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::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($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=Jfurn8qwMcClurken Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-09-18T22:30:20ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.22.0https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_9_Questions/CommentsWeek 9 Questions/Comments2007-10-25T11:51:46Z<p>Jfurn8qw: </p>
<hr />
<div>I’m rather amazed with the strict order imposed on a middle class housewife, as read in Catharine Beecher’s “System and Order”. Each day of the week is filled with a specific chore that is repeated the following week. It seems like such a lifestyle would become repetitious and mundane, yet Beecher refers to this “taste for regularity” as a “blessing”. How come?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I also found the piece “System and Order” by Catharine Beecher very interesting. The idea of a system for household duties and turning the house into a well-functioning, successful entity I think is reflective of the shifts going on in society. The shift from home production to office/factory production, the shift from agricultural, home-made/imported goods to finished goods made in factories, and the shift of men outside the home are all reflected in this piece. This piece reminded me of another piece I read in another class about time and how the introduction of clocks and watches placed an added stress to productivity both in factories and in the home. Similarly, women were expected to budget their time, assigning a specific amount of time per task. Beecher recommends dividing the tasks, spreading them throughout the week, and using children as a means to be more productive. Do these self-help manuals place more stress on women to live up to an ideal? Do you think Beecher’s advice intimidates women? How often was this advice practiced or did it remain an ideal? Do we see any similarities between Beecher’s advice and modern day life? –Mary Beth Dillane <br />
<br />
In regards to Mary Beth's question, I do think self-help manuals put more stress on women. Beecher's writing makes it seem that if there are any problems in the home than it is the woman's fault. According to Beecher, all a woman has to do is follow her "habit of system and order" and all should be fine. However, this obviously will not work for everyone. The proliferation of these self help manuals just perpetuates the notion of the idealized family. - Fiona C.<br />
<br />
When reading "System and Order", I found it very intersting when they said that "the success of democratic institutions all depends upon the intellectual and moral character of the mass of the people...It is equally conceded that the formation of the moral and intellectual character of the young is committed mainly to the female hand...Let the woman of a country be made virtuous and intelligent, and the men will certainly be the same. The proper education of a man decides the welfare of an individual; but educate a women, and the interests of a whole family are secured..." This is quite the assumption here.--Katie D.<br />
<br />
Did these strict definitions of womens' duties and the expectations of an intensely ordered household reflect an effort to balance the deferential wife? How much of the intense strictures on order attempted to show the strength and power of women because they were so limited to this realm of the domestic? Or, were those expectations of the idealized perfect home following order simply intensified when the home became the woman's sphere?--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
When reading Catherine Beecher's system and order one quote really stood out to me, "It is impossible for a conscientious woman to secure that peaceful mind, and cheerful enjoyment of life, which all should seek, who is constantly finding her dutings jarring with each other, and much remaining undone, which she feels that she ought to do..." This really shocked me because it is a very woman who is saying that it is natural for women to want to do these kind of things, thats what they are best at, and thats whats best for the good of the country. Also, when she gives the weekly schedule and talks about how children should be given tasks and schedules so that daughters will know how to act when they are married, I found this again reiterated in The Rules for the School. Number 10 states "Nothing can be well done with out proper attention to regularity..." -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
When reading the “Reports on Western Schools” letters from two teachers to Catharine Beecher, it is interesting to see the stark contrast of experiences. The first teacher seems to have zero amenities. She uses a “single board for a writing desk, a few bricks for andirons, and a stick of wood for shovel and tongs”. Some of her students are so poor they cannot afford shoes. She makes subtle hints that she is in need of money for purchasing suitable books, maps, slates, pencils, and paper, but we never read if she ever received any assistance. The other teacher had a new schoolhouse built for her which included writing desks and a black board. It is obvious that she is fairly well off in her new surroundings. Surprisingly, we find out that she has received some money from Mrs. Beecher which she used to purchase soap, candles, and a privacy screen. What would provoke Mrs. Beecher to give money to one of her pupils to spend personally while her other pupil is struggling to afford necessities to develop a decent school?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I also found it interesting, in "Reports on Western Schools", to see such a contrast in these teachers experiences. I too was wondering, along with Lisa,...if one teacher had very little ameneties, and the other was so well off...why did Mrs. Beecher give money to the teacher that was well off,to spend personally, when the other teacher was struggling to provide even a descent school?--Katie D.<br />
<br />
In regards to Katie's comment, I think Mrs. Beecher gave money to the well off teacher because of personal bias. Mrs. Beecher could have favored one teacher over another. What I also want to know about that document is why did all these women go out West on the frontier to teach, if the conditons out there were so bad? Did these women go out West for adventure and not realize what life on the frontier was like? ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
Catharine M. Sedgwick's journal entry "First to None" seemed much more personal than journal entries we have used as sources for this class. For example, contrasting this to Martha Ballards "diary" seems impossible because they read like two different types of sources, though they both have the same name (journal or diary). Is Sedgwick's very personal writing a sign of her affinity towards writing and bottled up private dissatisfaction, or is this more personal style of journal writing a trend in the nineteenth century?-- Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I agree with Kelly in the fact that Catherine Sedgwick journal is personal. She shows how deeply she feels towards her family. It seems to me that she has some regret in not getting married. Her brothers have replaced her as women of the house with their wives. She has lost her status as the house maiden. I get the feeling that she may even be jealous of the affections shown by her brothers to their wives. It must have been hard to go from being the adored sister to the old spinster.---Cheryl<br />
<br />
Going along with Kelly and Cheryl, this very personal journal really struck me. It's almost refreshing to read Sedgwick's experiences and feelings and emotions compared to some of the others we've read. She's almost allows for us to be able to relate to her more. Sometimes, for me at least, it's easy to read historical accounts and be completed disconnected from what I'm reading. But pieces like this one, as cheesy as it sounds, gives life to these people. Sedgwick's regret and maybe even jealousy, as Cheryl suggested, is something we can all relate to, even if indirectly. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
In this journal entry I really felt that this woman regretted her life and all that she had accomplished seemed to mean nothing to her. I know from another class that Sedgwick was a very popular writer in her time. Instead of reveling in her success, she dwells on what she did not have in life. I am sure that if she were to marry she would have been disappointed because just by reading this I can tell she has very high standards. --Julie Castanien <br />
<br />
In her letter from Lowell Harriet Farley writes about the "Yankee spirit" of the women in the mills. She writes using the rhetoric of the revolution (like we discussed in class) using terms like independence and freedom. It seems that the community of women provided a safe and affirming place for women to further develop and voice their beliefs. --Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
Although Farley's letter was supposed to defend mill work, it seems to me that Farley was not that happy. She writes that "the girls here are not contented," her feet ache and swell, and that a woman's right hand becomes larger than her left. Maybe this life would still seem better to women who were used to working on farms? - Fiona Cobb<br />
<br />
When I read Farley's piece I thought of it as propaganda for the mill work. Since the journal it was published in was funded by mill owners themselves and this piece was a fictional correspondence. I felt like they had to include some of the negative aspects about mill life (such as their feet ache and swell) to make the piece seem more credible and realistic but the overall message was to defend the work. Any time they said something negative about the work, it was always countered with a positive that outweighed the bad point. --Alex K. <br />
<br />
While it was a step forward in the fact that some able women were able to leave the farms and work in mills and plants such as the one in Lancaster, I think it is important to remember that it was men who controlled these operations. The rules of the houses were quite rigid as to how quiet a woman must be upon entering the house, where a woman was to sit at the table, and how a woman was to behave at meal times, etc. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Reading the petition of the Cherokee women was upsetting. The women ask the chiefs and warriors of the council to reconsider parting the land which they once owned before the US government overtook it. The women do not understand what else they must do to be accepted into white culture. They express their advances from a "savage" nation to a "civilized" one. To hear them use those terms while speaking of themselves was hard to read. --E. Hufford<br />
<br />
Emma Willard's letter to her sister is really pretty amusing. It sounds like a really horrible thing to say to a sister about to get married, but on the other hand it doesn't sound that different than what a lot of newly divorced people would say today. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
Emma Willard shows herself as a very caring older sister who wants to protect her younger sister from getting hurt. I like the way Emma tries to soften her blows to Mr. L’s character but at the same time makes it plain to her sister that a marriage to him would be a mistake.--- Cheryl<br />
<br />
I agree Allison. I thought the letter was pretty interesting, especially after reading that Emma herself married someone who gambled away her money later on in life. It seems that she needed to follow her own advice. As far as the letter goes, I suppose it was a good thing to go into a marriage with some form of skepticism since a woman’s reputation was such a key factor in determining her place in society.—Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
I too thought that Emma Willard's letter was amusing, considering that she ranted on about marriage and men, especially that she had not even met the guy yet. It sounded to me a lot like some women today's views on men and matrimony. I thought that, amusing though it was, it said a lot about the unhappiness of Emma's marriage and the changing ideas of family and marriage. In most of the letters we had read previously the center pieces in the writer's mind were her children and husband. Emma only briefly mentions her husband and child and the husband only in a complaining sort of way. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
My favorite part of the letter was that she wanted to meet the guy, I think she said something about having him come visit while her sister was there bu then she was concerned about the propriety of such an action. However, I do see this as an attempt to help her sister, it could be possible that she was just returning the favor I bet her younger sister passed judgment on the doctor before Emma married him. -- Julie Castanien <br />
<br />
It is so amazing that Amelia Knight crossed the Oregon Trail, and faced all the tribulations that this included, while pregnant! She cared for the children, walked long distances, and kept a fairly useful log of there trip with only a few mentions of being "sick." Also I really found her comments about the "romantic" hills covered with snow amusing. She can't help but put a little of her personality into this log while most of the diaries we have read have been fairly dry. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I thought Knight's log of her journey was quite fascinating as well, and I was totally surprised to find out that she was pregnant at the end! What a trooper. However, throughout the whole thing, I could not help but think that the next entry was going to say “Your oxen have died while fording the river” or “You have died of dysentery.” I suppose it’s fortunate for Amelia that my weird sense of humor didn’t play out and that she made it to Oregon after what was as her log describes as a tiresome, grueling journey. –Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
