters of Africa, Awake!" and "Reply to the Massachusetts Clergy." I certainly don't think that some girls did end up in terrible situations that they could not forsee, but I do get the sense that these grand moral reform ideas implicitly included female mindlessness. I suppose it all relates to women being the passionless, moral barometer of society who only have experience in the pure household. Of course, Sarah Grimke made the exact opposite statement when she wrote that womens displacement from equality has "introduced confusion into the world." pg 239 For her, inequality is the problem, for the minister she is responding to, it is equality. Its such a polarized mindset. I wonder if Lucy and Henry's marriage was deemed null if they signed agreements that were in direct contrast with the law regarding marriage at the time... -Chris Plummer<br />
<br />
<br />
The piece “Free Black Women in the Abolitionist Movement” touched briefly on the gender and race expectations of the time and how women reformers rebelled against these stereotypes. I know some of the pieces touched upon the idea of solidarity under the title “women,” yet pieces in both Woloch and Norton touched upon the idea of white reformers vs. black reformers. I was wondering how clear a divide there was between white and black reformers? White and black abolitionists? White and black suffragists? I know in the 1960s women’s movement, there was a great division among various ethnic lines; I’m wondering whether anyone knows if a similar race divide existed? Were black abolitionists/suffragists seeking rights different or separate from white women? Were there issues they both agreed on and fought for? --Mary Beth Dilla<br />
<br />
My question is in regards to Sojourner Truth. What I want to know is if she faced double the amount of prejudice that other women's rights activists faced since she was African American as well as a woman. ~Katherine Stinson~</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_11_Questions/CommentsWeek 11 Questions/Comments2007-11-08T05:14:55Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>I really enjoyed reading the account of Jannicke Saehle. She was so happy and enthusiastic in her letter to her brother. Though she was sick for four days of the voyage, she did not mind. She was so excited to be on her way to America. We discussed in class that many unmarried immigrant women suffered tremendously on their voyage over and upon their arrival. I realize this was true of most immigrant women, however, I found it refreshing to read such a positive account.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
When reading Jannicke Saehle's letter to her brother in the piece titled, "A Norwegian Immigrant in Wisconsin," I was shocked about how cheerful she was regarding her situation. She was thrilled to be making 1 dollar a week, which was strange to me, for many women mentioned in Sanger's study had made the same salary, had found it insufficient and thus decided to become prostitutes. Perhaps Saehle is so positive about her experience because she had just recently arrived in America, and had yet to encounter some of the harsh realities that other immigrants in New York faced. ~Juliann Boyles<br />
<br />
I agree with Juliann. Jannicke probably was naïve to the realities of her new home. But how wonderful to be as optimistic as she seems to be.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
There is also the very real possibility that she did not want to worry her family members at home with a long list of the bad parts of her new life so she focused on the positives. If she was like the other women who left Europe for America then the conditions in her homeland were such that warranted her leaving and trying to make her own in the world. Julie Castanien<br />
<br />
When reading Xin Jin's Contract, I remembered what Dr. McClurken had said about how the Chinese were the most exploited of all the immigrant groups. Although, in the contract, it mentions that Xin Jin had volunteered in her service of prostitution to pay off her debt, more than likely, there was manipulation going on there. How can someone consent when they don't understand what is being said to them? The language barrier alone must have been a reason why so many Chinese immigrants initially had "consented" to prostitution. I was a little disturbed when I read the part in her contract where it mentions additional work time in the instances of sickness or pregnancy, in that profession, how can one expect not to face such obstacles? When reading this piece, I got the impression that prostitution was an endless reality for many of the immigrant Chinese women, one without pay or hope of successfully getting out. ~Juliann Boyles<br />
<br />
Juliann, I have actually discussed the prostitution of Chinese immigrant women in California in another history class and they were coerced into a kind of sexual slavery as far back as the 1840s and 50s (with the gold rush). They usually worked in teriible conditions. In the San Fransisco red light district they were displayed in windows of buildings in these things called cribs- where they would be in view of people on the streets while doing their business. In all it was pretty horrible but some women were able to make lots of money in this manner. --Julie Castanien<br />
<br />
<br />
In the intro to Xin Jin's contract, Wolloch mentioned that prostitutes could be "redeemed" for a fee and were married to Chinese men. Would this have been against the women's will? Would she have preferred the marriage to years of prostitution? --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I was surprised at how similar all of the prostitution contracts were. Pretty much all of them referred to four or four and a half years of service, time off for the four diseases, if she is sick for more than 15 days then she works for a month extra and if she is pregnant she will serve an extra year. Was it such a regular and established practice that everyone already knew the "going rate?"--Alex K.<br />
<br />
When reading "A Citizen Protests the Rape of Indian Women in California, 1862," I found it interesting that the person writing this was so outraged by the soldier's rape of Indian squaws. The writer goes as far as to ask that if the Lieutenant of the soldiers was present during this rape, that his rank and position be stripped of him. I wonder if the writer would have had the same reaction had it been black women rather than Indian women who were raped.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Mrs. Green’s Account of Frontier Life in Colorado, 1887, did not surprise me how she felt about Colorado’s Great American Desert. It really is not a desert but a prairie. To a person who lived all their life in a wooded area, the prairie would look like a desert. Colorado’s prairies can actually be rather beautiful at certain times of the year. Many different kinds of wildlife inhabit the prairie especially back in the 1880s. It was too bad that Mrs. Green was too homesick and depressed to marvel at the different land that she now had a chance to experience. Though I do understand her feelings because that is how I felt when I moved from Colorado to Virginia. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Susan Shelby Magoffin seemed to have adapted to her life in Santa Fe New Mexico. I liked how she was happy to embrace the company of her family and friends. I thought her descriptions of the people she encountered were wonderful. I felt it showed just how much she enjoyed her new experiences.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
I also was surprised to read such a positive account from an immigrant coming to America. Although her trip over to New York sounded very difficult she is remarkably cheerful throughout the letter and credits God for getting her through the journey. In response to Juliann’s comment I’m guessing that Ms. Saehle is pleased with her $1.00 a week wages because they were more than she would have been able to earn in Norway. At the end of her letter Ms. Saehle makes a note that she received three acres of land for her work as a servant to the Torjersen family. Was giving land to new immigrants a common way to reimburse them? This form of reimbursement seems like an excellent way to help immigrants start their new lives in America. -Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
Also in regards to Jannicke Saehle's wage, I think she would be happy with the amount because she has the opportunity to earn a raise. This is probably something that wouldn't have happened in Norway. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
When reading Sanger's (Woloch) documentation of New York prostitutes I was wondering why he was so sympathetic? Perhaps it is also a reflection of Sanger's view towards women (women were too weak to resist temptation or seduction)? - F. Cobb</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_11_Questions/CommentsWeek 11 Questions/Comments2007-11-08T05:01:25Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>I really enjoyed reading the account of Jannicke Saehle. She was so happy and enthusiastic in her letter to her brother. Though she was sick for four days of the voyage, she did not mind. She was so excited to be on her way to America. We discussed in class that many unmarried immigrant women suffered tremendously on their voyage over and upon their arrival. I realize this was true of most immigrant women, however, I found it refreshing to read such a positive account.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
When reading Jannicke Saehle's letter to her brother in the piece titled, "A Norwegian Immigrant in Wisconsin," I was shocked about how cheerful she was regarding her situation. She was thrilled to be making 1 dollar a week, which was strange to me, for many women mentioned in Sanger's study had made the same salary, had found it insufficient and thus decided to become prostitutes. Perhaps Saehle is so positive about her experience because she had just recently arrived in America, and had yet to encounter some of the harsh realities that other immigrants in New York faced. ~Juliann Boyles<br />
<br />
I agree with Juliann. Jannicke probably was naïve to the realities of her new home. But how wonderful to be as optimistic as she seems to be.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
When reading Xin Jin's Contract, I remembered what Dr. McClurken had said about how the Chinese were the most exploited of all the immigrant groups. Although, in the contract, it mentions that Xin Jin had volunteered in her service of prostitution to pay off her debt, more than likely, there was manipulation going on there. How can someone consent when they don't understand what is being said to them? The language barrier alone must have been a reason why so many Chinese immigrants initially had "consented" to prostitution. I was a little disturbed when I read the part in her contract where it mentions additional work time in the instances of sickness or pregnancy, in that profession, how can one expect not to face such obstacles? When reading this piece, I got the impression that prostitution was an endless reality for many of the immigrant Chinese women, one without pay or hope of successfully getting out. ~Juliann Boyles<br />
<br />
I was surprised at how similar all of the prostitution contracts were. Pretty much all of them referred to four or four and a half years of service, time off for the four diseases, if she is sick for more than 15 days then she works for a month extra and if she is pregnant she will serve an extra year. Was it such a regular and established practice that everyone already knew the "going rate?"--Alex K.<br />
<br />
When reading "A Citizen Protests the Rape of Indian Women in California, 1862," I found it interesting that the person writing this was so outraged by the soldier's rape of Indian squaws. The writer goes as far as to ask that if the Lieutenant of the soldiers was present during this rape, that his rank and position be stripped of him. I wonder if the writer would have had the same reaction had it been black women rather than Indian women who were raped.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Mrs. Green’s Account of Frontier Life in Colorado, 1887, did not surprise me how she felt about Colorado’s Great American Desert. It really is not a desert but a prairie. To a person who lived all their life in a wooded area, the prairie would look like a desert. Colorado’s prairies can actually be rather beautiful at certain times of the year. Many different kinds of wildlife inhabit the prairie especially back in the 1880s. It was too bad that Mrs. Green was too homesick and depressed to marvel at the different land that she now had a chance to experience. Though I do understand her feelings because that is how I felt when I moved from Colorado to Virginia. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Susan Shelby Magoffin seemed to have adapted to her life in Santa Fe New Mexico. I liked how she was happy to embrace the company of her family and friends. I thought her descriptions of the people she encountered were wonderful. I felt it showed just how much she enjoyed her new experiences.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
I also was surprised to read such a positive account from an immigrant coming to America. Although her trip over to New York sounded very difficult she is remarkably cheerful throughout the letter and credits God for getting her through the journey. In response to Juliann’s comment I’m guessing that Ms. Saehle is pleased with her $1.00 a week wages because they were more than she would have been able to earn in Norway. At the end of her letter Ms. Saehle makes a note that she received three acres of land for her work as a servant to the Torjersen family. Was giving land to new immigrants a common way to reimburse them? This form of reimbursement seems like an excellent way to help immigrants start their new lives in America. -Caitlin Quinn</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_10_Questions/CommentsWeek 10 Questions/Comments2007-11-01T02:33:57Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>Woloch’s book--I found the reading The Cruel Mistress, to be a form of abolitionist propaganda to raise the argument about how inhumane slavery is. Angelina Grimke Weld would give great credibility to the abolitionist movement because of her observations of the southern community as she was once a southern herself. These observations are highly detailed as if it was fresh from her memories yet these accounts in her memories are at least fourteen years old. Thus it begs the question, did these mistresses really conduct themselves this way according to what Weld had witnessed? Are her memories that reliable? Or are these observations, in how mistresses treated their slaves, facts or exaggerations of the facts? –John Furner <br />
<br />
I think it is likely that these mistresses did conduct themselves in a way very similar to Weld's accounts even though a decent amount of time had passed between when she had witnessed the actions and when she recorded them for publishing. The treatment that she described I believe was very common of the slave owners to not see their slaves as fully human and therefore not treat them as such. However, the treatment that stood out most to me during this entry was how the mistress would not beat the slaves herself but have that slave's brother or sister beat them. I would think this would make them want to act out more.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I think another interesting aspect of Weld reading was that the "Cruel Mistress" was a very devoutly religious person and was actively Christian. Though this seems to be contradictory, it just shows (as previously mentioned) that slave owners did not view their slaves as people. The Cruel Mistress did not feel that her Christian charity included African Americans, only white people. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
In Woloch's book I was intreged by Sarah Haynesworth Gayle's diary entries. She sounded hurt by the actions of her slaves, as if she considered them to be her wayward children in a way. It goes back to what we discussed in class about the idea that slaveowners believed they were "helping" their slaves and that the slaves owed their masters for that. She sounded very disappointed for instance when some of her slaves started slacking off in their tasks as it were, and then she had to sell one of her favorite slaves because of it. I guess it is one thing to hear it in class and another in writing from the time the idea that they couldnt understand why the slaves would be unhappy. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
Going along with Mary, I was pretty bewildered by Gayle's attitudes towards her slaves. She says "it will not pain me now to part with the negroes... excessive indulgence has ruined them - they are idle yet full of complaints... I doubt if any of them would not believe a change of ownership could benefit them." She seems pretty annoyed at their behavior with this statement. She's almost getting sick of their attitude - and that leads me to what we discussed in class about white thoughts of slaves being like children. Gayle is getting sick of their attitude and is two seconds away from putting them in a time-out; it's just in this case the time-out is being sold to a different owner. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Continuing with what Vanessa and Mary have said, I thought that Gayle's entries excellently demonstrated the seemingly-contradictory attitudes towards slaves as both children and property. Vanessa compares Gayle to a mother frustrated with her wayward children, yet most mothers would still be pained by permanently parting with even the most disagreeable child. It's interesting to see how Gayle goes back and forth between affection and dismissal of her slaves depending on the circumstances. I also noticed that Gayle found some of her own self-worth in the respect of her slaves. She wrote, "I no longer feel confident that my orders will be obeyed, and often when they are the obedience is accompanied by murmuring, sour looks, and often surly language, that almost put me beside myself." She seems to be questioning her own abilities as a result of the slaves' disobedience. What did other people think about this? --Ashley H. <br />
<br />
I agree with Mary, I think that it was interesting that Sarah Haynesworth Gayle was shocked that her slaves would rebell against her because it reflects the ideas we talked about in class where the masters would believe they were helping the slaves and they should be greatful. What also surprised me about this excerpt was that it shows that personal attachments between masters slaves did happen. Maybe these are just superficial attachments that don't really count as friendships, but it's closer than I would have initally thought possible. She made it seem like she cared about her slave Mike and thought about him long after he had gone. This is probably rare, but this shows that it did happen. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I feel as though Gayle's attitudes towards her slaves were originally somewhat atypical. She seemed to really care about her slaves and not really want seem like the overbearing plantation mistress. However, when the slaves began to rebel in minor ways, like we learned in class, I believe her feelings became just. I know this sounds kind of awful, but really, what's the point of having domestic help if they're not going to do anything? Gayle even mentions that her servants were driving her crazy because for about four months they have done absolutely nothing. It kind of shows that shift towards the rebellious nature of slaves and the way they affected their masters in minor ways instead of an all out revolt. - Kelly W <br />
<br />
As Kelly pointed out, you can definitely see a form of slave resistance in the diary of Sarah Haynesworth Gayle. She notes that she doesn't know if her orders will be obeyed, and if they are, they are typically accompanied with murmuring and sour looks. Also, they were sluggish and inattentive. As we've learned through Prof McClurken's lectures, this was a way for a slave to maintain some form of dignity and self-respect.- Lisa W <br />
<br />
In "The Cruel Mistress" by Angelina Weld, I found it shocking how slave adults and children were treated the same when it came to punishment. From a slaveowner's point of view, it would make sense to me that if someone was your "property" that you would want to keep that "property" in the best shape possible, because then from a business perspective, you could get the most use out of "it". This makes me wonder why such drastic beating occurred for minor offenses? Flogging a slave until he/she can't work doesn't help anything. The master would lose money for the time the slave could not work and had to recover from the harsh beating. It is implied that children were severly whipped and harshly scolded, as well. Again, this does not make sense. You would want your "property" to grow big and strong, not take a chance at beating him/her to a bloody pulp and risk killing off such a valuable investment.- Lisa W.<br />
<br />
Woloch’ Book—Reading Louisa S. Cheeves McCord attack on Stowe was a bit difficult to swallow. It seems to me that she plays right into the Patriarchal system of having to assume the role to take care of those less fortunate. Otherwise, she attempts to give credence to southern white man’s burden for the purpose to have slaves. I find it amusing when she writes, “We proclaim it, on the contrary, a Godlike dispensation, a providential caring for the weak, and a refuge for the portionless.” (219) Why I find this amusing is that she believes the white race must assume a god like status in the care of the less fortunate, thereby the less fortunate group could only prosper in a civilized world, if they were enslaved by the white race; white man’s burden. However, if the white race were so godlike or given providence as she claims, then why are southern slave owners dependant on slaves for their very existence?—John Furner<br />
<br />
When I read that quote by McCord I immediately thought of paternalism in that they truly believed they were helping the less fortunate who could not care for themselves. She goes on to say that "slavery, even in his own land, is his destiny and his refuge from extinction." --Alex K. <br />
<br />
I had a hard time understanding McCord's arguments. She put forth a conservative viewpoint that did not necessarily match her own power. McCord was educated, managed her own plantation with 200 slaves (until her marriage) and had a public forum for her opinions. She received most of her education in the North. Knowing how deep racism was ingrained in the southern lifestyle, I still expected a more enlightened view from a woman of such independence. -- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
In this week’s readings we see the cruelty of slavery for women, through the abuse and sexual exploitation of black women. Even whites were morally opposed to the institution of slavery as seen by Mary Chestnut’s diary. I was taken back by the popularity of masters forcing sexual relations between men and women. I knew it was a practice, however I was under the impression that slave breeding was not very popular, and mostly masters relied on natural reproduction. What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of slave breeding? In the essay by Jennings, she explicitly discusses the role of white, slave owners in the sexual abuse of women. Did masters rape and abuse women simply because they could or did the sexual stereotypes of African American women of the time (“animal – like”, foreign, African queens, exotic, sexually aggressive, etc.) play into it? How did mistresses react to the relationships between masters and female slaves and illegitimate children? Are there examples of mistresses mistreating a woman she suspected was sleeping with her husband (I know Weld discusses the “cruel mistress” but I did not get the impression that her violence was deemed inappropriate or based on accusations of infidelity). Was there any advantage(s) to sleeping with the master? -Mary Beth D.<br />
<br />
Going along with Mary Beth, having to do with the cruelty of slavery for women, through the abuse of black men...I too was taken back by the popularity of masters forcing sexual relations between men and women, and thought it was less popular than portrayed in the reading. It was a bit of a surprise to me...-Katie D.<br />
<br />
In regards to slave breeding, I think the white masters forced it upon their slaves for purely economic reasons. Slaves were expensive to buy and they wouldn't have to buy them if they were born into slavery. They wanted the "strong, stoutly" slaves to reproduce with one another so they would have strong children to work for them. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
In Rose William's Story, that deals with an important issue of the extent to which slave owners interfered in slave familty life and encouraged slaves to reproduce...I enjoyed reading how it was in a woman slave's self-interest to have children, and child bearing increased her value as a slave and thereby diminished the liklihood of her sale and separation from family members. It was in the owners interest to encourage reproduction and thereby increase the extent of his slave property.-Katie D.<br />
<br />
I know that this is going to sound horrible and in many ways wrong, but the slave holders viewed their slaves as property, almost on the same grounds as cattle, right? That being said, maybe in thier minds they saw the breeding of slaves as nothing more then a farmer would see breeding cattle. Making sure the bloodlines were such that the product of the union will be of value and also insuring a certain number of offspring being born. As I said it sounds horrible but who knows what they might have been thinking, wrong thinking seems to be common place for slaveholders. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary. Slave owners did consider their slaves as livestock. If he manages to get a good breeding pair, it would save him a lot of money. If I were Rose, I would have felt sorely tempted to run that hot poker through the master and than Rufus. I admire the fact that Rose can be quite an understanding person. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Rose's story was indeed a very good example of how slave owners envisioned slaves as a very good investment and that the female slaves would indeed reproduce and, in turn, increase the number of slaves on one owner's property without the owner having to pay anything more. I felt bad that the master manipulated Rose, however, but I can completely understand how she felt she owed her master in return for keeping her with her family. It seemed like a very bizarre situation and it makes me wonder, was this typical? Were slaves normally made to feel guilty in order to obey their master, aside from the usual whipping or beating? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
I was saddened by Rose's story for a variety of reasons, but I particularly noticed her choice never to marry because "one 'sperience am 'nough for dis nigger. After what I does for de massa, I's never wants no truck with any man." I wonder if it was common for women used in such a way at a young age to avoid sexual relations permanently. --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
<br />
In the readings one of the things that stood out the most to me was in Modern Problems the article by Mrs. Virgina Hayes Shepard when she mentions Diana. I was surprised to see that when the master went to Diana to have sexual relations with her Diana actually went to her mistress for help. I thought that white mistresses would react badly to the idea that their husbands would be sleeping with the slaves but in DIana's case the mistress sympathized instead of becoming angry. It is stated that in part this is because she was also afraid of her husband. Is it possible that this is more common than we know because both the slave women and the mistresses were scared to bring it up?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I think that Diana would be the exception to the rule. In class we talked about how severe racial hierarchy was and while both women and African Americans were oppressed they did not form a bond. I think that white women more frequently used slaves to exercise the limited power to which they had access (like in Cruel Mistress). -Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I thought the document titled "Lucinda, a Free Woman, Asks to Be Reenslaved" was really interesting. She probably thought about what her life would be like for her as a free Black woman, and she probably realized that there weren't that she wouldn't have a very good life. Her life as a slave might be slightly better than her life as a free Black woman because as a slave she was with her husband, had a small place to live and got some food. Her situation is similar to the situation of some criminals today. Sometimes criminals who have just been released from jail want to go right back to jail, because they might have a better life in jail than out of it. In jail, they at least have a roof over their head and food to eat. ~Katherine Stinson~<br />
<br />
