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::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($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=Jackie+R.McClurken Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-09-18T22:33:27ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.22.0https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_6_Questions/Comments328--Week 6 Questions/Comments2008-02-12T05:53:41Z<p>Jackie R.: </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.</div>Jackie R.https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_5_Questions/Comments328--Week 5 Questions/Comments2008-02-07T06:28:27Z<p>Jackie R.: </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 />
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</div>Jackie R.https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_3_Questions/Comments328--Week 3 Questions/Comments2008-01-29T06:49:19Z<p>Jackie R.: </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</div>Jackie R.https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_2_Questions/Comments328--Week 2 Questions/Comments2008-01-24T06:03:13Z<p>Jackie R.: </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<br />
<br />
I like that how even though women were not allowed to vote they still had a great influence over who won the elections. The power that they seemed to have over their husbands in certain areas was impressive. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I thought that it was interesting that the girls of Cherokee Female Seminary all identified themselves as Cherokee eventhough they had different social, economic and ancestral backgrounds, even with identifying the same they still created a class system from economic status. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I was really intrigued by the discussion of how those in power expected the free blacks to remain in one place and be a stable working force, but blacks worked against this by moving in order to be in places that they wanted to be or in order to be closer to their families. In African American history, we learned that movement was one thing that was really valued by slaves, and often used as a form of resistance. I wonder if the reason they moved around so much was that it was the only way they could truly feel free. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I agree with Kellye about the influential power of women. I feel that this is a power that women have wielded throughout the ages. One can see the influence that mistresses had over powerful kings in history, and even in our own history, you can see it in Abigail Adam's correspondence with her husband while he was at the constitutional convention. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I think that the reason that so many politicians were encouraging women to withhold sex from their husbands because they realized that it would be quite an effective way to make husbands pay attention and change their votes. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I wonder what or if the future of African Americans would've been different if the newly freed slaves had not been so mobile and settled down and fit into the white capitalistic model of earninig the highest wage possible. - Emely A.<br />
<br />
I found the quotation of Congressman Bayne very interesting. It did not initially sit well with me. I first felt that his view on women was just as misogynistic-ally characteristic of the time. But after a closer look, I agree with Brown, who says that it is impossible to know Bayne's true meaning/intent when talking about women's "right to stay home". But perhaps he was purposely fighting for a middle ground in order to help out women, and especially black women. By using this terminology, it could have been possible for him to trick or sway some narrow-minded white congressmen into the belief that women also share the inherent right of suffrage. --Jackie Reed</div>Jackie R.https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_2_Questions/Comments328--Week 2 Questions/Comments2008-01-22T05:24:10Z<p>Jackie R.: </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 />
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</div>Jackie R.https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_1_Questions/Comments328--Week 1 Questions/Comments2008-01-19T20:18:04Z<p>Jackie R.: </p>
<hr />
<div>This is not a real post.<br />
<br />
I agree.<br />
<br />
You're both wrong. -- Sarah H.<br />
<br />
<br />
I found it extremely interesting in "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" that fatherhood was not seen as a natural thing but instead was viewed as being "social". Yet for women being a mother was a "natural" phenomenon. I would have thought that it would have also been seen as natural for the man to also assume a fatherly role despite his involvement in the public sphere. Is this because the men were already doing so much that being a fatherly figure just couldn't always be an important role? Or is it because if they were expected to show a more emotional side of them they would be considered less of a man because they wouldn't be acting tough? - Elizabeth L. Frank<br />
<br />
I was surprised to read in "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" that some Black Women scholars feel that even today the importance of black women and their roles in society are being overlooked in the fields of women's studies! I understood that it took a little while for scholars to realize that they had to look at the difference ethnicities differently as far as their experiences in society but I had no idea that there were aspects that were still being overlooked. I also liked the statement Leslie Alexander made in the first sentence of the last paragraph of the essay that in order to truly understand the experiences of women that scholars must become willing to explore the differences of the cultures instead of simply ignoring the fact that they are different. I thought that was a very good point. - Elizabeth L. Frank<br />
<br />
'''The theme of the four essays is to tackle the question, what is the meaning and importance in studying women’s history?''' In the first essay, Haulman points out that the study of women’s history has changed over time. It first focused on the measurable contributions of women to American society and then shifted to focus more on the private lives of women in their home life. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
It is interesting to note in the second essay that Bock brings up many different theories with which to compare the role of men and women in society. When examining the dichotomies suggested it is interesting to consider not only how women have affected society but also how the norms of society influenced the role of women. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