I loved Knight's diary! I thought it was a unique perspective on what we know and learn about the Oregon Trail. I know everyone played that game when they were little, and that obviously aided our understanding of the dangerous trip, so reading about what this woman actually went through was fascinating. I'm astonished that this woman, after being so "sick" throughout the entire trip and after caring for all of her other children, was able to survive and give birth to an eighth kid. Now that's girl power. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
Yes, I also found Knight’s travel journal the most interesting. I cannot imagine a long journey like the one Knight had to traverse without paved roads, without clean civilized rest stops and restaurants, and without motels and hospitals. Being faced with such extreme uncertainty must have been a daunting task itself. I cannot imagine the multitude of elements that Amelia Knight had to face, while dealing with her sickness and chores at the same time, and on top of that giving birth in such appalling conditions. We are certainly spoiled by today’s amenities. –John Furner <br />
<br />
In Catherine Beecher’s housekeeping manual she discusses the virtue of “system and order” and urges housewives to devote separate days of the week for specific household tasks such as Tuesdays for washing and Wednesday for ironing etc. I was first struck by the wide array of household tasks women were expected to perform and it is clear that maintaining the house was a full time job. While there were many comments on how these advice manuals would add more stress to women’s lives I think they would help women learn how to run their households more efficiently. Beecher emphasizes that women should delegate more tasks to their children and learn how to organize their household items. Women today still seek the same advice on how to stay organized and delegate chores to family members in order to carve out more alone time for themselves. For instance an article I just read in this month’s Self magazine gave 30 tips for how women can get more organized. <br />
After reading Sarah Ayer’s journal entries describing having to uproot her life and move to Massachusetts to live with her husband’s relatives when she became a widow I was surprised that the wife of a physician would have to go through all of this. I assume that Sarah’s husband left no will and she was not put in charge of the estate because it seemed like her only choice was to move in with her husband’s relatives which she was not happy to do. –Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
I thought that Sarah Ayer's journal and life were really sad. She lost her first four children, then later her husband, then her home, was separated from her children (who gave her more grief, especially Samuel), moved in with her husbands relatives who she didnt want to live with and all at the age of 40. Then she and her youngest child would die of scarlet fever! Two things were interesting to me though, outside of everything else. Why did she keep moving from house to house? Did no one family want her for very long? Also what happened to the idea of sons being in some way responsible for their widowed mother? If he was old enough to leave home he was old enough to help her. Also what was Sarah doing, why was she away from home? --Mary P.<br />
<br />
Mary, I agree with you about how sad this journal was. You could see how far she fell when her husband died. She had to give her home and move back and forth. I think the reason she went from house to house was because she wanted to put off her journey away from her home of 11 years but she also didn't want to be a burden on her friends. I was also wondering about the will, you would think that a doctor would make the needed precautions to care for his wife and family. -- Julie Castanien <br />
<br />
Woloch mentions the new ideal of romantic love as the reason to marry made some more hesitant to marry. From my family class last semester we learned that many nineteenth-century women went through a “marriage trauma,” worrying about what would happen if a spouse did not live up to their hopes and high ideals. Because of this singlehood therefore rose, the insistence that marriage should be based on love implied that it's immoral to marry for other reasons and that marriage based on love/companionship spurred some to call for more liberal divorce laws. Maybe this was a bit later in the century though. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
If a person today were to ask the common middle class wife during the early 1800s about the 'equality of the sexes,' I wonder if her response would be like Beecher's, who wrote"THe discussion of the question of the equality of the sexes, in intellectual capacity, seems both frivolous and useless, not only because it can never be decided, but because there would be no possible advantage in the decision." (pg 148). I guess people were discussing this topic, albeit in an 'intellectual capacity,' but to what extent were people discussing it, and where? I assume they just entertained the idea as a sort of fiction, or dream-like possibility. Its interesting to see that she would write there would be no possible advantage in an equality, certainly it tells me that the conception of a society of equality really didn't make much sense to her. Also, in the intro to her section, there was slight discussion of the 'professionalisation' of being a housewife, a notion that is occasionally seen today. I've heard some people trying to estimate how much money a modern housewife would earn if she was paid, and its always some high amount. Harriet Farley made an interesting observation about life in the mill: "You ask if the girls are contented here: I ask you, ifyou now of any one who is perfectly contented." (pg 179). I guess thats all she knows, and for her, there might not be much point in imagining it to be any better. -Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
Just a quick thought to the question of to what extent people where discussing "equality of the sexes" and where, I think that perhaps they did it in a similar fashion that we saw in the letters of Abigail Adams. As Christopher says, entertaining the idea as sort of fiction, toying with the idea but not necessarily having substance behind the discussion. But in the same matter, I'd also like to think that there were those revolutionaries who took it, or wanted to take it, that one step further into a serious discussion. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
The excerpt from Caroline Gilman's novel was one of the few accounts I've read which is specifically about adjusting to married life. I particularly enjoyed her advice for dealing with men: "How clear it is, then, that woman loses by petulance and recrimination! Her first study must be self-control, almost to hypocrisy." What struck me as interesting is that many women today would give similar advice to young brides. Today, however, it is typically made clear that selective feminine submission can be used as a source of power. For example, think about how often, both in real life and in film and television, references are made to the necessity of humoring men to let them think they are in control.-- Ashley H.<br />
<br />
I thought that document entitled "A Choctaw Mission School" was very interesting. The teachers seemed very kind and caring towards the Indian students and did not try to force the students to forget their native ways. I also noticed that Indian students quickly picked up the ways of Christianity and became concerned about their family members who were not Christian. What I want to know is how these girls fit back in with their families after they finished at this school. They had experienced something their family members had not and I wonder if these girls felt that they were now somehow better than their family because they had been to a "white school". ~K. Stinson~<br />
<br />
The woman I felt bad for was Mary Ballou. Reading her account of life out in the Gold Rush territory sounded awful. She was far away from her loved ones and laboring in a boarding house. It just did not seem like the life that anyone traveling out west to get rich would be expecting and I couldn't help but feel sorry for the poor woman. I was also intrigued as to how often she referenced her faith and how "no one but her maker knows her feelings." It must have been absolutely terrible. --Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
Maybe I was just seeing it tonight, but so many of these women seemed so miserable and trapped in their situations. I've always known women's lives were difficult and unhappy, but that was the big theme I'm taking away from all of this. Emma Willard seemed very unhappy with the marriage situation, Catharine Sedgwick seemed lost and miserable as a single woman, Sarah Ayer's suffering was evident in the list of deaths alone but she describes crying as she writes, the girls in the Choctaw school--especially Hannah Bradshaw and her sister Frutilla Townsley seemed miserable and sad. The author writing in the Lowell Offering carefully dodges her friend's question about contentedness, claiming no one is content because she cannot write she is content, and admits that the work "tried her patience" until she became numb to it. I'm not expecting a rose garden, but this was the theme I was seeing.--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
I also noticed that in the readings this week many of the women were feeling miserable, trapped or useless (useless such as the Cherokee Women resisting removal and failing in their attempts). I was wondering if maybe they are feeling more miserable because they are seeing the changes going on around them but the changes aren't always necessarily working to their advantage?- Elizabeth Frank <br />
<br />
I found the Sioux Tale "A Woman who Kills her Daughter" very interesting. However, I'm curious has to how it fits with the rest of these stories. I understand that the evil mother gets what she deserves for her feels for her son in law and killing her daughter over it, but it seems sort of out of place among the rest of the entries.- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Not necessarily in response, I think "A Woman Kills Her Daughter" provides a general exaggerated moral lesson. While being unrealistic, the story imparts a warning against lust and betrayal of family bonds. As we have read throughout the semester, it is interesting to see the similarities between Native American society and that of the colonies. It seems that while the methods of spreading information were rather different, the moral teachings can be closely related. --Robert Kopp<br />
<br />
I found the diary of Sarah Ayer unique and extremely revealing of the reality of a widow in this era. The diary did show the dependence of a wife on her husband, yet it showed more of a companionship destructed by death. Sarah never had it easy. Her first four children died, and then she was left alone without her “partner.” The diary really did show the notion of honest love and friendship. Ayer never wrote of the little rights she was given as a widow, she was upset that her children would never see their father again. The excerpt where she discussed her last walk through of the house was heart breaking. I am sure it is devastating in this era, but in my opinion, Sarah was completely alone. She says she is alone in her diary. She turns to religion. This could be a factor in the importance of religion in education. Women are expected to study and turn to religion in schools. Maybe this because in the end, when a husband dies, the only partnership left is between the widow and G-d. There is an air of burden that comes with the widow, and it can be seen in Sarah’s journal. Every day she goes and visits a new person. Not only a burden the host, it must be depressing to be a nomadic widow, because there is no one else to go home to. – T Halpern.</div>Jfurn8qwhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_4_Questions/CommentsWeek 4 Questions/Comments2007-09-19T16:07:23Z<p>Jfurn8qw: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found David Brainerd’s “A Remarkable Instance of Awakening” to be implausible. His accounts focused on the ideal response when converting non-believers i.e. confession of sin and realization of God’s power. These outcomes seem almost too good to be legitimate. The one example that threw a red flag up for me was when he said a young Indian convert of his laid flat on the ground after his service praying incessantly in her native language which he translated as, “have mercy on me, and help me to give you my heart”. Wouldn’t that be the ultimate form of flattery if your sermons were so good that they could make someone publicly display such compassion?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I got extremely frustrated while reading the examination of Abigail Hobbs at Salem Prison under “The ‘Casco Girls’ Accuse George Burroughs, 1692” in MP. First off, Abigail’s testimony contradicts itself so many times that it becomes quite obvious, at least to me, that she is lying. Why wasn’t this obvious to the Judge? Why wasn’t faulty testimony penalized? I thought these accusers were supposed to be hard-nosed Christians. If this were true how did they live with themselves knowing they committed a sin (LYING) in order to convict an innocent person?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I found "Landon Carter Complains About His Female Slaves, 1771-1773" in Major Problems page 82 & 83 rather shocking for many obvious reasons. Beyond this, the disparity between the treatment of African women and white women of the period is frightful. While colonial women may have had little power, it pales in comparison to the hopelessly bleak situation of the African female. I am sure that cowkeeping was not commonly thought to be a female task of the period. This task, along with many others, also carried the promise of whipping for failure. Based on the writing, it seems to be believe that whipping was the only cure for "poor" behavior. The same ideals of female submission were also applied with greater force, illustrated in the writing "The mother and sister fell on Beale when he went to apply my Prescription; but by the stumps of the switches they got also cured of their rebellious impudence..." (MP 83) It was with slavery that the submission of a race, especially with a focus to the women, was to be furthered. --Robert Kopp<br />
