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::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($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=199.111.74.80McClurken Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-09-18T23:06:38ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.22.0https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_12_Questions/Comments328--Week 12 Questions/Comments2008-04-08T23:53:43Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Rosa Parks and Virginia Foster Durr ==<br />
<br />
<br />
I too have heard of Rosa Parks story but never the details like this article had. What I thought was so interesting was how a bus boycott lasted a year and how all of the black people denied having anything to do with it, and their white bosses went along with the lie, because they needed people to do stuff around their house, and take care of their children. Not only that but everyone new that everyone was lying and there was nothing that anyone could do about it other than cops writing stupid tickets. When the boycott was over I wonder if their were still problems (I imagine so), because there is always that one person who ruins it for everyone, or starts trouble.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
I enjoyed the piece this week that focused mostly on Mrs. Rose Parks in MAW. I always knew the general story about Mrs. Parks, but never details to this extent. I knew there was a bus boycott, but I didn't realize it went on for a year. Just think of the revenue the bus companies suffered. I wonder why it lasted so long. Mrs. Parks really was a remarkable woman though. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
== Cynthia Griggs Fleming, “Ruby Doris Smith Robinson and Black Women’s Leadership in SNCC” ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mirta Vidal Reports on the Rising Consciousness of the Chicana About Her Special Oppression, 1971. ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Naomi Craig's interview ==<br />
<br />
Mrs. Naomi Craig's interview really lets the reader get a feel for how life was for her and her children. There were hard times, but they dealt with them. She discussed the problems she had with finding a house and a job just because of the color of her skin. She also never agreed with the Vietnam and what it did to children and their mother's who couldn't afford to send their children to college to get out of the draft. I know my dad had a draft card # for the Vietnam war and almost had to go... they got within 10 calls of his number before the war was declared over. I would hate to know the feeling that just because you can't afford college, you HAVE to go fight that war... --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
Naomi Craig's interview, she talks about how her and her husband had a hard time buying a home, and she addressed the issue how blacks also had a hard time getting jobs. I had to read "The Orgins of the Urban Crisis" for this week in my American Landscape class and it talks about exactly what she has adressed here in her interview. You would think that realtors wouldn't care who they were selling too, as long as they were making money doing it. I also couldn't believe how difficult they made it for black people to get a job. Also the book talked about how the realtors would use the fact that whites wanted to move if one black person moved into their neighborhood to their advantage to profit more. Although it only talked about the city of Detroit this obviously happened in other places. Most neighborhoods today are still mostly one race. Do we do it on purpose or not still? How many of you have come from a mostly white or mostly black neighborhood?--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
The story of Rosa Parks to me is both saddening and uplighting at the same time if that's possible. We know the black perspective on the issue but what was the white's perspective? Did all the white feels the same way and come to the same agreement or were there varying opinions? What did the white people on the bus think that day in history? -- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
After reading the article in MP, I feel like the arguments Chicanas had were no different than other races. Obviously they had some fair arguments to make but issues such as female oppresion and childcare, didn't everyone have that same problem unless you were a member of the upper class? -- Rose Ferguson</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_10_Questions/Comments328--Week 10 Questions/Comments2008-03-26T15:58:12Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>Debate topic: did the war economically elevate families during its duration or impoverish them? -- Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
The contrast between the concluding sentence of Ruth Marshak's "Women of Wartime Los Alamos" and the rest of the reading is interesting. She describes life as being so dreary and containing so many hardships and then ends by saying it was a great experience. Is that due to the fact that certain portions of her account were left out by the editors of the book in which her account is located? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I had the same question that Justin remarks on above. She started off with describing the place as this horrible entity, but ends it with Los Alamos being an educational experience and that they'll never feel that connected to a town again. Are there parts left out? or does she write this article in this way so that she could throw the bit of twist at the end? -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
Marion Stegeman's letters in "Women in the Armed Forces" are interesting when she talks about the time she landed at Ballinger Air Field in order to get her bearings. Didn't the Squn. Commander have anything more pressing to do? It all seems a little strange to me considering the fact that we are now living in the middle of a gas crisis. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Did the WACs's performance in the 5th Army have any influence on how they were treated as military personnel after World War II? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Matsumoto discusses “Japanese American Women during World War II” in Unequal Sisters. Part of it deals with the resettlement of some of the women from the Japanese internment camps, most of them being younger women attending college. Today, people tend to associate college educated people, and students of college age, with more liberal ideals. Was that true during this time as well? Was it easier for younger women of Japanese decent to be accepted in a college or university setting than if they were older and returning to a workforce with people of older generations? And did geography also play a role in how well or readily they were accepted? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting to read "Women of Wartime Los Alamos" by Ruth Marshak, because it showed a less common war time experience. It sounds like the woman who was describing her experience in this selection didn’t have a family with children, were there other families that moved there with children as well. If so, were these communities complete with some kind of education system as well? She describes the social aspects but not much further. What were the women’s roles in Los Alamos if they didn’t have children and while the husbands were working in the lab? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
Reading Matsumoto's "Japanese American Women during World War II" reminded me of a story I had to read in English class during high school. The other story said that people would destroy the houses of Japanese-Americans and take what they wanted, destroying the rest. Did this happen often? How did women deal with a destroyed home when they returned? Did families return to the homes and properties they had before the internments? Were they able to? --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I noticed in the movie in class and in the pictures, that the women were wearing pants. I think it is mentioned in a caption on page 179 in MAW, and several other times throughout the reading. This is quite a change from the ridiculous bicyling outfits we studied earlier. Was this a case of desperate times call for desperate measures or was it more acceptable during this time period for women to dress comfortably and efficiently at work/home while doing work? ---Landon Davis<br />
<br />
One thing i noticed throughout the MAW reading was a lack of overt patriotism. The oral history "Rosie the Riveter" by Hill focuses solely on the monetary aspects she gains by working. In "Women in the Armed Forces" the letters written by Stagemen only talk of how exciting it is, and allows her to stroke her ego as she talks about getting out of the plane and surprising all the men. I am not saying what they were doing was not patriotic because it was. But it does not sound like patriotism was the first reason alot of these women chose to work. Again in MP Bethune urges FDR to let African American women work. Bethune uses the term "united patriotism" but it seems more like a means to an end (equality) rather than the end in itself. Yerger expresses my skepticism on page 373 saying something like "women use the patriotic cause of their work as a front for the financial cause." ---- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
The article in US on the Japanese women I thought was interesting because right after the bombing of Pearl Harbor all of the Japanese were put in camps, and the Americans saw them as a threat, therefore putting them into these camps as a way to keep a watchfull eye on them as if they were to do something or had some part in why the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. This sounds all to familiar. When 9-11 happened Americans suddenly saw all middle easterners as a threat that were in the US. Although we did not throw them into camps, I remember watching the news and how they interviewed some immagrant middle easterners and how now they were treated differently.I've often wondered if the role was reveresed and an American white or black did something horrific in another country if other races would change the way the think of us, but by saying that what do other races, ethnicities think of us? I also thought how amazing it was that the Japanese found something good out of being kept in these camps, and utilized new skills they formed once they were out and used it to their advantage.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
The second article (Mrs. Norma Yerger) she makes the statement that "Many women thoroughly enjoy working & getting away from the home."(373) I'm sure many did enjoy their jobs since some working conditions had improved but probably there were just as many who didn't like their jobs, for whatever reason. Also relating that statement to the movie we watched in class; there was one part were the women were ok with giving their job back to the man who once had the position before going off to war. How true is that? Were many simply ok with going back to being house wife anhome maker, or did they really enjoy their job enough like the article says, therefore not wanting to give up their job.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
At the end of Marion Stegman's letters she expresses her concern to her mother about her "love" Ned and how she wants to marry him but also how she will work indefinitely. During this time when the number of women working rapidly increased, were long distance relationships even possible? Or were couples forced to go their own way for survival purposes and hope to reconnect safely at a later time? --- Rose Feguson<br />
<br />
In MP, I found it interesting to read about Jeanne Wakatsuki Houston whose father would not allow her to be confirmed in the Catholic church. He felt strongly that if she were confirmed she would never marry, especially a nice Japanese boy which is what he wanted. Was this the case with most girls around her age, with all religions? -- Rose Ferguson</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_10_Questions/Comments328--Week 10 Questions/Comments2008-03-26T15:50:31Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>Debate topic: did the war economically elevate families during its duration or impoverish them? -- Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
The contrast between the concluding sentence of Ruth Marshak's "Women of Wartime Los Alamos" and the rest of the reading is interesting. She describes life as being so dreary and containing so many hardships and then ends by saying it was a great experience. Is that due to the fact that certain portions of her account were left out by the editors of the book in which her account is located? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I had the same question that Justin remarks on above. She started off with describing the place as this horrible entity, but ends it with Los Alamos being an educational experience and that they'll never feel that connected to a town again. Are there parts left out? or does she write this article in this way so that she could throw the bit of twist at the end? -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
Marion Stegeman's letters in "Women in the Armed Forces" are interesting when she talks about the time she landed at Ballinger Air Field in order to get her bearings. Didn't the Squn. Commander have anything more pressing to do? It all seems a little strange to me considering the fact that we are now living in the middle of a gas crisis. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Did the WACs's performance in the 5th Army have any influence on how they were treated as military personnel after World War II? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Matsumoto discusses “Japanese American Women during World War II” in Unequal Sisters. Part of it deals with the resettlement of some of the women from the Japanese internment camps, most of them being younger women attending college. Today, people tend to associate college educated people, and students of college age, with more liberal ideals. Was that true during this time as well? Was it easier for younger women of Japanese decent to be accepted in a college or university setting than if they were older and returning to a workforce with people of older generations? And did geography also play a role in how well or readily they were accepted? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting to read "Women of Wartime Los Alamos" by Ruth Marshak, because it showed a less common war time experience. It sounds like the woman who was describing her experience in this selection didn’t have a family with children, were there other families that moved there with children as well. If so, were these communities complete with some kind of education system as well? She describes the social aspects but not much further. What were the women’s roles in Los Alamos if they didn’t have children and while the husbands were working in the lab? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
Reading Matsumoto's "Japanese American Women during World War II" reminded me of a story I had to read in English class during high school. The other story said that people would destroy the houses of Japanese-Americans and take what they wanted, destroying the rest. Did this happen often? How did women deal with a destroyed home when they returned? Did families return to the homes and properties they had before the internments? Were they able to? --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I noticed in the movie in class and in the pictures, that the women were wearing pants. I think it is mentioned in a caption on page 179 in MAW, and several other times throughout the reading. This is quite a change from the ridiculous bicyling outfits we studied earlier. Was this a case of desperate times call for desperate measures or was it more acceptable during this time period for women to dress comfortably and efficiently at work/home while doing work? ---Landon Davis<br />
<br />
One thing i noticed throughout the MAW reading was a lack of overt patriotism. The oral history "Rosie the Riveter" by Hill focuses solely on the monetary aspects she gains by working. In "Women in the Armed Forces" the letters written by Stagemen only talk of how exciting it is, and allows her to stroke her ego as she talks about getting out of the plane and surprising all the men. I am not saying what they were doing was not patriotic because it was. But it does not sound like patriotism was the first reason alot of these women chose to work. Again in MP Bethune urges FDR to let African American women work. Bethune uses the term "united patriotism" but it seems more like a means to an end (equality) rather than the end in itself. Yerger expresses my skepticism on page 373 saying something like "women use the patriotic cause of their work as a front for the financial cause." ---- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
The article in US on the Japanese women I thought was interesting because right after the bombing of Pearl Harbor all of the Japanese were put in camps, and the Americans saw them as a threat, therefore putting them into these camps as a way to keep a watchfull eye on them as if they were to do something or had some part in why the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. This sounds all to familiar. When 9-11 happened Americans suddenly saw all middle easterners as a threat that were in the US. Although we did not throw them into camps, I remember watching the news and how they interviewed some immagrant middle easterners and how now they were treated differently.I've often wondered if the role was reveresed and an American white or black did something horrific in another country if other races would change the way the think of us, but by saying that what do other races, ethnicities think of us? I also thought how amazing it was that the Japanese found something good out of being kept in these camps, and utilized new skills they formed once they were out and used it to their advantage.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
The second article (Mrs. Norma Yerger) she makes the statement that "Many women thoroughly enjoy working & getting away from the home."(373) I'm sure many did enjoy their jobs since some working conditions had improved but probably there were just as many who didn't like their jobs, for whatever reason. Also relating that statement to the movie we watched in class; there was one part were the women were ok with giving their job back to the man who once had the position before going off to war. How true is that? Were many simply ok with going back to being house wife anhome maker, or did they really enjoy their job enough like the article says, therefore not wanting to give up their job.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
At the end of Marion Stegman's letters she expresses her concern to her mother about her "love" Ned and how she wants to marry him but also how she will work indefinitely. During this time when the number of women working rapidly increased, were long distance relationships even possible? Or were couples forced to go their own way for survival purposes and hope to reconnect safely at a later time? --- Rose Feguson</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_9_Questions/Comments328--Week 9 Questions/Comments2008-03-20T01:18:05Z<p>199.111.74.80: /* Genora Johnson Dollinger, "Women and Labor Militancy" */</p>
<hr />
<div>== "I Want You Women Up North to Know" by Tillie Olson ==<br />
<br />
In "I Want You Women Up North to Know" by Tillie Olson I found this line hilarious " ...she says that he prays and dreams of a another world...a heaven (which he does not know was brought to earth in 1917 in Russia, by workers like him)"...hind-sight is 20/20 right?- Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I found this reading interesting but at the same time confusing. Tillie Olson is clearly attacking the women in the north who are buying the clothes that are being made, but its these women that are allowing the women she is writing about to have their jobs. Yes, their conditions are horrible and the pay is horrible, but thats not a reason to attack the other women I would think. I would also think that the depression, while it might have lessened in the Northern cities, was still affecting their lives, so her accusations seem to me to be unjustified.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
== Annelise Orleck, "Militant Housewives of the Depression" ==<br />
<br />
I was amazed to learn how organized and militant housewives were during the Great Depression. Prior to reading this week's reading, I didn't know people were able to actually find constructive ways of regaining a semblance of their previous way of life during the Great Depression. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I LOVED this reading! I enjoyed seeing how women reacted to some of the hardships of the depression in a more aggressive way. I found it interesting that Orleck mentions that the women who were speaking out weren't doing so because they wanted the attention but because they wanted to be able to fulfill their duties as wives and mothers, which fits into the idea of what a woman was supposed to be doing, making their efforts more acceptable in society. I had no idea that they were able to accomplish so much or that the movement of housewives was so widespread across the U.S.! These I think are definitely ones who, if I was a mother during this period, I would want my children to respect and look up to because they were fighting for something they believed so strongly in (even though I'd prefer to be something more than a housewife). -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
This really was a fun article to read. I was very impressed at how these women managed to keep their life somewhat the same during the depression. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
== All Eleanor Roosevelt readings ==<br />
<br />
All of this week's readings about and created by Eleanor Roosevelt really confirmed history's seemingly high opinion of her. The fact that the Roosevelts' were able to constructively respond to all of their mail during the Great Depression is very admirable. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I thougth it was interesting that women actually took the time to write Eleanor Roosevelt about things that they desperately needed, like clothing and jobs for their husbands. Just thinking in today's world and if a depression happened now, I would think it pointless to write the first lady about what I desperately needed, just because I would think she for one probably would never even read the letter and two she probably wouldn't care much less help me. Yet so many women in the 1930's wrote her their depressing situations, I assume because they were just so desperate and no one else could help them so why couldn't the first lady. They probably thougtht too that Eleanor could influence her husband since he was the President to make him do something. Also article 5 and 6 in MP show that Eleanor did actually take recongnition of the problems during the depression and talked about the problems and spoke actively on many of the problems she saw.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
What I found interesting were the letters to the Roosevelt's and specifically Eleanor in both MAW and MPA. Like Michelle had said I wouldn't be writing to the first lady if there was a depression. Especially in today's society the letter would just get lost or thrown away. One of the letters did bother me a bit. I know it really shouldn't have but, the one about the little girl who wants roller blades.... to me its just so wrong. I know she is younger and doesn't understand what is going on, but it just really bugged me that she asked for roller blades when people are dieing of hunger, and are out of work and on the streets. Then there is this girl asking for roller blades because he friends are making fun of her. No matter what age you are things like that just bother me. Also wouldn't the parents maybe explain to their child that mommy and daddy are having a few problems financially? -- Amanda Taub<br />
'''(McClurken don't make fun of me to much in class, I like to be there when i am made fun of save a little for Tuesday).'''<br />
<br />
For me the most interesting letter to Eleanor Roosevelt was the second one. The woman thanked Roosevelt for her reply to the last letter, but then said she did not need charity just a loan, even sending in collateral she claimed was valuable. However, what bothers me here is not the fact that the first lady could not possibly begin to make individual loans to people, but the size of this woman's ego or pride. She claimed she gave up her rings which held the highest emotional value to her, this is not true. What holds the highest value in this woman's life is clearly her ability to save face, her pride. If she was truly desperate, and in such great need that she would ask a loan from a stranger, she should be willing to give up her greatest asset; that of her ego, and take the charity that the government has set up for her. I have noticed the same trend more subtly throughout the rest of the readings, what is causing this? Is it a few isolated cases or does this pride fit in with the overall atttidue of the day, or somehow into the middle class ideals we have talked so extensively about? --- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
