Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ApiMain::$mCommit is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/api/ApiMain.php on line 195
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::current() should either be compatible with Iterator::current(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 571
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::next() should either be compatible with Iterator::next(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 585
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::key() should either be compatible with Iterator::key(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 578
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::valid() should either be compatible with Iterator::valid(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 603
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::rewind() should either be compatible with Iterator::rewind(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 553
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property LoadBalancer::$mWriteIndex is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/LoadBalancer.php on line 59
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::current() should either be compatible with Iterator::current(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 186
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::next() should either be compatible with Iterator::next(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 203
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::key() should either be compatible with Iterator::key(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 196
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::valid() should either be compatible with Iterator::valid(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 212
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::rewind() should either be compatible with Iterator::rewind(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 175
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property MessageCache::$mMemc is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/cache/MessageCache.php on line 135
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property LoadBalancer::$mWriteIndex is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/LoadBalancer.php on line 59
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Parser::$mPreprocessorClass is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/parser/Parser.php on line 234
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property RequestContext::$recursion is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/context/RequestContext.php on line 292
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property PPDStack::$accum is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/parser/Preprocessor_DOM.php on line 755
Warning: preg_match(): Compilation failed: subpattern name must start with a non-digit at offset 8 in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/MagicWord.php on line 907
Deprecated: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Pager.php on line 908
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$contribs is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 627
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$tagFilter is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 629
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$nsInvert is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 630
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$associated is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 631
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$deletedOnly is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 633
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$topOnly is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 634
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContentHandler::$mModelName is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/ContentHandler.php on line 402
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38 https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=KatelynLeaseMcClurken Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-09-18T22:33:23ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.22.0https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_15_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 15 Questions/Comments-327 092009-12-03T14:17:05Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Frances Ellen (Watkins) Harper, 1866 Woman’s Rights convention */</p>
<hr />
<div>== ''Comparative source questions'' ==<br />
<br />
'''I’m curious to what extent women truly believed that they were morally superior to men. They certainly used it to justify women taking a part in activities that were not typically approved of for women.''' For instance, one of Clara Lanza’s arguments for women working outside the home in clerical positions was that women’s morality would improve the business world. Some women’s rights activists also used that argument for why women should be able to vote. '''Were they consciously manipulating the rhetoric of the day or did they just naturally assume it to be the truth?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
'''<br />
One commonality between some readings for this week is the emphasis that women placed on their eduction.''' Although an education was more available to working class women than it had been during the eighteenth century, '''availability did not always translate to attainability.''' For example, in '''Lucy Salmon's study''', she came across domestic servicewomen working "eighteen hours" a day. This amount of labor would leave little time for women to acquire the skills necessary for what Salmon calls "intelligent work". In another story, 16 year-old '''Sadie Frowne''' worked an arduous eleven hours a day in a sweatshop, but long hours did not stop her from "going to school at night". Her case must have been somewhat exceptional; if most young laborers had opportunities like Sadie, organizations such as the Knights of Labor would have no need to focus their agenda on "taking little girls from the factory ... and educating them". -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 13, Urban Wage Earners'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Helen Campbell, 1893, study on NY wage laborers, “Shop Girls and Piece Workers” ==<br />
I thought it was interesting how she said that '''the girls who worked in the shops: "she knows far better what constitutes the life of the rich than the rich ever know of the life of the poor...of the woman she so often despises, even when longing the most to be one of them. She imitates where she can..."(bottom of page 294). This is further emphasizing the desire of lower-class women to be like the upper class, to strive for that 'perfect life.'''' It is a striking contrast that the girl hates the rich women, yet longs to be like them. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
Interesting article. Do you think focusing on women in poverty made for a more effective argument against the evils of poverty since women were supposed to be part of the work force? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I think it was a way to emphasize the evils of poverty. Obviously, these women were unable to stay in the domestic sphere. They had no choice but to work. I think focusing on horrible factory jobs that these women had to do definitely emphasizes this. I don't think that focusing on men working these jobs would gain very much attention. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Lucy Maynard Salmon, 1897, Vassar Historian who studied domestic service ==<br />
<br />
'''I noticed a difference in the way that working women were described in comparison to the language used about domestic women.''' Working women saw themselves as being immersed in society and into the world but a domestic woman "never read and does not know what is going on in the world." (P. 298) The working women also describe domestic women as having so much time on their hands, almost insinuating that domestic women's work is not equal to theirs. It was interesting how the working women say they enjoy their job more than they would being a domestic woman. They enjoy the freedom they have to go out and work, but then come home and do whatever they please. Their work and home lives are completely separate. Oppositely, domestic women are always around their work, continuously tending to the family and the house whenever it is needed. There are not set hours of work for domestic women.... their work is their life. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex on her ideas about working women. '''They saw themselves as in the world and intouch with society and it made me wonder if they were the real reason behind the push for women's rights? I know middle class women were heavily involved in shaping women's rights but did the efforts of the working class women make a difference?''' Working class women were proud of what they accomplished and according to this article boasted about what they could do, I agree a woman can do anything she sets her mind to but in a way didn't all women shape the womens rights movement? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I think the thing that struck me most about this article was the first industrial advantage. While I know it was not uncommon for a woman to work during this time period I had always thought it was out of necessity. ''' The idea of opportunities for promotion suggests the idea of a career to me as opposed to a job. Do you think jobs with promotions indicate a shift towards careers and less focus on the domestic duties of marriage?''' Later in the piece the young factory operative explains how domestic servants don't make good wives. I suppose I am just wondering what kind of role marriage played when women went looking for work. -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I agree that the gaining a promotion does make this job seem more like a career. These women seemed content with working. I had also assumed that women that worked did it because they had to. I never thought that they found pride in it. I also agree with Megan that these women had a bigger part in the womens' rights movement than I had previously thought. I'm sure these women thought they had nothing in common with the middle class women working in the movement. Overall, I think they did play a part. It may not have been the part that middle class women would have wanted, but these women were out having careers at a time when women were supposed to stay at home. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Isabel Eaton, 1899, research on black servants in Philadelphia ==<br />
'''Unlike the white women urban workers we read about for this week, this piece shows how little choice black women urban workers had in occupations.''' Most were domestic servants. Even those who were educated or had other job training could not get the jobs they wanted and were qualified for. '''The racial discrimination they experienced kept them locked into a job they felt was socially degrading and that provided little personal freedom and low wages.''' Due to being turned down, or even the fear of being turned down, most were kept them from seeking jobs outside of domestic service. '''So while white women with an education or job training could afford to be independent and had new job opportunities opened to them, black women were less likely to be able to experience this type of independence.'''<br />
--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
This article is sad because it shows us how race oriented people were even after the Civil War, but it is already a well known that Blacks did not reach any kind of true equality until the 20th century though. Actually, while I was reading this, I came up with kind of a random but related question: '''In the Antebellum South, when there was still slavery, the slaves would "fight back" in any way they could, including pretending to be really stupid so that they may screw up the task assigned to them, etc. So, I was wondering if this form of retaliation might have had any sort of negative impact after the Civil War for blacks searching for jobs (mostly in the south since that is where such things usually took place)?''' -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I think that it had to have a negative impact on them after the Civil War. It just perpetuated the stereotype that blacks were stupid and inferior. However, I'm not sure that it would have made a difference if they were the smartest people in the whole world. Whites were convinced that they were inferior and I doubt that they would have been willing to see anything else.-Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Clara Lanza, 1891, defends the female office clerk in NY ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Looking at The Office Clerk by Clara Lanza many things stand out to me. '''This piece is justifying the use of women as clerks. However, this justification feeds into the women’s assumed gender roles during that time period as much as the men’s justification as to why women should not be clerks. Both arguments use the overarching gender roles of the time.''' Men argue that women should remain in the home and be good wives and raise their children, they also argue that women fidget, they become anxious, they are temperamental, they giggle, and so on… these characteristics all fit into what women were presumed to be like. The counter this argument, Clara Lanza believes that women are more reliable than men, they come to work when sick, they don’t complain, and they can do all of this while being great wives. Both sides to this argument use what everyone would agree are characteristics of women of that time and the roles people expected them to play, just in different ways. '''This is similar to the arguments for and against women abolitionists and reformers, it is very interesting how gender roles can be used as justifications for different things.''' Based off of the readings about women’s roles as activists for women’s rights I can tell that the same use of gender roles as justifications for and against the movement being used here as well. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I agree a lot with Erin. Ms. Lanza states in the beginning of her response that "Among the woman workers in New York there are none who afford a more interesting study than the vast army of clerks, the work of a clerk being admirably adapted to the sex." '''While I think expected gender roles play a large part- the exactness of women's work, their reliability, and the ways in which they can be trusted- I also wonder if, at this time, there were beginning to be notions of differences between "sex" and "gender", one of the arguments, I think, of the feminist movement during the 20th Century, with gender being thought of as very much socially constructed.''' It almost seems like Ms. Lanza would make many of those in the women's movement at the time or the feminist movement today kind of angry- '''it seems as if in many ways she is very much defending the gender roles and stereotypes about women.''' -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Leonara Barry, on what the Knights of Labor are doing for women, 1888 ==<br />
<br />
This article provides some moral relief from the sources in this week's reading that are exemplary of ideologies which exacerbated conditions for women in the workplace. For example, the "difficulty" American-born girls felt about competing against a "foreign born and colored element," (297) noted and justified by Lucy Salmon, is ridiculous; Isabel Eaton, a black domestic worker, claims that black domestic workers often can't secure work because "white help is preferred" (299). Racial divides like this, so incorporated into American society, emphasize just how radical the Knights of Labor organization was to accept laborers regardless of race or gender. Are their radical methods generally blamed for the groups eventual failure? --Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Sadie Frome, 1902, “Story of a Sweatshop Girl” ==<br />
<br />
I really liked Sadie's story.''' I thought it was neat how she talked about her social activities outside of work- going to school at night and to the synagogue, having her fortune read by a fortune teller, and going out with Henry, to the theater, or dancing or to Coney Island. She seems like the quintessential "new" young woman of the early twentieth century- she is independent, able to save her money, and not ready to settle down and marry Henry, even though he wants her to. She seems very content with her situation right now and her life as it is- as if she is not ready for things to change just yet and is enjoying the benefits of her hard work and her independence.''' I really kind of admire her! -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I loved Sadie's story. She is a very practical person. She saves money and she knows how to have fun. '''I was a little disturbed by the matter or fact way she talks about getting her finger caught in the needle and how it could result in a broken bone or dismemberment.''' She did not seem concerned that it could happen to her. '''''I think it is funny that she keeps putting Henry off and that she does not want to get married.''''' I admire her independence. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Just like LeAnn and Allison said, I also enjoyed reading Sadie's story. It amazed me how she lived such a simple life, yet she was so content because she was independent and making money for herself. I found it interesting how she could only live on $2 a week! She even went on to say she could "have lived cheaper, but we are both fond of good things and felt that we could afford them." (P. 308) $2 a week! That is literally impossible now a days. But Sadie claimed the $2 was enough for her to get by on and live comfortably. '''I noticed the marriage decision she made. It is interesting to see the progression over the course of the centuries. Women insisted on waiting instead of being married in their teenage years. Could it be because they were making a life for themselves and wanted to establish their own independence before getting married?''' --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
'''I also very much enjoyed Sadie’s story, as she really lived the American dream. Having found trouble in her homeland, her mother and her moved to America, and with the help of family members here, was able to set up a home, find a job, save money, and live decently well.''' I can understand her desire to hold off on marriage, as she was successful in gaining independence and personal autonomy, which would most likely be revoked upon her marriage. Her desire for nice clothes was endearing as it reminded me much of the desires of young women today, and because she was also successful in saving there was no reason for her not to have nicer clothes, especially since she believed that a “girl who does not dress well is stuck in the corner” (311). '''Her independence and savvyness allows her that luxury and because of that - no one puts Sadie in the corner.''' -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
'''''I found it interesting that Sadie received /modest/$5.50 a week for her work. I don’t know what the average living costs of the time were and I don’t know what the average wage of men or women of the time but $5.50 seems quite a lot compared to the women mentioned in Helen Campbell’s piece on Shop girls and Piece Workers, and modest doesn’t seem to be the right adjective when comparing it to Campbell’s women.''''' Sadie used two dollars per week for living costs, saved one, and one dollar went to spend on clothing and pleasure. <br />
I love the mention of the fortune teller in this piece and the mention to the alarm clock that she can’t believe that because “I don’t see who the clock would know.” –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
I also really liked this story. It was definitely a change to read about her social outings. I also thought it was amazing that Sadie made $5.50 a week and was able to support herself, save, and have a little extra spending money. I was also wondering what the average wage of men at the time was. Sadie's pay does seem better than the pay in the piece workers article. I'm just wondering how it compares to a man's pay. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 16, Woman Suffrage/Women’s Rights'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Julia Ward Howe, 1899, Reminiscences ==<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Julia's Reminiscences as she tells her little story. When she said that part about when she said " 'I am with you' I have been with them ever since" I found that very touching. That and the last line about how although she gave a lot to the cause, it was repaid to her thousandfold. '''She was very proud of the work done as she should have been. She spoke of how the first 2/3 of her life were spent believing the masculine ideal of character as the only one...''' I liked the whole thing. She just seemed really endearing and heartfelt. - Christine<br />
<br />
== Stanton and Anthony, 1882, piece in ''History of Woman Suffrage'' ==<br />
<br />
Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony in Political Lessons take a unique and direct approach to gain women’s suffrage. '''Based off of their arguments, I can see why they may have been threatening. They argue that women, in all actuality, are quiet geniuses, unable to voice their opinions and they are frustrated.''' This goes completely against the gender roles of the time, which perceive women to be inferior people who were meant to stay home and care for her family who didn’t really have any real political opinions of her own and who followed their husband’s views. I also think that it was very bold for them to bring up topics such as class and race, and relate them to women's gender roles. I can see why this could be appealing for some and scary for others. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
== Frances Ellen (Watkins) Harper, 1866 Woman’s Rights convention ==<br />
'''"We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul." Strong words that people still need to come terms with today.''' I really enjoyed reading her speech. I feel so much more for the black woman of the time because they were fighting a double fight: race and gender rights were needed. Bringing up the "wrongs" done to the blacks by the whites was a powerful message, especially when she contrasted it to the "rights" that the "white women" keep takling about. - christine<br />
<br />
'''I felt deeply sorry for Frances Harper,''' not only was she a woman but also a black widow who inherited the role of provider for four children, only one of whom she was the true mother to. She quickly points out that if she was a man, she would not have been violated in the same terms and would have been as seen as more equal before law. I think her message of saying giving women the right to vote would not cure all injustice against women, and race would be a big factor. She knows the terms of the country and understands that while big steps are needed the country would work a step at a time to achieve equality. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I also feel sorry for Frances Harper. It would be hard enough at this time to be either a woman or black, but to be both would be incredibly difficult. Even if someone didn't hate you because you were black, they probably thought you were dumb because you were a woman. When we talked about her in class, I wasn't sure that I agreed with her idea of gaining rights for black men before women. After reading this, I think I see her point. Even if women gained the right to vote, black women would still be excluded, either legally or illegally. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Shoe women of Lynn, MA, 1874 ==<br />
In Shoemakers of Lynn, these women seemed very robust and seemed to want to do things that man does (such as chew tobacco and spit on the floor) and not be judged that it was not a “lady like” thing to do. '''It’s interesting that she refers to women as slaves to men.''' '''''What I thought stood out was when she spoke about women who are married, that they have no need for anything and have no idea the oppression that those who were not married had to face.''''' -Marsha<br />
<br />
'''Americus provides an interesting counter to women’s suffrage that I hadn’t considered. She wrote that the day she takes the ballot “will bring with it a conviction that the judgment I rely on has failed me, and the arm upon which I lean, is powerless to protect (367).” She felt that women’s suffrage would ultimately question female judgment. Women relied on their husbands willingly, but suggesting that they needed to vote would also suggest that their husbands weren’t what they trusted them to be, and that perhaps women couldn’t trust themselves either if they were able to be so completely deceived.''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
'''In many ways, the women’s rights movement was elitist.''' Wealthy women who had the leisure time to campaign for suffrage often asserted that they should vote to help counteract the votes of the working class. Working class women were less likely to participate in the women’s rights movement, therefore''' I thought Ella A. Little’s letter was pretty awesome. Her argument was that wealthy women did not really understand oppression and that working class women who had to “battle” to “earn their livelihood” were in more desperate need for the right to vote.''' I think it is really sad that this opinion is not often heard in the women’s rights movement. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
“Americus” was some character. “Americus” described chewing tobacco and spitting it on the floor as a right. Snoring was also described as a right, because, I suppose, it was more acceptable for men to snore. I thought it interesting that they compared the fact of being a woman to the idea of slavery when as the NWSA they were not fighting for the right of African Amerian’s suffrage, they were first focused on the right for women to vote. '''It amused me that apparently as soon as women gained the right to vote that as a whole they’d be less timid and not afraid of “burglars nights” as well as chew and spit tobacco and snore''' (the latter two mentioned before). –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Amelia Barr, (novelist and married) 1896, Speaks out against female suffrage ==<br />
'''I still think that it is a little weird whenever I hear about a woman who did not want rights or did not see them as important to have. Maybe they couldn't miss something they never had?''' In the document, she argued that if women were given rights they would have become tools, made irrational decisions, and be less likely to defend the nation. She also says that women are born graceful and soft and therefore could never do the work that rough men do. If I were a woman in the late Nineteenth Century, I would have just wanted to be seen as an equal to men and know that I would be treated fairly in court or receive an equal distribution of property or wealth from my deceased husband. I wouldn't consider those two examples as doing "the work of the virile virtues of men." - Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I found what Amelia Barr wrote very interesting. '''She’s not against discontented women in the working class fighting for better wages but rather against women in the political realm'''. I think she’s saying women are too fickle to make political decisions like decisions of war and that law would be in danger in the hands of women. Another point, I think she tried to make is that when a women steps out of the “domestic sphere” she put herself at risk for being criticized by a man (creating animosity) and Barr believed only women should criticize other women. - Marsha<br />
<br />
'''I disagree with pretty much everything she has to say but I can totally see the women of her time agreeing with her. She promotes stereotypes which annoys me.''' She asks if women get what they want and if they are allowed to work as men whether they will be happy. She asks if men's work is less tiresome then women's. Basically, isn't work just work? These are definitely interesting questions. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
'''I can understand why Amelia Barr would have followers, even though I totally disagree, as her arguments are written very well and she has arguments that attack women’s moral and sensible duties, such as their religion, their obligation to their families, and their femininity.''' Specifically her writing about women’s ability to vote and work and that her desire for knowledge was unnecessary and will take away her femininity was interesting to me, and made me wonder''' what she, or others like her, would think of the women of today? Would she see our accomplishments as really our failure as women? '''- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Anna Garlin Spencer, 1898, response to anti-suffrage attacks ==<br />
<br />
Spencer's reasoning for why women should have the right to vote was unique. '''She claimed that once the government began to get involved in matters dealing with "any form of educative, charitable or personally helpful work, it entered the area of distinctive feminine training and power." Once the government entered that woman's sphere, it became involved in women's lives, which meant women had a say in what the government did, especially in that female sphere.''' She made it seem like women had the right to be involved because of the government's entrance into their lives. She also implied that without women's suffrage, the government could not adequately function/make beneficial decisions in the woman's sphere of influence. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Charlotte Perkins Gilman, 20th Century feminist, 1903, The Home ==<br />
<br />
In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's piece, the reader gets the idea that she obviously thinks there is more to women than being housewives and mothers. She argues that women should be able to participate in society and not be stuck at home. '''The idea of a "home-husband" was a funny concept. She said, and I agree, "Never was any such idiot on earth as this hypothetical home-husband. It was not in him to stay in such primitive restrictions. But he has been quite willing to leave his wife in that interestingly remote period." Men are so adamant about keeping females inside the home but having the roles be reversed would be out of the question.''' -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I think '''in order for the women’s rights movement to proceed, people had to move beyond the idea that women were “naturally” moral and nurturing. I don’t think nineteenth-century Americans saw gender as fluid and dynamic, instead it was prescribed by God. In order to change, they needed to learn to see it as less of a biological function, and more of a result of socialization. ''Radicals such as Charlotte Perkins Gilman'' lead the way with ideas that women’s forced isolation in the home made them less capable for a public role rather than a natural lack of abilities.''' -Allison Luthern</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_15_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 15 Questions/Comments-327 092009-12-03T14:13:11Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Sadie Frome, 1902, “Story of a Sweatshop Girl” */</p>
<hr />
<div>== ''Comparative source questions'' ==<br />
<br />
'''I’m curious to what extent women truly believed that they were morally superior to men. They certainly used it to justify women taking a part in activities that were not typically approved of for women.''' For instance, one of Clara Lanza’s arguments for women working outside the home in clerical positions was that women’s morality would improve the business world. Some women’s rights activists also used that argument for why women should be able to vote. '''Were they consciously manipulating the rhetoric of the day or did they just naturally assume it to be the truth?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
'''<br />
One commonality between some readings for this week is the emphasis that women placed on their eduction.''' Although an education was more available to working class women than it had been during the eighteenth century, '''availability did not always translate to attainability.''' For example, in '''Lucy Salmon's study''', she came across domestic servicewomen working "eighteen hours" a day. This amount of labor would leave little time for women to acquire the skills necessary for what Salmon calls "intelligent work". In another story, 16 year-old '''Sadie Frowne''' worked an arduous eleven hours a day in a sweatshop, but long hours did not stop her from "going to school at night". Her case must have been somewhat exceptional; if most young laborers had opportunities like Sadie, organizations such as the Knights of Labor would have no need to focus their agenda on "taking little girls from the factory ... and educating them". -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 13, Urban Wage Earners'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Helen Campbell, 1893, study on NY wage laborers, “Shop Girls and Piece Workers” ==<br />
I thought it was interesting how she said that '''the girls who worked in the shops: "she knows far better what constitutes the life of the rich than the rich ever know of the life of the poor...of the woman she so often despises, even when longing the most to be one of them. She imitates where she can..."(bottom of page 294). This is further emphasizing the desire of lower-class women to be like the upper class, to strive for that 'perfect life.'''' It is a striking contrast that the girl hates the rich women, yet longs to be like them. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
Interesting article. Do you think focusing on women in poverty made for a more effective argument against the evils of poverty since women were supposed to be part of the work force? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I think it was a way to emphasize the evils of poverty. Obviously, these women were unable to stay in the domestic sphere. They had no choice but to work. I think focusing on horrible factory jobs that these women had to do definitely emphasizes this. I don't think that focusing on men working these jobs would gain very much attention. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Lucy Maynard Salmon, 1897, Vassar Historian who studied domestic service ==<br />
<br />
'''I noticed a difference in the way that working women were described in comparison to the language used about domestic women.''' Working women saw themselves as being immersed in society and into the world but a domestic woman "never read and does not know what is going on in the world." (P. 298) The working women also describe domestic women as having so much time on their hands, almost insinuating that domestic women's work is not equal to theirs. It was interesting how the working women say they enjoy their job more than they would being a domestic woman. They enjoy the freedom they have to go out and work, but then come home and do whatever they please. Their work and home lives are completely separate. Oppositely, domestic women are always around their work, continuously tending to the family and the house whenever it is needed. There are not set hours of work for domestic women.... their work is their life. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex on her ideas about working women. '''They saw themselves as in the world and intouch with society and it made me wonder if they were the real reason behind the push for women's rights? I know middle class women were heavily involved in shaping women's rights but did the efforts of the working class women make a difference?''' Working class women were proud of what they accomplished and according to this article boasted about what they could do, I agree a woman can do anything she sets her mind to but in a way didn't all women shape the womens rights movement? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I think the thing that struck me most about this article was the first industrial advantage. While I know it was not uncommon for a woman to work during this time period I had always thought it was out of necessity. ''' The idea of opportunities for promotion suggests the idea of a career to me as opposed to a job. Do you think jobs with promotions indicate a shift towards careers and less focus on the domestic duties of marriage?''' Later in the piece the young factory operative explains how domestic servants don't make good wives. I suppose I am just wondering what kind of role marriage played when women went looking for work. -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I agree that the gaining a promotion does make this job seem more like a career. These women seemed content with working. I had also assumed that women that worked did it because they had to. I never thought that they found pride in it. I also agree with Megan that these women had a bigger part in the womens' rights movement than I had previously thought. I'm sure these women thought they had nothing in common with the middle class women working in the movement. Overall, I think they did play a part. It may not have been the part that middle class women would have wanted, but these women were out having careers at a time when women were supposed to stay at home. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Isabel Eaton, 1899, research on black servants in Philadelphia ==<br />
'''Unlike the white women urban workers we read about for this week, this piece shows how little choice black women urban workers had in occupations.''' Most were domestic servants. Even those who were educated or had other job training could not get the jobs they wanted and were qualified for. '''The racial discrimination they experienced kept them locked into a job they felt was socially degrading and that provided little personal freedom and low wages.''' Due to being turned down, or even the fear of being turned down, most were kept them from seeking jobs outside of domestic service. '''So while white women with an education or job training could afford to be independent and had new job opportunities opened to them, black women were less likely to be able to experience this type of independence.'''<br />
--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
This article is sad because it shows us how race oriented people were even after the Civil War, but it is already a well known that Blacks did not reach any kind of true equality until the 20th century though. Actually, while I was reading this, I came up with kind of a random but related question: '''In the Antebellum South, when there was still slavery, the slaves would "fight back" in any way they could, including pretending to be really stupid so that they may screw up the task assigned to them, etc. So, I was wondering if this form of retaliation might have had any sort of negative impact after the Civil War for blacks searching for jobs (mostly in the south since that is where such things usually took place)?''' -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I think that it had to have a negative impact on them after the Civil War. It just perpetuated the stereotype that blacks were stupid and inferior. However, I'm not sure that it would have made a difference if they were the smartest people in the whole world. Whites were convinced that they were inferior and I doubt that they would have been willing to see anything else.-Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Clara Lanza, 1891, defends the female office clerk in NY ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Looking at The Office Clerk by Clara Lanza many things stand out to me. '''This piece is justifying the use of women as clerks. However, this justification feeds into the women’s assumed gender roles during that time period as much as the men’s justification as to why women should not be clerks. Both arguments use the overarching gender roles of the time.''' Men argue that women should remain in the home and be good wives and raise their children, they also argue that women fidget, they become anxious, they are temperamental, they giggle, and so on… these characteristics all fit into what women were presumed to be like. The counter this argument, Clara Lanza believes that women are more reliable than men, they come to work when sick, they don’t complain, and they can do all of this while being great wives. Both sides to this argument use what everyone would agree are characteristics of women of that time and the roles people expected them to play, just in different ways. '''This is similar to the arguments for and against women abolitionists and reformers, it is very interesting how gender roles can be used as justifications for different things.''' Based off of the readings about women’s roles as activists for women’s rights I can tell that the same use of gender roles as justifications for and against the movement being used here as well. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I agree a lot with Erin. Ms. Lanza states in the beginning of her response that "Among the woman workers in New York there are none who afford a more interesting study than the vast army of clerks, the work of a clerk being admirably adapted to the sex." '''While I think expected gender roles play a large part- the exactness of women's work, their reliability, and the ways in which they can be trusted- I also wonder if, at this time, there were beginning to be notions of differences between "sex" and "gender", one of the arguments, I think, of the feminist movement during the 20th Century, with gender being thought of as very much socially constructed.''' It almost seems like Ms. Lanza would make many of those in the women's movement at the time or the feminist movement today kind of angry- '''it seems as if in many ways she is very much defending the gender roles and stereotypes about women.''' -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Leonara Barry, on what the Knights of Labor are doing for women, 1888 ==<br />
<br />
This article provides some moral relief from the sources in this week's reading that are exemplary of ideologies which exacerbated conditions for women in the workplace. For example, the "difficulty" American-born girls felt about competing against a "foreign born and colored element," (297) noted and justified by Lucy Salmon, is ridiculous; Isabel Eaton, a black domestic worker, claims that black domestic workers often can't secure work because "white help is preferred" (299). Racial divides like this, so incorporated into American society, emphasize just how radical the Knights of Labor organization was to accept laborers regardless of race or gender. Are their radical methods generally blamed for the groups eventual failure? --Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Sadie Frome, 1902, “Story of a Sweatshop Girl” ==<br />
<br />
I really liked Sadie's story.''' I thought it was neat how she talked about her social activities outside of work- going to school at night and to the synagogue, having her fortune read by a fortune teller, and going out with Henry, to the theater, or dancing or to Coney Island. She seems like the quintessential "new" young woman of the early twentieth century- she is independent, able to save her money, and not ready to settle down and marry Henry, even though he wants her to. She seems very content with her situation right now and her life as it is- as if she is not ready for things to change just yet and is enjoying the benefits of her hard work and her independence.''' I really kind of admire her! -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I loved Sadie's story. She is a very practical person. She saves money and she knows how to have fun. '''I was a little disturbed by the matter or fact way she talks about getting her finger caught in the needle and how it could result in a broken bone or dismemberment.''' She did not seem concerned that it could happen to her. '''''I think it is funny that she keeps putting Henry off and that she does not want to get married.''''' I admire her independence. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Just like LeAnn and Allison said, I also enjoyed reading Sadie's story. It amazed me how she lived such a simple life, yet she was so content because she was independent and making money for herself. I found it interesting how she could only live on $2 a week! She even went on to say she could "have lived cheaper, but we are both fond of good things and felt that we could afford them." (P. 308) $2 a week! That is literally impossible now a days. But Sadie claimed the $2 was enough for her to get by on and live comfortably. '''I noticed the marriage decision she made. It is interesting to see the progression over the course of the centuries. Women insisted on waiting instead of being married in their teenage years. Could it be because they were making a life for themselves and wanted to establish their own independence before getting married?''' --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
'''I also very much enjoyed Sadie’s story, as she really lived the American dream. Having found trouble in her homeland, her mother and her moved to America, and with the help of family members here, was able to set up a home, find a job, save money, and live decently well.''' I can understand her desire to hold off on marriage, as she was successful in gaining independence and personal autonomy, which would most likely be revoked upon her marriage. Her desire for nice clothes was endearing as it reminded me much of the desires of young women today, and because she was also successful in saving there was no reason for her not to have nicer clothes, especially since she believed that a “girl who does not dress well is stuck in the corner” (311). '''Her independence and savvyness allows her that luxury and because of that - no one puts Sadie in the corner.''' -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
'''''I found it interesting that Sadie received /modest/$5.50 a week for her work. I don’t know what the average living costs of the time were and I don’t know what the average wage of men or women of the time but $5.50 seems quite a lot compared to the women mentioned in Helen Campbell’s piece on Shop girls and Piece Workers, and modest doesn’t seem to be the right adjective when comparing it to Campbell’s women.''''' Sadie used two dollars per week for living costs, saved one, and one dollar went to spend on clothing and pleasure. <br />
I love the mention of the fortune teller in this piece and the mention to the alarm clock that she can’t believe that because “I don’t see who the clock would know.” –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
I also really liked this story. It was definitely a change to read about her social outings. I also thought it was amazing that Sadie made $5.50 a week and was able to support herself, save, and have a little extra spending money. I was also wondering what the average wage of men at the time was. Sadie's pay does seem better than the pay in the piece workers article. I'm just wondering how it compares to a man's pay. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 16, Woman Suffrage/Women’s Rights'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Julia Ward Howe, 1899, Reminiscences ==<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Julia's Reminiscences as she tells her little story. When she said that part about when she said " 'I am with you' I have been with them ever since" I found that very touching. That and the last line about how although she gave a lot to the cause, it was repaid to her thousandfold. '''She was very proud of the work done as she should have been. She spoke of how the first 2/3 of her life were spent believing the masculine ideal of character as the only one...''' I liked the whole thing. She just seemed really endearing and heartfelt. - Christine<br />
<br />
== Stanton and Anthony, 1882, piece in ''History of Woman Suffrage'' ==<br />
<br />
Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony in Political Lessons take a unique and direct approach to gain women’s suffrage. '''Based off of their arguments, I can see why they may have been threatening. They argue that women, in all actuality, are quiet geniuses, unable to voice their opinions and they are frustrated.''' This goes completely against the gender roles of the time, which perceive women to be inferior people who were meant to stay home and care for her family who didn’t really have any real political opinions of her own and who followed their husband’s views. I also think that it was very bold for them to bring up topics such as class and race, and relate them to women's gender roles. I can see why this could be appealing for some and scary for others. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
== Frances Ellen (Watkins) Harper, 1866 Woman’s Rights convention ==<br />
'''"We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul." Strong words that people still need to come terms with today.''' I really enjoyed reading her speech. I feel so much more for the black woman of the time because they were fighting a double fight: race and gender rights were needed. Bringing up the "wrongs" done to the blacks by the whites was a powerful message, especially when she contrasted it to the "rights" that the "white women" keep takling about. - christine<br />
<br />
'''I felt deeply sorry for Frances Harper,''' not only was she a woman but also a black widow who inherited the role of provider for four children, only one of whom she was the true mother to. She quickly points out that if she was a man, she would not have been violated in the same terms and would have been as seen as more equal before law. I think her message of saying giving women the right to vote would not cure all injustice against women, and race would be a big factor. She knows the terms of the country and understands that while big steps are needed the country would work a step at a time to achieve equality. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
== Shoe women of Lynn, MA, 1874 ==<br />
In Shoemakers of Lynn, these women seemed very robust and seemed to want to do things that man does (such as chew tobacco and spit on the floor) and not be judged that it was not a “lady like” thing to do. '''It’s interesting that she refers to women as slaves to men.''' '''''What I thought stood out was when she spoke about women who are married, that they have no need for anything and have no idea the oppression that those who were not married had to face.''''' -Marsha<br />
<br />
'''Americus provides an interesting counter to women’s suffrage that I hadn’t considered. She wrote that the day she takes the ballot “will bring with it a conviction that the judgment I rely on has failed me, and the arm upon which I lean, is powerless to protect (367).” She felt that women’s suffrage would ultimately question female judgment. Women relied on their husbands willingly, but suggesting that they needed to vote would also suggest that their husbands weren’t what they trusted them to be, and that perhaps women couldn’t trust themselves either if they were able to be so completely deceived.''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
'''In many ways, the women’s rights movement was elitist.''' Wealthy women who had the leisure time to campaign for suffrage often asserted that they should vote to help counteract the votes of the working class. Working class women were less likely to participate in the women’s rights movement, therefore''' I thought Ella A. Little’s letter was pretty awesome. Her argument was that wealthy women did not really understand oppression and that working class women who had to “battle” to “earn their livelihood” were in more desperate need for the right to vote.''' I think it is really sad that this opinion is not often heard in the women’s rights movement. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
“Americus” was some character. “Americus” described chewing tobacco and spitting it on the floor as a right. Snoring was also described as a right, because, I suppose, it was more acceptable for men to snore. I thought it interesting that they compared the fact of being a woman to the idea of slavery when as the NWSA they were not fighting for the right of African Amerian’s suffrage, they were first focused on the right for women to vote. '''It amused me that apparently as soon as women gained the right to vote that as a whole they’d be less timid and not afraid of “burglars nights” as well as chew and spit tobacco and snore''' (the latter two mentioned before). –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Amelia Barr, (novelist and married) 1896, Speaks out against female suffrage ==<br />