I too was intrigued with Lucinda's plea to be reenslaved. I'm not sure I would say that she thought life would be "better" for her in slavery but rather perhaps she understood that in slvary she would find some sense of security. She would be reunited with her husband but at the same time there was no telling that he wouldn't be sold to another owner at some later point in time. I think it's difficult to understand or identitfy what Lucinda's rationing was in asking to be reenslaved other than the fact that she would be reunited with her husband.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I agree with Katherine. Lucinda probably felt like life would be too difficult for her in a state she wasn't familiar with and with people she didn't know. It would be difficult and scary to leave behind everything you know. It is also interesting to see a relationship of obvious affection if not love between slaves on different farms. However, why doesn't the book tell us what happens? I think the decision made by the commonwealth would be really interesting to read. -- Allison J. <br />
<br />
I have a question - Lucinda petitioned to be reenslaved so that she could be with her husband; she didn't want to be sent off somewhere so she could be free and leave him where he was. How typical was this? Is this an abnormal situation or were emancipated slaves really asking for this sort of treatment regularly? I feel as though this would be somewhat bizarre but I could be wrong. Thoughts? Answers? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
I realize this may be a dumb question but here it goes anyway, why are there such discrepancies among masters and their treatment of slaves? Are there any similiarities or connections among slave owners who were "kinder" to their slaves or among those masters who were unbearable? Were some more religious than others, did the age of the master play a role, the location, etc.? --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I was rather intrigued by the contrasting essays on freed black women, in Major Problems in American Women’s History. The first essay that should the devotion and love a freed slave had for her husband was very heart warming. She was willing to give up freedom in order to be with her love. Then there are the next two essays that inspire free slave women to rally together and free all the slaves. These last two essays cause me to believe that these women were highly educated because of the language they use to inspire others.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Wow. The essay that "Implores Other Free Black Women" to sign a petition to end slavery in D.C. is not so much imploring as yelling. I felt ashamed and lazy just reading it! This is really powerful writing and it is really very different from what I would have expected. The writer is obviously well educated, especially since they claim to be not only a woman but black as well. --Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison. The woman who wrote this obviously well educated, and she practically accuses all readers that they are slaves themselves - "a slave to hardness of heart." She's got some powerful words coming into play in this essay but she almost gets to the point of offensive. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Thelma Jennings essay, "The Sexual Exploitation of African American Slave Women," really hits home all the major points of this topic we discussed in class. Like the idea of female slaves having a tougher life than male slaves because not only did they have to do the work equal of men, but they also had to bear and raise children and also "cope with sexual abuse" by their masters. And the idea of "slave breeding" affected the family life too - it "made it very difficult for couples to establish family relationships." The whole female gender role system we often place on women of modern times and white women of the period is completely disrupted and destroyed for black slave women. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I was a bit confused by something in the reading that seemed contradictory. In the author's description of the "Rose William's Story" piece, he explains that it was in a woman slave's self-interest to have children because it increased her value as a slave and thereby diminished the likelihood of her sale and separation from family members. Then in the essay by Thelma Jennings she talks about women who practiced crude methods of birth control and abortion and inducing miscarriages as a form of passive resistance. She explains that this was common in a time when childbirth was dangerous and children could be sold at the master's whim. So which is it? Can it be both? --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_10_Questions/CommentsWeek 10 Questions/Comments2007-11-01T02:21:26Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>Woloch’s book--I found the reading The Cruel Mistress, to be a form of abolitionist propaganda to raise the argument about how inhumane slavery is. Angelina Grimke Weld would give great credibility to the abolitionist movement because of her observations of the southern community as she was once a southern herself. These observations are highly detailed as if it was fresh from her memories yet these accounts in her memories are at least fourteen years old. Thus it begs the question, did these mistresses really conduct themselves this way according to what Weld had witnessed? Are her memories that reliable? Or are these observations, in how mistresses treated their slaves, facts or exaggerations of the facts? –John Furner <br />
<br />
I think it is likely that these mistresses did conduct themselves in a way very similar to Weld's accounts even though a decent amount of time had passed between when she had witnessed the actions and when she recorded them for publishing. The treatment that she described I believe was very common of the slave owners to not see their slaves as fully human and therefore not treat them as such. However, the treatment that stood out most to me during this entry was how the mistress would not beat the slaves herself but have that slave's brother or sister beat them. I would think this would make them want to act out more.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In Woloch's book I was intreged by Sarah Haynesworth Gayle's diary entries. She sounded hurt by the actions of her slaves, as if she considered them to be her wayward children in a way. It goes back to what we discussed in class about the idea that slaveowners believed they were "helping" their slaves and that the slaves owed their masters for that. She sounded very disappointed for instance when some of her slaves started slacking off in their tasks as it were, and then she had to sell one of her favorite slaves because of it. I guess it is one thing to hear it in class and another in writing from the time the idea that they couldnt understand why the slaves would be unhappy. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
Going along with Mary, I was pretty bewildered by Gayle's attitudes towards her slaves. She says "it will not pain me now to part with the negroes... excessive indulgence has ruined them - they are idle yet full of complaints... I doubt if any of them would not believe a change of ownership could benefit them." She seems pretty annoyed at their behavior with this statement. She's almost getting sick of their attitude - and that leads me to what we discussed in class about white thoughts of slaves being like children. Gayle is getting sick of their attitude and is two seconds away from putting them in a time-out; it's just in this case the time-out is being sold to a different owner. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Continuing with what Vanessa and Mary have said, I thought that Gayle's entries excellently demonstrated the seemingly-contradictory attitudes towards slaves as both children and property. Vanessa compares Gayle to a mother frustrated with her wayward children, yet most mothers would still be pained by permanently parting with even the most disagreeable child. It's interesting to see how Gayle goes back and forth between affection and dismissal of her slaves depending on the circumstances. I also noticed that Gayle found some of her own self-worth in the respect of her slaves. She wrote, "I no longer feel confident that my orders will be obeyed, and often when they are the obedience is accompanied by murmuring, sour looks, and often surly language, that almost put me beside myself." She seems to be questioning her own abilities as a result of the slaves' disobedience. What did other people think about this? --Ashley H. <br />
<br />
I agree with Mary, I think that it was interesting that Sarah Haynesworth Gayle was shocked that her slaves would rebell against her because it reflects the ideas we talked about in class where the masters would believe they were helping the slaves and they should be greatful. What also surprised me about this excerpt was that it shows that personal attachments between masters slaves did happen. Maybe these are just superficial attachments that don't really count as friendships, but it's closer than I would have initally thought possible. She made it seem like she cared about her slave Mike and thought about him long after he had gone. This is probably rare, but this shows that it did happen. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I feel as though Gayle's attitudes towards her slaves were originally somewhat atypical. She seemed to really care about her slaves and not really want seem like the overbearing plantation mistress. However, when the slaves began to rebel in minor ways, like we learned in class, I believe her feelings became just. I know this sounds kind of awful, but really, what's the point of having domestic help if they're not going to do anything? Gayle even mentions that her servants were driving her crazy because for about four months they have done absolutely nothing. It kind of shows that shift towards the rebellious nature of slaves and the way they affected their masters in minor ways instead of an all out revolt. - Kelly W <br />
<br />
As Kelly pointed out, you can definitely see a form of slave resistance in the diary of Sarah Haynesworth Gayle. She notes that she doesn't know if her orders will be obeyed, and if they are, they are typically accompanied with murmuring and sour looks. Also, they were sluggish and inattentive. As we've learned through Prof McClurken's lectures, this was a way for a slave to maintain some form of dignity and self-respect.- Lisa W <br />
<br />
In "The Cruel Mistress" by Angelina Weld, I found it shocking how slave adults and children were treated the same when it came to punishment. From a slaveowner's point of view, it would make sense to me that if someone was your "property" that you would want to keep that "property" in the best shape possible, because then from a business perspective, you could get the most use out of "it". This makes me wonder why such drastic beating occurred for minor offenses? Flogging a slave until he/she can't work doesn't help anything. The master would lose money for the time the slave could not work and had to recover from the harsh beating. It is implied that children were severly whipped and harshly scolded, as well. Again, this does not make sense. You would want your "property" to grow big and strong, not take a chance at beating him/her to a bloody pulp and risk killing off such a valuable investment.- Lisa W.<br />
<br />
Woloch’ Book—Reading Louisa S. Cheeves McCord attack on Stowe was a bit difficult to swallow. It seems to me that she plays right into the Patriarchal system of having to assume the role to take care of those less fortunate. Otherwise, she attempts to give credence to southern white man’s burden for the purpose to have slaves. I find it amusing when she writes, “We proclaim it, on the contrary, a Godlike dispensation, a providential caring for the weak, and a refuge for the portionless.” (219) Why I find this amusing is that she believes the white race must assume a god like status in the care of the less fortunate, thereby the less fortunate group could only prosper in a civilized world, if they were enslaved by the white race; white man’s burden. However, if the white race were so godlike or given providence as she claims, then why are southern slave owners dependant on slaves for their very existence?—John Furner<br />
<br />
When I read that quote by McCord I immediately thought of paternalism in that they truly believed they were helping the less fortunate who could not care for themselves. She goes on to say that "slavery, even in his own land, is his destiny and his refuge from extinction." --Alex K. <br />
<br />
I had a hard time understanding McCord's arguments. She put forth a conservative viewpoint that did not necessarily match her own power. McCord was educated, managed her own plantation with 200 slaves (until her marriage) and had a public forum for her opinions. She received most of her education in the North. Knowing how deep racism was ingrained in the southern lifestyle, I still expected a more enlightened view from a woman of such independence. -- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
In this week’s readings we see the cruelty of slavery for women, through the abuse and sexual exploitation of black women. Even whites were morally opposed to the institution of slavery as seen by Mary Chestnut’s diary. I was taken back by the popularity of masters forcing sexual relations between men and women. I knew it was a practice, however I was under the impression that slave breeding was not very popular, and mostly masters relied on natural reproduction. What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of slave breeding? In the essay by Jennings, she explicitly discusses the role of white, slave owners in the sexual abuse of women. Did masters rape and abuse women simply because they could or did the sexual stereotypes of African American women of the time (“animal – like”, foreign, African queens, exotic, sexually aggressive, etc.) play into it? How did mistresses react to the relationships between masters and female slaves and illegitimate children? Are there examples of mistresses mistreating a woman she suspected was sleeping with her husband (I know Weld discusses the “cruel mistress” but I did not get the impression that her violence was deemed inappropriate or based on accusations of infidelity). Was there any advantage(s) to sleeping with the master? -Mary Beth D.<br />
<br />
Going along with Mary Beth, having to do with the cruelty of slavery for women, through the abuse of black men...I too was taken back by the popularity of masters forcing sexual relations between men and women, and thought it was less popular than portrayed in the reading. It was a bit of a surprise to me...-Katie D.<br />
<br />
In regards to slave breeding, I think the white masters forced it upon their slaves for purely economic reasons. Slaves were expensive to buy and they wouldn't have to buy them if they were born into slavery. They wanted the "strong, stoutly" slaves to reproduce with one another so they would have strong children to work for them. - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
In Rose William's Story, that deals with an important issue of the extent to which slave owners interfered in slave familty life and encouraged slaves to reproduce...I enjoyed reading how it was in a woman slave's self-interest to have children, and child bearing increased her value as a slave and thereby diminished the liklihood of her sale and separation from family members. It was in the owners interest to encourage reproduction and thereby increase the extent of his slave property.-Katie D.<br />
<br />
I know that this is going to sound horrible and in many ways wrong, but the slave holders viewed their slaves as property, almost on the same grounds as cattle, right? That being said, maybe in thier minds they saw the breeding of slaves as nothing more then a farmer would see breeding cattle. Making sure the bloodlines were such that the product of the union will be of value and also insuring a certain number of offspring being born. As I said it sounds horrible but who knows what they might have been thinking, wrong thinking seems to be common place for slaveholders. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary. Slave owners did consider their slaves as livestock. If he manages to get a good breeding pair, it would save him a lot of money. If I were Rose, I would have felt sorely tempted to run that hot poker through the master and than Rufus. I admire the fact that Rose can be quite an understanding person. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Rose's story was indeed a very good example of how slave owners envisioned slaves as a very good investment and that the female slaves would indeed reproduce and, in turn, increase the number of slaves on one owner's property without the owner having to pay anything more. I felt bad that the master manipulated Rose, however, but I can completely understand how she felt she owed her master in return for keeping her with her family. It seemed like a very bizarre situation and it makes me wonder, was this typical? Were slaves normally made to feel guilty in order to obey their master, aside from the usual whipping or beating? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
I was saddened by Rose's story for a variety of reasons, but I particularly noticed her choice never to marry because "one 'sperience am 'nough for dis nigger. After what I does for de massa, I's never wants no truck with any man." I wonder if it was common for women used in such a way at a young age to avoid sexual relations permanently. --Ashley H.<br />
<br />
<br />
In the readings one of the things that stood out the most to me was in Modern Problems the article by Mrs. Virgina Hayes Shepard when she mentions Diana. I was surprised to see that when the master went to Diana to have sexual relations with her Diana actually went to her mistress for help. I thought that white mistresses would react badly to the idea that their husbands would be sleeping with the slaves but in DIana's case the mistress sympathized instead of becoming angry. It is stated that in part this is because she was also afraid of her husband. Is it possible that this is more common than we know because both the slave women and the mistresses were scared to bring it up?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I think that Diana would be the exception to the rule. In class we talked about how severe racial hierarchy was and while both women and African Americans were oppressed they did not form a bond. I think that white women more frequently used slaves to exercise the limited power to which they had access (like in Cruel Mistress). -Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I thought the document titled "Lucinda, a Free Woman, Asks to Be Reenslaved" was really interesting. She probably thought about what her life would be like for her as a free Black woman, and she probably realized that there weren't that she wouldn't have a very good life. Her life as a slave might be slightly better than her life as a free Black woman because as a slave she was with her husband, had a small place to live and got some food. Her situation is similar to the situation of some criminals today. Sometimes criminals who have just been released from jail want to go right back to jail, because they might have a better life in jail than out of it. In jail, they at least have a roof over their head and food to eat. ~Katherine Stinson~<br />
<br />
I too was intrigued with Lucinda's plea to be reenslaved. I'm not sure I would say that she thought life would be "better" for her in slavery but rather perhaps she understood that in slvary she would find some sense of security. She would be reunited with her husband but at the same time there was no telling that he wouldn't be sold to another owner at some later point in time. I think it's difficult to understand or identitfy what Lucinda's rationing was in asking to be reenslaved other than the fact that she would be reunited with her husband.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I agree with Katherine. Lucinda probably felt like life would be too difficult for her in a state she wasn't familiar with and with people she didn't know. It would be difficult and scary to leave behind everything you know. It is also interesting to see a relationship of obvious affection if not love between slaves on different farms. However, why doesn't the book tell us what happens? I think the decision made by the commonwealth would be really interesting to read. -- Allison J. <br />
<br />
I have a question - Lucinda petitioned to be reenslaved so that she could be with her husband; she didn't want to be sent off somewhere so she could be free and leave him where he was. How typical was this? Is this an abnormal situation or were emancipated slaves really asking for this sort of treatment regularly? I feel as though this would be somewhat bizarre but I could be wrong. Thoughts? Answers? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
I realize this may be a dumb question but here it goes anyway, why are there such discrepancies among masters and their treatment of slaves? Are there any similiarities or connections among slave owners who were "kinder" to their slaves or among those masters who were unbearable? Were some more religious than others, did the age of the master play a role, the location, etc.? --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I was rather intrigued by the contrasting essays on freed black women, in Major Problems in American Women’s History. The first essay that should the devotion and love a freed slave had for her husband was very heart warming. She was willing to give up freedom in order to be with her love. Then there are the next two essays that inspire free slave women to rally together and free all the slaves. These last two essays cause me to believe that these women were highly educated because of the language they use to inspire others.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Wow. The essay that "Implores Other Free Black Women" to sign a petition to end slavery in D.C. is not so much imploring as yelling. I felt ashamed and lazy just reading it! This is really powerful writing and it is really very different from what I would have expected. The writer is obviously well educated, especially since they claim to be not only a woman but black as well. --Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison. The woman who wrote this obviously well educated, and she practically accuses all readers that they are slaves themselves - "a slave to hardness of heart." She's got some powerful words coming into play in this essay but she almost gets to the point of offensive. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Thelma Jennings essay, "The Sexual Exploitation of African American Slave Women," really hits home all the major points of this topic we discussed in class. Like the idea of female slaves having a tougher life than male slaves because not only did they have to do the work equal of men, but they also had to bear and raise children and also "cope with sexual abuse" by their masters. And the idea of "slave breeding" affected the family life too - it "made it very difficult for couples to establish family relationships." The whole female gender role system we often place on women of modern times and white women of the period is completely disrupted and destroyed for black slave women. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I was a bit confused by something in the reading that seemed contradictory. In the author's description of the "Rose William's Story" piece, he explains that it was in a woman slave's self-interest to have children because it increased her value as a slave and thereby diminished the likelihood of her sale and separation from family members. Then in the essay by Thelma Jennings she talks about women who practiced crude methods of birth control and abortion and inducing miscarriages as a form of passive resistance. She explains that this was common in a time when childbirth was dangerous and children could be sold at the master's whim. So which is it? Can it be both? --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_10_Questions/CommentsWeek 10 Questions/Comments2007-11-01T01:50:19Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>Woloch’s book--I found the reading The Cruel Mistress, to be a form of abolitionist propaganda to raise the argument about how inhumane slavery is. Angelina Grimke Weld would give great credibility to the abolitionist movement because of her observations of the southern community as she was once a southern herself. These observations are highly detailed as if it was fresh from her memories yet these accounts in her memories are at least fourteen years old. Thus it begs the question, did these mistresses really conduct themselves this way according to what Weld had witnessed? Are her memories that reliable? Or are these observations, in how mistresses treated their slaves, facts or exaggerations of the facts? –John Furner <br />
<br />
I think it is likely that these mistresses did conduct themselves in a way very similar to Weld's accounts even though a decent amount of time had passed between when she had witnessed the actions and when she recorded them for publishing. The treatment that she described I believe was very common of the slave owners to not see their slaves as fully human and therefore not treat them as such. However, the treatment that stood out most to me during this entry was how the mistress would not beat the slaves herself but have that slave's brother or sister beat them. I would think this would make them want to act out more.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In Woloch's book I was intreged by Sarah Haynesworth Gayle's diary entries. She sounded hurt by the actions of her slaves, as if she considered them to be her wayward children in a way. It goes back to what we discussed in class about the idea that slaveowners believed they were "helping" their slaves and that the slaves owed their masters for that. She sounded very disappointed for instance when some of her slaves started slacking off in their tasks as it were, and then she had to sell one of her favorite slaves because of it. I guess it is one thing to hear it in class and another in writing from the time the idea that they couldnt understand why the slaves would be unhappy. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
Going along with Mary, I was pretty bewildered by Gayle's attitudes towards her slaves. She says "it will not pain me now to part with the negroes... excessive indulgence has ruined them - they are idle yet full of complaints... I doubt if any of them would not believe a change of ownership could benefit them." She seems pretty annoyed at their behavior with this statement. She's almost getting sick of their attitude - and that leads me to what we discussed in class about white thoughts of slaves being like children. Gayle is getting sick of their attitude and is two seconds away from putting them in a time-out; it's just in this case the time-out is being sold to a different owner. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary, I think that it was interesting that Sarah Haynesworth Gayle was shocked that her slaves would rebell against her because it reflects the ideas we talked about in class where the masters would believe they were helping the slaves and they should be greatful. What also surprised me about this excerpt was that it shows that personal attachments between masters slaves did happen. Maybe these are just superficial attachments that don't really count as friendships, but it's closer than I would have initally thought possible. She made it seem like she cared about her slave Mike and thought about him long after he had gone. This is probably rare, but this shows that it did happen. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I feel as though Gayle's attitudes towards her slaves were originally somewhat atypical. She seemed to really care about her slaves and not really want seem like the overbearing plantation mistress. However, when the slaves began to rebel in minor ways, like we learned in class, I believe her feelings became just. I know this sounds kind of awful, but really, what's the point of having domestic help if they're not going to do anything? Gayle even mentions that her servants were driving her crazy because for about four months they have done absolutely nothing. It kind of shows that shift towards the rebellious nature of slaves and the way they affected their masters in minor ways instead of an all out revolt. - Kelly W <br />
<br />
Woloch’ Book—Reading Louisa S. Cheeves McCord attack on Stowe was a bit difficult to swallow. It seems to me that she plays right into the Patriarchal system of having to assume the role to take care of those less fortunate. Otherwise, she attempts to give credence to southern white man’s burden for the purpose to have slaves. I find it amusing when she writes, “We proclaim it, on the contrary, a Godlike dispensation, a providential caring for the weak, and a refuge for the portionless.” (219) Why I find this amusing is that she believes the white race must assume a god like status in the care of the less fortunate, thereby the less fortunate group could only prosper in a civilized world, if they were enslaved by the white race; white man’s burden. However, if the white race were so godlike or given providence as she claims, then why are southern slave owners dependant on slaves for their very existence?—John Furner<br />
<br />
When I read that quote by McCord I immediately thought of paternalism in that they truly believed they were helping the less fortunate who could not care for themselves. She goes on to say that "slavery, even in his own land, is his destiny and his refuge from extinction." --Alex K. <br />
<br />