<br />
This is in response about Landon Carter’s account of cowkeeping. Unfortunately, we don’t know the whole story as to why Sicely neglected her task. We only have Landon Carter’s account of the ordeal. Thus we are looking at this situation through the eyes of Landon Carter. How do we know if he didn’t manipulate or exaggerate this account to his benefit? May be he cried when his cow died. Perhaps Sicely had better things to do with her time than to cowkeep. Landon Carter did mention that she took a nap, perhaps she had a late night gathering of friends and relatives as this was the only time she could exert her freedom and her individuality from the day’s mindless tasks. Or maybe she was simply defiant to authority and paid no mind to her tasks regardless of the punishment. This may be her way to exert her freedom at the cost of getting the whip. I wish I could read her account of this situation maybe it would shed more light about her perceptions of slavery, her feelings,doubts, and insecurities then we would have the overall picture instead of a one sided view of an Elite.—John Furner</div>Jfurn8qwhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_4_Questions/CommentsWeek 4 Questions/Comments2007-09-19T14:01:23Z<p>Jfurn8qw: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found David Brainerd’s “A Remarkable Instance of Awakening” to be implausible. His accounts focused on the ideal response when converting non-believers i.e. confession of sin and realization of God’s power. These outcomes seem almost too good to be legitimate. The one example that threw a red flag up for me was when he said a young Indian convert of his laid flat on the ground after his service praying incessantly in her native language which he translated as, “have mercy on me, and help me to give you my heart”. Wouldn’t that be the ultimate form of flattery if your sermons were so good that they could make someone publicly display such compassion?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I got extremely frustrated while reading the examination of Abigail Hobbs at Salem Prison under “The ‘Casco Girls’ Accuse George Burroughs, 1692” in MP. First off, Abigail’s testimony contradicts itself so many times that it becomes quite obvious, at least to me, that she is lying. Why wasn’t this obvious to the Judge? Why wasn’t faulty testimony penalized? I thought these accusers were supposed to be hard-nosed Christians. If this were true how did they live with themselves knowing they committed a sin (LYING) in order to convict an innocent person?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I found "Landon Carter Complains About His Female Slaves, 1771-1773" in Major Problems page 82 & 83 rather shocking for many obvious reasons. Beyond this, the disparity between the treatment of African women and white women of the period is frightful. While colonial women may have had little power, it pales in comparison to the hopelessly bleak situation of the African female. I am sure that cowkeeping was not commonly thought to be a female task of the period. This task, along with many others, also carried the promise of whipping for failure. Based on the writing, it seems to be believe that whipping was the only cure for "poor" behavior. The same ideals of female submission were also applied with greater force, illustrated in the writing "The mother and sister fell on Beale when he went to apply my Prescription; but by the stumps of the switches they got also cured of their rebellious impudence..." (MP 83) It was with slavery that the submission of a race, especially with a focus to the women, was to be furthered. --Robert Kopp<br />
<br />
This is in response about Landon Carter’s account of cowkeeping. Unfortunately, we don’t know the whole story as to why Sicely neglected her task. We only have Landon Carter’s account of the ordeal. Thus we are looking at this situation through the eyes of Landon Carter. How do we know if he didn’t manipulate or exaggerate this account to his benefit? May be he cried when his cow died. Perhaps Sicely had better things to do with her time than to cowkeep. Landon Carter did mention that she took a nap, perhaps she had a late night gathering of friends and relatives as this was the only time she could exert her freedom and her individuality from the day’s mindless tasks. Or maybe she was simply defiant to authority and paid no mind to her tasks regardless of the punishment. This may be her way to exert her freedom at the cost of getting the whip. I wish I could read her account of this situation maybe it would shed more light about her perceptions of slavery, her feelings and doubts and insecurities then we would have the overall picture instead a one sided view of an Elite.—John Furner</div>Jfurn8qwhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_4_Questions/CommentsWeek 4 Questions/Comments2007-09-19T14:00:03Z<p>Jfurn8qw: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found David Brainerd’s “A Remarkable Instance of Awakening” to be implausible. His accounts focused on the ideal response when converting non-believers i.e. confession of sin and realization of God’s power. These outcomes seem almost too good to be legitimate. The one example that threw a red flag up for me was when he said a young Indian convert of his laid flat on the ground after his service praying incessantly in her native language which he translated as, “have mercy on me, and help me to give you my heart”. Wouldn’t that be the ultimate form of flattery if your sermons were so good that they could make someone publicly display such compassion?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I got extremely frustrated while reading the examination of Abigail Hobbs at Salem Prison under “The ‘Casco Girls’ Accuse George Burroughs, 1692” in MP. First off, Abigail’s testimony contradicts itself so many times that it becomes quite obvious, at least to me, that she is lying. Why wasn’t this obvious to the Judge? Why wasn’t faulty testimony penalized? I thought these accusers were supposed to be hard-nosed Christians. If this were true how did they live with themselves knowing they committed a sin (LYING) in order to convict an innocent person?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I found "Landon Carter Complains About His Female Slaves, 1771-1773" in Major Problems page 82 & 83 rather shocking for many obvious reasons. Beyond this, the disparity between the treatment of African women and white women of the period is frightful. While colonial women may have had little power, it pales in comparison to the hopelessly bleak situation of the African female. I am sure that cowkeeping was not commonly thought to be a female task of the period. This task, along with many others, also carried the promise of whipping for failure. Based on the writing, it seems to be believe that whipping was the only cure for "poor" behavior. The same ideals of female submission were also applied with greater force, illustrated in the writing "The mother and sister fell on Beale when he went to apply my Prescription; but by the stumps of the switches they got also cured of their rebellious impudence..." (MP 83) It was with slavery that the submission of a race, especially with a focus to the women, was to be furthered. --Robert Kopp<br />
<br />
This is in response about Landon Carter’s account of cowkeeping. Unfortunately, we don’t know the whole story as to why Sicely neglected her task. We only have Landon Carter’s account of the ordeal. Thus we are looking at this situation through the eyes of Landon Carter. How do we know if he didn’t manipulate or exaggerate this account to his benefit? May be he cried when his cow died. Perhaps Sicely had better things to do with her time than to cowkeep. Landon Carter did mention that she took a nap, perhaps she had a late night gathering of friends and relatives as this was the only time they could exert her freedom and her individuality from the day’s mindless tasks. Or maybe she was simply defiant to authority and paid no mind to her tasks regardless of the punishment. This may be her way to exert her freedom at the cost of getting the whip. I wish I could read her account of this situation maybe it would shed more light about her perceptions of slavery, her feelings and doubts and insecurities then we would have the overall picture instead a one sided view of an Elite.—John Furner</div>Jfurn8qwhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_3_Questions/CommentsWeek 3 Questions/Comments2007-09-13T03:45:03Z<p>Jfurn8qw: </p>
<hr />
<div>In Early American Women, the essay by Susanna Wesely made me feel thankful I was brought up the way I was. I disagree with her methods of controling children. I don't believe in programing children to be the way a parent wishes. I do agree with some of her her principles however. I think children should be praised everytime they behave correctly or are obediant. I believe children should be taught to be respectful to other's property. I don't think children need to be preforming the same routine every day regardless if it is in eating, sleeping ect. In Wesely's essay, she herself noted that when the children had to be at seperate houses when their home was destroyed by fire, that when they were reunited under one roof again, they aquired some bad behaviors. Perhaps if Wesely weren't so strict with her routines and ridgid discipline, her children may have come back with fewer negative influences.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
I definitely agree with Cheryl I was very glad my parents were not that strict. I think what got me the most was how the essay described how the mother would break the free will of the kids. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Wesley is certainly strict, and I would not always agree with her methods of punishment. However, she has the children's best interests at heart. She insisted that her children be well-mannered, honest, and educated, qualities which most would agree are necessary (or at least extremely helpful) if one wishes to be a productive, well-respected member of society. I also appreciated her emphasis on girls learning to read. Even if the intent was only to make sure women read the Bible, it's still a step in the right direction. - Ashley Hamilton<br />
<br />
While the essay of Susanna Wesely is very scary thinking about how those children were raised, I have to remember that that way of thinking was probably normal for the time and an acceptable way of thought. But to our modern minds it does seem very barbaric. I did like Eliza Pinckney's letter to herself however and thought that it gave a good insight into the minds of women at the time, especially married women in her social position. Reading what she wrote, some of it women try and apply in their lives today and it does seem to speak through the years. It is that part about making all her actions "Corrispond with that sincere love and Duty I bear him" that we tend to baulk at today. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I was also shocked about the strictness of Wesley's account of how she raised her children. Breaking the free will of the kids got me too. But in response Mary's comment that that was the way of thinking then and it was normal I'm not so sure. I'm sure some were that way but could this be an extreme case? Because for example, when she mentioned they acquired bad habits and behaviors when they lived with neighbors for a time. So therefore, not even some others in her own community were as harsh as her. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I also was very shocked when I read the account of Abigail Bailey and 1) she had 17 kids and 2) her husband tried having a relationship beyond a fatherly one. The account definitely showed how helpless a woman was when discovering her husband doing something wrong. In the intro to the account it says that she got her husband arrested but with the help of her brothers. But would she have been able to have him arrested without her brothers assistance?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I, too, was shocked while reading Abigail Bailey's "An Abominable Wickedness" and I agree with Elizabeth that the narrative did show how helpless a woman was under the rule of her husband. Yet, there are two sides to this wifely obedience. A “proper” woman saw it her solemn duty to uphold the marriage covenant and be a kind, faithful, and subservient wife to her husband. However, when the husband has violated the marriage covenant and has behaved immorally, exceptions ensue. All of a sudden, a woman with no rights now has all legal authority in the marriage. She knew divorce and breaking up her family was a sin (imagine how tough this must have been for her to deal with) but once she realized it was not her fault, she placed all guilt and blame on Mr. Bailey. Where was the point when Abigail realized enough was enough and she had to say something? Despite the fact she confronted him long after the first signs of his wrongdoing; many women could have assumed their position and not have said a word. I found it quite empowering to see docile and obedient Abigail become an enlivened woman and mother whose priorities changed; her duty was no longer to her husband but to her children.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