More than one of the essays point out that many subjects in American women’s history has been concentrated on white middle class women. It is important to look at the role of culture and ethnicity in women’s studies because all of these factors affect the experiences and challenges of women in society. '''The study of women is not static; it is changing, and shaped by many different factors''', and it is important to consider more than one. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
In the essay "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History," '''I found it interesting that the women's liberation movement in the United States was mainly about gender oppression. The movements were middle class white women who wrote about the history of white women in the West.''' Though, women of color looked towards third-world liberation movements for support instead of women's liberation movements. Only if women of all different ethnicities joined together earlier would women's rights have developed earlier? Also women of color's gender oppression was different than white women's gender oppression in that colored women had to struggle with race and class unlike white women who mostly struggled with class. --Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
'''In the essay "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," I found it interesting in the first point Nature vs. Culture that fatherhood was not seen as natural but social.''' Women scholars challenged this by stating that women are therefore seen as "nature always having a social meaning" and nature and culture mean different things in different times. Women are the ones that physically have the baby, but that does not mean they have to be subject to the male sexes. Men are also taught to grow up as a strong non-emotional person. This could also be why fatherhood is seen as social instead of natural. <br />
--Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
In "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" Gisela Bock discusses how a woman's nature were child bearing, carring for the family, and taking care of things around the house originated from Europe; but what was once seen as nature is now seen as work. I I find this very true today, because a lot of stay home mothers consider their position as a mother and care taker of the home a job, however without pay as Bock mentions an "unpaid work." (pg 9) Also on the other hand there are many women that work and women for years have competed with the men in their wages but because of their sex and not who does the job best. Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
'''Leslie M. Alexander's essay mostly discusses black women and how their history is different from that of white womens history, which it is, but in today's society of white and black women are they still that different? Is this generation of black women still largley influenced by past generations in how they view themselves as black women?''' She also goes on to say that in order to understand black women you have to understand the black community. (pg 21) I think understanding any comminity that in its self is a different culture you have to understand their culture and way of life before understanding that community of people. The United States is full of all kinds of culturally different people. Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" I found the second point, Work v. Family interesting because it looks at "women's work" and how it relates men as the "workers" and women as "non-workers". Women who are are non working mothers are still seen as "non-workers" today.''' I think that the stay at home mother profession should be given more respect in the professional world. Many stay at home mothers work just as hard if not harder than those in careers outside the home.''' --Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
In "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History" Castaneda discusses the problems faced by scholers of color in their work to properly show the history of thier ancestors. It was interseting that these scholars struggle to accurately portray these women and not let assumptions get in the way thier research. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
'''What I found interesting after reading all of the essays is that I still had no idea how historians should study women's history. From what I read I got the feeling that the study of women's history had the same problem as other thematic studies of history: how do you study the history of a single facet of society without studying the history of all of the other facets?''' --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I agree completely with Justin. The editor raises a very valid point in the beginning before we even approach the essays, and that is "how do you study women's history?" After reading all of the essays, it's clear that it is very difficult to lump all of women's history together to study. There are so many different aspects of women's history to take into account that it almost seems impossible to study it all at once without leaving something out. Then again, isn't that what happens with history in general? When we're taught history, ignoring that men are typically the central characters, think of how much is left out so that we can stay on task for a single semester on a topic that could seem quite specific in the first place. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
An unfortunate conclusion from "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" was the need for the undermining of an important aspect of the Women's Movement in order for Women's History in order to be properly studied. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
'''After reading "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" by Gisela Bock, I realized how much of a connection our society's conception of women has with the writing of its history: how can women's history be properly studied without first changing our perceptions of women? If the study of women's history is part of the changing of our perception of women then should we expect its study to be apolitical?''' --Justin Mattos<br />
'''<br />
In Kate Haukman’s essay, she talks about the difficulty of studying women without examining gender history as well. If this is the case, which Bock also believed it is, then how can it be that the study of men’s history seems often less related to gender roles?''' - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