I had a hard time understanding McCord's arguments. She put forth a conservative viewpoint that did not necessarily match her own power. McCord was educated, managed her own plantation with 200 slaves (until her marriage) and had a public forum for her opinions. She received most of her education in the North. Knowing how deep racism was ingrained in the southern lifestyle, I still expected a more enlightened view from a woman of such independence. -- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
In this week’s readings we see the cruelty of slavery for women, through the abuse and sexual exploitation of black women. Even whites were morally opposed to the institution of slavery as seen by Mary Chestnut’s diary. I was taken back by the popularity of masters forcing sexual relations between men and women. I knew it was a practice, however I was under the impression that slave breeding was not very popular, and mostly masters relied on natural reproduction. What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of slave breeding? In the essay by Jennings, she explicitly discusses the role of white, slave owners in the sexual abuse of women. Did masters rape and abuse women simply because they could or did the sexual stereotypes of African American women of the time (“animal – like”, foreign, African queens, exotic, sexually aggressive, etc.) play into it? How did mistresses react to the relationships between masters and female slaves and illegitimate children? Are there examples of mistresses mistreating a woman she suspected was sleeping with her husband (I know Weld discusses the “cruel mistress” but I did not get the impression that her violence was deemed inappropriate or based on accusations of infidelity). Was there any advantage(s) to sleeping with the master? -Mary Beth D.<br />
<br />
Going along with Mary Beth, having to do with the cruelty of slavery for women, through the abuse of black men...I too was taken back by the popularity of masters forcing sexual relations between men and women, and thought it was less popular than portrayed in the reading. It was a bit of a surprise to me...-Katie D.<br />
<br />
In Rose William's Story, that deals with an important issue of the extent to which slave owners interfered in slave familty life and encouraged slaves to reproduce...I enjoyed reading how it was in a woman slave's self-interest to have children, and child bearing increased her value as a slave and thereby diminished the liklihood of her sale and separation from family members. It was in the owners interest to encourage reproduction and thereby increase the extent of his slave property.-Katie D.<br />
<br />
I know that this is going to sound horrible and in many ways wrong, but the slave holders viewed their slaves as property, almost on the same grounds as cattle, right? That being said, maybe in thier minds they saw the breeding of slaves as nothing more then a farmer would see breeding cattle. Making sure the bloodlines were such that the product of the union will be of value and also insuring a certain number of offspring being born. As I said it sounds horrible but who knows what they might have been thinking, wrong thinking seems to be common place for slaveholders. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary. Slave owners did consider their slaves as livestock. If he manages to get a good breeding pair, it would save him a lot of money. If I were Rose, I would have felt sorely tempted to run that hot poker through the master and than Rufus. I admire the fact that Rose can be quite an understanding person. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Rose's story was indeed a very good example of how slave owners envisioned slaves as a very good investment and that the female slaves would indeed reproduce and, in turn, increase the number of slaves on one owner's property without the owner having to pay anything more. I felt bad that the master manipulated Rose, however, but I can completely understand how she felt she owed her master in return for keeping her with her family. It seemed like a very bizarre situation and it makes me wonder, was this typical? Were slaves normally made to feel guilty in order to obey their master, aside from the usual whipping or beating? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
<br />
In the readings one of the things that stood out the most to me was in Modern Problems the article by Mrs. Virgina Hayes Shepard when she mentions Diana. I was surprised to see that when the master went to Diana to have sexual relations with her Diana actually went to her mistress for help. I thought that white mistresses would react badly to the idea that their husbands would be sleeping with the slaves but in DIana's case the mistress sympathized instead of becoming angry. It is stated that in part this is because she was also afraid of her husband. Is it possible that this is more common than we know because both the slave women and the mistresses were scared to bring it up?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I think that Diana would be the exception to the rule. In class we talked about how severe racial hierarchy was and while both women and African Americans were oppressed they did not form a bond. I think that white women more frequently used slaves to exercise the limited power to which they had access (like in Cruel Mistress). -Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I thought the document titled "Lucinda, a Free Woman, Asks to Be Reenslaved" was really interesting. She probably thought about what her life would be like for her as a free Black woman, and she probably realized that there weren't that she wouldn't have a very good life. Her life as a slave might be slightly better than her life as a free Black woman because as a slave she was with her husband, had a small place to live and got some food. Her situation is similar to the situation of some criminals today. Sometimes criminals who have just been released from jail want to go right back to jail, because they might have a better life in jail than out of it. In jail, they at least have a roof over their head and food to eat. ~Katherine Stinson~<br />
<br />
I too was intrigued with Lucinda's plea to be reenslaved. I'm not sure I would say that she thought life would be "better" for her in slavery but rather perhaps she understood that in slvary she would find some sense of security. She would be reunited with her husband but at the same time there was no telling that he wouldn't be sold to another owner at some later point in time. I think it's difficult to understand or identitfy what Lucinda's rationing was in asking to be reenslaved other than the fact that she would be reunited with her husband.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I agree with Katherine. Lucinda probably felt like life would be too difficult for her in a state she wasn't familiar with and with people she didn't know. It would be difficult and scary to leave behind everything you know. It is also interesting to see a relationship of obvious affection if not love between slaves on different farms. However, why doesn't the book tell us what happens? I think the decision made by the commonwealth would be really interesting to read. -- Allison J. <br />
<br />
I have a question - Lucinda petitioned to be reenslaved so that she could be with her husband; she didn't want to be sent off somewhere so she could be free and leave him where he was. How typical was this? Is this an abnormal situation or were emancipated slaves really asking for this sort of treatment regularly? I feel as though this would be somewhat bizarre but I could be wrong. Thoughts? Answers? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
I realize this may be a dumb question but here it goes anyway, why are there such discrepancies among masters and their treatment of slaves? Are there any similiarities or connections among slave owners who were "kinder" to their slaves or among those masters who were unbearable? Were some more religious than others, did the age of the master play a role, the location, etc.? --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I was rather intrigued by the contrasting essays on freed black women, in Major Problems in American Women’s History. The first essay that should the devotion and love a freed slave had for her husband was very heart warming. She was willing to give up freedom in order to be with her love. Then there are the next two essays that inspire free slave women to rally together and free all the slaves. These last two essays cause me to believe that these women were highly educated because of the language they use to inspire others.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Wow. The essay that "Implores Other Free Black Women" to sign a petition to end slavery in D.C. is not so much imploring as yelling. I felt ashamed and lazy just reading it! This is really powerful writing and it is really very different from what I would have expected. The writer is obviously well educated, especially since they claim to be not only a woman but black as well. --Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison. The woman who wrote this obviously well educated, and she practically accuses all readers that they are slaves themselves - "a slave to hardness of heart." She's got some powerful words coming into play in this essay but she almost gets to the point of offensive. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Thelma Jennings essay, "The Sexual Exploitation of African American Slave Women," really hits home all the major points of this topic we discussed in class. Like the idea of female slaves having a tougher life than male slaves because not only did they have to do the work equal of men, but they also had to bear and raise children and also "cope with sexual abuse" by their masters. And the idea of "slave breeding" affected the family life too - it "made it very difficult for couples to establish family relationships." The whole female gender role system we often place on women of modern times and white women of the period is completely disrupted and destroyed for black slave women. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I was a bit confused by something in the reading that seemed contradictory. In the author's description of the "Rose William's Story" piece, he explains that it was in a woman slave's self-interest to have children because it increased her value as a slave and thereby diminished the likelihood of her sale and separation from family members. Then in the essay by Thelma Jennings she talks about women who practiced crude methods of birth control and abortion and inducing miscarriages as a form of passive resistance. She explains that this was common in a time when childbirth was dangerous and children could be sold at the master's whim. So which is it? Can it be both? --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_10_Questions/CommentsWeek 10 Questions/Comments2007-11-01T01:40:03Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>Woloch’s book--I found the reading The Cruel Mistress, to be a form of abolitionist propaganda to raise the argument about how inhumane slavery is. Angelina Grimke Weld would give great credibility to the abolitionist movement because of her observations of the southern community as she was once a southern herself. These observations are highly detailed as if it was fresh from her memories yet these accounts in her memories are at least fourteen years old. Thus it begs the question, did these mistresses really conduct themselves this way according to what Weld had witnessed? Are her memories that reliable? Or are these observations, in how mistresses treated their slaves, facts or exaggerations of the facts? –John Furner <br />
<br />
I think it is likely that these mistresses did conduct themselves in a way very similar to Weld's accounts even though a decent amount of time had passed between when she had witnessed the actions and when she recorded them for publishing. The treatment that she described I believe was very common of the slave owners to not see their slaves as fully human and therefore not treat them as such. However, the treatment that stood out most to me during this entry was how the mistress would not beat the slaves herself but have that slave's brother or sister beat them. I would think this would make them want to act out more.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In Woloch's book I was intreged by Sarah Haynesworth Gayle's diary entries. She sounded hurt by the actions of her slaves, as if she considered them to be her wayward children in a way. It goes back to what we discussed in class about the idea that slaveowners believed they were "helping" their slaves and that the slaves owed their masters for that. She sounded very disappointed for instance when some of her slaves started slacking off in their tasks as it were, and then she had to sell one of her favorite slaves because of it. I guess it is one thing to hear it in class and another in writing from the time the idea that they couldnt understand why the slaves would be unhappy. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
Going along with Mary, I was pretty bewildered by Gayle's attitudes towards her slaves. She says "it will not pain me now to part with the negroes... excessive indulgence has ruined them - they are idle yet full of complaints... I doubt if any of them would not believe a change of ownership could benefit them." She seems pretty annoyed at their behavior with this statement. She's almost getting sick of their attitude - and that leads me to what we discussed in class about white thoughts of slaves being like children. Gayle is getting sick of their attitude and is two seconds away from putting them in a time-out; it's just in this case the time-out is being sold to a different owner. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary, I think that it was interesting that Sarah Haynesworth Gayle was shocked that her slaves would rebell against her because it reflects the ideas we talked about in class where the masters would believe they were helping the slaves and they should be greatful. What also surprised me about this excerpt was that it shows that personal attachments between masters slaves did happen. Maybe these are just superficial attachments that don't really count as friendships, but it's closer than I would have initally thought possible. She made it seem like she cared about her slave Mike and thought about him long after he had gone. This is probably rare, but this shows that it did happen. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I feel as though Gayle's attitudes towards her slaves were originally somewhat atypical. She seemed to really care about her slaves and not really want seem like the overbearing plantation mistress. However, when the slaves began to rebel in minor ways, like we learned in class, I believe her feelings became just. I know this sounds kind of awful, but really, what's the point of having domestic help if they're not going to do anything? Gayle even mentions that her servants were driving her crazy because for about four months they have done absolutely nothing. It kind of shows that shift towards the rebellious nature of slaves and the way they affected their masters in minor ways instead of an all out revolt. - Kelly W <br />
<br />
Woloch’ Book—Reading Louisa S. Cheeves McCord attack on Stowe was a bit difficult to swallow. It seems to me that she plays right into the Patriarchal system of having to assume the role to take care of those less fortunate. Otherwise, she attempts to give credence to southern white man’s burden for the purpose to have slaves. I find it amusing when she writes, “We proclaim it, on the contrary, a Godlike dispensation, a providential caring for the weak, and a refuge for the portionless.” (219) Why I find this amusing is that she believes the white race must assume a god like status in the care of the less fortunate, thereby the less fortunate group could only prosper in a civilized world, if they were enslaved by the white race; white man’s burden. However, if the white race were so godlike or given providence as she claims, then why are southern slave owners dependant on slaves for their very existence?—John Furner<br />
<br />
I had a hard time understanding McCord's arguments. She put forth a conservative viewpoint that did not necessarily match her own power. McCord was educated, managed her own plantation with 200 slaves (until her marriage) and had a public forum for her opinions. She received most of her education in the North. Knowing how deep racism was ingrained in the southern lifestyle, I still expected a more enlightened view from a woman of such independence. -- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
In this week’s readings we see the cruelty of slavery for women, through the abuse and sexual exploitation of black women. Even whites were morally opposed to the institution of slavery as seen by Mary Chestnut’s diary. I was taken back by the popularity of masters forcing sexual relations between men and women. I knew it was a practice, however I was under the impression that slave breeding was not very popular, and mostly masters relied on natural reproduction. What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of slave breeding? In the essay by Jennings, she explicitly discusses the role of white, slave owners in the sexual abuse of women. Did masters rape and abuse women simply because they could or did the sexual stereotypes of African American women of the time (“animal – like”, foreign, African queens, exotic, sexually aggressive, etc.) play into it? How did mistresses react to the relationships between masters and female slaves and illegitimate children? Are there examples of mistresses mistreating a woman she suspected was sleeping with her husband (I know Weld discusses the “cruel mistress” but I did not get the impression that her violence was deemed inappropriate or based on accusations of infidelity). Was there any advantage(s) to sleeping with the master? -Mary Beth D.<br />
<br />
Going along with Mary Beth, having to do with the cruelty of slavery for women, through the abuse of black men...I too was taken back by the popularity of masters forcing sexual relations between men and women, and thought it was less popular than portrayed in the reading. It was a bit of a surprise to me...-Katie D.<br />
<br />
In Rose William's Story, that deals with an important issue of the extent to which slave owners interfered in slave familty life and encouraged slaves to reproduce...I enjoyed reading how it was in a woman slave's self-interest to have children, and child bearing increased her value as a slave and thereby diminished the liklihood of her sale and separation from family members. It was in the owners interest to encourage reproduction and thereby increase the extent of his slave property.-Katie D.<br />
<br />
I know that this is going to sound horrible and in many ways wrong, but the slave holders viewed their slaves as property, almost on the same grounds as cattle, right? That being said, maybe in thier minds they saw the breeding of slaves as nothing more then a farmer would see breeding cattle. Making sure the bloodlines were such that the product of the union will be of value and also insuring a certain number of offspring being born. As I said it sounds horrible but who knows what they might have been thinking, wrong thinking seems to be common place for slaveholders. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary. Slave owners did consider their slaves as livestock. If he manages to get a good breeding pair, it would save him a lot of money. If I were Rose, I would have felt sorely tempted to run that hot poker through the master and than Rufus. I admire the fact that Rose can be quite an understanding person. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Rose's story was indeed a very good example of how slave owners envisioned slaves as a very good investment and that the female slaves would indeed reproduce and, in turn, increase the number of slaves on one owner's property without the owner having to pay anything more. I felt bad that the master manipulated Rose, however, but I can completely understand how she felt she owed her master in return for keeping her with her family. It seemed like a very bizarre situation and it makes me wonder, was this typical? Were slaves normally made to feel guilty in order to obey their master, aside from the usual whipping or beating? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
<br />
In the readings one of the things that stood out the most to me was in Modern Problems the article by Mrs. Virgina Hayes Shepard when she mentions Diana. I was surprised to see that when the master went to Diana to have sexual relations with her Diana actually went to her mistress for help. I thought that white mistresses would react badly to the idea that their husbands would be sleeping with the slaves but in DIana's case the mistress sympathized instead of becoming angry. It is stated that in part this is because she was also afraid of her husband. Is it possible that this is more common than we know because both the slave women and the mistresses were scared to bring it up?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I think that Diana would be the exception to the rule. In class we talked about how severe racial hierarchy was and while both women and African Americans were oppressed they did not form a bond. I think that white women more frequently used slaves to exercise the limited power to which they had access (like in Cruel Mistress). -Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I thought the document titled "Lucinda, a Free Woman, Asks to Be Reenslaved" was really interesting. She probably thought about what her life would be like for her as a free Black woman, and she probably realized that there weren't that she wouldn't have a very good life. Her life as a slave might be slightly better than her life as a free Black woman because as a slave she was with her husband, had a small place to live and got some food. Her situation is similar to the situation of some criminals today. Sometimes criminals who have just been released from jail want to go right back to jail, because they might have a better life in jail than out of it. In jail, they at least have a roof over their head and food to eat. ~Katherine Stinson~<br />
<br />
I too was intrigued with Lucinda's plea to be reenslaved. I'm not sure I would say that she thought life would be "better" for her in slavery but rather perhaps she understood that in slvary she would find some sense of security. She would be reunited with her husband but at the same time there was no telling that he wouldn't be sold to another owner at some later point in time. I think it's difficult to understand or identitfy what Lucinda's rationing was in asking to be reenslaved other than the fact that she would be reunited with her husband.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I agree with Katherine. Lucinda probably felt like life would be too difficult for her in a state she wasn't familiar with and with people she didn't know. It would be difficult and scary to leave behind everything you know. It is also interesting to see a relationship of obvious affection if not love between slaves on different farms. However, why doesn't the book tell us what happens? I think the decision made by the commonwealth would be really interesting to read. -- Allison J. <br />
<br />
I have a question - Lucinda petitioned to be reenslaved so that she could be with her husband; she didn't want to be sent off somewhere so she could be free and leave him where he was. How typical was this? Is this an abnormal situation or were emancipated slaves really asking for this sort of treatment regularly? I feel as though this would be somewhat bizarre but I could be wrong. Thoughts? Answers? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
I realize this may be a dumb question but here it goes anyway, why are there such discrepancies among masters and their treatment of slaves? Are there any similiarities or connections among slave owners who were "kinder" to their slaves or among those masters who were unbearable? Were some more religious than others, did the age of the master play a role, the location, etc.? --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I was rather intrigued by the contrasting essays on freed black women, in Major Problems in American Women’s History. The first essay that should the devotion and love a freed slave had for her husband was very heart warming. She was willing to give up freedom in order to be with her love. Then there are the next two essays that inspire free slave women to rally together and free all the slaves. These last two essays cause me to believe that these women were highly educated because of the language they use to inspire others.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Wow. The essay that "Implores Other Free Black Women" to sign a petition to end slavery in D.C. is not so much imploring as yelling. I felt ashamed and lazy just reading it! This is really powerful writing and it is really very different from what I would have expected. The writer is obviously well educated, especially since they claim to be not only a woman but black as well. --Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison. The woman who wrote this obviously well educated, and she practically accuses all readers that they are slaves themselves - "a slave to hardness of heart." She's got some powerful words coming into play in this essay but she almost gets to the point of offensive. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Thelma Jennings essay, "The Sexual Exploitation of African American Slave Women," really hits home all the major points of this topic we discussed in class. Like the idea of female slaves having a tougher life than male slaves because not only did they have to do the work equal of men, but they also had to bear and raise children and also "cope with sexual abuse" by their masters. And the idea of "slave breeding" affected the family life too - it "made it very difficult for couples to establish family relationships." The whole female gender role system we often place on women of modern times and white women of the period is completely disrupted and destroyed for black slave women. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I was a bit confused by something in the reading that seemed contradictory. In the author's description of the "Rose William's Story" piece, he explains that it was in a woman slave's self-interest to have children because it increased her value as a slave and thereby diminished the likelihood of her sale and separation from family members. Then in the essay by Thelma Jennings she talks about women who practiced crude methods of birth control and abortion and inducing miscarriages as a form of passive resistance. She explains that this was common in a time when childbirth was dangerous and children could be sold at the master's whim. So which is it? Can it be both? --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_9_Questions/CommentsWeek 9 Questions/Comments2007-10-25T00:42:45Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>I’m rather amazed with the strict order imposed on a middle class housewife, as read in Catharine Beecher’s “System and Order”. Each day of the week is filled with a specific chore that is repeated the following week. It seems like such a lifestyle would become repetitious and mundane, yet Beecher refers to this “taste for regularity” as a “blessing”. How come?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I also found the piece “System and Order” by Catharine Beecher very interesting. The idea of a system for household duties and turning the house into a well-functioning, successful entity I think is reflective of the shifts going on in society. The shift from home production to office/factory production, the shift from agricultural, home-made/imported goods to finished goods made in factories, and the shift of men outside the home are all reflected in this piece. This piece reminded me of another piece I read in another class about time and how the introduction of clocks and watches placed an added stress to productivity both in factories and in the home. Similarly, women were expected to budget their time, assigning a specific amount of time per task. Beecher recommends dividing the tasks, spreading them throughout the week, and using children as a means to be more productive. Do these self-help manuals place more stress on women to live up to an ideal? Do you think Beecher’s advice intimidates women? How often was this advice practiced or did it remain an ideal? Do we see any similarities between Beecher’s advice and modern day life? –Mary Beth Dillane <br />
<br />
In regards to Mary Beth's question, I do think self-help manuals put more stress on women. Beecher's writing makes it seem that if there are any problems in the home than it is the woman's fault. According to Beecher, all a woman has to do is follow her "habit of system and order" and all should be fine. However, this obviously will not work for everyone. The proliferation of these self help manuals just perpetuates the notion of the idealized family. - Fiona C.<br />
<br />
When reading "System and Order", I found it very intersting when they said that "the success of democratic institutions all depends upon the intellectual and moral character of the mass of the people...It is equally conceded that the formation of the moral and intellectual character of the young is committed mainly to the female hand...Let the woman of a country be made virtuous and intelligent, and the men will certainly be the same. The proper education of a man decides the welfare of an individual; but educate a women, and the interests of a whole family are secured..." This is quite the assumption here.--Katie D.<br />