While a huge part of Abigail Bailey's remaining silent for so long was due to the time period and the fact that she had very little or no legal power, I think we must also recognize that this story could probably be told by someone today. Many women and children are still abused and still feel as though any legal action they took would simply be one person's word against another. Also I think that the footnote is very interesting. Why is it that the editor feels that it is necessary to excuse Abigail's actions. As an abused woman I feel that it is amazing that she spoke up at all, while the editor seems to think that readers might not understand her hesitance. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I agree. I am an intern at both RCDV (domestic violence place) and RCASA (a sexual assault place) and this kind of story is very common even today. It is very hard for someone to speak up in this situation. I just watched a video on incest actually and the effects are lifechanging. Many child abuse survivors were extremely hurt that there mothers didn't speak up and help them. I think it is amazing she said anything at all, especially for that time. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
I believe Abigail had a good reason to be hesitant. Know one wants to believe they married such a monster that could rape repeatedly is own daughter. I do not blame her for wanting more proof. Women in her day and age were brought up with the notion to love, honor and obey their husbands. It went against everything she believed in to just come forward when she did for the sake of her child.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
I also found it interesting that while Abigail seemed certain of her husband's wrongdoing, she resented her daughter for not coming forward and exposing what he was doing (Woloch 45). Yes, Abigail had a lot at stake for exposing the husband, but ultimately, didn’t the daughter as well? I suppose she didn't have a husband to lose, but couldn't she could be seen as reponsible for breaking up her family as well?--Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
<br />
I want to second the things that several people have already said about how rare it still is for people to speak out and take action against incest or any kind of domestic/familial abuse. I also think Abigail deserves exceptional credit for all she worked through and spoke out against. I also think Kaitlyn raises a good point, but I'm not sure what--short of being accused of encouraging her father's advances or lacking in morals--the daughter would have been blamed for.--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
I found Martha Ballard’s entry “A Maine Midwife” to be quite insightful. Just by her keeping a very brief journal we are able to calculate birth rates, see some folk remedies, find out when and how people died, and keep up on town news and events. On a sidenote: what’s the deal with all the burnt feet during those first few days in August?- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
I personally was amused at the first reading in Woloch on "The Duties of Husbands and Wives." While Woloch acknowledges that this is not necessarily how people acted, I couldn't help imagining what it would be like if someone two hundred years from now used one of our articles on relationships to judge the relationships of people at large. The Bullet's Sexclamations article perhaps? It is interesting to keep in mind that the primary sources that we have are just as small portion of what would have existed at this time. -- Allison Johnson<br />
<br />
I believe Abigail had a good reason to be hesitant. Know one wants to believe they married such a monster that could rape repeatedly is own daughter. I do not blame her for wanting more proof. Women in her day and age were brought up with the notion to love, honor and obey their husbands. It went against everything she believed in to just come forward when she did for the sake of her child.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
While reading the article, "To Use Her As His Wife" by Sklar, I noticed a few of the things we discussed in class on Tuesday in practice. The main thing that stuck out for me was how there was never a real record of Martha Root and her story during her court case; everything we know about this case was on account of the male lawyers or the father of Martha's children. This point, in my opinion, really emphasized that most of what we know about colonial women during this time period was somehow influenced by men. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I totally agree with Kelly about "To Use Her As His WIfe." It touched on what we went over in class and really seemed to personify the idea that women in general are second class citizens as this point. I also found it really interesting, though I was not surprised, was the complete double standard that seemed to be held towards Martha. I mean it took two people to create those children and yet she is the one whose reputation was forever tarnished and her eventual marriage at age 34 was a "last chance" scenario that enabled her to finally get out of town. I also had a question about the idea that a younger sibling doesnt marry before the oldest so there are no two marrigable people of the same sex in the same family. But what happens if one sibling is a perpetual spinster or what if, like in the case of Martha's children, there happened to be twins? --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how fully Sklar researched the lives of Jonathan Edwards and Joseph Hawley. At first I thought it was a bit extreme when she was writing about their grandparents, but then I saw how much of their past and family life shaped their actions and motivations. I think it shows that as historians we need to delve below the surface in order to contrusct a representation that is as accurate as can be. - Fiona C. <br />
<br />
In Sklar's essay I was surprised to read that Edwards, as a minister, argued against the "double standard" and said that Elisha should have to marry Martha regardless of the claims that she was not a virgin and that she seduced him. To me it seems that Edwards and Hawley seized upon the case because they saw it as an opportunity to promote their beliefs (kind of like today). Their insistence might also explain why Martha pushed her claim despite the risk to her reputation and future ability to marry. - Fiona C. <br />
<br />
I really loved the letters between Esther Burr and Sally Prince. The letters were a great way to see the relationships that women of the time could have with each other while at the same time relaying an idea of what daily life was like for these women. I just thought that they were really interesting. --Mary P.<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary about the insight the letters exchanged between Esther Burr and Sally Prince give us. By reading the journals that the two women kept, we historians can catch a glimpse of what life was like (vaguely) from a female's perspective for once and not via a man's perspective. It also emphasizes the point we discussed in class how social life amongst women was very important and how women were at the base of kinship networks. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary and Kelly. I found the letters between Ester Burr and Sally Prince to be fascinating. I particularly enjoyed the last letter (No. 22), in which Ester discusses having an argument with Mr. Ewing. She says, “(My Tongue, you know, hangs pretty loose, my thoughts Crouded in—so I sputtered away for dear life.) You may Guss what a large field this speech opened for me—I retorted several severe things upon him before he had time to speak again” (Woloch 41). This passage, while it made me laugh, also made me wonder, how typical was it for women to openly argue with men and was it widely accepted?--Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
After reading Susanna Wesley’s letter to her son about how to raise children by conquering their will, enforcing strict rules, and teaching them the importance of religion and daily prayer I was surprised to read the 8th rule she had for her household: “that no girl be taught to work till she can read very well; and that she be kept to her work with the same application and for the same time that she was held to reading.” This stood out to me as being a radical idea for the early 1700s and in sharp contrast to the entire message of the piece. I wonder if women saw their daughters not being able to read well and decided to fix the problem by enforcing these types of rules or if Wesley was simply more educated and represented the beginning of social changes that colonial women made in their households. --Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
Like Caitlin, I was surprised by rule 8. Maybe because Wesley could obviously write well for her time, she saw education become an advantage in her own life and wished to pass it on. Also, Wesley was obviously a very spiritual person, maybe she wanted young women to read so they could read The Bible? -Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
While reading the letters of Esther Burr and Sally Prince, I found myself amused by Esther's Letter No. 22. She related her conversation with Mr. Ewing about women. He beleived that women should only converse on subjects they "understood." I loved Esther's thought, "My tongue, you know, hangs pretty loose, thoughts Crouded in-so I sputtered away for dear life." -- E. Hufford<br />
<br />
When reading "To Use Her As His Wife," I was quite impressed with Jonathan Edwards' support for Martha. How many other men at that time would have reacted the same way? I was saddened to learn that his support for Martha did have something to do with his dismissal from the pulpit in 1750. -- E. Hufford <br />
<br />
I was struck by the last paragraph in the sermon "About the Duties of Husbands and Wives." At the very end, after stating how marriages should involve love and tenderness, Wadsworth as if on a side note, mentions that parents should wisely match their children with someone who is "proper." This point seems to have little emphasis in his sermon which mainly seems about loving someone you potentially might not even like. If all of this love and tenderness Wadsworth speaks of should occur shouldn't selecting a spouse with whom you are compatible be a higher priority? --Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
In "About the Duties of Husbands and Wives," Wadsworth advises wives, "Yea, though possibly you have greater abilities of mind than he has, was of some high birth, and he of a more common birth, or did bring more estate, yet since he is your husband, God has made him your head, and set him above you, and made it your duty to love and revere him." I find it interesting that Wadsworth acknowledges the possibility of women being smarter than their husbands. They realized the superiority of some women, yet they used religion as a tool to keep women under control. - Ashley Hamilton <br />
<br />
I think the role of women and the economy or more accurately the role of women as a labor force brings up some interesting points that ties to some larger themes we have discussed so far. With regards to slavery the role of the mother and inheritance is once again an issue. While we saw that some Native American cultures used the mother as a line of inheritance, when it came to slavery a child’s status as free or slave was determined by the mother. Another idea we have begun to touch upon is the hierarchy of society and women. For instance indentured servants, apprentices, or slaves occupied the same area as their mistresses but the mistress was in charge, in control due to her elevated status. In the introduction paragraph of this chapter Woloch asks questions about women’s work in the pre-industrial economy. One idea that really stuck out to me was this idea of all-women work groups. Could groups of women who worked in the field, who had things in common such as motherhood or the same master constitute the continuation of the theme of kinship we have already established in both Native American culture and Colonial culture? -- Mary Beth Dillane<br />
<br />
<br />
The first thing that struck me from Woloch was in the very beginning when she talks about the duties of husbands and wives. While in class we discuss how the woman have no power and really don't exsist as themselves the way the Wadsworth describes it, it sounds touching almost. The quote that stuck out the most to me was, " Yet his government should not be with rigor, haughtiness, harshness, severity, but with the greatest love, gentleness, kindness, tenderness that may be. Though he governs her, he must not treat her as a servant, but as his own flesh; he must love her as himself." (28-29) Now whether or not this truely happened I do not know, however, if women were treated like this I'm not entirely sure they would ever be truely unhappy. Then in Susan Wesley's letter, where she describes her by-laws, the last one being "that no girl be taught to work till she can read very well..." shocked me also. (33) For some reason I was under the impression that a young girls education was never a high priority. Those were just two of things that really stood out to me but the book was full of information that really opened my eyes to what the people were like at that time. -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
I liked Eliza Pinckney’s list titled “To Improve in Every Virtue” because it gives historians a good idea of what women in Pinckney’s social class were concerned with during the 1750s. She mentions God first, assuring us that religion is a top priority in her life. She also talks about making others happy and striving to be a good wife, mother, and daughter. Many of women’s priorities have shifted in society since the 1750s, while others have stayed the same. I wonder how this list would change if Pinckney had lived in our generation. -- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I also was impressed by how evolved Eliza Pinckney was in “To Improve in Every Virtue” and particularly by the fact that as a teenager she ran her father’s three Carolina plantations. I’m sure she had lots of help but it still seems like such a large responsibility for a young woman. -Caitlin Quinn <br />