In Bock’s essay, I found particularly interesting her comment that '''in today’s world we still reserve the terms “working women” and “working mother” for employed women only, overlooking, even with our language, the fact that being a mother is work.''' I guess this just goes to show you how truly slanted society still in is valuing men’s work over women’s. - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
Castaneda discusses the challenges of studying women of color. When to place a person within historical perspective, is it more important to explore their race or gender first? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
In her essay, "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History," Leslie Alexander makes a statement near the end saying, '''"The challenge remains for us to analyze Black women through their own eyes rather than through the lens of whiteness and opression." (p.22). My question, is does anyone think that is truly possible? Most of what scholars have on Black women's history has been recorded by whites, and for a great deal of time, by white men. I believe that now we as historians should be able to look at this history through the eyes of those who experienced it, but a large chunk of this history has been warped and skewed in some way. Does anyone think it's possible to correct that? Or, regardless of the tools and resources we have today, are things always going to be interpreted in a more biased sense than they should be?''' -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it extremely interesting in "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" that motherhood was a natural phenomenon, however fatherhood was not seen as natural at all, it was seen as social. Yet for women being a mother was a "natural" phenomenon. I have always assumed that fatherhood was a natural phenomenon like motherhood despite their involvement in the social sphere. The child is just as much apart of him as it is the mother. My question is if this is because men were so involved in society there wasn't time? Or was it the fact that he could not show his nurturing/loving side? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
<br />
'''While reading the Dichotomies essay I found it amazing that fatherhood was seen as “social.” I always felt that motherhood and fatherhood were both ‘natural,’ but now I’m not sure. I have a feeling this was not worldwide though, since each culture is different. I’m curious how other cultures viewed mother- and fatherhood.''' –Ashley W.<br />
<br />
'''I did not realize until reading these essays just how many problems are in the field of women’s history. ''' From the sounds of the essays there have been problems getting the field established and then getting the field of women’s history to cover all women, regardless of race and class. It sounded like it was getting better, but still has lots of room for improvement. – Ashley W.<br />
<br />
I found Bock's view of the sex and gender dichotomy to be particularly interesting. I never considered that the distincion of sex from gender would restate the nature versus nurture issue. I considered this distinction to be helpful to show that many feminine characteristics should not be considered inherent nor subordinate. Bock argues that these simple definitions only hurt by reinforcing the differences between the sexes and therefore polarizing the study of women. Like other studies of history, the study of women should be a continuous effort without the pause to separate a women's world into what is physiological from what is cultural. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
'''What I am already finding interesting with the study of women’s history versus other studies of history that I have made is its social and active participation in the present.''' I feel like the goal in my other history classes has been to recreate a time or event in the past, examine cause and effect, draw similarities, etc. but of things that happened in the past and stay in the past. Whereas so far I feel like women’s study is looking into the past as well but in the attempt to create “a change towards more freedom and justice” (Bock) in the present. -karly kovalcik<br />
<br />
I found Bock’s discussion of equality vs. difference really interesting. She wonders why it is that “difference” is attributed to women and “equality” to men. '''Which makes me wonder if establishing equality in history is the main goal of women’s history, does making it a “different” field facilitate this or just reinforce dichotomies?''' When the women suffragists were fighting for the right to vote they weren’t voting for a “woman’s” vote they were just looking for the right to vote. I think there are the same inherent problems that we found with segregation and the “separate but equal” philosophy. -karly kovalcik<br />
<br />
One question posed by Bock's essay that really stood out for me was the use of the words "equality" and "justice" when applied to separate genders. It was interesting that for men, these two words complement each other but for women, they are in opposition. The focus seems to be on their context in comparing history and then gender-focused history. In the traditional sense of history with a "male" focus, equality and justice are words with a positive focus, as words that have translated into positive action. When history is focused on women, equality and justice become negative, words that have been almost unachievable goals in that context. To me, it seems like it comes back to whether we are unwilling to look at history that shows us in an unfavorable light, just like the question with looking at racial minorities' history in America. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I never stopped to consider how feminism and women's history seems so focused on white middle-class women until I read Castaneda and Alexander's essays. There seems to be little representation of minority women when talking about American women's history. It seems like a race issue but is it more the case of white American women keeping minorities and race issues away from feminism or is it, as Alexander claims, that women, especially black women, are less concerned with their gender and more with race issues in history? --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I agree with many others who have mentioned that parenthood always seemed as if it should be natural for both parties, however it is seen as natural only for women. '''How much does this have to do with the unique experience of women in pregnancy? Pregnancy is a natural experience reserved only for women, which might be why women see parenthood as natural. However, for men, they do not get to experience pregnancy, and only bond with the child once it is born.''' This may help to create the sensation that parenthood is natural for women but not for me. --Angela Scott <br />