<br />
When reading the “Reports on Western Schools” letters from two teachers to Catharine Beecher, it is interesting to see the stark contrast of experiences. The first teacher seems to have zero amenities. She uses a “single board for a writing desk, a few bricks for andirons, and a stick of wood for shovel and tongs”. Some of her students are so poor they cannot afford shoes. She makes subtle hints that she is in need of money for purchasing suitable books, maps, slates, pencils, and paper, but we never read if she ever received any assistance. The other teacher had a new schoolhouse built for her which included writing desks and a black board. It is obvious that she is fairly well off in her new surroundings. Surprisingly, we find out that she has received some money from Mrs. Beecher which she used to purchase soap, candles, and a privacy screen. What would provoke Mrs. Beecher to give money to one of her pupils to spend personally while her other pupil is struggling to afford necessities to develop a decent school?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I also found it interesting, in "Reports on Western Schools", to see such a contrast in these teachers experiences. I too was wondering, along with Lisa,...if one teacher had very little ameneties, and the other was so well off...why did Mrs. Beecher give money to the teacher that was well off,to spend personally, when the other teacher was struggling to provide even a descent school?--Katie D.<br />
<br />
Catharine M. Sedgwick's journal entry "First to None" seemed much more personal than journal entries we have used as sources for this class. For example, contrasting this to Martha Ballards "diary" seems impossible because they read like two different types of sources, though they both have the same name (journal or diary). Is Sedgwick's very personal writing a sign of her affinity towards writing and bottled up private dissatisfaction, or is this more personal style of journal writing a trend in the nineteenth century?-- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
In her letter from Lowell Harriet Farley writes about the "Yankee spirit" of the women in the mills. She writes using the rhetoric of the revolution (like we discussed in class) using terms like independence and freedom. It seems that the community of women provided a safe and affirming place for women to further develop and voice their beliefs. --Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
Although Farley's letter was supposed to defend mill work, it seems to me that Farley was not that happy. She writes that "the girls here are not contented," her feet ache and swell, and that a woman's right hand becomes larger than her left. Maybe this life would still seem better to women who were used to working on farms? - Fiona Cobb<br />
<br />
When I read Farley's piece I thought of it as propaganda for the mill work. Since the journal it was published in was funded by mill owners themselves and this piece was a fictional correspondence. I felt like they had to include some of the negative aspects about mill life (such as their feet ache and swell) to make the piece seem more credible and realistic but the overall message was to defend the work. Any time they said something negative about the work, it was always countered with a positive that outweighed the bad point. --Alex K. <br />
<br />
While it was a step forward in the fact that some able women were able to leave the farms and work in mills and plants such as the one in Lancaster, I think it is important to remember that it was men who controlled these operations. The rules of the houses were quite rigid as to how quiet a woman must be upon entering the house, where a woman was to sit at the table, and how a woman was to behave at meal times, etc. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Reading the petition of the Cherokee women was upsetting. The women ask the chiefs and warriors of the council to reconsider parting the land which they once owned before the US government overtook it. The women do not understand what else they must do to be accepted into white culture. They express their advances from a "savage" nation to a "civilized" one. To hear them use those terms while speaking of themselves was hard to read. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Emma Willard's letter to her sister is really pretty amusing. It sounds like a really horrible thing to say to a sister about to get married, but on the other hand it doesn't sound that different than what a lot of newly divorced people would say today. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
It is so amazing that Amelia Knight crossed the Oregon Trail, and faced all the tribulations that this included, while pregnant! She cared for the children, walked long distances, and kept a fairly useful log of there trip with only a few mentions of being "sick." Also I really found her comments about the "romantic" hills covered with snow amusing. She can't help but put a little of her personality into this log while most of the diaries we have read have been fairly dry. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
<br />
In Catherine Beecher’s housekeeping manual she discusses the virtue of “system and order” and urges housewives to devote separate days of the week for specific household tasks such as Tuesdays for washing and Wednesday for ironing etc. I was first struck by the wide array of household tasks women were expected to perform and it is clear that maintaining the house was a full time job. While there were many comments on how these advice manuals would add more stress to women’s lives I think they would help women learn how to run their households more efficiently. Beecher emphasizes that women should delegate more tasks to their children and learn how to organize their household items. Women today still seek the same advice on how to stay organized and delegate chores to family members in order to carve out more alone time for themselves. For instance an article I just read in this month’s Self magazine gave 30 tips for how women can get more organized. <br />
After reading Sarah Ayer’s journal entries describing having to uproot her life and move to Massachusetts to live with her husband’s relatives when she became a widow I was surprised that the wife of a physician would have to go through all of this. I assume that Sarah’s husband left no will and she was not put in charge of the estate because it seemed like her only choice was to move in with her husband’s relatives which she was not happy to do. –Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
Woloch mentions the new ideal of romantic love as the reason to marry made some more hesitant to marry. From my family class last semester we learned that many nineteenth-century women went through a “marriage trauma,” worrying about what would happen if a spouse did not live up to their hopes and high ideals. Because of this singlehood therefore rose, the insistence that marriage should be based on love implied that it's immoral to marry for other reasons and that marriage based on love/companionship spurred some to call for more liberal divorce laws. Maybe this was a bit later in the century though. --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_9_Questions/CommentsWeek 9 Questions/Comments2007-10-25T00:25:20Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>I’m rather amazed with the strict order imposed on a middle class housewife, as read in Catharine Beecher’s “System and Order”. Each day of the week is filled with a specific chore that is repeated the following week. It seems like such a lifestyle would become repetitious and mundane, yet Beecher refers to this “taste for regularity” as a “blessing”. How come?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I also found the piece “System and Order” by Catharine Beecher very interesting. The idea of a system for household duties and turning the house into a well-functioning, successful entity I think is reflective of the shifts going on in society. The shift from home production to office/factory production, the shift from agricultural, home-made/imported goods to finished goods made in factories, and the shift of men outside the home are all reflected in this piece. This piece reminded me of another piece I read in another class about time and how the introduction of clocks and watches placed an added stress to productivity both in factories and in the home. Similarly, women were expected to budget their time, assigning a specific amount of time per task. Beecher recommends dividing the tasks, spreading them throughout the week, and using children as a means to be more productive. Do these self-help manuals place more stress on women to live up to an ideal? Do you think Beecher’s advice intimidates women? How often was this advice practiced or did it remain an ideal? Do we see any similarities between Beecher’s advice and modern day life? –Mary Beth Dillane <br />
<br />
In regards to Mary Beth's question, I do think self-help manuals put more stress on women. Beecher's writing makes it seem that if there are any problems in the home than it is the woman's fault. According to Beecher, all a woman has to do is follow her "habit of system and order" and all should be fine. However, this obviously will not work for everyone. The proliferation of these self help manuals just perpetuates the notion of the idealized family. - Fiona C.<br />
<br />
When reading "System and Order", I found it very intersting when they said that "the success of democratic institutions all depends upon the intellectual and moral character of the mass of the people...It is equally conceded that the formation of the moral and intellectual character of the young is committed mainly to the female hand...Let the woman of a country be made virtuous and intelligent, and the men will certainly be the same. The proper education of a man decides the welfare of an individual; but educate a women, and the interests of a whole family are secured..." This is quite the assumption here.--Katie D.<br />
<br />
When reading the “Reports on Western Schools” letters from two teachers to Catharine Beecher, it is interesting to see the stark contrast of experiences. The first teacher seems to have zero amenities. She uses a “single board for a writing desk, a few bricks for andirons, and a stick of wood for shovel and tongs”. Some of her students are so poor they cannot afford shoes. She makes subtle hints that she is in need of money for purchasing suitable books, maps, slates, pencils, and paper, but we never read if she ever received any assistance. The other teacher had a new schoolhouse built for her which included writing desks and a black board. It is obvious that she is fairly well off in her new surroundings. Surprisingly, we find out that she has received some money from Mrs. Beecher which she used to purchase soap, candles, and a privacy screen. What would provoke Mrs. Beecher to give money to one of her pupils to spend personally while her other pupil is struggling to afford necessities to develop a decent school?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I also found it interesting, in "Reports on Western Schools", to see such a contrast in these teachers experiences. I too was wondering, along with Lisa,...if one teacher had very little ameneties, and the other was so well off...why did Mrs. Beecher give money to the teacher that was well off,to spend personally, when the other teacher was struggling to provide even a descent school?--Katie D.<br />
<br />
Catharine M. Sedgwick's journal entry "First to None" seemed much more personal than journal entries we have used as sources for this class. For example, contrasting this to Martha Ballards "diary" seems impossible because they read like two different types of sources, though they both have the same name (journal or diary). Is Sedgwick's very personal writing a sign of her affinity towards writing and bottled up private dissatisfaction, or is this more personal style of journal writing a trend in the nineteenth century?-- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
In her letter from Lowell Harriet Farley writes about the "Yankee spirit" of the women in the mills. She writes using the rhetoric of the revolution (like we discussed in class) using terms like independence and freedom. It seems that the community of women provided a safe and affirming place for women to further develop and voice their beliefs. --Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
Although Farley's letter was supposed to defend mill work, it seems to me that Farley was not that happy. She writes that "the girls here are not contented," her feet ache and swell, and that a woman's right hand becomes larger than her left. Maybe this life would still seem better to women who were used to working on farms? - Fiona Cobb<br />
<br />
When I thought of Farley's piece I thought of it as propaganda for the mill work. Since the journal it was published in was funded by mill owners themselves and this piece was a fictional correspondence. I felt like they had to include some of the negative aspects about mill life (such as their feet ache and swell) to make the piece seem more credible and realistic but the overall message was to defend the work. Any time they said something negative about the work, it was always countered with a positive that outweighed the bad point. --Alex K. <br />
<br />
While it was a step forward in the fact that some able women were able to leave the farms and work in mills and plants such as the one in Lancaster, I think it is important to remember that it was men who controlled these operations. The rules of the houses were quite rigid as to how quiet a woman must be upon entering the house, where a woman was to sit at the table, and how a woman was to behave at meal times, etc. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Reading the petition of the Cherokee women was upsetting. The women ask the chiefs and warriors of the council to reconsider parting the land which they once owned before the US government overtook it. The women do not understand what else they must do to be accepted into white culture. They express their advances from a "savage" nation to a "civilized" one. To hear them use those terms while speaking of themselves was hard to read. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Emma Willard's letter to her sister is really pretty amusing. It sounds like a really horrible thing to say to a sister about to get married, but on the other hand it doesn't sound that different than what a lot of newly divorced people would say today. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
It is so amazing that Amelia Knight crossed the Oregon Trail, and faced all the tribulations that this included, while pregnant! She cared for the children, walked long distances, and kept a fairly useful log of there trip with only a few mentions of being "sick." Also I really found her comments about the "romantic" hills covered with snow amusing. She can't help but put a little of her personality into this log while most of the diaries we have read have been fairly dry. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
<br />
In Catherine Beecher’s housekeeping manual she discusses the virtue of “system and order” and urges housewives to devote separate days of the week for specific household tasks such as Tuesdays for washing and Wednesday for ironing etc. I was first struck by the wide array of household tasks women were expected to perform and it is clear that maintaining the house was a full time job. While there were many comments on how these advice manuals would add more stress to women’s lives I think they would help women learn how to run their households more efficiently. Beecher emphasizes that women should delegate more tasks to their children and learn how to organize their household items. Women today still seek the same advice on how to stay organized and delegate chores to family members in order to carve out more alone time for themselves. For instance an article I just read in this month’s Self magazine gave 30 tips for how women can get more organized. <br />
After reading Sarah Ayer’s journal entries describing having to uproot her life and move to Massachusetts to live with her husband’s relatives when she became a widow I was surprised that the wife of a physician would have to go through all of this. I assume that Sarah’s husband left no will and she was not put in charge of the estate because it seemed like her only choice was to move in with her husband’s relatives which she was not happy to do. –Caitlin Quinn</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_8_Questions/CommentsWeek 8 Questions/Comments2007-10-18T03:25:25Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found it interesting in ''Women Alone: Property and Personalism'' how women expressed their displeasure with family members openly in their wills by leaving them out or adding conditions to the inheritance. Meanwhile men, when writing their wills, adhered to a basic format. I liked how the author made clear that even though women were limited in their influence and power in legal and political rights, they asserted their power through their wills. - Elizabeth Frank <br />
<br />
I too though it was very interesting how women openly expressed their displeasure in their wills by leaving them out or adding conditions to the inheritance, and as for the men, they just followed a simple format. These women finally got the change to assert their power through their wills, something that they never got the chance to do before...as far as political and legal rights are concerned. -Katie D.<br />
<br />
The women of Petersburg seemed to be self-sufficient. I was surprised to hear women wrote a great many of the wills. When it was mentioned how they highly personalized their wills, it reminded me of how a grandmother of mine use to threaten her relations about leaving them out of her will. This same grandmother also had good control of the family finances. I think she was pretty unique. -Cheryl<br />
<br />
It is sort of understandable that a woman would choose favorites, since the patriarch of a family would probably be treated with respect by all members of the family, but a matriarch? I am sure that many family members treated her like she was incompetent and unsuited to lead the family. Would the son-in-law have left that same clause reprimanding Bolling's husband, had he been alive? I doubt it. I wouldn't leave them anything either! -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
In Woloch's book, Malefactors and Complainants, Women were very active participants in the New England county courts, where they appeared in several capacities. It was interesting to me that occasionally wives served as attorneys for their husbands;colonies that accepted this practice did so on the grounds that the wife was legally an extension of her husband. -Katie D.<br />
<br />
It doesn't really make sense to me why the wives were able to serve as attorneys for their husbands though if in other capacities women were not thought to be rational or logical or capable of higher thought. Why then would the men put their "fate" in their wives hands? Or did an attorney have a more limited role then, or have a different meaning? --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I gathered from the reading in Woloch that the fame sol traders were not major players but rather women for one reason or another needed to earn a living. The laws passed were to both protect the feme sol traders from being taken advantage of and keep them from taking advantage of others. -Cheryl<br />
<br />
In Woloch we are shown that in New England it was easier for women to receive a divorce from the courts than it was in the Chesapeake region. I actually found this surprising. Because New England was formed around strict religious ideals I expected that divorce would be harder to get approved of. I understand that divorce was given based on if a woman was abused, if adultery was committed or if a wife or husband was left for an extended period without contact from the other. HOWEVER, why was it less difficult to get a divorce in a region with such strong foundations in religion? I feel like I'm missing a connection someplace in there.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Maybe this is due to the layout of towns in New England verses the Chesapeake. Towns are more prevelant in the north and, perhaps because of this, courts and town councils seem to be more prevelant as well. When you live in an isolated area, probably far removed from the courts and your neighbors, it would be harder to go to the court for anything at all so something like a domestic dispute would be hard to take to court. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
In response to Elizabeth's comment, I was wondering how varying views of marriage may have affected divorce rates in New England and the Chesapeake region. I think we've read that the Puritans viewed marriage more as a civil union than a sacred bond, so it may not actually be contradictory for them to allow divorce. What type of religion, if any, flourished in the Chesapeake? -- Ashley H. <br />
<br />
Elizabeth I think it would be interesting to study how many cases were brought to court and how many divorces were actually approved. While we see New England as strange for allowing divorce in such a strict, Puritan society we are not fully aware of how common the practice was or how easy of a time an abused or neglected woman had winning her case. Another section in Woloch I found fascinating was this idea of Feme Sole Traders which allowed married women to engage in businesses. I thought it was interesting how South Carolina had more "liberal laws." What could be a motive for that? Did a particular trade lend itself to this idea of Feme Sole Traders? How common was the practice? Was it socially unacceptable to take economic matters into one's own hands and not leave it up to the man? --Mary Beth Dillane<br />
<br />
I also was amazed with the section on the Feme Sole Traders. I thought it was unacceptable for women to be able to take on such economic matters, especially after what happened in the Dutch Colonies when the English arrived. Was this practice of the woman being a major player economically really that common? - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
In another class I have taken it was mentioned that while married women in New England had few legal rights they were more able to divorce because of the Puritan idea of what a home and familiy and patriarchal household. If a marriage was not the ideal marriage or if a man was not upholding his patriarchal responsibilities a woman was within her rights to divorce him. However, who knows what other motives New England law makers might have had. Also on the Feme Sole Traders, the question on a particular trade is a good one. If I had to take a guess I would say whatever trade she might want to get involved in, but also maybe not a trade that was of a masculine sort, like selling men's clothes or something like that. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I'm curious about how sentencing for crimes may have been affected by gender.For example, the reading mentions that Mary Chelson was whipped and had to pay a fee for "committing of fornication.... and having a bastard childe." In the trial Chelson named the father of her child, what would his punishment have been?-- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I was also interested in the sentencing for crimes and its relationship to gender. I found it interesting that on one occassion, the "Backway Sentenced", the man got whipped five more times for the woman for committing fornication before marriage. Why did the amount of whipping for fornication change? It seems like for the most part the charge was 15 slashes (even if a bastard child is involved). However, it fluctuates based on the case, sometimes 10 and a small monetary payment, sometimes 20. Why is this? Were some charged less because they were deemed "better" citizens? Fornication is fornication. How can you say one case is worse than another?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I found the excert about the sentencing of crimes very interesting. I was amazed at some of the things that people were charged for. For example the people who were fined for fornication before thier marriage. SInce there were a lot of fornication cases in this piece I probably shouldnt have been surprised, but they were MARRIED. Who should care that they had "fornicated" before marriage. And why did they tell people anyway, that seemed silly. Also what was up with that one lady, Margaret Brewster, who disguised herself and came to meeting? --Mary P.<br />
<br />
Maybe it wasn't that they told people about the fornication but that they were caught fornicating when, or where, they shouldn't have been. This is the best explaination I can come up with because you're right that it would be silly for them to admit to committing fornication before marriage. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I definitely agree with the comments about the fornication before marriage and the punishments of such, but when taking a look at their society that they lived in, it certainly correlates. I studied in another class that these activities and others that demonstrated individualistic tendencies or independence or even anything that was outside the community norm were severely "frowned upon" and punishment was necessary. Anything to keep the community cohesive and respected. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I believe that, in this deeply religious society, confessing to fornication was essentially confessing to a sin, with the thought process being to repent and accept the punishment. Perhaps reasoning for this was to ensure a Christian afterlife or to prevent a "bastard child" from being ostracized by the surrounding community.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I was just amazed, in general, that women were allowed to leave wills and have some say in what happened with property after someone's death. I didn't realize that women were allowed to have this much power in the relationship, was this a new ideology? Or had this always been common? - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I too was surprised that women were able to have a say in what happened to their property after their death. I also found it interesting that through antenuptial contracts, women could retain come control over their property. I thought that when a woman married, she became the property of her husband.-- E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Right, when a woman married she did become the property of her husband, but if the husband died first, I believe she was entitled to 1/3 of the assests. I also noticed that much of the stuff women left to people in their wills was movable property so it wasn't like the women were dealing with the larger issues, like property. --Alex K. <br />
<br />
I was surprised at the Tennison Decision portion of "A Separation Decision" in Wolock. Many of the other divorces or separations seemed to be granted for desertion, and in these cases it makes economic sense to allow a woman to remarry so she does not become a drain on the community. However, in this case John Tennisson was willing to support his wife under his own roof, but she was granted a legal separation because "he could never entertain that love and respect for his said wife . . . as is properly due" (75). Loveless marriages couldn't have been that uncommon; I have to wonder what was going on behind the scenes that made this relationship worse than others. ---Ashley H.<br />
<br />
When reading Suzanne Lebsock's article, I was interested in the fact that white women sometimes left money and other provisions to their slaves when writing their wills. More women than men gave slaves their freedom through their wills. One woman's provisions for her slaves were written with more love and detail than were her provisions for her son and grandchildren according to Lebsock. I think this empahsizes the importance and effect of individual relationships that some white women had with their slaves.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I was fascinated reading the Lebsock's article. I did a research paper several years ago about the subject of women and the wills they left behind and it was really common to see where one child would get either everything or most everything. Then when the census records were looked at as well you could see where the woman had several children but some got nothing. That to me was really interesting to see how women divided up their property.~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
Question in response to Mary Beth's comment: Why is that so? Were women leaving their property to the one child that was the favorite? Or just the oldest child? And why exclude some of them from getting anything at all? Men seemed to have certain guidelines that dictated who got what (i.e. oldest son got most or all of the inheritance) but women did not necessarily have those guidelines. So is this an example of a freedom they had, giving their property to whomever they choose? -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