'''I still think that it is a little weird whenever I hear about a woman who did not want rights or did not see them as important to have. Maybe they couldn't miss something they never had?''' In the document, she argued that if women were given rights they would have become tools, made irrational decisions, and be less likely to defend the nation. She also says that women are born graceful and soft and therefore could never do the work that rough men do. If I were a woman in the late Nineteenth Century, I would have just wanted to be seen as an equal to men and know that I would be treated fairly in court or receive an equal distribution of property or wealth from my deceased husband. I wouldn't consider those two examples as doing "the work of the virile virtues of men." - Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I found what Amelia Barr wrote very interesting. '''She’s not against discontented women in the working class fighting for better wages but rather against women in the political realm'''. I think she’s saying women are too fickle to make political decisions like decisions of war and that law would be in danger in the hands of women. Another point, I think she tried to make is that when a women steps out of the “domestic sphere” she put herself at risk for being criticized by a man (creating animosity) and Barr believed only women should criticize other women. - Marsha<br />
<br />
'''I disagree with pretty much everything she has to say but I can totally see the women of her time agreeing with her. She promotes stereotypes which annoys me.''' She asks if women get what they want and if they are allowed to work as men whether they will be happy. She asks if men's work is less tiresome then women's. Basically, isn't work just work? These are definitely interesting questions. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
'''I can understand why Amelia Barr would have followers, even though I totally disagree, as her arguments are written very well and she has arguments that attack women’s moral and sensible duties, such as their religion, their obligation to their families, and their femininity.''' Specifically her writing about women’s ability to vote and work and that her desire for knowledge was unnecessary and will take away her femininity was interesting to me, and made me wonder''' what she, or others like her, would think of the women of today? Would she see our accomplishments as really our failure as women? '''- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Anna Garlin Spencer, 1898, response to anti-suffrage attacks ==<br />
<br />
Spencer's reasoning for why women should have the right to vote was unique. '''She claimed that once the government began to get involved in matters dealing with "any form of educative, charitable or personally helpful work, it entered the area of distinctive feminine training and power." Once the government entered that woman's sphere, it became involved in women's lives, which meant women had a say in what the government did, especially in that female sphere.''' She made it seem like women had the right to be involved because of the government's entrance into their lives. She also implied that without women's suffrage, the government could not adequately function/make beneficial decisions in the woman's sphere of influence. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Charlotte Perkins Gilman, 20th Century feminist, 1903, The Home ==<br />
<br />
In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's piece, the reader gets the idea that she obviously thinks there is more to women than being housewives and mothers. She argues that women should be able to participate in society and not be stuck at home. '''The idea of a "home-husband" was a funny concept. She said, and I agree, "Never was any such idiot on earth as this hypothetical home-husband. It was not in him to stay in such primitive restrictions. But he has been quite willing to leave his wife in that interestingly remote period." Men are so adamant about keeping females inside the home but having the roles be reversed would be out of the question.''' -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I think '''in order for the women’s rights movement to proceed, people had to move beyond the idea that women were “naturally” moral and nurturing. I don’t think nineteenth-century Americans saw gender as fluid and dynamic, instead it was prescribed by God. In order to change, they needed to learn to see it as less of a biological function, and more of a result of socialization. ''Radicals such as Charlotte Perkins Gilman'' lead the way with ideas that women’s forced isolation in the home made them less capable for a public role rather than a natural lack of abilities.''' -Allison Luthern</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_15_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 15 Questions/Comments-327 092009-12-03T14:09:51Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Isabel Eaton, 1899, research on black servants in Philadelphia */</p>
<hr />
<div>== ''Comparative source questions'' ==<br />
<br />
'''I’m curious to what extent women truly believed that they were morally superior to men. They certainly used it to justify women taking a part in activities that were not typically approved of for women.''' For instance, one of Clara Lanza’s arguments for women working outside the home in clerical positions was that women’s morality would improve the business world. Some women’s rights activists also used that argument for why women should be able to vote. '''Were they consciously manipulating the rhetoric of the day or did they just naturally assume it to be the truth?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
'''<br />
One commonality between some readings for this week is the emphasis that women placed on their eduction.''' Although an education was more available to working class women than it had been during the eighteenth century, '''availability did not always translate to attainability.''' For example, in '''Lucy Salmon's study''', she came across domestic servicewomen working "eighteen hours" a day. This amount of labor would leave little time for women to acquire the skills necessary for what Salmon calls "intelligent work". In another story, 16 year-old '''Sadie Frowne''' worked an arduous eleven hours a day in a sweatshop, but long hours did not stop her from "going to school at night". Her case must have been somewhat exceptional; if most young laborers had opportunities like Sadie, organizations such as the Knights of Labor would have no need to focus their agenda on "taking little girls from the factory ... and educating them". -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 13, Urban Wage Earners'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Helen Campbell, 1893, study on NY wage laborers, “Shop Girls and Piece Workers” ==<br />
I thought it was interesting how she said that '''the girls who worked in the shops: "she knows far better what constitutes the life of the rich than the rich ever know of the life of the poor...of the woman she so often despises, even when longing the most to be one of them. She imitates where she can..."(bottom of page 294). This is further emphasizing the desire of lower-class women to be like the upper class, to strive for that 'perfect life.'''' It is a striking contrast that the girl hates the rich women, yet longs to be like them. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
Interesting article. Do you think focusing on women in poverty made for a more effective argument against the evils of poverty since women were supposed to be part of the work force? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I think it was a way to emphasize the evils of poverty. Obviously, these women were unable to stay in the domestic sphere. They had no choice but to work. I think focusing on horrible factory jobs that these women had to do definitely emphasizes this. I don't think that focusing on men working these jobs would gain very much attention. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Lucy Maynard Salmon, 1897, Vassar Historian who studied domestic service ==<br />
<br />
'''I noticed a difference in the way that working women were described in comparison to the language used about domestic women.''' Working women saw themselves as being immersed in society and into the world but a domestic woman "never read and does not know what is going on in the world." (P. 298) The working women also describe domestic women as having so much time on their hands, almost insinuating that domestic women's work is not equal to theirs. It was interesting how the working women say they enjoy their job more than they would being a domestic woman. They enjoy the freedom they have to go out and work, but then come home and do whatever they please. Their work and home lives are completely separate. Oppositely, domestic women are always around their work, continuously tending to the family and the house whenever it is needed. There are not set hours of work for domestic women.... their work is their life. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex on her ideas about working women. '''They saw themselves as in the world and intouch with society and it made me wonder if they were the real reason behind the push for women's rights? I know middle class women were heavily involved in shaping women's rights but did the efforts of the working class women make a difference?''' Working class women were proud of what they accomplished and according to this article boasted about what they could do, I agree a woman can do anything she sets her mind to but in a way didn't all women shape the womens rights movement? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I think the thing that struck me most about this article was the first industrial advantage. While I know it was not uncommon for a woman to work during this time period I had always thought it was out of necessity. ''' The idea of opportunities for promotion suggests the idea of a career to me as opposed to a job. Do you think jobs with promotions indicate a shift towards careers and less focus on the domestic duties of marriage?''' Later in the piece the young factory operative explains how domestic servants don't make good wives. I suppose I am just wondering what kind of role marriage played when women went looking for work. -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I agree that the gaining a promotion does make this job seem more like a career. These women seemed content with working. I had also assumed that women that worked did it because they had to. I never thought that they found pride in it. I also agree with Megan that these women had a bigger part in the womens' rights movement than I had previously thought. I'm sure these women thought they had nothing in common with the middle class women working in the movement. Overall, I think they did play a part. It may not have been the part that middle class women would have wanted, but these women were out having careers at a time when women were supposed to stay at home. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Isabel Eaton, 1899, research on black servants in Philadelphia ==<br />
'''Unlike the white women urban workers we read about for this week, this piece shows how little choice black women urban workers had in occupations.''' Most were domestic servants. Even those who were educated or had other job training could not get the jobs they wanted and were qualified for. '''The racial discrimination they experienced kept them locked into a job they felt was socially degrading and that provided little personal freedom and low wages.''' Due to being turned down, or even the fear of being turned down, most were kept them from seeking jobs outside of domestic service. '''So while white women with an education or job training could afford to be independent and had new job opportunities opened to them, black women were less likely to be able to experience this type of independence.'''<br />
--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
This article is sad because it shows us how race oriented people were even after the Civil War, but it is already a well known that Blacks did not reach any kind of true equality until the 20th century though. Actually, while I was reading this, I came up with kind of a random but related question: '''In the Antebellum South, when there was still slavery, the slaves would "fight back" in any way they could, including pretending to be really stupid so that they may screw up the task assigned to them, etc. So, I was wondering if this form of retaliation might have had any sort of negative impact after the Civil War for blacks searching for jobs (mostly in the south since that is where such things usually took place)?''' -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I think that it had to have a negative impact on them after the Civil War. It just perpetuated the stereotype that blacks were stupid and inferior. However, I'm not sure that it would have made a difference if they were the smartest people in the whole world. Whites were convinced that they were inferior and I doubt that they would have been willing to see anything else.-Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Clara Lanza, 1891, defends the female office clerk in NY ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Looking at The Office Clerk by Clara Lanza many things stand out to me. '''This piece is justifying the use of women as clerks. However, this justification feeds into the women’s assumed gender roles during that time period as much as the men’s justification as to why women should not be clerks. Both arguments use the overarching gender roles of the time.''' Men argue that women should remain in the home and be good wives and raise their children, they also argue that women fidget, they become anxious, they are temperamental, they giggle, and so on… these characteristics all fit into what women were presumed to be like. The counter this argument, Clara Lanza believes that women are more reliable than men, they come to work when sick, they don’t complain, and they can do all of this while being great wives. Both sides to this argument use what everyone would agree are characteristics of women of that time and the roles people expected them to play, just in different ways. '''This is similar to the arguments for and against women abolitionists and reformers, it is very interesting how gender roles can be used as justifications for different things.''' Based off of the readings about women’s roles as activists for women’s rights I can tell that the same use of gender roles as justifications for and against the movement being used here as well. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I agree a lot with Erin. Ms. Lanza states in the beginning of her response that "Among the woman workers in New York there are none who afford a more interesting study than the vast army of clerks, the work of a clerk being admirably adapted to the sex." '''While I think expected gender roles play a large part- the exactness of women's work, their reliability, and the ways in which they can be trusted- I also wonder if, at this time, there were beginning to be notions of differences between "sex" and "gender", one of the arguments, I think, of the feminist movement during the 20th Century, with gender being thought of as very much socially constructed.''' It almost seems like Ms. Lanza would make many of those in the women's movement at the time or the feminist movement today kind of angry- '''it seems as if in many ways she is very much defending the gender roles and stereotypes about women.''' -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Leonara Barry, on what the Knights of Labor are doing for women, 1888 ==<br />
<br />
This article provides some moral relief from the sources in this week's reading that are exemplary of ideologies which exacerbated conditions for women in the workplace. For example, the "difficulty" American-born girls felt about competing against a "foreign born and colored element," (297) noted and justified by Lucy Salmon, is ridiculous; Isabel Eaton, a black domestic worker, claims that black domestic workers often can't secure work because "white help is preferred" (299). Racial divides like this, so incorporated into American society, emphasize just how radical the Knights of Labor organization was to accept laborers regardless of race or gender. Are their radical methods generally blamed for the groups eventual failure? --Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Sadie Frome, 1902, “Story of a Sweatshop Girl” ==<br />
<br />
I really liked Sadie's story.''' I thought it was neat how she talked about her social activities outside of work- going to school at night and to the synagogue, having her fortune read by a fortune teller, and going out with Henry, to the theater, or dancing or to Coney Island. She seems like the quintessential "new" young woman of the early twentieth century- she is independent, able to save her money, and not ready to settle down and marry Henry, even though he wants her to. She seems very content with her situation right now and her life as it is- as if she is not ready for things to change just yet and is enjoying the benefits of her hard work and her independence.''' I really kind of admire her! -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I loved Sadie's story. She is a very practical person. She saves money and she knows how to have fun. '''I was a little disturbed by the matter or fact way she talks about getting her finger caught in the needle and how it could result in a broken bone or dismemberment.''' She did not seem concerned that it could happen to her. '''''I think it is funny that she keeps putting Henry off and that she does not want to get married.''''' I admire her independence. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Just like LeAnn and Allison said, I also enjoyed reading Sadie's story. It amazed me how she lived such a simple life, yet she was so content because she was independent and making money for herself. I found it interesting how she could only live on $2 a week! She even went on to say she could "have lived cheaper, but we are both fond of good things and felt that we could afford them." (P. 308) $2 a week! That is literally impossible now a days. But Sadie claimed the $2 was enough for her to get by on and live comfortably. '''I noticed the marriage decision she made. It is interesting to see the progression over the course of the centuries. Women insisted on waiting instead of being married in their teenage years. Could it be because they were making a life for themselves and wanted to establish their own independence before getting married?''' --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
'''I also very much enjoyed Sadie’s story, as she really lived the American dream. Having found trouble in her homeland, her mother and her moved to America, and with the help of family members here, was able to set up a home, find a job, save money, and live decently well.''' I can understand her desire to hold off on marriage, as she was successful in gaining independence and personal autonomy, which would most likely be revoked upon her marriage. Her desire for nice clothes was endearing as it reminded me much of the desires of young women today, and because she was also successful in saving there was no reason for her not to have nicer clothes, especially since she believed that a “girl who does not dress well is stuck in the corner” (311). '''Her independence and savvyness allows her that luxury and because of that - no one puts Sadie in the corner.''' -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
'''''I found it interesting that Sadie received /modest/$5.50 a week for her work. I don’t know what the average living costs of the time were and I don’t know what the average wage of men or women of the time but $5.50 seems quite a lot compared to the women mentioned in Helen Campbell’s piece on Shop girls and Piece Workers, and modest doesn’t seem to be the right adjective when comparing it to Campbell’s women.''''' Sadie used two dollars per week for living costs, saved one, and one dollar went to spend on clothing and pleasure. <br />
I love the mention of the fortune teller in this piece and the mention to the alarm clock that she can’t believe that because “I don’t see who the clock would know.” –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 16, Woman Suffrage/Women’s Rights'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Julia Ward Howe, 1899, Reminiscences ==<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Julia's Reminiscences as she tells her little story. When she said that part about when she said " 'I am with you' I have been with them ever since" I found that very touching. That and the last line about how although she gave a lot to the cause, it was repaid to her thousandfold. '''She was very proud of the work done as she should have been. She spoke of how the first 2/3 of her life were spent believing the masculine ideal of character as the only one...''' I liked the whole thing. She just seemed really endearing and heartfelt. - Christine<br />
<br />
== Stanton and Anthony, 1882, piece in ''History of Woman Suffrage'' ==<br />
<br />
Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony in Political Lessons take a unique and direct approach to gain women’s suffrage. '''Based off of their arguments, I can see why they may have been threatening. They argue that women, in all actuality, are quiet geniuses, unable to voice their opinions and they are frustrated.''' This goes completely against the gender roles of the time, which perceive women to be inferior people who were meant to stay home and care for her family who didn’t really have any real political opinions of her own and who followed their husband’s views. I also think that it was very bold for them to bring up topics such as class and race, and relate them to women's gender roles. I can see why this could be appealing for some and scary for others. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
== Frances Ellen (Watkins) Harper, 1866 Woman’s Rights convention ==<br />
'''"We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul." Strong words that people still need to come terms with today.''' I really enjoyed reading her speech. I feel so much more for the black woman of the time because they were fighting a double fight: race and gender rights were needed. Bringing up the "wrongs" done to the blacks by the whites was a powerful message, especially when she contrasted it to the "rights" that the "white women" keep takling about. - christine<br />
<br />
'''I felt deeply sorry for Frances Harper,''' not only was she a woman but also a black widow who inherited the role of provider for four children, only one of whom she was the true mother to. She quickly points out that if she was a man, she would not have been violated in the same terms and would have been as seen as more equal before law. I think her message of saying giving women the right to vote would not cure all injustice against women, and race would be a big factor. She knows the terms of the country and understands that while big steps are needed the country would work a step at a time to achieve equality. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
== Shoe women of Lynn, MA, 1874 ==<br />
In Shoemakers of Lynn, these women seemed very robust and seemed to want to do things that man does (such as chew tobacco and spit on the floor) and not be judged that it was not a “lady like” thing to do. '''It’s interesting that she refers to women as slaves to men.''' '''''What I thought stood out was when she spoke about women who are married, that they have no need for anything and have no idea the oppression that those who were not married had to face.''''' -Marsha<br />
<br />
'''Americus provides an interesting counter to women’s suffrage that I hadn’t considered. She wrote that the day she takes the ballot “will bring with it a conviction that the judgment I rely on has failed me, and the arm upon which I lean, is powerless to protect (367).” She felt that women’s suffrage would ultimately question female judgment. Women relied on their husbands willingly, but suggesting that they needed to vote would also suggest that their husbands weren’t what they trusted them to be, and that perhaps women couldn’t trust themselves either if they were able to be so completely deceived.''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
'''In many ways, the women’s rights movement was elitist.''' Wealthy women who had the leisure time to campaign for suffrage often asserted that they should vote to help counteract the votes of the working class. Working class women were less likely to participate in the women’s rights movement, therefore''' I thought Ella A. Little’s letter was pretty awesome. Her argument was that wealthy women did not really understand oppression and that working class women who had to “battle” to “earn their livelihood” were in more desperate need for the right to vote.''' I think it is really sad that this opinion is not often heard in the women’s rights movement. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
“Americus” was some character. “Americus” described chewing tobacco and spitting it on the floor as a right. Snoring was also described as a right, because, I suppose, it was more acceptable for men to snore. I thought it interesting that they compared the fact of being a woman to the idea of slavery when as the NWSA they were not fighting for the right of African Amerian’s suffrage, they were first focused on the right for women to vote. '''It amused me that apparently as soon as women gained the right to vote that as a whole they’d be less timid and not afraid of “burglars nights” as well as chew and spit tobacco and snore''' (the latter two mentioned before). –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Amelia Barr, (novelist and married) 1896, Speaks out against female suffrage ==<br />
'''I still think that it is a little weird whenever I hear about a woman who did not want rights or did not see them as important to have. Maybe they couldn't miss something they never had?''' In the document, she argued that if women were given rights they would have become tools, made irrational decisions, and be less likely to defend the nation. She also says that women are born graceful and soft and therefore could never do the work that rough men do. If I were a woman in the late Nineteenth Century, I would have just wanted to be seen as an equal to men and know that I would be treated fairly in court or receive an equal distribution of property or wealth from my deceased husband. I wouldn't consider those two examples as doing "the work of the virile virtues of men." - Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I found what Amelia Barr wrote very interesting. '''She’s not against discontented women in the working class fighting for better wages but rather against women in the political realm'''. I think she’s saying women are too fickle to make political decisions like decisions of war and that law would be in danger in the hands of women. Another point, I think she tried to make is that when a women steps out of the “domestic sphere” she put herself at risk for being criticized by a man (creating animosity) and Barr believed only women should criticize other women. - Marsha<br />
<br />
'''I disagree with pretty much everything she has to say but I can totally see the women of her time agreeing with her. She promotes stereotypes which annoys me.''' She asks if women get what they want and if they are allowed to work as men whether they will be happy. She asks if men's work is less tiresome then women's. Basically, isn't work just work? These are definitely interesting questions. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
'''I can understand why Amelia Barr would have followers, even though I totally disagree, as her arguments are written very well and she has arguments that attack women’s moral and sensible duties, such as their religion, their obligation to their families, and their femininity.''' Specifically her writing about women’s ability to vote and work and that her desire for knowledge was unnecessary and will take away her femininity was interesting to me, and made me wonder''' what she, or others like her, would think of the women of today? Would she see our accomplishments as really our failure as women? '''- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Anna Garlin Spencer, 1898, response to anti-suffrage attacks ==<br />
<br />
Spencer's reasoning for why women should have the right to vote was unique. '''She claimed that once the government began to get involved in matters dealing with "any form of educative, charitable or personally helpful work, it entered the area of distinctive feminine training and power." Once the government entered that woman's sphere, it became involved in women's lives, which meant women had a say in what the government did, especially in that female sphere.''' She made it seem like women had the right to be involved because of the government's entrance into their lives. She also implied that without women's suffrage, the government could not adequately function/make beneficial decisions in the woman's sphere of influence. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Charlotte Perkins Gilman, 20th Century feminist, 1903, The Home ==<br />
<br />
In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's piece, the reader gets the idea that she obviously thinks there is more to women than being housewives and mothers. She argues that women should be able to participate in society and not be stuck at home. '''The idea of a "home-husband" was a funny concept. She said, and I agree, "Never was any such idiot on earth as this hypothetical home-husband. It was not in him to stay in such primitive restrictions. But he has been quite willing to leave his wife in that interestingly remote period." Men are so adamant about keeping females inside the home but having the roles be reversed would be out of the question.''' -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I think '''in order for the women’s rights movement to proceed, people had to move beyond the idea that women were “naturally” moral and nurturing. I don’t think nineteenth-century Americans saw gender as fluid and dynamic, instead it was prescribed by God. In order to change, they needed to learn to see it as less of a biological function, and more of a result of socialization. ''Radicals such as Charlotte Perkins Gilman'' lead the way with ideas that women’s forced isolation in the home made them less capable for a public role rather than a natural lack of abilities.''' -Allison Luthern</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_15_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 15 Questions/Comments-327 092009-12-03T14:04:17Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Lucy Maynard Salmon, 1897, Vassar Historian who studied domestic service */</p>
<hr />
<div>== ''Comparative source questions'' ==<br />
<br />
'''I’m curious to what extent women truly believed that they were morally superior to men. They certainly used it to justify women taking a part in activities that were not typically approved of for women.''' For instance, one of Clara Lanza’s arguments for women working outside the home in clerical positions was that women’s morality would improve the business world. Some women’s rights activists also used that argument for why women should be able to vote. '''Were they consciously manipulating the rhetoric of the day or did they just naturally assume it to be the truth?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
'''<br />
One commonality between some readings for this week is the emphasis that women placed on their eduction.''' Although an education was more available to working class women than it had been during the eighteenth century, '''availability did not always translate to attainability.''' For example, in '''Lucy Salmon's study''', she came across domestic servicewomen working "eighteen hours" a day. This amount of labor would leave little time for women to acquire the skills necessary for what Salmon calls "intelligent work". In another story, 16 year-old '''Sadie Frowne''' worked an arduous eleven hours a day in a sweatshop, but long hours did not stop her from "going to school at night". Her case must have been somewhat exceptional; if most young laborers had opportunities like Sadie, organizations such as the Knights of Labor would have no need to focus their agenda on "taking little girls from the factory ... and educating them". -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 13, Urban Wage Earners'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Helen Campbell, 1893, study on NY wage laborers, “Shop Girls and Piece Workers” ==<br />
I thought it was interesting how she said that '''the girls who worked in the shops: "she knows far better what constitutes the life of the rich than the rich ever know of the life of the poor...of the woman she so often despises, even when longing the most to be one of them. She imitates where she can..."(bottom of page 294). This is further emphasizing the desire of lower-class women to be like the upper class, to strive for that 'perfect life.'''' It is a striking contrast that the girl hates the rich women, yet longs to be like them. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
Interesting article. Do you think focusing on women in poverty made for a more effective argument against the evils of poverty since women were supposed to be part of the work force? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I think it was a way to emphasize the evils of poverty. Obviously, these women were unable to stay in the domestic sphere. They had no choice but to work. I think focusing on horrible factory jobs that these women had to do definitely emphasizes this. I don't think that focusing on men working these jobs would gain very much attention. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Lucy Maynard Salmon, 1897, Vassar Historian who studied domestic service ==<br />
<br />
'''I noticed a difference in the way that working women were described in comparison to the language used about domestic women.''' Working women saw themselves as being immersed in society and into the world but a domestic woman "never read and does not know what is going on in the world." (P. 298) The working women also describe domestic women as having so much time on their hands, almost insinuating that domestic women's work is not equal to theirs. It was interesting how the working women say they enjoy their job more than they would being a domestic woman. They enjoy the freedom they have to go out and work, but then come home and do whatever they please. Their work and home lives are completely separate. Oppositely, domestic women are always around their work, continuously tending to the family and the house whenever it is needed. There are not set hours of work for domestic women.... their work is their life. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex on her ideas about working women. '''They saw themselves as in the world and intouch with society and it made me wonder if they were the real reason behind the push for women's rights? I know middle class women were heavily involved in shaping women's rights but did the efforts of the working class women make a difference?''' Working class women were proud of what they accomplished and according to this article boasted about what they could do, I agree a woman can do anything she sets her mind to but in a way didn't all women shape the womens rights movement? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I think the thing that struck me most about this article was the first industrial advantage. While I know it was not uncommon for a woman to work during this time period I had always thought it was out of necessity. ''' The idea of opportunities for promotion suggests the idea of a career to me as opposed to a job. Do you think jobs with promotions indicate a shift towards careers and less focus on the domestic duties of marriage?''' Later in the piece the young factory operative explains how domestic servants don't make good wives. I suppose I am just wondering what kind of role marriage played when women went looking for work. -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I agree that the gaining a promotion does make this job seem more like a career. These women seemed content with working. I had also assumed that women that worked did it because they had to. I never thought that they found pride in it. I also agree with Megan that these women had a bigger part in the womens' rights movement than I had previously thought. I'm sure these women thought they had nothing in common with the middle class women working in the movement. Overall, I think they did play a part. It may not have been the part that middle class women would have wanted, but these women were out having careers at a time when women were supposed to stay at home. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Isabel Eaton, 1899, research on black servants in Philadelphia ==<br />
'''Unlike the white women urban workers we read about for this week, this piece shows how little choice black women urban workers had in occupations.''' Most were domestic servants. Even those who were educated or had other job training could not get the jobs they wanted and were qualified for. '''The racial discrimination they experienced kept them locked into a job they felt was socially degrading and that provided little personal freedom and low wages.''' Due to being turned down, or even the fear of being turned down, most were kept them from seeking jobs outside of domestic service. '''So while white women with an education or job training could afford to be independent and had new job opportunities opened to them, black women were less likely to be able to experience this type of independence.'''<br />
--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
This article is sad because it shows us how race oriented people were even after the Civil War, but it is already a well known that Blacks did not reach any kind of true equality until the 20th century though. Actually, while I was reading this, I came up with kind of a random but related question: '''In the Antebellum South, when there was still slavery, the slaves would "fight back" in any way they could, including pretending to be really stupid so that they may screw up the task assigned to them, etc. So, I was wondering if this form of retaliation might have had any sort of negative impact after the Civil War for blacks searching for jobs (mostly in the south since that is where such things usually took place)?''' -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
== Clara Lanza, 1891, defends the female office clerk in NY ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Looking at The Office Clerk by Clara Lanza many things stand out to me. '''This piece is justifying the use of women as clerks. However, this justification feeds into the women’s assumed gender roles during that time period as much as the men’s justification as to why women should not be clerks. Both arguments use the overarching gender roles of the time.''' Men argue that women should remain in the home and be good wives and raise their children, they also argue that women fidget, they become anxious, they are temperamental, they giggle, and so on… these characteristics all fit into what women were presumed to be like. The counter this argument, Clara Lanza believes that women are more reliable than men, they come to work when sick, they don’t complain, and they can do all of this while being great wives. Both sides to this argument use what everyone would agree are characteristics of women of that time and the roles people expected them to play, just in different ways. '''This is similar to the arguments for and against women abolitionists and reformers, it is very interesting how gender roles can be used as justifications for different things.''' Based off of the readings about women’s roles as activists for women’s rights I can tell that the same use of gender roles as justifications for and against the movement being used here as well. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I agree a lot with Erin. Ms. Lanza states in the beginning of her response that "Among the woman workers in New York there are none who afford a more interesting study than the vast army of clerks, the work of a clerk being admirably adapted to the sex." '''While I think expected gender roles play a large part- the exactness of women's work, their reliability, and the ways in which they can be trusted- I also wonder if, at this time, there were beginning to be notions of differences between "sex" and "gender", one of the arguments, I think, of the feminist movement during the 20th Century, with gender being thought of as very much socially constructed.''' It almost seems like Ms. Lanza would make many of those in the women's movement at the time or the feminist movement today kind of angry- '''it seems as if in many ways she is very much defending the gender roles and stereotypes about women.''' -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Leonara Barry, on what the Knights of Labor are doing for women, 1888 ==<br />
<br />
This article provides some moral relief from the sources in this week's reading that are exemplary of ideologies which exacerbated conditions for women in the workplace. For example, the "difficulty" American-born girls felt about competing against a "foreign born and colored element," (297) noted and justified by Lucy Salmon, is ridiculous; Isabel Eaton, a black domestic worker, claims that black domestic workers often can't secure work because "white help is preferred" (299). Racial divides like this, so incorporated into American society, emphasize just how radical the Knights of Labor organization was to accept laborers regardless of race or gender. Are their radical methods generally blamed for the groups eventual failure? --Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Sadie Frome, 1902, “Story of a Sweatshop Girl” ==<br />
<br />
I really liked Sadie's story.''' I thought it was neat how she talked about her social activities outside of work- going to school at night and to the synagogue, having her fortune read by a fortune teller, and going out with Henry, to the theater, or dancing or to Coney Island. She seems like the quintessential "new" young woman of the early twentieth century- she is independent, able to save her money, and not ready to settle down and marry Henry, even though he wants her to. She seems very content with her situation right now and her life as it is- as if she is not ready for things to change just yet and is enjoying the benefits of her hard work and her independence.''' I really kind of admire her! -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I loved Sadie's story. She is a very practical person. She saves money and she knows how to have fun. '''I was a little disturbed by the matter or fact way she talks about getting her finger caught in the needle and how it could result in a broken bone or dismemberment.''' She did not seem concerned that it could happen to her. '''''I think it is funny that she keeps putting Henry off and that she does not want to get married.''''' I admire her independence. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Just like LeAnn and Allison said, I also enjoyed reading Sadie's story. It amazed me how she lived such a simple life, yet she was so content because she was independent and making money for herself. I found it interesting how she could only live on $2 a week! She even went on to say she could "have lived cheaper, but we are both fond of good things and felt that we could afford them." (P. 308) $2 a week! That is literally impossible now a days. But Sadie claimed the $2 was enough for her to get by on and live comfortably. '''I noticed the marriage decision she made. It is interesting to see the progression over the course of the centuries. Women insisted on waiting instead of being married in their teenage years. Could it be because they were making a life for themselves and wanted to establish their own independence before getting married?''' --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
'''I also very much enjoyed Sadie’s story, as she really lived the American dream. Having found trouble in her homeland, her mother and her moved to America, and with the help of family members here, was able to set up a home, find a job, save money, and live decently well.''' I can understand her desire to hold off on marriage, as she was successful in gaining independence and personal autonomy, which would most likely be revoked upon her marriage. Her desire for nice clothes was endearing as it reminded me much of the desires of young women today, and because she was also successful in saving there was no reason for her not to have nicer clothes, especially since she believed that a “girl who does not dress well is stuck in the corner” (311). '''Her independence and savvyness allows her that luxury and because of that - no one puts Sadie in the corner.''' -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
'''''I found it interesting that Sadie received /modest/$5.50 a week for her work. I don’t know what the average living costs of the time were and I don’t know what the average wage of men or women of the time but $5.50 seems quite a lot compared to the women mentioned in Helen Campbell’s piece on Shop girls and Piece Workers, and modest doesn’t seem to be the right adjective when comparing it to Campbell’s women.''''' Sadie used two dollars per week for living costs, saved one, and one dollar went to spend on clothing and pleasure. <br />
I love the mention of the fortune teller in this piece and the mention to the alarm clock that she can’t believe that because “I don’t see who the clock would know.” –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 16, Woman Suffrage/Women’s Rights'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Julia Ward Howe, 1899, Reminiscences ==<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Julia's Reminiscences as she tells her little story. When she said that part about when she said " 'I am with you' I have been with them ever since" I found that very touching. That and the last line about how although she gave a lot to the cause, it was repaid to her thousandfold. '''She was very proud of the work done as she should have been. She spoke of how the first 2/3 of her life were spent believing the masculine ideal of character as the only one...''' I liked the whole thing. She just seemed really endearing and heartfelt. - Christine<br />
<br />
== Stanton and Anthony, 1882, piece in ''History of Woman Suffrage'' ==<br />
<br />
Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony in Political Lessons take a unique and direct approach to gain women’s suffrage. '''Based off of their arguments, I can see why they may have been threatening. They argue that women, in all actuality, are quiet geniuses, unable to voice their opinions and they are frustrated.''' This goes completely against the gender roles of the time, which perceive women to be inferior people who were meant to stay home and care for her family who didn’t really have any real political opinions of her own and who followed their husband’s views. I also think that it was very bold for them to bring up topics such as class and race, and relate them to women's gender roles. I can see why this could be appealing for some and scary for others. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
== Frances Ellen (Watkins) Harper, 1866 Woman’s Rights convention ==<br />
'''"We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul." Strong words that people still need to come terms with today.''' I really enjoyed reading her speech. I feel so much more for the black woman of the time because they were fighting a double fight: race and gender rights were needed. Bringing up the "wrongs" done to the blacks by the whites was a powerful message, especially when she contrasted it to the "rights" that the "white women" keep takling about. - christine<br />
<br />
'''I felt deeply sorry for Frances Harper,''' not only was she a woman but also a black widow who inherited the role of provider for four children, only one of whom she was the true mother to. She quickly points out that if she was a man, she would not have been violated in the same terms and would have been as seen as more equal before law. I think her message of saying giving women the right to vote would not cure all injustice against women, and race would be a big factor. She knows the terms of the country and understands that while big steps are needed the country would work a step at a time to achieve equality. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
== Shoe women of Lynn, MA, 1874 ==<br />
In Shoemakers of Lynn, these women seemed very robust and seemed to want to do things that man does (such as chew tobacco and spit on the floor) and not be judged that it was not a “lady like” thing to do. '''It’s interesting that she refers to women as slaves to men.''' '''''What I thought stood out was when she spoke about women who are married, that they have no need for anything and have no idea the oppression that those who were not married had to face.''''' -Marsha<br />
<br />
'''Americus provides an interesting counter to women’s suffrage that I hadn’t considered. She wrote that the day she takes the ballot “will bring with it a conviction that the judgment I rely on has failed me, and the arm upon which I lean, is powerless to protect (367).” She felt that women’s suffrage would ultimately question female judgment. Women relied on their husbands willingly, but suggesting that they needed to vote would also suggest that their husbands weren’t what they trusted them to be, and that perhaps women couldn’t trust themselves either if they were able to be so completely deceived.''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
'''In many ways, the women’s rights movement was elitist.''' Wealthy women who had the leisure time to campaign for suffrage often asserted that they should vote to help counteract the votes of the working class. Working class women were less likely to participate in the women’s rights movement, therefore''' I thought Ella A. Little’s letter was pretty awesome. Her argument was that wealthy women did not really understand oppression and that working class women who had to “battle” to “earn their livelihood” were in more desperate need for the right to vote.''' I think it is really sad that this opinion is not often heard in the women’s rights movement. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
“Americus” was some character. “Americus” described chewing tobacco and spitting it on the floor as a right. Snoring was also described as a right, because, I suppose, it was more acceptable for men to snore. I thought it interesting that they compared the fact of being a woman to the idea of slavery when as the NWSA they were not fighting for the right of African Amerian’s suffrage, they were first focused on the right for women to vote. '''It amused me that apparently as soon as women gained the right to vote that as a whole they’d be less timid and not afraid of “burglars nights” as well as chew and spit tobacco and snore''' (the latter two mentioned before). –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Amelia Barr, (novelist and married) 1896, Speaks out against female suffrage ==<br />
'''I still think that it is a little weird whenever I hear about a woman who did not want rights or did not see them as important to have. Maybe they couldn't miss something they never had?''' In the document, she argued that if women were given rights they would have become tools, made irrational decisions, and be less likely to defend the nation. She also says that women are born graceful and soft and therefore could never do the work that rough men do. If I were a woman in the late Nineteenth Century, I would have just wanted to be seen as an equal to men and know that I would be treated fairly in court or receive an equal distribution of property or wealth from my deceased husband. I wouldn't consider those two examples as doing "the work of the virile virtues of men." - Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I found what Amelia Barr wrote very interesting. '''She’s not against discontented women in the working class fighting for better wages but rather against women in the political realm'''. I think she’s saying women are too fickle to make political decisions like decisions of war and that law would be in danger in the hands of women. Another point, I think she tried to make is that when a women steps out of the “domestic sphere” she put herself at risk for being criticized by a man (creating animosity) and Barr believed only women should criticize other women. - Marsha<br />
<br />
'''I disagree with pretty much everything she has to say but I can totally see the women of her time agreeing with her. She promotes stereotypes which annoys me.''' She asks if women get what they want and if they are allowed to work as men whether they will be happy. She asks if men's work is less tiresome then women's. Basically, isn't work just work? These are definitely interesting questions. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
'''I can understand why Amelia Barr would have followers, even though I totally disagree, as her arguments are written very well and she has arguments that attack women’s moral and sensible duties, such as their religion, their obligation to their families, and their femininity.''' Specifically her writing about women’s ability to vote and work and that her desire for knowledge was unnecessary and will take away her femininity was interesting to me, and made me wonder''' what she, or others like her, would think of the women of today? Would she see our accomplishments as really our failure as women? '''- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Anna Garlin Spencer, 1898, response to anti-suffrage attacks ==<br />