<br />
I found the reading of "American Women ASk Eleanor for Help" nteresting as well as heartbreaking. It amazed me to read that within a day Eleanor would have 5 to 8 thousand letters and she made a huge effort to either answer them herself or pass it on to the correct agency. It surprised me the things the ladies asked for varying from roller skates to a job for a husband. How was Roosevelt able to answer all of these letters and was she able to satisfy the needs and wants of most? -- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
== Meridel Lesueur, "Despair of Unemployed Women" ==<br />
<br />
Reading Meridel Lesueur's article really struck me. Just how starved the women were, and the endless sitting at the job bureau day after day. The description of some of their faces really made me feel a little sad. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I found this reading interesting because it showed that the middle class ideals, or what i guess could be described as middle class prejudice or maybe just denial in this case, still affected women even in this time of crisis. Where as before when the economy was good, women were not afforded the same opportunities as men (i.e. lower wages, lower glass ceilings, smaller scope of job opportunities), now in the depression women still arent afforded the same rights and opportunities as men (i.e. no flop houses, a cultural unwillingness to see women living in the parks, and charities only helping the deserving few). -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
== Ann Marie Low's "The Dust Bowl" ==<br />
<br />
Ann Marie Low's "The Dust Bowl" was intriguing to read. Just how much dust piled up and how much they had to wash to keep their dishes, clothes, and house clean was unreal. I had always been told that there was 'a lot of dust,' but this article really put it in perspective. How did the people manage to live in it? I know that it said many babies and elderly died in it, but how did people live in it? --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I really like the piece titled Dust Bowl.Finding out the things these people had to go through. The excessive cleaning that occurs before anything, all the hours put into cleaning are such wasted hours. I never really thought of it like this, all this time spent on the cleaning could have been used for finding a job or getting more food. The one thing that did give me a little relief was that Ann Marie Low, the girl writing this had time for leisure, she was able to go out to the movies, that even through this she was able to maintain some social life. Even though sometimes housekeeping did get in the way she was able to do things for her self. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
Ignoring the fact of the endless dust, life for this family seemed to be much better, as Amanda said the girl seemed to have time for leisure, and the ham, eggs, and bread seem like a feast compared to the rations of crackers described in the earlier readings of women in the cities. Was this true for the majority of rural families compared with those in the cities? Or is this a rare case? As an afterthought, I still havent decided if I would rather starve or live in all that dust, both sound unpleasant.----Landon Davis<br />
<br />
== Margaret Jarman Hagood's "The Life Cycle of a White Southern Farm Woman" ==<br />
<br />
Margaret Jarman Hagood's "The Life Cycle of a White Southern Farm Woman" was so depressing! I was reading it and toward the end I had to stop and just stare at the book. I never realized that a baby that close to birth who was so active could just... die like that. 11 days before birth! I read it allowed to my husband and our friend who was visiting and they both stared at me and asked "Why are you reading something so depressing!?!?" Does those kinds of death still happen in America today? I mean, that close to birth? --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
This article bothered me a bit. Like Ashley I was shocked about the death of her baby so close to its birth but Margaret Hagood seemed to be extremely petty to me. She was annoyed because one of her children wasn't as pretty as she hoped and she just seemed annoyed that she couldn't have all the material things that she wanted. I just found her annoying because she seemed to not be upset because of the hardship of the depression but because she was worried that her daughter and that she, herself, wouldn't be viewed as pretty.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
== Genora Johnson Dollinger, "Women and Labor Militancy" ==<br />
<br />
Dollinger's essay on "Women and Labor Militancy" was interesting. I I had no idea some women took it so far and seriously in these union groups. Sure we've learned how they take a militant approuch, but the lady in this reading was beyond that. What I thought was so interesting about her was how she used her gender against the cops in order to get where and what she wanted. She knew as a women that the cops would not shoot her in the back like they would a man, and therefore marching herself right in there on these strikes helping to defend these men, as well as using a type of reverse psychology on the cops to try and get them to see their fight. Pretty smart. On top of that she is like, oh by the way I had TB while I was doing all of this. She had some guts. She had a lot of women back her up on these strikes and even though the cops did not shoot them like they may have done to men I wonder if any got arrested at least?--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
Dollinger wrote about "Women and Labor Militancy" in the 1930's. Women formed the Emergency Brigade as their form of activism, which at the time was very appreciated by the men it was helping. However, as women's roles in these positions became less necessary and demands were being met, their roles became less necessary. People quickly reverted back to their previous expectations and as it states on page 170 men began saying, "Well, you women did a wonderful job, but now your duty is back there getting those kids in school, getting the wash done, and regular meals again…" Though the women were helpful for that time, does it really show progress for women and their increasingly public roles if it can disappear as quickly as it can emerge? I think it shows how easily the situation of women can change within certain societal conditions, how fragile progress can be, and how easily it is to revert back to the default. The challenge then becomes not how to be more active and make progress at a certain time or under certain circumstances, but how to use all of these collectively to change the default. –Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I found it interesting to read the account of a woman raised in Flint Michigan and working with tue unions. Not only was I raised an hour or so south of Flint but both of my grandparents worked for the UAW during the depression. It's interesting to read what these women went through because its not something my grandparents talk about often. -- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
== Carlotta Martin's "A Mexican-American Childhood during the Depression" ==<br />
<br />
In "A Mexican-American Childhood during the Depression" Carlotta Martin discusses what is like growing up in the barrio and how difficult life was during the Great Depression. She mentions that it was more common for children to be raised by their grandparents. Would this be in the sense that was it common for grandparents to live in the same households as their children and other extended family and for them to serve as we would see babysitters today? Or did the grandparents take their grandchildren, live separately, and give both parents a chance to work. Was this common within other ethnic groups or social classes as well? Or did it simply serve as an opportunity for the children to get an education as opposed to working to help their struggling families during the depression? –Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
== Photo Essay ==<br />
Personally, I loved the Photo essay. I think that photographs are a really interesting way to show how things have changed from one era to the next and the pictures in this week's reading did just that. Seeing women in pants and with shorter hair on almost every girl was a neat thing to see because this had recently become a new fad. The photos are also a great way to visualize what we were talking about in class on Tuesday, including women working in men's jobs while they went off to war (like in the aviation plant photo) and joining and supporting unions (like in the auto workers' auxiliary photo). It kind of proves that all of this stuff really did happen which is beneficial when it seems kind of unreal that women wearing pants had been such a major controversy. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
== Dorothy Dunbar Bromley on Birth Control in the Depression ==<br />
It annoys me how it took an economic depression to make people realize how important birth control was. It would happen that way, people say how immoral it is until babies become an economic burden that they can't afford. I am glad, however, that they DID realize it was important though because the more children, the harsher the despression would've been. It is sad to see that the poorer people always were the ones having the most children, that is unfortunately the way it usually is.- Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I agree with Emely Amaya's comment on the studies regarding the high number of births among poor people during the Great Depression. I was sort of wondering and hoping that studies such as those were the reason behind the repeal of prohibitions against the dissemination of information regarding birth control by AMA doctors. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Isnt it still true today that despite the wide availability and knowledge of birth control, the families that can not afford to have a child still are the ones who end up having the most children?--Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I have to ask the same question Landon does because wide availability and knowledge of birth control does not necessarily solve the problem. I'm not suggesting that the Depression did not increase hardships or awareness for birth control. I think that the problem is more complicated. Perhaps the reasons are embedded in culture, or it may have more to do with the subservient status of women to men. In many cases the man dictates the use of birth control. I've read articles that suggest that young women would rather risk pregnancy that lose a boyfriend. Birth control only works if both partners are willing to use it.--LisaM<br />
<br />
When it takes a depression for people to finally realize that having lots of children is not a good idea it really only effects those that had the money to have children in the first place. The ones that cant afford to are still going to have them. The ones that limited children due to the depression were typically middle class families. It is sad, that it continues to be the families that cant afford children that are having such large numbers. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
== Lydia Mendoza recalls her career in the Depression ==<br />
I loved the Lydia Mendoza recollection. Her modesty was overwhelming, but at the same time she was able to effectively describe how tough the depression was on families, and especially on minorities. Having to play in the plaza for two nights in a row just to make up the rent for the week had to have been difficult and you can really understand why her mother was hesitant about letting her travel to go on the radio show. If I were her mother I probably would have done the same thing -- her daughter was earning her quite a bit in the plaza so why change that, right? At the same time, I think it was wonderful that the manager found her a sponsor - it's kind of romanticized really and the way a great success story should start. I also liked how, by reading Lydia's piece, you could tell that women were still trying to establish themselves alongside men in the music world (and life in general.) "It was a very pretty sight and very special because we were women and very young..." Her discussion of the plaza being filled entirely with groups of men playing their instruments just emphasizes how all cultures dealt with a gender struggle. --Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
== P’ing Yu, Racism among white CA Clubwomen, 1937 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Louise Mitchell, Denounces the “Slave Markets” where Domestics are Hired in NYC, 1940 ==<br />
<br />
It is so sad that so many young women had to stand on the street corners just to try to get work. I was surprised that domestic workers made up most of the country's job force, especially when it was a last resort job for women. Reading the piece about the domestic "slave markets" really showed how hard it was for women, especially African-American women, to get jobs. --Kellye Sorber</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_9_Questions/Comments328--Week 9 Questions/Comments2008-03-20T01:16:45Z<p>199.111.74.80: /* All Eleanor Roosevelt readings */</p>
<hr />
<div>== "I Want You Women Up North to Know" by Tillie Olson ==<br />
<br />
In "I Want You Women Up North to Know" by Tillie Olson I found this line hilarious " ...she says that he prays and dreams of a another world...a heaven (which he does not know was brought to earth in 1917 in Russia, by workers like him)"...hind-sight is 20/20 right?- Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I found this reading interesting but at the same time confusing. Tillie Olson is clearly attacking the women in the north who are buying the clothes that are being made, but its these women that are allowing the women she is writing about to have their jobs. Yes, their conditions are horrible and the pay is horrible, but thats not a reason to attack the other women I would think. I would also think that the depression, while it might have lessened in the Northern cities, was still affecting their lives, so her accusations seem to me to be unjustified.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
== Annelise Orleck, "Militant Housewives of the Depression" ==<br />
<br />
I was amazed to learn how organized and militant housewives were during the Great Depression. Prior to reading this week's reading, I didn't know people were able to actually find constructive ways of regaining a semblance of their previous way of life during the Great Depression. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I LOVED this reading! I enjoyed seeing how women reacted to some of the hardships of the depression in a more aggressive way. I found it interesting that Orleck mentions that the women who were speaking out weren't doing so because they wanted the attention but because they wanted to be able to fulfill their duties as wives and mothers, which fits into the idea of what a woman was supposed to be doing, making their efforts more acceptable in society. I had no idea that they were able to accomplish so much or that the movement of housewives was so widespread across the U.S.! These I think are definitely ones who, if I was a mother during this period, I would want my children to respect and look up to because they were fighting for something they believed so strongly in (even though I'd prefer to be something more than a housewife). -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
This really was a fun article to read. I was very impressed at how these women managed to keep their life somewhat the same during the depression. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
== All Eleanor Roosevelt readings ==<br />
<br />
All of this week's readings about and created by Eleanor Roosevelt really confirmed history's seemingly high opinion of her. The fact that the Roosevelts' were able to constructively respond to all of their mail during the Great Depression is very admirable. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I thougth it was interesting that women actually took the time to write Eleanor Roosevelt about things that they desperately needed, like clothing and jobs for their husbands. Just thinking in today's world and if a depression happened now, I would think it pointless to write the first lady about what I desperately needed, just because I would think she for one probably would never even read the letter and two she probably wouldn't care much less help me. Yet so many women in the 1930's wrote her their depressing situations, I assume because they were just so desperate and no one else could help them so why couldn't the first lady. They probably thougtht too that Eleanor could influence her husband since he was the President to make him do something. Also article 5 and 6 in MP show that Eleanor did actually take recongnition of the problems during the depression and talked about the problems and spoke actively on many of the problems she saw.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
What I found interesting were the letters to the Roosevelt's and specifically Eleanor in both MAW and MPA. Like Michelle had said I wouldn't be writing to the first lady if there was a depression. Especially in today's society the letter would just get lost or thrown away. One of the letters did bother me a bit. I know it really shouldn't have but, the one about the little girl who wants roller blades.... to me its just so wrong. I know she is younger and doesn't understand what is going on, but it just really bugged me that she asked for roller blades when people are dieing of hunger, and are out of work and on the streets. Then there is this girl asking for roller blades because he friends are making fun of her. No matter what age you are things like that just bother me. Also wouldn't the parents maybe explain to their child that mommy and daddy are having a few problems financially? -- Amanda Taub<br />
'''(McClurken don't make fun of me to much in class, I like to be there when i am made fun of save a little for Tuesday).'''<br />
<br />
For me the most interesting letter to Eleanor Roosevelt was the second one. The woman thanked Roosevelt for her reply to the last letter, but then said she did not need charity just a loan, even sending in collateral she claimed was valuable. However, what bothers me here is not the fact that the first lady could not possibly begin to make individual loans to people, but the size of this woman's ego or pride. She claimed she gave up her rings which held the highest emotional value to her, this is not true. What holds the highest value in this woman's life is clearly her ability to save face, her pride. If she was truly desperate, and in such great need that she would ask a loan from a stranger, she should be willing to give up her greatest asset; that of her ego, and take the charity that the government has set up for her. I have noticed the same trend more subtly throughout the rest of the readings, what is causing this? Is it a few isolated cases or does this pride fit in with the overall atttidue of the day, or somehow into the middle class ideals we have talked so extensively about? --- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
<br />
I found the reading of "American Women ASk Eleanor for Help" nteresting as well as heartbreaking. It amazed me to read that within a day Eleanor would have 5 to 8 thousand letters and she made a huge effort to either answer them herself or pass it on to the correct agency. It surprised me the things the ladies asked for varying from roller skates to a job for a husband. How was Roosevelt able to answer all of these letters and was she able to satisfy the needs and wants of most? -- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
== Meridel Lesueur, "Despair of Unemployed Women" ==<br />
<br />
Reading Meridel Lesueur's article really struck me. Just how starved the women were, and the endless sitting at the job bureau day after day. The description of some of their faces really made me feel a little sad. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I found this reading interesting because it showed that the middle class ideals, or what i guess could be described as middle class prejudice or maybe just denial in this case, still affected women even in this time of crisis. Where as before when the economy was good, women were not afforded the same opportunities as men (i.e. lower wages, lower glass ceilings, smaller scope of job opportunities), now in the depression women still arent afforded the same rights and opportunities as men (i.e. no flop houses, a cultural unwillingness to see women living in the parks, and charities only helping the deserving few). -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
== Ann Marie Low's "The Dust Bowl" ==<br />
<br />
Ann Marie Low's "The Dust Bowl" was intriguing to read. Just how much dust piled up and how much they had to wash to keep their dishes, clothes, and house clean was unreal. I had always been told that there was 'a lot of dust,' but this article really put it in perspective. How did the people manage to live in it? I know that it said many babies and elderly died in it, but how did people live in it? --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I really like the piece titled Dust Bowl.Finding out the things these people had to go through. The excessive cleaning that occurs before anything, all the hours put into cleaning are such wasted hours. I never really thought of it like this, all this time spent on the cleaning could have been used for finding a job or getting more food. The one thing that did give me a little relief was that Ann Marie Low, the girl writing this had time for leisure, she was able to go out to the movies, that even through this she was able to maintain some social life. Even though sometimes housekeeping did get in the way she was able to do things for her self. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
Ignoring the fact of the endless dust, life for this family seemed to be much better, as Amanda said the girl seemed to have time for leisure, and the ham, eggs, and bread seem like a feast compared to the rations of crackers described in the earlier readings of women in the cities. Was this true for the majority of rural families compared with those in the cities? Or is this a rare case? As an afterthought, I still havent decided if I would rather starve or live in all that dust, both sound unpleasant.----Landon Davis<br />
<br />
== Margaret Jarman Hagood's "The Life Cycle of a White Southern Farm Woman" ==<br />
<br />
Margaret Jarman Hagood's "The Life Cycle of a White Southern Farm Woman" was so depressing! I was reading it and toward the end I had to stop and just stare at the book. I never realized that a baby that close to birth who was so active could just... die like that. 11 days before birth! I read it allowed to my husband and our friend who was visiting and they both stared at me and asked "Why are you reading something so depressing!?!?" Does those kinds of death still happen in America today? I mean, that close to birth? --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
This article bothered me a bit. Like Ashley I was shocked about the death of her baby so close to its birth but Margaret Hagood seemed to be extremely petty to me. She was annoyed because one of her children wasn't as pretty as she hoped and she just seemed annoyed that she couldn't have all the material things that she wanted. I just found her annoying because she seemed to not be upset because of the hardship of the depression but because she was worried that her daughter and that she, herself, wouldn't be viewed as pretty.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
== Genora Johnson Dollinger, "Women and Labor Militancy" ==<br />
<br />
Dollinger's essay on "Women and Labor Militancy" was interesting. I I had no idea some women took it so far and seriously in these union groups. Sure we've learned how they take a militant approuch, but the lady in this reading was beyond that. What I thought was so interesting about her was how she used her gender against the cops in order to get where and what she wanted. She knew as a women that the cops would not shoot her in the back like they would a man, and therefore marching herself right in there on these strikes helping to defend these men, as well as using a type of reverse psychology on the cops to try and get them to see their fight. Pretty smart. On top of that she is like, oh by the way I had TB while I was doing all of this. She had some guts. She had a lot of women back her up on these strikes and even though the cops did not shoot them like they may have done to men I wonder if any got arrested at least?--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