<br />
I found the essay "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" by Leslie M. Alexander to be both interesting and thought provoking. At one point Alexander points out that it is important to understand the Black community in order to understand the Black woman. I think that this denotes an importance of understanding culture that can be applied to studying all women. '''Isn't it important to understand the culture that a person comes from in order to understand the individual itself? All individuals exist within a given culture and are influenced by cultural norms and roles.''' --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," I found the discussion of equality v. difference very interesting. How do you decide which is more important equality or difference between the sexes? It seems as though we need to find a happy medium where we can recognize that men and women are different but equal. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Karly's comment about how our study of women's history might affect the present. In studying women's history, I wonder how prior assumptions and ideas might change in knowing the true facts behind various women's movements. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
After reading all the essays, I have found that the field of women's history is not nearly as simplistic as I had thought. I never realized all the issues that could arise in the field of women's history, it is so much more than simply the study of women. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I thought Alexander's essay concerning race offered an interesting viewpoint. '''I agree that it is essential to consider race and culture first in order to understand how the concept of gender applies to the lives of African American women. I think this is an important point to keep in mind when evaluating women and the men they interact with throughout this course. Shouldn't the study of women take a multidimensional approach because of the labels other than "woman" that shape what direction their lives will take?''' -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Kate Haulman in the point that studying women gave a new perspective on history. it's history through the eyes of a new group, a group that makes up half (arguably even more) of society. Women have always been there, at home, supproting their husbands and silently witnessing their activities. There is a lot that they have to say that gives us an even greater insight in events that we alread knew about. -Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I agree with Emely. Women's history is important, because life is not just about the big events, but about about the small, everyday moments that shape a person's life - and so is the way of history. If the study of history was only limited to major military or political victories or losses - and the men that had a part in them - a whole, deeper understanding of a culture would just be lost. Sometimes a look into the basic, ordinary events of life can be the most telling of a civilization, and women have always played a major part in that. ~Juliann<br />
<br />
I found several very interesting points in Haulman's essay. '''The most interesting and thought provoking for me was when she was discussing the definition of the word woman and female. What I gleaned from her discussion on this topic is that the word woman is constantly changing in meaning, as women socially evolve. For instance she gave the example of a man knitting. She said if a man knits is he really a man, for he has taken on "woman's work"'''. I have always thought of man and woman in a strictly biological sense, so this really made me think.- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay I thought her section about intergration vs. autonomy was a little off base. '''If she is using the word autonomous to signify independence, I think that she would seriously be short changing the study of women's history. How could one completely divest women's history from that of mens'? Or mens' history from that of womens? It seems to me that you would need to be familiar with one to fully understand the other.''' -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Kate Haulman's essay argues that the term "woman" is a fluid concept, based on gender, who has defined it as a category, and who has claimed it as an identiy. If that is so, then should transsexuals who believe they are and/or identify themselves as "women" be included in studies of "women's history", even if biologically they have a Y chromosome and not two X chromosomes? Gisela Bock addressed this subject at a glance during her discussion of sex versus gender, but did not really illuminate it. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
In reference to Antonia I Castaneda writing, Women of Color and the rewriting of Western History, she states two facts that I found interesting. First of all, she states that most feminist scholars write on the history of white women in the west and secondly, that women scholars of color focus on women of third world countries.(p.15) The history of white and colored women has been told by primarily white men, I thought, because there may have not been enough primary sources from women of any color. There was a time when women were not educated and many could not read nor write, therefore not keeping memoirs or journals to tell their stories. For example, the history of women during the Colonial or Antebellum period was most likely taken from the journals of men about what they wrote in regards to women at that time. '''What, if any, impact did the lack of women’s skills have on the writing of women’s history?''' Secondly, wouldn’t it be more difficult to find primary sources on women of a third world country rather that women in America. –Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay, I found it interesting where the issue of equality vs difference was discussed. The argument that equality and justice go hand in hand for men but not women is really strange to me. I have always thought that women were equal but different so why is it so hard for equality to mean justice for women as well as for men. [[User:MaryBeth|MaryBeth]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''I thought it was interesting that in the essay by Alexander that she describes how the study of Black women has to include the study of the whole Black community in order to fully understand the role of Black women. Wouldn't that be true for all groups of women though?''' I think every woman is shaped by the community that they are a part of and in order to fully understand anyone you would need to be able to put them into context, and that includes understanding their roles in their community.<br />