<br />
<br />
The story about Abigail was most interesting, for a number of reasons. She definitely had alot of children, even by early American standards, but her husband engaged in an incestuous relationship with one of his daughters. I wonder what the punishment for such a thing was? Abigail's statement about the law seemed very revealing about a sense of inadequacy: "It may appear surprising that such wickednes was not checked by legal restraints." Its interesting to see that put in the same chapter with "About The Duties of Husbands and Wives," considering how obviously contradictory Abigail's reality was from the idea of Wadsworth. In the primary source reading, there was a statement about how alot of people do marry the one's they love, and live happily ever after. Of course, happy stories don't seem to be the one's most written about, and not really the most historically useful. The position of women seemed somewhat contradictory, they could divorce in New England, but then they had nothing. Did people realize this as a problem? It would seem they didn't. <br />
-Christopher Plummer<br />
<br />
I was most struck by the Spanish government's guidelines regarding honor, a woman's virginity, and marriage. I found the idea that it could be more disgraceful for someone to be married to another person so clearly beyond their social status fascinating. It was interesting to me that class issues outranked the honor/virtue issues related to illegitimate children and premarital sex. Was it really more of an embarrassment to be married to someone not of your caste than be pregnant and unmarried, or is this an example of source bias?--Andrea Meyer<br />
<br />
Woloch's book page 42-46. I can’t even imagine what Abigail must have been going through as she notes the psychological changes in her daughter. She must have felt powerless. What was her perception of justice during this period in history? I can’t even begin to fathom that. At first, she tried to reject this horrible act, but couldn’t. I interpret her account as foreboding fears of reprisals from her husband or the patriarchal institutions. I have great admiration for Abigail, for the anxiety she must have been going through was incredibly overwhelming. But through this terror, she gives us a glimpse of the past in a concise manner to address the ills—the mental and physical abuse that was bestowed upon them by this nasty man. I think Abigail’s detailed account of the behavioral problems she encountered would give insighte in today’s fields such as Sociology, Psychology, and Criminal Science in evaluating domestic and non-domestic abuse in today’s society.—John Furner</div>Jfurn8qwhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_2_Questions/CommentsWeek 2 Questions/Comments2007-09-06T03:41:47Z<p>Jfurn8qw: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found it interesting in the passage by John Heckewelder( page 30- 33) in Modern Problems where he says that the women's work load was so much lighter than that of the mens. I found this particularly interesting because in one of my classes last semester we read some articles about Europeans reactions to Native American society in Virginia and it said how lazy the European men felt that the Indian men were because it appeared that the women did the majority of the work within the village. I thought it was interesting seeing the different views that this reading exposed. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Continuing from what Elizabeth wrote, It is infact very intersting to see how different groups of people play differnt roles, and how each group views those roles played by each gender.--Katie D.<br />
<br />
I too was interested by the passage about women’s work written by John Heckewelder. I actually found myself getting a little miffed at him for saying such a thing. However, Mary Jemison somewhat backs up what he says in the account of her captivity. She hints that the work was different from the work that white women had to face, but in the end, it all equaled out. “Our labor was not severe; and that of one year was exactly similar in almost every respect to that of the others, with out that endless variety that is to be observed in the common labor of white people…their task is probably not harder than that of white women…” (Woloch 21). Of course, Jemison doesn’t really mention men’s work in her passage, so it’s hard to tell if Seneca men compare to the “macho men” that Heckewelder describes. --Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
I was also a bit baffled at Heckewelder's discription and thought it contrasted so some of the ideas that I interpreted from our lecture on Tuesday. I got from the lecture that women not only pulled their weight, but really did more than that. Granted the region really determined the labor of both genders, but I got that women worked a lot harder than Heckewelder was describing. Maybe I'm just being a "feminist"- but I do not think that Hechewelder was giving women enough credit- but who is surprised about that? -- Talya Halpern<br />
<br />
In Woloch's book, having to do with marriage and treatment of their wives,(p.9-11), I found it intersting how he says that there are many persons who believe, from the labour that they see the Indian women perform, that they are in a manner treated as slaves. These labours, indeed, are hard, compared with the tasks that are imposed upon females in civilized society, but they are no more than their fair share of the hardships attendant on savage life. So they are not only voluntarily, but cheerfully submitted to the work. <br />
--Katie D.<br />
<br />
Heckewelder's discription also described the women as being "...cheerful." Maybe it was a European interpretation that smiling and cheerfulness was through the fear of the great stong Native American men. Now in the prespective of a historian who knows a bit more about the Native American culture it can be frustrating to read some accounts of Europeans and their interactions with the Natives. Women as we learned are cheerful not out of fear- maybe they were cheerful because they did have some power and influence over the tribes. If Heckewelder observed the strange freedoms that men and women had with marriage, could the connection not be made that these women have lots of liberties in other aspects of their societies and culture? - Talya Halpern<br />
<br />
Katie, I was also interested in the idea that somehow fieldwork alone made slaves, but housework did not...Is there any explanation for that, Dr. McClurken? Or someone else who saw something I missed?--A. Meyer<br />
<br />
This is a total shot in the dark, but from a European perspective, I think that they would be used to women doing domestic work as opposed to working in the fields. Taking care of the home was a woman's place in European society and when seeing a Native woman doing those tasks, that was a normal thing to them. However, when women were working in the fields, a red flag must have gone up and they were like "Whoa, must be a slave." I don't know, just a kind of [bad] a guess.--Kaitlyn G.<br />
<br />
Throughout the personal narratives we have read, it has become obvious that Europeans thought their way of life to be far more superior to the way of life of the Natives they encountered. Due to the fact that they had never seen a society perform this way, Europeans defined this foreign culture as erroneous and thought it their divine right to intervene. Are there any current examples of this “responsibility” to intrude on foreign societies and make them like ours? Without trying to make this a political argument, one may argue the situation in Iraq. For instance, an attempt was made by the U.S. to spread democracy to this dictatorship. - Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
Lisa, I would have to agree with you. The term manifest destiny comes to mind. Though the term may not be as common anymore, the ideology certainly still exists. It was this idea that enabled the Europeans to justify their dealings with the Native Americans and any others who came accross the European's path. -- Elizabeth H.<br />
<br />
This brings to mind the anthropological term of ethnocentrism to me. As the term suggests, the Europeans looked at the world through their own cultural perspective, believing that they are superior. All other societies are therefore judged based on their own views/culture/lifestyle. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
Though Native Americans were not nearly as interfering in the lives of European settlers as the settlers were to them I think it is safe to say that the Native Americans would have viewed the European way of life as erroneous and as something that needed to be corrected as well. In fact, with what we know of Native Americans sharing their ways of farming it is possible that Native Americans felt and acted in the same way, seeing Europeans as ignorant and behind the times, only we do not have any primary sources to back up their of the story. Anyway all I am trying to say is that the Europeans most likely were not the only ones looking down on another group of people. Just interesting to remember that we only have one side of the story. --Allison J. <br />
<br />
To what extent were European prejudices against natives based on differences about gender roles? To what extent were they more based on standards of living and tools? If native peoples had similar gender roles to Europeans, would the Europeans have had better gender relations, or would they still be doomed due to European prejudices about tools or desires for land?--Andrea Meyer<br />
<br />
I don't think similar gender roles would have solved all the problems between Native American and European relations but I think it definitely would have helped the situation. Had they been more alike, both sides ethnocentrism would not have been so strong. I think this would have reduced the tension between the groups. People fear what they don't understand. --Alex K.<br />
<br />
We have several accounts of Native men being introduced to European ideas about gender and the absolute rights European men had in the 17th century. How frequently and quickly did Natives apply these ideas, and how did the application process disrupt Native family dynamics? Because all our accounts are from Europeans, we really don't have any sense of how things were within the Native families when European ideas were experimented with. Did Native women resist European ideals or did some accept these "new" roles?--Andrea Meyer<br />
<br />
It’s amazing that over 300 years later we are running into the same storylines. The story of Sarah Ahhaton committing adultery sounds as if it could’ve been taken right off the front pages of People Magazine. It’s surprising to see the parallels between our two time periods. Sarah accused her husband, William, of philandering long before he became suspicious and jealous of her relationship with Joseph. Yet, William was not put on trial and was not questioned about his unfaithfulness. It was Sarah who was wrongfully accused, pleaded innocent, and was ridiculed before she had even committed the sin (granted William did have a right to speculate- but that’s not the point). Why wasn’t William ever questioned about his running around? And what about Joseph- he gets off scot-free! What we see here is something that has continually found its way into society: the double standard.- Lisa Wilkerson<br />
<br />
In Woloch page 21, the recollections of Mary Jemison, I was really struck by her point of view on the work and labor of Indian women. "Our labor was not severe... Notwithstanding the Indian women have all the fuel and bread to procure, and the cooking to perform, their task is probably not harder that that of white women, who have those articles provided for them; and their cares certainly are not half as numerous, nor half as great." As a European woman now being held in captivity, I think it's a more trustworthy look at the work of Indian women versus the work of white women. -- Vanessa Smiley<br />
<br />
One of the things I personally liked about the Woloch reading was that she, right from the get go, reminded us that most women in the early period were not literate -- they could not read or write and therefore most of what we know about them comes from men or writings of elite, white women. I think that we, as historians need to keep that in mind when analyzing and studying these sorts of materials because more often than not, these stories and facts are altered or skewed in some way. -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
In the reading posted on Black Board it talks about how Christianity changed the gender roles and how women were treated. It shocked me that the women were summoned to a council and told that their influence basically had caused demons to come into the village (at least thats the impression I got). Also in that reading I saw how native american society ended up being very similar to the European society in which women were expected to be pure and loyal only to her husband and if she wasn't she was punished where as well men were SUPPOSED to be they often weren't and weren't punished for their adultery. I also am wondering why women let themselves be pushed into a role where they had less influence, if I had been in that position I'm positive I would have fought back. Does anyone else have thoughts on the black board reading?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I noticed that Father Le Leune cites the possible corruption of Indian men as the main reasoning behind the conversion of Indian women: "for the boys that we shall have reared in the knowledge of God, when they marry Savage girls or women accustomed to wandering in the woods, will, as their husbands, be compelled to follow them and thus fall back into barbarism, or to leave them." Did anyone else find this an interesting extension of the Christian concepts of original sin and Eve's fall in the Garden of Eden? -- Ashley Hamilton<br />