<br />
Spencer's reasoning for why women should have the right to vote was unique. '''She claimed that once the government began to get involved in matters dealing with "any form of educative, charitable or personally helpful work, it entered the area of distinctive feminine training and power." Once the government entered that woman's sphere, it became involved in women's lives, which meant women had a say in what the government did, especially in that female sphere.''' She made it seem like women had the right to be involved because of the government's entrance into their lives. She also implied that without women's suffrage, the government could not adequately function/make beneficial decisions in the woman's sphere of influence. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Charlotte Perkins Gilman, 20th Century feminist, 1903, The Home ==<br />
<br />
In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's piece, the reader gets the idea that she obviously thinks there is more to women than being housewives and mothers. She argues that women should be able to participate in society and not be stuck at home. '''The idea of a "home-husband" was a funny concept. She said, and I agree, "Never was any such idiot on earth as this hypothetical home-husband. It was not in him to stay in such primitive restrictions. But he has been quite willing to leave his wife in that interestingly remote period." Men are so adamant about keeping females inside the home but having the roles be reversed would be out of the question.''' -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I think '''in order for the women’s rights movement to proceed, people had to move beyond the idea that women were “naturally” moral and nurturing. I don’t think nineteenth-century Americans saw gender as fluid and dynamic, instead it was prescribed by God. In order to change, they needed to learn to see it as less of a biological function, and more of a result of socialization. ''Radicals such as Charlotte Perkins Gilman'' lead the way with ideas that women’s forced isolation in the home made them less capable for a public role rather than a natural lack of abilities.''' -Allison Luthern</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_15_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 15 Questions/Comments-327 092009-12-03T13:58:53Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Helen Campbell, 1893, study on NY wage laborers, “Shop Girls and Piece Workers” */</p>
<hr />
<div>== ''Comparative source questions'' ==<br />
<br />
'''I’m curious to what extent women truly believed that they were morally superior to men. They certainly used it to justify women taking a part in activities that were not typically approved of for women.''' For instance, one of Clara Lanza’s arguments for women working outside the home in clerical positions was that women’s morality would improve the business world. Some women’s rights activists also used that argument for why women should be able to vote. '''Were they consciously manipulating the rhetoric of the day or did they just naturally assume it to be the truth?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
'''<br />
One commonality between some readings for this week is the emphasis that women placed on their eduction.''' Although an education was more available to working class women than it had been during the eighteenth century, '''availability did not always translate to attainability.''' For example, in '''Lucy Salmon's study''', she came across domestic servicewomen working "eighteen hours" a day. This amount of labor would leave little time for women to acquire the skills necessary for what Salmon calls "intelligent work". In another story, 16 year-old '''Sadie Frowne''' worked an arduous eleven hours a day in a sweatshop, but long hours did not stop her from "going to school at night". Her case must have been somewhat exceptional; if most young laborers had opportunities like Sadie, organizations such as the Knights of Labor would have no need to focus their agenda on "taking little girls from the factory ... and educating them". -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 13, Urban Wage Earners'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Helen Campbell, 1893, study on NY wage laborers, “Shop Girls and Piece Workers” ==<br />
I thought it was interesting how she said that '''the girls who worked in the shops: "she knows far better what constitutes the life of the rich than the rich ever know of the life of the poor...of the woman she so often despises, even when longing the most to be one of them. She imitates where she can..."(bottom of page 294). This is further emphasizing the desire of lower-class women to be like the upper class, to strive for that 'perfect life.'''' It is a striking contrast that the girl hates the rich women, yet longs to be like them. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
Interesting article. Do you think focusing on women in poverty made for a more effective argument against the evils of poverty since women were supposed to be part of the work force? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I think it was a way to emphasize the evils of poverty. Obviously, these women were unable to stay in the domestic sphere. They had no choice but to work. I think focusing on horrible factory jobs that these women had to do definitely emphasizes this. I don't think that focusing on men working these jobs would gain very much attention. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Lucy Maynard Salmon, 1897, Vassar Historian who studied domestic service ==<br />
<br />
'''I noticed a difference in the way that working women were described in comparison to the language used about domestic women.''' Working women saw themselves as being immersed in society and into the world but a domestic woman "never read and does not know what is going on in the world." (P. 298) The working women also describe domestic women as having so much time on their hands, almost insinuating that domestic women's work is not equal to theirs. It was interesting how the working women say they enjoy their job more than they would being a domestic woman. They enjoy the freedom they have to go out and work, but then come home and do whatever they please. Their work and home lives are completely separate. Oppositely, domestic women are always around their work, continuously tending to the family and the house whenever it is needed. There are not set hours of work for domestic women.... their work is their life. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex on her ideas about working women. '''They saw themselves as in the world and intouch with society and it made me wonder if they were the real reason behind the push for women's rights? I know middle class women were heavily involved in shaping women's rights but did the efforts of the working class women make a difference?''' Working class women were proud of what they accomplished and according to this article boasted about what they could do, I agree a woman can do anything she sets her mind to but in a way didn't all women shape the womens rights movement? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I think the thing that struck me most about this article was the first industrial advantage. While I know it was not uncommon for a woman to work during this time period I had always thought it was out of necessity. ''' The idea of opportunities for promotion suggests the idea of a career to me as opposed to a job. Do you think jobs with promotions indicate a shift towards careers and less focus on the domestic duties of marriage?''' Later in the piece the young factory operative explains how domestic servants don't make good wives. I suppose I am just wondering what kind of role marriage played when women went looking for work. -John Rowley<br />
<br />
== Isabel Eaton, 1899, research on black servants in Philadelphia ==<br />
'''Unlike the white women urban workers we read about for this week, this piece shows how little choice black women urban workers had in occupations.''' Most were domestic servants. Even those who were educated or had other job training could not get the jobs they wanted and were qualified for. '''The racial discrimination they experienced kept them locked into a job they felt was socially degrading and that provided little personal freedom and low wages.''' Due to being turned down, or even the fear of being turned down, most were kept them from seeking jobs outside of domestic service. '''So while white women with an education or job training could afford to be independent and had new job opportunities opened to them, black women were less likely to be able to experience this type of independence.'''<br />
--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
This article is sad because it shows us how race oriented people were even after the Civil War, but it is already a well known that Blacks did not reach any kind of true equality until the 20th century though. Actually, while I was reading this, I came up with kind of a random but related question: '''In the Antebellum South, when there was still slavery, the slaves would "fight back" in any way they could, including pretending to be really stupid so that they may screw up the task assigned to them, etc. So, I was wondering if this form of retaliation might have had any sort of negative impact after the Civil War for blacks searching for jobs (mostly in the south since that is where such things usually took place)?''' -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
== Clara Lanza, 1891, defends the female office clerk in NY ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Looking at The Office Clerk by Clara Lanza many things stand out to me. '''This piece is justifying the use of women as clerks. However, this justification feeds into the women’s assumed gender roles during that time period as much as the men’s justification as to why women should not be clerks. Both arguments use the overarching gender roles of the time.''' Men argue that women should remain in the home and be good wives and raise their children, they also argue that women fidget, they become anxious, they are temperamental, they giggle, and so on… these characteristics all fit into what women were presumed to be like. The counter this argument, Clara Lanza believes that women are more reliable than men, they come to work when sick, they don’t complain, and they can do all of this while being great wives. Both sides to this argument use what everyone would agree are characteristics of women of that time and the roles people expected them to play, just in different ways. '''This is similar to the arguments for and against women abolitionists and reformers, it is very interesting how gender roles can be used as justifications for different things.''' Based off of the readings about women’s roles as activists for women’s rights I can tell that the same use of gender roles as justifications for and against the movement being used here as well. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I agree a lot with Erin. Ms. Lanza states in the beginning of her response that "Among the woman workers in New York there are none who afford a more interesting study than the vast army of clerks, the work of a clerk being admirably adapted to the sex." '''While I think expected gender roles play a large part- the exactness of women's work, their reliability, and the ways in which they can be trusted- I also wonder if, at this time, there were beginning to be notions of differences between "sex" and "gender", one of the arguments, I think, of the feminist movement during the 20th Century, with gender being thought of as very much socially constructed.''' It almost seems like Ms. Lanza would make many of those in the women's movement at the time or the feminist movement today kind of angry- '''it seems as if in many ways she is very much defending the gender roles and stereotypes about women.''' -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Leonara Barry, on what the Knights of Labor are doing for women, 1888 ==<br />
<br />
This article provides some moral relief from the sources in this week's reading that are exemplary of ideologies which exacerbated conditions for women in the workplace. For example, the "difficulty" American-born girls felt about competing against a "foreign born and colored element," (297) noted and justified by Lucy Salmon, is ridiculous; Isabel Eaton, a black domestic worker, claims that black domestic workers often can't secure work because "white help is preferred" (299). Racial divides like this, so incorporated into American society, emphasize just how radical the Knights of Labor organization was to accept laborers regardless of race or gender. Are their radical methods generally blamed for the groups eventual failure? --Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Sadie Frome, 1902, “Story of a Sweatshop Girl” ==<br />
<br />
I really liked Sadie's story.''' I thought it was neat how she talked about her social activities outside of work- going to school at night and to the synagogue, having her fortune read by a fortune teller, and going out with Henry, to the theater, or dancing or to Coney Island. She seems like the quintessential "new" young woman of the early twentieth century- she is independent, able to save her money, and not ready to settle down and marry Henry, even though he wants her to. She seems very content with her situation right now and her life as it is- as if she is not ready for things to change just yet and is enjoying the benefits of her hard work and her independence.''' I really kind of admire her! -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I loved Sadie's story. She is a very practical person. She saves money and she knows how to have fun. '''I was a little disturbed by the matter or fact way she talks about getting her finger caught in the needle and how it could result in a broken bone or dismemberment.''' She did not seem concerned that it could happen to her. '''''I think it is funny that she keeps putting Henry off and that she does not want to get married.''''' I admire her independence. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Just like LeAnn and Allison said, I also enjoyed reading Sadie's story. It amazed me how she lived such a simple life, yet she was so content because she was independent and making money for herself. I found it interesting how she could only live on $2 a week! She even went on to say she could "have lived cheaper, but we are both fond of good things and felt that we could afford them." (P. 308) $2 a week! That is literally impossible now a days. But Sadie claimed the $2 was enough for her to get by on and live comfortably. '''I noticed the marriage decision she made. It is interesting to see the progression over the course of the centuries. Women insisted on waiting instead of being married in their teenage years. Could it be because they were making a life for themselves and wanted to establish their own independence before getting married?''' --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
'''I also very much enjoyed Sadie’s story, as she really lived the American dream. Having found trouble in her homeland, her mother and her moved to America, and with the help of family members here, was able to set up a home, find a job, save money, and live decently well.''' I can understand her desire to hold off on marriage, as she was successful in gaining independence and personal autonomy, which would most likely be revoked upon her marriage. Her desire for nice clothes was endearing as it reminded me much of the desires of young women today, and because she was also successful in saving there was no reason for her not to have nicer clothes, especially since she believed that a “girl who does not dress well is stuck in the corner” (311). '''Her independence and savvyness allows her that luxury and because of that - no one puts Sadie in the corner.''' -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
'''''I found it interesting that Sadie received /modest/$5.50 a week for her work. I don’t know what the average living costs of the time were and I don’t know what the average wage of men or women of the time but $5.50 seems quite a lot compared to the women mentioned in Helen Campbell’s piece on Shop girls and Piece Workers, and modest doesn’t seem to be the right adjective when comparing it to Campbell’s women.''''' Sadie used two dollars per week for living costs, saved one, and one dollar went to spend on clothing and pleasure. <br />
I love the mention of the fortune teller in this piece and the mention to the alarm clock that she can’t believe that because “I don’t see who the clock would know.” –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== ''Woloch, Chapter 16, Woman Suffrage/Women’s Rights'' ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Julia Ward Howe, 1899, Reminiscences ==<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Julia's Reminiscences as she tells her little story. When she said that part about when she said " 'I am with you' I have been with them ever since" I found that very touching. That and the last line about how although she gave a lot to the cause, it was repaid to her thousandfold. '''She was very proud of the work done as she should have been. She spoke of how the first 2/3 of her life were spent believing the masculine ideal of character as the only one...''' I liked the whole thing. She just seemed really endearing and heartfelt. - Christine<br />
<br />
== Stanton and Anthony, 1882, piece in ''History of Woman Suffrage'' ==<br />
<br />
Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony in Political Lessons take a unique and direct approach to gain women’s suffrage. '''Based off of their arguments, I can see why they may have been threatening. They argue that women, in all actuality, are quiet geniuses, unable to voice their opinions and they are frustrated.''' This goes completely against the gender roles of the time, which perceive women to be inferior people who were meant to stay home and care for her family who didn’t really have any real political opinions of her own and who followed their husband’s views. I also think that it was very bold for them to bring up topics such as class and race, and relate them to women's gender roles. I can see why this could be appealing for some and scary for others. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
== Frances Ellen (Watkins) Harper, 1866 Woman’s Rights convention ==<br />
'''"We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul." Strong words that people still need to come terms with today.''' I really enjoyed reading her speech. I feel so much more for the black woman of the time because they were fighting a double fight: race and gender rights were needed. Bringing up the "wrongs" done to the blacks by the whites was a powerful message, especially when she contrasted it to the "rights" that the "white women" keep takling about. - christine<br />
<br />
'''I felt deeply sorry for Frances Harper,''' not only was she a woman but also a black widow who inherited the role of provider for four children, only one of whom she was the true mother to. She quickly points out that if she was a man, she would not have been violated in the same terms and would have been as seen as more equal before law. I think her message of saying giving women the right to vote would not cure all injustice against women, and race would be a big factor. She knows the terms of the country and understands that while big steps are needed the country would work a step at a time to achieve equality. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
== Shoe women of Lynn, MA, 1874 ==<br />
In Shoemakers of Lynn, these women seemed very robust and seemed to want to do things that man does (such as chew tobacco and spit on the floor) and not be judged that it was not a “lady like” thing to do. '''It’s interesting that she refers to women as slaves to men.''' '''''What I thought stood out was when she spoke about women who are married, that they have no need for anything and have no idea the oppression that those who were not married had to face.''''' -Marsha<br />
<br />
'''Americus provides an interesting counter to women’s suffrage that I hadn’t considered. She wrote that the day she takes the ballot “will bring with it a conviction that the judgment I rely on has failed me, and the arm upon which I lean, is powerless to protect (367).” She felt that women’s suffrage would ultimately question female judgment. Women relied on their husbands willingly, but suggesting that they needed to vote would also suggest that their husbands weren’t what they trusted them to be, and that perhaps women couldn’t trust themselves either if they were able to be so completely deceived.''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
'''In many ways, the women’s rights movement was elitist.''' Wealthy women who had the leisure time to campaign for suffrage often asserted that they should vote to help counteract the votes of the working class. Working class women were less likely to participate in the women’s rights movement, therefore''' I thought Ella A. Little’s letter was pretty awesome. Her argument was that wealthy women did not really understand oppression and that working class women who had to “battle” to “earn their livelihood” were in more desperate need for the right to vote.''' I think it is really sad that this opinion is not often heard in the women’s rights movement. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
“Americus” was some character. “Americus” described chewing tobacco and spitting it on the floor as a right. Snoring was also described as a right, because, I suppose, it was more acceptable for men to snore. I thought it interesting that they compared the fact of being a woman to the idea of slavery when as the NWSA they were not fighting for the right of African Amerian’s suffrage, they were first focused on the right for women to vote. '''It amused me that apparently as soon as women gained the right to vote that as a whole they’d be less timid and not afraid of “burglars nights” as well as chew and spit tobacco and snore''' (the latter two mentioned before). –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Amelia Barr, (novelist and married) 1896, Speaks out against female suffrage ==<br />
'''I still think that it is a little weird whenever I hear about a woman who did not want rights or did not see them as important to have. Maybe they couldn't miss something they never had?''' In the document, she argued that if women were given rights they would have become tools, made irrational decisions, and be less likely to defend the nation. She also says that women are born graceful and soft and therefore could never do the work that rough men do. If I were a woman in the late Nineteenth Century, I would have just wanted to be seen as an equal to men and know that I would be treated fairly in court or receive an equal distribution of property or wealth from my deceased husband. I wouldn't consider those two examples as doing "the work of the virile virtues of men." - Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I found what Amelia Barr wrote very interesting. '''She’s not against discontented women in the working class fighting for better wages but rather against women in the political realm'''. I think she’s saying women are too fickle to make political decisions like decisions of war and that law would be in danger in the hands of women. Another point, I think she tried to make is that when a women steps out of the “domestic sphere” she put herself at risk for being criticized by a man (creating animosity) and Barr believed only women should criticize other women. - Marsha<br />
<br />
'''I disagree with pretty much everything she has to say but I can totally see the women of her time agreeing with her. She promotes stereotypes which annoys me.''' She asks if women get what they want and if they are allowed to work as men whether they will be happy. She asks if men's work is less tiresome then women's. Basically, isn't work just work? These are definitely interesting questions. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
'''I can understand why Amelia Barr would have followers, even though I totally disagree, as her arguments are written very well and she has arguments that attack women’s moral and sensible duties, such as their religion, their obligation to their families, and their femininity.''' Specifically her writing about women’s ability to vote and work and that her desire for knowledge was unnecessary and will take away her femininity was interesting to me, and made me wonder''' what she, or others like her, would think of the women of today? Would she see our accomplishments as really our failure as women? '''- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Anna Garlin Spencer, 1898, response to anti-suffrage attacks ==<br />
<br />
Spencer's reasoning for why women should have the right to vote was unique. '''She claimed that once the government began to get involved in matters dealing with "any form of educative, charitable or personally helpful work, it entered the area of distinctive feminine training and power." Once the government entered that woman's sphere, it became involved in women's lives, which meant women had a say in what the government did, especially in that female sphere.''' She made it seem like women had the right to be involved because of the government's entrance into their lives. She also implied that without women's suffrage, the government could not adequately function/make beneficial decisions in the woman's sphere of influence. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Charlotte Perkins Gilman, 20th Century feminist, 1903, The Home ==<br />
<br />
In Charlotte Perkins Gilman's piece, the reader gets the idea that she obviously thinks there is more to women than being housewives and mothers. She argues that women should be able to participate in society and not be stuck at home. '''The idea of a "home-husband" was a funny concept. She said, and I agree, "Never was any such idiot on earth as this hypothetical home-husband. It was not in him to stay in such primitive restrictions. But he has been quite willing to leave his wife in that interestingly remote period." Men are so adamant about keeping females inside the home but having the roles be reversed would be out of the question.''' -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I think '''in order for the women’s rights movement to proceed, people had to move beyond the idea that women were “naturally” moral and nurturing. I don’t think nineteenth-century Americans saw gender as fluid and dynamic, instead it was prescribed by God. In order to change, they needed to learn to see it as less of a biological function, and more of a result of socialization. ''Radicals such as Charlotte Perkins Gilman'' lead the way with ideas that women’s forced isolation in the home made them less capable for a public role rather than a natural lack of abilities.''' -Allison Luthern</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_13-14_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 13-14 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-23T16:27:14Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Sarah and Lucy Chase, Teaching the Freedmen, 1866-1868 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Louisa May Alcott, Hospital Sketches, 1862-1863 ==<br />
<br />
A Union Nurse, shows the experience of Louisa May Alcott as a nurse in the Union Hotel Hospital in Washington, D.C. One thing that stood out to me was Dorthea Dix’s call for women nurses. She was specific in that she was looking for “women between 30 and 50 years old, single, sober, hard-working, moral, and plain looking.” At first I thought that the age of 30 was a little old to be a cut off considering there must have been so many single, sober, hard-working, moral, and plain looking girls that were between 20 and 30 that would not have families to worry about so they would have the ability to become nurses. But then I realized that perhaps the act of being a young woman and working in close proximity with men would be considered immoral in and of itself. I am curious if they sent any women away because they were too good looking! –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I also thought it was really interesting that Dorthea Dix wanted women between the age of 30-50. I agree with Erin that women probably had to be atleast 30 because it would be seen as inappropriate for a younger women to be working with men. I think that Dix extended the age to 50 because there were probably a lot of widows in their 40's. I thought the requirement that the women be plain looking was funny, but I guess it makes sense. If the nurse was too good looking, the patients would probably be hitting on her all day long. On the other hand, if the patients had not been able to pay for prostitutes, they probably would be hitting on their nurses even if they were "plain looking". -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Mary Livermore, [Northern women on farm during war], 1890 -- Woloch and Major Problems readings. ==<br />
I thought it was interesting that Mary Livermore's observation of the women working in the fields at first bothered her. Livermore compared women’s devotion to their family life and maintaining their farms to men’s devotion to the war when she said, “the women had enlisted in the war.” This gave women some gender equality and these responsibilities were accepted because it was in the name of family, home, and country. -Marsha <br />
<br />
I really liked the quote "the women had enlisted in the war". While most women were not in battle or even serving as nurses, the Civil War changed their lives. They had to take on completely new responsiblities. I wonder if the women knew how much their lives would be changed by the war. I think they were caught up in the glory of the war. I bet if they knew how much their life would change, or in the instance of southern women that the war would be in their backyard, they would not have pushed the men to fight. I don't think that they realized what they were getting themselves into at all. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
In Modern Problems, Mary Livermore spoke of the work of women. She set a strong and emotional tone that women set forth in the war. I think she was saying that the men in the war were given hope through the inspiring women and “ministering angels.” She also compares women’s “relief societies” to regiments in the war. -Marsha<br />
<br />
<br />
I liked the end of Mary Livermore's selection when she is comparing harvesting and domestic chores. She explains that harvesting is not any harder than "typical" women's work and so females should be able/allowed to do it. She also wants men to know that women are serving the country in the fields doing the harvest in the same way men are in the war serving. The examples she gives help prove her statement that "women had enlisted for the war." I feel she is also trying to make the point that men's opinions about women working in the field does not matter because under the circumstances the women are the only ones able to do the work that is necessary in keeping up the estate or home. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
== Louticia Jackson’s letter in 1863 ==<br />
<br />
Despite the fact Louticia is having a problem with slaves <br />
who are taking advantage of having no white man in<br />
charge of them I still find her letter interesting. <br />
She is clearly struggling with the fact that her "servants" <br />
are not helping her. I did not like how when Willes the slave <br />
yelled she took to her bed cause it "excited" her. Stop whining <br />
and yell back. I know women would never do that but <br />
I say desperate times call for desperate measures. LeAnn T.<br />
<br />
== Eva Jones to Mary Jones, her mother-in-law, 1865 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Accounts of former slaves, 1865-1937 ==<br />
<br />
== VA woman, recorded by abolitionist Laura Haviland in 1866 ==<br />
<br />
== Harriet Tubman, from her white female biographer, Sarah Bradford, 1886 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Clara Burdett, to notary in Union camp in KY, March 1865 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Fanny Berry, in Weevils in the Wheat, 1937 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Tennessee Woman, 1929 [TN Nanny] ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mary Anderson, NC ==<br />
<br />
== Katie Darling, in TX ==<br />
<br />
== Sarah and Lucy Chase, Teaching the Freedmen, 1866-1868 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Sarah Chase and Lucy Chase’s letters because I did a lot of research on the topic of white northern women going south to teach newly freed blacks for my second paper and I was able to draw parallels between the Chase sisters and Mary Ames (who I focused on for my paper). The Chase sisters were from a wealthy family Massachusetts, and had been against slavery since before the war began, and went to Savannah after the war ended as teachers. In the letters, I can tell that becoming teachers in the south was not just about teaching the basics of reading and writing but it was about teaching new ways of life. These teachers thought that it was their responsibility to show the newly freed blacks how to be religious, self-sufficient, and how to be good people (by their standards). I have no doubt that the teachers had the best intentions, but I wonder if these rich white women were setting unattainable expectations and standards on black families and what this meant for them. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I thought these letters really showed the complexity of life in the South after the Civil War. Sarah Chase stated that she could hardly see the possibility of the North and South united because the South had an “intensely bitter” feeling “against anything Northern.” White people of the South resented all that Northern educators were doing for freed blacks since many white Southerners were uneducated themselves. However, Southern white people would rather not attend school at all than go to desegregated schools. Sarah Chase is an excellent example of the common racist feelings among abolitionists. She stated that her purpose was not to make black people equal to white people; she wished that white people always have a higher social standing. Even those trying to help the freed slaves were racist! Given the completely pervasive racism, it is not hard for me to realize how difficult life would be for black people after the Civil War. I can see how the Civil War really required a later Civil Rights Movement. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I agree that these letters really show the complexity of the South after the Civil War. These letters do a good job of showing just how bitter the South was over losing the war. I also think it was great the women like Sarah and Lucy went to the South to educate the freed slaves. If they hadn't, I'm sure these freed slaves would have remained uneducated because I highly doubt that the southerners would have helped them. At least, most of them would not have helped. I think it is easy for us to look back at these letters and think "wow, even the women that taught these freed slaves were racist". However, you have to remember that almost every white American, even abolitionists, considered themselves to be superior. For all of their lives, African-Americans had been held down and considered inferior. I do not think Lucy and Sarah would have considered themselves to be racist. I think that African-American inferiority is all they had known all of their lives. They probably thought that they were doing a great thing to help the freed slaves. I think the whole nation, even most Northerners, were pretty racist at this time following the Civil War. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Susie King Taylor, Reminiscences of My Life in Camp, 1902 ==<br />
<br />
== Ada Bacot, Confederate Nurse, 1862 ==<br />
I cannot imagine working with wounded men some of them enemies. Ada says she is not sure that she can treat Yankee soldiers the same as Confederate soldiers. At first my reaction was what kind of person wouldn't help out a wounded man he deserves treatment like everyone else. Then I thought about it. That soldier you are helping could have killed your father or brother or son. I would like to think I would treat everyone the same but I am not sure I could. I think Ada is a good person for at least making the effort to help humanity despite the fact they are the enemy. LeAnn T.<br />
<br />
== Maria Daly, 1862, Northerner in the South (New Orleans) ==<br />
<br />
== Sarah Morgan, 1863, Teen diary ==<br />
This diary entry reminded me of the Abigail Adams letters we read earlier in the course because I think both are severely out of context. The editors chose the most radical thing Abigail Adams and Sarah Morgan ever said and placed only those quotes in this book. I researched Sarah Morgan’s diary for the second paper in this class. I discovered that Sarah Morgan expressed support and desire for traditional gender roles of domestic female dependence much more often than her imaginations of fighting as a soldier. Later in the diary, she even renounced women expressing strong patriotic emotions. She said that her brothers’ political thought and action spoke for her. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
== Cornelia Hancock, Union Nurse, 1863 ==<br />
<br />
== Caroline Kirkland, 1863, defends Northern women’s support of Northern men ==<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting to read about a women who was defending the involvement Northern women had during the Civil War. She seemed very passionate about explaining the good they were doing and how they were helping in a positive way. Caroline Kirkland believed in her view so much as to say that if Southern women acted more like Northern women, the war may not have taken place.I thought that was a bold statement. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
== Ella Gertrude Clanton Thomas, January 1865 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_13-14_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 13-14 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-22T14:43:45Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Mary Livermore, [Northern women on farm during war], 1890 -- Woloch and Major Problems readings. */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Louisa May Alcott, Hospital Sketches, 1862-1863 ==<br />
<br />
A Union Nurse, shows the experience of Louisa May Alcott as a nurse in the Union Hotel Hospital in Washington, D.C. One thing that stood out to me was Dorthea Dix’s call for women nurses. She was specific in that she was looking for “women between 30 and 50 years old, single, sober, hard-working, moral, and plain looking.” At first I thought that the age of 30 was a little old to be a cut off considering there must have been so many single, sober, hard-working, moral, and plain looking girls that were between 20 and 30 that would not have families to worry about so they would have the ability to become nurses. But then I realized that perhaps the act of being a young woman and working in close proximity with men would be considered immoral in and of itself. I am curious if they sent any women away because they were too good looking! –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I also thought it was really interesting that Dorthea Dix wanted women between the age of 30-50. I agree with Erin that women probably had to be atleast 30 because it would be seen as inappropriate for a younger women to be working with men. I think that Dix extended the age to 50 because there were probably a lot of widows in their 40's. I thought the requirement that the women be plain looking was funny, but I guess it makes sense. If the nurse was too good looking, the patients would probably be hitting on her all day long. On the other hand, if the patients had not been able to pay for prostitutes, they probably would be hitting on their nurses even if they were "plain looking". -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Mary Livermore, [Northern women on farm during war], 1890 -- Woloch and Major Problems readings. ==<br />
I thought it was interesting that Mary Livermore's observation of the women working in the fields at first bothered her. Livermore compared women’s devotion to their family life and maintaining their farms to men’s devotion to the war when she said, “the women had enlisted in the war.” This gave women some gender equality and these responsibilities were accepted because it was in the name of family, home, and country. -Marsha <br />
<br />
I really liked the quote "the women had enlisted in the war". While most women were not in battle or even serving as nurses, the Civil War changed their lives. They had to take on completely new responsiblities. I wonder if the women knew how much their lives would be changed by the war. I think they were caught up in the glory of the war. I bet if they knew how much their life would change, or in the instance of southern women that the war would be in their backyard, they would not have pushed the men to fight. I don't think that they realized what they were getting themselves into at all. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
In Modern Problems, Mary Livermore spoke of the work of women. She set a strong and emotional tone that women set forth in the war. I think she was saying that the men in the war were given hope through the inspiring women and “ministering angels.” She also compares women’s “relief societies” to regiments in the war. -Marsha<br />
<br />
== Louticia Jackson’s letter in 1863 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Eva Jones to Mary Jones, her mother-in-law, 1865 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Accounts of former slaves, 1865-1937 ==<br />
<br />
== VA woman, recorded by abolitionist Laura Haviland in 1866 ==<br />
<br />
== Harriet Tubman, from her white female biographer, Sarah Bradford, 1886 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Clara Burdett, to notary in Union camp in KY, March 1865 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Fanny Berry, in Weevils in the Wheat, 1937 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Tennessee Woman, 1929 [TN Nanny] ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mary Anderson, NC ==<br />
<br />
== Katie Darling, in TX ==<br />
<br />
== Sarah and Lucy Chase, Teaching the Freedmen, 1866-1868 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Sarah Chase and Lucy Chase’s letters because I did a lot of research on the topic of white northern women going south to teach newly freed blacks for my second paper and I was able to draw parallels between the Chase sisters and Mary Ames (who I focused on for my paper). The Chase sisters were from a wealthy family Massachusetts, and had been against slavery since before the war began, and went to Savannah after the war ended as teachers. In the letters, I can tell that becoming teachers in the south was not just about teaching the basics of reading and writing but it was about teaching new ways of life. These teachers thought that it was their responsibility to show the newly freed blacks how to be religious, self-sufficient, and how to be good people (by their standards). I have no doubt that the teachers had the best intentions, but I wonder if these rich white women were setting unattainable expectations and standards on black families and what this meant for them. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
== Susie King Taylor, Reminiscences of My Life in Camp, 1902 ==<br />
<br />
== Ada Bacot, Confederate Nurse, 1862 ==<br />
<br />
== Maria Daly, 1862, Northerner in the South (New Orleans) ==<br />
<br />
== Sarah Morgan, 1863, Teen diary ==<br />
<br />
== Cornelia Hancock, Union Nurse, 1863 ==<br />
<br />
== Caroline Kirkland, 1863, defends Northern women’s support of Northern men ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Ella Gertrude Clanton Thomas, January 1865 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_13-14_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 13-14 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-22T14:39:35Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Louisa May Alcott, Hospital Sketches, 1862-1863 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Louisa May Alcott, Hospital Sketches, 1862-1863 ==<br />
<br />
A Union Nurse, shows the experience of Louisa May Alcott as a nurse in the Union Hotel Hospital in Washington, D.C. One thing that stood out to me was Dorthea Dix’s call for women nurses. She was specific in that she was looking for “women between 30 and 50 years old, single, sober, hard-working, moral, and plain looking.” At first I thought that the age of 30 was a little old to be a cut off considering there must have been so many single, sober, hard-working, moral, and plain looking girls that were between 20 and 30 that would not have families to worry about so they would have the ability to become nurses. But then I realized that perhaps the act of being a young woman and working in close proximity with men would be considered immoral in and of itself. I am curious if they sent any women away because they were too good looking! –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I also thought it was really interesting that Dorthea Dix wanted women between the age of 30-50. I agree with Erin that women probably had to be atleast 30 because it would be seen as inappropriate for a younger women to be working with men. I think that Dix extended the age to 50 because there were probably a lot of widows in their 40's. I thought the requirement that the women be plain looking was funny, but I guess it makes sense. If the nurse was too good looking, the patients would probably be hitting on her all day long. On the other hand, if the patients had not been able to pay for prostitutes, they probably would be hitting on their nurses even if they were "plain looking". -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Mary Livermore, [Northern women on farm during war], 1890 -- Woloch and Major Problems readings. ==<br />
I thought it was interesting that Mary Livermore's observation of the women working in the fields at first bothered her. Livermore compared women’s devotion to their family life and maintaining their farms to men’s devotion to the war when she said, “the women had enlisted in the war.” This gave women some gender equality and these responsibilities were accepted because it was in the name of family, home, and country. -Marsha <br />
<br />
In Modern Problems, Mary Livermore spoke of the work of women. She set a strong and emotional tone that women set forth in the war. I think she was saying that the men in the war were given hope through the inspiring women and “ministering angels.” She also compares women’s “relief societies” to regiments in the war. -Marsha<br />
<br />
== Louticia Jackson’s letter in 1863 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Eva Jones to Mary Jones, her mother-in-law, 1865 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Accounts of former slaves, 1865-1937 ==<br />
<br />
== VA woman, recorded by abolitionist Laura Haviland in 1866 ==<br />
<br />
== Harriet Tubman, from her white female biographer, Sarah Bradford, 1886 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Clara Burdett, to notary in Union camp in KY, March 1865 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Fanny Berry, in Weevils in the Wheat, 1937 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Tennessee Woman, 1929 [TN Nanny] ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mary Anderson, NC ==<br />
<br />
== Katie Darling, in TX ==<br />
<br />
== Sarah and Lucy Chase, Teaching the Freedmen, 1866-1868 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Sarah Chase and Lucy Chase’s letters because I did a lot of research on the topic of white northern women going south to teach newly freed blacks for my second paper and I was able to draw parallels between the Chase sisters and Mary Ames (who I focused on for my paper). The Chase sisters were from a wealthy family Massachusetts, and had been against slavery since before the war began, and went to Savannah after the war ended as teachers. In the letters, I can tell that becoming teachers in the south was not just about teaching the basics of reading and writing but it was about teaching new ways of life. These teachers thought that it was their responsibility to show the newly freed blacks how to be religious, self-sufficient, and how to be good people (by their standards). I have no doubt that the teachers had the best intentions, but I wonder if these rich white women were setting unattainable expectations and standards on black families and what this meant for them. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
== Susie King Taylor, Reminiscences of My Life in Camp, 1902 ==<br />
<br />
== Ada Bacot, Confederate Nurse, 1862 ==<br />
<br />
== Maria Daly, 1862, Northerner in the South (New Orleans) ==<br />
<br />
== Sarah Morgan, 1863, Teen diary ==<br />
<br />
== Cornelia Hancock, Union Nurse, 1863 ==<br />
<br />
== Caroline Kirkland, 1863, defends Northern women’s support of Northern men ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Ella Gertrude Clanton Thomas, January 1865 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_12_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 12 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-12T14:29:24Z<p>KatelynLease: /* 1852, Sarah Josepha Hale, editor of Godey’s Lady’s Book */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Comparative source questions ==<br />
After reading all the different entries in the book, I've noticed that all the women who were involved in reform movements were 100% dedicated to their cause. There were very few who were semi-dedicated, or who only partially cared. These women were involved for a reason, and they weren't going to stop, no matter who or what tried to deter them. Their dedication is what kept the reform movement going. But '''the ironic thing is that while all these women were putting in so much effort into these movements, none of it was out of selfish motives (at least not what we can see).''' I think that is what made the reform movement as great as it was, women helping one another. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex. I also noticed this, and it really comes across in the section written by Julie Jeffrey when she writes about the diaries and letters left by women activists and the difficulties they endured. '''These women were risking a great deal both in their home lives and when they were taking such a public stand. They put an enormous amount of time and effort into the cause which left them, in some cases, exhausted and stressed. I agree with Jeffrey's assessment that "No matter what one's attitude might be toward women's rights, to embrace abolitionism was to embrace radicalism" (155).''' I also found it interesting that in '''almost all of the writings from the Woloch readings for this week, the women used both the Bible and the Constitution as proof/reason for their calls for equality.''' It seems like the church really let women down during this period because women activists were counting on their support and then were actually attacked by church ministers for their position or perhaps, their vocality.--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
I agree with you Nancy and Alex. These women were very unselfish. Even though there was less of a chance that they would be attacked for being abolitionists, it still could have happened. People hated abolitionists. To go against the crowd in this way shows strength and courage. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== The Advocate of Moral Reform, 1838 ==<br />
<br />
In The Advocate of Moral Reform I found it interesting that moral reformers were against “the hazard of elopement”. They believed that elopement was an escape from parental authority and “the first step to ruin”. In the story, the girl elopes and is led into prostitution, and is then saved. I am curious how often this type of thing actually happened. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I thought it was strange that when the girl was found in the brothel by the person from her home town, that he himself did not get her out of the place himself, instead he went to the "Moral Reform Society" and asked them to get her out.-Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that the moral reformers brought the circus into the mix. I can definitely see how they’d take issue with it, but I think they may’ve been overreacting just a tad. The young man who knew the girl, “having heard of the performances of a wonderful animal at the Circus, was induced for once to visit that school of immorality and debauchery (234).” They actually suggest that going to the circus leads to the whorehouse. The young man apparently only went because of his exposure to those shady circus folk. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