[[User:MaryBeth|MaryBeth]]<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary Beth. Women of all races in the study of history have been underrepresented. But a woman is not just defined exclusively by her gender, but also her race and region. Just because a person is a female, does not mean that she has had the same experiences as all the other women of her time period. Race plays a major role in defining a woman's role in her community. ~Juliann<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with what both MaryBeth and Juliann say about women of all races having been underrepresented in history, particularly American history. But can't this observation also apply to men of every race? Most U.S. history books are overwhelmingly concerned with telling the stories of white men. So, which is the bigger problem - the fact that women as a group are being underrepresented or that men and women of so many different races are underrepresented? -Marilyn<br />
<br />
When Bock discusses the topic of work vs. family, this statement struck me: "Obviously, men's work is valued more highly than women's work." I think this is sad. In today's world, women who have both a job and children are expected to be everything to everyone 24 hours a day. In addition to her responsibilities in the workplace, at home, a woman is the cook, maid, nurse, chauffeur, accountant, etc., and she is always on duty. Yes, the man may have a demanding job outside of the home for which he is paid, but the job of wife and mother is just as difficult (if not more) and should be respected no less. Many women do not have to choose between work and family because they are successful at both. -Marilyn<br />
<br />
It seems clear from these essays that the individual experiences of women are not only shaped by their historical context, but also the intersections between race, class, and cultural identities. These socially constructed categories necessarily complicate the field of women’s history by denying a shared experience of womanhood. When Kate Haulman describes the traditional emphasis on the “normative” experiences of white, middle and upper class women she recognizes that this approach is exclusionary, problematic, and limiting. In order to avoid typifying woman as a singular, unified concept, women’s historians must examine the interplay of race, class, and cultural identities within the category of gender. -- Paul<br />
<br />
The need to address women's history is obviously complicated. You cannot address it merely by placing all women in one category; each race, class and culture dictates a different history. If we address only those women, who are "notable women" or "women worthies" as Haulman mentions, we alienate a large majority of women in the world's population.--LisaM<br />
<br />
The actual language used to depict women vary. The debate between historians on choice of approach and language is interesting. In Bock's essay historian Joan Scott is quoted as asking the question, "Why is it, for instance, that 'equality' and 'justice' seem to complement each other in the case of men, but be opposed to each other in the case of women?" Is this being hypersensitive? Have we, namely women, grown so complacent with our language that we have a tendancy to ignore or dismiss such interpretations of language?--LisaM<br />
<br />
In "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," the discussion of equality v.difference I found to be very interesting. '''How do you figure you what is more important difference or equality between the sexes? This has been a question between historians and everyone else how do you decide what is more important without forgetting the other half? Is it possible to have both or can we only have one?''' --Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I was surprised to see that Elizabeth's entry had exactly what i was thinking about "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History". I found it incredibly ironic that motherhood is considered something innate for women and expected, "natural" as she said, however men do not have the same connection with fatherhood. This is something that i still think is evident today which leads me to my next point.... -Julie R<br />
<br />
'''Marylin makes an incredibly good point about Bock's Statement, "men's work is valued more highly than woman's". This again shows how women, even today are expected to still take care of the home, tend to the children and also work full time while all of this STILL being valued less than a man simply going to work. Women have a huge amount of responsibility at home that is usually overlooked simply becuase she is a woman.''' -Julie R<br />
<br />
In adition to women of color in general just simply being overlooked as stated by Castaneda, I feel like it can also be said that the history of all women around the world is different. For lots of women around the world the "natural" part of the nature vs. social argument still applies very much. As touched upon by Haulman under her defenition of "women", you can't just take all women and have just ONE big women's history because their histories and levels of experiences are all different.- Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I think Julie and Amanda both make great points about "women's work". While reading, I couldn't help but sing the '''"Can a woman fly an airplane? Yes she can, yes she can!"''' song to myself. The whole song is meant to inspire and encourage young girls to do whatever work they want to do when they grow up regardless of whether that work has been seen primarily as "man's work" in the past or present. The song fails to promote work that is seen as primarily "women's work" as an equally empowering, or acceptable, or noble job. The song should say, "Can a woman be a mother, yes she can", or "Can a woman be a teacher, yes she can." And that brings up another point as far as equality goes. Today, because women do fly planes, are doctors, and even do run nations (still not ours as much): what about the prejudice against men who take on roles that have traditionally been roles held by been? There should be a new song that says, '''"Can a man stay home with children? Yes he can, yes he can! <br />
Can a man become a nurse? Yes he can, yes he can! <br />
Can a man dance in ballet, can he iron shirts, or play <br />
in his sister's bright pink skirts? Oh yes he can, yes he can!"'''-Jackie R.</div>Jackie R. 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