Dollinger wrote about "Women and Labor Militancy" in the 1930's. Women formed the Emergency Brigade as their form of activism, which at the time was very appreciated by the men it was helping. However, as women's roles in these positions became less necessary and demands were being met, their roles became less necessary. People quickly reverted back to their previous expectations and as it states on page 170 men began saying, "Well, you women did a wonderful job, but now your duty is back there getting those kids in school, getting the wash done, and regular meals again…" Though the women were helpful for that time, does it really show progress for women and their increasingly public roles if it can disappear as quickly as it can emerge? I think it shows how easily the situation of women can change within certain societal conditions, how fragile progress can be, and how easily it is to revert back to the default. The challenge then becomes not how to be more active and make progress at a certain time or under certain circumstances, but how to use all of these collectively to change the default. –Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Carlotta Martin's "A Mexican-American Childhood during the Depression" ==<br />
<br />
In "A Mexican-American Childhood during the Depression" Carlotta Martin discusses what is like growing up in the barrio and how difficult life was during the Great Depression. She mentions that it was more common for children to be raised by their grandparents. Would this be in the sense that was it common for grandparents to live in the same households as their children and other extended family and for them to serve as we would see babysitters today? Or did the grandparents take their grandchildren, live separately, and give both parents a chance to work. Was this common within other ethnic groups or social classes as well? Or did it simply serve as an opportunity for the children to get an education as opposed to working to help their struggling families during the depression? –Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
== Photo Essay ==<br />
Personally, I loved the Photo essay. I think that photographs are a really interesting way to show how things have changed from one era to the next and the pictures in this week's reading did just that. Seeing women in pants and with shorter hair on almost every girl was a neat thing to see because this had recently become a new fad. The photos are also a great way to visualize what we were talking about in class on Tuesday, including women working in men's jobs while they went off to war (like in the aviation plant photo) and joining and supporting unions (like in the auto workers' auxiliary photo). It kind of proves that all of this stuff really did happen which is beneficial when it seems kind of unreal that women wearing pants had been such a major controversy. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
== Dorothy Dunbar Bromley on Birth Control in the Depression ==<br />
It annoys me how it took an economic depression to make people realize how important birth control was. It would happen that way, people say how immoral it is until babies become an economic burden that they can't afford. I am glad, however, that they DID realize it was important though because the more children, the harsher the despression would've been. It is sad to see that the poorer people always were the ones having the most children, that is unfortunately the way it usually is.- Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I agree with Emely Amaya's comment on the studies regarding the high number of births among poor people during the Great Depression. I was sort of wondering and hoping that studies such as those were the reason behind the repeal of prohibitions against the dissemination of information regarding birth control by AMA doctors. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Isnt it still true today that despite the wide availability and knowledge of birth control, the families that can not afford to have a child still are the ones who end up having the most children?--Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I have to ask the same question Landon does because wide availability and knowledge of birth control does not necessarily solve the problem. I'm not suggesting that the Depression did not increase hardships or awareness for birth control. I think that the problem is more complicated. Perhaps the reasons are embedded in culture, or it may have more to do with the subservient status of women to men. In many cases the man dictates the use of birth control. I've read articles that suggest that young women would rather risk pregnancy that lose a boyfriend. Birth control only works if both partners are willing to use it.--LisaM<br />
<br />
When it takes a depression for people to finally realize that having lots of children is not a good idea it really only effects those that had the money to have children in the first place. The ones that cant afford to are still going to have them. The ones that limited children due to the depression were typically middle class families. It is sad, that it continues to be the families that cant afford children that are having such large numbers. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
== Lydia Mendoza recalls her career in the Depression ==<br />
I loved the Lydia Mendoza recollection. Her modesty was overwhelming, but at the same time she was able to effectively describe how tough the depression was on families, and especially on minorities. Having to play in the plaza for two nights in a row just to make up the rent for the week had to have been difficult and you can really understand why her mother was hesitant about letting her travel to go on the radio show. If I were her mother I probably would have done the same thing -- her daughter was earning her quite a bit in the plaza so why change that, right? At the same time, I think it was wonderful that the manager found her a sponsor - it's kind of romanticized really and the way a great success story should start. I also liked how, by reading Lydia's piece, you could tell that women were still trying to establish themselves alongside men in the music world (and life in general.) "It was a very pretty sight and very special because we were women and very young..." Her discussion of the plaza being filled entirely with groups of men playing their instruments just emphasizes how all cultures dealt with a gender struggle. --Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
== P’ing Yu, Racism among white CA Clubwomen, 1937 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Louise Mitchell, Denounces the “Slave Markets” where Domestics are Hired in NYC, 1940 ==<br />
<br />
It is so sad that so many young women had to stand on the street corners just to try to get work. I was surprised that domestic workers made up most of the country's job force, especially when it was a last resort job for women. Reading the piece about the domestic "slave markets" really showed how hard it was for women, especially African-American women, to get jobs. --Kellye Sorber</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_8_Questions/Comments328--Week 8 Questions/Comments2008-03-13T01:18:35Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>THE ONLINE READING IS LOCATED HERE: [http://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/docs/MP-Reading.pdf Week 8 Reading]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
In this week's reading of "'But We Would Never Talk about it': The Structures of Lesbian Discretion in South Dakota, 1928-1933" by Elizabeth Lapovsky Kennedy, the idea that struck me the deepest was the thought that the now extinct sensibility that existed during the first half of the twentieth century actually helped a minority people. Having unofficial social mores and a respect for others' privacy allowed for lesbians who were white to live productive lives as long as they lived according to same social standards that ruled the lives of heterosexual women. This custom appears to have created a type of equality that may or may not exist today. Given the fact that the majority of the things that many homosexual couples are fighting for today did not yet exist for heterosexual couples, it would seem as if during this point in time, lesbianism was treated as an extreme eccentricity that should be controlled out of respect for one's neighbors. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I did not find it as surprising that is was so possible for Julia Boyer Reinstein's family to accept her lesbianism. While I am sure that her mother and father would have preferred to have a son-in-law, that the father enjoyed not having to entertain potential male suitors and having someone who would cover up his extramaterial affairs should not be overlooked. In a certain sense, I think what made her lesbianism easier to accept than if Julia Boyer Reinstein had been a homosexual male was that the society in which she lived was patriarchal and thus the desires of the father won out over the desires of the mother, and her father really did not care whether she enjoyed a heterosexual marriage or not. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
So then does the tying of sexuality with politics and identity mischaracterize people and their politics, concerns, and histories? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
After reading "But we would never talk about it" I didn't feel surprised about any of it. Being a lesbian back then was not defined as it was today. It was common for women to confide in each other and sleep in the same bed and have an intimate relationship. However, a lot of people did not know what was really going on behind closed doors, which I feel is a reason why no one every talked about it. The only thing that did surprise me was that her parents were ok with it all. There is a passage that talks about how her mother would make a comment about how she wasn't with this one boy, but in the end her being a lesbian didn't bother her, she was actually very polite to Dorothy. In Julia's father's case, it didn't surprise me so much after there were comments made that he could have all of her attention. He didn't need to entertain possible son - in- laws, however I also feel like he used Julia because she was gay. By giving Julia his consent and accepting her it keep their relationship close, however he might of done this because it covered up all of his affairs. My question was did Julia ever see her father and her relationship this way, or was she just happy that her father accepted her? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
The second part that I thought was the most interesting was her encounter with Amelia Earhart. It shows how cautious girls were towards other girls. I feel that these women were so unsure about themselves that they really had to question others more. Especially since this was one of her earlier encounters, it shows that in the beginning Julia was very timid about her sexuality. Since she was shy about her self, she wasn't going to go out and put the moves on every girl, especially not Earhart. But as she gets older her "sense" gets stronger, through all the trips she took with her father. She could tell which woman was the "odd" one of the bunch, I also feel that over the years other women started to feel a little more comfortable with being gay and showing it a little more. Which made it easier for women like Julia to point out the "odd" girl. My only question was were there women like today who went through these phases of lesbians and then just turned straight and marry? Or was it because society was starting to see lesbians for what they were and women felt pressured to become straight live the way society wants them to? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
Kennedy uses the case of Julia to discuss the discretion of lesbianism in the early 1900’s. There were, however, many other aspects to Julia’s identity than just her sexuality. This is pointed on page 415, when Kennedy states “she came into her womanhood as a lesbian, as a college student, as the daughter of a father who was prominent citizen and business owner, and as the daughter of a mother who was strongly independent yet part of an established small-town protestant family.” Given this, the discretion of Julia’s sexuality may have been because it would have been a trait that overshadowed the others; it may have become her only identifying factor in the public eye as opposed to just one of many. Could there have been any other traits during this time that people felt the need to cover-up, other than sexuality? And how true is this still today? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
Lesbianism wasn’t something that could be discriminated against publicly; this is in contrast to other aspects of one’s identity such as gender or race, which could once have been discriminated against legally. Yet Julia still feared that if she was obvious about how she felt then she would not be able to receive all the benefits and privileges of her class. Which would be harder to deal with, discrimination by law or discrimination by society? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
All I have to say is, wow. I know there are still a lot of problems with accepting lesbianism today, but to read that a father accepted it and used it to his advantage was incredibly. I feel that even lesbianism today is kept quite because most people seem not to always accept it, however not as much as the 1920s and 1930s. There are gay rights movements and things like ‘gay day’ at theme or amusement parks, which to me shouts “we accept all people of sexual preferences.” That could also just be a money marketing scam… However, I really did enjoy this piece by Elizabeth Kennedy because going through the public school system I had friends that I knew were lesbians, but we never talked about it, not even when they would have a break up with their girlfriend. If there was a break-up we would take the friend for ice-cream or something, but nothing was ever said about the situation. –Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
<br />
I pity the most definitely unsatisfied woman married to that Dr. Carlton C. Frederick! His unqualified theories on woman were as sexist as Freud's of that same time period (the grotesque double standard was very popular then)! This article compared to the survey's of Dr. Mosher were so starkly different, I wonder what kind of effect the controversy had over the general population-and more importantly over the general female population? His assertive views on Nymphomaniacs has actually made me question the sexism based around that "disorder"-I would be interested in further study of the history of Nymphomania as recognized by physicians and society. Also in consideration of mental disorders: this article is part of the great slew of material that prolonged the accepted myth that homosexuality is a mental illness well into the early 70s in American. I don't know how doctors could do it back then- to use unsubstantiated views as evidence for such sexist publications! ~~Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
I agree with Jackie that Dr. Frederick was a wack job! Where on earth did he get his information from. It really makes you wonder how many doctors in those days actually did any kind of research or if they were simply stuck on a certain view of women and because they were a doctor they felt that gave them authority and validation to what their theory on the female and sex was.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
I agree with Jackie about the Dr. Frederick essay. My question is: Was Frederick saying that nymphomania in women, was when they acheived the same level of sexuality and deisre that men had? Or was it on some completely different level? Also I found it disturbing, and almost funny how he so easily bridged a gap between masturbation and pedophelia.----Landon Davis<br />
<br />
There were several parts of the reading off the wiki that fit in perfectly with the companionate marriage we discussed in class today. Most noticeably the second passage from extracts from the Mosher Survey, respondent 10 was qouted as "I think for man and woman married from love, it may be used temperately, as one of the highest manifestations of love." This passage exemplifies the break from the repressive victorian era ideals of marriage, that women should not enjoy sex, and that it should be used primarily for reproduction. Another example was the second letter to Sanger, the man was asking for details of contraception, not for (entirely) selfish reasons, he seemed genuinely concerned about his wife's welfare and happiness. ----Landon Davis<br />
<br />
After reading the online reading something that stuck out to me the most was the letters to Margaret Sanger. I found it surprising that men and women were actually staying away from their spouses because they don't want anymore children. Because birth control was not offered to women, and especially women who lived in rural areas, it was ruining marriages. In letter number 4 the wife was actually thinking about their financial stability knowing they can not have another child and all the husband wants is sex not really caring about the situation. This whole concept of the companion family caused higher expectations, however in these letters the women and or men mention that they love their spouse dearly but because they don't want to reproduce tears them apart. If there was such a big problem with divorce rates increasing and infidelity then why wasn't this taken into account? Is it because people are just to afraid to talk about sex? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
When reading the letters to Margaret Sanger about birth control I kind of asked the same question Amanda did on why wasn't it taken into account that divorce rates incresasing was really possibly due to infidelity which was essentially caused by fear of having sex in result of having children. Therefore birth control would really possibly save marriage, however I don't think it is because people were afraid to talk about sex even though it wasn't talked about but, instead maybe what they really wanted was to be able to have sex freely without the worry of getting pregnant, and birth control would allow a married couple to have control over how many children they wanted. Maybe they thought, this thought was a scary or selfish thing to even think or want becasue for so long people just had children, but because the world was changing there was just no need for families with 7 to 10 children anymore.--Michelle M. <br />
<br />
I agree with Landon and also saw many parallels between the discussion of the companionate family in class and also in society today. Blanchard and Manasses' discussion of courtship points out that men and women were able to "become intimately acquainted" before marriage and discuss openly and equally about their opinions of married life before they were married. The notion that men and women must be compatible personalities, working together as partners in all areas demonstrates the new ideal. Yet there are still hidden facets of Victorian ideals engrained into the companionate marriage. The "lurking fear that she may seem too passionate, and her husband may suspect what still seems to her dreadful secret, she cannot give herself up to free enjoyment of his love," still alludes to the idea that women are not supposed to enjoy sex and when they do there is something morally wrong with them. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I also saw a parallel between Blanchard and Manasses' discussion and society's ideals today. Sex education, and the lack thereof, is still a problem. Many schools still strictly follow an abstinence only program and students are left uneducated about where to go for family planning options. In many cases women still grow up experiencing "conditioned responses toward sex" in which parents have punished any form of sexual expression. The experiences of women described in this reading (anxiety, embarressment, guilt) caused by society's ideals still strongly exist. Their discussion was a liberal view and today this view would be considered conservative but how much have the ideals of women's sexuality changed from the early 20th century? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
<br />
I was surprised after reading the "Extracts from the Mosher Survey, 1892-1913" because I did not realize that it seemed that most women did not have knowledge of sexual physiology before marriage. I'm guessing most of the men knew though. I think the 'birds and the bees' was mostly explained by my teachers when I was in 4th or 5th grade, or around age 9 or 10. Times have changed considerably, but I wonder how many U.S. females are raised in such a way still that they do not know much about it. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
<br />
So, as everyone knows, I hate the idea of using Lysol as a means of contraception. As a result, reading the one interview with Respondent 44 made me cringe. Bichloride? Really? I'm assuming they used the mercury compound since I saw another interviewee discuss it and I almost fell over. That stuff is dangerous so it astounded me that it had "no effect" as she stated. It never ceases to amaze me the lengths to which people would go to prevent pregnancies in the early 20th century. It was interesting to read all of the interviews though and compare and contrast them. The differences were slight because the years were relatively close together, but the shifts in belief about the purposes of intercourse emphasized that shift from a "sex is for male pleasure and reproduction only" world to a "women can like it too" sort of atmosphere. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
After reading the respondents from Mosher I was surprised to find out how many women really knew nothing about sex once they were married. I knew that it was somthing not talked about, but to be a women just married and not knowing what sex even was had to be scary and maybe even confusing to them. Did the husbands know though? What I also thought was interesting about their resoponses was that those who did try some kind of means to prevent pregnancy, when asked if their health was effected they all said no. The things they used didn't sound like very safe things, but what I've come to realize by these readings this week is that women seemed to be desperate for anything to have some kind of control over conception, but were the men just as desperate in hopes that something would emerge to prevent pregnancy once there were so many children already in the family too?--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
I flat out laughed when I read the beginning of "The Manifestations of Nymphomania." What I thought was so interesting about this reading, besides the ideology that if women liked sex as much as men the world would be one giant brothel, was that this was documented at the turn of the century. I think it's a good example of the mentality some conservatives were trying to hold on to as the "new woman" burst onto the scene. I just didn't really understand his distinction between "insane" and the "not insane." Were the insane and mildly insane nymphomaniacs the ones that went into bars and started flirting with men, etc? -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
The letters to Margaret Sanger about the need for birth control were extremely interesting. I thought it was strange how women assumed they would just magically know how to not have children once they were married. Also, I wondered if married couples not having sex so as to not have any more children led to affairs outside the marriage. Clearly, there was no birth control for any type of sexual relationship but I get the feeling that these people writing in thought that extramarital affairs couldn’t result in children. What did prostitutes do for birth control? – Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
Malcom Bissell’s essay on birth control discusses how small group meetings in people’s home might be the most effect way of disseminating birth control information. I think this is very telling of society’s views at the time. Clearly, birth control was wanted and necessary, but there was such a social stigma and controversy over using it that people didn’t want to be publicly seen as seeking out information. – Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