<br />
One of the contributing reasons for some native women losing power and not "fighting back" might have been the fact that European's justified their lifestyle and gender roles with lessons from Christianity. Wrestling with a new notion of God must have been unbelievably overwhelming and with the threat of hell looming perhaps women surrendered power, in part, because of fear of the consequences of acting against Christianity or European morals. - Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I found it pretty interesting in the Woloch reading the complete opposite views of the two women captives. Mary Rowlandson seems to really hate being with the Indians even while she was trying to figure out why God had allowed this to happen to her. She also seemed to contridict herself as far as her treatment..sometimes harshly and sometimes with mercy. The other captive Mary Jemison chose to stay with her captives even though they killed all of her relatives. She even says her situation was easy (pg 20). She even describes her Indian "sisters" as "peaceable and mild in their dispositions; temperment and decent in their habits, and very tender and gentle" towards her (pg21). I wonder if the difference is just how each individual tribe responded to the settlers or if was because of the time periods they lived in? Did the Indians attitude towards the settlers change that dramatically? ~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
I think it is really important to remember, as we are reading Mary Rowlandson's narrative, that she had just lost a child. A lot of her animosity and unhappiness could be attributed to the sadness of losing a child rather than the harsh and savage treatment of the Native Americans. Maybe this is why there are some inconsistencies in here account. Such as describing Native Americans as cruel but one paragraph later mentioning how one family took her in and fed her. -- Allison J. <br />
<br />
I agree with Alison about Rowlandson's account of captivity might have been influenced by her sadness. Also, Rowlandson was described as a "middle-aged minister's wife," while at the time of her initial capture, Jemison was a teenager. I wonder how much Rowlandson's previous life experiences and beliefs influenced her views on the natives. Rowlandson's account of the natives seems inconsistent. One could speculate that Rowlandson's opinions about the Native Americans were formed prior to her capture and this might contribute to her negative view of them. -Kelly Martin<br />
<br />
I also agree with you, Allison, but if you read some of what Mary Rowlandson discusses, at one point she actually takes food from a starving child who is also a captive (pg 15). As a general question, do you believe she would do this sort of thing out of spite towards children? Or was she merely just trying to survive in what she considered a horrid world? -- Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I completely agree with Lisa on the Sarah Ahhaton reading. I wonder, though, why was Joseph's mother who seemed to be setting the whole affair up never confronted? She seems like she was intentionally trying to get things started between Sarah and Joseph, and Sarah ends up taking all the blame and punishment. I think at the very least Joseph should have been held accountable for his part but maybe that is just putting my values on them. I wonder why when it was so easy for Indian women or men to divorce, why was Sarah made into such an example? ~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
In discussing Sarah Ahhaton, I think it's important to remember that Sarah was a converted Indian; her husband was a Native American Christian minister, and she herself was a professed Christian. While it may have been easy for Indian men and women to divorce before contact with Europeans, Sarah's conversion makes her, to a certain extent, subject to the same moral code and laws governing Christians. As an Indian, moreover, she would possibly be under even more scrutiny as Europeans expected Indians to return to their "savage" ways. -- Ashley Hamilton<br />
<br />
I found it rather interesting when reading Woloch's passage (on page 4) that a few Indian women actually benefited from European arrival. Those women in hunting tribes benefited through expanded fur trade. While I realize that the majority of women suffered an extremely negative impact from the Europeans, I found this example somewhat unusual. -- Elizabeth H.<br />
<br />
Replying to Andrea Meyers question up above, I too thought about that at first. It's not like European men just expected their wives to just lull about and look pretty. However, I don't think Europeans didn't think women should not do any work I think it was just based on the kind of work they did. Women should not to do work in the fields, however they should do work in the house. It's also a lot less rigourous. Men should be in the fields. -- Emily Miller<br />
<br />
I also thought it was really interesting to see the differences in opinion between the captive stories of Mary Jemison and Mary Rowlandson. As Allison said above, it is important to note that Mary Rowlandson did loose a child. I think some other factors that account for their differences could be that Mary Jemison was younger when she was taken and didn’t have a husband or children. Also, Rowlandson was taken during a period of harship and war for the natives serving as her captors. This could account for more harsh living conditions. <br />
-- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
(Plane Essay) Did the fact that Sarah Ahhaton told the story to an Englishman have any effect on the narrative? Could the Englishman have perhaps asked leading questions that may have skewed her story? - F.Cobb<br />
<br />
I was interested by the two writings of the English man and woman who had been adopted into an Native American tribe to replace children who had died. (Mary Jemison writing in Woloch and John Tanner in MP). Was this a common practice? Why were the Native Americans so accepting of white people? Perhaps the two writings are just examples of the exception rather than the norm? - F. Cobb<br />
<br />
It was interesting to read John Heckewelder’s passage on Indian marriages because they are different from the European or American institution of marriage. For instance marriages among Indians are not contracts for life, there are no vows, or promises and either party can leave whenever they please. Heckewelder describes an Indian marriage being more like a working partnership where the husband performs certain tasks such as building the house and hunting and the woman acts as his help mate and labors in the field. I would have loved to read more about different aspects of Indian marriages instead of just learning about the work that both parties perform and that divorce is not viewed as seriously as it was in Europe and America at the time. Unfortunately since so few first hand records remain we have to rely on white European men’s accounts which leave out important details and always carry bias.-Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
<br />
I get the impression that Samuel de Champlain was rather surprised at the physical appearance of the Native Americans. His statements about their physical presence really seem to give me the impression that those back-home in Europe were really at a loss as to what to expect in the New World. The statement that their skin color is beautiful, "although olive" was rather amusing for its historical value. Also of interest was John Tanner's talk of being drunk and of his Native American adopted mother, Net-no-kwa, being drunk. The native Americans had whiskey? And was drunkeness something common? That always seemed like a western, European thing to me. John was supposedly drunk for two days, and did nobody really notice? I guess it really gives the modern person a real sense of their life span when a thirteen year old boy would be drunk for two days and nobody really reacting to it. It was also interesting to see how the trade of John was affected by, as it seems, getting everybody tipsy. -Chris Plummer<br />
<br />
Just as a general question, was Mary Jemison's situation common, in the sense that she did not want to move back into white society when the Native Americans allowed her to? Perhaps she chose to remain with the Native Americans because she was captured when she was young and life with the Native Americans was the only life she knew and felt comfortable in. ~Katherine S.~<br />
<br />
In response to Kelly's comment about Mary Rowlandson taking food from a starving child, I think Mary was just trying to survive in what she considered a horrid world. It seemed to me that she had an attitude of every person for themselves, and she was looking out for herself by eating the child's food. ~Katherine S.~<br />
<br />
>>Whoops I made an error in my input, I mistakenly placed my input under the discussion tab sorry>> ...Better teach the girls for they will corrupt the boys. I’m sure this sentence got most of you upset. It got me upset when I read the short blackboard article of Father Le Jeune. It seems that once again girls would lead the God fearing boys into the path of barbarism and the evil that it entails. This very much parallels with the Biblical account of Adam and Eve where of course Eve brought sin upon all of humankind. Also is Le Jeune referring men and women as boys and girls, belittling Indian adults as mere children? Sort of elevating himself as a lofty religious figurehead whereas the Indian adults are mere children since they are only beginning to understand God. Le Jeune’s account reminds me of the domesticity issues of the mid 20th century as in Elaine Tyler May’s book Homeward Bound, where the sex of women, if left untamed by men, were compared to being radioactively explosive thus leading men to the path of destruction. –John Furner</div>Jfurn8qwhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_1_Questions/CommentsWeek 1 Questions/Comments2007-08-30T11:52:58Z<p>Jfurn8qw: </p>
<hr />
<div> -- Major Problems, 1-23<br />
<br />
The first essay mentions how women were once only seen as important to history because of their relation to important men. A prime example of this is our University. Mary Washington is recognized solely as the mother of George Washington. She is seen as important because of her son not because of any of her own actions. -- Allison<br />
<br />
That's an awesome example! I wonder if other cultures were/are inclined to qulify their women in a similar manner. --Katelynn <br />
<br />
I think Allison makes an excellent point. I'm reminded of a quote from the movie History Boys. The quote is from the woman history teacher who says, "History is a commentary on the various and continuing incapabilities of men. What is history? History is women following behind with the bucket." She may have some feminist tendencies when saying this, but I think it can be a relevant quote for what Kate Haulman is saying in her essay and the point Allison made. -- Vanessa<br />
<br />
One of my other professors mentioned that history is constantly being reinterpreted and rewritten, so can any of the questions represented by this book ever actually be answered to everyone's satisfaction? -- Allison<br />
<br />
In response to Allison's question: I think that you have a good point. I seriously doubt that any of these questions will ever be answered to everyone's satisfaction. Like in all things there will always be someone who is not satisfied, someone who continues to look for another way to answer the question. Its human nature. You can see that just looking at the essays, even though the historians writing this are all involved in women's history they all have different ideas of how you should go about it and what you should focus on. --Mary<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary and Allison also. It is human nature to not be satisfied- and it is in our nature to complain and always want to adapt in ideologies. None of the questions asked in Chapter 1 can ever be answered coherently because the answers can be interepreted in so many different ways. I mean the book has four essays on the topic so far, all of which are different.- Talya <br />
<br />
>In response to the above, I think that the entire point of the first chapter is to show how the idea of American Women's History has changed and adapted (or how it should do so) in response to people's questions. Therefore if you are unsatisfied with some historian's account of history you can take the time to study that account and others so that you can find a different truth. For example the final two essays were written by women who were unsatisfied with the way minority women are represented in the realm of women's history so they devoted time to studying women from other cultures and racial backgrounds so as to satisfy their queries. Their work only adds to our understanding. -- Julie Castanien <br />
<br />
<br />
There was one section while reading that stood out for me and that was the part on page twelve about equality and difference. I found it interesting that she should mention the idea that so often in the search for women's "equality" women want to be treated as if they were men and often over look the differences between men and women because they have often been used as a basis for discimination. While this section was very confusing, in my opinion at least, just because of the strong and opposing opinions about the subject, personally I think that just because a woman wants to be seen as an equal to a man in the eyes of society and in the eyes of the law that is no reason to set aside her femininity. --Mary<br />