Ok to be fair to the story the circus is a scary place! You never know what kind of shady business is going on there! It did seem kind of odd though that they would throw in the circus aspect of the story. I guess the author had a bad experience with the circus? This piece was slightly amusing/pathetic it reminded me of the story of Charlotte (was that her name?) the other very very silly girl who ran off with someone and was abandoned and then died when her father came and forgave her. Why are these girls so silly? I hope we have evolved!-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
For the topic, I found this piece almost humorous. The writer seems to be putting forth a conspiracy theory that the man intentionally lured his very innocent victim into the state of needing to become a prostitute to pay for her bills. This article portrays a young country girl, innocent in the ways of the world, as a victim to the evils of both male immorality (sex) and the city. Exaggerated and a little over the top, I am sure it received plenty of attention, but also very pointedly displaying the evils of sex and prostitution.-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
I agree that this piece is kind of funny. It makes this girl sound so naive, like she had no idea what she was getting herself into. She may not have. However, I doubt that she was tricked into prostitution. Women may not have had a lot of rights but they were not stupid. It was kind of creepy that this was going on at a circus. I'm sure this story helped motivate people to be against prostitution. Well, at least the ladies. I'm sure most men didn't really care what prostitutes had to go through, since the prostitutes were doing business with them. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Maria Stewart, 1831, “O, Ye Daughters of Africa, Awake!” in the Liberator. ==<br />
Maria Stewart seems out of her time. She is strong and vigile with her words. She recognizes her part in the constitution by saying that all men are free and equal. I think she makes a loud and vigilant statement when she says principles makes the man not the color of the skin. I thought it was interesting also when she wrote that even though many think blacks are an inferior race that God does not look at them that way. Maria Stewart had professed her faith to God. I think she was expressing that blacks allegiance was to their country and faith to God -not their masters. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
The writing of Maria W. Stewart reminded me of Martin Luther King Jr. She wrote: “Far be it from me to recommend to you either to kill, burn, or destroy. But I would strongly recommend to you to improve your talents; let not one lie buried in the earth. Show forth your powers of the mind...” Stewart and King both promoted non-violent protest and spoke of equality in religious terms. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
<br />
As I read this passage, Maria Stewart said many things that stood out to me as brave, but also showed her dedication to the cause. She reaches out to people with the intent to empower them. She says, "Many think, because your skins are tinged with a sable hue, that you are an inferior race of beings." (P. 236) To the people she specifically talks to, she gives them little chance for excuses as to why they do not stand up and support reform and stand up for their rights. It was interesting how Maria Stewart referred to God in everything she said. She believed her work was for God and believed, with that idea, that she (and other AFrican Americans) could achieve anything. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed this passage. I thought that she was very intelligent, brave, and most of all--she was articulate. I thought it was very clever to bring up the fact that the blood and tears of the African Americans had really more so than even the Europeans, settled America and made it was it was. I also like how she mentioned that while African Americans were busy doing all the physical labor required to build up a nation, their masters had been busy with "head-work." It was an interesting way to describe that fact that some parts of society had had a 200 year head start on education, while others yearned just to learn how to read. -Mary Turner<br />
<br />
== Letter to Liberator from Andover Female Antislavery Society, 1836 ==<br />
Referring to the meetings of the Female Antislavery Society, this woman was stressing the importance of a woman's role in reform. It was women's Godly duty to reform those in the south, who believed in slavery. Using such words as "scourged sisters" at the South, meaning black women are our sisters and are being tortured by the south. The south must be corrected for their wrong doings. Black women are being opressed and we must reform the south to stop the oppression. She saw it as a degradation of women or what she called "darkness." -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I agree with Marsha in that women stressed their importance in reform. They saw it as their "Christian duty" to help their enslaved sisters. According to these antislavery women, they were justified in condemning slavery because it "robbed women in slavery of virtue". It is interesting that these antislavery women who had their ideals of what it meant to be women believed that slave women had those same ideals. I wonder how southern white women felt about this. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
I think it is always so interesting when people interpret the bible and use it for whatever point they was to make or argue. In this case with the letter, I liked the way the lady wanted to explain how God viewed women-that they had a duty but also that they should not be slaves. I also liked the statement that said it "disregards the relation of husband and wife, brother and sister, parent and child-shuts out the intellect the light of knowledge-whelms hope in despair and ruins the soul." The letter had a lot of good points to make. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
When I read this piece, I was really impressed by the ammount of imagery used. It was very well written, and made to grab the readers attention and convince them that slavery is indeed, a very vile practice. This is definately propaganda, catering to the northern white middle class women. It was made to be really moving and convincing, to draw more women into the cause of anti-slavery, and it seems like a good enough piece of work to have been able to do the job. Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
== Sarah Grimke’s response to the Mass Clergy, 1837 ==<br />
I was really impressed by the choice of words and imagery Grimke uses in her response to the Mass Clergy. Just to imagine how learned and politically savvy this woman must have been is not much of a feat. I can see this woman being someone who could run verbal circles around almost anyone. And, it is also interssting that she intreperts the bible as saying that men and women were created equal. I am curious to know if saying that men and women were created equal under god was a very different thing, or if that was a rather normal statement to make at the time? Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I agree with Kristina about the way Sarah Grimke spoke to the clergy. She was not afraid to ask the hard questions, the ones she knew she was justified in asking, such s "how monstrous is the doctrine that woman is to be dependent on man? Where in all the sacred scriptures is this taught?" Grimke speaks out on eveyrthing she finds wrong with the clergy in relation to women's rights. I think I mostly enjoyed her last sentence, "But no where does Godsay that he made any disntinction between us as moral and intelligent beings." I feel like that was almost a slap in the face to the clergy, because in one sentence, she was able to assert female intelligence over that of men, and it came across as an insult. I was glad to see someone could be courageous and speak up, without being afraid. Grimke did her research, and had evidence to back up what she was arguing. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Declaration of Sentiments at Seneca Falls, 1848 (written by Elizabeth Cady Stanton) ==<br />
<br />
I don’t really understand why women would be willing to put forth their rights and equality unanimously except for voting rights. If women were kept out of political life because they were considered unsuited for it intellectually and emotionally, but the women and men at Seneca Falls were arguing the opposite, why not just go for the gold? The Declaration of Sentiments is threatening already, what difference would one more assertion make. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
<br />
I don't really understand why the Declaration of Sentiments began with the introduction to the Declaration of Independence. I know the women were trying to establish that they were entitled to the freedoms men did as a result of the Declaration of Independence, but I feel like by repeating it, the women are not making any progress. However, I do feel that some of the statements made in the Declaration of Sentiments were very strong. When the women write, "He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead." (P. 242) The phrase "civilly dead" just seems like a strong way of describing the lack of rights for women, but that probably describes the women's feelings almost exactly on the matter. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Lucy Stone (and Henry Blackwell)’s Marriage Protest, 1855 ==<br />
The marriage protest I compared to a modern day pre-nuptial agreement. With Lucy having this agreement read at her wedding she took a strong stance for women's rights as did her husband and those who attended the wedding. I think her fight against William Blackstone's words, "the existence of the wife is suspended during marriage." spoke louder than any sewing circle. Lucy wanted an equal partnership in her marriage and with this agreement believed she would get it, but I question how was the protest enforced? Did her husband truly agree to all six points in the protest? If so, I strongly commend him for standing by his wife in her fight for women's rights and hope he set a further example for marriages in the 1850s. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
The introduction to this piece noted that Lucy Stone endured much ridicule and persecution for her protest, but it does not mention how others regarded Henry Blackwell, Lucy’s husband. I would think that those opposed to the protest would also ridicule Blackwell for his perceived inability to keep Lucy submissive to him. I think Blackwell’s actions were very brave and liberal-thinking because he gave society a large opportunity to question his masculinity. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
This protest was very interesting. That the husband would sign this very rebellious statement during a time when the man is viewed as the head of the household seemed very liberal of him. My question would be was how did this protest stand legally? Many of the portions of this protest include legal issues such as guardianship over children, laws over wills, property, and the rejection of feme covert. Did this really do anything outside of the house?-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
wow! This was really cool! I wonder if she was one of the first women to keep her own name when she got married. I also wonder if this agreement had any standing in a court of law, but regardless it was a very compelling act of rebellion against the legal system in regards to married womens rights. I know the story mentioned that Lucy received ridicule for her actions but I would find it hard to believe that her husband didn't receive that and much worse from other men. Both her and her husbands actions are extremely commendable and I hope that it inspired other women of that time to demand the same sort of rights in their own marriages.---Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I really liked this protest and the fact that both Lucy Stone and her husband signed it. Whether this had any legal standing, which I doubt, may not really have mattered. It was probably very effective in making others start to question the issues it raised. I also, would be interested in knowing what kind of ridicule Blackwell may have experienced because of this.--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Sojourner Truth (Isabella Van Wagener), 1851 (Ohio Convention). ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Isablle Graham and Society for Relief of Poor Widows, 1806 ==<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how much Isabella Graham invoked the idea that, as Christian women, it was both their moral and religious duty to fight against slavery, which they saw as a sin. She considers them "blessed", as well as "Good Samaritans". These religious sentiments are echoed in the next document, the minutes of the meeting of the Anti-Slavery Convention in 1837, which starts off with a reading of the Scripture and offering of prayer, and then goes on to state the necessity of "treading" in the "Redeemer's" steps and preserving "God's gift of freedom." I didn't realize how much of a role religion played in the Abolition movement, or perhaps how much it was expressed. I also thought it was interesting how Isabella Graham seemed to encourage the women in their "duties", portraying the widows as less fortunate and in need of assistance ("the approach of winter is as the approach of death.") -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women, 1837 ==<br />
Compared to what I learned about the Constitutional Conventions and early Congress in my Revolution class, a lot of things seemed to be accomplished in this convention. They had 8 revolutions passed in the first day, in fact, everything seemed to pass. However, this could simply be the fact that so many like-minded individuals chose to meet at this group whereas elected/appointed officials who may not share the same view were in the Constitutional Conventions or Congress, this leads to debate. Just wondering, about how long would these conventions last? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== American Female Reform Society Warns Mothers of “Solitary Vice”, 1839 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== 1848, Elizabeth McClintock and Elizabeth Cady Stanton defend the Declaration of Sentiments and the 1848 convention ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== 1852, Sarah Josepha Hale, editor of Godey’s Lady’s Book ==<br />
<br />
While this passage consisted of only a paragraph, I found it interesting how Mrs. Hale took a stance on voting. She did not think women needed the right to vote when they could influence the men in their lives, yet did the men not have the final say so in the home? I think this passage took a step backwards for the women's movement, while yes women could attempt to influence men did they really? This was not like the Native Americans in which women could keep food from men if things did not go their way. I think this passage serves to represent women as subservient to their husbands and or sons. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I also found in interesting that Mrs. Hale did not think that women needed the right to vote. I'm sure some women did have profound influence over their husbands, especially in those in companionate marriages. However, I have trouble believing that a husband would vote a certain way just because the little woman at home says so. I agree with Megan that this seems like a step backward. After reading passages by women like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, its strange to read a piece like this. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
Do you think this passage is related to any of the reform movements, such as prohibition or prostitution? Perhaps many women at the time felt that if they focused to much on women's suffrage, the issues that were important to them would be left behind. Do you think that some women believed in women's suffrage, but did not think it was worth fighting for because it would hinder other important issues? - John Rowley<br />
<br />
I still find it kind of odd that a woman would write something such as this. I suppose it is because we have grown up in a time where we can vote. Although she does have a point that the woman can have an effect as a mother on how her children would vote. This comes back to the idea that it’s the woman’s job to raise good citizens. Like Megan W. I feel like it is very unlikely that she would have much effect on her husband’s vote. –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
== Julie Roy Jeffrey, “Ordinary Women in the Antislavery Movement,” in the Introduction to ''The Great Silent Army of Abolitionism: Ordinary Women in the Anti-slavery Movement'', 1998. ==<br />
<br />
I liked this essay by Julie Roy Jeffrey. I liked how she talked about the plain, average woman being a big part of the abolition movement. William Lloyd Garrison Jr said that the "leaders would have been powerless" without their help. Jeffrey talks about individual movements that were created after the national antislavery effort was ended in the mid Nineteenth century. She also mentioned how the involvement in this effort put women outside their sphere like we talked about in class. The end of the essay mentions several women who were a part of this movement that I think was important to include. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I also really liked this essay. One part that especially interests me is when Julie Roy Jeffrey discussed the ways in which the abolitionist movement affected women's "self-perception and self-image". She talks about how the movement instilled in women the necessity of learning to "reason and to argue", which completely goes against society's expectation that women be submissive and passive. I also feel like in many ways the movement, along with other reform and moral movements of the period, may have given some women greater confidence in themselves and their abilities, as well as more assurance and self-assertiveness. On the other hand, some women could have felt as Sarah Ernst did, when she stated that the "sleepless nights and anxious distressed days" she was spending in commitments to the abolitionist movement were "not calculated to give a healthy constitution" to her newborn baby. I wonder how women such as Sarah balanced their roles as mothers and wives with their duties and commitments to the various movements? -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Nancy Isenberg’s “Women’s Rights and the Politics of Church and State in Antebellum America,” (1998) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Shirley Yee, “Free Black Women in the Abolitionist Movement,” in ''Black Women Abolitionists: A Study in Activism, 1828-1860'', (1992). ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_12_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 12 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-12T14:26:14Z<p>KatelynLease: /* The Advocate of Moral Reform, 1838 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Comparative source questions ==<br />
After reading all the different entries in the book, I've noticed that all the women who were involved in reform movements were 100% dedicated to their cause. There were very few who were semi-dedicated, or who only partially cared. These women were involved for a reason, and they weren't going to stop, no matter who or what tried to deter them. Their dedication is what kept the reform movement going. But '''the ironic thing is that while all these women were putting in so much effort into these movements, none of it was out of selfish motives (at least not what we can see).''' I think that is what made the reform movement as great as it was, women helping one another. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex. I also noticed this, and it really comes across in the section written by Julie Jeffrey when she writes about the diaries and letters left by women activists and the difficulties they endured. '''These women were risking a great deal both in their home lives and when they were taking such a public stand. They put an enormous amount of time and effort into the cause which left them, in some cases, exhausted and stressed. I agree with Jeffrey's assessment that "No matter what one's attitude might be toward women's rights, to embrace abolitionism was to embrace radicalism" (155).''' I also found it interesting that in '''almost all of the writings from the Woloch readings for this week, the women used both the Bible and the Constitution as proof/reason for their calls for equality.''' It seems like the church really let women down during this period because women activists were counting on their support and then were actually attacked by church ministers for their position or perhaps, their vocality.--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
I agree with you Nancy and Alex. These women were very unselfish. Even though there was less of a chance that they would be attacked for being abolitionists, it still could have happened. People hated abolitionists. To go against the crowd in this way shows strength and courage. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== The Advocate of Moral Reform, 1838 ==<br />
<br />
In The Advocate of Moral Reform I found it interesting that moral reformers were against “the hazard of elopement”. They believed that elopement was an escape from parental authority and “the first step to ruin”. In the story, the girl elopes and is led into prostitution, and is then saved. I am curious how often this type of thing actually happened. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I thought it was strange that when the girl was found in the brothel by the person from her home town, that he himself did not get her out of the place himself, instead he went to the "Moral Reform Society" and asked them to get her out.-Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that the moral reformers brought the circus into the mix. I can definitely see how they’d take issue with it, but I think they may’ve been overreacting just a tad. The young man who knew the girl, “having heard of the performances of a wonderful animal at the Circus, was induced for once to visit that school of immorality and debauchery (234).” They actually suggest that going to the circus leads to the whorehouse. The young man apparently only went because of his exposure to those shady circus folk. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
Ok to be fair to the story the circus is a scary place! You never know what kind of shady business is going on there! It did seem kind of odd though that they would throw in the circus aspect of the story. I guess the author had a bad experience with the circus? This piece was slightly amusing/pathetic it reminded me of the story of Charlotte (was that her name?) the other very very silly girl who ran off with someone and was abandoned and then died when her father came and forgave her. Why are these girls so silly? I hope we have evolved!-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
For the topic, I found this piece almost humorous. The writer seems to be putting forth a conspiracy theory that the man intentionally lured his very innocent victim into the state of needing to become a prostitute to pay for her bills. This article portrays a young country girl, innocent in the ways of the world, as a victim to the evils of both male immorality (sex) and the city. Exaggerated and a little over the top, I am sure it received plenty of attention, but also very pointedly displaying the evils of sex and prostitution.-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
I agree that this piece is kind of funny. It makes this girl sound so naive, like she had no idea what she was getting herself into. She may not have. However, I doubt that she was tricked into prostitution. Women may not have had a lot of rights but they were not stupid. It was kind of creepy that this was going on at a circus. I'm sure this story helped motivate people to be against prostitution. Well, at least the ladies. I'm sure most men didn't really care what prostitutes had to go through, since the prostitutes were doing business with them. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Maria Stewart, 1831, “O, Ye Daughters of Africa, Awake!” in the Liberator. ==<br />
Maria Stewart seems out of her time. She is strong and vigile with her words. She recognizes her part in the constitution by saying that all men are free and equal. I think she makes a loud and vigilant statement when she says principles makes the man not the color of the skin. I thought it was interesting also when she wrote that even though many think blacks are an inferior race that God does not look at them that way. Maria Stewart had professed her faith to God. I think she was expressing that blacks allegiance was to their country and faith to God -not their masters. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
The writing of Maria W. Stewart reminded me of Martin Luther King Jr. She wrote: “Far be it from me to recommend to you either to kill, burn, or destroy. But I would strongly recommend to you to improve your talents; let not one lie buried in the earth. Show forth your powers of the mind...” Stewart and King both promoted non-violent protest and spoke of equality in religious terms. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
<br />
As I read this passage, Maria Stewart said many things that stood out to me as brave, but also showed her dedication to the cause. She reaches out to people with the intent to empower them. She says, "Many think, because your skins are tinged with a sable hue, that you are an inferior race of beings." (P. 236) To the people she specifically talks to, she gives them little chance for excuses as to why they do not stand up and support reform and stand up for their rights. It was interesting how Maria Stewart referred to God in everything she said. She believed her work was for God and believed, with that idea, that she (and other AFrican Americans) could achieve anything. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Letter to Liberator from Andover Female Antislavery Society, 1836 ==<br />
Referring to the meetings of the Female Antislavery Society, this woman was stressing the importance of a woman's role in reform. It was women's Godly duty to reform those in the south, who believed in slavery. Using such words as "scourged sisters" at the South, meaning black women are our sisters and are being tortured by the south. The south must be corrected for their wrong doings. Black women are being opressed and we must reform the south to stop the oppression. She saw it as a degradation of women or what she called "darkness." -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I agree with Marsha in that women stressed their importance in reform. They saw it as their "Christian duty" to help their enslaved sisters. According to these antislavery women, they were justified in condemning slavery because it "robbed women in slavery of virtue". It is interesting that these antislavery women who had their ideals of what it meant to be women believed that slave women had those same ideals. I wonder how southern white women felt about this. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
I think it is always so interesting when people interpret the bible and use it for whatever point they was to make or argue. In this case with the letter, I liked the way the lady wanted to explain how God viewed women-that they had a duty but also that they should not be slaves. I also liked the statement that said it "disregards the relation of husband and wife, brother and sister, parent and child-shuts out the intellect the light of knowledge-whelms hope in despair and ruins the soul." The letter had a lot of good points to make. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
When I read this piece, I was really impressed by the ammount of imagery used. It was very well written, and made to grab the readers attention and convince them that slavery is indeed, a very vile practice. This is definately propaganda, catering to the northern white middle class women. It was made to be really moving and convincing, to draw more women into the cause of anti-slavery, and it seems like a good enough piece of work to have been able to do the job. Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
== Sarah Grimke’s response to the Mass Clergy, 1837 ==<br />
I was really impressed by the choice of words and imagery Grimke uses in her response to the Mass Clergy. Just to imagine how learned and politically savvy this woman must have been is not much of a feat. I can see this woman being someone who could run verbal circles around almost anyone. And, it is also interssting that she intreperts the bible as saying that men and women were created equal. I am curious to know if saying that men and women were created equal under god was a very different thing, or if that was a rather normal statement to make at the time? Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I agree with Kristina about the way Sarah Grimke spoke to the clergy. She was not afraid to ask the hard questions, the ones she knew she was justified in asking, such s "how monstrous is the doctrine that woman is to be dependent on man? Where in all the sacred scriptures is this taught?" Grimke speaks out on eveyrthing she finds wrong with the clergy in relation to women's rights. I think I mostly enjoyed her last sentence, "But no where does Godsay that he made any disntinction between us as moral and intelligent beings." I feel like that was almost a slap in the face to the clergy, because in one sentence, she was able to assert female intelligence over that of men, and it came across as an insult. I was glad to see someone could be courageous and speak up, without being afraid. Grimke did her research, and had evidence to back up what she was arguing. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Declaration of Sentiments at Seneca Falls, 1848 (written by Elizabeth Cady Stanton) ==<br />
<br />
I don’t really understand why women would be willing to put forth their rights and equality unanimously except for voting rights. If women were kept out of political life because they were considered unsuited for it intellectually and emotionally, but the women and men at Seneca Falls were arguing the opposite, why not just go for the gold? The Declaration of Sentiments is threatening already, what difference would one more assertion make. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
<br />
I don't really understand why the Declaration of Sentiments began with the introduction to the Declaration of Independence. I know the women were trying to establish that they were entitled to the freedoms men did as a result of the Declaration of Independence, but I feel like by repeating it, the women are not making any progress. However, I do feel that some of the statements made in the Declaration of Sentiments were very strong. When the women write, "He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead." (P. 242) The phrase "civilly dead" just seems like a strong way of describing the lack of rights for women, but that probably describes the women's feelings almost exactly on the matter. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Lucy Stone (and Henry Blackwell)’s Marriage Protest, 1855 ==<br />
The marriage protest I compared to a modern day pre-nuptial agreement. With Lucy having this agreement read at her wedding she took a strong stance for women's rights as did her husband and those who attended the wedding. I think her fight against William Blackstone's words, "the existence of the wife is suspended during marriage." spoke louder than any sewing circle. Lucy wanted an equal partnership in her marriage and with this agreement believed she would get it, but I question how was the protest enforced? Did her husband truly agree to all six points in the protest? If so, I strongly commend him for standing by his wife in her fight for women's rights and hope he set a further example for marriages in the 1850s. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
The introduction to this piece noted that Lucy Stone endured much ridicule and persecution for her protest, but it does not mention how others regarded Henry Blackwell, Lucy’s husband. I would think that those opposed to the protest would also ridicule Blackwell for his perceived inability to keep Lucy submissive to him. I think Blackwell’s actions were very brave and liberal-thinking because he gave society a large opportunity to question his masculinity. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
This protest was very interesting. That the husband would sign this very rebellious statement during a time when the man is viewed as the head of the household seemed very liberal of him. My question would be was how did this protest stand legally? Many of the portions of this protest include legal issues such as guardianship over children, laws over wills, property, and the rejection of feme covert. Did this really do anything outside of the house?-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
wow! This was really cool! I wonder if she was one of the first women to keep her own name when she got married. I also wonder if this agreement had any standing in a court of law, but regardless it was a very compelling act of rebellion against the legal system in regards to married womens rights. I know the story mentioned that Lucy received ridicule for her actions but I would find it hard to believe that her husband didn't receive that and much worse from other men. Both her and her husbands actions are extremely commendable and I hope that it inspired other women of that time to demand the same sort of rights in their own marriages.---Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I really liked this protest and the fact that both Lucy Stone and her husband signed it. Whether this had any legal standing, which I doubt, may not really have mattered. It was probably very effective in making others start to question the issues it raised. I also, would be interested in knowing what kind of ridicule Blackwell may have experienced because of this.--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Sojourner Truth (Isabella Van Wagener), 1851 (Ohio Convention). ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Isablle Graham and Society for Relief of Poor Widows, 1806 ==<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how much Isabella Graham invoked the idea that, as Christian women, it was both their moral and religious duty to fight against slavery, which they saw as a sin. She considers them "blessed", as well as "Good Samaritans". These religious sentiments are echoed in the next document, the minutes of the meeting of the Anti-Slavery Convention in 1837, which starts off with a reading of the Scripture and offering of prayer, and then goes on to state the necessity of "treading" in the "Redeemer's" steps and preserving "God's gift of freedom." I didn't realize how much of a role religion played in the Abolition movement, or perhaps how much it was expressed. I also thought it was interesting how Isabella Graham seemed to encourage the women in their "duties", portraying the widows as less fortunate and in need of assistance ("the approach of winter is as the approach of death.") -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women, 1837 ==<br />
Compared to what I learned about the Constitutional Conventions and early Congress in my Revolution class, a lot of things seemed to be accomplished in this convention. They had 8 revolutions passed in the first day, in fact, everything seemed to pass. However, this could simply be the fact that so many like-minded individuals chose to meet at this group whereas elected/appointed officials who may not share the same view were in the Constitutional Conventions or Congress, this leads to debate. Just wondering, about how long would these conventions last? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== American Female Reform Society Warns Mothers of “Solitary Vice”, 1839 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== 1848, Elizabeth McClintock and Elizabeth Cady Stanton defend the Declaration of Sentiments and the 1848 convention ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== 1852, Sarah Josepha Hale, editor of Godey’s Lady’s Book ==<br />
<br />
While this passage consisted of only a paragraph, I found it interesting how Mrs. Hale took a stance on voting. She did not think women needed the right to vote when they could influence the men in their lives, yet did the men not have the final say so in the home? I think this passage took a step backwards for the women's movement, while yes women could attempt to influence men did they really? This was not like the Native Americans in which women could keep food from men if things did not go their way. I think this passage serves to represent women as subservient to their husbands and or sons. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
Do you think this passage is related to any of the reform movements, such as prohibition or prostitution? Perhaps many women at the time felt that if they focused to much on women's suffrage, the issues that were important to them would be left behind. Do you think that some women believed in women's suffrage, but did not think it was worth fighting for because it would hinder other important issues? - John Rowley<br />
<br />
I still find it kind of odd that a woman would write something such as this. I suppose it is because we have grown up in a time where we can vote. Although she does have a point that the woman can have an effect as a mother on how her children would vote. This comes back to the idea that it’s the woman’s job to raise good citizens. Like Megan W. I feel like it is very unlikely that she would have much effect on her husband’s vote. –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
== Julie Roy Jeffrey, “Ordinary Women in the Antislavery Movement,” in the Introduction to ''The Great Silent Army of Abolitionism: Ordinary Women in the Anti-slavery Movement'', 1998. ==<br />
<br />
I liked this essay by Julie Roy Jeffrey. I liked how she talked about the plain, average woman being a big part of the abolition movement. William Lloyd Garrison Jr said that the "leaders would have been powerless" without their help. Jeffrey talks about individual movements that were created after the national antislavery effort was ended in the mid Nineteenth century. She also mentioned how the involvement in this effort put women outside their sphere like we talked about in class. The end of the essay mentions several women who were a part of this movement that I think was important to include. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I also really liked this essay. One part that especially interests me is when Julie Roy Jeffrey discussed the ways in which the abolitionist movement affected women's "self-perception and self-image". She talks about how the movement instilled in women the necessity of learning to "reason and to argue", which completely goes against society's expectation that women be submissive and passive. I also feel like in many ways the movement, along with other reform and moral movements of the period, may have given some women greater confidence in themselves and their abilities, as well as more assurance and self-assertiveness. On the other hand, some women could have felt as Sarah Ernst did, when she stated that the "sleepless nights and anxious distressed days" she was spending in commitments to the abolitionist movement were "not calculated to give a healthy constitution" to her newborn baby. I wonder how women such as Sarah balanced their roles as mothers and wives with their duties and commitments to the various movements? -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Nancy Isenberg’s “Women’s Rights and the Politics of Church and State in Antebellum America,” (1998) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Shirley Yee, “Free Black Women in the Abolitionist Movement,” in ''Black Women Abolitionists: A Study in Activism, 1828-1860'', (1992). ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_12_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 12 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-12T14:22:51Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Comparative source questions */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Comparative source questions ==<br />
After reading all the different entries in the book, I've noticed that all the women who were involved in reform movements were 100% dedicated to their cause. There were very few who were semi-dedicated, or who only partially cared. These women were involved for a reason, and they weren't going to stop, no matter who or what tried to deter them. Their dedication is what kept the reform movement going. But '''the ironic thing is that while all these women were putting in so much effort into these movements, none of it was out of selfish motives (at least not what we can see).''' I think that is what made the reform movement as great as it was, women helping one another. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex. I also noticed this, and it really comes across in the section written by Julie Jeffrey when she writes about the diaries and letters left by women activists and the difficulties they endured. '''These women were risking a great deal both in their home lives and when they were taking such a public stand. They put an enormous amount of time and effort into the cause which left them, in some cases, exhausted and stressed. I agree with Jeffrey's assessment that "No matter what one's attitude might be toward women's rights, to embrace abolitionism was to embrace radicalism" (155).''' I also found it interesting that in '''almost all of the writings from the Woloch readings for this week, the women used both the Bible and the Constitution as proof/reason for their calls for equality.''' It seems like the church really let women down during this period because women activists were counting on their support and then were actually attacked by church ministers for their position or perhaps, their vocality.--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
I agree with you Nancy and Alex. These women were very unselfish. Even though there was less of a chance that they would be attacked for being abolitionists, it still could have happened. People hated abolitionists. To go against the crowd in this way shows strength and courage. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== The Advocate of Moral Reform, 1838 ==<br />
<br />
In The Advocate of Moral Reform I found it interesting that moral reformers were against “the hazard of elopement”. They believed that elopement was an escape from parental authority and “the first step to ruin”. In the story, the girl elopes and is led into prostitution, and is then saved. I am curious how often this type of thing actually happened. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I thought it was strange that when the girl was found in the brothel by the person from her home town, that he himself did not get her out of the place himself, instead he went to the "Moral Reform Society" and asked them to get her out.-Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that the moral reformers brought the circus into the mix. I can definitely see how they’d take issue with it, but I think they may’ve been overreacting just a tad. The young man who knew the girl, “having heard of the performances of a wonderful animal at the Circus, was induced for once to visit that school of immorality and debauchery (234).” They actually suggest that going to the circus leads to the whorehouse. The young man apparently only went because of his exposure to those shady circus folk. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
Ok to be fair to the story the circus is a scary place! You never know what kind of shady business is going on there! It did seem kind of odd though that they would throw in the circus aspect of the story. I guess the author had a bad experience with the circus? This piece was slightly amusing/pathetic it reminded me of the story of Charlotte (was that her name?) the other very very silly girl who ran off with someone and was abandoned and then died when her father came and forgave her. Why are these girls so silly? I hope we have evolved!-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
For the topic, I found this piece almost humorous. The writer seems to be putting forth a conspiracy theory that the man intentionally lured his very innocent victim into the state of needing to become a prostitute to pay for her bills. This article portrays a young country girl, innocent in the ways of the world, as a victim to the evils of both male immorality (sex) and the city. Exaggerated and a little over the top, I am sure it received plenty of attention, but also very pointedly displaying the evils of sex and prostitution.-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Maria Stewart, 1831, “O, Ye Daughters of Africa, Awake!” in the Liberator. ==<br />
Maria Stewart seems out of her time. She is strong and vigile with her words. She recognizes her part in the constitution by saying that all men are free and equal. I think she makes a loud and vigilant statement when she says principles makes the man not the color of the skin. I thought it was interesting also when she wrote that even though many think blacks are an inferior race that God does not look at them that way. Maria Stewart had professed her faith to God. I think she was expressing that blacks allegiance was to their country and faith to God -not their masters. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
The writing of Maria W. Stewart reminded me of Martin Luther King Jr. She wrote: “Far be it from me to recommend to you either to kill, burn, or destroy. But I would strongly recommend to you to improve your talents; let not one lie buried in the earth. Show forth your powers of the mind...” Stewart and King both promoted non-violent protest and spoke of equality in religious terms. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
<br />
As I read this passage, Maria Stewart said many things that stood out to me as brave, but also showed her dedication to the cause. She reaches out to people with the intent to empower them. She says, "Many think, because your skins are tinged with a sable hue, that you are an inferior race of beings." (P. 236) To the people she specifically talks to, she gives them little chance for excuses as to why they do not stand up and support reform and stand up for their rights. It was interesting how Maria Stewart referred to God in everything she said. She believed her work was for God and believed, with that idea, that she (and other AFrican Americans) could achieve anything. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Letter to Liberator from Andover Female Antislavery Society, 1836 ==<br />
Referring to the meetings of the Female Antislavery Society, this woman was stressing the importance of a woman's role in reform. It was women's Godly duty to reform those in the south, who believed in slavery. Using such words as "scourged sisters" at the South, meaning black women are our sisters and are being tortured by the south. The south must be corrected for their wrong doings. Black women are being opressed and we must reform the south to stop the oppression. She saw it as a degradation of women or what she called "darkness." -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I agree with Marsha in that women stressed their importance in reform. They saw it as their "Christian duty" to help their enslaved sisters. According to these antislavery women, they were justified in condemning slavery because it "robbed women in slavery of virtue". It is interesting that these antislavery women who had their ideals of what it meant to be women believed that slave women had those same ideals. I wonder how southern white women felt about this. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
I think it is always so interesting when people interpret the bible and use it for whatever point they was to make or argue. In this case with the letter, I liked the way the lady wanted to explain how God viewed women-that they had a duty but also that they should not be slaves. I also liked the statement that said it "disregards the relation of husband and wife, brother and sister, parent and child-shuts out the intellect the light of knowledge-whelms hope in despair and ruins the soul." The letter had a lot of good points to make. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
When I read this piece, I was really impressed by the ammount of imagery used. It was very well written, and made to grab the readers attention and convince them that slavery is indeed, a very vile practice. This is definately propaganda, catering to the northern white middle class women. It was made to be really moving and convincing, to draw more women into the cause of anti-slavery, and it seems like a good enough piece of work to have been able to do the job. Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
== Sarah Grimke’s response to the Mass Clergy, 1837 ==<br />
I was really impressed by the choice of words and imagery Grimke uses in her response to the Mass Clergy. Just to imagine how learned and politically savvy this woman must have been is not much of a feat. I can see this woman being someone who could run verbal circles around almost anyone. And, it is also interssting that she intreperts the bible as saying that men and women were created equal. I am curious to know if saying that men and women were created equal under god was a very different thing, or if that was a rather normal statement to make at the time? Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I agree with Kristina about the way Sarah Grimke spoke to the clergy. She was not afraid to ask the hard questions, the ones she knew she was justified in asking, such s "how monstrous is the doctrine that woman is to be dependent on man? Where in all the sacred scriptures is this taught?" Grimke speaks out on eveyrthing she finds wrong with the clergy in relation to women's rights. I think I mostly enjoyed her last sentence, "But no where does Godsay that he made any disntinction between us as moral and intelligent beings." I feel like that was almost a slap in the face to the clergy, because in one sentence, she was able to assert female intelligence over that of men, and it came across as an insult. I was glad to see someone could be courageous and speak up, without being afraid. Grimke did her research, and had evidence to back up what she was arguing. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Declaration of Sentiments at Seneca Falls, 1848 (written by Elizabeth Cady Stanton) ==<br />
<br />
I don’t really understand why women would be willing to put forth their rights and equality unanimously except for voting rights. If women were kept out of political life because they were considered unsuited for it intellectually and emotionally, but the women and men at Seneca Falls were arguing the opposite, why not just go for the gold? The Declaration of Sentiments is threatening already, what difference would one more assertion make. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
<br />
I don't really understand why the Declaration of Sentiments began with the introduction to the Declaration of Independence. I know the women were trying to establish that they were entitled to the freedoms men did as a result of the Declaration of Independence, but I feel like by repeating it, the women are not making any progress. However, I do feel that some of the statements made in the Declaration of Sentiments were very strong. When the women write, "He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead." (P. 242) The phrase "civilly dead" just seems like a strong way of describing the lack of rights for women, but that probably describes the women's feelings almost exactly on the matter. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Lucy Stone (and Henry Blackwell)’s Marriage Protest, 1855 ==<br />
The marriage protest I compared to a modern day pre-nuptial agreement. With Lucy having this agreement read at her wedding she took a strong stance for women's rights as did her husband and those who attended the wedding. I think her fight against William Blackstone's words, "the existence of the wife is suspended during marriage." spoke louder than any sewing circle. Lucy wanted an equal partnership in her marriage and with this agreement believed she would get it, but I question how was the protest enforced? Did her husband truly agree to all six points in the protest? If so, I strongly commend him for standing by his wife in her fight for women's rights and hope he set a further example for marriages in the 1850s. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