It says on page 79 in Woloch that Goodwife Amee was "presented by the grandjury for absenting her selfe from the publique worship of God." Does this mean that she was brought to court because she left a public display of worship on the Sabbath (Sunday?)? I'm confused about the antenuptial contracts, didn't the wife loose her legal standing when she became married, or was this more of a colonial-time period thing? If it was, how did it change and why? It seems like such a beneficial thing to men, and giving women's limited legal standing anyways, I'm at a loss to explain the change. The end of the blackboard article notes that women were more sensitive to people in precarious economic positions, or their tendency to reward their 'favorite' people, which I found interesting in how that is such a contrast to the tendencies of men. An obvious explanation might be that women could easily sympathize with a slave since, perhaps, they saw their own position in a similar light? -Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
In the Wolock reading, under the Divorce in New England section, the most common reason for granting a divorce was abandonment by the husband. I'm sure there are varied reasons why these men left their wives but none of the court records state why any of them left. It's probably hard to tell, but did the courts know why these men were leaving? Did the wives? What was the most common reason for abandonment?-- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I also wondered why abandonment was the most common reason for divorce in New England because I assumed it would be abuse. Were all these men running off and starting other families or did they leave their wives because they felt they could set up a better life for themselves somewhere else?<br />
In the Woloch piece on “Divorce in New England” it was interesting to read that of the thirteen colonies only Massachusetts and Connecticut offered absolute divorce. Even though absolute divorce existed in the 17th century a women could only petition the court for divorce in cases of adultery, desertion, or an absence of seven years. I wonder what the court’s reasoning was behind making a women wait seven years before petitioning the court for a divorce. Seven years seems like a very long time for a woman to have to live by herself and care for her family without her husband’s support. <br />
When Elizabeth Griswould petitioned the court to have sole custody of her children it was interesting to see the court ordering the children’s father to pay child support payments. I was not aware that courts ordered parents to pay child support as early as the seventeenth century.--Caitlin Quinn</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_8_Questions/CommentsWeek 8 Questions/Comments2007-10-18T03:01:23Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found it interesting in ''Women Alone: Property and Personalism'' how women expressed their displeasure with family members openly in their wills by leaving them out or adding conditions to the inheritance. Meanwhile men, when writing their wills, adhered to a basic format. I liked how the author made clear that even though women were limited in their influence and power in legal and political rights, they asserted their power through their wills. - Elizabeth Frank <br />
<br />
I too though it was very interesting how women openly expressed their displeasure in their wills by leaving them out or adding conditions to the inheritance, and as for the men, they just followed a simple format. These women finally got the change to assert their power through their wills, something that they never got the chance to do before...as far as political and legal rights are concerned. -Katie D.<br />
<br />
The women of Petersburg seemed to be self-sufficient. I was surprised to hear women wrote a great many of the wills. When it was mentioned how they highly personalized their wills, it reminded me of how a grandmother of mine use to threaten her relations about leaving them out of her will. This same grandmother also had good control of the family finances. I think she was pretty unique. -Cheryl<br />
<br />
It is sort of understandable that a woman would choose favorites, since the patriarch of a family would probably be treated with respect by all members of the family, but a matriarch? I am sure that many family members treated her like she was incompetent and unsuited to lead the family. Would the son-in-law have left that same clause reprimanding Bolling's husband, had he been alive? I doubt it. I wouldn't leave them anything either! -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
In Woloch's book, Malefactors and Complainants, Women were very active participants in the New England county courts, where they appeared in several capacities. It was interesting to me that occasionally wives served as attorneys for their husbands;colonies that accepted this practice did so on the grounds that the wife was legally an extension of her husband. -Katie D.<br />
<br />
It doesn't really make sense to me why the wives were able to serve as attorneys for their husbands though if in other capacities women were not thought to be rational or logical or capable of higher thought. Why then would the men put their "fate" in their wives hands? Or did an attorney have a more limited role then, or have a different meaning? --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I gathered from the reading in Woloch that the fame sol traders were not major players but rather women for one reason or another needed to earn a living. The laws passed were to both protect the feme sol traders from being taken advantage of and keep them from taking advantage of others. -Cheryl<br />
<br />
In Woloch we are shown that in New England it was easier for women to receive a divorce from the courts than it was in the Chesapeake region. I actually found this surprising. Because New England was formed around strict religious ideals I expected that divorce would be harder to get approved of. I understand that divorce was given based on if a woman was abused, if adultery was committed or if a wife or husband was left for an extended period without contact from the other. HOWEVER, why was it less difficult to get a divorce in a region with such strong foundations in religion? I feel like I'm missing a connection someplace in there.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Maybe this is due to the layout of towns in New England verses the Chesapeake. Towns are more prevelant in the north and, perhaps because of this, courts and town councils seem to be more prevelant as well. When you live in an isolated area, probably far removed from the courts and your neighbors, it would be harder to go to the court for anything at all so something like a domestic dispute would be hard to take to court. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
In response to Elizabeth's comment, I was wondering how varying views of marriage may have affected divorce rates in New England and the Chesapeake region. I think we've read that the Puritans viewed marriage more as a civil union than a sacred bond, so it may not actually be contradictory for them to allow divorce. What type of religion, if any, flourished in the Chesapeake? -- Ashley H. <br />
<br />
Elizabeth I think it would be interesting to study how many cases were brought to court and how many divorces were actually approved. While we see New England as strange for allowing divorce in such a strict, Puritan society we are not fully aware of how common the practice was or how easy of a time an abused or neglected woman had winning her case. Another section in Woloch I found fascinating was this idea of Feme Sole Traders which allowed married women to engage in businesses. I thought it was interesting how South Carolina had more "liberal laws." What could be a motive for that? Did a particular trade lend itself to this idea of Feme Sole Traders? How common was the practice? Was it socially unacceptable to take economic matters into one's own hands and not leave it up to the man? --Mary Beth Dillane<br />
<br />
I also was amazed with the section on the Feme Sole Traders. I thought it was unacceptable for women to be able to take on such economic matters, especially after what happened in the Dutch Colonies when the English arrived. Was this practice of the woman being a major player economically really that common? - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
In another class I have taken it was mentioned that while married women in New England had few legal rights they were more able to divorce because of the Puritan idea of what a home and familiy and patriarchal household. If a marriage was not the ideal marriage or if a man was not upholding his patriarchal responsibilities a woman was within her rights to divorce him. However, who knows what other motives New England law makers might have had. Also on the Feme Sole Traders, the question on a particular trade is a good one. If I had to take a guess I would say whatever trade she might want to get involved in, but also maybe not a trade that was of a masculine sort, like selling men's clothes or something like that. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I'm curious about how sentencing for crimes may have been affected by gender.For example, the reading mentions that Mary Chelson was whipped and had to pay a fee for "committing of fornication.... and having a bastard childe." In the trial Chelson named the father of her child, what would his punishment have been?-- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I found the excert about the sentencing of crimes very interesting. I was amazed at some of the things that people were charged for. For example the people who were fined for fornication before thier marriage. SInce there were a lot of fornication cases in this piece I probably shouldnt have been surprised, but they were MARRIED. Who should care that they had "fornicated" before marriage. And why did they tell people anyway, that seemed silly. Also what was up with that one lady, Margaret Brewster, who disguised herself and came to meeting? --Mary P.<br />
<br />
Maybe it wasn't that they told people about the fornication but that they were caught fornicating when, or where, they shouldn't have been. This is the best explaination I can come up with because you're right that it would be silly for them to admit to committing fornication before marriage. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I definitely agree with the comments about the fornication before marriage and the punishments of such, but when taking a look at their society that they lived in, it certainly correlates. I studied in another class that these activities and others that demonstrated individualistic tendencies or independence or even anything that was outside the community norm were severely "frowned upon" and punishment was necessary. Anything to keep the community cohesive and respected. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I believe that, in this deeply religious society, confessing to fornication was essentially confessing to a sin, with the thought process being to repent and accept the punishment. Perhaps reasoning for this was to ensure a Christian afterlife or to prevent a "bastard child" from being ostracized by the surrounding community.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I was just amazed, in general, that women were allowed to leave wills and have some say in what happened with property after someone's death. I didn't realize that women were allowed to have this much power in the relationship, was this a new ideology? Or had this always been common? - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I too was surprised that women were able to have a say in what happened to their property after their death. I also found it interesting that through antenuptial contracts, women could retain come control over their property. I thought that when a woman married, she became the property of her husband.-- E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I was surprised at the Tennison Decision portion of "A Separation Decision" in Wolock. Many of the other divorces or separations seemed to be granted for desertion, and in these cases it makes economic sense to allow a woman to remarry so she does not become a drain on the community. However, in this case John Tennisson was willing to support his wife under his own roof, but she was granted a legal separation because "he could never entertain that love and respect for his said wife . . . as is properly due" (75). Loveless marriages couldn't have been that uncommon; I have to wonder what was going on behind the scenes that made this relationship worse than others. ---Ashley H.<br />
<br />
When reading Suzanne Lebsock's article, I was interested in the fact that white women sometimes left money and other provisions to their slaves when writing their wills. More women than men gave slaves their freedom through their wills. One woman's provisions for her slaves were written with more love and detail than were her provisions for her son and grandchildren according to Lebsock. I think this empahsizes the importance and effect of individual relationships that some white women had with their slaves.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I was fascinated reading the Lebsock's article. I did a research paper several years ago about the subject of women and the wills they left behind and it was really common to see where one child would get either everything or most everything. Then when the census records were looked at as well you could see where the woman had several children but some got nothing. That to me was really interesting to see how women divided up their property.~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
Question in response to Mary Beth's comment: Why is that so? Were women leaving their property to the one child that was the favorite? Or just the oldest child? And why exclude some of them from getting anything at all? Men seemed to have certain guidelines that dictated who got what (i.e. oldest son got most or all of the inheritance) but women did not necessarily have those guidelines. So is this an example of a freedom they had, giving their property to whomever they choose? -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
It says on page 79 in Woloch that Goodwife Amee was "presented by the grandjury for absenting her selfe from the publique worship of God." Does this mean that she was brought to court because she left a public display of worship on the Sabbath (Sunday?)? I'm confused about the antenuptial contracts, didn't the wife loose her legal standing when she became married, or was this more of a colonial-time period thing? If it was, how did it change and why? It seems like such a beneficial thing to men, and giving women's limited legal standing anyways, I'm at a loss to explain the change. The end of the blackboard article notes that women were more sensitive to people in precarious economic positions, or their tendency to reward their 'favorite' people, which I found interesting in how that is such a contrast to the tendencies of men. An obvious explanation might be that women could easily sympathize with a slave since, perhaps, they saw their own position in a similar light? -Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
In the Wolock reading, under the Divorce in New England section, the most common reason for granting a divorce was abandonment by the husband. I'm sure there are varied reasons why these men left their wives but none of the court records state why any of them left. It's probably hard to tell, but did the courts know why these men were leaving? Did the wives? What was the most common reason for abandonment?-- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I also wondered why abandonment was the most common reason for divorce in New England because I assumed it would be abuse. Were all these men running off and starting other families or did they leave their wives because they felt they could set up a better life for themselves somewhere else?<br />
In the Woloch piece on “Divorce in New England” it was interesting to read that of the thirteen colonies only Massachusetts and Connecticut offered absolute divorce. Even though absolute divorce existed in the 17th century a women could only petition the court for divorce in cases of adultery, desertion, or an absence of seven years. I wonder what the court’s reasoning was behind making a women wait seven years before petitioning the court for a divorce. Seven years seems like a very long time for a woman to have to live by herself and care for her family without her husband’s support. <br />
When Elizabeth Griswould petitioned the court to have sole custody of her children it was interesting to see the court ordering the children’s father to pay child support payments. I was not aware that courts ordered parents to pay child support as early as the seventeenth century.--Caitlin Quinn</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_7_Questions/CommentsWeek 7 Questions/Comments2007-10-11T02:20:26Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>In the reading from Woloch's book, part of Martha Ballard's diary, I thought it was great how Martha didn't even begin her career until age 42,had six kids,and had several careers such as a housewife, slaughtered livestock, spun flax, produced candles and soap, knitted cloathing, pieced quilts, raised chickens, milked cows, fed pigs, and grew vegetables. Martha also ran a buisy local practice as a healer and midwife, and did much more! This was a remarkable women in my eyes.-Katie D.<br />
<br />
In the reading from Woloch's book, part of Martha Ballard's diary, I liked how her diary was at once a professional log, a family record, and a community record, because of her continual involvement with clients, neighbors, and local happenings.- Katie D.<br />
<br />
I also liked how her diary was a log not only for herself and her family but also for her community. While reading the entries it was clear that she was writing it not only for herself because of how she records the details, like who is sick, who gave birth etc. I found it interesting that it was a midwife who seemed to be keeping logs of the town and not a man in some other professional field within the town.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Along those lines, I was wondering why she didn't begin keeping a diary until she was 50 years old. Was it because she thought of her diary as more of a log for the community (as Elizabeth put it) and this was the time she was doing the most communal work (after her kids were not so young)? --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting too how her diary did cover all points of her life, not just about her being a good wife or a good mother or a good midwife or what have you. That was one aspect of her diary that stood out from the diaries we have looked at previously. The diaries from the other periods seemed more concerned with making the writer look like a good Christian or the proper woman of the time, like she wrote it because she knew that it would be read some day and that she wanted to make sure her decendants knew what a wonderful person she was. While Martha Ballard may have had the same intention it also seems as though she wanted to keep the record more for herself and her children then to show how good she was. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
In her diary, Martha Ballard mentions a man by the name of Mr. Ballard a couple of times, which I’m assuming is her husband. I was curious as to how much control he actually had over her life. I got the impression that midwives were usually widows or were unattached to a man. Does that make her case unusual? She is very independent and very busy, and she seems to do a lot of her healing and midwife duties on her own. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
--Yes, it was common 18th century practice for a husband and wife to address each other as "Mr. Smith" and "Mrs. Smith" even when writing to each other. Although, the emergence of companionate marriage in some relationships did change that. A more interesting question to me is, in what ways did the Ballards' marriage show signs of the emergence of companionate marriage?.--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
I believe the Ballard's marriage did show characteristics of a companionate marriage. I think the fact that she mentioned her anniversary among her work notes could show that it is something that she is proud of. Also, Martha was a very active midwife and I do not she could have been without support from her husband. - Fiona C.<br />
<br />
In response to Jennifer about Mr. Ballard, who I too assume is her husband, I suppose that he had as much control over some aspects of her life as most men did over their wives. But I also got the impression that he is not always/not often at home. Frequently she wrote about him being off surveying somewhere. But also Martha was an older woman, who had already given birth to children, who did have a vocation and so she did have probably slightly more control then most. At the same time however, she is still known as Mrs. Martha Ballard and her role as a housewife and mother and grandmother takes presidence over her role as a midwife. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I think Martha uses the name Mr. Ballard, who I am sure is her husband, out of respect and love for her husband as the provider and business man that he is. I know when I was young it was not uncommon for couple who were elderly at that time to refer to themselves as Mr. Smith and Mrs. Smith. Also couples who were business people tended to call each other by their formal names. I am a big fan of the old T.V. series The Walton’s. The Godseys were characters in the show that called each other Mr. Godsey and Mrs. Godsey. They didn’t often use their first name when they where addressing each other. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
I agree somewhat with Cheryl on why Martha refers to her husband as Mr. Ballard, but maybe this use of full names could give us some idea of why she kept the diary. It was obviously not solely for personal pleasure. Maybe she was keeping it so that later on others could understand it if necessary and she wanted to be clear about who she was referring to. She often references how much she paid for certain services or how much she was paid so I can't help but wonder what exactly this diary was kept for. For her own personal recollection? As some sort of family banking account? As proof of particular jobs and payments? -- Allison J<br />
<br />
While reading over Martha's diary online, I was surprised to read the section about Martha's son and eventual daughter-in-law. The couple had a child out of wedlock but the courts were less concerned with their immoral behavior but rather identifying the father so that the community would not be responsible for supporting the mother and child. Is this evidence of the ongoing shift from a religious to a secular society ? --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Religion still seems to be a very large factor in her life since she notes who in her family went to church on Sunday and she usually gives a clear reason if she doesn't go. She also talks about town meetings during which they decide to hire on preachers, etc. Possibly this concern over the father of the illegitimate child really is just a concern about money. At this time there would obviously be no government programs for single mothers or illegitimate children so something had to be done. Maybe this situation just shows that premarital sex did happen and it happened frequently enough that the community knew that it was important to take action before they were saddled with a child to care for. -- Allison J <br />
<br />
When reading Martha's diary dated the 9th of July 1806, I was appalled when reading of the Purrinton murders. I was shocked in the sense that one does not usually attribute such horrific behavior to that time. Many people today blame suicide-homicides on the society in which we live. I found it intersting and horrifying that such atrocities did happen even two hundred years ago.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I have been reading a lot of medical history lately and I found Martha’s diary passages in the winter very interesting in the fact that she gives good details on her ailments. The details are so good it makes me wonder if the fact there are many times during the winter when they are feeling fatigued and colicky that maybe it might be due to lack of a completely balanced diet. Often in the 1700s and 1800s fruits and vegetables are not very abundant. This food items are very high in various vitamins and minerals our body needs. Some of the symptoms Martha wrote about fit some of the vitamin deficiency diseases I am studying. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
What I would like to know is how Martha Ballard had the time to run her own household and take care of her own family as well as be a busy midwife. She seemed to be on call all the time and at the end of the diary entry in the Woloch book, she said she lost 42 nights of sleep that year! ~Katherine Stinson~<br />
<br />
In response to Katherine's comment I think Martha had more time to focus on being a midwife because her children were all grown up by this time so she did not have to spend anytime on child rearing. I researched her a bit more and found out that she wrote at night while her family slept so she was not spending time during the day on these entries. <br />
Martha Ballard is a wonderful example of an 18th century woman who was not only a dutiful wife and mother but also had a professional role in her community as midwife and healer for thirty years. I found it remarkable that she kept her diary for such a long period of time and made daily entries. Martha also seemed to be very sick throughout some of these years but that did not stop her from performing all her household and professional duties. –Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
In Woloch's excerpt, I noticed that though the year she delivered 28 babies and 17 of them were "daughters" that is a lot of female babies. Was there something in this town's water that made them all girls? I also would have liked to read about how many of these babies survived the year, and how their mothers were doing. Why did she tell us the number of daughters? Does that show us that she values girl babies over boy babies? Could it be that she was just using short hand and telling us how many of one sex is easier than how many of both? -- Julie Castanien<br />
<br />
I also would like to comment on how cool that website was that had her entire diary. It provided an excellent way of seeing the source first hand while still making it understandable. -- Julie Castanien<br />
<br />
I agree with Julie, I liked how the site explained her dating system and the way she spelled her words. It made it much easier to understand what she was writing. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I'm curious about the qualifications for being a midwife. I assume training was fairly informal and reputation seemed to be the only resume. The Woloch reading refers to another, less trustworthy midwife "Mrs. Smith." Why was Smith not trusted? What was the difference between Smith and Ballard?-- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
After reading Kelly's question, I wondered under what conditions midwives were held responsible for the death of an infant or mother in labor. With limited medical knowledge, how was it determined whether a death (or near-death, as in the case of Mrs. Babcock) was the fault of the midwife or a natural event beyond human aid?-- Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I don't understand how Mrs. Smith still remained a midwife. After many botched medical performances, how come her reputation never got smeared? How was she still being called for medical assistance? Since Mrs. Ballard did note some of Mrs. Smith's faulty doings, was there ever anyone that she could consult in order to get her to stop practicing? It seems like Mrs. Smith being in the picture just made for more "clean-up work" for Mrs. Ballard and more trecherous ailments for her patients.- Lisa W.<br />
<br />
<br />
Becoming a midwife seemed to be one of the few ways women could achieve status in the eighteenth century community. I wonder if this contributed to Ballard's desire to seek the role later in life. --Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
<br />
There seemed to be little mention of her husband, I wonder why that it is. Maybe he was busy or nothing worth noting happened? I guess since Martha already had six kids, she knew pretty much all one could know about having children, so midwifery seemed like a logical thing for her do. It certainly kept her busy, since she delivers a couple kids every month. The editor characterizes other midwives as 'competitors,' which I found interesting. The thought of midwifery usually doesn't bring competition and economics to my mind. -Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
Chris raises an interesting question, did many areas have multiple midwives? The Ballards' Augusta-area home seemed to be more on the frontier...--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
Did anyone else find the practice of making women swear the identity of their child's father in the height of labor--so it would be the truth--absolutely absurd? What besides fear of death and pain would make the women be truthful?--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