The discussion of “modern marriage” was really interesting to me. I find it horrifying that ideals of companionship didn’t exist before this time. Even in this essay, there is a part where Phyllis Blanchard and Carolyn Manassas question what a companion marriage may mean for the future once sexual desire fades. I just found it interesting that eve they are not true believers in companionship. – Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed reading "But We Would Never Talk About It." However, I was not at all surprised about the fact that these women did not talk about their sexual preferences and experiences with other women or their parents, mostly because I still have the impression that while during this time period it was becoming more acceptable for sex to be discusses it still wasn't really done. And since sex in general wasn't talked about, why would a varying preference be talked about? Also while I found it amazing that her mother and father supported her and were ok with her sexual choice, I was also disgusted by the fact the father would use that to his advantage so he could continue his extramarital affairs! I do have to wonder, was she really ok with covering for her dad in these instances, or did she have any resentment towards him for using her in this way and if her nonchalant attitude towards it was because it was simply how she dealt with those feelings?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I also found the readings from the Wiki very interesting! I was slightly shocked at some of the details in the "Extracts from the Mosher survey: 1892-1913". Mostly I was surprised at how long some of these couples waited before they had sex after marrying! There was one woman who said that their first time having sex was 5 months after they were married! I found this surprising because most married couples are simply expected to do that on their wedding night. And like Kelly I was shocked at the items they used to attempt to control pregnancies and then claimed that they had no physical affect on them when it should have.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I found Carlton C. Fredericks article amusing at the same time it was irritating. It was amusing to me because of the way he approached the subject yet irritating because of its sexism. He seemed to imply that only insane or mildly insane women would likely turn to Nymphomania. I also find it interesting that he said women turned to other women to achieve satisfaction, wouldn't it then follow the logical path of his thought that to rectify this husbands should focus on more than just their sexual pleasure?(I'm not saying I agree with his thought process). Also, is he saying that men can't have nymphomania and that its an aliment strictly suffered by women?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In Unequal Sisters, I found the quote "You don't know if someone is a lesbian unless you've slept with her" to be interesting. I'm not surprised that women who were lesbians didn't discuss their sexuality openly but why was it started that way? Besides religious aspects, where did the term lesbian or gay gain its percieved connotation? I feel like it was only more recently that males and females who were gay felt safe in taking pride of their sexuality. -- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I thought it was creepy reading Julia's story and how her father thought of her daughter as the "apple of his eye". It was weird to me that he subconsciously made a deal with her not to exploit her lesiban affairs as long as she kept quiet about his extramarital activities. Was this just one account or a more "normal" occurence at the time? -- Rose Ferguson</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_7_Questions/Comments328--Week 7 Questions/Comments2008-02-23T02:27:45Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>"Anxious Mothers write the Children’s Bureau" deals with the health problems related to women and infants. People concerned wrote to the Children’s Bureau of the Department of Labor, which was formed until 1912. Before this, and even after this, was there anything for people to turn to on more of a local level? In addition, the first letter points out that the doctor was not available while the woman was giving birth, and the last letter points out the deficiencies in the profession. Was it more common or more reliable to see a midwife during this time? <br />
--Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I think it is interesting to look at the women’s movement and how it evolved in different generations. Bromely begins by looking at the term “feminism” and how some people thought that this meant a young woman who had a job and who is no longer “old fashioned.” She looks at generational gaps between women in their twenties and women in their forties. If you were to make this breakdown today, how would women’s opinions on feminism differ? –Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
With women having the ability to vote, I think it would have been interesting to track votes by gender and if a wife's vote was the same or opposite as her husband. Did females double the number of votes or was their a clear difference between what women found as important issues vs. the men? -- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I was shocked to read about the KKK. I had no idea in 1925 there were between 3 and 4 million American members involved. Also to read there were 500,000 women in a a "Women of the KKK" scares me. What drew all these individuals into this organization? Why so many women in 1925 and fewer in the later years? -- Rose Ferguson</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_6_Questions/Comments328--Week 6 Questions/Comments2008-02-21T02:15:43Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found Jane Addams's view that women needed to be involved in the political parties since organizations for public good founded by a charismatic individual usually died after their departure to be interesting. Her belief that political parties produced more long lasting and stable change through their unification of the states and the nation was what interested me about her view, especially given today's political climate. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I also found it interesting that there existed Negro women who belonged to the Democratic party since it was the party that had recently worked for their enslavement and did not really support woman's rights at the time. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I found Leonara O'Reilly's "A Labor Organizer Speaks Out for Suffrage" to be a very good argument, but I failed to see how it was different from all of the other arguments that Congress probably had already heard that talked about how women's suffrage was the right thing to do and failed to speak about how women's suffrage was in the Congressmen's best interests. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I enjoyed the personal writings by the various working women. All were so informative and individual tone helped to understand the kind of labor, their general treatment, and their personal feelings about the job: gratitude, vulnerability. All these jobs were considered women's work and all were poorly (payed even compared to cheap male labor), demeaning in some way, and offered either high health hazards or demanded long hours. I found Agnes Nestor particularly inspiring, that she worked from unskilled glove maker to union leader (being part of that small 2.2%) and lobbyist for women's work rights. ~Jackie R.<br />
<br />
The speech delivered by Abigail Scott Duniway (printed in Modern American Women), I thought was very interesting. She brings up a very good question, if women were sincere in their belief that men considered women’s opinions and kept their promises to women, then why would men not also feel safe in allowing women the right to vote? Her speech continues, to discuss how men and women were created equally as halves and without the consideration of both, there can never be a whole. –Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
There were many arguments both for and against women’s suffrage. Many of these arguments are outlined, in a satirical manner, by Marie Jenny Howe in “An Anti-Suffrage Monologue.” Throughout the monologue, she compares two opposite and extreme arguments to point out how ridiculous an extreme belief can be. One of her arguments can almost be applied to Duniway’s argument. Howe states that, “If the women were enfranchised they would vote exactly as their husbands do and only double the existing vote. Do you like that argument? If not, take this one. If the Women were enfranchised they would vote against their own husbands, thus creating dissension, family quarrels, and divorce,” (102). If men and women truly are two halves of a whole, as Duniway suggests, then the first statement would most certainly be true. If the second statement is taken as true and the votes of men and women cancel each other out and create conflict, then wouldn’t the same be true if voting were left to only men as well? If conflicting votes led to quarrel and instability within a family, then wouldn’t conflicting votes among men result in quarrel and instability in society? Looking at both of these extremes as Howe does throughout the monologue, leads one to realize that a more moderate view would be more functional and practical. –Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I found it intriguing in the article by Melanie Gustafon, that even though the progressive party did not accept African American men, there were still some African American men that supported the party. My guess is they saw the party as being 'progressive' and would be the best party to, hopefully, eventually carry their own political desires. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
It was a nice change of pace to read what a woman against suffrage had to say about suffrage. I found her points intriguing, but I also wondered why facts were not proof... facts are usually there to prove one point or another. The article about Alice Paul and the conditions under which the prisoners were kept were horrible! No fresh air, the sweeping of dust into the cells, and feeding them basically raw pork is just horrible. Did this happen at most prisons? Does it still happen? -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I found the"Partisan Women in the Progressive Era" by Melanie Gustafson very interesting. I didn't know that the idea of partisan vs. non-partisan was actually a gendered idea, nor had I thought about the idea that women's auxiliaries could have been seen as women's lack of dedication to the political arena (pg 250). However, one of the points she makes that stood out to me the most was the fact that women suffragists, specifically, Ida HUsted Harper, felt that women's involvement in partisan activities was actually damaging to the suffrage movement. My line of thinking would say that the involvement in the partisan groups would actually help the movement since it would show the dedication that women had to politics that supposedly the women's auxiliaries did not. -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
<br />
In "Inez Haynes Irwin Recalls the Militance of Suffragists in the National Woman's Party, 1921" it is mentioned that after the Senate and President remained silent on the issue of women's suffrage they announced their intention to hold a (peaceful) demonstration yet, when President Wilson heard this, he immediately said he would accept and talk to a delegation of women. I was wondering if he decided to talk to the women because he was afraid that they would meet together and gain support instead of quieting down if the bill didn't pass? And if this was his hope, how could he have expected the women who wanted the vote so badly to simply back down? In other words, did he talk with them with the hope of preventing the very demonstration that they had despite (or maybe because) of this meeting?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Yet again I found the readings in Modern American Women absolutely fascinating! I enjoyed reading how many different ways the suffrage movement was promoted and with what ideas, as well with ideas that the anti-suffragists would use (although that came through a satire). Perhaps one of my favorites of these readings was the first one, "A Western Suffragist Talks to her Eastern Sisters" by Abigail Scott Duniway. It said in the introduction that the East coast suffragists saw her as more radical than they wished to be but I don't understand what was so radical about the ideas expressed in the piece we read (this may simply be due to the time period difference). I would have thought that her arguments that the movement was not a war between the genders but a movement for interdependence and that women did not want to remove men from their rights or limit them, but simply wanted to gain the ability to chose their own rights would have been comforting to those men who felt that the movement was a threat to their power. The "Anti-Suffrage Monologue" as also very interesting, at the same time irritating because I am aware that there were women who did actually hold these beliefs. However I do wonder if they would have phrased them in this way or it the arguments were exaggerated in this piece due to its satirical nature. Lastly, I also found the rules contained in "Front Door Lobbying' for Suffrage' by Maud Wood Park to be extremely interesting because it demonstrates the desire of women to gain suffrage while still being viewed as lady-like and proper. I found every single one of these readings interesting but it was those three that stood out to me the most.-Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I found Marie Jenny Howe's An Anti-Suffrage Monologue very interesting. Her 5th anti-suffrage couplet I found to be very funny and some what accurate. She stated "women can not band together. They are incapable of organization. No two women can even be friends. Women are cats." The fact that I am a girl I really see this. Throughout our lives we deal with our friends stabbing us in the back and someone gossiping about the other. Especially as I have gotten older women have become a lot more brutal. I do find this to be an issue in social settings and political settings. However since there was and is still a belief, why do women accomplish so much when its more then one person fighting for the same goal? Is it because we are still male dominated and we have them to regulate women's organizations? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I'm not sure if I agree with Amanda's sentiment of "funny" when referring to Howe's "An Anti-Suffrage Monologue." In one passage she states, "Enfranchisement is what makes man man. Disfranchisement is what makes woman woman. If women were enfranchised every man would be just like every woman and every woman would be just like every man. There would be no difference between them. and don't you think this would rob life of just a little of its poetry and romance?" What romance novel was this lady reading! She also goes on to characterize the women that participate in the suffrage movement by saying, "Observe their inability, their mental disability, their spiritual instability and general debility!" Are these the characteristics of only the women seeking their rights or of all women? It appears that this women can make a claim to the characteristics depicted in Amanda's post because she has obviously exhibited this behavior in her writing. I think the "Antis" were afraid of change;I would guess they were quite comfortable within the sanctuary of their homes, and the thought of operating outside the domestic sphere was intimidating.--LisaM <br />
<br />
In the Abigail Scott Duniway piece she made a point that I believe is dead on. "She said A home w/o a man in it is only half a home. A government w/o a women is only half a government. A man w/o a women is only one-half of a pair... a women w/o a man is like the other half..." What I don't understand is how men of this time period don't understand that if they did not have women in the home there wouldn't be a home. Everything she does for him wouldn't get done, and god forbid he does anything for himself when he gets home. Relating this document to Howe, she says women are there to wash the dishes and if the mistress of the house doesn't do it she hires someone. A man washing the dishes would be "blasphemy." Even before the 1900s I find it funny that men don't realize women do dictate their lives, women were influencing their husbands political activity. Women have a way of manipulating men to think they had the brilliant idea when really it was the women's decision all along. So in reality if women just stopped standing by their men then a large a majority of the American male population would probably be helpless. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I agree with you to an extent, Amanda. You're right when you say that women influenced their husbands' political activity, but if you think about the reasons men were afraid to let women vote, one of them dealt with the fear that women would vote exactly like their husbands and without their own agenda. In reality, these women wanted the vote so that they could help themselves. I don't think most of them wanted to vote the same way as the men in their lives did. But your right; women did have (and still do) have a major impact on the way men acted politically. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I agree with Amanda, and I was really struck by the comment "A home without a man in it is only half a home. A government without a woman is only half a government..." But I think the fact that men didn't really understand demonstrates the double standard at that time. It seems that they thought that yes, a home without a man is only half a home, but they only thought that women should stay in their "domestic sphere" and should not enter the public sphere. The double standard is that men have to be in the home or it would only be half of a home, but women's place is only in the home. In this same article, I was also struck by her comments on the "evolution" of homemaking and her discussion of how more was being done in factories. She also discusses how more girls will work more in the factories through this process of evolution. I thought that these comments were a little brave, because isn't that what men were fearing? That women would leave the home and enter the workforce? But then, she reconciles it a little by saying that the younger girls will go to work so that the mothers can stay home... --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I agree with amanda also to an extend on Duniway's qoute. And to an extent I mean I agree with the qoute based on the time in which it was said, because you have to remember that specific time period. It is true for that time period that a house with out a man was only half a home, and half a government and so on. The home is where the women were, but financially the man for the most part was the supporter, or head of house hold. So yes with out a women being in the house a man would not know what to do. However in today's world I think it is interesting that society has evolved to where now either sex can be independent, and not really needing to depend on the other sex for whatever. Therefore her qoute had a good meaning at the time.<br />
--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
I also agree with Amanda and Kelly. These women wanted the vote so that they could help change their own lives. They were already able to influence their men, so why would they vote they way their husbands did. Many of these women probably already had an influence on who their husbands were voting for. Changing it so that they could vote only insured that they could better fix the problems faced in their town. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
In MP the Inez Haynes piece I found to be extremely inspiring. These women speak to two senators and they honestly tell these women your bill is not coming up today. Then you have Wilson saying I am in sympathy with you, a nice little white lie and the suffragists saying ha I will believe it when I see it. I really like this piece because they weren't naive about what was really going on. But what really gets me is that these two senators did not lie to the women they were honestly like no not happening, then you have the President pretty much lying. I find that comical because it really shows who Wilson really is. But my question is why would he lie to these women? I don't understand how he could not think this was not an important issue and that when its time for re-election his presidency is in their hands. So my question is why would he lie to these women? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
After reading Florence Luscomb's piece, "Open-Air Meetings: A New Suffrage Tactic," I couldn't help but be impressed by the lengths these suffragettes went to in order to have their voices heard. The numbers she gave at the end, "We have spoken to 24,900 people ... we gave held 97 meetings ... and have obtained over 2000 signatures" is absolutely incredible. When studying the Suffrage movement, you never think of the extremes that some women went to and Luscomb and her colleague surely went above and beyond to get their opinions all over Massachusetts. I also liked her comment about taking the roof away from a female speaker and she immediately becomes a raving lunatic. If you think about it, the perception was true, especially since it went against the good old Sphere of Domesticity. Oh, and my apologies for using the word "suffragette." Blame Mary Poppins. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
Like Kelly I found "Open-Air Meetings: A New Suffrage Tactic," of great interest. Women suffrage groups obviously realized that to be heard they required a larger voice from the population of women. It is easy for government officials to dismiss a handful of suffrage organizers as fanatical, but a large group of women is a force to be reckoned with. The tactic of conducting open-air meetings allowed the suffrage representatives access to a segment of the women's population that they were not likely to see in any organization meeting.--LisaM <br />
<br />
I really liked Maud Wood Park's "'Front Door Lobbying' For Suffrage." I thought the list of rules that were drafted were a great representation of how women tried to still be seen as moral and proper but still be able to voice their opinions for their cause. My favorite line, however, was the last section where Maud Wood Park discusses her favorite report which said "He said, 'I'm with you; I'm for it, I'm going to vote for it. Now don't bother me,' all in one breath." There must have been a large number of these amusing reports because I'm sure the men they were lobbying to enjoyed their visits. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I agree with Kelly. The list of rules really demonstrated how it was good to be involved in politics but yet at the same time still follow the ideals of society. Women wanted a larger role but were smart enough to realize that they needed to work toward it with baby steps. They couldn't just jump into the political realm, instead they could enter it but only by remaining lady like. -- Kellye<br />
<br />
Marie Howe's essay on anti-suffrage was unlike anything I had ever read before. Her beleives or arguments were unbeleivable. She was totally unsupportive of the female gender, and shot down women, and really herself. She essentially calls women dumb, when she says, "women cannot understand politics." Well, why can't they, thats what education is for(102). Also she does not care about fact, instead she wants proof(103). Well aren't facts the samething as proof? Her whole essay makes me wonder what kind of childhood she had, because it was kind of angering to read how she thought women were just suppose to look up to their husbands and remain the little submissive women always, and have no role to play other than the house wife. Her own arguments have no proof and really just sound dumb.<br />
--Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Michelle, I am guessing you did not realize that the article by Howe was satirical, your reaction to the article really shows how effective a weapon satire was in this instance. I think this shows that Howe did an excellent job explaining her point and in pointing out the fundamental flaws & hypocrisy in the arguments of the anti-suffragists, in a comical way. -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
<br />
Haynes recollection of the protest at Lafayette does an excellent job of exploring the feelings of frustration the suffragists were feeling at the time. As you read you begin to see how these women were continually being misled and disrespected by powerful men who held the key to what they had been working so hard to achieve for decades. They were so close to achieving their goals only to have them slip out of grasp time and time again, the tension and angst these women are feeling becomes palpable as you read. I am surprised more of the protests did not turn violent --- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