The introduction to this piece noted that Lucy Stone endured much ridicule and persecution for her protest, but it does not mention how others regarded Henry Blackwell, Lucy’s husband. I would think that those opposed to the protest would also ridicule Blackwell for his perceived inability to keep Lucy submissive to him. I think Blackwell’s actions were very brave and liberal-thinking because he gave society a large opportunity to question his masculinity. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
This protest was very interesting. That the husband would sign this very rebellious statement during a time when the man is viewed as the head of the household seemed very liberal of him. My question would be was how did this protest stand legally? Many of the portions of this protest include legal issues such as guardianship over children, laws over wills, property, and the rejection of feme covert. Did this really do anything outside of the house?-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
wow! This was really cool! I wonder if she was one of the first women to keep her own name when she got married. I also wonder if this agreement had any standing in a court of law, but regardless it was a very compelling act of rebellion against the legal system in regards to married womens rights. I know the story mentioned that Lucy received ridicule for her actions but I would find it hard to believe that her husband didn't receive that and much worse from other men. Both her and her husbands actions are extremely commendable and I hope that it inspired other women of that time to demand the same sort of rights in their own marriages.---Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I really liked this protest and the fact that both Lucy Stone and her husband signed it. Whether this had any legal standing, which I doubt, may not really have mattered. It was probably very effective in making others start to question the issues it raised. I also, would be interested in knowing what kind of ridicule Blackwell may have experienced because of this.--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Sojourner Truth (Isabella Van Wagener), 1851 (Ohio Convention). ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Isablle Graham and Society for Relief of Poor Widows, 1806 ==<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how much Isabella Graham invoked the idea that, as Christian women, it was both their moral and religious duty to fight against slavery, which they saw as a sin. She considers them "blessed", as well as "Good Samaritans". These religious sentiments are echoed in the next document, the minutes of the meeting of the Anti-Slavery Convention in 1837, which starts off with a reading of the Scripture and offering of prayer, and then goes on to state the necessity of "treading" in the "Redeemer's" steps and preserving "God's gift of freedom." I didn't realize how much of a role religion played in the Abolition movement, or perhaps how much it was expressed. I also thought it was interesting how Isabella Graham seemed to encourage the women in their "duties", portraying the widows as less fortunate and in need of assistance ("the approach of winter is as the approach of death.") -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women, 1837 ==<br />
Compared to what I learned about the Constitutional Conventions and early Congress in my Revolution class, a lot of things seemed to be accomplished in this convention. They had 8 revolutions passed in the first day, in fact, everything seemed to pass. However, this could simply be the fact that so many like-minded individuals chose to meet at this group whereas elected/appointed officials who may not share the same view were in the Constitutional Conventions or Congress, this leads to debate. Just wondering, about how long would these conventions last? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== American Female Reform Society Warns Mothers of “Solitary Vice”, 1839 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== 1848, Elizabeth McClintock and Elizabeth Cady Stanton defend the Declaration of Sentiments and the 1848 convention ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== 1852, Sarah Josepha Hale, editor of Godey’s Lady’s Book ==<br />
<br />
While this passage consisted of only a paragraph, I found it interesting how Mrs. Hale took a stance on voting. She did not think women needed the right to vote when they could influence the men in their lives, yet did the men not have the final say so in the home? I think this passage took a step backwards for the women's movement, while yes women could attempt to influence men did they really? This was not like the Native Americans in which women could keep food from men if things did not go their way. I think this passage serves to represent women as subservient to their husbands and or sons. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
Do you think this passage is related to any of the reform movements, such as prohibition or prostitution? Perhaps many women at the time felt that if they focused to much on women's suffrage, the issues that were important to them would be left behind. Do you think that some women believed in women's suffrage, but did not think it was worth fighting for because it would hinder other important issues? - John Rowley<br />
<br />
I still find it kind of odd that a woman would write something such as this. I suppose it is because we have grown up in a time where we can vote. Although she does have a point that the woman can have an effect as a mother on how her children would vote. This comes back to the idea that it’s the woman’s job to raise good citizens. Like Megan W. I feel like it is very unlikely that she would have much effect on her husband’s vote. –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
== Julie Roy Jeffrey, “Ordinary Women in the Antislavery Movement,” in the Introduction to ''The Great Silent Army of Abolitionism: Ordinary Women in the Anti-slavery Movement'', 1998. ==<br />
<br />
I liked this essay by Julie Roy Jeffrey. I liked how she talked about the plain, average woman being a big part of the abolition movement. William Lloyd Garrison Jr said that the "leaders would have been powerless" without their help. Jeffrey talks about individual movements that were created after the national antislavery effort was ended in the mid Nineteenth century. She also mentioned how the involvement in this effort put women outside their sphere like we talked about in class. The end of the essay mentions several women who were a part of this movement that I think was important to include. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I also really liked this essay. One part that especially interests me is when Julie Roy Jeffrey discussed the ways in which the abolitionist movement affected women's "self-perception and self-image". She talks about how the movement instilled in women the necessity of learning to "reason and to argue", which completely goes against society's expectation that women be submissive and passive. I also feel like in many ways the movement, along with other reform and moral movements of the period, may have given some women greater confidence in themselves and their abilities, as well as more assurance and self-assertiveness. On the other hand, some women could have felt as Sarah Ernst did, when she stated that the "sleepless nights and anxious distressed days" she was spending in commitments to the abolitionist movement were "not calculated to give a healthy constitution" to her newborn baby. I wonder how women such as Sarah balanced their roles as mothers and wives with their duties and commitments to the various movements? -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
== Nancy Isenberg’s “Women’s Rights and the Politics of Church and State in Antebellum America,” (1998) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Shirley Yee, “Free Black Women in the Abolitionist Movement,” in ''Black Women Abolitionists: A Study in Activism, 1828-1860'', (1992). ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_11_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 11 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-06T18:40:57Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Citizen protest of rape of Indian women in California, 1862 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Mary Anne Sadlier's Bessy Conway ==<br />
<br />
I found it really interesting that Bessy, upon leaving Ireland to come to America, said that she was planning on returning to her family in a few years. Was it common for men and women who left Ireland to plan on returning one day? Also, I thought it was cool that Bessy was able to return home and help her family, it seems very ideal, like this is what the typical Irish immigrant woman would strive to do, leave home on her own (getting her burden off her family) and making enough money to turn around and help support her family. So what was Mary Anne Sadlier's goal in writing this story? -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
It was very obvious that Bessy loved Ireland. I also wonder how many Irish immigrants that wanted to return home one day actually did. The trip to America had to be an extremely long trip. For her to come to America, work hard in difficult circumstances, and then make the trip back to Ireland took a lot of strength and courage. I just wonder how often situations like this actually happened. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I think that Bessy Conway was one of the lucky ones because she was able to go and had a job lined up for her with a place to live. She was one of those who embraced the myth of so much opportunity in a new world. She was a hard worker and expected the same of others around her (especially the other servants in the house.)-Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I agree that Bessy did embrace the myth of so much opportunity in America. I wonder how much of this was because she was a character in Mary Anne Sadlier's story. Do you think the all immigrants worked hard and expected the same of those around them? How many actually returned home after making money? I find it hard to imagine going to a new country and making money, then going back to poverty and starvation. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I found the mixed chapters we read of Bessy's story put a sense of reality on the true plight of young Irish women and men. From the early chapters discussing her families struggles and her earnestness to leave her home to help her family made me wonder if all young immigrants cared the same for Ireland and their families as Bessy? Chapters 6 and 15 stood out the most to me with their discussion of religion and how it was so important eventually leading to Bessy's dismissal was this normal in America? Did Americans fear religious takeover from the Irish immigrants? -Megan W. <br />
<br />
I thought the pictures of the starving people was awful and it was hard to read the chapter about Bessy's starving family. They kept their faith in God and kept saying that God would save them. I cannot imagine having enough food. Bessy was definitely a very lucky girl that she had a good job and earned quite a bit of money. It think it is interesting that Mary Anne Sadlier made Bessy out to be a hard worker which and implied that is why she was successful. Bessy just had a better opportunity then most. The author made the other servant out to be lazy which is why they ultimately were lost to poverty. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Jannicke Saehle, 1847, Norwegian immigrant’s letters ==<br />
I enjoyed this piece, it provided a lot of information about immigrants (though certainly not the majority of the poor Irish who suffered an awful journey across the Atlantic.) Jannicke Saehle obviously has some money as she was able to site see once arriving in America. I found her statement about sea sickness, “And after five minutes my turn came, also, to contribute my share to the Atlantic Ocean,” quite humorous. <br />
I also found it interesting her mentioning the abundance of food in America and that Americans tended to toss the extra to swine while people in her homeland starved. I certainly hope Johannes, her brother to whom she was writing, was not one of the starving people for I would hate to hear of all the waste if I were to be one of the starving poor. <br />
One question, though, how common were the museums that she described with wild animals? –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
I didn't realize that museuems of the kind she was describing existed at this time period in New York...I wonder if she was mentioning the Museum of Natural History. I have been there but who is the soldier with no head? I don't remember seeing that last time I went to any history museums. Her story was nice to read, because unlike so many others she truly seems to be living a better life in America. Even her passage over seemed to be blessed with good fortune. the tone of Jannickes story was happy and upbeat making her seem like the type of person who would find the silver lining in ever episode. However I wonder if she was trying to play things up a bit to comfort her family that maybe was worried about her well being?--Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I agree with Emma about liking the tone of the piece. Most tales or accounts of people immigrating to the United States around this time usually are filled with bad tales, deaths, sicknesses etc. It was interesting to point out the fact though that maybe she was not being 100% truthful about it to ease her family's worry. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I agree that the tone of these letters were a nice change of pace. However, I also find it hard to believe that immigration was full of happiness and sunshine. Especially since every other story that I have heard was a lot more negative. I think that the immigrants that wrote these letters were lying to try to keep their families from worrying about them. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== William Sanger, New York Prostitutes, 1858 ==<br />
I found it interesting that Sanger sympathizes with the prostitutes in his study and that he blamed fathers, husbands, and families for not doing their job. The immorality is from the failures of these figures in women's lives. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I also found Dr. Sanger's belief that the women he interviewed were victims of their environment (and not necessarily prostitutes because of a moral flaw in character, etc.) very interesting. I think it could be applied in geographical concepts and ideas, too- for example, the belief in "environmental determinism" (or the idea that your environment and surroundings have a major impact on who you are as a person) versus "environmental possibilism", where your environment can place some limits on you, but you are essentially responsible for who you are and what you do. I also found it interesting that, in discussing the reasons why some of the women would have cited "Inclination" as a reason for their becoming a prostitute, Dr. Sanger also mentioned and acknowledged female desires. In most of what we have discussed in class, we have talked about how women were expected to be "pure" and "chaste", while only men could actually have sexual desires and emotions. Dr. Sanger states, "The force of desire can be neither denied nor disputed, but still in the bosoms of most females that force exists in a slumbering state until aroused by some outside influences." Thus, he still, in many ways, is reinforcing the belief that women (while acknowledging that they might actually have "desires"- shocking!)should keep these repressed and private. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I agree that it is very interesting that Sanger blamed husbands, fathers, and the environment for these women becoming prostitutes. I think that a lot of that comes from the fact that women were expected to be so "pure" and "chaste". Obviously, they really weren't so pure and chaste. I mean I definitely don't think a woman would become a prostitute just because she likes sex. The women that Sanger studied were young, poor immigrants. They needed to make money and there were not many job opportunities for them. I think there's more to it than just that their husbands and fathers failed them. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I didn't find the statistics gathered by Sanger to be other than what I expected. Young, immigrants, poor, etc. I did find it amusing that he (as well as everybody else) was convinced women were passionless and just would not be inclined to do such a "profession". - Christine<br />
<br />
The causes for women turning to prostitution were varied but most were centered around what others did to them. Family abandoning them, violated, alcohol were some of the reasons. I thought what was particularly interesting was the number one reason: they voluntarily went into prostitution to gratify their own sexual passions. If the survey is true, why would Sanger feel sympathetic towards the women? The choice was theirs in most cases. -Amy Van Ness <br />
<br />
I do not think that all of those women choose to go into prostitution for sexual gratification. There was such a taboo against women who sold themselves that none of those women would do it if not for necessity. The women were probably lying. I felt awful that they had to resort to this to support their family. I am surprised that there were so many that said their family turned them out. I cannot imagine getting thrown out of my house. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that a fair number of women seemed to choose “inclination” as the reason they were prostitutes, which basically means they just liked sex. I personally have a hard time understanding why anyone (even people who really like sex) would choose to be a prostitute unless they had no other means to support themselves. So, how many of these women were actually telling the truth? Were they perhaps to proud to admit that they were prostitutes because they were unable to support themselves another way? Wouldn’t it be worse for them to imply that they were lusty and passionate when it was understood that women were uninterested in sex rather than that they were just simply poor and needy? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
To me Dr. Sanger was reinforcing the notion that women were more primative and needy of men, given that many said that they were in the profession to satisfy their own desires and that the powerful impact that men had on their becoming prostitutes. Although it is interesting to see the doctor blaming some of the issue on men. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I also have a problem with the category of inclination. Every one of those examples listed stated that these women became prostitutes due to need for income rather than need for sex. It seems very much like a stretch to me that those women would become a prostitutes in order to “gratify the sexual passions”, and am more inclined to believe in the analysis of inclination for an “easy life” which suggests need for income and goods. Sanger himself did not believe this though he refused it because he was of the notion that white women did not want sex, and that he often blamed the men who should be responsible. He was definitely a man of his time. It was however interesting as it looked into other jobs women did besides keeping house and trying to stay virtuous.-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
This article was interesting especially the survey at the beginning listing examples as to why these women became prostitutes. One of the answers that had me questioning was “Too ill to work.” These women would be too ill to work but felt fine enough to have sex for money. Dr. Sangers’ analysis was fascinating as well, he was trying to work out why the women would turn to prostitution. He did not seem to believe the answer of “inclination” as the intro to the article states he saw women as passionless. It seems in many of these historical documents men either saw women as passionless perhaps virtuous or they saw them too passionate and needed to be married in order to keep them in their place. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
This might be naive of me but I noticed a lot of the women who became prostitutes said it was because they were seduced and abandoned by lovers, now that is very unfortunate and all but is it necessary to go into prostitution afterwards? I know that losing ones virginity would "ruin" an unmarried girl but why are these girls telling everyone that they were ruined? Maybe these girls were not being discreet about their "torrid" affairs but I feel like it could have been beneficial for them to lie about them! Obviously in cases where they ended up pregnant this would not be possible but there must have been some cases where they could have gone home and no one would be the wiser! -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Xin Jin's Contract, 1886 ==<br />
<br />
I just find it very strange that there were contracts for prostitution. It seems short, but rather thorough. They make sure to include what happens if shes sick, pregnant, or runs away. The three most plausible situations I suppose. - Christine<br />
<br />
While this passage was short, it was clear and concise of the punishments women (Xin Jin)would face if they violated their contracts. I did not find it fair that Xin Jin was brought here and owed the family money but was given no means necessary to fulfill her payment other than prostitution. Did Americans find this to be a valid occupation? After reading this contract I wonder if other immigrants faced the same sort of contract or forms of punishment if they did comply? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
After reading this entry, I wondered if all the terms and conditions these girls had to abide by just for passage to America was really worth the risk. If a girl became sick, she had to work longer; or if she became pregnant, the deal was off and she was sent back to China. I feel like sickness and pregnancy were pretty frequent, and to me, its any wonder that these girls actually put themselves through it. It is understandable though, that they only were prostitutes to pay for their passage and afterwards may lead a normal life, but it just seems like such a traumatic thing to go through. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
The language used in the contract made it sound like the customer was renting a car, rather than dealing with a human being: “if a customer asks to take her out” and “she shall be returned within 100 days (239)” come to mind. I’m curious who wrote up the contracts and ran the brothels? Were they whites or other Chinese? Whites hardly considered the Chinese to be human, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if they considered it like renting out property, but you’d hope the Chinese would have slightly more respect for their own people. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I also thought this contract (and the others like it) was very interesting. I would however, have liked to have known the after stories to go with these contracts. The time at first (four and one half years) seems very small, however like Alex stated, I would think sickness and pregnancy would accumulate a lot of extra time for these ladies. I would like to have known the actual amount of time they had to work, whether they received their freedom, or whether they lived to see the end. Were they in the habit of using birth control? How effective was it? These contracts would be very interesting to see in a much larger context to see how the women fared at the end of them. -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
I also would have liked to read a personal story about one of these chinese prostitutes. While reading this article as well as the other similar ones dealing with prostitution in the west as well as in New York I found myself wondering about the women who become pregnant. I know they have a specific clause for that in the Chinese Prostitution bill...but would they have the child and continue to raise it? I found myself wondering what the outcome would be for the prostitutes who became pregnant and for their child. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
It does seem strange to have a contract for prostitution - but if prostitution was going on in their homeland, it would only seem strange to us. Would the women that were prostituted out see this as an opportunity for them, considering they were told they would eventually have freedom? (even though they were lied to and never given their freedom) Another point, it would seem as a no end situation if they got a disease because I would think their chances of getting a disease are so much higher with multiple partners. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
== Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-76 ==<br />
I still think it's crazy that the price of passage/ food for some Chinese women coming to America was prostitution. I guess if things were worse back in China the option to become a prostitute might seem bright, but I don't know. The terms for this "occupation" was usually for a few years. These women must have been in real need; I don't think selling my body would ever be worth coming to America for me. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
To add to what Amy was saying about the length of time a woman would have to serve her term, I find it excessive that if a woman were to "escape and be recovered" (p.238), at least in the case of Yut Kum, then they were asking for a life sentence. I find this extremely excessive. And also, conception is noted as a "sickness" (p. 238); was pregnancy common with concubines? Granted, I doubt that a servant's mistress would be too concerned with the latest birth control methods. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
The wording of these contracts sounded to me more like slavery than several years of servitude. “Yet Kum consents to prostitute her body to receive company…”; “Ah Ho distinctly agrees to give her body to Mr. Yee for services as a prostitute…”; “She makes her body over to the woman Sep Sam, to serve as a prostitute…”. Each of these contracts emphasizes the fact that the Chinese women no longer owned or controlled their own bodies. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I agree that these contracts seem more like slavery that several years of servitude. I also wonder how often these women became pregnant. What about STDs? I doubt that the "owners" of these women were practicing safe sex. Were disease and pregnancy a big problem for prostitutes at this time? - Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Susan Shelby Magoffin in Santa Fe, 1846 ==<br />
Although the writer of this piece was far from the “civilized” East Coast of the United States, I still found that the cult of domesticity still impacted her. She was very proud of her ability to manage her household, including the servants. In her opinion, success was attained when she could “gain one bright smile and sweet kiss, from my good, kind husband.” She was very concerned with making her home a refuge for her husband when he returned from work. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I found it comical that Susan Shelby Magoffin thought she needed to "be more expert in ... Spanish" (p. 236) so that she could get advice about men. It is not surprising that she would make the effort to interact with other cultures given her interactions with American women were probably limited. For example, she will be the "only traderess" (p. 235) at the American-thrown Spanish ball. - Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Citizen protest of rape of Indian women in California, 1862 ==<br />
I thought that this was a very interesting piece. I was very happy that a citizen would protest the rape of Native Americans even if the ones committing the crime were officers in the US army. I did find it particularly interesting though that the person refers to one officer as possibly being a "pretend Lieut." I would be curious to know if impersonating soldiers was at all typical if the men could get away with it,(or at least think they could get away with it).-Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I agree with you Kristina that I liked the fact that someone stood up to white men especially soldiers. I wonder the reasons why someone would be a "pretend Lieutenant" if he really was one. Maybe for cases such as this? Knowing that they could do basically whatever they want as a soldier and not get away with it? -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I agree that it was interesting that an American was defending Native American women that were being raped by American soldiers. It would have been easy to just look the other way. I think it's sad that we hear so many stories of soldiers raping civilians. British soldiers did it during the Revolution. American soldiers raped Native Americans. I just think its incredibly wrong for soldiers to treat civilians, even "enemy" civilians, that way. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Zitkala-Sa Travels to the Land of the Big Red Apples, 1884 ==<br />
<br />
This piece made me kind of sad, especially for the mother, who I feel like realizes what her daughter wants to do and knows that getting an education will be good and beneficial for her, but still does not want to let her go. I feel like the mother in many ways perhaps feels cautious towards the "white men" and the missionaries and distrusts them, and yet, despite this, she sees the merits of an education for her daughter, as well as her daughter's excitement, and feels she must let her go. I think this relates a lot to what we talked about in class about possible tensions within families as a result of attempts at assimilation, especially between generations. The daughter is excited for this opportunity and to ride on the "iron horse" and to see the land where there are plenty of red apples to eat for everybody, while the mother is watching her traditional world rapidly change all around her because of the white settlers and missionaries- she has to give up her wigwam and now live in a log house, for example. She is a "foreigner" in her own home. At the same time, I also feel sorry for the daughter, as well. After all her excitement at the opportunity to go East, she watches the "lonely figure" of her mother vanish as she drives away, and then feels as "frightened and bewildered as the captured young of a wild creature." (p.241) I wonder if this was her first time being away from home and all by herself? I feel as if maybe her mother knew exactly what the daughter was getting herself into, but she still let her go- maybe so the daughter could realize it for herself? It is a hard lesson. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
One of the first things that I noticed when reading this piece was the absence of a father. Her brother Dawee does not seem to be old enough to be part of the decision making process. When faced with the decision, her mother seems very reluctant to let Zitkala-Sa go away but is unable to make a firm decision. Do you think this situation would have been different if there was a father figure? Would he have let Zitkala-Sa go away to the white-run school as easily as the mother did? Would she have been as eager to go? - John Rowley<br />
<br />
With reference to Allison's comment about Zitkala-Sa's mother feeling like a foreigner in her own home, I can only imagine that when Zitkala-Sa returns to her mother, that feeling will strengthen. The assimilation process at these white-run schools were designed to reinvent the children and discouraged any practice of native traditions that might be waiting for her upon her return to her mother. One time I saw pictures of students when they first arrived to a school and after they were "westernized". The differences with astonishing- I bet when Dawee came back to visit, his mother didn't even recognize him! Additionally, the pictures only portrayed physical changes (i.e. a haircut), but I bet these were negligible compared to the spiritual changes of religious conversion. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison, this was a very sad piece, both for the mother and Zitkala-Sa. It was interesting that the mother did not trust the missionaries and stated that they lie, yet she finally decides to let her eight year old child go with them. I also found it interesting that her mother makes the housing changes after Dawee comes back from being "educated." So the influence of the education is indeed working through the children in the efforts to change the way that the Native Americans lived. The fact that even Dawee, having been through the education experience provided by the missionaries, does not think Zitkala-Sa should go makes me wonder why the mother and even Zitkala-Sa did not listen to him. At the end, when Zitkala-Sa gets to the school, her description of how frightened she was was very sad. The men who came to Zitkala-Sa's village are referred to as missionaries. At this point, how large of a role did religious organizations play in taking Native American children to schools for the purpose of assimilation? Or was it a combined religious and educational purpose? Also, what kind of education they received at these schools would be interesting to know? -Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
Reading this piece, I felt very sad for both the mother and the daughter. It must have been such a difficult decision for Zitkala-Sa's mother to make. On one, hand, she already lost three years out of her sons life, and I'm sure he came home as a very different person from what he was like when he left, but on the other hand, the educational opportunities for Zitkala-Sa must have been hard to ignore. I thought the aunt's foresight on the issue was interesting, when she commented that as Zitkala-Sa grew up there would be fewer and fewer real Dakota and more white men. That recognition of the slow decline of her culture just struck me as very sad, and it made me wonder if that was a common viewpoint among the adults of the tribe. Finally, It was interesting to see how the missionaries tempted Zitkala-Sa into going with them, and how little enticement was actually needed before she was willing to go to the missionary school. ~Melissa Patterson<br />
<br />
== Mrs. A. M. Greene, in Colorado Territory -- Frontier life – 1887 ==<br />
<br />
Mrs. Greene's writing about the life in Colorado was very interesting. She was willing to do anything for her husband, even if it meant sacrificing her own comfort and happiness. She clearly hated where they had moved to, and missed her family greatly. It would seem that she would have picked up and moved if given the chance. But the funny thing is, when she is given the chance by her husband, she refuses and says "Go without you, no, never." (P. 242) I feel as though Mrs. Greene focused on the landscape and other tangible things, instead of looking at the glass half full and realizing she was safe, with her family, etc. But it was probably extrremely hard to leave your home land and move cross country, enduring a rough journey, only to find a place where there was nothing but desert and where you were isolated from everything and everyone. That was probably the hardest part for her. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Violet Cragg requests an Army Pension, 1908 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_11_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 11 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-06T18:37:37Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Jannicke Saehle, 1847, Norwegian immigrant’s letters */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Mary Anne Sadlier's Bessy Conway ==<br />
<br />
I found it really interesting that Bessy, upon leaving Ireland to come to America, said that she was planning on returning to her family in a few years. Was it common for men and women who left Ireland to plan on returning one day? Also, I thought it was cool that Bessy was able to return home and help her family, it seems very ideal, like this is what the typical Irish immigrant woman would strive to do, leave home on her own (getting her burden off her family) and making enough money to turn around and help support her family. So what was Mary Anne Sadlier's goal in writing this story? -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
It was very obvious that Bessy loved Ireland. I also wonder how many Irish immigrants that wanted to return home one day actually did. The trip to America had to be an extremely long trip. For her to come to America, work hard in difficult circumstances, and then make the trip back to Ireland took a lot of strength and courage. I just wonder how often situations like this actually happened. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I think that Bessy Conway was one of the lucky ones because she was able to go and had a job lined up for her with a place to live. She was one of those who embraced the myth of so much opportunity in a new world. She was a hard worker and expected the same of others around her (especially the other servants in the house.)-Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I agree that Bessy did embrace the myth of so much opportunity in America. I wonder how much of this was because she was a character in Mary Anne Sadlier's story. Do you think the all immigrants worked hard and expected the same of those around them? How many actually returned home after making money? I find it hard to imagine going to a new country and making money, then going back to poverty and starvation. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I found the mixed chapters we read of Bessy's story put a sense of reality on the true plight of young Irish women and men. From the early chapters discussing her families struggles and her earnestness to leave her home to help her family made me wonder if all young immigrants cared the same for Ireland and their families as Bessy? Chapters 6 and 15 stood out the most to me with their discussion of religion and how it was so important eventually leading to Bessy's dismissal was this normal in America? Did Americans fear religious takeover from the Irish immigrants? -Megan W. <br />
<br />
I thought the pictures of the starving people was awful and it was hard to read the chapter about Bessy's starving family. They kept their faith in God and kept saying that God would save them. I cannot imagine having enough food. Bessy was definitely a very lucky girl that she had a good job and earned quite a bit of money. It think it is interesting that Mary Anne Sadlier made Bessy out to be a hard worker which and implied that is why she was successful. Bessy just had a better opportunity then most. The author made the other servant out to be lazy which is why they ultimately were lost to poverty. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Jannicke Saehle, 1847, Norwegian immigrant’s letters ==<br />
I enjoyed this piece, it provided a lot of information about immigrants (though certainly not the majority of the poor Irish who suffered an awful journey across the Atlantic.) Jannicke Saehle obviously has some money as she was able to site see once arriving in America. I found her statement about sea sickness, “And after five minutes my turn came, also, to contribute my share to the Atlantic Ocean,” quite humorous. <br />
I also found it interesting her mentioning the abundance of food in America and that Americans tended to toss the extra to swine while people in her homeland starved. I certainly hope Johannes, her brother to whom she was writing, was not one of the starving people for I would hate to hear of all the waste if I were to be one of the starving poor. <br />
One question, though, how common were the museums that she described with wild animals? –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
I didn't realize that museuems of the kind she was describing existed at this time period in New York...I wonder if she was mentioning the Museum of Natural History. I have been there but who is the soldier with no head? I don't remember seeing that last time I went to any history museums. Her story was nice to read, because unlike so many others she truly seems to be living a better life in America. Even her passage over seemed to be blessed with good fortune. the tone of Jannickes story was happy and upbeat making her seem like the type of person who would find the silver lining in ever episode. However I wonder if she was trying to play things up a bit to comfort her family that maybe was worried about her well being?--Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I agree with Emma about liking the tone of the piece. Most tales or accounts of people immigrating to the United States around this time usually are filled with bad tales, deaths, sicknesses etc. It was interesting to point out the fact though that maybe she was not being 100% truthful about it to ease her family's worry. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I agree that the tone of these letters were a nice change of pace. However, I also find it hard to believe that immigration was full of happiness and sunshine. Especially since every other story that I have heard was a lot more negative. I think that the immigrants that wrote these letters were lying to try to keep their families from worrying about them. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== William Sanger, New York Prostitutes, 1858 ==<br />
I found it interesting that Sanger sympathizes with the prostitutes in his study and that he blamed fathers, husbands, and families for not doing their job. The immorality is from the failures of these figures in women's lives. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I also found Dr. Sanger's belief that the women he interviewed were victims of their environment (and not necessarily prostitutes because of a moral flaw in character, etc.) very interesting. I think it could be applied in geographical concepts and ideas, too- for example, the belief in "environmental determinism" (or the idea that your environment and surroundings have a major impact on who you are as a person) versus "environmental possibilism", where your environment can place some limits on you, but you are essentially responsible for who you are and what you do. I also found it interesting that, in discussing the reasons why some of the women would have cited "Inclination" as a reason for their becoming a prostitute, Dr. Sanger also mentioned and acknowledged female desires. In most of what we have discussed in class, we have talked about how women were expected to be "pure" and "chaste", while only men could actually have sexual desires and emotions. Dr. Sanger states, "The force of desire can be neither denied nor disputed, but still in the bosoms of most females that force exists in a slumbering state until aroused by some outside influences." Thus, he still, in many ways, is reinforcing the belief that women (while acknowledging that they might actually have "desires"- shocking!)should keep these repressed and private. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I agree that it is very interesting that Sanger blamed husbands, fathers, and the environment for these women becoming prostitutes. I think that a lot of that comes from the fact that women were expected to be so "pure" and "chaste". Obviously, they really weren't so pure and chaste. I mean I definitely don't think a woman would become a prostitute just because she likes sex. The women that Sanger studied were young, poor immigrants. They needed to make money and there were not many job opportunities for them. I think there's more to it than just that their husbands and fathers failed them. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I didn't find the statistics gathered by Sanger to be other than what I expected. Young, immigrants, poor, etc. I did find it amusing that he (as well as everybody else) was convinced women were passionless and just would not be inclined to do such a "profession". - Christine<br />
<br />
The causes for women turning to prostitution were varied but most were centered around what others did to them. Family abandoning them, violated, alcohol were some of the reasons. I thought what was particularly interesting was the number one reason: they voluntarily went into prostitution to gratify their own sexual passions. If the survey is true, why would Sanger feel sympathetic towards the women? The choice was theirs in most cases. -Amy Van Ness <br />
<br />
I do not think that all of those women choose to go into prostitution for sexual gratification. There was such a taboo against women who sold themselves that none of those women would do it if not for necessity. The women were probably lying. I felt awful that they had to resort to this to support their family. I am surprised that there were so many that said their family turned them out. I cannot imagine getting thrown out of my house. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that a fair number of women seemed to choose “inclination” as the reason they were prostitutes, which basically means they just liked sex. I personally have a hard time understanding why anyone (even people who really like sex) would choose to be a prostitute unless they had no other means to support themselves. So, how many of these women were actually telling the truth? Were they perhaps to proud to admit that they were prostitutes because they were unable to support themselves another way? Wouldn’t it be worse for them to imply that they were lusty and passionate when it was understood that women were uninterested in sex rather than that they were just simply poor and needy? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
To me Dr. Sanger was reinforcing the notion that women were more primative and needy of men, given that many said that they were in the profession to satisfy their own desires and that the powerful impact that men had on their becoming prostitutes. Although it is interesting to see the doctor blaming some of the issue on men. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I also have a problem with the category of inclination. Every one of those examples listed stated that these women became prostitutes due to need for income rather than need for sex. It seems very much like a stretch to me that those women would become a prostitutes in order to “gratify the sexual passions”, and am more inclined to believe in the analysis of inclination for an “easy life” which suggests need for income and goods. Sanger himself did not believe this though he refused it because he was of the notion that white women did not want sex, and that he often blamed the men who should be responsible. He was definitely a man of his time. It was however interesting as it looked into other jobs women did besides keeping house and trying to stay virtuous.-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
This article was interesting especially the survey at the beginning listing examples as to why these women became prostitutes. One of the answers that had me questioning was “Too ill to work.” These women would be too ill to work but felt fine enough to have sex for money. Dr. Sangers’ analysis was fascinating as well, he was trying to work out why the women would turn to prostitution. He did not seem to believe the answer of “inclination” as the intro to the article states he saw women as passionless. It seems in many of these historical documents men either saw women as passionless perhaps virtuous or they saw them too passionate and needed to be married in order to keep them in their place. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
This might be naive of me but I noticed a lot of the women who became prostitutes said it was because they were seduced and abandoned by lovers, now that is very unfortunate and all but is it necessary to go into prostitution afterwards? I know that losing ones virginity would "ruin" an unmarried girl but why are these girls telling everyone that they were ruined? Maybe these girls were not being discreet about their "torrid" affairs but I feel like it could have been beneficial for them to lie about them! Obviously in cases where they ended up pregnant this would not be possible but there must have been some cases where they could have gone home and no one would be the wiser! -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Xin Jin's Contract, 1886 ==<br />
<br />
I just find it very strange that there were contracts for prostitution. It seems short, but rather thorough. They make sure to include what happens if shes sick, pregnant, or runs away. The three most plausible situations I suppose. - Christine<br />
<br />
While this passage was short, it was clear and concise of the punishments women (Xin Jin)would face if they violated their contracts. I did not find it fair that Xin Jin was brought here and owed the family money but was given no means necessary to fulfill her payment other than prostitution. Did Americans find this to be a valid occupation? After reading this contract I wonder if other immigrants faced the same sort of contract or forms of punishment if they did comply? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
After reading this entry, I wondered if all the terms and conditions these girls had to abide by just for passage to America was really worth the risk. If a girl became sick, she had to work longer; or if she became pregnant, the deal was off and she was sent back to China. I feel like sickness and pregnancy were pretty frequent, and to me, its any wonder that these girls actually put themselves through it. It is understandable though, that they only were prostitutes to pay for their passage and afterwards may lead a normal life, but it just seems like such a traumatic thing to go through. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
The language used in the contract made it sound like the customer was renting a car, rather than dealing with a human being: “if a customer asks to take her out” and “she shall be returned within 100 days (239)” come to mind. I’m curious who wrote up the contracts and ran the brothels? Were they whites or other Chinese? Whites hardly considered the Chinese to be human, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if they considered it like renting out property, but you’d hope the Chinese would have slightly more respect for their own people. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I also thought this contract (and the others like it) was very interesting. I would however, have liked to have known the after stories to go with these contracts. The time at first (four and one half years) seems very small, however like Alex stated, I would think sickness and pregnancy would accumulate a lot of extra time for these ladies. I would like to have known the actual amount of time they had to work, whether they received their freedom, or whether they lived to see the end. Were they in the habit of using birth control? How effective was it? These contracts would be very interesting to see in a much larger context to see how the women fared at the end of them. -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
I also would have liked to read a personal story about one of these chinese prostitutes. While reading this article as well as the other similar ones dealing with prostitution in the west as well as in New York I found myself wondering about the women who become pregnant. I know they have a specific clause for that in the Chinese Prostitution bill...but would they have the child and continue to raise it? I found myself wondering what the outcome would be for the prostitutes who became pregnant and for their child. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
It does seem strange to have a contract for prostitution - but if prostitution was going on in their homeland, it would only seem strange to us. Would the women that were prostituted out see this as an opportunity for them, considering they were told they would eventually have freedom? (even though they were lied to and never given their freedom) Another point, it would seem as a no end situation if they got a disease because I would think their chances of getting a disease are so much higher with multiple partners. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
== Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-76 ==<br />
I still think it's crazy that the price of passage/ food for some Chinese women coming to America was prostitution. I guess if things were worse back in China the option to become a prostitute might seem bright, but I don't know. The terms for this "occupation" was usually for a few years. These women must have been in real need; I don't think selling my body would ever be worth coming to America for me. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
To add to what Amy was saying about the length of time a woman would have to serve her term, I find it excessive that if a woman were to "escape and be recovered" (p.238), at least in the case of Yut Kum, then they were asking for a life sentence. I find this extremely excessive. And also, conception is noted as a "sickness" (p. 238); was pregnancy common with concubines? Granted, I doubt that a servant's mistress would be too concerned with the latest birth control methods. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