In response to Andrea's question, I agree that it seems like a ridiculous notion to us. With the very real possibility of death in labor, however, perhaps it was believed that a Christian woman wouldn't risk damnation by lying with death possibly moments away.-- Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I also thought it was interesting how much time and effort Ballard put into her work. She often spent a whole day with her patients and sometimes had to travel long distances or in bad weather. In one year she had lost 42 nights of sleep! - Fiona C.<br />
<br />
Another common theme I found throughout Ballard's diary was disease and death. Not only did three of her own children die in 1769, but her diary is dotted with funerals and deaths. There were seven or eight deaths in the excerpt from the book alone. --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_7_Questions/CommentsWeek 7 Questions/Comments2007-10-11T02:19:38Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>In the reading from Woloch's book, part of Martha Ballard's diary, I thought it was great how Martha didn't even begin her career until age 42,had six kids,and had several careers such as a housewife, slaughtered livestock, spun flax, produced candles and soap, knitted cloathing, pieced quilts, raised chickens, milked cows, fed pigs, and grew vegetables. Martha also ran a buisy local practice as a healer and midwife, and did much more! This was a remarkable women in my eyes.-Katie D.<br />
<br />
In the reading from Woloch's book, part of Martha Ballard's diary, I liked how her diary was at once a professional log, a family record, and a community record, because of her continual involvement with clients, neighbors, and local happenings.- Katie D.<br />
<br />
I also liked how her diary was a log not only for herself and her family but also for her community. While reading the entries it was clear that she was writing it not only for herself because of how she records the details, like who is sick, who gave birth etc. I found it interesting that it was a midwife who seemed to be keeping logs of the town and not a man in some other professional field within the town.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Along those lines, I was wondering why she didn't begin keeping a diary until she was 50 years old. Was it because she thought of her diary as more of a log for the community (as Elizabeth put it) and this was the time she was doing the most communal work (after her kids were not so young)?<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting too how her diary did cover all points of her life, not just about her being a good wife or a good mother or a good midwife or what have you. That was one aspect of her diary that stood out from the diaries we have looked at previously. The diaries from the other periods seemed more concerned with making the writer look like a good Christian or the proper woman of the time, like she wrote it because she knew that it would be read some day and that she wanted to make sure her decendants knew what a wonderful person she was. While Martha Ballard may have had the same intention it also seems as though she wanted to keep the record more for herself and her children then to show how good she was. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
In her diary, Martha Ballard mentions a man by the name of Mr. Ballard a couple of times, which I’m assuming is her husband. I was curious as to how much control he actually had over her life. I got the impression that midwives were usually widows or were unattached to a man. Does that make her case unusual? She is very independent and very busy, and she seems to do a lot of her healing and midwife duties on her own. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
--Yes, it was common 18th century practice for a husband and wife to address each other as "Mr. Smith" and "Mrs. Smith" even when writing to each other. Although, the emergence of companionate marriage in some relationships did change that. A more interesting question to me is, in what ways did the Ballards' marriage show signs of the emergence of companionate marriage?.--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
I believe the Ballard's marriage did show characteristics of a companionate marriage. I think the fact that she mentioned her anniversary among her work notes could show that it is something that she is proud of. Also, Martha was a very active midwife and I do not she could have been without support from her husband. - Fiona C.<br />
<br />
In response to Jennifer about Mr. Ballard, who I too assume is her husband, I suppose that he had as much control over some aspects of her life as most men did over their wives. But I also got the impression that he is not always/not often at home. Frequently she wrote about him being off surveying somewhere. But also Martha was an older woman, who had already given birth to children, who did have a vocation and so she did have probably slightly more control then most. At the same time however, she is still known as Mrs. Martha Ballard and her role as a housewife and mother and grandmother takes presidence over her role as a midwife. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I think Martha uses the name Mr. Ballard, who I am sure is her husband, out of respect and love for her husband as the provider and business man that he is. I know when I was young it was not uncommon for couple who were elderly at that time to refer to themselves as Mr. Smith and Mrs. Smith. Also couples who were business people tended to call each other by their formal names. I am a big fan of the old T.V. series The Walton’s. The Godseys were characters in the show that called each other Mr. Godsey and Mrs. Godsey. They didn’t often use their first name when they where addressing each other. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
I agree somewhat with Cheryl on why Martha refers to her husband as Mr. Ballard, but maybe this use of full names could give us some idea of why she kept the diary. It was obviously not solely for personal pleasure. Maybe she was keeping it so that later on others could understand it if necessary and she wanted to be clear about who she was referring to. She often references how much she paid for certain services or how much she was paid so I can't help but wonder what exactly this diary was kept for. For her own personal recollection? As some sort of family banking account? As proof of particular jobs and payments? -- Allison J<br />
<br />
While reading over Martha's diary online, I was surprised to read the section about Martha's son and eventual daughter-in-law. The couple had a child out of wedlock but the courts were less concerned with their immoral behavior but rather identifying the father so that the community would not be responsible for supporting the mother and child. Is this evidence of the ongoing shift from a religious to a secular society ? --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Religion still seems to be a very large factor in her life since she notes who in her family went to church on Sunday and she usually gives a clear reason if she doesn't go. She also talks about town meetings during which they decide to hire on preachers, etc. Possibly this concern over the father of the illegitimate child really is just a concern about money. At this time there would obviously be no government programs for single mothers or illegitimate children so something had to be done. Maybe this situation just shows that premarital sex did happen and it happened frequently enough that the community knew that it was important to take action before they were saddled with a child to care for. -- Allison J <br />
<br />
When reading Martha's diary dated the 9th of July 1806, I was appalled when reading of the Purrinton murders. I was shocked in the sense that one does not usually attribute such horrific behavior to that time. Many people today blame suicide-homicides on the society in which we live. I found it intersting and horrifying that such atrocities did happen even two hundred years ago.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I have been reading a lot of medical history lately and I found Martha’s diary passages in the winter very interesting in the fact that she gives good details on her ailments. The details are so good it makes me wonder if the fact there are many times during the winter when they are feeling fatigued and colicky that maybe it might be due to lack of a completely balanced diet. Often in the 1700s and 1800s fruits and vegetables are not very abundant. This food items are very high in various vitamins and minerals our body needs. Some of the symptoms Martha wrote about fit some of the vitamin deficiency diseases I am studying. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
What I would like to know is how Martha Ballard had the time to run her own household and take care of her own family as well as be a busy midwife. She seemed to be on call all the time and at the end of the diary entry in the Woloch book, she said she lost 42 nights of sleep that year! ~Katherine Stinson~<br />
<br />
In response to Katherine's comment I think Martha had more time to focus on being a midwife because her children were all grown up by this time so she did not have to spend anytime on child rearing. I researched her a bit more and found out that she wrote at night while her family slept so she was not spending time during the day on these entries. <br />
Martha Ballard is a wonderful example of an 18th century woman who was not only a dutiful wife and mother but also had a professional role in her community as midwife and healer for thirty years. I found it remarkable that she kept her diary for such a long period of time and made daily entries. Martha also seemed to be very sick throughout some of these years but that did not stop her from performing all her household and professional duties. –Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
In Woloch's excerpt, I noticed that though the year she delivered 28 babies and 17 of them were "daughters" that is a lot of female babies. Was there something in this town's water that made them all girls? I also would have liked to read about how many of these babies survived the year, and how their mothers were doing. Why did she tell us the number of daughters? Does that show us that she values girl babies over boy babies? Could it be that she was just using short hand and telling us how many of one sex is easier than how many of both? -- Julie Castanien<br />
<br />
I also would like to comment on how cool that website was that had her entire diary. It provided an excellent way of seeing the source first hand while still making it understandable. -- Julie Castanien<br />
<br />
I agree with Julie, I liked how the site explained her dating system and the way she spelled her words. It made it much easier to understand what she was writing. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I'm curious about the qualifications for being a midwife. I assume training was fairly informal and reputation seemed to be the only resume. The Woloch reading refers to another, less trustworthy midwife "Mrs. Smith." Why was Smith not trusted? What was the difference between Smith and Ballard?-- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
After reading Kelly's question, I wondered under what conditions midwives were held responsible for the death of an infant or mother in labor. With limited medical knowledge, how was it determined whether a death (or near-death, as in the case of Mrs. Babcock) was the fault of the midwife or a natural event beyond human aid?-- Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I don't understand how Mrs. Smith still remained a midwife. After many botched medical performances, how come her reputation never got smeared? How was she still being called for medical assistance? Since Mrs. Ballard did note some of Mrs. Smith's faulty doings, was there ever anyone that she could consult in order to get her to stop practicing? It seems like Mrs. Smith being in the picture just made for more "clean-up work" for Mrs. Ballard and more trecherous ailments for her patients.- Lisa W.<br />
<br />
<br />
Becoming a midwife seemed to be one of the few ways women could achieve status in the eighteenth century community. I wonder if this contributed to Ballard's desire to seek the role later in life. --Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
<br />
There seemed to be little mention of her husband, I wonder why that it is. Maybe he was busy or nothing worth noting happened? I guess since Martha already had six kids, she knew pretty much all one could know about having children, so midwifery seemed like a logical thing for her do. It certainly kept her busy, since she delivers a couple kids every month. The editor characterizes other midwives as 'competitors,' which I found interesting. The thought of midwifery usually doesn't bring competition and economics to my mind. -Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
Chris raises an interesting question, did many areas have multiple midwives? The Ballards' Augusta-area home seemed to be more on the frontier...--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
Did anyone else find the practice of making women swear the identity of their child's father in the height of labor--so it would be the truth--absolutely absurd? What besides fear of death and pain would make the women be truthful?--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
In response to Andrea's question, I agree that it seems like a ridiculous notion to us. With the very real possibility of death in labor, however, perhaps it was believed that a Christian woman wouldn't risk damnation by lying with death possibly moments away.-- Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I also thought it was interesting how much time and effort Ballard put into her work. She often spent a whole day with her patients and sometimes had to travel long distances or in bad weather. In one year she had lost 42 nights of sleep! - Fiona C.<br />
<br />
Another common theme I found throughout Ballard's diary was disease and death. Not only did three of her own children die in 1769, but her diary is dotted with funerals and deaths. There were seven or eight deaths in the excerpt from the book alone. --Alex K.</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_6_Questions/CommentsWeek 6 Questions/Comments2007-10-04T04:06:25Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>In the reading by Eve Korkfield titled Judith Sargent Murray: The Story of Margaretta, I thought it was interesting, while tracing her education, that Mr. Vigillius's wife pronounced her to be "a perfect mistress; her knowledge of the English, and French tongues, was fully adequate to her years; and her manner of reading had peculiar charms; her handwriting was neat and easy; she was a good accomptant...and much more. Margaretta was quite the accomplisher! - Katie D.<br />
<br />
Eve Korkfields Judith Sergeant Mary was very interesting in the fact that her parents’ idea of education sounded like a basic training for future sophisticated wives. I am sure young Mary would have no problem procuring a wealth husband with all of her learned refinements.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
Going along with that same reading, I don't quite know what I think or how I feel about the following lines:<br />
<br />
~"I think the propriety of circumscribing the education of a female, within such narrow bounds as are frequently assigned, is at least problematical."<br />
<br />
~"The accomplished, the liberally accomplished female, if she is destined to move in the line of competency, will be regarded as a pleasing and instructive companion." <br />
<br />
~"We have been assiduously employed in cultivating the mind of Margaretta."<br />
<br />
These lines just really caught my eye and wondered if they caught anyone else's eye. They all, to me, seem to run with the themes/ideas we've discussed in class. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Vanessa, I agree with your comments that these few selections do somewhat contradict what we know about the role education played in the lives of pre-Revolutionary women. However when we fast forward to the post-war period, it seems like the idea of women receiving an education change with regards to "public virtue" and "republican motherhood". Women could receive an education if it a)made them a better companion to their husband or b)helped them to better teach their sons/the next generation of American citizens morals and genteel manners.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
The line "We have been assiduously employed in cultivating the mind of Margaretta" also caught my eye and it ties in perfectly with the one that really stuck out to me, "and when the mind is judiciously balanced, it renders the possessor not only more valuable but also more amiable, and more generally useful." I'm kind of amused that the education of women was merely to make them more useful, and better yet, more useful to men. Their job was, as we learned in the lecture on Tuesday, to be able to teach men how to properly run the country and teach girls how to assist those men in whatever way possible. I can't decipher, though, whether or not this story was meant to be somewhat satirical since it was written by a woman pretending to be a man. I kind of got the feeling she was criticizing the education system. Thoughts? -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
In the Murray reading, I found the following sentence particularly interesting: "No, Mr. Pedant, she was not unfitted for her proper sphere; and your stomach, however critical it may be, never digested finer puddings than those which I, with an uncommon zest, have partook, as knowing they were the composition of her fair hand--- yes, in the receipts of cookery she is thoroughly versed; she is in every respect the complete housewife" (136). After listing all her accomplishments, Murray's narrator, Mr. Vigillius, seems to feel it is necessary to assure the reader that Margaretta possesses the necessary feminine skills as well. This passage almost reads like an advertisement of Margaretta's suitability for marriage. -Ashley H. <br />
<br />
I find Rowson's biography rather odd. For a woman known as an actress, how did she achieve the respectability to open a popular girls' school in a town as straitlaced as Boston? How did did she manage to publish under her own name and achieve such success? Does it seem to anyone else that she borrowed details from her own life to write with?--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
In the reading from Catherine Scholten, it was interesting to me how during the colonial period pregnant women were commonly thought of as "breeding" and "teeming", though theologians attributed dignity to carrying the "living soul" of a child. -Katie D.<br />
<br />
I agree with Katie D. the vocabulary used to explain a pregnant women is very interesting, as is the way theologians viewed women's pregnancies. I just wonder if this "living soul" ideology was prevelant through the colonies at this time or not because it seems to go against the theological ideas that women were suppose to suffer in childbirth because they were tainted with original sin. I just wonder if they believed women were the cause of sin and evil and therefore suffered in child birth, why would they choose to say then say women were the carriers of a "living soul" and were "blessed among women"? Doesn't this idea seem a little off and contradictory? --Katelynn V. <br />
<br />
In Catherine Scholten's account of the change that took place in childbirth procedures I had a question occur to me. While obviously the new medical science allowed doctors to help reduce the pain and risk of childbirth, why did they not let women train in this new medically accepted field? I understand that men thought that women wouldn't be able to understand all the technical terms and the sciences that the training would occur, but at the same time, women had been delivering the children through midwifery long before men came into the field. Wouldn't it have made more sense to simply train the women who already knew a great deal about birthing in the new sciences so that the woman giving birth would still be comfortable and the death rates in birth would go down?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I agree with Elizabeth, while I understand that men thought women perhaps were not as capable to understand the science of it, I found it crazy that they had to do almost everything blindly because women were nervous about the male doctors seeing their privates. Another thing that struck me was that while this showed the intrusion of men in the womens sphere (I believe it proves the mens of that time superiority complex) it also showed some progress. Men saw it as their duty to protect women through child brith and "... women could now reasonably look to men for safety in the "perilous conditions" of childbirth." -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
<br />
I still find it very odd that women were able to be convinced that men--who had no experience with women's bodies or the childbearing process--were their superiors when it came to childbirth. Furthermore, because midwives first started calling doctors for difficult births, I wonder how that changed doctors' perceptions of childbirth. Did it cause male doctors to think childbirth was more dangerous than it really was, leading to some of the 19th century emphasis on not wearing out a woman's body? Why did the change to male doctors seem to coincide with an increased emphasis on smaller families and reserving energy and resources? I find Scholten's report on NY laws requiring midwives not to discuss their business and women's bodies in front of men (except in emergencies) very interesting. It makes me wonder how much male doctors lost out on, because midwives wouldn't discuss it in front of them. It also makes me wonder how female midwives became desperate and concerned enough about science that they were willing to bring in male doctors, when the feelings against talking about childbearing in front of men were so strong--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
I agree, Andrea. I found myself getting annoyed that women seemed to be so easily convinced that men had such a better knowledge of childbearing and child birth than midwives. It seems to me that women would have placed more trust into the hands of someone who had actually gone through the experience. I think the questions you raise are definitely valid, and I found myself thinking about some of the same things as I was reading.--Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
I agree with both Andrea and Kaitlyn. However, I wonder how this change came about. How did the doctors convince women that they were better, or more skilled in the ways of childbirth than a midwife who'd been helping deliver children her whole life? Where their pamphlets and articles that were circulated to help make this switch? How was is that these elite women placed so much faith in these doctors who couldn't even look and see what they were doing. By not seeing what they were doing couldn't they do more harm than good? ---Katelynn V. <br />
<br />
I think that what might have aided womens acceptance of the shift to men physicians instead of midwifes may have just been as simple as they were the ones with medical training. Plus they were men and supposedly had more reason than women. Also it wasn't an immediate switch to men, it was more gradual. At first, the men worked with the midwives or were only called in emergencies. Then it was because they were able to ease the pain and had the tools to help pull out the child. The fact that many medical schools devoted at least one professor to solely focus on midwifery speaks to societies view of the necessity of proper training and the male focus of all things medical. --Alex K. <br />
<br />
In the excerpt from Susanna Rowson’s: “Charlotte. A Tale of Truth” she writes about the tragic story of a young girl who leaves her family and friends behind for an Army Lieutenant she falls in love with. In the preface Rowson explains that she wrote the novel to warn parents about what could happen to their daughters as well as for young women who could find themselves in a situation similar to Charlottes. I really enjoyed reading this piece because even though Rowson wrote it in 1794 I found it easy to relate to the dilemma Charlotte was having over wanting to please her parents but at the same time trying to follow her heart. It is interesting to see that women today still feel many of the same pressures Charlotte felt in the 1790s. For instance many women are still concerned about choosing a husband who is accepted by their friends and family and it can split families apart when a woman defies her parents and marries someone who they find unsuitable. Many men today are also careful about respecting the wishes of their future in-laws by asking her father for permission to marry.--Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
<br />
In regards to "Charlotte. A Tale of Truth", the preface says it's somewhat based on a true story. Despite its romanticized points, it makes me wonder if it was a common occurrence for men to take women to the colonies against their will. Also, if they did come here and were unhappy, why couldn't they write back to their fathers and tell them they were virtually kidnapped? I know my daddy would fork up any amount to get me back home. Seeing Charlotte's father's undying love for her, I'm sure he would have done the same.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
Maybe Charlotte was ashamed of abandoning and having disappointed her family and felt she could not reach out for their help. Or maybe she felt it was her duty to her now husband to obey him or at least stay with him. Also, Rowson writes, "Sometimes, indeed, he (Charlottes husband) would steal out at the close of evening, and pass a few hours with her; and then so much was she attached to him, that all her sorrows were forgotten while blest with his society." So even though was usually miserable, her intense love for him kept pulling her back to him. --Alex<br />
<br />
I also found "Charlotte. A Tale of Truth" interesting but what I found most interesting was the image that was shown of the Army Lieutenant. Susanna Rowson writes his character as a less than wonderful man, after all Charlotte told him she wouldn't go with him because of her duty to her parents but he picked her up and took her anyway, at this point it seemed to be against her will. And once in America he left her alone the majority of the time and in the end instead of dying in the arms of her "love" she died in the arms of her dad (which was still very touching). Was Susanna warning girls against dishonoring her parents or keeping an eye out for men who would tell them what they wanted to hear in order to achieve their goals? - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In my history of the book seminar, we were required to read Charlotte Temple in its entirety. I really enjoyed reading the book then, and i liked rereading a couple of chapters for this weeks reading. The story itself, as other have suggested revolves around Charolette who is torn between love and duty to both her parents and her supposed lover. What is really interesting about the novel is that there are places where the author, a female author at that, speaks directly to the reader and either explains or apologizes for the actions of the characters or warns the reader away from what she sees as dangerous to young women. What is also very interesting is that this book was the first "bestseller" in the unites states. What does the books subject and popularity tell us about the readers and society during the late 18th century? ---Katelynn V. <br />
<br />
"Charlotte. A Tale of Truth" was a very touching piece. I found it interesting that the idea of not wanting to disappoint her father mattered greatly to Charlotte. As she was dying, all Charlotte wanted was to see her father one last time and receive his blessing. It almost seems to reemphasize the beloved American concept of "Daddy's little girl." --E.Hufford<br />
<br />
I was very taken with the story about Charlotte. I feel pretty certain that Rowson wrote this story to discourage young women to give into passions of love. I thought the way she depicted Montraville, fit the descriptions of a seducer to a tee. Charlotte’s act of giving her baby to her father and then dying in his arms was a dramatic way to drive home the message that young women should listen to their parents’ advice. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
I think another aspect of "Charlotte A Tale of Truth" is that it was probably a response to the fact that girls could now make decisions about who they chose to marry. Their marriages were no longer arranged or forced to as great of an extent as they used to be so I'm led to believe that this piece was possibly a response to the idea that children, especially daughters, should still take their parents' advice when it comes to matters of the heart. Marriage is a big decision and parents only want the best for their children, be that economic gain or just to make sure they're with someone that will truly love them. - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I thought Rowson's piece reflected the different stereotypes attributed to women during this time. There was Charlotte, the helpless rich girl who is indecisive and weak; the promiscuous Mademoiselle, and the wise Madame Du Pont trying to steer Charlotte in the right direction. Furthermore, Rowson didn't believe these characters could change. Mademoiselle was bad in the beginning and bad in the end, Charlotte was always helpless. -F. Cobb<br />
<br />