<br />
In regards to Mary's comment, I agree that equality should never be awarded based on one's femininity. The dichotomy was a contrast between feminists who deny difference between males and females and those who use their differences as a strength or access to power. I think it is vital to realize that "femininity" is a construct that has been forced upon women. "Femininity" and "Masculinity" have regulated gender politics and certainly there is nothing wrong with expressing either- but they are just labels that have been oppressive to those who wish to transcend their designated gender roles. I think that there would be value in discussing from where "femininity" stems and how free thought is and has been affected by this construct. --Kelly<br />
<br />
I'd like to pose a question of opinion, if permitted, in response to Mary's and Kelly's comments. It's a situation that I know many instances of and wonder about what everyone else thinks of it. Woman A wants to go to college, get a degree, and continue her education (perhaps to get a masters or doctorate). She hopes to achieve a full and lengthy career while maintaining a family life. Woman B wants to finish college but her main goal is to start a family and stay at home to take care of her children and the household. She has no desire for a career and is more than satisfied with her life as a stay-at-home mom/homemaker. I don't really have a follow-up question other than to open the floor to opinion, but is there anything wrong with either woman's goals and should either be seen as less-equal or more equal than the other? -- Vanessa<br />
<br />
In response to Vanessa's comment, I don't believe the issue should be whether or not one woman's goals are more or less equal to those of the other woman. The important issue is that women have the choice to pursue an education and career and/or they have the choice to become mothers and care for their households. We have come a long way in history considering the choice was not always there. -- Elizabeth<br />
<br />
One, I think that either choice contains a life time of dedication and hard work. Vanessa's question for Woman B was if the woman went to school and then just stayed home. What if woman B never went to school at all? What if she simply became a house wife? What does everyone think about a housewife with no education? What if school was not even an option because it was not important? It is so interesting that school has now become the factor of success. A while ago, college was not for everyone- especially not for women at one point. What does everyone think about how an uneducated housewife would be viewed upon today versus a century ago?- Talya. <br />
<br />
I agree with Elizabeth. In the 1950s the typical family dynamic was a stay at home mom (homemaker) and a father who worked (the breadwinner). "The Problem That Has No Name" written by Betty Friedan speaks to women who had no other options than to raise the children and be the homemaker. That is what society told them they had to/should do at that time. "The Problem" was that many women became depressed and wanted more from their life. I don't mean to down homemakers at all. Rather, I say this because women did not have a real choice then. Like Elizabeth said though, now women have more choices. Both homemakers and career women should be valued for their work. --Alex<br />
<br />
I agree with Elizabeth but also think that looking at what influences a woman's life goal could potentially be telling. I would be curious about how the goals of Woman A and B have been supported by their peers, the media, and other outside forces. --Kelly <br />
<br />
I have been a stay at home mom but I also held a part-time job if hours that were different from my husbands. This was a way I could balanace a career and be a mother at the same time. It was difficult but I had plenty of support from my family, peers and others. The only thing I put on hold was my education. Hopefully this coming spring I will graduate.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
Women's history has come a long way. I agree with Gerda Lerner when she says "the striking fact about the historiography of women is the general neglect of the subject by historians." (p.8). There is something about the neglect of women's studies that makes us want to focus even more on their history. --Katie<br />
<br />
Speaking of Gerda Lerner, she was a speaker during last years women's history month here on campus. I went to hear her speak and she was a really strong, intelligent and persistent women. She spoke of the Seneca Falls Convention and the Declaration of Sentiments written there advocating for the women's rights. In addition, she also addressed the women's movement stereotype that it only involved white middle class women. She mentioned that the working class, blacks and some men were also involved. Lerner also noted that although the Equal Rights Amendment has yet to be passed, she does not feel that it would be the magic ticket to solve all women’s issues. She stressed that legal reforms/changes are not enough. Social support and cultural transformation is needed. The attitudes of men and women alike need to change in support of these issues. Knowing women’s history is a major step in the right direction. Lerner basically founded women’s history programs, stressing that we have a right to know our own history. --Alex<br />
<br />
Knowing that it is gender that defines "man" and "woman", or "male" and "female", what exactly truely defines the category "women"? --Katie<br />
<br />
I believe that when studying women's history it is easy to get caught up in the oppression of women. It's important to remember that not all cultures were as oppressive over women as were European societies. We know that many Native American women had a stronger role in soceity than most European women. This is not to say that women were never oppressed, rather that depending on the soceity of study, women's roles were different.-- Elizabeth<br />
<br />
In response to Elizabeth's comment: I definitely agree. In fact, while I was reading the essays, I kept reminding myself about the different situations of women throughout history, like Native Americans as you mentioned. However, not focusing on oppression is sometimes hard to do as Leslie Alexander points out, some scholars seek to incoroporate race into their studies and end up "focusing exclusively on oppression" (20).--Kaitlyn<br />
<br />
I agree, there has been so many positive parts in Women's history. Yet, we cannot forget some of the good parts were incorporated hand in hand with the status of the particular female individual. Abigail Adams for example- I'm sure she would not have been popular or involved in the Revolutionary War as much as she was if she was not married to her famous husband.- Talya. <br />
<br />
In her essay Alexander argued that historians are "reluctant to explore how the reality of race influences Black women's lives." What is the cause of this reluctance? Can this statement also be applied to all minority women? - Fiona<br />
<br />
The authors argue that women's history needs to be examined from multiple angles: class, race, culture, ethnicity, sexuality, age, work, etc. Is this possible? Would it still be women's history or would it become something like African American women's history or Latino women's history? - Fiona<br />
<br />
Elaborating on Fiona's questions, how do we define any group for the purpose of studying its history? How does one draw important distinctions (class, race, age, etc.) while not creating a focus so narrow or specific as to be impractical for study as a group? Also, Gisela Bock refers to the emergence of "men's history" and "men's studies." Has anyone actually witnesses any examples of this? -Ashley<br />
<br />
I don't think the reading covered this so i was curious if anyone else knew- How did the study of women specifically in history begin? did it begin with the feminist movements?- Elizabeth<br />
<br />
As Cheryl states below, the preface states the basic reasons that this topic came into play. 1) the feminist movement in the 1960s and 2) women began to enter into the field of history and historical study as a result of employment opportunities that they had not previously been given. And one reason seems to be the result of the other. - Kelly W.<br />
<br />
In the preface of the book, more details are given about the study of women's histroy.--Cheryl<br />
<br />
I was actually curious about the same thing. I believe one of the authors mentioned that the field of study stretched all the way back to the 1950s (I could be wrong). That being said, with the ever-changing role of women in society, how do you think the study of women's history has changed since its beginning and how do you think it will change in the future?--Kaitlyn<br />
<br />
Playing a bit of a devil's advocate, wouldn't it be fair to say that women have always played a role in history by nature of the biological process? However, in regards to the readings I think the authors all seem to agree that the study of women's history began between 1950-1970-ish. --Katelynn <br />
<br />
Why would the feminist movement be thought of as damaging to Women's Studies? I would think that it would be a positive thing so that women can see where they've been and how they could advance. - Elizabeth<br />
<br />
To comment on Allison’s Mary Washington statement that opened this discussion, Bock’s essay makes a great point in her public v. private dichotomy. She says, “male workers, male politicians and male scholars perform their tasks only because they are born, reared, and cared for by the women’s labor”(10). Thus, George is a public reflection of Mary’s private raising. We are able to see the woman Mary was through the man George became.--Lisa<br />
<br />
How does one determine what is gender neutral? Especially when it comes to applying gender neutrallity to laws that invovled violence like rape and battery?--Cheryl<br />
<br />
There is a comment somewhere amongst these essays that states that women’s history is a compilation of only the exceptional women from history, thus creating a history that is unrepresentative of every woman. Isn’t most history (not just women’s history) we read that of the extraordinary and not the commonplace?--Lisa<br />
<br />
In response to your question, Lisa, I'd have to agree with you on that one. Most history we study from grade school through our current education focuses primarily on major events, not only of women, but of men as well. Discussions are always based on the extraordinary and the only way we tap into the lives of the commonplace is by digging for primary sources and analyzing what we can. I feel however, that the field is slowly beginning to expand and bring the commonplace closer to the center. (I think that made sense). - Kelly W <br />
<br />
In her essay "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," Gisela Bock states that women appeared front and center in the historian's eye because of their subjectivity and that "women are not only victims but also actively shape their own lives, society and history." How does everyone feel about this statement? Do you agree that it was also partly at the fault of women that the gender was not previously studied? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
It was actually a surprise to me how indepth the discussion of "women's history" really is. I had always been under the simple assumption that women's history was just precisely that: history of women. The reality that such a two word phrase would contain so many issues regarding gender, race, class... appears very important, despite my previous assumptions. The idea that women's history was actually 'white women's history' was an observation that jumped out at me. It seems so easy to fight for a perspective/focus in history with the goal of some type of equality while at the same time ignoring a whole type of inequality in your focus. The sections dealing with the multiple dichotomies was very interesting, considering how even today such phrases are used. In the case of "work and family," its interesting to see how a practical consideration of "paid and unpaid work" was given a more ethical/moral (perhaps even a religious/theological one?) with the phrase "work and family" -it makes me wonder what other dichotomies in society that seem to be ethical or social values are at base purely practical ones. --Chris Plummer<br />
<br />
I would first like to start by commenting to Allison’s opening statement about women’s history in relation to men and would like to throw out another question. Considering the time period we are focusing on in this class and the mostly male-dominated/patriarchal society of the time is it contextually appropriate to only focus on women without considering important men both publicly and privately in women’s lives? I think Haulman brings up an extremely important part of understanding women’s historiography and that was the need and desire to have a history of all types, classes, races, etc. of women but can we do that without some comparison to men? (particularly in this half of the course). I also think Haulman, Castaneda, and Alexander brought up an important point about titles and incorporating women of color. In my research for my 299 paper I came across research and studies about minority groups in the 1960s women’s movement, how they viewed the women’s movement, how they participated, and how they viewed the predominantly white, middle class woman’s struggle compared to theirs. It made me think of other titles such as the “History of African Americans” and what that title would mean broken down. ----Mary Beth Dillane<br />
<br />