The speech given by Duniway really exemplifies how powerful the doctrine of seperate spheres and the middle class ideals of womanhood really were. Here is a woman who is clearly as independent and career minded as any man yet she still works to quell any fears the nation might have. She reassures them that politics won't corrupt the women and that women won't neglect their household duties. She was smart to swallow her pride in this instance, she knew how to get what she wanted. -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I was surprised to read that Jane Adams endorsed Theodore Roosevelt…. He is not someone that stands out in my mind as a proponent of gender equality. I was equally as surprised by his public letter thanking Jane Adams and supporting the women’s movement. – Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
Why did women’s organizations, such as the League of Women Voters keep the idea of “the nonpartisan woman” alive if it was hurting the movement and allowing women to be seen as less dedicated or uninterested in politics? – Cat Debelius <br />
<br />
I found “Front Door Lobbying” for Suffrage to be extremely ironic. Perhaps this was there tactic, to up play the social stigma of womanhood in order to get what they want, but the Directions and Don’ts List for the lobbying suffragist read just like a Cosmo magazine. – Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
I found it interesting in Abigail Scott Duniway's speech that she tries to point out that the suffrage movement was not in "a spirit of warfare between the sexes" but in the "spirit of harmony and inter-dependence between men and women" (96). I think it is interesting that she goes on to explain how much women "like" men, was she trying to show that all women in the suffrage movement were not hard-core man hating feminists? Did feminist's have that image of man haters at that time?~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
I also thought it was interesting reading Marie Jenny Howe in her "An Anti-Suffrage Monologue". I was a little confused at one point because she says in one sentence that her argument against suffrage was that women would not use it but then in the next sentence says that if they were enfranchised they would spend all their time at the polls and neglect their family. Ok so which is it?? How can she not go to the polls but at the same time spend all her time there? Her whole argument makes absolutely no sense to me.~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
I was also a little confused at first when I read "An Anti-Suffrage Monologue," but after going back I realized that that was the point of the whole thing--to be confusing. I think that Howe does an excellent job of pointing out the inconsistencies and ridiculous nature of the arguments of the "antis." She points out that the central flaw of the antis involves the fact that they use two contradicting arguments to support their claims. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting to read about "Open-Air Meetings" by Florence Luscomb. The meetings reminded me more of a potluck type ordeal than a way of gaining votes and getting a serious point across. Also, when Florence talks about a successful "summer of campaigning" I thought to myself wow have times changed. I can't imagine Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or John McCain going out to any large open outdoors space for their campaign. It sounds like their open air meetings were more for an entertainment purpose. -- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I found the the "Anti-Suffrage Monologue" by Marie Jenny Howe to be incredibly frustrating to read. The quote "If women vote, what will become of men? They will all slink off drunk and disorderly. We antis understand men" Really?? Did someone actually write that? "What makes a husband faithful and loving? The ballot and the monopoly of that privledge." Again, really!? I'm not sure I need to say more. -- Rose Ferguson</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_5_Questions/Comments328--Week 5 Questions/Comments2008-02-14T02:24:47Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>In Harriet Brunkhurst's article I found it sad to read how the mother of working women expected so much more of their working daughters than of their working sons. Not only was being looked down upon for being in the same level as men bad enoough, but they were expected to cook, clean and do other odd end things around the house after a tiresome day at work, while the sons did nothing but relax after a tiresome day at work. The part that most hit me was Cecil's story. Her mother has her work and wants to hear nothing about how Cecil is tired from work yet she has the nerver to say "John is so tired when he returns from work" about her husband!!! -Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I also found it interesting to read Harriet Brunkhurst’s article in Major Problems in American Women’s History. It was sad that the women were not as respected as men for holding full time business jobs. However, I think it was largely to do with the context of the time. Mothers couldn’t empathize with their daughters because they expected them to play the same role in the household that they had once held. They knew that their daughters were the main providers, but the idea of this was out of line with the traditional norms and expectations of society at the time. This conflict created a double standard for the working girls, conforming to both the expectations one would hold for the head of the house as well as the expectations for the woman of the house, with fewer of the benefits of each. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
The other thing that stuck out to me about Harriet Brunkhurst's piece was the bit about housework being so much more tiresome than paid jobs were at the time. It kind of brings up that little dig that with the sphere of domesticity, women were expected to work around the house and were no longer considered real "breadwinners" because their jobs were innate. It seems almost as if the mothers were upset their daughters could go out and make money for "shorter workdays" while they were stuck at home taking care of the household and making sure the family was comfortable when they returned home, finding their family ungrateful for all they do. -- Kelly Wuyscik <br />
<br />
I find it kind of interesting how the political events taking place in China had a big effect on the way Chinese people in Ameica lived. I admire how the women in Chinese in America helped the Revoultionary cause back in the homeland and helped liberize the women both here in America and in China by allowing them to unbind their feet, go out in public and learn to read and be educated and become independent from men.- Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
It is interesting to compare Modern American Women: “The Harsh Conditions of Domestic Service” with how Fannie Williams describes the “Problem of Employment for Negro Women in Major Problems. Both of these sources describe working conditions for African American women. The first source discusses the role of the “nurse” in the household. The nurse however is responsible for much more than caring for the health of children and family, she is asked to carry out household tasks as well. It is almost as if slavery is continued by the need and difficulty of African American women to find work. The second source points out specifically that, African American women are more commonly employed to domestic service. She seems to take a different spin out however by suggesting that if you can’t be employed to a more honorable position, then make the position you can work more honorable. The question then becomes, what makes a position honorable? And how can you elevate a position if you have no control over the pay, benefits, or job description? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
Kelly I also agree with you Nellie Bly was an incredible woman, however I find it amazing that she traveled all the way around the world and the most interesting passage this book could print was the one about her packing her carry on bag. I would have liked to hear more about her actual travels. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I found the Linda Gordon's essay pretty interesting. Her comparisons of black women's and white women's welfare activist goals were enlightening. It makes since that black women would be so much more passionate for better education, because for middle class white women it was often a given. Black women activists, however, sought to improve the welfare of their entire community, starting with their children, and not just focus on the issues of women. Also, I don't know if this made anyone else laugh but on page 215 some records are quoted on money raised through charity work: things like Bazaars, bake sales, baby contest...BABY CONTESTS? That just sounds ridiculous! What does that even entail, besides a bunch of self-indulgent parents acting like 19th century stage moms.--Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
I was amazed by the large role that the YWCA played in the liberation of Chinese women. From what I read, I think that they were more liberated than white women. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Like Justin I was surprised how the YWCA played such an important role. These women were isolated and this organization pulled them from their closets. It is amazing how customs shaped the Chinese woman's life experience. In "Unbound Feet" it states, "it was considered immodest to be seen too many times during the year."(263) Chinese women were made invisible by their culture. The idea of seeing a friend only on a special occasion, which was not due to distance, or the need to travel in a closed coach for short distances is suffocating. The YWCA recognized this and offered an opportunity that allowed women of similar backgrounds to meet and receive assistance outside their homes, but the most important contribution the YWCA gave these women was power. The power to meet, to decide and to change their lives in a way that they could now participate in it.--LisaM<br />
<br />
In Harriet Brunkhurst's article entitled "Business Girls," she identifies how a mother and daughter struggle in their relationship. Despite the daughter's role as the breadwinner, the mother, who is a homemaker, inflicts her judgment of her daughter's behavior within the confines of the home. The mother "would yield without question to husband or son occupying the same position, debates Rose's every movement simply because she is a girl."(266) We read about suppression of race and gender, but the suppression from within the structure of a girl's life can dictate a life of inadequacy. Our socialization and placement in the world is influenced by school, government, friends and most importantly family. The family instills values and beliefs and is the most enduring agent in the life of a child. If this type of suppression exists within the family, what can be expected of a child as an adult?--LisaM <br />
<br />
I think Lisa makes a good point about what can be expected of a child as an adult. I know my mother struggles with having her mom live with her right now. My grandma was raised that women stay home, do housework, raise children, and have a 'man' provide for them. Every day mom comes home tired and wore out (its been stressful at work lately) and my grandmother gets on her case about laundry, dishes, vacuming, and the like the moment she walks in, but says nothing to my father who helps my mom out with housework all the time. She fights with mom but when dad says something she shuts up and leaves mom alone. Its almost like I watch and live in this time setting because she also does it to me when I'm visiting my parents --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
How was sexual harassment handled during the early 20th century? I mean there are accounts of needing witnesses and having detectives, but it all seems a bit informal. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Like Justin, I am curious how sexual harassment was handled. It seemed that many males got away with sexual harassing females because the females did not want to lose their job. Did this occur often? Did many of the harassers get dealt with? --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I found it interesting to read in "The Burdens of Rural Woman's Lives" that the husband stayed home during the Civil War after being drafted by paying $300. It seemed to be a parallel to more recent wars like the Vietnam War. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Kind of going off of Justin's comment, I was actually curious about the farm woman's husban in "The Burden's of Rural Woman's Lives." Was it common for men to pay the $300 and get out of service? Or was this something only the wealthier could get away with? I ask this question mostly because everything I've learned about the Civil War indicated that there were soldiers needed on the battlefields and by reading about this family, they didn't seem like they had all that much money. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it intriguiing while reading Judy Yung's essay in Unequal Sisters that the protestant church was the first to encourage chinese women and that the Chinese women's involvement with church activities helped to expand their gender roles. I knew foot binding has ended, but its always nice to read about something that ended that I felt was cruel. I also found it interesting that to support the revolution, women in China did various activities such as enlisting in the army and engaging in dangerous uncover work. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
"Unbound Feet" doesn't go in depth on the foot binding issue. Based upon what I have read the process of foot binding was painful and and caused physical problems later in life, but what struck me was that there was a stigma attached to it. Foot binding made a woman more desirable, which makes them marriage worthy. I read one account where a potential mother-in-law checked the feet of the potential bride. If she had not been foot bound, the marriage was not approved by the family. Mothers performed this painful procedure, which began around the age of 4, on their daughters. Can you imagine putting a child in pain to conform to the norms within the culture.--LisaM<br />
<br />
I agree with Lisa, I can't imagine putting a child that young through that much pain only to conform to the norms of the culture! It's interesting that the women, who know the pain that the foot binding causes, were the ones to bind the feet of the young girls. I think that it just shows how much women get caught up in the gender roles and norms of a given culture. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
The article I really took interest in was ''Buffalobird Woman's Story''. I know that in Native American societies women were the oweners of the land they were in charge of agricultural practices. This had been going on for hundreds and hundreds of years, and the fact that the government comes in a just changes everything really bothers me. They give them all these crops to plant when they don't even eat them and a lot of the crops are left in the ground. In reality the nation was just wasting their money providing seeds and showing them new planting techniques. I find it funny that in the end the women states that her old ways are more efficient then the new ways. She even proves this by winning a prize for her corn because she grew it the way she knew. What I am so confused about is why the government had to control how they grew their crops? Why waste time even worrying about what they are growing and how? Is it really that important of an issue? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I agree with Amanda it seems like the government came in and told the Indians how and what to grow, but didnt teach them anything past that. The article talks about how the Indians did not like the way the food tasted or how it would spoil after a while. If the government was going to take the time to show the Indians how to produce the new foods, why not teach them how to perserve the new foods, or even cook and season them, so that the food was edible. It looks like the gov't only gave the Indians half of the knowledge they needed to make the new foods work. And if the Indians were happy beofre why even change it up in the first place? - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
''Rose Cohen Describes Her First Job in New York City, 1892''really upset me. Number one the fact that this factory employer intentionally took advantage of the fact that she was young she was taken care of. It also really bothered me when her father pointed out to her that she was being employed weekly so she couldn't get paid more. I don't understand why the father would ever be fine with something like that. She is working just as hard as him to make money so the rest of the family could come to New York. The part that upset me the most is when she talked about how on her walks home she would pretend that she was coming home to her family and a warm meal. The last line" I used to keep this up until I turned the key in the door and opened it and stood facing the dark, cold, silent room." which makes me question, why even bother going through all this? Wouldn't it be better for the family to be together? Even if things were bad at least they would have each other. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
Like Amanda, I had a hard time getting through "Rose Cohen Describes Her First Job in New York City, 1892," because it was such a depressing piece. Listening to her little voice describe how terrible her life was and how horribly her father was about her situation just upset me a lot. The paragraph about her imaginary family was so heart wrenching I couldn't help but want that for her. To come home to an cold, lonely, empty house must have been terrible, especially at her age. I could never imaging going through something like that. -- Kelly Wuyscik <br />
<br />
The readings in MP and MAW both discuss how difficult the lives of working women were, for every type of women. The immagrants were over worked and underpaid as well as black women, but they had to fight even harder to find a job, and then there were the white women who worked in department stores who ended up selling themselves to make ends meet. What was interesting about the department store essay was how none of the women referred to what they did after hours as prostiting. I assume this is because they were possibly ashamed of what they were doing and trying to make it sound like something its not. It was more than just going out to the theatre or dinner. Also surprisingly enough these girls were very young as well as the men they were intertaining seemed to be married most of the time. This was easy money for them which seemed to be why it was so appealing.<br />
--Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In Judy Yung's essay she says that black and Chinese women modeled their clubs after the white womens, but they formed these clubs because they were not allowed in the white womens, so why model it after them because after all each had different motives? This also brings me to another question which I'm not sure even deals with this just yet during this time, but the question of segregation. Everything was segregated into black and white like schools, theatres, and restrooms, so where does that leave people like the Chinese?<br />
--Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In response to Michelle, I think the reason they modeled their clubs after the white women because they wanted to be accepted into that culture. Even though they had different motives they wanted acceptance as well. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I was impressed by the amount Chinese women were in the public sphere. I feel that if they had a larger population and an earlier start they could have surpassed the efforts of white women. I was surprised that the church was one of the main organizations that helped these women enter the public sphere. I would have thought that the church would have tried to keep women in traditional roles. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I was also surprised by the role that the church played in bringing the Chinese women into the public sphere. Although, I think that the church's main effort may have been to simply Americanize the Chinese women, and maybe they realized that they had to get them out of the house in order to do that. In that sense, maybe bringing them into the public sphere and beginning to change the gender norms was an afterthought rather than the primary motivation. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
It seems as if the Chinese women first had to break through their own incredibly repressive culture, only to enter into what is a comparibly better but still repressive American Culture. Not only did these women face gender discrimination from men, racial discrimination from the other ethnic groups, but they were discriminated against in amazingly archaic ways by their own people (foot-binding,not leaving the home save for once a year, etc.). Despite the prejudices imposed on the Chinese by Americans, the lifting of their own cultural restraints after the Chinese revolution must have been a wonderful and exciting experience for the women. --Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I was impressed by how well written some of the pieces were in the MAW reading. Obviously I am not referring to the writings to the Chicago based DEFENDER, but the two letters to the Jewish Forward, and the article "Harsh Conditions of Domestic Servitude" were both intelligent well worded essays. This points out to me the wasted potential of what must have been thousands upon thousands of women during this time period. They were reduced to factory, shopgirl, or domestic work, when they were clearly educated enough to make a real contribution to society. - Landon Davis <br />
<br />
I also found interesting in "the burden of rural womens lives" the fact that this womoan not only never complained, but almost was bragging at points about how hard her work was but how easily she seemed to accomplish it. She talked about how many articles she was able to read while churning butter, the record amounts of wood or other goods she would stack and produce, and how at 58 she could easily walk a mile as fast as anyone else. She never complained even when mentioning that only 5 of her 8 children were still alive. Her son was attending Cornell, but she seemed most proud of the fact that she has survived such a hard life. I take my hat off to her. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I thought Agnes Nester's piece, "The Story of a Glove Maker," explained very well the way women and young girls were treated in factories. The fact that they had clocks, not so they knew when to leave, but to calculate how much time they had lost is truly disheartening. It was unfair of the factory owners to take advantage of them and deduct pay because their machine broke. It just bothers me that things that were out of control were penalties to them. Walking around waiting for the beltboy to come and fix your sewing machine should not mean you lose pay. But I suppose that since women were considered such cheap labor and since the factory owners were skimping on that much, why should we expect them to have functioning machinery too? -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found the journal "The Harsh Conditions of Domestic Service" in MAW to be an eye opener. Reading about the negro woman and her daily taks including 14-16 hours of work with nursing children not hers as one of them to be insane. She was the main caretaker of these children with restricted visitation of her own.. seriously!? What got to me was the quote "I live a treadmill life; and I see my own children onl when they happen to see me on the streets when I am out with the children, or when my children come to the 'yard' to see me." -- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I also thought the quote by Frances Willard to be incredibly true with her parallels to life and bicycles. "I always felt a strong attraction toward the bicycle, because it is the vehicle of so much harmless pleasure, and because the skill required in handling it obliges those who mount to keep clear heads and steady hands." I'm sure it was hard to keep a clear head when some of the work these women were doing wouldn't allow them to see their family. -- Rose Ferguson</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_4_Questions/Comments328--Week 4 Questions/Comments2008-02-07T03:24:32Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>While reading the primary source documents of the ''Modern American Women'' I found it a bit disconcerting that the women were so similar to the women of today. It is kind of a shame that history repeats itself so fully. I suppose it is evidence that change is gradual and more of an evolution. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Although it was an interesting study, Linda Gordon's study "Black and White Visions of Welfare: Women's Welfare Activism, 1890-1945" came very close to simply listing the differences between the two races of activists. Her conclusions did not seem to have a lot of depth. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I have to agree with Justin Mattos on his comment about Linda Gordon's essay. I too felt that that she really just listed the differences and similarities without any real conclusion. However, I do believe to have a better sense of what was happening, it is good to know that just because welfare groups existed, they didn't all go after the same things. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