The wording of these contracts sounded to me more like slavery than several years of servitude. “Yet Kum consents to prostitute her body to receive company…”; “Ah Ho distinctly agrees to give her body to Mr. Yee for services as a prostitute…”; “She makes her body over to the woman Sep Sam, to serve as a prostitute…”. Each of these contracts emphasizes the fact that the Chinese women no longer owned or controlled their own bodies. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I agree that these contracts seem more like slavery that several years of servitude. I also wonder how often these women became pregnant. What about STDs? I doubt that the "owners" of these women were practicing safe sex. Were disease and pregnancy a big problem for prostitutes at this time? - Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Susan Shelby Magoffin in Santa Fe, 1846 ==<br />
Although the writer of this piece was far from the “civilized” East Coast of the United States, I still found that the cult of domesticity still impacted her. She was very proud of her ability to manage her household, including the servants. In her opinion, success was attained when she could “gain one bright smile and sweet kiss, from my good, kind husband.” She was very concerned with making her home a refuge for her husband when he returned from work. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I found it comical that Susan Shelby Magoffin thought she needed to "be more expert in ... Spanish" (p. 236) so that she could get advice about men. It is not surprising that she would make the effort to interact with other cultures given her interactions with American women were probably limited. For example, she will be the "only traderess" (p. 235) at the American-thrown Spanish ball. - Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Citizen protest of rape of Indian women in California, 1862 ==<br />
I thought that this was a very interesting piece. I was very happy that a citizen would protest the rape of Native Americans even if the ones committing the crime were officers in the US army. I did find it particularly interesting though that the person refers to one officer as possibly being a "pretend Lieut." I would be curious to know if impersonating soldiers was at all typical if the men could get away with it,(or at least think they could get away with it).-Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I agree with you Kristina that I liked the fact that someone stood up to white men especially soldiers. I wonder the reasons why someone would be a "pretend Lieutenant" if he really was one. Maybe for cases such as this? Knowing that they could do basically whatever they want as a soldier and not get away with it? -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
== Zitkala-Sa Travels to the Land of the Big Red Apples, 1884 ==<br />
<br />
This piece made me kind of sad, especially for the mother, who I feel like realizes what her daughter wants to do and knows that getting an education will be good and beneficial for her, but still does not want to let her go. I feel like the mother in many ways perhaps feels cautious towards the "white men" and the missionaries and distrusts them, and yet, despite this, she sees the merits of an education for her daughter, as well as her daughter's excitement, and feels she must let her go. I think this relates a lot to what we talked about in class about possible tensions within families as a result of attempts at assimilation, especially between generations. The daughter is excited for this opportunity and to ride on the "iron horse" and to see the land where there are plenty of red apples to eat for everybody, while the mother is watching her traditional world rapidly change all around her because of the white settlers and missionaries- she has to give up her wigwam and now live in a log house, for example. She is a "foreigner" in her own home. At the same time, I also feel sorry for the daughter, as well. After all her excitement at the opportunity to go East, she watches the "lonely figure" of her mother vanish as she drives away, and then feels as "frightened and bewildered as the captured young of a wild creature." (p.241) I wonder if this was her first time being away from home and all by herself? I feel as if maybe her mother knew exactly what the daughter was getting herself into, but she still let her go- maybe so the daughter could realize it for herself? It is a hard lesson. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
One of the first things that I noticed when reading this piece was the absence of a father. Her brother Dawee does not seem to be old enough to be part of the decision making process. When faced with the decision, her mother seems very reluctant to let Zitkala-Sa go away but is unable to make a firm decision. Do you think this situation would have been different if there was a father figure? Would he have let Zitkala-Sa go away to the white-run school as easily as the mother did? Would she have been as eager to go? - John Rowley<br />
<br />
With reference to Allison's comment about Zitkala-Sa's mother feeling like a foreigner in her own home, I can only imagine that when Zitkala-Sa returns to her mother, that feeling will strengthen. The assimilation process at these white-run schools were designed to reinvent the children and discouraged any practice of native traditions that might be waiting for her upon her return to her mother. One time I saw pictures of students when they first arrived to a school and after they were "westernized". The differences with astonishing- I bet when Dawee came back to visit, his mother didn't even recognize him! Additionally, the pictures only portrayed physical changes (i.e. a haircut), but I bet these were negligible compared to the spiritual changes of religious conversion. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison, this was a very sad piece, both for the mother and Zitkala-Sa. It was interesting that the mother did not trust the missionaries and stated that they lie, yet she finally decides to let her eight year old child go with them. I also found it interesting that her mother makes the housing changes after Dawee comes back from being "educated." So the influence of the education is indeed working through the children in the efforts to change the way that the Native Americans lived. The fact that even Dawee, having been through the education experience provided by the missionaries, does not think Zitkala-Sa should go makes me wonder why the mother and even Zitkala-Sa did not listen to him. At the end, when Zitkala-Sa gets to the school, her description of how frightened she was was very sad. The men who came to Zitkala-Sa's village are referred to as missionaries. At this point, how large of a role did religious organizations play in taking Native American children to schools for the purpose of assimilation? Or was it a combined religious and educational purpose? Also, what kind of education they received at these schools would be interesting to know? -Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
Reading this piece, I felt very sad for both the mother and the daughter. It must have been such a difficult decision for Zitkala-Sa's mother to make. On one, hand, she already lost three years out of her sons life, and I'm sure he came home as a very different person from what he was like when he left, but on the other hand, the educational opportunities for Zitkala-Sa must have been hard to ignore. I thought the aunt's foresight on the issue was interesting, when she commented that as Zitkala-Sa grew up there would be fewer and fewer real Dakota and more white men. That recognition of the slow decline of her culture just struck me as very sad, and it made me wonder if that was a common viewpoint among the adults of the tribe. Finally, It was interesting to see how the missionaries tempted Zitkala-Sa into going with them, and how little enticement was actually needed before she was willing to go to the missionary school. ~Melissa Patterson<br />
<br />
== Mrs. A. M. Greene, in Colorado Territory -- Frontier life – 1887 ==<br />
<br />
Mrs. Greene's writing about the life in Colorado was very interesting. She was willing to do anything for her husband, even if it meant sacrificing her own comfort and happiness. She clearly hated where they had moved to, and missed her family greatly. It would seem that she would have picked up and moved if given the chance. But the funny thing is, when she is given the chance by her husband, she refuses and says "Go without you, no, never." (P. 242) I feel as though Mrs. Greene focused on the landscape and other tangible things, instead of looking at the glass half full and realizing she was safe, with her family, etc. But it was probably extrremely hard to leave your home land and move cross country, enduring a rough journey, only to find a place where there was nothing but desert and where you were isolated from everything and everyone. That was probably the hardest part for her. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Violet Cragg requests an Army Pension, 1908 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_11_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 11 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-06T18:35:34Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Mary Anne Sadlier's Bessy Conway */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Mary Anne Sadlier's Bessy Conway ==<br />
<br />
I found it really interesting that Bessy, upon leaving Ireland to come to America, said that she was planning on returning to her family in a few years. Was it common for men and women who left Ireland to plan on returning one day? Also, I thought it was cool that Bessy was able to return home and help her family, it seems very ideal, like this is what the typical Irish immigrant woman would strive to do, leave home on her own (getting her burden off her family) and making enough money to turn around and help support her family. So what was Mary Anne Sadlier's goal in writing this story? -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
It was very obvious that Bessy loved Ireland. I also wonder how many Irish immigrants that wanted to return home one day actually did. The trip to America had to be an extremely long trip. For her to come to America, work hard in difficult circumstances, and then make the trip back to Ireland took a lot of strength and courage. I just wonder how often situations like this actually happened. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I think that Bessy Conway was one of the lucky ones because she was able to go and had a job lined up for her with a place to live. She was one of those who embraced the myth of so much opportunity in a new world. She was a hard worker and expected the same of others around her (especially the other servants in the house.)-Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I agree that Bessy did embrace the myth of so much opportunity in America. I wonder how much of this was because she was a character in Mary Anne Sadlier's story. Do you think the all immigrants worked hard and expected the same of those around them? How many actually returned home after making money? I find it hard to imagine going to a new country and making money, then going back to poverty and starvation. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I found the mixed chapters we read of Bessy's story put a sense of reality on the true plight of young Irish women and men. From the early chapters discussing her families struggles and her earnestness to leave her home to help her family made me wonder if all young immigrants cared the same for Ireland and their families as Bessy? Chapters 6 and 15 stood out the most to me with their discussion of religion and how it was so important eventually leading to Bessy's dismissal was this normal in America? Did Americans fear religious takeover from the Irish immigrants? -Megan W. <br />
<br />
I thought the pictures of the starving people was awful and it was hard to read the chapter about Bessy's starving family. They kept their faith in God and kept saying that God would save them. I cannot imagine having enough food. Bessy was definitely a very lucky girl that she had a good job and earned quite a bit of money. It think it is interesting that Mary Anne Sadlier made Bessy out to be a hard worker which and implied that is why she was successful. Bessy just had a better opportunity then most. The author made the other servant out to be lazy which is why they ultimately were lost to poverty. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Jannicke Saehle, 1847, Norwegian immigrant’s letters ==<br />
I enjoyed this piece, it provided a lot of information about immigrants (though certainly not the majority of the poor Irish who suffered an awful journey across the Atlantic.) Jannicke Saehle obviously has some money as she was able to site see once arriving in America. I found her statement about sea sickness, “And after five minutes my turn came, also, to contribute my share to the Atlantic Ocean,” quite humorous. <br />
I also found it interesting her mentioning the abundance of food in America and that Americans tended to toss the extra to swine while people in her homeland starved. I certainly hope Johannes, her brother to whom she was writing, was not one of the starving people for I would hate to hear of all the waste if I were to be one of the starving poor. <br />
One question, though, how common were the museums that she described with wild animals? –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
I didn't realize that museuems of the kind she was describing existed at this time period in New York...I wonder if she was mentioning the Museum of Natural History. I have been there but who is the soldier with no head? I don't remember seeing that last time I went to any history museums. Her story was nice to read, because unlike so many others she truly seems to be living a better life in America. Even her passage over seemed to be blessed with good fortune. the tone of Jannickes story was happy and upbeat making her seem like the type of person who would find the silver lining in ever episode. However I wonder if she was trying to play things up a bit to comfort her family that maybe was worried about her well being?--Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I agree with Emma about liking the tone of the piece. Most tales or accounts of people immigrating to the United States around this time usually are filled with bad tales, deaths, sicknesses etc. It was interesting to point out the fact though that maybe she was not being 100% truthful about it to ease her family's worry. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
== William Sanger, New York Prostitutes, 1858 ==<br />
I found it interesting that Sanger sympathizes with the prostitutes in his study and that he blamed fathers, husbands, and families for not doing their job. The immorality is from the failures of these figures in women's lives. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I also found Dr. Sanger's belief that the women he interviewed were victims of their environment (and not necessarily prostitutes because of a moral flaw in character, etc.) very interesting. I think it could be applied in geographical concepts and ideas, too- for example, the belief in "environmental determinism" (or the idea that your environment and surroundings have a major impact on who you are as a person) versus "environmental possibilism", where your environment can place some limits on you, but you are essentially responsible for who you are and what you do. I also found it interesting that, in discussing the reasons why some of the women would have cited "Inclination" as a reason for their becoming a prostitute, Dr. Sanger also mentioned and acknowledged female desires. In most of what we have discussed in class, we have talked about how women were expected to be "pure" and "chaste", while only men could actually have sexual desires and emotions. Dr. Sanger states, "The force of desire can be neither denied nor disputed, but still in the bosoms of most females that force exists in a slumbering state until aroused by some outside influences." Thus, he still, in many ways, is reinforcing the belief that women (while acknowledging that they might actually have "desires"- shocking!)should keep these repressed and private. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I agree that it is very interesting that Sanger blamed husbands, fathers, and the environment for these women becoming prostitutes. I think that a lot of that comes from the fact that women were expected to be so "pure" and "chaste". Obviously, they really weren't so pure and chaste. I mean I definitely don't think a woman would become a prostitute just because she likes sex. The women that Sanger studied were young, poor immigrants. They needed to make money and there were not many job opportunities for them. I think there's more to it than just that their husbands and fathers failed them. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I didn't find the statistics gathered by Sanger to be other than what I expected. Young, immigrants, poor, etc. I did find it amusing that he (as well as everybody else) was convinced women were passionless and just would not be inclined to do such a "profession". - Christine<br />
<br />
The causes for women turning to prostitution were varied but most were centered around what others did to them. Family abandoning them, violated, alcohol were some of the reasons. I thought what was particularly interesting was the number one reason: they voluntarily went into prostitution to gratify their own sexual passions. If the survey is true, why would Sanger feel sympathetic towards the women? The choice was theirs in most cases. -Amy Van Ness <br />
<br />
I do not think that all of those women choose to go into prostitution for sexual gratification. There was such a taboo against women who sold themselves that none of those women would do it if not for necessity. The women were probably lying. I felt awful that they had to resort to this to support their family. I am surprised that there were so many that said their family turned them out. I cannot imagine getting thrown out of my house. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that a fair number of women seemed to choose “inclination” as the reason they were prostitutes, which basically means they just liked sex. I personally have a hard time understanding why anyone (even people who really like sex) would choose to be a prostitute unless they had no other means to support themselves. So, how many of these women were actually telling the truth? Were they perhaps to proud to admit that they were prostitutes because they were unable to support themselves another way? Wouldn’t it be worse for them to imply that they were lusty and passionate when it was understood that women were uninterested in sex rather than that they were just simply poor and needy? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
To me Dr. Sanger was reinforcing the notion that women were more primative and needy of men, given that many said that they were in the profession to satisfy their own desires and that the powerful impact that men had on their becoming prostitutes. Although it is interesting to see the doctor blaming some of the issue on men. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I also have a problem with the category of inclination. Every one of those examples listed stated that these women became prostitutes due to need for income rather than need for sex. It seems very much like a stretch to me that those women would become a prostitutes in order to “gratify the sexual passions”, and am more inclined to believe in the analysis of inclination for an “easy life” which suggests need for income and goods. Sanger himself did not believe this though he refused it because he was of the notion that white women did not want sex, and that he often blamed the men who should be responsible. He was definitely a man of his time. It was however interesting as it looked into other jobs women did besides keeping house and trying to stay virtuous.-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
This article was interesting especially the survey at the beginning listing examples as to why these women became prostitutes. One of the answers that had me questioning was “Too ill to work.” These women would be too ill to work but felt fine enough to have sex for money. Dr. Sangers’ analysis was fascinating as well, he was trying to work out why the women would turn to prostitution. He did not seem to believe the answer of “inclination” as the intro to the article states he saw women as passionless. It seems in many of these historical documents men either saw women as passionless perhaps virtuous or they saw them too passionate and needed to be married in order to keep them in their place. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
This might be naive of me but I noticed a lot of the women who became prostitutes said it was because they were seduced and abandoned by lovers, now that is very unfortunate and all but is it necessary to go into prostitution afterwards? I know that losing ones virginity would "ruin" an unmarried girl but why are these girls telling everyone that they were ruined? Maybe these girls were not being discreet about their "torrid" affairs but I feel like it could have been beneficial for them to lie about them! Obviously in cases where they ended up pregnant this would not be possible but there must have been some cases where they could have gone home and no one would be the wiser! -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Xin Jin's Contract, 1886 ==<br />
<br />
I just find it very strange that there were contracts for prostitution. It seems short, but rather thorough. They make sure to include what happens if shes sick, pregnant, or runs away. The three most plausible situations I suppose. - Christine<br />
<br />
While this passage was short, it was clear and concise of the punishments women (Xin Jin)would face if they violated their contracts. I did not find it fair that Xin Jin was brought here and owed the family money but was given no means necessary to fulfill her payment other than prostitution. Did Americans find this to be a valid occupation? After reading this contract I wonder if other immigrants faced the same sort of contract or forms of punishment if they did comply? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
After reading this entry, I wondered if all the terms and conditions these girls had to abide by just for passage to America was really worth the risk. If a girl became sick, she had to work longer; or if she became pregnant, the deal was off and she was sent back to China. I feel like sickness and pregnancy were pretty frequent, and to me, its any wonder that these girls actually put themselves through it. It is understandable though, that they only were prostitutes to pay for their passage and afterwards may lead a normal life, but it just seems like such a traumatic thing to go through. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
The language used in the contract made it sound like the customer was renting a car, rather than dealing with a human being: “if a customer asks to take her out” and “she shall be returned within 100 days (239)” come to mind. I’m curious who wrote up the contracts and ran the brothels? Were they whites or other Chinese? Whites hardly considered the Chinese to be human, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if they considered it like renting out property, but you’d hope the Chinese would have slightly more respect for their own people. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I also thought this contract (and the others like it) was very interesting. I would however, have liked to have known the after stories to go with these contracts. The time at first (four and one half years) seems very small, however like Alex stated, I would think sickness and pregnancy would accumulate a lot of extra time for these ladies. I would like to have known the actual amount of time they had to work, whether they received their freedom, or whether they lived to see the end. Were they in the habit of using birth control? How effective was it? These contracts would be very interesting to see in a much larger context to see how the women fared at the end of them. -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
I also would have liked to read a personal story about one of these chinese prostitutes. While reading this article as well as the other similar ones dealing with prostitution in the west as well as in New York I found myself wondering about the women who become pregnant. I know they have a specific clause for that in the Chinese Prostitution bill...but would they have the child and continue to raise it? I found myself wondering what the outcome would be for the prostitutes who became pregnant and for their child. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
It does seem strange to have a contract for prostitution - but if prostitution was going on in their homeland, it would only seem strange to us. Would the women that were prostituted out see this as an opportunity for them, considering they were told they would eventually have freedom? (even though they were lied to and never given their freedom) Another point, it would seem as a no end situation if they got a disease because I would think their chances of getting a disease are so much higher with multiple partners. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
== Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-76 ==<br />
I still think it's crazy that the price of passage/ food for some Chinese women coming to America was prostitution. I guess if things were worse back in China the option to become a prostitute might seem bright, but I don't know. The terms for this "occupation" was usually for a few years. These women must have been in real need; I don't think selling my body would ever be worth coming to America for me. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
To add to what Amy was saying about the length of time a woman would have to serve her term, I find it excessive that if a woman were to "escape and be recovered" (p.238), at least in the case of Yut Kum, then they were asking for a life sentence. I find this extremely excessive. And also, conception is noted as a "sickness" (p. 238); was pregnancy common with concubines? Granted, I doubt that a servant's mistress would be too concerned with the latest birth control methods. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
The wording of these contracts sounded to me more like slavery than several years of servitude. “Yet Kum consents to prostitute her body to receive company…”; “Ah Ho distinctly agrees to give her body to Mr. Yee for services as a prostitute…”; “She makes her body over to the woman Sep Sam, to serve as a prostitute…”. Each of these contracts emphasizes the fact that the Chinese women no longer owned or controlled their own bodies. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I agree that these contracts seem more like slavery that several years of servitude. I also wonder how often these women became pregnant. What about STDs? I doubt that the "owners" of these women were practicing safe sex. Were disease and pregnancy a big problem for prostitutes at this time? - Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Susan Shelby Magoffin in Santa Fe, 1846 ==<br />
Although the writer of this piece was far from the “civilized” East Coast of the United States, I still found that the cult of domesticity still impacted her. She was very proud of her ability to manage her household, including the servants. In her opinion, success was attained when she could “gain one bright smile and sweet kiss, from my good, kind husband.” She was very concerned with making her home a refuge for her husband when he returned from work. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I found it comical that Susan Shelby Magoffin thought she needed to "be more expert in ... Spanish" (p. 236) so that she could get advice about men. It is not surprising that she would make the effort to interact with other cultures given her interactions with American women were probably limited. For example, she will be the "only traderess" (p. 235) at the American-thrown Spanish ball. - Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Citizen protest of rape of Indian women in California, 1862 ==<br />
I thought that this was a very interesting piece. I was very happy that a citizen would protest the rape of Native Americans even if the ones committing the crime were officers in the US army. I did find it particularly interesting though that the person refers to one officer as possibly being a "pretend Lieut." I would be curious to know if impersonating soldiers was at all typical if the men could get away with it,(or at least think they could get away with it).-Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I agree with you Kristina that I liked the fact that someone stood up to white men especially soldiers. I wonder the reasons why someone would be a "pretend Lieutenant" if he really was one. Maybe for cases such as this? Knowing that they could do basically whatever they want as a soldier and not get away with it? -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
== Zitkala-Sa Travels to the Land of the Big Red Apples, 1884 ==<br />
<br />
This piece made me kind of sad, especially for the mother, who I feel like realizes what her daughter wants to do and knows that getting an education will be good and beneficial for her, but still does not want to let her go. I feel like the mother in many ways perhaps feels cautious towards the "white men" and the missionaries and distrusts them, and yet, despite this, she sees the merits of an education for her daughter, as well as her daughter's excitement, and feels she must let her go. I think this relates a lot to what we talked about in class about possible tensions within families as a result of attempts at assimilation, especially between generations. The daughter is excited for this opportunity and to ride on the "iron horse" and to see the land where there are plenty of red apples to eat for everybody, while the mother is watching her traditional world rapidly change all around her because of the white settlers and missionaries- she has to give up her wigwam and now live in a log house, for example. She is a "foreigner" in her own home. At the same time, I also feel sorry for the daughter, as well. After all her excitement at the opportunity to go East, she watches the "lonely figure" of her mother vanish as she drives away, and then feels as "frightened and bewildered as the captured young of a wild creature." (p.241) I wonder if this was her first time being away from home and all by herself? I feel as if maybe her mother knew exactly what the daughter was getting herself into, but she still let her go- maybe so the daughter could realize it for herself? It is a hard lesson. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
One of the first things that I noticed when reading this piece was the absence of a father. Her brother Dawee does not seem to be old enough to be part of the decision making process. When faced with the decision, her mother seems very reluctant to let Zitkala-Sa go away but is unable to make a firm decision. Do you think this situation would have been different if there was a father figure? Would he have let Zitkala-Sa go away to the white-run school as easily as the mother did? Would she have been as eager to go? - John Rowley<br />
<br />
With reference to Allison's comment about Zitkala-Sa's mother feeling like a foreigner in her own home, I can only imagine that when Zitkala-Sa returns to her mother, that feeling will strengthen. The assimilation process at these white-run schools were designed to reinvent the children and discouraged any practice of native traditions that might be waiting for her upon her return to her mother. One time I saw pictures of students when they first arrived to a school and after they were "westernized". The differences with astonishing- I bet when Dawee came back to visit, his mother didn't even recognize him! Additionally, the pictures only portrayed physical changes (i.e. a haircut), but I bet these were negligible compared to the spiritual changes of religious conversion. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison, this was a very sad piece, both for the mother and Zitkala-Sa. It was interesting that the mother did not trust the missionaries and stated that they lie, yet she finally decides to let her eight year old child go with them. I also found it interesting that her mother makes the housing changes after Dawee comes back from being "educated." So the influence of the education is indeed working through the children in the efforts to change the way that the Native Americans lived. The fact that even Dawee, having been through the education experience provided by the missionaries, does not think Zitkala-Sa should go makes me wonder why the mother and even Zitkala-Sa did not listen to him. At the end, when Zitkala-Sa gets to the school, her description of how frightened she was was very sad. The men who came to Zitkala-Sa's village are referred to as missionaries. At this point, how large of a role did religious organizations play in taking Native American children to schools for the purpose of assimilation? Or was it a combined religious and educational purpose? Also, what kind of education they received at these schools would be interesting to know? -Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
Reading this piece, I felt very sad for both the mother and the daughter. It must have been such a difficult decision for Zitkala-Sa's mother to make. On one, hand, she already lost three years out of her sons life, and I'm sure he came home as a very different person from what he was like when he left, but on the other hand, the educational opportunities for Zitkala-Sa must have been hard to ignore. I thought the aunt's foresight on the issue was interesting, when she commented that as Zitkala-Sa grew up there would be fewer and fewer real Dakota and more white men. That recognition of the slow decline of her culture just struck me as very sad, and it made me wonder if that was a common viewpoint among the adults of the tribe. Finally, It was interesting to see how the missionaries tempted Zitkala-Sa into going with them, and how little enticement was actually needed before she was willing to go to the missionary school. ~Melissa Patterson<br />
<br />
== Mrs. A. M. Greene, in Colorado Territory -- Frontier life – 1887 ==<br />
<br />
Mrs. Greene's writing about the life in Colorado was very interesting. She was willing to do anything for her husband, even if it meant sacrificing her own comfort and happiness. She clearly hated where they had moved to, and missed her family greatly. It would seem that she would have picked up and moved if given the chance. But the funny thing is, when she is given the chance by her husband, she refuses and says "Go without you, no, never." (P. 242) I feel as though Mrs. Greene focused on the landscape and other tangible things, instead of looking at the glass half full and realizing she was safe, with her family, etc. But it was probably extrremely hard to leave your home land and move cross country, enduring a rough journey, only to find a place where there was nothing but desert and where you were isolated from everything and everyone. That was probably the hardest part for her. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Violet Cragg requests an Army Pension, 1908 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_11_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 11 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-05T14:16:08Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-76 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Mary Anne Sadlier's Bessy Conway ==<br />
<br />
I found it really interesting that Bessy, upon leaving Ireland to come to America, said that she was planning on returning to her family in a few years. Was it common for men and women who left Ireland to plan on returning one day? Also, I thought it was cool that Bessy was able to return home and help her family, it seems very ideal, like this is what the typical Irish immigrant woman would strive to do, leave home on her own (getting her burden off her family) and making enough money to turn around and help support her family. So what was Mary Anne Sadlier's goal in writing this story? -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
It was very obvious that Bessy loved Ireland. I also wonder how many Irish immigrants that wanted to return home one day actually did. The trip to America had to be an extremely long trip. For her to come to America, work hard in difficult circumstances, and then make the trip back to Ireland took a lot of strength and courage. I just wonder how often situations like this actually happened. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I think that Bessy Conway was one of the lucky ones because she was able to go and had a job lined up for her with a place to live. She was one of those who embraced the myth of so much opportunity in a new world. She was a hard worker and expected the same of others around her (especially the other servants in the house.)-Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I found the mixed chapters we read of Bessy's story put a sense of reality on the true plight of young Irish women and men. From the early chapters discussing her families struggles and her earnestness to leave her home to help her family made me wonder if all young immigrants cared the same for Ireland and their families as Bessy? Chapters 6 and 15 stood out the most to me with their discussion of religion and how it was so important eventually leading to Bessy's dismissal was this normal in America? Did Americans fear religious takeover from the Irish immigrants? -Megan W. <br />
<br />
I thought the pictures of the starving people was awful and it was hard to read the chapter about Bessy's starving family. They kept their faith in God and kept saying that God would save them. I cannot imagine having enough food. Bessy was definitely a very lucky girl that she had a good job and earned quite a bit of money. It think it is interesting that Mary Anne Sadlier made Bessy out to be a hard worker which and implied that is why she was successful. Bessy just had a better opportunity then most. The author made the other servant out to be lazy which is why they ultimately were lost to poverty. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Jannicke Saehle, 1847, Norwegian immigrant’s letters ==<br />
I enjoyed this piece, it provided a lot of information about immigrants (though certainly not the majority of the poor Irish who suffered an awful journey across the Atlantic.) Jannicke Saehle obviously has some money as she was able to site see once arriving in America. I found her statement about sea sickness, “And after five minutes my turn came, also, to contribute my share to the Atlantic Ocean,” quite humorous. <br />
I also found it interesting her mentioning the abundance of food in America and that Americans tended to toss the extra to swine while people in her homeland starved. I certainly hope Johannes, her brother to whom she was writing, was not one of the starving people for I would hate to hear of all the waste if I were to be one of the starving poor. <br />
One question, though, how common were the museums that she described with wild animals? –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
== William Sanger, New York Prostitutes, 1858 ==<br />
I found it interesting that Sanger sympathizes with the prostitutes in his study and that he blamed fathers, husbands, and families for not doing their job. The immorality is from the failures of these figures in women's lives. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I also found Dr. Sanger's belief that the women he interviewed were victims of their environment (and not necessarily prostitutes because of a moral flaw in character, etc.) very interesting. I think it could be applied in geographical concepts and ideas, too- for example, the belief in "environmental determinism" (or the idea that your environment and surroundings have a major impact on who you are as a person) versus "environmental possibilism", where your environment can place some limits on you, but you are essentially responsible for who you are and what you do. I also found it interesting that, in discussing the reasons why some of the women would have cited "Inclination" as a reason for their becoming a prostitute, Dr. Sanger also mentioned and acknowledged female desires. In most of what we have discussed in class, we have talked about how women were expected to be "pure" and "chaste", while only men could actually have sexual desires and emotions. Dr. Sanger states, "The force of desire can be neither denied nor disputed, but still in the bosoms of most females that force exists in a slumbering state until aroused by some outside influences." Thus, he still, in many ways, is reinforcing the belief that women (while acknowledging that they might actually have "desires"- shocking!)should keep these repressed and private. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I agree that it is very interesting that Sanger blamed husbands, fathers, and the environment for these women becoming prostitutes. I think that a lot of that comes from the fact that women were expected to be so "pure" and "chaste". Obviously, they really weren't so pure and chaste. I mean I definitely don't think a woman would become a prostitute just because she likes sex. The women that Sanger studied were young, poor immigrants. They needed to make money and there were not many job opportunities for them. I think there's more to it than just that their husbands and fathers failed them. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I didn't find the statistics gathered by Sanger to be other than what I expected. Young, immigrants, poor, etc. I did find it amusing that he (as well as everybody else) was convinced women were passionless and just would not be inclined to do such a "profession". - Christine<br />
<br />
The causes for women turning to prostitution were varied but most were centered around what others did to them. Family abandoning them, violated, alcohol were some of the reasons. I thought what was particularly interesting was the number one reason: they voluntarily went into prostitution to gratify their own sexual passions. If the survey is true, why would Sanger feel sympathetic towards the women? The choice was theirs in most cases. -Amy Van Ness <br />
<br />
I do not think that all of those women choose to go into prostitution for sexual gratification. There was such a taboo against women who sold themselves that none of those women would do it if not for necessity. The women were probably lying. I felt awful that they had to resort to this to support their family. I am surprised that there were so many that said their family turned them out. I cannot imagine getting thrown out of my house. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that a fair number of women seemed to choose “inclination” as the reason they were prostitutes, which basically means they just liked sex. I personally have a hard time understanding why anyone (even people who really like sex) would choose to be a prostitute unless they had no other means to support themselves. So, how many of these women were actually telling the truth? Were they perhaps to proud to admit that they were prostitutes because they were unable to support themselves another way? Wouldn’t it be worse for them to imply that they were lusty and passionate when it was understood that women were uninterested in sex rather than that they were just simply poor and needy? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
To me Dr. Sanger was reinforcing the notion that women were more primative and needy of men, given that many said that they were in the profession to satisfy their own desires and that the powerful impact that men had on their becoming prostitutes. Although it is interesting to see the doctor blaming some of the issue on men. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I also have a problem with the category of inclination. Every one of those examples listed stated that these women became prostitutes due to need for income rather than need for sex. It seems very much like a stretch to me that those women would become a prostitutes in order to “gratify the sexual passions”, and am more inclined to believe in the analysis of inclination for an “easy life” which suggests need for income and goods. Sanger himself did not believe this though he refused it because he was of the notion that white women did not want sex, and that he often blamed the men who should be responsible. He was definitely a man of his time. It was however interesting as it looked into other jobs women did besides keeping house and trying to stay virtuous.-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
This article was interesting especially the survey at the beginning listing examples as to why these women became prostitutes. One of the answers that had me questioning was “Too ill to work.” These women would be too ill to work but felt fine enough to have sex for money. Dr. Sangers’ analysis was fascinating as well, he was trying to work out why the women would turn to prostitution. He did not seem to believe the answer of “inclination” as the intro to the article states he saw women as passionless. It seems in many of these historical documents men either saw women as passionless perhaps virtuous or they saw them too passionate and needed to be married in order to keep them in their place. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Xin Jin's Contract, 1886 ==<br />
<br />
I just find it very strange that there were contracts for prostitution. It seems short, but rather thorough. They make sure to include what happens if shes sick, pregnant, or runs away. The three most plausible situations I suppose. - Christine<br />
<br />
While this passage was short, it was clear and concise of the punishments women (Xin Jin)would face if they violated their contracts. I did not find it fair that Xin Jin was brought here and owed the family money but was given no means necessary to fulfill her payment other than prostitution. Did Americans find this to be a valid occupation? After reading this contract I wonder if other immigrants faced the same sort of contract or forms of punishment if they did comply? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
After reading this entry, I wondered if all the terms and conditions these girls had to abide by just for passage to America was really worth the risk. If a girl became sick, she had to work longer; or if she became pregnant, the deal was off and she was sent back to China. I feel like sickness and pregnancy were pretty frequent, and to me, its any wonder that these girls actually put themselves through it. It is understandable though, that they only were prostitutes to pay for their passage and afterwards may lead a normal life, but it just seems like such a traumatic thing to go through. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
The language used in the contract made it sound like the customer was renting a car, rather than dealing with a human being: “if a customer asks to take her out” and “she shall be returned within 100 days (239)” come to mind. I’m curious who wrote up the contracts and ran the brothels? Were they whites or other Chinese? Whites hardly considered the Chinese to be human, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if they considered it like renting out property, but you’d hope the Chinese would have slightly more respect for their own people. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I also thought this contract (and the others like it) was very interesting. I would however, have liked to have known the after stories to go with these contracts. The time at first (four and one half years) seems very small, however like Alex stated, I would think sickness and pregnancy would accumulate a lot of extra time for these ladies. I would like to have known the actual amount of time they had to work, whether they received their freedom, or whether they lived to see the end. Were they in the habit of using birth control? How effective was it? These contracts would be very interesting to see in a much larger context to see how the women fared at the end of them. -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-76 ==<br />
I still think it's crazy that the price of passage/ food for some Chinese women coming to America was prostitution. I guess if things were worse back in China the option to become a prostitute might seem bright, but I don't know. The terms for this "occupation" was usually for a few years. These women must have been in real need; I don't think selling my body would ever be worth coming to America for me. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
To add to what Amy was saying about the length of time a woman would have to serve her term, I find it excessive that if a woman were to "escape and be recovered" (p.238), at least in the case of Yut Kum, then they were asking for a life sentence. I find this extremely excessive. And also, conception is noted as a "sickness" (p. 238); was pregnancy common with concubines? Granted, I doubt that a servant's mistress would be too concerned with the latest birth control methods. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
The wording of these contracts sounded to me more like slavery than several years of servitude. “Yet Kum consents to prostitute her body to receive company…”; “Ah Ho distinctly agrees to give her body to Mr. Yee for services as a prostitute…”; “She makes her body over to the woman Sep Sam, to serve as a prostitute…”. Each of these contracts emphasizes the fact that the Chinese women no longer owned or controlled their own bodies. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I agree that these contracts seem more like slavery that several years of servitude. I also wonder how often these women became pregnant. What about STDs? I doubt that the "owners" of these women were practicing safe sex. Were disease and pregnancy a big problem for prostitutes at this time? - Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Susan Shelby Magoffin in Santa Fe, 1846 ==<br />
Although the writer of this piece was far from the “civilized” East Coast of the United States, I still found that the cult of domesticity still impacted her. She was very proud of her ability to manage her household, including the servants. In her opinion, success was attained when she could “gain one bright smile and sweet kiss, from my good, kind husband.” She was very concerned with making her home a refuge for her husband when he returned from work. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I found it comical that Susan Shelby Magoffin thought she needed to "be more expert in ... Spanish" (p. 236) so that she could get advice about men. It is not surprising that she would make the effort to interact with other cultures given her interactions with American women was probably limited. For example, she will be the "only traderess" (p. 235) at the American-thrown Spanish ball. - Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Citizen protest of rape of Indian women in California, 1862 ==<br />
I thought that this was a very interesting piece. I was very happy that a citizen would protest the rape of Native Americans even if the ones committing the crime were officers in the US army. I did find it particularly interesting though that the person refers to one officer as possibly being a "pretend Lieut." I would be curious to know if impersonating soldiers was at all typical if the men could get away with it,(or at least think they could get away with it).-Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
== Zitkala-Sa Travels to the Land of the Big Red Apples, 1884 ==<br />
<br />
This piece made me kind of sad, especially for the mother, who I feel like realizes what her daughter wants to do and knows that getting an education will be good and beneficial for her, but still does not want to let her go. I feel like the mother in many ways perhaps feels cautious towards the "white men" and the missionaries and distrusts them, and yet, despite this, she sees the merits of an education for her daughter, as well as her daughter's excitement, and feels she must let her go. I think this relates a lot to what we talked about in class about possible tensions within families as a result of attempts at assimilation, especially between generations. The daughter is excited for this opportunity and to ride on the "iron horse" and to see the land where there are plenty of red apples to eat for everybody, while the mother is watching her traditional world rapidly change all around her because of the white settlers and missionaries- she has to give up her wigwam and now live in a log house, for example. She is a "foreigner" in her own home. At the same time, I also feel sorry for the daughter, as well. After all her excitement at the opportunity to go East, she watches the "lonely figure" of her mother vanish as she drives away, and then feels as "frightened and bewildered as the captured young of a wild creature." (p.241) I wonder if this was her first time being away from home and all by herself? I feel as if maybe her mother knew exactly what the daughter was getting herself into, but she still let her go- maybe so the daughter could realize it for herself? It is a hard lesson. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