So while reading Scholten's piece, I decided that had I lived during that time, I strongly doubt I would have had children. Childbirth is hard enough today with the pain and anxiety surrounding it. Add the thought of dying and the need to be spiritually prepared as John Oliver so kindly pointed out in his "A Present for Teeming Women," and there is no doubt many women today would probably have been scared out of childbearing (myself included). -- E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I totally agree. The examples and excerpts from literature given to pregnant women of the day were a bit much. Especially those from A Present for Teeming American Women, like you said. The comparison of a warm chamber to a grave was a little too freaky, but I suppose that was sort of the point.--Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
In response to E. Hufford, I was thinking that childbirth would be difficult, but the only certain way to avoid pregancy would be to remain unmarried. With the limited opportunities available to women, I think many women would rather risk childbirth than a poor spinsterhood. What kind of social stigma was attached to women who chose to remain unmarried or those who were unable to have children?-- Ashley H. <br />
<br />
I was a little confused by Murray's piece, "The Story of Margaretta." Apparently Murray wrote the series under the name of Mr. Vigillius. Therefore, she is pretending to be a man writing about the education of a woman, though she really is a woman. Why would she use the pen name? What it because she wanted to be taken seriously? - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
The question I had in my head while reading Scholten's article was, "why didn't women want men in there?" The article mentions prejudice as the cause, which seems ridiculously simple but obvious. Its interesting for me to see how the interpretation of the Bible seemed to follow the presence of male midwifery. Maybe its just the organization of the article, but does suggest that in America, social change precedes and causes a change in religion? Is this a common trend? The very fact that men are actually entering the profession of midwifery seems to be the flat reason for it being accepted. The need for professionals in times of emergencies ultimately gave way to just a general need when people realized that these people knew what they were doing (relatively) and that their tools wouldn't actually harm the child. On a different topic, I found this quote from Murray really interesting: "Her person, the symmetry of her features, the rose and lily of her complexion....these are the endowments of nature --while the artificial accomplishments with which she is invested...confer upon her no real or intrinsic merit." pg 137. Maybe I'm misreading that, but is that say her looks are more 'valuable' than the 'artificial' accomplishments of character? <br />
-Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
I also really enjoyed reading Rowson's story about Charlotte. I think it is interesting how things that were written about back then can still be things we are dealing with today. Like when she talked about how women liked a man in uniform : "A man of an indifferent appearance, will, when arrayed in a military habit, shew to advantage..."(194) and the fact that even though Charlotte wanted to do the right thing she let her "boyfriend" talk her into something she did not want to. That is something that young women today still deal with. ~~Mary Beth Conrad</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_6_Questions/CommentsWeek 6 Questions/Comments2007-10-04T03:50:02Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>In the reading by Eve Korkfield titled Judith Sargent Murray: The Story of Margaretta, I thought it was interesting, while tracing her education, that Mr. Vigillius's wife pronounced her to be "a perfect mistress; her knowledge of the English, and French tongues, was fully adequate to her years; and her manner of reading had peculiar charms; her handwriting was neat and easy; she was a good accomptant...and much more. Margaretta was quite the accomplisher! - Katie D.<br />
<br />
Eve Korkfields Judith Sergeant Mary was very interesting in the fact that her parents’ idea of education sounded like a basic training for future sophisticated wives. I am sure young Mary would have no problem procuring a wealth husband with all of her learned refinements.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
Going along with that same reading, I don't quite know what I think or how I feel about the following lines:<br />
<br />
~"I think the propriety of circumscribing the education of a female, within such narrow bounds as are frequently assigned, is at least problematical."<br />
<br />
~"The accomplished, the liberally accomplished female, if she is destined to move in the line of competency, will be regarded as a pleasing and instructive companion." <br />
<br />
~"We have been assiduously employed in cultivating the mind of Margaretta."<br />
<br />
These lines just really caught my eye and wondered if they caught anyone else's eye. They all, to me, seem to run with the themes/ideas we've discussed in class. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
Vanessa, I agree with your comments that these few selections do somewhat contradict what we know about the role education played in the lives of pre-Revolutionary women. However when we fast forward to the post-war period, it seems like the idea of women receiving an education change with regards to "public virtue" and "republican motherhood". Women could receive an education if it a)made them a better companion to their husband or b)helped them to better teach their sons/the next generation of American citizens morals and genteel manners.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
The line "We have been assiduously employed in cultivating the mind of Margaretta" also caught my eye and it ties in perfectly with the one that really stuck out to me, "and when the mind is judiciously balanced, it renders the possessor not only more valuable but also more amiable, and more generally useful." I'm kind of amused that the education of women was merely to make them more useful, and better yet, more useful to men. Their job was, as we learned in the lecture on Tuesday, to be able to teach men how to properly run the country and teach girls how to assist those men in whatever way possible. I can't decipher, though, whether or not this story was meant to be somewhat satirical since it was written by a woman pretending to be a man. I kind of got the feeling she was criticizing the education system. Thoughts? -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
In the Murray reading, I found the following sentence particularly interesting: "No, Mr. Pedant, she was not unfitted for her proper sphere; and your stomach, however critical it may be, never digested finer puddings than those which I, with an uncommon zest, have partook, as knowing they were the composition of her fair hand--- yes, in the receipts of cookery she is thoroughly versed; she is in every respect the complete housewife" (136). After listing all her accomplishments, Murray's narrator, Mr. Vigillius, seems to feel it is necessary to assure the reader that Margaretta possesses the necessary feminine skills as well. This passage almost reads like an advertisement of Margaretta's suitability for marriage. -Ashley H. <br />
<br />
I find Rowson's biography rather odd. For a woman known as an actress, how did she achieve the respectability to open a popular girls' school in a town as straitlaced as Boston? How did did she manage to publish under her own name and achieve such success? Does it seem to anyone else that she borrowed details from her own life to write with?--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
In the reading from Catherine Scholten, it was interesting to me how during the colonial period pregnant women were commonly thought of as "breeding" and "teeming", though theologians attributed dignity to carrying the "living soul" of a child. -Katie D.<br />
<br />
I agree with Katie D. the vocabulary used to explain a pregnant women is very interesting, as is the way theologians viewed women's pregnancies. I just wonder if this "living soul" ideology was prevelant through the colonies at this time or not because it seems to go against the theological ideas that women were suppose to suffer in childbirth because they were tainted with original sin. I just wonder if they believed women were the cause of sin and evil and therefore suffered in child birth, why would they choose to say then say women were the carriers of a "living soul" and were "blessed among women"? Doesn't this idea seem a little off and contradictory? --Katelynn V. <br />
<br />
In Catherine Scholten's account of the change that took place in childbirth procedures I had a question occur to me. While obviously the new medical science allowed doctors to help reduce the pain and risk of childbirth, why did they not let women train in this new medically accepted field? I understand that men thought that women wouldn't be able to understand all the technical terms and the sciences that the training would occur, but at the same time, women had been delivering the children through midwifery long before men came into the field. Wouldn't it have made more sense to simply train the women who already knew a great deal about birthing in the new sciences so that the woman giving birth would still be comfortable and the death rates in birth would go down?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I agree with Elizabeth, while I understand that men thought women perhaps were not as capable to understand the science of it, I found it crazy that they had to do almost everything blindly because women were nervous about the male doctors seeing their privates. Another thing that struck me was that while this showed the intrusion of men in the womens sphere (I believe it proves the mens of that time superiority complex) it also showed some progress. Men saw it as their duty to protect women through child brith and "... women could now reasonably look to men for safety in the "perilous conditions" of childbirth." -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
<br />
I still find it very odd that women were able to be convinced that men--who had no experience with women's bodies or the childbearing process--were their superiors when it came to childbirth. Furthermore, because midwives first started calling doctors for difficult births, I wonder how that changed doctors' perceptions of childbirth. Did it cause male doctors to think childbirth was more dangerous than it really was, leading to some of the 19th century emphasis on not wearing out a woman's body? Why did the change to male doctors seem to coincide with an increased emphasis on smaller families and reserving energy and resources? I find Scholten's report on NY laws requiring midwives not to discuss their business and women's bodies in front of men (except in emergencies) very interesting. It makes me wonder how much male doctors lost out on, because midwives wouldn't discuss it in front of them. It also makes me wonder how female midwives became desperate and concerned enough about science that they were willing to bring in male doctors, when the feelings against talking about childbearing in front of men were so strong--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
I agree, Andrea. I found myself getting annoyed that women seemed to be so easily convinced that men had such a better knowledge of childbearing and child birth than midwives. It seems to me that women would have placed more trust into the hands of someone who had actually gone through the experience. I think the questions you raise are definitely valid, and I found myself thinking about some of the same things as I was reading.--Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
I agree with both Andrea and Kaitlyn. However, I wonder how this change came about. How did the doctors convince women that they were better, or more skilled in the ways of childbirth than a midwife who'd been helping deliver children her whole life? Where their pamphlets and articles that were circulated to help make this switch? How was is that these elite women placed so much faith in these doctors who couldn't even look and see what they were doing. By not seeing what they were doing couldn't they do more harm than good? ---Katelynn V. <br />
<br />
I think that what might have aided womens acceptance of the shift to men physicians instead of midwifes may have just been as simple as they were the ones with medical training. Plus they were men and supposedly had more reason than women. Also it wasn't an immediate switch to men, it was more gradual. At first, the men worked with the midwives or were only called in emergencies. Then it was because they were able to ease the pain and had the tools to help pull out the child. The fact that many medical schools devoted at least one professor to solely focus on midwifery speaks to societies view of the necessity of proper training and the male focus of all things medical. --Alex K. <br />
<br />
In the excerpt from Susanna Rowson’s: “Charlotte. A Tale of Truth” she writes about the tragic story of a young girl who leaves her family and friends behind for an Army Lieutenant she falls in love with. In the preface Rowson explains that she wrote the novel to warn parents about what could happen to their daughters as well as for young women who could find themselves in a situation similar to Charlottes. I really enjoyed reading this piece because even though Rowson wrote it in 1794 I found it easy to relate to the dilemma Charlotte was having over wanting to please her parents but at the same time trying to follow her heart. It is interesting to see that women today still feel many of the same pressures Charlotte felt in the 1790s. For instance many women are still concerned about choosing a husband who is accepted by their friends and family and it can split families apart when a woman defies her parents and marries someone who they find unsuitable. Many men today are also careful about respecting the wishes of their future in-laws by asking her father for permission to marry.--Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
In regards to "Charlotte. A Tale of Truth", the preface says it's somewhat based on a true story. Despite its romanticized points, it makes me wonder if it was a common occurrence for men to take women to the colonies against their will. Also, if they did come here and were unhappy, why couldn't they write back to their fathers and tell them they were virtually kidnapped? I know my daddy would fork up any amount to get me back home. Seeing Charlotte's father's undying love for her, I'm sure he would have done the same.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I also found "Charlotte. A Tale of Truth" interesting but what I found most interesting was the image that was shown of the Army Lieutenant. Susanna Rowson writes his character as a less than wonderful man, after all Charlotte told him she wouldn't go with him because of her duty to her parents but he picked her up and took her anyway, at this point it seemed to be against her will. And once in America he left her alone the majority of the time and in the end instead of dying in the arms of her "love" she died in the arms of her dad (which was still very touching). Was Susanna warning girls against dishonoring her parents or keeping an eye out for men who would tell them what they wanted to hear in order to achieve their goals? - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In my history of the book seminar, we were required to read Charlotte Temple in its entirety. I really enjoyed reading the book then, and i liked rereading a couple of chapters for this weeks reading. The story itself, as other have suggested revolves around Charolette who is torn between love and duty to both her parents and her supposed lover. What is really interesting about the novel is that there are places where the author, a female author at that, speaks directly to the reader and either explains or apologizes for the actions of the characters or warns the reader away from what she sees as dangerous to young women. What is also very interesting is that this book was the first "bestseller" in the unites states. What does the books subject and popularity tell us about the readers and society during the late 18th century? ---Katelynn V. <br />
<br />
"Charlotte. A Tale of Truth" was a very touching piece. I found it interesting that the idea of not wanting to disappoint her father mattered greatly to Charlotte. As she was dying, all Charlotte wanted was to see her father one last time and receive his blessing. It almost seems to reemphasize the beloved American concept of "Daddy's little girl." --E.Hufford<br />
<br />
I was very taken with the story about Charlotte. I feel pretty certain that Rowson wrote this story to discourage young women to give into passions of love. I thought the way she depicted Montraville, fit the descriptions of a seducer to a tee. Charlotte’s act of giving her baby to her father and then dying in his arms was a dramatic way to drive home the message that young women should listen to their parents’ advice. ---Cheryl<br />
<br />
I think another aspect of "Charlotte A Tale of Truth" is that it was probably a response to the fact that girls could now make decisions about who they chose to marry. Their marriages were no longer arranged or forced to as great of an extent as they used to be so I'm led to believe that this piece was possibly a response to the idea that children, especially daughters, should still take their parents' advice when it comes to matters of the heart. Marriage is a big decision and parents only want the best for their children, be that economic gain or just to make sure they're with someone that will truly love them. - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I thought Rowson's piece reflected the different stereotypes attributed to women during this time. There was Charlotte, the helpless rich girl who is indecisive and weak; the promiscuous Mademoiselle, and the wise Madame Du Pont trying to steer Charlotte in the right direction. Furthermore, Rowson didn't believe these characters could change. Mademoiselle was bad in the beginning and bad in the end, Charlotte was always helpless. -F. Cobb<br />
<br />
So while reading Scholten's piece, I decided that had I lived during that time, I strongly doubt I would have had children. Childbirth is hard enough today with the pain and anxiety surrounding it. Add the thought of dying and the need to be spiritually prepared as John Oliver so kindly pointed out in his "A Present for Teeming Women," and there is no doubt many women today would probably have been scared out of childbearing (myself included). -- E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I totally agree. The examples and excerpts from literature given to pregnant women of the day were a bit much. Especially those from A Present for Teeming American Women, like you said. The comparison of a warm chamber to a grave was a little too freaky, but I suppose that was sort of the point.--Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
In response to E. Hufford, I was thinking that childbirth would be difficult, but the only certain way to avoid pregancy would be to remain unmarried. With the limited opportunities available to women, I think many women would rather risk childbirth than a poor spinsterhood. What kind of social stigma was attached to women who chose to remain unmarried or those who were unable to have children?-- Ashley H. <br />
<br />
I was a little confused by Murray's piece, "The Story of Margaretta." Apparently Murray wrote the series under the name of Mr. Vigillius. Therefore, she is pretending to be a man writing about the education of a woman, though she really is a woman. Why would she use the pen name? What it because she wanted to be taken seriously? - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
The question I had in my head while reading Scholten's article was, "why didn't women want men in there?" The article mentions prejudice as the cause, which seems ridiculously simple but obvious. Its interesting for me to see how the interpretation of the Bible seemed to follow the presence of male midwifery. Maybe its just the organization of the article, but does suggest that in America, social change precedes and causes a change in religion? Is this a common trend? The very fact that men are actually entering the profession of midwifery seems to be the flat reason for it being accepted. The need for professionals in times of emergencies ultimately gave way to just a general need when people realized that these people knew what they were doing (relatively) and that their tools wouldn't actually harm the child. On a different topic, I found this quote from Murray really interesting: "Her person, the symmetry of her features, the rose and lily of her complexion....these are the endowments of nature --while the artificial accomplishments with which she is invested...confer upon her no real or intrinsic merit." pg 137. Maybe I'm misreading that, but is that say her looks are more 'valuable' than the 'artificial' accomplishments of character? <br />
-Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
I also really enjoyed reading Rowson's story about Charlotte. I think it is interesting how things that were written about back then can still be things we are dealing with today. Like when she talked about how women liked a man in uniform : "A man of an indifferent appearance, will, when arrayed in a military habit, shew to advantage..."(194) and the fact that even though Charlotte wanted to do the right thing she let her "boyfriend" talk her into something she did not want to. That is something that young women today still deal with. ~~Mary Beth Conrad</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_5_Questions/CommentsWeek 5 Questions/Comments2007-09-27T01:52:52Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>"Thomas Paine Admits Women Have Some Rights" left me wondering if his comments would have helped or hindered women in the eighteenth century. Paine states grievances against women while projecting them to be weak and fragile. He praises their contributions and advocates for recognition of female accomplishment, while belittling women with allusions to their inability to care for themselves. Paine's claims seem to be overwhelmingly contradictory. So, my question is-- Could Paine be considered an early feminist? -Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
When reading "Thomas Paine Admits Women Have Some Rights", I also was a bit confused to where Paine was coming from. His claim's were infact very contradictory with one another. After reading Kelly's question,this leads me to believe that he could be a considered an early feminist in some ways. -Katie D.<br />
<br />
I also found "Thomas Paine Admits Women Have some Rights" very interesting in that he contradicts himself in saying women are weak but have a great deal of courage for putting up with oppression throughout time and the world. Though this article did make me wonder what men's reaction to his article would have been. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Well, I too was a little confused. But looking at it in context- this is all propoganda. Is this not to just gather more patriots for the "cause"? His soft side of defending women could gather more support from the women, yet his ideas of the mascline chivalry could win the support of men. - Talya Halpern. <br />
<br />
When reading the essay "A Carolina Patriot" in Woloch's book, there was an excerpt found from Eliza Wilkerson's wartime letters to an unspecified friend. I found it intersting that she said "For my part, "I would rather explore unknown regions, blessed with liberty, than remain in my native country if to be cursed with slavery"(p.123). Throughout this excerpt Eliza seems to be "inventing" herself - adopting the pose appropriate to a "female patriot". -Katie D.<br />
<br />
I found the letter that Katie D. mentioned to be very interesting and I would agree with the statement that she seems to be "inventing" herself. Everything that she wrote is apparently saturated with patriotic thoughts and feelings. I am curious however just how common an attitude towards politics at the time was Eliza Wilkerson's or were more women inclined to have more of the feelings of Grace Galloway (starting on page 124). Grace Galloway's diary entries are such a total opposite to the letter of ELiza Wilkerson that a reader is battered with very strong opposing views. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
In regards to Katie and Mary's comments, I am also curious about how a different audience would have altered Eliza Wilkerson's statements. How might her opinions or framing of opinions have been altered if voiced to a man? Would Eliza have the same feeling of invention? -Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
In regards to Eliza’s letter, I was also struck by her quote, “I would rather explore unknown regions, blessed with liberty, than remain in my native country if to be cursed with slavery.” It certainly paints a pretty bold picture. However, I always find it ironic when plantation owners, who are presumably slave owners, make comparisons to how wickedly they are being treated by others, when they themselves own slaves. Essentially saying, “It’s okay to treat someone else like that, just as long as it’s not me.”- Lisa Wilkerson <br />
<br />
Another thing I found interesting was when Eliza Wilkinson's wrote,"I would not wish that we should meddle in what is unbecoming female delicacy...." She was so "progressive" in her views and how much she spoke out for the inclusion of women in areas beside domestic labor and yet she still fell victim to some gender stereotyping. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
<br />
While reading Benjamin Rush's "Thoughts Upon Female Education" I was struck by the change in the views concerning female education that we have come upon in just this short span that we have discussed. Where as before women were taught to read mostly so that they could read the Bible, now men are encouraged to promote the education of their daughters for the sake of their property, for women were often left as stewards of property and business during a husbands absence, but also, and from Rush's continuing mention of it importantly, the fact that these daughters will be growing up and getting married and having children, particularly sons, and they will have the task of educating these sons in a manner befitting their status and learning. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary regarding Rush's lecture on female education. Girls were actually going to be challenged academically in all of the subjects they formerly were kept away from. What intrigued me about this lecture, however, is that it was aimed towards men in the audience and not actually the girls who would be undergoing this new academic change. And not only was it directed at men, but at men of a much higher social class who would be in charge of allowing this change to happen. It really shows how the elite were coming into play and actually becoming a threat to the rest of the colonists. (I also enjoy that he refused to let students study French, but that's a bit off-topic) - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I though that it was interesting how in Esther DeBerdt's "Sentiments of an American Woman", she freely admits that women have "...feeble hands..." (115). I would have thought that a comment like that would be more likely to come from a man of that time and not a woman. ~Katherine S.~<br />
<br />
I felt that the way Mary Jemison described the Native Americans in the article "The War for Independence...", made them seem very materialistic. It seemed that all the Native Americans cared about were the goods they were going to receive from the British and nothing else. ~Katherine S.~<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed reading "An American Woman Asserts Women's Rights." I found it interesting that this woman flat out said that many women would do whatever they could to help the revolution during this time when many men felt like women wouldn't want to give up their luxuries to help the cause. I also enjoyed how she compared american women to the women of antiquity who helped save their nations. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I also enjoyed reading "An American Woman Asserts Women's Rights." I am the sap that this stuff was written for- I immediately felt like I could go dig a trench or build a wall to help our good ole' boys. I thought it was an excellent propoganda piece and could serve to get women who are not interested in politics involved in the fight for America's independence.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I also enjoyed reading Esther DeBerdt Reed's piece. By showing examples of past women who struggled on behalf of their own nations, Esther bolsters her argument. I like the fact that she did not try to argue in passive manner. She asserts herself and her fellow women who want to do more to serve their nation. Her sentiments are much more convincing and empowering due to the manner in which she presented herself. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