It does seem like she just listed the differences between the two groups of reformers, however once I saw the tables in the back I was impressed. Until I saw those tables it hadnt sunk in that Gordon actually went back and found real women activist and studied them. Maybe I am just not used to studying history but I thought that was pretty cool. After i saw those tables with the lists of actual women activists I looked at the reading in a whole different light. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I also observed in the primary source documents of ''Modern American Women'' that the stereotypes of women have only changed slightly today. Women are still thought to be more fragile than men, and there is still a need to protect them from harm. It has only been within the last decade that the idea of a working women has gained mainstream acceptance. I wonder if this observation stems from the fact that the primary source documents that I read were from the perspective of educated women. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Chapter 14 of Unequal Sisters deals with the differences in welfare activism between African American and white women. Gordon points out that white women had more of an ability to work politically and seek donations from those who would be more able to help (i.e. congressional representatives or other political figures) while the African American women focused their activities around the community and church. She continues, to point out that white women activists focused more on charity and relief while black women sought to provide for more universal needs such as education and health. If there were poor or unfortunate people in both groups (black and white), why is it that white women activists focused on particular people while black women activists focused on reform that is more general? Did societal norms during this time make it more inappropriate to provide individual charity to black women? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I found it interesting to read “Speaking out Against Lynching” by Ida B. Wells. She discusses the harsh punishments that African Americans were subjected to due to the stereotypes that white men and women held. On p age 15 she states, “With the Southern white man, any misalliance existing between a white woman and a colored man is a sufficient foundation for the charge of rape. The southern white man says that it is impossible for a voluntary alliance to exist between a white woman and a colored man, and therefore, the fact of an alliance is a proof of force.” Given this, would it also be considered rape if it were a black woman and a white man? Moreover, who would be at fault, would it be the man forcing himself onto the woman, or the woman because she is black? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I also thought the reading by Wells was interesting. She only discusses the accusations that black men were raping white women. She never mentions black women being raped. Was it just something that they didn't talk about or something that they just took as a fact of life during those times? I thought it interesting that discussing how black men were falsely accused of rape and lynched even when it was well known at the time that it was a concentual relationship, but then went on to say that even when the white man left for war he left the white women to be protected by the black men. So why all of a sudden is the lynching of black men on the rise? Was it because now they were free and more like competition to the whites than they had been before?~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
In response to Mary Beth, I do think that to some extent the lynching of black was due to competition, but also due to fear. Before the African Americans were free, white men had never considered them to be a threat. When they left home they trusted that they would return with their home and family in the same state. It never crossed their minds that it would be possible for their family to be in danger because there had never been any reason to mistrust. Wells states on page 15 that "the world has accepted the story that the Negro is a monster which the Southern white man has painted him." With this image that is created, when the African Americans are free, the white men thus see it as the release of "a monster" and they no longer feel safe and trustworthy as they did before, when "the monster" was contained. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I also found the reading on Wells interesting. In response to Mary Beth's point about the black women not officially being raped I believe it has some background in the idea that black women were naturally more passionate (less pure) than white women and therefore couldn't be raped because they would still be willing to have that relationship. I also agree with Jessica in that i think the lynching increased because there was a greater amount of fear now about the black community being free and the white community felt the need to use fear to control them. Likewise, in the South (where lynching was common) it might have been a way for the white community to maintain control and limit the amount of change that took place despite slavery being over. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In response to Jessica's question, I think that white women were able to focus more on specific groups, because unlike black women, white women just had to focus on issues of sexual inequality whereas black women had the issues of sexual AND racial inequality going against them, as well as establishing themselves in a newly free world. Chapter 14 of Unequal Sister does highlight that the two major focus point for black women groups was education and health care. These were issues that obviously had to be taken care of after slavery because the whites weren't going to provide it fully for them (yes, a lot of groups DID help) but they knew they had to rely on themselves(as the article shows) to fully develop and not remain stagnant and looked down upon by the white community.- Emely Amaya.<br />
<br />
I also found in interesting in Gordon's piece on Welfare that she notes one specific difference. She states that the white groups that were looking for reform were looking at people "other" than themselves. They saw themselves as helping people less fortunate than themselves but still with a "moral" aspect between who was the "worthy and the unworthy poor" (pg 225). In contrast the black groups focused on middle class and poor blacks. The black groups also focused more on education and health instead of charitys like the whites. ~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
After reading ''Modern American Women'' I do agree with my classmates on how the perception of women has not changed drastically. It is now socially acceptable for a women to go off into the business world and make a name for herself. Even jobs such a teacher and a nurse that were considered women's work are still dominated today by women. Since I am an education major I go into a lot of elementary schools and the staff is female dominated. I think it is wrong that today where anyone can be anything, people still stereotype jobs and classify things as mens work or females work. This eve goes beyond the adults of the nation. We start these stereotypes early in children's lives. I have always remembered when I was younger and would go to Mc Donalds they would ask "would you like a girl toy or a boy toy?" Sometimes yeah I wanted the princess toy but other times I also wanted the hot wheels car. It is so disturbing to know that we are still dealing with this issue. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
After reading the article on Women's welfare activism,I too felt that she really just listed the differences and similarities without any real conclusion.However on the second page of the article, it talks about the differences of how white and black women were raising money. It says oh of course women raise money but they were also so busy attending White House conferences and correspondence with Supreme Court Justices and the black women it just states they organized bake sales, rummage sales and church dinners. I guess after reading this my biggest pet peeve is that yes white women did have more power in society. However, its not like there were no black women doing the same things. I just don't like how these women are talked down, for what they had their time was just as well spent as a white women. This really just made me feel that white women were more interested in their social lives or making them selves look better and black women worked as a team, they worked for the well being of everyone. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
While reading Chapter 14, I began to think about the possibly that the difference between the perspective of white women and black women on the poor that they helped was a matter of progression or evolution. As the black women received more power, it seemed that they became more like the white women and began to explicitly look down on the poorer black social classes. I saw this occurrence when the author talked about the views of the black poor by educated black women being the same as white women.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
While reading MAW, I came across an exert from Ida B. Wells, which in truth makes sense, but I didn't expect to see exert from something I have read in the past. There piece of the article here touched me almost as much as it touched me then. The black women were not treated equally in any light, and were not considered to be able to be 'raped' because they were not pure and pious like the white women. Part of that comes through in the last paragraph of the exert. It makes me mad to think that people once thought like this, but what is even more scary is some people still do. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
After reading a bit more in the Modern American Women book, I find myself getting emotionally involved with the information presented. I felt anger towards the father who was treating his daughter like a sack of trash in "An immigrant Daughter Awakens to the Possibilities of the New World." I felt heartbroke when he slapped her because she was leaving. At the same time I know this happened a lot towards women... and it breaks my heart to know what some women had to go through. I've been lucky to have a father who was supportive in everything I chose and only opposed my decisions when they were bad decisions. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I completely agree with Ashley since I was also touched by some of the readings in Modern American Women. I also was upset at the way the young girl was treated by her father in "An Immigrant Daughter Awakens to the Possibilities of the New World". I always knew parents treated their daughters in such a harsh way at times, but it was very hard to see how harshly she was treated. I have to say if I was in her position I also would have left home. Though I did enjoy how she points out that she got in so much trouble for taking the girls word that they would get the 2 cents she owed when she says her dad had given away a lot more merchandise without any payment at all. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Bertha Palmer's speech at the opening of the Women's Building was so progressive except for the part where she says: "It willing acknowledges that the industries, arts, and commerce of the world have been for centuries in the hands of men who have carefully trained themselves for the responsibilities devolving upon them, and who have, consequently, without question, contributed vastly more than women to the valuable thought, research, invention, science, art and literature, which have become the rich heritage of the human race." Does she actually believe this? Or is she catering to what the public will most except in order to support her movement? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
I found Anzia Yeziercka's (Immigrant Daughter) story very interesting as far as the existance of two worlds (old/new) for young immigrant women. I feel like today American woman still struggle with existing in between the Old and the New world. It is amazing how sometimes problems never get solved they just evolve. - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
Mary Harris seemed incredible against the predominant constructs of gender and the entire system of change in America. Clearly she has struggled greatly in her lifetime and criticized women's methods of change... yet she seems to offer now feasibly alternative route. - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
The difference between the white activism and the black activism discussed in Unequal Sisters was not very surprising to me. I figured that since black women were also fighting for civil rights their fight would be stronger. They seemed to have the largest networks of people working toward the cause. They held fundraising fuctions to help raise the money needed to fund their programs. It is easy to understand how these women bonded in the way that they did. The bond that these women grew amongst themselves was largely due to the having to rely on eachother so much. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I agree with Kellye about how it wasn't surprising about the differences between black and white activism. The black women had so much more to fight for, and not only that but how education was their most important area of activism instead of voting like for the white women.-- Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
I was impressed with the vast number of organizations that were formed as a result of the fundraising efforts of activist women. I was even more shocked to find the cost of maintaining these organizations and that these women were able to raise the money needed. ---Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting to learn how educated these women were. I knew some women were getting degrees but not this many and not African Americans. I also thought it was interesting to see how important, influential, or rich the parents of these women were even the African American women had wealthy parents. -- Christine Wuebker<br />
<br />
Another thing I found intersting was the view these women had about the role of women. I would have thought that since these women were out in the work force trying to bring about change they would have supported other women in the work place but they don't. It also was a surprise to learn about how many of the women were single, divorced, widowed, married, or living with a "partner." The interacting and sense of community created amoung these women is amazing. -- Christine Wuebker<br />
<br />
It surprises me that black women started to develop social classes just as the white women. Black women who started to gain power, like the power whites had, these black women started to treat the poor and less fortunate black women like a low class. This really bothers me because after everything these women have been through you would except them to try to help each other out, but instead they forget about them and treat them as peasants. What my question is, are these higher powered black women doing this because they are trying to be whiter? Do they care more about upper class societies views on them? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I was also surprised on how the black women started a social class just like the white women, but to try and answer your question(s) Amanda, I don't think they were trying to be whiter but maybe instead were so tired of the white social class they were instead competing now against them on what race was better as well as trying to gain the much wanted respect from white society they have wanted for so long. --Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Kind of going off of what both Amanda and Michelle said, I think we have to keep in mind that there was a social ideal that all women had to try to live up to. The domestic of separate spheres was still alive and well and I feel like some black women felt that they had to adhere to that doctrine in order to make some headway in the world. Now, I'm not saying that's how all black women felt or acted, but I'm sure it played some sort of part. But what upsets me the most, and it's talked about in Anna Cooper's piece, "Black Women Plan to Lead Their Race," is that black women were subjected to the bottom of the social hierarchy on two accounts: race AND gender. No matter which way they tried to advance, they always had someone trying to hold them back. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I agree with Cat and the Anzia Yeziercka's (Immigrant Daughter)piece. Women are stuck dealing with the old and the new world. The problem with todays society is that only some people truly believe in the modern day women however, a good amount of people are so stuck in the past. Its not fair how women have to fight for so much when people need to stop living in the past. --Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
Along with many other posts about the emotional involvement MAW commands of its readers, I found that "Margaret Sanger's Epiphany over Birth Control" opened my eyes to the desperate and difficult position of being a women with no control over her own body. Still today there are few practical birth control methods for the women that need it most. The pill and other hormonal methods are not cheap and condoms primarily place responsiblity on the male partner. It was heart-breaking to hear "a baby born dead, great relief - the death of an older child, sorrow but again relief" (86) as it must have been for Sanger. Sanger was not on a crusade to put a stop to child birth or to change the understanding that sex was for procreation, but rather to bring peace of mind to the women that so desperatly needed it. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
<br />
I also was very touched by "Margaret Sanger's Epiphany over Birth Control". I knew that women had been attempting ways to control the number of children they had for a very long time but I had no idea that someone could self induce an abortion (especially since i really don't know how that works). I also found it so shocking that even married women didn't want to put faith in their husbands desire not to have any more children even though it would reduce the stress on his life and make paying bills easier. I would have thought they would also be glad to have less children to take care of. -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In response to your comment Elizabeth, I'm not so sure it was the fact that they would have less children to take care of so much as the women would be in control of their own bodies and be making family altering decisions. Women were supposed to obey their husbands and if they took a stand and decided that they were going to prevent their family from increasing, then the husband would, in essence, lose a bit of power over his wife. I think that was what terrified them more than anything else. Some men actually were thrilled that their wives were looking into birth control. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
After taking History of Sexuality last semester and discussing Margaret Sanger I was not at all surprised with the "Margaret Sanger's Epihany over Birth Control." It was and still is hard to be a women when it comes to birth control. Women today are far better off than the women of Margaret Sanger's time. It is so much easier for women to obtain birth control today then ever before. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I was very suprised to learn when reading Edith Eudora Ammons' piece about life as a female homesteader that women were more successful in staying with their claims by 6%. As she recalled being driven further and further into the unsettled land I can only imagine how disconnecting and daunting that ride must have been. The Ammons sister's hard work is clear proof of a way in which American women were able to take a different route and break the social expectations. After reading about the women who went west with their husbands or in order to find a husband in the past weeks, it was very uplifting to read about the other opportunities the west had for women. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I thought "Wages for Housework" was the best essay, it made me laugh. I thought it was very interesting on how she capitalized certain sentences in order to show her frustration and to get her point across. I also thought this essay sounded very much like a modern day women and her frustration with being a house wife and how it is not looked at as being a job, because a lot more than just cleaning and cooking goes into taking care of a house and family. --Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In Nellie Bly's essay she says, "I had such a strong belief in the world's greeting me as I greeted it, that I refused to arm myself. I knew if my conduct was proper I should always find men ready to protect me,..." (pg6-7) She is amazing in the fact that she was going to attempt to fly around the world and the fact that she was a women was going to make this awesome, but in this quote she seems completely oblivious to the real world, and that not everyone you meet is going to like you, aswell as thinking any man would be willing to protect her. Its like she ready to be considered equal to man by doing this great thing but yet still depend on them for protection. --Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Gordon's essay in US as Kellye mentions as well as I have responded to her comment above about not being suprised about the differences in white and black women activism, but my question is why could women in general, black and white just come together and be the first ones to over look race and fight the cause of womens rights together? I think if they could have done that would of had a more dominate impact in getting what and where they wanted to be.--Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
was also very surprised by Edith Eudora Ammon's piece, but mainly that while they met some resistance in their journey west, they did not seem to get mistreated nearly has much as I would have expected. I would have thought that as two women going west to homestead they would have gotten scoffed at yet I don't recall this being mentioned in the recounting. Is this because it didn't happen or because they chose to ignore it?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In the Unequal Sisters reading by Linda Gordon I found very interesting the concept of social motherhood among the black women's welfare reform groups. These women were mostly single and were not biological mothers yet the main issues they focused on were familial in nature. I do not necessarily think that this indicates the selfless mindset of these women, but rather points to how strongly the doctrine of seperate spheres and the middle classs status quo, affected everyones' decisions during this time period. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Another point worth mentioning from Gordon's essay was how incredibly interdependent these women were on each other. Ths interdependnce born out of necessity to survive eventually evolved into a powerful social and even political network. Some of these women's groups had real political power; distributing tax money etc. However, for a woman to be truly powerful within these groups she had to have connections to a powerful man, her husband, or father usually as is the case with Brandeis and Beyer. --- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
The speech by Palmer in Modern American Women brought up an excellent point. This was the point that most of the people in power equate life for everyone to what their own life is like. So to the men in power at the time, opening the workforce up to women seemed unnatural, dangerous, and threatening. However, this was because they were thinking about their own wives and daughters entering the workforce, which neither the men or most likely the women would have wanted, seeing as they come from upper class families. However, to the less fortunate, opening the workforce ot women was essential. These women needed to work in order to survive, alot of them did not have husbands who could or would support them. I think that this is still a mistake we all make today, not just the politicians, we fail to put ourselves in other peoples' shoes. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