One of the first things that I noticed when reading this piece was the absence of a father. Her brother Dawee does not seem to be old enough to be part of the decision making process. When faced with the decision, her mother seems very reluctant to let Zitkala-Sa go away but is unable to make a firm decision. Do you think this situation would have been different if there was a father figure? Would he have let Zitkala-Sa go away to the white-run school as easily as the mother did? Would she have been as eager to go? - John Rowley<br />
<br />
With reference to Allison's comment about Zitkala-Sa's mother feeling like a foreigner in her own home, I can only imagine that when Zitkala-Sa returns to her mother, that feeling will strengthen. The assimilation process at these white-run schools were designed to reinvent the children and discouraged any practice of native traditions that might be waiting for her upon her return to her mother. One time I saw pictures of students when they first arrived to a school and after they were "westernized". The differences with astonishing- I bet when Dawee came back to visit, his mother didn't even recognize him! Additionally, the pictures only portrayed physical changes (i.e. a haircut), but I bet these were negligible compared to the spiritual changes of religious conversion. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison, this was a very sad piece, both for the mother and Zitkala-Sa. It was interesting that the mother did not trust the missionaries and stated that they lie, yet she finally decides to let her eight year old child go with them. I also found it interesting that her mother makes the housing changes after Dawee comes back from being "educated." So the influence of the education is indeed working through the children in the efforts to change the way that the Native Americans lived. The fact that even Dawee, having been through the education experience provided by the missionaries, does not think Zitkala-Sa should go makes me wonder why the mother and even Zitkala-Sa did not listen to him. At the end, when Zitkala-Sa gets to the school, her description of how frightened she was was very sad. The men who came to Zitkala-Sa's village are referred to as missionaries. At this point, how large of a role did religious organizations play in taking Native American children to schools for the purpose of assimilation? Or was it a combined religious and educational purpose? Also, what kind of education they received at these schools would be interesting to know? -Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Mrs. A. M. Greene, in Colorado Territory -- Frontier life – 1887 ==<br />
<br />
Mrs. Greene's writing about the life in Colorado was very interesting. She was willing to do anything for her husband, even if it meant sacrificing her own comfort and happiness. She clearly hated where they had moved to, and missed her family greatly. It would seem that she would have picked up and moved if given the chance. But the funny thing is, when she is given the chance by her husband, she refuses and says "Go without you, no, never." (P. 242) I feel as though Mrs. Greene focused on the landscape and other tangible things, instead of looking at the glass half full and realizing she was safe, with her family, etc. But it was probably extrremely hard to leave your home land and move cross country, enduring a rough journey, only to find a place where there was nothing but desert and where you were isolated from everything and everyone. That was probably the hardest part for her. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Violet Cragg requests an Army Pension, 1908 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_11_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 11 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-05T14:12:55Z<p>KatelynLease: /* William Sanger, New York Prostitutes, 1858 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Mary Anne Sadlier's Bessy Conway ==<br />
<br />
I found it really interesting that Bessy, upon leaving Ireland to come to America, said that she was planning on returning to her family in a few years. Was it common for men and women who left Ireland to plan on returning one day? Also, I thought it was cool that Bessy was able to return home and help her family, it seems very ideal, like this is what the typical Irish immigrant woman would strive to do, leave home on her own (getting her burden off her family) and making enough money to turn around and help support her family. So what was Mary Anne Sadlier's goal in writing this story? -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
It was very obvious that Bessy loved Ireland. I also wonder how many Irish immigrants that wanted to return home one day actually did. The trip to America had to be an extremely long trip. For her to come to America, work hard in difficult circumstances, and then make the trip back to Ireland took a lot of strength and courage. I just wonder how often situations like this actually happened. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I think that Bessy Conway was one of the lucky ones because she was able to go and had a job lined up for her with a place to live. She was one of those who embraced the myth of so much opportunity in a new world. She was a hard worker and expected the same of others around her (especially the other servants in the house.)-Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I found the mixed chapters we read of Bessy's story put a sense of reality on the true plight of young Irish women and men. From the early chapters discussing her families struggles and her earnestness to leave her home to help her family made me wonder if all young immigrants cared the same for Ireland and their families as Bessy? Chapters 6 and 15 stood out the most to me with their discussion of religion and how it was so important eventually leading to Bessy's dismissal was this normal in America? Did Americans fear religious takeover from the Irish immigrants? -Megan W. <br />
<br />
I thought the pictures of the starving people was awful and it was hard to read the chapter about Bessy's starving family. They kept their faith in God and kept saying that God would save them. I cannot imagine having enough food. Bessy was definitely a very lucky girl that she had a good job and earned quite a bit of money. It think it is interesting that Mary Anne Sadlier made Bessy out to be a hard worker which and implied that is why she was successful. Bessy just had a better opportunity then most. The author made the other servant out to be lazy which is why they ultimately were lost to poverty. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Jannicke Saehle, 1847, Norwegian immigrant’s letters ==<br />
I enjoyed this piece, it provided a lot of information about immigrants (though certainly not the majority of the poor Irish who suffered an awful journey across the Atlantic.) Jannicke Saehle obviously has some money as she was able to site see once arriving in America. I found her statement about sea sickness, “And after five minutes my turn came, also, to contribute my share to the Atlantic Ocean,” quite humorous. <br />
I also found it interesting her mentioning the abundance of food in America and that Americans tended to toss the extra to swine while people in her homeland starved. I certainly hope Johannes, her brother to whom she was writing, was not one of the starving people for I would hate to hear of all the waste if I were to be one of the starving poor. <br />
One question, though, how common were the museums that she described with wild animals? –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
== William Sanger, New York Prostitutes, 1858 ==<br />
I found it interesting that Sanger sympathizes with the prostitutes in his study and that he blamed fathers, husbands, and families for not doing their job. The immorality is from the failures of these figures in women's lives. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I also found Dr. Sanger's belief that the women he interviewed were victims of their environment (and not necessarily prostitutes because of a moral flaw in character, etc.) very interesting. I think it could be applied in geographical concepts and ideas, too- for example, the belief in "environmental determinism" (or the idea that your environment and surroundings have a major impact on who you are as a person) versus "environmental possibilism", where your environment can place some limits on you, but you are essentially responsible for who you are and what you do. I also found it interesting that, in discussing the reasons why some of the women would have cited "Inclination" as a reason for their becoming a prostitute, Dr. Sanger also mentioned and acknowledged female desires. In most of what we have discussed in class, we have talked about how women were expected to be "pure" and "chaste", while only men could actually have sexual desires and emotions. Dr. Sanger states, "The force of desire can be neither denied nor disputed, but still in the bosoms of most females that force exists in a slumbering state until aroused by some outside influences." Thus, he still, in many ways, is reinforcing the belief that women (while acknowledging that they might actually have "desires"- shocking!)should keep these repressed and private. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I agree that it is very interesting that Sanger blamed husbands, fathers, and the environment for these women becoming prostitutes. I think that a lot of that comes from the fact that women were expected to be so "pure" and "chaste". Obviously, they really weren't so pure and chaste. I mean I definitely don't think a woman would become a prostitute just because she likes sex. The women that Sanger studied were young, poor immigrants. They needed to make money and there were not many job opportunities for them. I think there's more to it than just that their husbands and fathers failed them. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I didn't find the statistics gathered by Sanger to be other than what I expected. Young, immigrants, poor, etc. I did find it amusing that he (as well as everybody else) was convinced women were passionless and just would not be inclined to do such a "profession". - Christine<br />
<br />
The causes for women turning to prostitution were varied but most were centered around what others did to them. Family abandoning them, violated, alcohol were some of the reasons. I thought what was particularly interesting was the number one reason: they voluntarily went into prostitution to gratify their own sexual passions. If the survey is true, why would Sanger feel sympathetic towards the women? The choice was theirs in most cases. -Amy Van Ness <br />
<br />
I do not think that all of those women choose to go into prostitution for sexual gratification. There was such a taboo against women who sold themselves that none of those women would do it if not for necessity. The women were probably lying. I felt awful that they had to resort to this to support their family. I am surprised that there were so many that said their family turned them out. I cannot imagine getting thrown out of my house. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that a fair number of women seemed to choose “inclination” as the reason they were prostitutes, which basically means they just liked sex. I personally have a hard time understanding why anyone (even people who really like sex) would choose to be a prostitute unless they had no other means to support themselves. So, how many of these women were actually telling the truth? Were they perhaps to proud to admit that they were prostitutes because they were unable to support themselves another way? Wouldn’t it be worse for them to imply that they were lusty and passionate when it was understood that women were uninterested in sex rather than that they were just simply poor and needy? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
To me Dr. Sanger was reinforcing the notion that women were more primative and needy of men, given that many said that they were in the profession to satisfy their own desires and that the powerful impact that men had on their becoming prostitutes. Although it is interesting to see the doctor blaming some of the issue on men. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I also have a problem with the category of inclination. Every one of those examples listed stated that these women became prostitutes due to need for income rather than need for sex. It seems very much like a stretch to me that those women would become a prostitutes in order to “gratify the sexual passions”, and am more inclined to believe in the analysis of inclination for an “easy life” which suggests need for income and goods. Sanger himself did not believe this though he refused it because he was of the notion that white women did not want sex, and that he often blamed the men who should be responsible. He was definitely a man of his time. It was however interesting as it looked into other jobs women did besides keeping house and trying to stay virtuous.-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
This article was interesting especially the survey at the beginning listing examples as to why these women became prostitutes. One of the answers that had me questioning was “Too ill to work.” These women would be too ill to work but felt fine enough to have sex for money. Dr. Sangers’ analysis was fascinating as well, he was trying to work out why the women would turn to prostitution. He did not seem to believe the answer of “inclination” as the intro to the article states he saw women as passionless. It seems in many of these historical documents men either saw women as passionless perhaps virtuous or they saw them too passionate and needed to be married in order to keep them in their place. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Xin Jin's Contract, 1886 ==<br />
<br />
I just find it very strange that there were contracts for prostitution. It seems short, but rather thorough. They make sure to include what happens if shes sick, pregnant, or runs away. The three most plausible situations I suppose. - Christine<br />
<br />
While this passage was short, it was clear and concise of the punishments women (Xin Jin)would face if they violated their contracts. I did not find it fair that Xin Jin was brought here and owed the family money but was given no means necessary to fulfill her payment other than prostitution. Did Americans find this to be a valid occupation? After reading this contract I wonder if other immigrants faced the same sort of contract or forms of punishment if they did comply? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
After reading this entry, I wondered if all the terms and conditions these girls had to abide by just for passage to America was really worth the risk. If a girl became sick, she had to work longer; or if she became pregnant, the deal was off and she was sent back to China. I feel like sickness and pregnancy were pretty frequent, and to me, its any wonder that these girls actually put themselves through it. It is understandable though, that they only were prostitutes to pay for their passage and afterwards may lead a normal life, but it just seems like such a traumatic thing to go through. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
The language used in the contract made it sound like the customer was renting a car, rather than dealing with a human being: “if a customer asks to take her out” and “she shall be returned within 100 days (239)” come to mind. I’m curious who wrote up the contracts and ran the brothels? Were they whites or other Chinese? Whites hardly considered the Chinese to be human, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if they considered it like renting out property, but you’d hope the Chinese would have slightly more respect for their own people. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I also thought this contract (and the others like it) was very interesting. I would however, have liked to have known the after stories to go with these contracts. The time at first (four and one half years) seems very small, however like Alex stated, I would think sickness and pregnancy would accumulate a lot of extra time for these ladies. I would like to have known the actual amount of time they had to work, whether they received their freedom, or whether they lived to see the end. Were they in the habit of using birth control? How effective was it? These contracts would be very interesting to see in a much larger context to see how the women fared at the end of them. -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-76 ==<br />
I still think it's crazy that the price of passage/ food for some Chinese women coming to America was prostitution. I guess if things were worse back in China the option to become a prostitute might seem bright, but I don't know. The terms for this "occupation" was usually for a few years. These women must have been in real need; I don't think selling my body would ever be worth coming to America for me. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
To add to what Amy was saying about the length of time a woman would have to serve her term, I find it excessive that if a woman were to "escape and be recovered" (p.238), at least in the case of Yut Kum, then they were asking for a life sentence. I find this extremely excessive. And also, conception is noted as a "sickness" (p. 238); was pregnancy common with concubines? Granted, I doubt that a servant's mistress would be too concerned with the latest birth control methods. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
The wording of these contracts sounded to me more like slavery than several years of servitude. “Yet Kum consents to prostitute her body to receive company…”; “Ah Ho distinctly agrees to give her body to Mr. Yee for services as a prostitute…”; “She makes her body over to the woman Sep Sam, to serve as a prostitute…”. Each of these contracts emphasizes the fact that the Chinese women no longer owned or controlled their own bodies. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
== Susan Shelby Magoffin in Santa Fe, 1846 ==<br />
Although the writer of this piece was far from the “civilized” East Coast of the United States, I still found that the cult of domesticity still impacted her. She was very proud of her ability to manage her household, including the servants. In her opinion, success was attained when she could “gain one bright smile and sweet kiss, from my good, kind husband.” She was very concerned with making her home a refuge for her husband when he returned from work. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I found it comical that Susan Shelby Magoffin thought she needed to "be more expert in ... Spanish" (p. 236) so that she could get advice about men. It is not surprising that she would make the effort to interact with other cultures given her interactions with American women was probably limited. For example, she will be the "only traderess" (p. 235) at the American-thrown Spanish ball. - Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Citizen protest of rape of Indian women in California, 1862 ==<br />
I thought that this was a very interesting piece. I was very happy that a citizen would protest the rape of Native Americans even if the ones committing the crime were officers in the US army. I did find it particularly interesting though that the person refers to one officer as possibly being a "pretend Lieut." I would be curious to know if impersonating soldiers was at all typical if the men could get away with it,(or at least think they could get away with it).-Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
== Zitkala-Sa Travels to the Land of the Big Red Apples, 1884 ==<br />
<br />
This piece made me kind of sad, especially for the mother, who I feel like realizes what her daughter wants to do and knows that getting an education will be good and beneficial for her, but still does not want to let her go. I feel like the mother in many ways perhaps feels cautious towards the "white men" and the missionaries and distrusts them, and yet, despite this, she sees the merits of an education for her daughter, as well as her daughter's excitement, and feels she must let her go. I think this relates a lot to what we talked about in class about possible tensions within families as a result of attempts at assimilation, especially between generations. The daughter is excited for this opportunity and to ride on the "iron horse" and to see the land where there are plenty of red apples to eat for everybody, while the mother is watching her traditional world rapidly change all around her because of the white settlers and missionaries- she has to give up her wigwam and now live in a log house, for example. She is a "foreigner" in her own home. At the same time, I also feel sorry for the daughter, as well. After all her excitement at the opportunity to go East, she watches the "lonely figure" of her mother vanish as she drives away, and then feels as "frightened and bewildered as the captured young of a wild creature." (p.241) I wonder if this was her first time being away from home and all by herself? I feel as if maybe her mother knew exactly what the daughter was getting herself into, but she still let her go- maybe so the daughter could realize it for herself? It is a hard lesson. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
One of the first things that I noticed when reading this piece was the absence of a father. Her brother Dawee does not seem to be old enough to be part of the decision making process. When faced with the decision, her mother seems very reluctant to let Zitkala-Sa go away but is unable to make a firm decision. Do you think this situation would have been different if there was a father figure? Would he have let Zitkala-Sa go away to the white-run school as easily as the mother did? Would she have been as eager to go? - John Rowley<br />
<br />
With reference to Allison's comment about Zitkala-Sa's mother feeling like a foreigner in her own home, I can only imagine that when Zitkala-Sa returns to her mother, that feeling will strengthen. The assimilation process at these white-run schools were designed to reinvent the children and discouraged any practice of native traditions that might be waiting for her upon her return to her mother. One time I saw pictures of students when they first arrived to a school and after they were "westernized". The differences with astonishing- I bet when Dawee came back to visit, his mother didn't even recognize him! Additionally, the pictures only portrayed physical changes (i.e. a haircut), but I bet these were negligible compared to the spiritual changes of religious conversion. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison, this was a very sad piece, both for the mother and Zitkala-Sa. It was interesting that the mother did not trust the missionaries and stated that they lie, yet she finally decides to let her eight year old child go with them. I also found it interesting that her mother makes the housing changes after Dawee comes back from being "educated." So the influence of the education is indeed working through the children in the efforts to change the way that the Native Americans lived. The fact that even Dawee, having been through the education experience provided by the missionaries, does not think Zitkala-Sa should go makes me wonder why the mother and even Zitkala-Sa did not listen to him. At the end, when Zitkala-Sa gets to the school, her description of how frightened she was was very sad. The men who came to Zitkala-Sa's village are referred to as missionaries. At this point, how large of a role did religious organizations play in taking Native American children to schools for the purpose of assimilation? Or was it a combined religious and educational purpose? Also, what kind of education they received at these schools would be interesting to know? -Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Mrs. A. M. Greene, in Colorado Territory -- Frontier life – 1887 ==<br />
<br />
Mrs. Greene's writing about the life in Colorado was very interesting. She was willing to do anything for her husband, even if it meant sacrificing her own comfort and happiness. She clearly hated where they had moved to, and missed her family greatly. It would seem that she would have picked up and moved if given the chance. But the funny thing is, when she is given the chance by her husband, she refuses and says "Go without you, no, never." (P. 242) I feel as though Mrs. Greene focused on the landscape and other tangible things, instead of looking at the glass half full and realizing she was safe, with her family, etc. But it was probably extrremely hard to leave your home land and move cross country, enduring a rough journey, only to find a place where there was nothing but desert and where you were isolated from everything and everyone. That was probably the hardest part for her. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Violet Cragg requests an Army Pension, 1908 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_11_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 11 Questions/Comments-327 092009-11-05T14:06:44Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Mary Anne Sadlier's Bessy Conway */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Mary Anne Sadlier's Bessy Conway ==<br />
<br />
I found it really interesting that Bessy, upon leaving Ireland to come to America, said that she was planning on returning to her family in a few years. Was it common for men and women who left Ireland to plan on returning one day? Also, I thought it was cool that Bessy was able to return home and help her family, it seems very ideal, like this is what the typical Irish immigrant woman would strive to do, leave home on her own (getting her burden off her family) and making enough money to turn around and help support her family. So what was Mary Anne Sadlier's goal in writing this story? -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
It was very obvious that Bessy loved Ireland. I also wonder how many Irish immigrants that wanted to return home one day actually did. The trip to America had to be an extremely long trip. For her to come to America, work hard in difficult circumstances, and then make the trip back to Ireland took a lot of strength and courage. I just wonder how often situations like this actually happened. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
I think that Bessy Conway was one of the lucky ones because she was able to go and had a job lined up for her with a place to live. She was one of those who embraced the myth of so much opportunity in a new world. She was a hard worker and expected the same of others around her (especially the other servants in the house.)-Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I found the mixed chapters we read of Bessy's story put a sense of reality on the true plight of young Irish women and men. From the early chapters discussing her families struggles and her earnestness to leave her home to help her family made me wonder if all young immigrants cared the same for Ireland and their families as Bessy? Chapters 6 and 15 stood out the most to me with their discussion of religion and how it was so important eventually leading to Bessy's dismissal was this normal in America? Did Americans fear religious takeover from the Irish immigrants? -Megan W. <br />
<br />
I thought the pictures of the starving people was awful and it was hard to read the chapter about Bessy's starving family. They kept their faith in God and kept saying that God would save them. I cannot imagine having enough food. Bessy was definitely a very lucky girl that she had a good job and earned quite a bit of money. It think it is interesting that Mary Anne Sadlier made Bessy out to be a hard worker which and implied that is why she was successful. Bessy just had a better opportunity then most. The author made the other servant out to be lazy which is why they ultimately were lost to poverty. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Jannicke Saehle, 1847, Norwegian immigrant’s letters ==<br />
I enjoyed this piece, it provided a lot of information about immigrants (though certainly not the majority of the poor Irish who suffered an awful journey across the Atlantic.) Jannicke Saehle obviously has some money as she was able to site see once arriving in America. I found her statement about sea sickness, “And after five minutes my turn came, also, to contribute my share to the Atlantic Ocean,” quite humorous. <br />
I also found it interesting her mentioning the abundance of food in America and that Americans tended to toss the extra to swine while people in her homeland starved. I certainly hope Johannes, her brother to whom she was writing, was not one of the starving people for I would hate to hear of all the waste if I were to be one of the starving poor. <br />
One question, though, how common were the museums that she described with wild animals? –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
== William Sanger, New York Prostitutes, 1858 ==<br />
I found it interesting that Sanger sympathizes with the prostitutes in his study and that he blamed fathers, husbands, and families for not doing their job. The immorality is from the failures of these figures in women's lives. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I also found Dr. Sanger's belief that the women he interviewed were victims of their environment (and not necessarily prostitutes because of a moral flaw in character, etc.) very interesting. I think it could be applied in geographical concepts and ideas, too- for example, the belief in "environmental determinism" (or the idea that your environment and surroundings have a major impact on who you are as a person) versus "environmental possibilism", where your environment can place some limits on you, but you are essentially responsible for who you are and what you do. I also found it interesting that, in discussing the reasons why some of the women would have cited "Inclination" as a reason for their becoming a prostitute, Dr. Sanger also mentioned and acknowledged female desires. In most of what we have discussed in class, we have talked about how women were expected to be "pure" and "chaste", while only men could actually have sexual desires and emotions. Dr. Sanger states, "The force of desire can be neither denied nor disputed, but still in the bosoms of most females that force exists in a slumbering state until aroused by some outside influences." Thus, he still, in many ways, is reinforcing the belief that women (while acknowledging that they might actually have "desires"- shocking!)should keep these repressed and private. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I didn't find the statistics gathered by Sanger to be other than what I expected. Young, immigrants, poor, etc. I did find it amusing that he (as well as everybody else) was convinced women were passionless and just would not be inclined to do such a "profession". - Christine<br />
<br />
The causes for women turning to prostitution were varied but most were centered around what others did to them. Family abandoning them, violated, alcohol were some of the reasons. I thought what was particularly interesting was the number one reason: they voluntarily went into prostitution to gratify their own sexual passions. If the survey is true, why would Sanger feel sympathetic towards the women? The choice was theirs in most cases. -Amy Van Ness <br />
<br />
I do not think that all of those women choose to go into prostitution for sexual gratification. There was such a taboo against women who sold themselves that none of those women would do it if not for necessity. The women were probably lying. I felt awful that they had to resort to this to support their family. I am surprised that there were so many that said their family turned them out. I cannot imagine getting thrown out of my house. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that a fair number of women seemed to choose “inclination” as the reason they were prostitutes, which basically means they just liked sex. I personally have a hard time understanding why anyone (even people who really like sex) would choose to be a prostitute unless they had no other means to support themselves. So, how many of these women were actually telling the truth? Were they perhaps to proud to admit that they were prostitutes because they were unable to support themselves another way? Wouldn’t it be worse for them to imply that they were lusty and passionate when it was understood that women were uninterested in sex rather than that they were just simply poor and needy? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
To me Dr. Sanger was reinforcing the notion that women were more primative and needy of men, given that many said that they were in the profession to satisfy their own desires and that the powerful impact that men had on their becoming prostitutes. Although it is interesting to see the doctor blaming some of the issue on men. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I also have a problem with the category of inclination. Every one of those examples listed stated that these women became prostitutes due to need for income rather than need for sex. It seems very much like a stretch to me that those women would become a prostitutes in order to “gratify the sexual passions”, and am more inclined to believe in the analysis of inclination for an “easy life” which suggests need for income and goods. Sanger himself did not believe this though he refused it because he was of the notion that white women did not want sex, and that he often blamed the men who should be responsible. He was definitely a man of his time. It was however interesting as it looked into other jobs women did besides keeping house and trying to stay virtuous.-- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
This article was interesting especially the survey at the beginning listing examples as to why these women became prostitutes. One of the answers that had me questioning was “Too ill to work.” These women would be too ill to work but felt fine enough to have sex for money. Dr. Sangers’ analysis was fascinating as well, he was trying to work out why the women would turn to prostitution. He did not seem to believe the answer of “inclination” as the intro to the article states he saw women as passionless. It seems in many of these historical documents men either saw women as passionless perhaps virtuous or they saw them too passionate and needed to be married in order to keep them in their place. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Xin Jin's Contract, 1886 ==<br />
<br />
I just find it very strange that there were contracts for prostitution. It seems short, but rather thorough. They make sure to include what happens if shes sick, pregnant, or runs away. The three most plausible situations I suppose. - Christine<br />
<br />
While this passage was short, it was clear and concise of the punishments women (Xin Jin)would face if they violated their contracts. I did not find it fair that Xin Jin was brought here and owed the family money but was given no means necessary to fulfill her payment other than prostitution. Did Americans find this to be a valid occupation? After reading this contract I wonder if other immigrants faced the same sort of contract or forms of punishment if they did comply? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
After reading this entry, I wondered if all the terms and conditions these girls had to abide by just for passage to America was really worth the risk. If a girl became sick, she had to work longer; or if she became pregnant, the deal was off and she was sent back to China. I feel like sickness and pregnancy were pretty frequent, and to me, its any wonder that these girls actually put themselves through it. It is understandable though, that they only were prostitutes to pay for their passage and afterwards may lead a normal life, but it just seems like such a traumatic thing to go through. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
The language used in the contract made it sound like the customer was renting a car, rather than dealing with a human being: “if a customer asks to take her out” and “she shall be returned within 100 days (239)” come to mind. I’m curious who wrote up the contracts and ran the brothels? Were they whites or other Chinese? Whites hardly considered the Chinese to be human, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if they considered it like renting out property, but you’d hope the Chinese would have slightly more respect for their own people. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I also thought this contract (and the others like it) was very interesting. I would however, have liked to have known the after stories to go with these contracts. The time at first (four and one half years) seems very small, however like Alex stated, I would think sickness and pregnancy would accumulate a lot of extra time for these ladies. I would like to have known the actual amount of time they had to work, whether they received their freedom, or whether they lived to see the end. Were they in the habit of using birth control? How effective was it? These contracts would be very interesting to see in a much larger context to see how the women fared at the end of them. -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-76 ==<br />
I still think it's crazy that the price of passage/ food for some Chinese women coming to America was prostitution. I guess if things were worse back in China the option to become a prostitute might seem bright, but I don't know. The terms for this "occupation" was usually for a few years. These women must have been in real need; I don't think selling my body would ever be worth coming to America for me. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
To add to what Amy was saying about the length of time a woman would have to serve her term, I find it excessive that if a woman were to "escape and be recovered" (p.238), at least in the case of Yut Kum, then they were asking for a life sentence. I find this extremely excessive. And also, conception is noted as a "sickness" (p. 238); was pregnancy common with concubines? Granted, I doubt that a servant's mistress would be too concerned with the latest birth control methods. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
The wording of these contracts sounded to me more like slavery than several years of servitude. “Yet Kum consents to prostitute her body to receive company…”; “Ah Ho distinctly agrees to give her body to Mr. Yee for services as a prostitute…”; “She makes her body over to the woman Sep Sam, to serve as a prostitute…”. Each of these contracts emphasizes the fact that the Chinese women no longer owned or controlled their own bodies. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
== Susan Shelby Magoffin in Santa Fe, 1846 ==<br />
Although the writer of this piece was far from the “civilized” East Coast of the United States, I still found that the cult of domesticity still impacted her. She was very proud of her ability to manage her household, including the servants. In her opinion, success was attained when she could “gain one bright smile and sweet kiss, from my good, kind husband.” She was very concerned with making her home a refuge for her husband when he returned from work. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I found it comical that Susan Shelby Magoffin thought she needed to "be more expert in ... Spanish" (p. 236) so that she could get advice about men. It is not surprising that she would make the effort to interact with other cultures given her interactions with American women was probably limited. For example, she will be the "only traderess" (p. 235) at the American-thrown Spanish ball. - Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Citizen protest of rape of Indian women in California, 1862 ==<br />
I thought that this was a very interesting piece. I was very happy that a citizen would protest the rape of Native Americans even if the ones committing the crime were officers in the US army. I did find it particularly interesting though that the person refers to one officer as possibly being a "pretend Lieut." I would be curious to know if impersonating soldiers was at all typical if the men could get away with it,(or at least think they could get away with it).-Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
== Zitkala-Sa Travels to the Land of the Big Red Apples, 1884 ==<br />
<br />
This piece made me kind of sad, especially for the mother, who I feel like realizes what her daughter wants to do and knows that getting an education will be good and beneficial for her, but still does not want to let her go. I feel like the mother in many ways perhaps feels cautious towards the "white men" and the missionaries and distrusts them, and yet, despite this, she sees the merits of an education for her daughter, as well as her daughter's excitement, and feels she must let her go. I think this relates a lot to what we talked about in class about possible tensions within families as a result of attempts at assimilation, especially between generations. The daughter is excited for this opportunity and to ride on the "iron horse" and to see the land where there are plenty of red apples to eat for everybody, while the mother is watching her traditional world rapidly change all around her because of the white settlers and missionaries- she has to give up her wigwam and now live in a log house, for example. She is a "foreigner" in her own home. At the same time, I also feel sorry for the daughter, as well. After all her excitement at the opportunity to go East, she watches the "lonely figure" of her mother vanish as she drives away, and then feels as "frightened and bewildered as the captured young of a wild creature." (p.241) I wonder if this was her first time being away from home and all by herself? I feel as if maybe her mother knew exactly what the daughter was getting herself into, but she still let her go- maybe so the daughter could realize it for herself? It is a hard lesson. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
One of the first things that I noticed when reading this piece was the absence of a father. Her brother Dawee does not seem to be old enough to be part of the decision making process. When faced with the decision, her mother seems very reluctant to let Zitkala-Sa go away but is unable to make a firm decision. Do you think this situation would have been different if there was a father figure? Would he have let Zitkala-Sa go away to the white-run school as easily as the mother did? Would she have been as eager to go? - John Rowley<br />
<br />
With reference to Allison's comment about Zitkala-Sa's mother feeling like a foreigner in her own home, I can only imagine that when Zitkala-Sa returns to her mother, that feeling will strengthen. The assimilation process at these white-run schools were designed to reinvent the children and discouraged any practice of native traditions that might be waiting for her upon her return to her mother. One time I saw pictures of students when they first arrived to a school and after they were "westernized". The differences with astonishing- I bet when Dawee came back to visit, his mother didn't even recognize him! Additionally, the pictures only portrayed physical changes (i.e. a haircut), but I bet these were negligible compared to the spiritual changes of religious conversion. -Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison, this was a very sad piece, both for the mother and Zitkala-Sa. It was interesting that the mother did not trust the missionaries and stated that they lie, yet she finally decides to let her eight year old child go with them. I also found it interesting that her mother makes the housing changes after Dawee comes back from being "educated." So the influence of the education is indeed working through the children in the efforts to change the way that the Native Americans lived. The fact that even Dawee, having been through the education experience provided by the missionaries, does not think Zitkala-Sa should go makes me wonder why the mother and even Zitkala-Sa did not listen to him. At the end, when Zitkala-Sa gets to the school, her description of how frightened she was was very sad. The men who came to Zitkala-Sa's village are referred to as missionaries. At this point, how large of a role did religious organizations play in taking Native American children to schools for the purpose of assimilation? Or was it a combined religious and educational purpose? Also, what kind of education they received at these schools would be interesting to know? -Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Mrs. A. M. Greene, in Colorado Territory -- Frontier life – 1887 ==<br />
<br />
Mrs. Greene's writing about the life in Colorado was very interesting. She was willing to do anything for her husband, even if it meant sacrificing her own comfort and happiness. She clearly hated where they had moved to, and missed her family greatly. It would seem that she would have picked up and moved if given the chance. But the funny thing is, when she is given the chance by her husband, she refuses and says "Go without you, no, never." (P. 242) I feel as though Mrs. Greene focused on the landscape and other tangible things, instead of looking at the glass half full and realizing she was safe, with her family, etc. But it was probably extrremely hard to leave your home land and move cross country, enduring a rough journey, only to find a place where there was nothing but desert and where you were isolated from everything and everyone. That was probably the hardest part for her. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Violet Cragg requests an Army Pension, 1908 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_10_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 10 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-29T13:50:45Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Lucinda, a free woman, requests reenslavement, 1813 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Sarah Haynesworth Gayle, “An Alabama Diary,” 1828, 1833 ==<br />
<br />
In Sarah Haynesworth Gayle’s diary she talks about how her slaves are no longer as obedient as they had been previously. She describes them as lazy and full of complaints. Even her favorite slave would not listen. What is interesting is that she takes this as an attack on herself, she states “I am unable to accommodate myself to the disagreeable change.” I’m not exactly sure what she was expected to do, or what she could do. – Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I also found it interesting that she was taking the slaves' disobedience so personally. I guess it goes back to what we talked about in class, that most southerners thought slaves were happy to be slaves and that they had a paternal relationship with them. She's probably confused because she thinks that her slaves have such a great life so why would they disobey? It's crazy the way that people can make themselves believe things that are obviously not true. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
Sarah Haynesworth’s diary entry where she was complaining about slave’s disobedience was written in 1828, I am having a hard time figuring out where this change in the slaves is coming from. In this context of time, this was before Nat Turner’s rebellion in 1831, but way after other attempted slave rebellions. So, I am curious as to where this change was coming from? – Erin Sanderson <br />
<br />
Maybe Sarah Haynesworth Gayle's means of discipline was not as threatening to the slaves as it had been under her parents and felt that they could rebel more strongly without a proactive master. Though I don't think that their was goal to to be sold (a group that size may have had slave families), nothing is said about actions taken by mr or mrs Gayle to correct their behavior and Mrs. Gayle seems to use the sale of her slaves as vengeance to the poor behavior they had been exhibiting. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
== Angelina Grimké Weld, 1839, “The Cruel Mistress” ==<br />
I think it's interesting Angelina Grimke Weld, when referring to the abuse of the Cruel Mistress towards her house servants, points out that this woman had no shame in the abuse towards them. Weld goes on and on about these horrible atrocities of the abuse and stated throughout this piece that this mistress was a respectable Christian women. This made Weld as an abolitionist stand out as only a few. The abuse of slaves was accepted and probably expected in order to remain in control of them in the eyes of a slave owner. This slave holder without a doubt probably made a spectacle to make sure the slaves remained obedient. This female mistress seems extremely temperamental. The pious and vulgar language used against her slaves was likely her attempt to make sure they knew she was above them in every manor -race, class, and possibly better in Gods eyes as well. I am curious to know how they thought God looked at a black person, did they think God perceived them as they did? -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I think it is interesting that this woman is such a paragon of virtue according to upper society and she is kind and generous to the poor but cannot see what a tyrant she is toward her slaves. It is also interesting to see a woman who id depicted in a cruel light. They are supposed to be the kinder gentler sex and here she is committing atrocities toward her slaves. It is an abuse of power and yet because they are property she cannot see it as such. I am sure that women all over the south commited cruel if not crueler acts then their husbands. Women sometimes are much crueler then men so I am sure they thought of new ways to punish their slaves all the time. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Slavery obviously had a serious emotional and psychological impact on slaves, and the Grimké reading shows how slavery could impact whites. In the case described here a woman is cruel and abusive, faultfinding, and prone towards emotional outbursts that could be extended beyond her slaves and onto her family. There’s also the matter of hypocrisy in being accepted by the community as a good Christian in spite of these vicious faults. However, I’m curious what kind of psychological effects slavery had on men and woman of the South who did not believe in slavery, rare as they were, but who witnessed its horrors. Angelina says “one who is a slaveholder at heart never recognizes a human being in a slave (217).” But people like the Grimké sisters saw human beings, and constantly witnessing violence done to others can be quite a harrowing experience. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
<br />
One thing that I was not quite sure about in this article was who slavery was doing the most damage to. While the the descriptions of the beatings of the slaves did make me feel for them, it seemed to me that the point of the article was to show how bad slavery made the slave-owning women become. Were the descriptions of the punishments that the slaves faced more horrendous due to the fact that a women was administering them? Would this writing have been less effective if it had described a slave-owning male? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I like the question that John brought up in his post, I think that Angelina Grimke purposely depicted a slave owning female as opposed to male. At least in my opinion it seemed like it would be more shocking to Northern women to read of the cruelty being administered by their southern counterparts. I think her story might have been less shocking if she had depicted a tale of a cruel master. I noticed that the husband (if he existed) of the mistress in question was not mentioned during the story. Beating and whipping definitely appeared as punishments that would be associated with male slave owners and not mistresses.I was horrified that a supposedly gentile woman could administer such terrible beatings. It is much easier as the reader to conjure up an image of an evil slave owner not of his wife. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I think that Angelina Grimke Weld's account of the treatment of slaves really made me realize the extent to which slaves were abused. They not only had to suffer through physical torture/abuse, but also dealt with verbal abuse, especially by their mistress in this case. I think people mostly focus on the abuse of slaves who worked outside, from the manual labor and the whippings, but I think that the "house-servants", as Grimke calls them, also suffered just as much if not more. What I found odd was how the mistress claimed to be such a devout Christian and prayed and sang praises at the family altar daily, and then a couple of hours later, a slave was taken their to whipped inhumanely. It just didn't make sense to me how someone could be so two-faced and hypocritical. I think Angelina Grimke Ward summed up the mindset of slave holders in one simple sentence: "Slaveholders think nothing of them, because they regard their slaves as ''property'' the mere instruments of their convenience and pleasure." (Woloch, P. 217)--- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Louisa S. Cheeves McCord, “Review of Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” 1853 ==<br />