When reading Abigail Adams' correspondence with her husband John and friend Mercy, I found myself sympathizing with Abigail. Her frustration with John when he wrote. "As to your extraordinary Code of Laws, I cannot but laugh" must have been great. Reading her letter to Mercy about John's repsonse seems as though it could have been written by a woman today to a friend complaining about her husband's actions.-- E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I agree with those thoughts on the letters of Abigail Adams. And I find it revealing in John Adams' character. He's a historically important figure in our nations history and we hold him on a high pedestal for that. But he still thinks typical thoughts of the time period with regards to women and their "rights." His comments not only include the "I cannot but laugh comment" but even to say "We know better than to repeal our Masculine systems." We can continue to think of John Adams as a great man and important to the founding of our nation, but we must recognize his averageness in his thoughts. If that made any sense at all. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I felt that Phillis Wheatley's address to George III was an amazing piece of literature. I think it was so clever to include the words free and equal into her poem. Wheatley was treated a lot differently from most slaves . She was educated among white children, and was even sent to Europe to progress is studies and writing. Did her owners really read her poem? I am sure they were delighted for her--and them because they own her. But did they hear it? Did anyone else see those underlying messages for freedom from slavery? Did anyone agree with her underlying tones of the poem? - Talya Halpern<br />
<br />
I have to agree with Talya that Wheatley was very clever and I think it's possible she was underestimated by those around her. She was obviously intelligent but her cleverness leads me to think she could outsmart even her owners. Of course, we will probably never know, but I like to think she had a few laughs at the expense of others as she wrote this poem as well as her others. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I found Phillis Wheatley's poem to King George III interesting. How was it that Woloch was able to interpret the poem as a subtle jab at the King yet the those in England who screened her book of poetry for poems of Revolution missed it? Nevertheless, I agree with those above that it was a very clever way to get her views across. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I felt that Mary Jemison Views the Revolution was a great account of the War for Independence. Mary’s descriptions were not that of a typical woman. She describes scenes of prisoners being punished that many women would not even want to watch let alone observe and write about. I especially like the end of her story when she writes of how she hired herself out to an escaped black slave and how she was not too worried about the gun the slave stood over her with. I doubt many women of the colonial settlements would do the same.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
I think Abigail Adams statement to "pay particular care and attention" to the ladies or they are "determined to forment a rebellion" was priceless! Then her husband calls her "saucy". It is amazing to see that even in a relationship like the Adams' had the notion of women being fragile and needing their husbands protection and guidance was still made very clear. ~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
I was also confused by Thomas Paine. He seemed in one breath to praise women and the next breath insult them. I wonder how the women of the time saw his remarks. Did they feel insulted as well or was it something they were used to (being praised and insulted at the same time)?~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
Its interesting that the lecture by Rush about women was actually directed toward men. But its not really surprising, who else was directing culture and such things at this time? Its also worth noting how its put into contrast with Great Britain, just a few years after the American Revolution. Does this represent a self-conscious attempt to different what it means to be American from that of British? The letters between the Adams was also really interesting because it does show that although Adams is romaticized in American history, he was still a man of times. Its interesting that he refers to patriarchy as a 'theory' when he says about the 'masculine systems' that they "are little more than a theory." What exactly does that mean? That its merely a good model for behavior? I certainly don't think they were so detached toward these norms that they could truly think of them as a "theory." Its interesting to see him change the subject from "masucline systems" holding women down to a discussion of independence from the "peticoat." It seems to suggest that Adams didn't quite notice the similarity of the 'oppression' of women as the same as the peticoat toward the American. <br />
-Christopher Plummer</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_4_Questions/CommentsWeek 4 Questions/Comments2007-09-20T02:17:49Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found David Brainerd’s “A Remarkable Instance of Awakening” to be implausible. His accounts focused on the ideal response when converting non-believers i.e. confession of sin and realization of God’s power. These outcomes seem almost too good to be legitimate. The one example that threw a red flag up for me was when he said a young Indian convert of his laid flat on the ground after his service praying incessantly in her native language which he translated as, “have mercy on me, and help me to give you my heart”. Wouldn’t that be the ultimate form of flattery if your sermons were so good that they could make someone publicly display such compassion?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I got extremely frustrated while reading the examination of Abigail Hobbs at Salem Prison under “The ‘Casco Girls’ Accuse George Burroughs, 1692” in MP. First off, Abigail’s testimony contradicts itself so many times that it becomes quite obvious, at least to me, that she is lying. Why wasn’t this obvious to the Judge? Why wasn’t faulty testimony penalized? I thought these accusers were supposed to be hard-nosed Christians. If this were true how did they live with themselves knowing they committed a sin (LYING) in order to convict an innocent person?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I found "Landon Carter Complains About His Female Slaves, 1771-1773" in Major Problems page 82 & 83 rather shocking for many obvious reasons. Beyond this, the disparity between the treatment of African women and white women of the period is frightful. While colonial women may have had little power, it pales in comparison to the hopelessly bleak situation of the African female. I am sure that cowkeeping was not commonly thought to be a female task of the period. This task, along with many others, also carried the promise of whipping for failure. Based on the writing, it seems to be believe that whipping was the only cure for "poor" behavior. The same ideals of female submission were also applied with greater force, illustrated in the writing "The mother and sister fell on Beale when he went to apply my Prescription; but by the stumps of the switches they got also cured of their rebellious impudence..." (MP 83) It was with slavery that the submission of a race, especially with a focus to the women, was to be furthered. --Robert Kopp<br />
<br />
This is in response about Landon Carter’s account of cowkeeping. Unfortunately, we don’t know the whole story as to why Sicely neglected her task. We only have Landon Carter’s account of the ordeal. Thus we are looking at this situation through the eyes of Landon Carter. How do we know if he didn’t manipulate or exaggerate this account to his benefit? May be he cried when his cow died. Perhaps Sicely had better things to do with her time than to cowkeep. Landon Carter did mention that she took a nap, perhaps she had a late night gathering of friends and relatives as this was the only time she could exert her freedom and her individuality from the day’s mindless tasks. Or maybe she was simply defiant to authority and paid no mind to her tasks regardless of the punishment. This may be her way to exert her freedom at the cost of getting the whip. I wish I could read her account of this situation maybe it would shed more light about her perceptions of slavery, her feelings,doubts, and insecurities then we would have the overall picture instead of a one sided view of an Elite.—John Furner<br />
<br />
I agree it is a shame we don't have the slaves account on all this. Personally after reading Landon Carters complaint's, I believe a saint would even be whipped. This man has seroius power issues and takes them out on those who are not able to defend themselves.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
In MP, page 55, the Trial of Bridget Bishop, I just found it interesting that while she was being "indicted for bewitching of several persons in the neighborhood," that there was "little occasion to prove the witchcraft; it being evident and notorious to all beholders." The girl has no hope! The court says that no real evidence is needed to prove what Bishop has supposedly done because apparently anyone can tell she's a witch. Even then, the court is basing their decision on the opinions of others instead of solid, factual evidence. Although, it's important to note that this took place in 1692 in Salem Town, so this incident sits among many during this "witch hunt." So maybe they were getting witch-convicting happy. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I agree that this selection really shows the hysteria and paranoia of the 1692 trials. It also has several examples of "spectral evidence." The court didn't need real evidence because the spectral evidence was enough for them to convict. - Fiona C.<br />
<br />
Elizabeth Sandwith Drinker (MP page 80) was a wealthy Philadelphian woman. But more than that, she is the textbook stereotype for women of her social class. In her diary, she describes her work and the work of other women around her. This work includes making baby clothes, knitting, plating, ironing, "[measuring] the Girls for Stays," and quilting, among other things. As much as some people would like to branch off from those stereotypes and look at those unique, powerful women, sometimes we just have to accept the fact that those stereotypes we steer away from were true to life back during that time period. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
I think Eliabeth life is an ideal one. She wants for nothing. She as chances to socialize with her peers. It doesn't appear that she is bored. It makes me wonder why anyone would want to steer away from that sterotype.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
I don't really agree with that statement. I don't think we can tell from her diary because she really didn't include her feelings. It was mostly just a listing of what tasks she does each day. She may have been happy but I don't think we can know from that. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
When reading Malefactors and Complainants in Woloch, I was wondering why the men who helped the women to fornicate or misbehave don't get into trouble except for the couple who both confessed their guilt together. Weren't women supposed to be the weaker, non intellgent gender in that day and age? Shouldn't the men be getting the punishment, after all they are the smarter ones that were all powerfull.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
I found the narrative of Old Elizabeth to be quite an emotional one. Though she was one of a kind, her experience as a slave child must have been shared by many. Imagine what it was like to be separated from your family, the only familiar aspect of life in a foreign land. She was willing to risk of the consequences of running away to just see her mother for a short period of time. This is only a fraction of the hardship and heartbreak felt by many other slave families.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Landon Carter complains that it is impossible to make his slaves work. Encouragement nor punishment have any effect on his them. Clearly, there was no motivation for them to work. What were they were working toward? Freedom was not an option. Many were separated from their families and in despair. I found it interesting that Carter does not seem to understand this or that he does not want to understand this.--E. Hufford<br />
<br />
I found Karin Wulf's piece interesting because it spoke to those poorer, unmarried or widowed women and how they made ends meet. There were options available for women to earn an income if you fell into those categories. Draper for example was able to be a tavernkeeper. It's interesting how Wulf states, "As independent women, they could act legally and economically in ways that their married sisters, bound to coverture, could not. I wonder if some women took this into account and because of this decided not to marry at all. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I know as historians we shouldn't ask "what if" but, could Anne Hutchinson have won her trial if she hadn't mentioned that God spoke to her? She was going so strong and then as soon as she said that the Governor replies that "the case is altered" and they immediately banish her. - Fiona C.<br />
<br />
I think that if Anne Hutchinson had not specifically said God spoke to her she would have been acquitted but because of the beliefs of the puritans that God no longer spoke to people directly that admission by her became their whole case against her and was the sole reason for banishment. ~~Mary Beth Conrad</div>199.111.74.68https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_3_Questions/CommentsWeek 3 Questions/Comments2007-09-13T02:13:16Z<p>199.111.74.68: </p>
<hr />
<div>In Early American Women, the essay by Susanna Wesely made me feel thankful I was brought up the way I was. I disagree with her methods of controling children. I don't believe in programing children to be the way a parent wishes. I do agree with some of her her principles however. I think children should be praised everytime they behave correctly or are obediant. I believe children should be taught to be respectful to other's property. I don't think children need to be preforming the same routine every day regardless if it is in eating, sleeping ect. In Wesely's essay, she herself noted that when the children had to be at seperate houses when their home was destroyed by fire, that when they were reunited under one roof again, they aquired some bad behaviors. Perhaps if Wesely weren't so strict with her routines and ridgid discipline, her children may have come back with fewer negative influences.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
I definitely agree with Cheryl I was very glad my parents were not that strict. I think what got me the most was how the essay described how the mother would break the free will of the kids. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
While the essay of Susanna Wesely is very scary thinking about how those children were raised, I have to remember that that way of thinking was probably normal for the time and an acceptable way of thought. But to our modern minds it does seem very barbaric. I did like Eliza Pinckney's letter to herself however and thought that it gave a good insight into the minds of women at the time, especially married women in her social position. Reading what she wrote, some of it women try and apply in their lives today and it does seem to speak through the years. It is that part about making all her actions "Corrispond with that sincere love and Duty I bear him" that we tend to baulk at today. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I was also shocked about the strictness of Wesley's account of how she raised her children. Breaking the free will of the kids got me too. But in response Mary's comment that that was the way of thinking then and it was normal I'm not so sure. I'm sure some were that way but could this be an extreme case? Because for example, when she mentioned they acquired bad habits and behaviors when they lived with neighbors for a time. So therefore, not even some others in her own community were as harsh as her. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I also was very shocked when I read the account of Abigail Bailey and 1) she had 17 kids and 2) her husband tried having a relationship beyond a fatherly one. The account definitely showed how helpless a woman was when discovering her husband doing something wrong. In the intro to the account it says that she got her husband arrested but with the help of her brothers. But would she have been able to have him arrested without her brothers assistance?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I, too, was shocked while reading Abigail Bailey's "An Abominable Wickedness" and I agree with Elizabeth that the narrative did show how helpless a woman was under the rule of her husband. Yet, there are two sides to this wifely obedience. A “proper” woman saw it her solemn duty to uphold the marriage covenant and be a kind, faithful, and subservient wife to her husband. However, when the husband has violated the marriage covenant and has behaved immorally, exceptions ensue. All of a sudden, a woman with no rights now has all legal authority in the marriage. She knew divorce and breaking up her family was a sin (imagine how tough this must have been for her to deal with) but once she realized it was not her fault, she placed all guilt and blame on Mr. Bailey. Where was the point when Abigail realized enough was enough and she had to say something? Despite the fact she confronted him long after the first signs of his wrongdoing; many women could have assumed their position and not have said a word. I found it quite empowering to see docile and obedient Abigail become an enlivened woman and mother whose priorities changed; her duty was no longer to her husband but to her children.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
While a huge part of Abigail Bailey's remaining silent for so long was due to the time period and the fact that she had very little or no legal power, I think we must also recognize that this story could probably be told by someone today. Many women and children are still abused and still feel as though any legal action they took would simply be one person's word against another. Also I think that the footnote is very interesting. Why is it that the editor feels that it is necessary to excuse Abigail's actions. As an abused woman I feel that it is amazing that she spoke up at all, while the editor seems to think that readers might not understand her hesitance. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I agree. I am an intern at both RCDV (domestic violence place) and RCASA (a sexual assault place) and this kind of story is very common even today. It is very hard for someone to speak up in this situation. I just watched a video on incest actually and the effects are lifechanging. Many child abuse survivors were extremely hurt that there mothers didn't speak up and help them. I think it is amazing she said anything at all, especially for that time. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I believe Abigail had a good reason to be hesitant. Know one wants to believe they married such a monster that could rape repeatedly is own daughter. I do not blame her for wanting more proof. Women in her day and age were brought up with the notion to love, honor and obey their husbands. It went against everything she believed in to just come forward when she did for the sake of her child.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
I found Martha Ballard’s entry “A Maine Midwife” to be quite insightful. Just by her keeping a very brief journal we are able to calculate birth rates, see some folk remedies, find out when and how people died, and keep up on town news and events. On a sidenote: what’s the deal with all the burnt feet during those first few days in August?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I personally was amused at the first reading in Woloch on "The Duties of Husbands and Wives." While Woloch acknowledges that this is not necessarily how people acted, I couldn't help imagining what it would be like if someone two hundred years from now used one of our articles on relationships to judge the relationships of people at large. The Bullet's Sexclamations article perhaps? It is interesting to keep in mind that the primary sources that we have are just as small portion of what would have existed at this time. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I believe Abigail had a good reason to be hesitant. Know one wants to believe they married such a monster that could rape repeatedly is own daughter. I do not blame her for wanting more proof. Women in her day and age were brought up with the notion to love, honor and obey their husbands. It went against everything she believed in to just come forward when she did for the sake of her child.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
While reading the article, "To Use Her As His Wife" by Sklar, I noticed a few of the things we discussed in class on Tuesday in practice. The main thing that stuck out for me was how there was never a real record of Martha Root and her story during her court case; everything we know about this case was on account of the male lawyers or the father of Martha's children. This point, in my opinion, really emphasized that most of what we know about colonial women during this time period was somehow influenced by men. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I totally agree with Kelly about "To Use Her As His WIfe." It touched on what we went over in class and really seemed to personify the idea that women in general are second class citizens as this point. I also found it really interesting, though I was not surprised, was the complete double standard that seemed to be held towards Martha. I mean it took two people to create those children and yet she is the one whose reputation was forever tarnished and her eventual marriage at age 34 was a "last chance" scenario that enabled her to finally get out of town. I also had a question about the idea that a younger sibling doesnt marry before the oldest so there are no two marrigable people of the same sex in the same family. But what happens if one sibling is a perpetual spinster or what if, like in the case of Martha's children, there happened to be twins? --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how fully Sklar researched the lives of Jonathan Edwards and Joseph Hawley. At first I thought it was a bit extreme when she was writing about their grandparents, but then I saw how much of their past and family life shaped their actions and motivations. I think it shows that as historians we need to delve below the surface in order to contrusct a representation that is as accurate as can be. - Fiona C. <br />
<br />
In Sklar's essay I was surprised to read that Edwards, as a minister, argued against the "double standard" and said that Elisha should have to marry Martha regardless of the claims that she was not a virgin and that she seduced him. To me it seems that Edwards and Hawley seized upon the case because they saw it as an opportunity to promote their beliefs (kind of like today). Their insistence might also explain why Martha pushed her claim despite the risk to her reputation and future ability to marry. - Fiona C. <br />
<br />
I really loved the letters between Esther Burr and Sally Prince. The letters were a great way to see the relationships that women of the time could have with each other while at the same time relaying an idea of what daily life was like for these women. I just thought that they were really interesting. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary about the insight the letters exchanged between Esther Burr and Sally Prince give us. By reading the journals that the two women kept, we historians can catch a glimpse of what life was like (vaguely) from a female's perspective for once and not via a man's perspective. It also emphasizes the point we discussed in class how social life amongst women was very important and how women were at the base of kinship networks. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
After reading Susanna Wesley’s letter to her son about how to raise children by conquering their will, enforcing strict rules, and teaching them the importance of religion and daily prayer I was surprised to read the 8th rule she had for her household: “that no girl be taught to work till she can read very well; and that she be kept to her work with the same application and for the same time that she was held to reading.” This stood out to me as being a radical idea for the early 1700s and in sharp contrast to the entire message of the piece. I wonder if women saw their daughters not being able to read well and decided to fix the problem by enforcing these types of rules or if Wesley was simply more educated and represented the beginning of social changes that colonial women made in their households. --Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
Like Caitlin, I was surprised by rule 8. Maybe because Wesley could obviously write well for her time, she saw education become an advantage in her own life and wished to pass it on. Also, Wesley was obviously a very spiritual person, maybe she wanted young women to read so they could read The Bible? -Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
While reading the letters of Esther Burr and Sally Prince, I found myself amused by Esther's Letter No. 22. She related her conversation with Mr. Ewing about women. He beleived that women should only converse on subjects they "understood." I loved Esther's thought, "My tongue, you know, hangs pretty loose, thoughts Crouded in-so I sputtered away for dear life." -- E. Hufford<br />
<br />
When reading "To Use Her As His Wife," I was quite impressed with Jonathan Edwards' support for Martha. How many other men at that time would have reacted the same way? I was saddened to learn that his support for Martha did have something to do with his dismissal from the pulpit in 1750. -- E. Hufford <br />
<br />
I was struck by the last paragraph in the sermon "About the Duties of Husbands and Wives." At the very end, after stating how marriages should involve love and tenderness, Wadsworth as if on a side note, mentions that parents should wisely match their children with someone who is "proper." This point seems to have little emphasis in his sermon which mainly seems about loving someone you potentially might not even like. If all of this love and tenderness Wadsworth speaks of should occur shouldn't selecting a spouse with whom you are compatible be a higher priority? --Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I think the role of women and the economy or more accurately the role of women as a labor force brings up some interesting points that ties to some larger themes we have discussed so far. With regards to slavery the role of the mother and inheritance is once again an issue. While we saw that some Native American cultures used the mother as a line of inheritance, when it came to slavery a child’s status as free or slave was determined by the mother. Another idea we have begun to touch upon is the hierarchy of society and women. For instance indentured servants, apprentices, or slaves occupied the same area as their mistresses but the mistress was in charge, in control due to her elevated status. In the introduction paragraph of this chapter Woloch asks questions about women’s work in the pre-industrial economy. One idea that really stuck out to me was this idea of all-women work groups. Could groups of women who worked in the field, who had things in common such as motherhood or the same master constitute the continuation of the theme of kinship we have already established in both Native American culture and Colonial culture? -- Mary Beth Dillane<br />
<br />
<br />
The first thing that struck me from Woloch was in the very beginning when she talks about the duties of husbands and wives. While in class we discuss how the woman have no power and really don't exsist as themselves the way the Wadsworth describes it, it sounds touching almost. The quote that stuck out the most to me was, " Yet his government should not be with rigor, haughtiness, harshness, severity, but with the greatest love, gentleness, kindness, tenderness that may be. Though he governs her, he must not treat her as a servant, but as his own flesh; he must love her as himself." (28-29) Now whether or not this truely happened I do not know, however, if women were treated like this I'm not entirely sure they would ever be truely unhappy. Then in Susan Wesley's letter, where she describes her by-laws, the last one being "that no girl be taught to work till she can read very well..." shocked me also. (33) For some reason I was under the impression that a young girls education was never a high priority. Those were just two of things that really stood out to me but the book was full of information that really opened my eyes to what the people were like at that time. -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
I liked Eliza Pinckney’s list titled “To Improve in Every Virtue” because it gives historians a good idea of what women in Pinckney’s social class were concerned with during the 1750s. She mentions God first, assuring us that religion is a top priority in her life. She also talks about making others happy and striving to be a good wife, mother, and daughter. Many of women’s priorities have shifted in society since the 1750s, while others have stayed the same. I wonder how this list would change if Pinckney had lived in our generation. -- Jennifer Feldhaus</div>199.111.74.68 Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38