In reading "The Fair Women, Chicago, 1893" in Modern American Women, I found it interesting how Bertha Palmer is obviously struggling with the conflict between the idealized woman and the reality that many women face. At one point she says that it is the board's "belief that every woman, who is presiding over a happy home, is fulfilling her highest and truest function, and could not be lured from it by temptations offered by factories or studios." And then a few sentences later she talks about how it is only the favored class that can live in these conditions and that the majority of women are living under much poorer conditions. In a way, it seems as though she is still holding those ideals of women, but recognizing that most women cannot live up to them. I guess I'm just wondering how that differs from the rest of the people who simply hold those ideals, and is it even any better to recognize that the majority of women can't live up to the ideals but still hold them anyways? --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
In reading "Speaking Out Against Lynching" in Modern American Women, the thing that struck me most is the obvious double standard that exists between sexual relations that happen between a black man and a white woman in comparison to those that exist between a white man and a black woman. I know that I may be looking at this from a present perspective, but it just strikes me that it is considered rape for a black man to have sex with a white woman, but nothing is said when a white man has sex with a black woman (which happened very often). I think that this double standard brings up issues with both race and gender. It brings up issues with gender because it indicates that white women are incapable of consenting to sexual interactions with a black man (but men can consent to sexual relations with a black woman). And it brings up issues of race because of the differential treatment between the races, and thinking about the likeliness that black women have of being raped. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I also thought "Wages for Housework" was a clever and humorous article. Conger-Kaneko seemed to denounce traditional women use her writing style. I thought it was very interesting, though not valid in every case, that she compared women's roles to those of slaves. I would imagine this would be a very persuasive arguement to move women towards equal rights after being compared to the slaves who had been freed for decades. I cannot imagine how women seeking to stay in their tradtional roles would argue against Conger-Kaneko's points? Although I imagine they were probably not interested in reading Progressive Woman. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
After having read some of the above comments about Ida B. Wells' essay, I thought more about her argument and the social and political climate during the time of lynching. I do agree with Jessica that it was somewhat out of fear because the black men were no longer under the control of the white masters. Lynching was one of the ways they could exhibit their control over this sector of society. It obviously didn't have to do with whether black men were actually raping white women; for white men, it was about controlling that sector of society. In response to Mary Beth's comment about Wells' essay, the viewpoint of many white Southern men was not that they were raping black women. It was only their superiority over the inferior race, black women being the most inferior because they were black and women. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
The discussion about moving up by way of housework and domestic services was brought up in the readings, and I believe that it ties in very well with what we've learned about in class. You can see the same sort of thing happening with the end of the Civil War, and clerical work. Like we discussed, women took clerical positions while men were away fighting, but soon after the war ended, those who kept their jobs soon learned that their jobs had become "secretarial." Those who once had the opportunity to move up in the business world while they were clerks soon found themselves stuck in the same place since secretarial work didn't provide much opportunity to elevate. But I agree, the question is, who decides what makes a position honorable? -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I've decided that Nellie Bly is my new hero. The way she stood up to her boss and threatened to go to another paper if she wasn't allowed to "travel the world in 80 days" was incredible, especially for a woman of her time. What's even more interesting is how some of the stereotypes she faced still plague women today. For one, she's "too delicate" since she's a woman and would need protection. Second, her boss was concerned she'd have too much luggage, and if you think about women today (I know I, myself, am guilty of this) they pack much more than necessary. She even said herself, "Packing that bag was the most difficult undertaking of my life." It's just interesting to see the correlation and then quite impressive to see how she overcame gender stereotypes to beat "the man" at his own game. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I loved that the excerpt about bicycle riding by Frances Willard was included in the chapter. It's simplicity had the strongest message of encouragement for women to leave behind their usual constraints and go out into the world, to take control of their lives. She points out that for too long women have been constrained by their clothing and appearance. Willard asks women to take uncomplicated modern inventions and free themselves. My favorite quote from the piece was, "They that know nothing fear nothing." (p.18) It was a phrase that offered such quiet strength for the women of that time and even to women now. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I know a few other of my classmates have commented on it, but I felt that I should also comment on the birth control article too. I was also amazed at some of the ways women tried to have abortions. I have to agree though with Kelly that birth control was a way men would lose power over women, but I don't understand why the men wanted to have so many children to try to provide for in his home. Why not use condoms or pull out? Were the men so uncaring they ignored the pain of the female they married and the hunger of their children? --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
In response to Ashley W., I don't think the men of that time really thought about the pain of the female in child birth,etc. Just from researching my family, I found that my grandfathers father had 18 children from 2 different wives (the first wife died in childbirth) and birth control in that family was never an option. My grandfather is the youngest and was born in 1923. He told me that his father believed that the more children you had the better off you were because you had more people to work in the fields at harvest time and they felt you could have more livestock because there were more people to share the work. My grandfathers family was totally self sufficient and he says they barely noticed the depression because they were self sufficient. I think maybe a lot of men had the same mindset and didn't see their wives as "suffering" because it was the way they survived. That of course is a rural example I don't know if it would have been the same in the cities but I am sure it was somewhat different.~~MaryBeth C<br />
<br />
Based on chapter 14, about black and white women’s vision of welfare activism, the book states that white women mostly helped out with political work and donations. Black women were more interested in helping there community and their churches. Could this be because black women saw other people as one class level and will help anyone, while white women will help out the upper class with politics to gain more women’s rights? <br />
–Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
I agree with Landon about how women were successful in gaining political power, but how far did that power get you? Even today I feel like women are still seen as the only way of gaining power is by having a strong male influence in the business beside you. <br />
–Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
In the “Modern American Women” book, the documents of Jane Addams were very interesting. Jane Addams was unsure of what she wanted to do after college. Most women just get married and have children. She wanted to figure out a way to help people especially women by restoring balance in activities that were along the traditional lines. In 1889 Addams created the Hull House; a place where she developed social services and recreational programs to help the less fortune. If Addams was another woman to break down doors for more opportunities for other women why didn’t women’s ways of work life change? Also this shows that women do not have to get married right after college. <br />
-Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
"The Feminist Challenge to the Privatized Home" was an interesting perspective on the home. Instead of telling women they could do it all, she asks women to consider working together with the family and other women to help them combine work and home. It seems so different from the feminist perspective that prevails today where women can do it all: home, work, and family. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
In "Modern American Women" I found this quote "We feel therefore, obliged to state our believe that every woman who is presiding over a happy home, is fulfilling her highest and truest function, and could not be lured from it by temptations offered by factories or studies." All I have to say to this is wow have times changed since this was written. Women are making it a priority to be an asset to the workforce. --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I found it interesting to read about Alice Hamilton and how she got a medical degree from the University of MIchigan. (I am biased after growing up in Ann Arbor!) I thought it was interesting to read about her train of thought as to why a medical degree. She pursued medicine not because of an interest but because she knew she could excel in it even as a woman. --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I found this quote powerful and couldn't not post it. "We may convince the world that ability is not a matter of sex." --- Rose Ferguson</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_3_Questions/Comments328--Week 3 Questions/Comments2008-01-31T02:20:27Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>The one thing that immediately struck me while I began reading the Castaneda piece was the classification between "Spanish" and "Mexican" and how, to me, that distinction seems to still be true, on a certain level, today. Castaneda points out how Spanish women were always purer and more mysterious; romanticized in a sense. The Mexican women on the other hand were impure on pretty much every count. Does anyone else feel that this stereotype between the two ethnicities still holds up today or is that just me? Based on general opinion, I feel as though this major difference still sticks out in people's minds (not saying that this distinction is right in any sense.) - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I was extremely impressed by the scale of the Cherokee Seminary school. For it's time, it seemed like an impressive operation for a people so tremendously discriminated against in America, excepting the multiple burnings down of the building! I was, however, struck by the authors constant use of the word "progressive", which to me is usually a positive word, meaning moving toward improved living/way of life and education for the public. The author used it so negatively though, as a way to describe the discriminating, racially-mixed Cherokee girls and their families usually. Looking at her writings from a historians perspective I see how the word might have been used by the people themselves as a justifier of their own belief of superiority, but the author should not have used it herself because it makes it seem as though she is drawing the line herself between the status of tradition verse progression and pure-blood verse mixed-blood.~Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
The readings this week largely had to do with how historians have struggled to characterize women by race and gender. Women of other races were frequently overlooked. As Castaneda points out in chapter four, when women were studied, it was either because of their significance in relation to someone important, such as a governor. The experiences of any other women would be generalized to stereotype women of that particular race overall. This is interesting to keep in mind when reading “The Life and Legend of Gertrudis Barceló in Nineteenth-Century Santa Fe” by Gonzalez, in which he discusses how the life of one woman (Dona Gertrudis Barceló) impacted the image that people held of Spanish-Mexican women. Why is it that the lives and experiences of minority women could see easily and readily be generalized? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting to read “Too Dark to Be Angels” by Mihesuah. The article described the all female seminary for Cherokee girls. When examining the experiences of Cherokee women in an all female setting, it easier to see the impact that race and economics played in their lives. You no longer have the issue of breaking down the study by gender and race, nor do you have the question of which plays a more significant role. In looking at the experiences of the Cherokee women in this school, it is easy to see that segregation occurred even when the playing field seemed to be leveled. The more white blood the females had, the more accepted they were by others. Additionally, it would be more likely that they would be able to marry and be economically and culturally successful. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I also thought the reading about the female seminary for the Cherokee girls was very interesting. It seems odd to me that there was such an emphasis placed on the percentage of cherokee vs white blood you had. It was an Indian school but it seems that to be accepted or what the girls felt was preferred was to be as "white" as possible, but yet they still talked about the percent, however small, of Cherokee blood they had. Most of the girls in the pictures to me did not "look" like a typical Cherokee and if the emphasis was on being as "white" as possible why did they even attend the seminary, why not go to a white school. Were they that segregated that even a small amount of Cherokee blood would prevent them from going to a white school, and who would know if you didn't say anything about what percent white you were? ~~Mary Beth C<br />
<br />
While reading "Gender, Race, and Culture: Spanish Mexican Women in the Historiography of Frontier California" and "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History" by Antonia I. Castaneda, I wondered whether it were true that only Westerners studied the history of Hispanic women until the 1970s or 1980s. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
After reading "The Life and Legend of Gertrudis Barcelo in Nineteenth-Century Santa Fe" by Deena J. Gonzalez, I found it interesting that during that time it was so easy to step outside the boundaries of the perceptions of the general populace. The case of interesting women like Barcelo is very similar to the inability of the Native Americans to see the ships of Cortez until Cortez's men pointed them out to them.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
It is strange that in the "Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-1876" "stone-woman" was considered a problem/disease. From what I understand, having sex through prostitution is not an enjoyable experience.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
My favorite reading out of all of these essays was "To Dark to Be Angels" by Devon Mihesuah, because my great grandmother was apparently 1/4 cherokee, so it was like reading apart of her history. But what I found so interesting about this essay was how these cherokee women were trying to live up to a white persons society, or "adapting to society's 'whiteness'."(187) For so many years the European society in America had tried to civilize Indians, and get them out of farming and hunting, and in this reading it was like they gave up their fight of keeping their heritage and decided to try and fit in to white society. Why? There was all of the sudden the whiter you looked the better off you were, and this often left the full blooded cherokee women feeling inferior to white yet still.<br />
--Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Deena Gonzalez's essay on Gertrudis Barcelo describes a very interesting women. She basically went against what all the other women in society were expected to be like. She was rich and most interesting was that she made her saloon the center of the town's social and economic life, as well as military and political people coming to her for advise (255). Wasn't that unheard of in those days? How was it that she was able to lead this life and other women didn't, or did they try? --Michelle Marduesz<br />
<br />
Castaneda's article caused me to think on how the problem with the history of CA and its residents before Anglos is a problem with many areas. What I mean by that is a history that does integrate race, gender, and culture or class as categories of historical analysis (page 71) is a problem are for many places. It just really strikes a bit harder when you read a little of the historiography on some of the problems of the already published and out there history. -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I was impressed and slightly confused on the essay by Mihesuah about the female Cherokee seminary. I was impressed because even though the school burned down they rebuilt it and it still exists (at least the ending made it sound that way). I was confused because if the whiter you were the better, why did full-blooded traditionalist Cherokees send their daughters there? Were they trying to get an upperhand on the white man? Even if it meant learning to write and read the language in order to better fight the white man? It had me confused. Also, if it was a Cherokee school, why girls go who were barely even Cherokee?, like the one mentioned on page 186 who was only 1/32 Cherokee. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
The essay "Too Dark to be Angels" concludes by stating that the seminary was a progressive success. I can not help but question this outcome based on what I read. I have no doubts that the seminary provided short term advantages to its attendees as it related to social and economic status however, it appears also that the women let petty matters of snobbery and ego undermine the overall mission of the seminary (which I imagine was to uplift the Cherokee nation through education). It seems that by attending this seminary Cherokees were destroying themselves from the inside out. The women learned to feel either superior or inferior and therefore they could not remain united as an ethnic group. Also, the fact that whites were put on such a high pedestal made the Cherokees vulnerable to manipulation in the future. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Bancroft's qoute "a race halfway between the proud Castillian and the lowly root digger." existing "halfway between savage and civilization." on page 59 of Casteneda's essay is reprehensible. It caused me to quesiton the root cause of such racism, and prejudice. What makes someone racist? Is it truly just because the other person looks different? Is it about pre-conceived notions or hearsay, turned hateful stereotypes? Could it be a morally corrupt individual looking for a way to dehumanize a group, in order to justify poor treatment (i.e. stealing Indian land or slavery)? It seems there has to be some underlying motive for racism, besides just the color of one's skin vs. antohers'. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
After doing the readings, "A Citizen Protests the Rape of Indian Women in California, 1862" attracted my attention the most, and I struggled to figure out why. I think this document raises a lot of questions about gender norms during the time period, in a substantially different way than the other documents in Major Problems. It's clear from the other readings that rape and domination of Native Americans was not uncommon. "A Citizen Protests" raises the questions about the response to these acts by average citizens. The author of the letter labels the rapists brutes, who should be punished "in justice to decency, humanity, and civilization." However, its clear the author's morals aren't widely shared, why else would his or her letter to the editor be anonymous? ~ Matt Struth<br />
<br />
I agree with Kelly and her thoughts on the Castaneda piece and how it described the classification between "Spanish" and "Mexican" and how the distinction seems to still be true, on a certain level, today. It is pointed out that Spanish women were always purer held higher up in societies eyes. The Mexican women on the other hand were impure in every way. Basically no matter how corny this sounds, Spanish women are classy and Mexican women are trashy. This is still seen today, even in my mind sometimes you think of Mexican you think lower class. However, when you think Spanish, you see a women wearing bright colors beautiful clothes.I wonder do we think this way because Spain is located in Europe and when Eurpoe comes to mind you think of places like Milan or Paris? --Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I had the same questions about the essay by Mihesuah about the female Cherokee seminary as Ashley. What I didn't understand was why whiter was better? I found it interesting that full-blood Cherokees were sending their children to this extremely expensive school to become whiter. Is it to try to become equals with white people or is it to pull ahead of them? What I really don't understand is why are the Cherokees trying to wipe out their culture. That is what happened when we first settled the Indians became "whiter" and look at where they are now, language has been lost, traditions stories the list goes on. To me it seems like this school was good for the purpose of education but I felt as if it took away culture. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
<br />
I think that Antonia Castaneda's essay makes some far-reaching claims that are not completely warranted. Castaneda credits the biased work of Bancroft with informing all later popular and scholarly works with specific stereotypes of Spanish women (pg 59). While perhaps not central to Castaneda's essay I don't understand how one, or even a few historical scholars could be solely responsible for passing on biased perceptions. I think Castaneda ignores other ways that negative stereotypes get passed on. The fact that these negative stereotypes persist in persons who are not scholars of history indicates that later scholars might not have adopted the same stereotypes that Bancroft did solely because he did, but because they embraced these stereotypes in their daily lives. ~ Matt Struth<br />
<br />
I found the documents about women in the Trans-Mississippi Frontier West incredibly interesting and shocking at the same time. The Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes were the most shocking of the collection. Was this a common phenomenon at this time? --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I agree with Amanda's points about the female Cherokee seminary. I feel that the Cherokees were attending this school in hopes of becoming 'whiter', which did result in a dilution of their culture. One must wonder if they saw this as a negative thing, however. They saw that whites had the money, the land, and the privilege. Is it possible that they willingly sacrificed their unique culture in hopes of attaining these things that whites had and they did not? --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I think Matt brings up an interesting point about "A Citizen Protests the Rape of Indian Women in California, 1862," in mentioning that the letter was anonymous. To our minds, the opinions shared seem to be the norm, but the simple fact that the writer of this letter felt the need to keep their opinions anonymous definitely demonstrates that these opinions were not the norm. This reflects a sad fact of race and gender norms of the time. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