I thought that it was interesting in Antonia Castaneda's essay how she mentions that the women, who wrote the history of women in the West, only wrote about white women. I think that it is difficult to write a through history of women in the West without highlighting the accomplishments of Native American, Hispanic and Asian women. ~Katherine~<br />
<br />
Going along with Katherine's comment, think of how little we know about the American (and when I say American I mean US) southeast and the Native American tribes. Most of what we are taught is that they were fighting a battle they were ultimately going to lose -- isn't most history biased in that sort of way and not just women's history? - Kelly W<br />
<br />
I also thought that it was interesting how Leslie Alexander mentions that the feminist movement was not very successful with African American women. It was not successful because African American families were very close knit and the movement required women to distance themselves a little bit from their families. ~Katherine~<br />
<br />
One of the things that struck me the most in the reading was the section about equality versus difference. As I was reading it I kept thinking Why is it so difficult for women to be equal. I believe that we (as women) should not be treated exactly like men because we are different and have different issues that cannot be addressed that way, such as what was mentioned in the text of rape, abortion, and spousal abuse (pg12). I think Bock's question of "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." (pg12) is a very important question and sums up the women's struggle to be visible. ~Mary Beth C~<br />
<br />
In regards to Mary Beth's statement on gender equality versus gender difference, there is no easy resolution. This debate is as old as the feminist movement. While some feminist wish to dichotomize themselves from men, highlighting their differences, others wish to ignore all differences in the interest of obtaining equality. Yet, how can equality ever be truly reached with such distinct divisions between men and women? Try as we might to ignore our differences, men and women are not the same. Despite the feminist movement and deviation from traditional roles, the words "feminine" and "masculine" still imply certain characteristics,activities and lifestyles. ~Juliann <br />
<br />
I found the various references to the complications of writing to represent a whole sex interesting. The progression from the inclusion of "important and influential" figures in women's history, to a history that strives to incorporate the vast meanings of what it means to be a woman in all respects in all periods is daunting, if not hopeless. But, striving for such complete understanding seems to be a crucial goal of the modern historian. Diversity of study is finding an important prominence, but in such the danger of dilution of the subject field becomes apparent. -- Robert Kopp<br />
<br />
Vanessa's question hit on an issue that we're starting to see the pendulum sort of swing in the opposite direction on, but for so long we have only wanted to talk about and recognize the active and "exciting" action taking parts of history. No one wants to talk about keeping a family on the homefront or making the parts for the planes that dropped the bombs, they want to talk about flying in to drop the bombs. At the same time, as we try to recognize the importance of raising families, and women like Abigail Adams who were intellectually advanced and deserve credit for being recognized as leaders within their own time, we neglect to give attention to women who assumed active roles equal or comparable to male roles--why do we know Jack Jouett and Paul Revere, but we don't know Sybil Luddington and Dicey Langston? Women's history seems to have gone to extremes, resulting in attention being devoted most unequally. --Andrea<br />
<br />
Bock and Haulman seemed to do an excellent job of articulating key themes in gender and women's studies, themes I have not seen articulated as succintly and clearly elsewhere. Bock's numbered themes simply identify issues my women's studies class spent weeks discussing, issues that I believe we will find continually reappear and connect in subtle ways we would never anticipate...These are issues that apply to other minorities on some level in many situations--like the integration discussion. Are any neglected/minority accounts of history better taught on their own independently or better off integrated into mainstream history? African American, Latino or even Irish History/Studies could easily be substituted for Women's Studies/History in many of these essays. Haulman's explanation of the sexuality nature vs. nurture debate is significantly clearer than the essays used in the same series' book on Sexual History by Weeks and Rictor Norton, which fail to address many examples like mannerisms, which Haulman uses well. Leslie Alexander's discussion of historians' use of the contributionist model with African American history also seemed to apply to women's history in general, or really any history that's been neglected from the "Dead White Men" version of history. It made me realize that women's history really is discussed in terms of contributions or assistance or help, never in terms of achievements or actions, contrary to the "he did" history of DWM. That thought left me frustrated and asking "What would Gerda say?" (besides to keep insisting on the recognition of obscure minority examples of women which derail Dr. McClurken's classes). --Andrea<br />
<br />
In response to Mary Beth’s question about how important it is to incorporate men into our study of women, I think it is important to include them because they did play an important role in influencing women’s lives and choices. While the degree is debatable, the fact remains that Women were influenced by the male dominated society in which they lived. We wouldn’t be getting the full picture if we failed to incorporate men into that history.<br />
For me, the equality v. difference argument in the Gisella Bock essay was very interesting. Though I am all for female independence, equal education and job opportunities, etc. I’m not convinced that women and men should be treated as gender neutral. Biologically we are different and face different issues in society. –- Jennifer Feldhaus<br />
<br />
I agree with Jennifer. In the study of women's history, important male influences should not be ignored, for we as historians would fail to see the big picture. Both sexes have played an integral role in the shaping of our world. You cannot tell the story of a woman without mentioning the important men in her life, for as a housewife, a woman's success was dependent upon the success of her husband and sons. ~Juliann<br />
<br />
Jennifer- I completely agree. Men and Women should not be treated as gender neutral. The difference between us- not just physically- but mentally, emotionally, and physcologically, are to extreme to be considered equal. That is not to say that we should not have equal rights- but not only do we face different issues in society differenty, we react differently to those issues. - Talya.<br />
<br />
Talya makes a good point. Gender Neutrality is a sticky subject. Whereas most women want to be treated equally, we still desire special recognition or accomodation, simply because of natural differences. But how can a woman be treated differently from a man and still equal? ~Juliann<br />
<br />
I thought this article raised interesting questions about gender and the role that men and women are asked to preform in society. While I think that equal pay for the same work is important, I would be cautious in saying that gender should be a neutral. If its neutral than would what would we base our differences on? --Katelynn<br />
<br />
These were posted in another area accidentally:<br />
<br />
I don't think the reading covered this so i was curious if anyone else knew- How did the study of women specifically in history begin? did it begin with the feminist movements?- Elizabeth<br />
<br />
--Not sure if this is really what you're looking for but I believe Gerda Lerner started the first(?) women's history department at the University of Wisconsin...which would make it somewhat linked to the feminist movements, but partially independent?--Andrea<br />
<br />
Why would the feminist movement be thought of as damaging to Women's Studies? I would think that it would be a positive thing so that women can see where they've been and how they could advance. - Elizabeth<br />
<br />
--I really liked this question, the first thing I can think of is feminism has traditionally had less respect and interest in traditional women's roles as homemakers, etc. --Andrea<br />
<br />
I didn't realize that so many different groups identified themselves as "American" women, like the Cherokees. While I think the four major bolded themes in the Haulman essay are useful, they are also major themes in Gender Studies and Women's Studies. In the History of U.S. Sexuality, we are reading nature vs. culture/constructionist vs. essentialist essays, and I believe Haulman's part 1 addresses important issues like mannerisms and hobbies, which I haven't seen articulated as well elsewhere. Unfortunately, I agree with the vicious cycle Haulman identifies on p. 11, whereby women's efforts to be more historically recognized and gain rights limited them. --Andrea<br />
<br />
Lesile Alexander raised some interesting points in her essay about how the feminist movement affects African American women’s history. I have always seen women’s history as inextricably linked to the feminist movement but never considered the ramifications that it would have for African American women. While Lesile Alexander states that the feminist movement was useful in liberating white women she says it also forced Black women into the same mold and has therefore prevented a full understanding of black women’s lives. Throughout the essay Alexander states the importance of incorporating race into women’s history going so far as to say that black women’s lives cannot be understood if they are continually viewed through the “lens of whiteness and oppression.” I wanted to see if people agreed with Alexander that African American women’s history has been misunderstood for years because racial differences have not been examined fully enough.-Caitlin Quinn<br />
<br />
> Yes Caitlin, I agree with Alexander about African American women's history. I also know that there are similar issues with Latina History. There seems to be this prevailing theme that when it comes to minority women the primary goal is to see their racial or ethnic group liberated before they are liberated as women. I could try to make a stretch here and compare this racial and ethic liberation to that of the White American Male Colonists from the oppressive English rule before the White women could be liberated but I think that is over kill. --Julie Castanien <br />
<br />
I am surprised because I have yet to see anyone comment (unless I have not read this page closely enough) on something just casually mentioned in some of the essays that still astounds me. This is one half of the world's population we are talking about here. I know that the two last essays warn us against labeling women as a unified group but I still have trouble wrapping my head around the fact that until the 1960s and later has Women's History come to the forefront.-- Julie Castanien<br />
<br />
>Personally I think, out of all the essays, Kate Haulman’s essay really hits it on the nail. Haulman argues about Worthiness, it seems that worthiness is a measure of scholarly review. She uses the examples of Marie Curie, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Clara Barton. These Individual women were covered based on their individual merit, but do they represent all women in general? The point I’m trying to make is that worthiness is measured in a male dominated world, and it is reflected in history text books. But the error, in my opinion, is that worthiness is inclusive and is not representative of the whole population. Thus are rich white male noble elites that shaped are nation with laws and institutions a fair representation of all white males in general? My answer is no. Therefore, history in general is extremely complex as it has its range of class, race, gender, etc. And the study of women’s history has these complex issues a sort of Pandora’s Box that once open it presents a multitude of problems that Haulman points out in her essay. –John Furner</div>Jfurn8qwhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Reading_Questions/CommentsTalk:Reading Questions/Comments2007-08-30T11:48:32Z<p>Jfurn8qw: New page: Personally I think, out of all the essays, Kate Haulman’s essay really hits it on the nail. Haulman argues about Worthiness, it seems that worthiness is a measure of scholarly review. ...</p>
<hr />
<div>Personally I think, out of all the essays, Kate Haulman’s essay really hits it on the nail. Haulman argues about Worthiness, it seems that worthiness is a measure of scholarly review. She uses the examples of Marie Curie, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Clara Barton. These Individual women were covered based on their individual merit, but do they represent all women in general? The point I’m trying to make is that worthiness is measured in a male dominated world, and it is reflected in history text books. But the error, in my opinion, is that worthiness is inclusive and is not representative of the whole population. Thus are rich white male noble elites that shaped are nation with laws and institutions a fair representation of all white males in general? My answer is no. Therefore, history in general is extremely complex as it has its range of class, race, gender, etc. And the study of women’s history has these complex issues a sort of Pandora’s Box that once open it presents a multitude of problems that Haulman points out in her essay. –John Furner</div>Jfurn8qw 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