As I was reading "Zitkala-Sa Travels to the Land of the Big Red Apples," a few things really struck me. First, I was amazed by the conflict between the young girl and her mother and that the young girl wanted to leave her family. I was also amazed that it was ultimately the mother's decision whether or not to send the young girl away, and in fact the father was not mentioned at all. I think that this highlights a cultural difference between the Dakotas and the white Americans. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I thought that an important and likely common racial and gender issue was highlighted in "Violet Cragg, Ex-Slave and Former Army Nurse, Requests an Army Pension, 1908." She mentioned that the father of her daughter was a white man. Sadly, I think that this was all too common, and denotes how white men took advantage of enslaved women. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
Mihesuah's piece about the diluded culture of the Cherokee women shows the power of the white, middle classed ideal. I thought the school's class system was very interesting and exposed how strong the force to wipe out Native American presence really was. I felt as if the Cherokee culture was breeded out with each new generation of students striving for white ideals. I wondered if perhaps within my own Eastern European ancestory a similiar process of acculturation took place. For now although I consider myself American I still have a sense of Polish pride, but after reading about the Cherokee seminary perhaps my ancestors strove to break apart from their cultural ties? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I found the article "Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes" to be extremely disturbing. As if it weren't bad enough to be sold to someone for my body the rules were absurd. I'm not sure which one was worse "if she concieves, she shall serve one year more" or "if she should escape and be recovered, then her time shall never expire." Who came up with these ideas and rules and how is this accepted in any society?? - Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
Growing up we've all been exposed to different stereotypes of various classifications of individuals. After doing the readings this week, it makes me question what did other races and genders think of whites? what were white femailes stereotyped as and has it changed throughout the years? It the perception change depending on who you talk to and do different backgrounds have varying perceptions? I'm curious as to how the "typical" white woman was portrayed. - Rose Ferguson</div>199.111.74.80https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_2_Questions/Comments328--Week 2 Questions/Comments2008-01-24T03:07:07Z<p>199.111.74.80: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found it interesting that the concept of a separation between freedom and suffrage that existed during the Post-Civil War period is very well upheld assumption today. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
The gradual disenfranchisement and barring from political participation of black women seems to be an interesting example of white society's influence on black culture. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
What were the similarities between the political participation of black women and political participation of the women of immigrant groups and other minorities? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting in the reading where the author discussed the concept of family being the "unifying thread" that bound African Americans together. She says that "the notion of family members as having a mutual and continuing responsibility to help each other and to prepare for hard times" (pg 125). Wouldn't that have been true of any family during the reconstruction period, black or white? ~~Mary Beth C<br />
<br />
I agree with Justin that it is interesting to see how the African American women were gradually pushed out of the political arena after having been so active and vocal. I think it is funny how the women would "take sactions" (pg 135),such as abstaining from sexual relations, against men that voted for the Democratic party! ~~ Mary Beth C<br />
<br />
The concept that I found most intriguing overall in the reading was the conflicting views of freedom and suffrage being an individual possession versus communal. This led to the different treatment of people who voted against the popular view. To someone who thought individuals were responsible to only themselves they would view hostility against other voters as opposing the libreal democratic process whereas in the African American community, where suffrage was viewed as a collective possesion, it was right to be hostile towards those who threatened the well being of the whole community. -Karly Kovalcik<br />
<br />
Although the difference may be slight on paper, there is a huge difference between the African American woman's perspective that her husband votes for her in a way that represents her political beliefs and ideologies versus a white woman's perspective that her husband voted for her without consulting with her because he acted individually in a way that was best for his wife and children. -Karly Kovalcik<br />
<br />
After reading the article I made a decision that I had previously I had been flip-flopping between. I now believe that there needs to be subcategories of the women's history to include at least, but not limiting to, African American Women's history. The history seems to be so different just from the article we had to read. Such as, the black women feeling that they were equally part of the vote that the black men casted. I don't remember ever hearing about that before, at least with white women, but then again I haven't taken a women's history course before either -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I agree completely with Ashley. After reading this article, it has become clear to me that women's history needs definite subcategories. But that just makes me thing about how many subcategories can we really delve into? I mean, if you think of how many different subject classes are offered to us within our history department, all of which normally pertain to "men's history," do we need all of those categories for women's history as well? - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
The other thing I found interesting in the article by Elsa Brown was just how the women and men viewed the 'sense of the vote' at first. Such as the vote casted by the men was equally the women's vote, and how the black republican politicians were able to get (well, it seems like the article was meaning quite a few) many of the black women to reject black male democratic voters. Also, just the fact the black women to fight to even get to vote in Richmond's First African Baptist Church astounded me with the way the article was talking about community earlier on. It definitely feels like slowly, but surely, the women were losing the political say they had through their men. -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
In chapter 8, Brown gives examples of the freed African American trying to regain the importance of ''the family''. The church was impacted by the new seating integration, families lived together in support, and even none relatives were taken into homes that had room in racial solidarity. Single and widowed women lived together, sharing incomes and responsibility over child care. In a way, black women were improving and strengthening the idea of ''the family'' that white society held such virtue in. By living as sisters with none relatives, but former "fellow servants", African American women created an even stronger sense of female solidarity and sisterhood than white women. While many white women of the time looked down on excessive charity (even to single women with children), black women were united. I believe the lacking sense of sisterhood among all white women and failure to unite with African American women hurt them in the struggle for suffrage.--Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
The experience of slavery created a need to embrace other African Americans, so it is not surprising that they reached out to the community of African Americans during the Reconstruction Era and beyond. It was family and a sense of community that held African Americans together. "Whether one eats or starves in this setting depends on the available resources within the community as a whole."(126) This essay reminded me of a conversation that I had with a senior African American woman in Georgia, who told me that during the violence of the 1950s communities of African Americans posted neighborhood watches. According to the story, white males, sometimes intoxicated, would drive through black communities seeking victims. The men took on the responsibility of protecting the citizens within the community. This women said that they seldom left the neighborhood due to potential violence, and there was no need to because school, church, and markets were all within the perimeter of the black community.--LisaM<br />
<br />
The concept that the freedom and political liberty of U.S. citizens was not synonymous (130) seems a blatent contradition to present day eyes. As we all know, the black codes in the Reconstruction Era disenfranchised large populations of blacks. Brown's essay states that black women felt they had a stake in the man's choice in voting. I recall in Georgia history, the sizeable female black population was considered a threat if allowed to vote; black women were inclined to vote Republican, and the South were Democrats.--LisaM<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Karly about how there is a huge difference between the African American woman's perspective that her husband votes for her representing her political beliefs and to a white woman's perspective that the husband voted for her without consulting with her. That he voted for who he though was best for him and his wife and children. I think it shows that even though all men are superior when it comes to women, African American men have more respect to their wives then a white man does to his. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
Something that I found interesting in the reading was when it discussed how blacks were active participants throughout the state constitutional convention. African Americans both male and female crowded the galleries speaking their opinions letting their voices be heard. It says " White women, for example, certainly on occasion sat in the convention's gallery as visitors silently observing the proceedings..."(pg129). African American women were standing besides the men that "represented" them and took part in trying to make changes, while the white women sat there quietly letting their men make decisions for them. I just find this funny because you would think a white women would have a little more part in politics; but I guess an African American woman didn't have much to loose if she spoke out of turn or defended her own ideas. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting that Brown discussed the varying ways to interpret the word “freedom.” For black women, freedom was the ability to remain close to the community and help the family. She stated that for black women, “the charity of this penniless negress in receiving another poverty-stricken creature under her roof was characteristic of the freedmen” (p. 126). On the other hand, from the perspective of white men and women, freedom was the ability to get ahead and better oneself. For example, Brown states, “freedpeople should adopt naturally those habits of thrift, diligence, and acquisitiveness that were a cornerstone of free labor ideology” (p.127). This highlights an important difference in perspective. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
Brown talks a lot about the difference between freedom and political liberty. There was debate on whether or not civil right should be an “inherent corollary to freedom.” She mentions the views of Gibson when discussing this point, in which he suggests, “persons who had not yet learned to regulate their lives appropriately—to be thrifty, industrious, and diligent—were not yet capable of responsibly exercising liberty. Those not capable of political liberty would rely on those capable of it to protect their freedom” (p 130). In the time following the civil war, women did not have the right to vote, given this statement, is it because society did not view them as “capable of the responsibility?” Moreover, is this, to some extent true today, with the definition of “capable”, not applying to gender, but to age? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
In Browns essay I thought it was interesting on page 129 that during debates white women were silent and the African Americans were not. Instead they participated and loudly; however Brown doesn't say whether the African Amercians were men or women or both. Why were the white women silent? <br />
Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
What was also intersting to me in Browns essay was that Southern Black women and men debated the issue of woman suffrage (131). I assume this is because Black men were in the same boat as women in general because they didn't have much rights either so they understood the frustration of not having certain rights and in this case the right to vote. <br />
Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In response to your assumption Michelle, I'm going to agree somewhat, and say that black men also debated the issue of women's suffrage, because they too had to struggle to have a political voice. They had a difficult time obtaining the right to vote themselves, so they also had to persuade women to help them and back them up while trying to get a shot at the vote. This, of course, led to a massive debate over whether or not black men or women as a gender should be granted the right to vote first, and caused quite a stir when it was granted to men. There were quite a few men, though, like Frederick Douglass I believe, who supported the woman's right to vote. They understood what it was like to be considered politically naive, so I'm sure that helped in some way. - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that during the Reconstruction Era while men and women who had been slaves focused on finding the families that they had been separated from the white society surrounding these families found something wrong with the fact the black community latched onto the families they had around them. It seemed odd that they would have such a negative view on the fact that these people had such a strong desire to help out family members or even simply other people who experienced the difficulties of slavery with them. I would have thought that this would have been something that would have been admired instead of mocked. They were helping others out which was something that I had understood was the duty of any Christian, especially during this time period where the majority of the nation was Christian. Was it simply because they were a different skin color than them? Or was it because many white people during this period were so focused on improving their lot in life that they couldn't have cared less about how the others were doing? - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading how although the black women in communities were denied the right to actually cast a vote in elections they still made their political opinions known. I especially enjoyed reading that these women would threaten their husbands in order to insure they voted in a way that represented not only his opinions but also hers as well! - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
What I found interesting in Brown's essay was that while African Americans were TECHNICALLY exteneded all the freedoms and liberties afforded the white male populous, there were still social norms and restraints (that were more powerful than any amendment) that constrained their freedoms. These could be seen explicitly in the south, and more subtly in the North but they definetly existed. However, even in the time of Jim Crow laws, and a time when women (white or black) still could not vote, in the African American community black women had real power. On page 130 Brown talks about how black culture had both an internal and external political structure. In the internal structure black women had just as much power as the men. So why was this not the case with the white culture of the day? Did the conditions within slavery equalize black men and women, is this something that carried over from their culture in Africa, or were black women simply more strong willed and outspoken? - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Another point worth discussing from the reading was the incredibly gernerous and nuclear support system African Americans set up during reconstruction. Brown talks about how the ex-slaves would depend on one another, for food, shelter, and money. Sometimes they would even go so far as to share bank accounts. Although I admire their genorosity and envy their sense of community, I have to wonder if African American Society as a whole in the long run would not have been better off if the individuals would have put their extra money to a productive use for themselves individually, rather than dontating it to the poor. If families with extra money(time or space)would have invested this money - in businesses, or in education for their offspring the African American community may ascended to equality alot sooner than they did(assuming they have). - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
The white characterization of newly freed blacks as "lazy and shiftless" because of their sense of collective responsibility was simply ignorance of their own history. During the Revolutionary Period and Founding, it was not uncommon for people to quarter soldiers and economically help one another due to oppression from their common foe - the British. The individualistic and free labor ideology in white America really took hold with the opening of the frontier. As an oppressed people, it was only natural that the black community would bond in such a way in the face of the oppression and discrimination which they would continue to face for another 100+ years. Phil N.<br />
<br />
Another note from late 18th, early 19th century: As far as whites had been concerned at first, only the middle and upper classes of white males had access to the ballot box. Freedom and suffrage were not linked until this time, starting with the Jacksonian period. Before that, almost 200 years had elapsed in which the franchise being the domain of the upper classes was never seriously challenged. - Phil N.<br />
<br />
I think Brown's piece brings to light a clear division between Black and White women in this time period: active vs. passive. Black women were just as active in their communities as Black men were. Their work was respected and acknowledged in the community while White women were conforming to a societal ideal that discouraged the "work" that was alongside men. After the civil war there was a window for African Americans to actively shape their own place in American society and the women were a very strong force in that. I wondered while reading if this difference of racial culture from the post-civil war period is infiltrated into American culture today? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I agree with Amanda on how African American men treated their wives more respectively with voting than white men did. African American men consulted with their wives about who was best for the position for them and their children. White men just voted for whom they believed was best for the position without talking to their wives. Could the reason for this be because African Americans were treated unequally or naturally they just had more respect for their wives? –Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
What I also found interesting was how black Republican politicians in the south “took women’s participation seriously and publicly encouraged them to abstain from sexual relations with any man who voted Democratic.” I think that is getting too much into the personal life. Some women actually left their husbands or broke off the wedding until the election was over. Black Republican politicians in a way could brain-wash these women in the South. Could this be because the politicians are encouraging women to participate and are showing acknowledgment towards them? –Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
Reading this article just emphasizes how much more of a struggle African American women had, especially in the political realm. Some historians tend to forget that black women had to struggle because not only were they of another race, but they were also of the "weaker" gender. So reading about how much they actually did, and how active they were in politics, it shows just how impressive and how determined they were to make a stand and get something accomplished. Granted, things didn't happen overnight, but for those women who actively participated in making a voice for themselves they showed just how much some women really wanted to be able to have a say. I think that makes sense. If it doesn't, ask me in class. - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it interesting the different ways that women found to become involved in politics before they had the right to vote. It seems as though women became truly invested in their husband's political stance and tried to influence him. It seems much more as though the men had to think of the group when they cast their vote, rather than simply voting for themselves. It's almost as though the women held the men accountable for their votes. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I noticed that a sense of community seemed to be an important factor in discussing southern black women's political history. Community seems to be incredibly important to southern black women during this time. It is interesting to think of the many different communities to which they likely belonged, and the influence that they had on each of these communities. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I found it very interesting that freed slaves were NOT most enthused about the possibility to work for pay, but rather what meant more to them was mobility... and therefore to pursue the enjoyment of life by minimizing the "time spent at work." - Cat<br />
<br />
One thing this reading definitely highlights is that historians must be very vigilant about the reflection of their own social assumptions and political expectations in their work. - Cat<br />
<br />
I was surprised the author said women were "encouraged" to withhold sex and marriage in an effort to get their husbands to vote Republican. Who was encouraging them? I thought this type of female power wielding was looked down upon by society. - Cat<br />
<br />
As I was reading about the Black community and it's power over the individual I began thinking about collective women. Will it ever be possible to unite American women politically in a fashion similar to the Black community so that by voting the "wrong" way it would be a disgrace towards women of all races? That the Black community understood that "the issue...was not autonomy but responsibility" (136) played such a strong role in shaping the Reconstruction era. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
<br />
I may have missed it, but what were the views of the Democrats? Why were women so opposed to Democrats? Women were carrying weapons and withholding sex, and men feared them. One Woman said that “If a colored man votes the Democratic ticket he has sold himself”. I am interested to know what exactly the Democratic views were and why women were so disturbed with them. Was it just colored women or were white women opposed to the Democrats as well? <br />
Women have not always been able to vote, however we see in Brown’s essay that they make there feelings heard and well known.—Nikole Wellman <br />
<br />
Beverly Nash was a state senator in 1872 and proposed a woman’s suffrage amendment to the state constitution. Women were not allowed to vote yet but they are holding a political office. How is this so? --Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
What is a Whipper?—Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
I found the quote "Their fates were intimately tied together; individual freedom could be achieved only through collective autonomy" to be very frustrating. Not only is it bad enough a woman is considered a salve but in order for her to gain freedom everyone else must be freed as well. I can't even comprehend what that have been like. We're thankful to have atleast some individualism in society today. --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I found it quite ironic to read about Elizabeth Botume and Beaufort South Carolina which is where I'm from and my parents currently live. If you told me today that in the 2008 presidential election I could not vote due to my gender I'd most likely laugh and then scream in your face. --- Rose Ferguson</div>199.111.74.80 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