Personally, I liked McCords sarcasm, "Bravo! Mrs.Stowe! Your deductions are bold things, and override sense and reason with wonderful facility." She really attacked Stowe pretty hard with this review, though. And, I find it slightly suprising that she would be so pro-slavery, being that she grew up in the North. It seems to me that she should have been a little sympathetic towards slaves. But, perhaps she had slaves in the North too, and it wasn't much different to her than the South. I am curious to know if that may have been the case or not. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I also very much liked this piece. Louisa’s writing was smart, witty and fantastically snarky! I thought this was a great form of rebuttal, undermining the integrity of the argument presented as well as the author by sarcastically saying that Stowe was only perpetuating common ideas and lies about slavery. By over exaggerating several ideas in the book, such as: “The poor negro, astounded by the torrent of progress, which, bursting over the world, now hangs menacingly (for to the wild man is not civilization always menacing?) above him, would vainly follow with the stream, and is swept away in the current” Louisa discourages readers of Stowe to believe Stowes writing which Louisa shows to be fantastical and unreliable. -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Mary Boykin Chestnut’s diary, 1861 ==<br />
Mary Chesnut, a woman of very high social standing, smoked opium? “It enables me to retain every particle of mind or sense or brains I ever have, & so quiets my nerves that I can calmly reason & take rational views of things otherwise maddening.” (pg 221) She was very clear why she used the drug, but these statements made me curious about the popularity of opium. Did her friends use it too? Was it expensive or hard to obtain? Was there any social stigma against it? –Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I was also curious about Mary’s use of Opium. I know opium was used as medicine before morphine was popular, however I wonder as to how it was used. In her diary, Mary said: “I quickly took opium…”, does this mean it was still in its seed form or was it processed into a liquid or pill? Or was smoking an appropriate behavior for women? I was also very much intrigued by Mary’s very confusing ideas about slavery. In one section she writes that “ours is a monstrous system & wrong & iniquity” and in yet another that” my countrywomen are as pure as angels- tho surrounded by another race who are- the social evil!” She appears to think slavery is wrong, however at the same time she retains a very racist attitude that seems to oppose her earlier statement. Maybe she ought to lay off the opium before she begins to ponder theoretical issues... -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
Having a husband that was a lawyer and official in the Confederacy, Mary Boymin Chestnut may have visited Charleston which is port city having access to goods that may have been brought over from China which had just experienced the second opium war. Being in the upperclass, having disposable income, and having a rebellious nature (keeping a secret diary in a lock box to write whatever social commentaries she wants sounds a little rebellious for a lady at this time to me) and having an unhappy domestic life, seems to fit in with using opium in my opinion. She seemed like an interesting person to me, denouncing the clergy and arguing that slavery is a "curse" becuase of the bad that it brings out in people instead of the human rights that the slaves have as people. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
Like the previous posters I was rather confused/shocked by the casual mention of her using opium. I suppose I have the same question as above how often did people of her status use opium? Another thing that caught my attention was her saying “I was amused. Said Elizabeth was his /present/ wife.” this is an example of what we talked about earlier in the semester about “now wives” and such. –Megan M.<br />
<br />
I was, like everyone else that posted, shocked by the way Mary's discussed her use of opium. It seems strange to me that a woman in her position would be using drugs. I am also curious as to how many other women were using opium. Was this common? -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Rose Williams’s Story in the Federal Writers’ Project Interviews, 1941. ==<br />
The introduction to this narrative stated that it was in a slave woman’s best interest to have children because it decreased her likelihood of being sold. The benefits are not so clear in Rose Williams’s case because her owner did not let her choose her partner. I think this provides a good example to show that slavery could be a quid pro quo relationship. Rose’s owner did something nice for her, bought her along with her parents, and then used that as a bargaining tool to get what he wanted out of her. Of course the slaveholder always had the upper hand, but I think it is important to note that some bargaining occurred. As I was reading for another class, I came across a slave woman who remarked about her master: “I own him and he owns me.” The master-slave relationship was anything but simple. –Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison's statements and the second paragraph in this piece sums up slave women perfectly stating, "child-bearing increased her value as a slave..." (226). Slave women were less likely to be separated from their children because slave-owners wanted to keep the mother around for reprodution and to train her children to be the ideal slave for the master. But, in the case of Rose Williams, did she really profit from being sold alongside her parents? The slave-owners and slave relationship appeared to be a give and take, even though the owner normally won slaves learned from masters mistakes. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I agree with both Allison and Megan, the master/slave relationship was not simple. Not only did the masters control the work that the slaves did but dictated their lives in general. Rose Williams' is a good example of this. It is an interesting relationship because though every aspect of her life was controlled, she still felt like still owed it to her Mr. Hawkins to be with the man who he chose for her. Mr. Hawkins would be getting more slaves out of the deal, but what would Rose be getting? I guess the better question would be, what wouldn't Rose be getting? and that would be whipped. Rose states, "De nex' day de massa call me and tell me, "Woman, I's pay big money for you and I's done dat for de cause I wants yous to raise me chilllens. I's put you to life with Rufus for dat purpose. Now, if you doesn't want whippin' at de stake, yous do what I wants."" I think what stood out to me most in this reading is how Rose was treated. I realize that slaves were property, and owners could do what they wanted. But in my crazy mind, I imagined that slaves would do their work but would be able to have their own families or personal time once work was done, I didn't think that these families were forced upon women as means to get more slaves for their owners. I guess I always just assumed that slave women wanted families of their own, this definitely wasn't the case! --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
I assumed the same thing Erin did about slave women wanting families of their own. I enjoyed reading Rose Williams's story. Although her life was almost 100% dictated by her master, she found subtle ways to undermine his authority, like showing Rufus who was in charge when she was forced to live with him. Also, it was interesting to see the male/female relationship at work. Rose showed no respect to Rufus, and pretty much wore the pants in their relationship. But the male/female relationship was very different between Rose and her master. She did what he wanted, although she didn't agree with it. It just goes to show how white superiority was so strong while the way Blacks interacted with one another was so different. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Lucinda, a free woman, requests reenslavement, 1813 ==<br />
Reading this document made me sad. I can only imagine the turmoil going through Lucinda, deciding to give up her freedom so that she could be with her husband. She must have loved him very much. But I wonder, Perhaps Lucinda did not only stay because of her husband. I mean, that was a big part of it, but she may also have been scared to leave the area that she lived in for so long. Her husband may have been the major factor, but maybe she just really did not want to go to Tennessee. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I thought this was a really interesting, and unique, document- I'm sure there must not be many like it. Lucinda, like Kristina stated, must have deeply loved her husband- so much so that she requests to be reenslaved even when she has gained her freedom. Why would she do this? Even if she was reenslaved, there was always the possibility that her husband might be sold off and she would be separated from him then. Lucinda, however, takes this risk, which I think shows remarkable bravery and courage, as well as loyalty and devotion to her husband. I wonder what her previous experiences were with enslavement- maybe under her "late" mistress, Mary Matthews, she was treated fairly well and therefore had no real perception of how violent slavery under a different master or perhaps on a different plantation could be. I wonder whether this knowledge would have influenced her decision in any way? -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
It was very incredible to read that a slave would willingly be put back into slavery after being freed just to be with her husband. I think this qualifies as proof that love can make you stupid. This situation is a clear example of the many ways that slave owners could use family to keep control over slaves. While separating families (or the threat of it) and laws preventing freed blacks from living in the state controls blacks, but it also seems like it could be a check on other slave owners. If slave owners who considered the possibility of freeing their slaves after their deaths see that some of the freed slaves go right back to being slaves again, they’d probably be less inclined to bother. Also, freed blacks willingly entering slavery again helped reinforce the idea of paternalism. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
This petition was incredibly interesting in the fact that Lucinda refused freedom to be able to stay with her husband. She was asking to be re-enslaved since the state did not allow emancipated slaves to stay within the state. I find this remarkable. I would’ve thought she would have gone North, find work in whatever area she could and then save up some money to buy his freedom. However, she asked to be bought by her husband’s owner. I feel like this would probably have, as Taylor also mentions, convince white slave masters that slaves needed a father figure in their idea of paternalism. –Megan M<br />
<br />
I thought this account was kind of inspiring and sad at the same time. This woman achieved what most slaves only dreamed about-freedom. Once she attained it, however, she did not want it. She did not want to be free without her husband. I think it shows that love is very powerful and was still very much a part of people's marriages even in the 19th Century and even for slaves. I thought this woman was brave and romantic. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I felt really sad after I read this. She was finally free but couldn't be happy because her husband was not with her. That definitely shows how much she loved him and how important he was to her. Freedom was a dream for slaves. She was incredibly brave to refuse freedom in order to stay with her husband. I wonder how often situations like this happened. I agree with Megan that it would have made sense if Lucinda went to the North and tried to save money in order to buy his freedom. Maybe Lucinda felt that she may never have been able to afford it. I agree with Taylor that Lucinda willingly reentering slavery reinforces the idea of paternalism. Her master was probably thinking that her life was so great being a slave that that is why she stayed. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Connecticut woman asks other free black women to sign anti-slavery petitions, 1839 ==<br />
I felt the persuasion utilized in this argument was very compelling. I would have felt guilty if I had been a free Black woman and had not acted. She uses everything that women are supposed to care about(taking care of their family) as a reason for other women to get involved. Her descriptions are also very vivid and provide a picture of the hardships of slave women and their children. How common and how effective were these types of addresses in getting women involved?--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Mary Still, black abolitionist, along with other Philadelphia free women, forms “Female Publication Society” to promote the moral uplift of free and slave African Americans, 1861 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mrs. Virginia Hayes Shepherd’s memories, 1937 ==<br />
I found Mrs. Hayes recollection of slavery to be on the mark and amusing. The story of her youth is important to understanding what a former slave family had to go through after the Civil War, but the short paragraphs on Diana stood out the most to me. Diana appeared to be cunning and knew how to outwit the white man, when slaves were thought to be "child-like" Diana outsmarted her master. She knew she could not run away from slavery, but she knew how to manipulate it to her advantage and this proves any slave-owners theory on slaves as false in my eyes. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
After reading Mrs. Hayes account, I feel like her experience as a slave was quite different from the typical slave experience. Hayes writes about her master, saying, "He never bothered to collect their [slaves] wages himself. Our master allowed his slaves so much freedom that we were called free niggers by slaves on other plantations." (MP P. 181) Mrs. Hayes knew she had a decently good life for being a slave but was very aware of the plights of nearby slaves and was sympathetic to their troubles. The things Mrs. Hayes said about Diana and how she was treated by her master probably describes many female slaves lives. I thought it was interesting how the mistress was sympathetic towards Diana, after she was assaulted. I would have expected the opposite; that the mistress would have just ignored the problem. It was almost as though the mistress and Diana shared a similar experience, both being abused by the master/husband, sexually for Diana and physically for the mistress. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Thelma Jennings, “Sexual Exploitation of African American Slave Women,” 1990 ==<br />
I agree with Thelma Jennings that African American slave women were sexually exploited. Reading the stories they told of the atrocities imposed by white slave owners was horrifying and at sometimes difficult to read. Jennings stated that the ideology of race played a key role and explained the view white slave owners. Though some slaves were treated better than others, I think it’s important to remember that when slave owners bought a slave they became your property and were looked at as capital. It was the idea of investing in your capital to produce more then they could make more money. African American slaves - particularly women which Jenning’s referred to, were considered as an item not as a person. Though it is twisted to think people are property, they did then, and it allowed white slave owners to take advantage of their slaves in any and every way they could. -Marsha<br />
<br />
Thelma Jennings writes the sad tale of women who are sexually exploited. They were forced to have sex with other slaves so that there would me more slaves. Many white men gave no consideration to women who were married and would force them to have sex with others despite this. This is disturbing and I imagine that the women who were subject to this sexual abuse have a wealth of bitterness. I could never live under these conditions and I have respect for the endurance of these women. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
When Thelma Jennings wrote that slave women would go so far as to induce miscarriages and practice abortion in order "deprive" their owners of what they most wanted (more slaves in order to increase their productivity and therefore their wealth and social standing), I was astonished. I can understand it being a form of passive resistance, and slave women perhaps wanting to assert some control over their lives in any way that they could, but I can't imagine being so resentful and bitter (perhaps that is not the best word, but I can't think of a better one right now....) that a woman would take the life of her child. Did she feel it was in the child's best interests- maybe to prevent him/her from suffering the way that she felt she was suffering? I'm not sure. That statement just totally blew me away- it made me realize how far some slave women were really willing to go in order to demonstrate, in their own way, their contempt and hatred of the situation they were in. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I noticed in one of the testimonies that a woman whose father was a white slaver owner and her mother a slave described her mother as being very light skinned and favored amongst the white. That seemed to be a pattern in the literature on the south that I have read that those who were light skinned were more likely to be exploited into having sexual relations with their masters. Would women like her and mulatto children have been treated differently by their fellow slaves? I wonder if they would have been resentful and bitter towards these women and children even though they were almost always the victims. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I thought it was really sad to read about the exploitation of black women and slaves. These women seemed to be the last ones on the totem pole. They were described as genderless. Not only were they forced to have sex with white men, but they were also forced at times to mate with black men to reproduce the type of offspring that the master wanted. I think it's despicable that after a woman got pregnant that she was forced to work in the fields or forced to do work in general and at the same time received physical abuse. I did like the ending of the essay, however, that even though these women received such treatment they had faith that the future would be different. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
This article sheds light on the practice of sexual abuse of a slave by their owner. I found it surprising that, according to one line of questioning, "Twenty-two [interviewees'] ... fathers were white men" (Jennings, 186) and in another line of questioning, "Thirty-six of the interviewees ... noted that the master himself was guilty of interracial sex" (Jennings, 187). These interviews show that, not only sexual abuse, but slave breeding was a visible component to the institution of slavery. This article makes me wonder how the wives of slaveholders felt about their husbands extramarital affairs, since they ''must'' have been aware it was happening. Did they support their husbands actions from either a financial or social standpoint? -Seth Mintzer</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_10_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 10 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-29T13:46:16Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Mary Boykin Chestnut’s diary, 1861 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Sarah Haynesworth Gayle, “An Alabama Diary,” 1828, 1833 ==<br />
<br />
In Sarah Haynesworth Gayle’s diary she talks about how her slaves are no longer as obedient as they had been previously. She describes them as lazy and full of complaints. Even her favorite slave would not listen. What is interesting is that she takes this as an attack on herself, she states “I am unable to accommodate myself to the disagreeable change.” I’m not exactly sure what she was expected to do, or what she could do. – Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I also found it interesting that she was taking the slaves' disobedience so personally. I guess it goes back to what we talked about in class, that most southerners thought slaves were happy to be slaves and that they had a paternal relationship with them. She's probably confused because she thinks that her slaves have such a great life so why would they disobey? It's crazy the way that people can make themselves believe things that are obviously not true. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
Sarah Haynesworth’s diary entry where she was complaining about slave’s disobedience was written in 1828, I am having a hard time figuring out where this change in the slaves is coming from. In this context of time, this was before Nat Turner’s rebellion in 1831, but way after other attempted slave rebellions. So, I am curious as to where this change was coming from? – Erin Sanderson <br />
<br />
Maybe Sarah Haynesworth Gayle's means of discipline was not as threatening to the slaves as it had been under her parents and felt that they could rebel more strongly without a proactive master. Though I don't think that their was goal to to be sold (a group that size may have had slave families), nothing is said about actions taken by mr or mrs Gayle to correct their behavior and Mrs. Gayle seems to use the sale of her slaves as vengeance to the poor behavior they had been exhibiting. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
== Angelina Grimké Weld, 1839, “The Cruel Mistress” ==<br />
I think it's interesting Angelina Grimke Weld, when referring to the abuse of the Cruel Mistress towards her house servants, points out that this woman had no shame in the abuse towards them. Weld goes on and on about these horrible atrocities of the abuse and stated throughout this piece that this mistress was a respectable Christian women. This made Weld as an abolitionist stand out as only a few. The abuse of slaves was accepted and probably expected in order to remain in control of them in the eyes of a slave owner. This slave holder without a doubt probably made a spectacle to make sure the slaves remained obedient. This female mistress seems extremely temperamental. The pious and vulgar language used against her slaves was likely her attempt to make sure they knew she was above them in every manor -race, class, and possibly better in Gods eyes as well. I am curious to know how they thought God looked at a black person, did they think God perceived them as they did? -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I think it is interesting that this woman is such a paragon of virtue according to upper society and she is kind and generous to the poor but cannot see what a tyrant she is toward her slaves. It is also interesting to see a woman who id depicted in a cruel light. They are supposed to be the kinder gentler sex and here she is committing atrocities toward her slaves. It is an abuse of power and yet because they are property she cannot see it as such. I am sure that women all over the south commited cruel if not crueler acts then their husbands. Women sometimes are much crueler then men so I am sure they thought of new ways to punish their slaves all the time. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Slavery obviously had a serious emotional and psychological impact on slaves, and the Grimké reading shows how slavery could impact whites. In the case described here a woman is cruel and abusive, faultfinding, and prone towards emotional outbursts that could be extended beyond her slaves and onto her family. There’s also the matter of hypocrisy in being accepted by the community as a good Christian in spite of these vicious faults. However, I’m curious what kind of psychological effects slavery had on men and woman of the South who did not believe in slavery, rare as they were, but who witnessed its horrors. Angelina says “one who is a slaveholder at heart never recognizes a human being in a slave (217).” But people like the Grimké sisters saw human beings, and constantly witnessing violence done to others can be quite a harrowing experience. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
<br />
One thing that I was not quite sure about in this article was who slavery was doing the most damage to. While the the descriptions of the beatings of the slaves did make me feel for them, it seemed to me that the point of the article was to show how bad slavery made the slave-owning women become. Were the descriptions of the punishments that the slaves faced more horrendous due to the fact that a women was administering them? Would this writing have been less effective if it had described a slave-owning male? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I like the question that John brought up in his post, I think that Angelina Grimke purposely depicted a slave owning female as opposed to male. At least in my opinion it seemed like it would be more shocking to Northern women to read of the cruelty being administered by their southern counterparts. I think her story might have been less shocking if she had depicted a tale of a cruel master. I noticed that the husband (if he existed) of the mistress in question was not mentioned during the story. Beating and whipping definitely appeared as punishments that would be associated with male slave owners and not mistresses.I was horrified that a supposedly gentile woman could administer such terrible beatings. It is much easier as the reader to conjure up an image of an evil slave owner not of his wife. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I think that Angelina Grimke Weld's account of the treatment of slaves really made me realize the extent to which slaves were abused. They not only had to suffer through physical torture/abuse, but also dealt with verbal abuse, especially by their mistress in this case. I think people mostly focus on the abuse of slaves who worked outside, from the manual labor and the whippings, but I think that the "house-servants", as Grimke calls them, also suffered just as much if not more. What I found odd was how the mistress claimed to be such a devout Christian and prayed and sang praises at the family altar daily, and then a couple of hours later, a slave was taken their to whipped inhumanely. It just didn't make sense to me how someone could be so two-faced and hypocritical. I think Angelina Grimke Ward summed up the mindset of slave holders in one simple sentence: "Slaveholders think nothing of them, because they regard their slaves as ''property'' the mere instruments of their convenience and pleasure." (Woloch, P. 217)--- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Louisa S. Cheeves McCord, “Review of Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” 1853 ==<br />
Personally, I liked McCords sarcasm, "Bravo! Mrs.Stowe! Your deductions are bold things, and override sense and reason with wonderful facility." She really attacked Stowe pretty hard with this review, though. And, I find it slightly suprising that she would be so pro-slavery, being that she grew up in the North. It seems to me that she should have been a little sympathetic towards slaves. But, perhaps she had slaves in the North too, and it wasn't much different to her than the South. I am curious to know if that may have been the case or not. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I also very much liked this piece. Louisa’s writing was smart, witty and fantastically snarky! I thought this was a great form of rebuttal, undermining the integrity of the argument presented as well as the author by sarcastically saying that Stowe was only perpetuating common ideas and lies about slavery. By over exaggerating several ideas in the book, such as: “The poor negro, astounded by the torrent of progress, which, bursting over the world, now hangs menacingly (for to the wild man is not civilization always menacing?) above him, would vainly follow with the stream, and is swept away in the current” Louisa discourages readers of Stowe to believe Stowes writing which Louisa shows to be fantastical and unreliable. -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Mary Boykin Chestnut’s diary, 1861 ==<br />
Mary Chesnut, a woman of very high social standing, smoked opium? “It enables me to retain every particle of mind or sense or brains I ever have, & so quiets my nerves that I can calmly reason & take rational views of things otherwise maddening.” (pg 221) She was very clear why she used the drug, but these statements made me curious about the popularity of opium. Did her friends use it too? Was it expensive or hard to obtain? Was there any social stigma against it? –Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I was also curious about Mary’s use of Opium. I know opium was used as medicine before morphine was popular, however I wonder as to how it was used. In her diary, Mary said: “I quickly took opium…”, does this mean it was still in its seed form or was it processed into a liquid or pill? Or was smoking an appropriate behavior for women? I was also very much intrigued by Mary’s very confusing ideas about slavery. In one section she writes that “ours is a monstrous system & wrong & iniquity” and in yet another that” my countrywomen are as pure as angels- tho surrounded by another race who are- the social evil!” She appears to think slavery is wrong, however at the same time she retains a very racist attitude that seems to oppose her earlier statement. Maybe she ought to lay off the opium before she begins to ponder theoretical issues... -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
Having a husband that was a lawyer and official in the Confederacy, Mary Boymin Chestnut may have visited Charleston which is port city having access to goods that may have been brought over from China which had just experienced the second opium war. Being in the upperclass, having disposable income, and having a rebellious nature (keeping a secret diary in a lock box to write whatever social commentaries she wants sounds a little rebellious for a lady at this time to me) and having an unhappy domestic life, seems to fit in with using opium in my opinion. She seemed like an interesting person to me, denouncing the clergy and arguing that slavery is a "curse" becuase of the bad that it brings out in people instead of the human rights that the slaves have as people. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
Like the previous posters I was rather confused/shocked by the casual mention of her using opium. I suppose I have the same question as above how often did people of her status use opium? Another thing that caught my attention was her saying “I was amused. Said Elizabeth was his /present/ wife.” this is an example of what we talked about earlier in the semester about “now wives” and such. –Megan M.<br />
<br />
I was, like everyone else that posted, shocked by the way Mary's discussed her use of opium. It seems strange to me that a woman in her position would be using drugs. I am also curious as to how many other women were using opium. Was this common? -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Rose Williams’s Story in the Federal Writers’ Project Interviews, 1941. ==<br />
The introduction to this narrative stated that it was in a slave woman’s best interest to have children because it decreased her likelihood of being sold. The benefits are not so clear in Rose Williams’s case because her owner did not let her choose her partner. I think this provides a good example to show that slavery could be a quid pro quo relationship. Rose’s owner did something nice for her, bought her along with her parents, and then used that as a bargaining tool to get what he wanted out of her. Of course the slaveholder always had the upper hand, but I think it is important to note that some bargaining occurred. As I was reading for another class, I came across a slave woman who remarked about her master: “I own him and he owns me.” The master-slave relationship was anything but simple. –Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison's statements and the second paragraph in this piece sums up slave women perfectly stating, "child-bearing increased her value as a slave..." (226). Slave women were less likely to be separated from their children because slave-owners wanted to keep the mother around for reprodution and to train her children to be the ideal slave for the master. But, in the case of Rose Williams, did she really profit from being sold alongside her parents? The slave-owners and slave relationship appeared to be a give and take, even though the owner normally won slaves learned from masters mistakes. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I agree with both Allison and Megan, the master/slave relationship was not simple. Not only did the masters control the work that the slaves did but dictated their lives in general. Rose Williams' is a good example of this. It is an interesting relationship because though every aspect of her life was controlled, she still felt like still owed it to her Mr. Hawkins to be with the man who he chose for her. Mr. Hawkins would be getting more slaves out of the deal, but what would Rose be getting? I guess the better question would be, what wouldn't Rose be getting? and that would be whipped. Rose states, "De nex' day de massa call me and tell me, "Woman, I's pay big money for you and I's done dat for de cause I wants yous to raise me chilllens. I's put you to life with Rufus for dat purpose. Now, if you doesn't want whippin' at de stake, yous do what I wants."" I think what stood out to me most in this reading is how Rose was treated. I realize that slaves were property, and owners could do what they wanted. But in my crazy mind, I imagined that slaves would do their work but would be able to have their own families or personal time once work was done, I didn't think that these families were forced upon women as means to get more slaves for their owners. I guess I always just assumed that slave women wanted families of their own, this definitely wasn't the case! --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
I assumed the same thing Erin did about slave women wanting families of their own. I enjoyed reading Rose Williams's story. Although her life was almost 100% dictated by her master, she found subtle ways to undermine his authority, like showing Rufus who was in charge when she was forced to live with him. Also, it was interesting to see the male/female relationship at work. Rose showed no respect to Rufus, and pretty much wore the pants in their relationship. But the male/female relationship was very different between Rose and her master. She did what he wanted, although she didn't agree with it. It just goes to show how white superiority was so strong while the way Blacks interacted with one another was so different. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Lucinda, a free woman, requests reenslavement, 1813 ==<br />
Reading this document made me sad. I can only imagine the turmoil going through Lucinda, deciding to give up her freedom so that she could be with her husband. She must have loved him very much. But I wonder, Perhaps Lucinda did not only stay because of her husband. I mean, that was a big part of it, but she may also have been scared to leave the area that she lived in for so long. Her husband may have been the major factor, but maybe she just really did not want to go to Tennessee. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I thought this was a really interesting, and unique, document- I'm sure there must not be many like it. Lucinda, like Kristina stated, must have deeply loved her husband- so much so that she requests to be reenslaved even when she has gained her freedom. Why would she do this? Even if she was reenslaved, there was always the possibility that her husband might be sold off and she would be separated from him then. Lucinda, however, takes this risk, which I think shows remarkable bravery and courage, as well as loyalty and devotion to her husband. I wonder what her previous experiences were with enslavement- maybe under her "late" mistress, Mary Matthews, she was treated fairly well and therefore had no real perception of how violent slavery under a different master or perhaps on a different plantation could be. I wonder whether this knowledge would have influenced her decision in any way? -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
It was very incredible to read that a slave would willingly be put back into slavery after being freed just to be with her husband. I think this qualifies as proof that love can make you stupid. This situation is a clear example of the many ways that slave owners could use family to keep control over slaves. While separating families (or the threat of it) and laws preventing freed blacks from living in the state controls blacks, but it also seems like it could be a check on other slave owners. If slave owners who considered the possibility of freeing their slaves after their deaths see that some of the freed slaves go right back to being slaves again, they’d probably be less inclined to bother. Also, freed blacks willingly entering slavery again helped reinforce the idea of paternalism. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
This petition was incredibly interesting in the fact that Lucinda refused freedom to be able to stay with her husband. She was asking to be re-enslaved since the state did not allow emancipated slaves to stay within the state. I find this remarkable. I would’ve thought she would have gone North, find work in whatever area she could and then save up some money to buy his freedom. However, she asked to be bought by her husband’s owner. I feel like this would probably have, as Taylor also mentions, convince white slave masters that slaves needed a father figure in their idea of paternalism. –Megan M<br />
<br />
I thought this account was kind of inspiring and sad at the same time. This woman achieved what most slaves only dreamed about-freedom. Once she attained it, however, she did not want it. She did not want to be free without her husband. I think it shows that love is very powerful and was still very much a part of people's marriages even in the 19th Century and even for slaves. I thought this woman was brave and romantic. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
== Connecticut woman asks other free black women to sign anti-slavery petitions, 1839 ==<br />
I felt the persuasion utilized in this argument was very compelling. I would have felt guilty if I had been a free Black woman and had not acted. She uses everything that women are supposed to care about(taking care of their family) as a reason for other women to get involved. Her descriptions are also very vivid and provide a picture of the hardships of slave women and their children. How common and how effective were these types of addresses in getting women involved?--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Mary Still, black abolitionist, along with other Philadelphia free women, forms “Female Publication Society” to promote the moral uplift of free and slave African Americans, 1861 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mrs. Virginia Hayes Shepherd’s memories, 1937 ==<br />
I found Mrs. Hayes recollection of slavery to be on the mark and amusing. The story of her youth is important to understanding what a former slave family had to go through after the Civil War, but the short paragraphs on Diana stood out the most to me. Diana appeared to be cunning and knew how to outwit the white man, when slaves were thought to be "child-like" Diana outsmarted her master. She knew she could not run away from slavery, but she knew how to manipulate it to her advantage and this proves any slave-owners theory on slaves as false in my eyes. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
After reading Mrs. Hayes account, I feel like her experience as a slave was quite different from the typical slave experience. Hayes writes about her master, saying, "He never bothered to collect their [slaves] wages himself. Our master allowed his slaves so much freedom that we were called free niggers by slaves on other plantations." (MP P. 181) Mrs. Hayes knew she had a decently good life for being a slave but was very aware of the plights of nearby slaves and was sympathetic to their troubles. The things Mrs. Hayes said about Diana and how she was treated by her master probably describes many female slaves lives. I thought it was interesting how the mistress was sympathetic towards Diana, after she was assaulted. I would have expected the opposite; that the mistress would have just ignored the problem. It was almost as though the mistress and Diana shared a similar experience, both being abused by the master/husband, sexually for Diana and physically for the mistress. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Thelma Jennings, “Sexual Exploitation of African American Slave Women,” 1990 ==<br />
I agree with Thelma Jennings that African American slave women were sexually exploited. Reading the stories they told of the atrocities imposed by white slave owners was horrifying and at sometimes difficult to read. Jennings stated that the ideology of race played a key role and explained the view white slave owners. Though some slaves were treated better than others, I think it’s important to remember that when slave owners bought a slave they became your property and were looked at as capital. It was the idea of investing in your capital to produce more then they could make more money. African American slaves - particularly women which Jenning’s referred to, were considered as an item not as a person. Though it is twisted to think people are property, they did then, and it allowed white slave owners to take advantage of their slaves in any and every way they could. -Marsha<br />
<br />
Thelma Jennings writes the sad tale of women who are sexually exploited. They were forced to have sex with other slaves so that there would me more slaves. Many white men gave no consideration to women who were married and would force them to have sex with others despite this. This is disturbing and I imagine that the women who were subject to this sexual abuse have a wealth of bitterness. I could never live under these conditions and I have respect for the endurance of these women. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
When Thelma Jennings wrote that slave women would go so far as to induce miscarriages and practice abortion in order "deprive" their owners of what they most wanted (more slaves in order to increase their productivity and therefore their wealth and social standing), I was astonished. I can understand it being a form of passive resistance, and slave women perhaps wanting to assert some control over their lives in any way that they could, but I can't imagine being so resentful and bitter (perhaps that is not the best word, but I can't think of a better one right now....) that a woman would take the life of her child. Did she feel it was in the child's best interests- maybe to prevent him/her from suffering the way that she felt she was suffering? I'm not sure. That statement just totally blew me away- it made me realize how far some slave women were really willing to go in order to demonstrate, in their own way, their contempt and hatred of the situation they were in. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I noticed in one of the testimonies that a woman whose father was a white slaver owner and her mother a slave described her mother as being very light skinned and favored amongst the white. That seemed to be a pattern in the literature on the south that I have read that those who were light skinned were more likely to be exploited into having sexual relations with their masters. Would women like her and mulatto children have been treated differently by their fellow slaves? I wonder if they would have been resentful and bitter towards these women and children even though they were almost always the victims. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I thought it was really sad to read about the exploitation of black women and slaves. These women seemed to be the last ones on the totem pole. They were described as genderless. Not only were they forced to have sex with white men, but they were also forced at times to mate with black men to reproduce the type of offspring that the master wanted. I think it's despicable that after a woman got pregnant that she was forced to work in the fields or forced to do work in general and at the same time received physical abuse. I did like the ending of the essay, however, that even though these women received such treatment they had faith that the future would be different. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
This article sheds light on the practice of sexual abuse of a slave by their owner. I found it surprising that, according to one line of questioning, "Twenty-two [interviewees'] ... fathers were white men" (Jennings, 186) and in another line of questioning, "Thirty-six of the interviewees ... noted that the master himself was guilty of interracial sex" (Jennings, 187). These interviews show that, not only sexual abuse, but slave breeding was a visible component to the institution of slavery. This article makes me wonder how the wives of slaveholders felt about their husbands extramarital affairs, since they ''must'' have been aware it was happening. Did they support their husbands actions from either a financial or social standpoint? -Seth Mintzer</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_10_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 10 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-29T13:44:51Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Sarah Haynesworth Gayle, “An Alabama Diary,” 1828, 1833 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Sarah Haynesworth Gayle, “An Alabama Diary,” 1828, 1833 ==<br />
<br />
In Sarah Haynesworth Gayle’s diary she talks about how her slaves are no longer as obedient as they had been previously. She describes them as lazy and full of complaints. Even her favorite slave would not listen. What is interesting is that she takes this as an attack on herself, she states “I am unable to accommodate myself to the disagreeable change.” I’m not exactly sure what she was expected to do, or what she could do. – Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I also found it interesting that she was taking the slaves' disobedience so personally. I guess it goes back to what we talked about in class, that most southerners thought slaves were happy to be slaves and that they had a paternal relationship with them. She's probably confused because she thinks that her slaves have such a great life so why would they disobey? It's crazy the way that people can make themselves believe things that are obviously not true. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
Sarah Haynesworth’s diary entry where she was complaining about slave’s disobedience was written in 1828, I am having a hard time figuring out where this change in the slaves is coming from. In this context of time, this was before Nat Turner’s rebellion in 1831, but way after other attempted slave rebellions. So, I am curious as to where this change was coming from? – Erin Sanderson <br />
<br />
Maybe Sarah Haynesworth Gayle's means of discipline was not as threatening to the slaves as it had been under her parents and felt that they could rebel more strongly without a proactive master. Though I don't think that their was goal to to be sold (a group that size may have had slave families), nothing is said about actions taken by mr or mrs Gayle to correct their behavior and Mrs. Gayle seems to use the sale of her slaves as vengeance to the poor behavior they had been exhibiting. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
== Angelina Grimké Weld, 1839, “The Cruel Mistress” ==<br />
I think it's interesting Angelina Grimke Weld, when referring to the abuse of the Cruel Mistress towards her house servants, points out that this woman had no shame in the abuse towards them. Weld goes on and on about these horrible atrocities of the abuse and stated throughout this piece that this mistress was a respectable Christian women. This made Weld as an abolitionist stand out as only a few. The abuse of slaves was accepted and probably expected in order to remain in control of them in the eyes of a slave owner. This slave holder without a doubt probably made a spectacle to make sure the slaves remained obedient. This female mistress seems extremely temperamental. The pious and vulgar language used against her slaves was likely her attempt to make sure they knew she was above them in every manor -race, class, and possibly better in Gods eyes as well. I am curious to know how they thought God looked at a black person, did they think God perceived them as they did? -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I think it is interesting that this woman is such a paragon of virtue according to upper society and she is kind and generous to the poor but cannot see what a tyrant she is toward her slaves. It is also interesting to see a woman who id depicted in a cruel light. They are supposed to be the kinder gentler sex and here she is committing atrocities toward her slaves. It is an abuse of power and yet because they are property she cannot see it as such. I am sure that women all over the south commited cruel if not crueler acts then their husbands. Women sometimes are much crueler then men so I am sure they thought of new ways to punish their slaves all the time. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Slavery obviously had a serious emotional and psychological impact on slaves, and the Grimké reading shows how slavery could impact whites. In the case described here a woman is cruel and abusive, faultfinding, and prone towards emotional outbursts that could be extended beyond her slaves and onto her family. There’s also the matter of hypocrisy in being accepted by the community as a good Christian in spite of these vicious faults. However, I’m curious what kind of psychological effects slavery had on men and woman of the South who did not believe in slavery, rare as they were, but who witnessed its horrors. Angelina says “one who is a slaveholder at heart never recognizes a human being in a slave (217).” But people like the Grimké sisters saw human beings, and constantly witnessing violence done to others can be quite a harrowing experience. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
<br />
One thing that I was not quite sure about in this article was who slavery was doing the most damage to. While the the descriptions of the beatings of the slaves did make me feel for them, it seemed to me that the point of the article was to show how bad slavery made the slave-owning women become. Were the descriptions of the punishments that the slaves faced more horrendous due to the fact that a women was administering them? Would this writing have been less effective if it had described a slave-owning male? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
I like the question that John brought up in his post, I think that Angelina Grimke purposely depicted a slave owning female as opposed to male. At least in my opinion it seemed like it would be more shocking to Northern women to read of the cruelty being administered by their southern counterparts. I think her story might have been less shocking if she had depicted a tale of a cruel master. I noticed that the husband (if he existed) of the mistress in question was not mentioned during the story. Beating and whipping definitely appeared as punishments that would be associated with male slave owners and not mistresses.I was horrified that a supposedly gentile woman could administer such terrible beatings. It is much easier as the reader to conjure up an image of an evil slave owner not of his wife. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I think that Angelina Grimke Weld's account of the treatment of slaves really made me realize the extent to which slaves were abused. They not only had to suffer through physical torture/abuse, but also dealt with verbal abuse, especially by their mistress in this case. I think people mostly focus on the abuse of slaves who worked outside, from the manual labor and the whippings, but I think that the "house-servants", as Grimke calls them, also suffered just as much if not more. What I found odd was how the mistress claimed to be such a devout Christian and prayed and sang praises at the family altar daily, and then a couple of hours later, a slave was taken their to whipped inhumanely. It just didn't make sense to me how someone could be so two-faced and hypocritical. I think Angelina Grimke Ward summed up the mindset of slave holders in one simple sentence: "Slaveholders think nothing of them, because they regard their slaves as ''property'' the mere instruments of their convenience and pleasure." (Woloch, P. 217)--- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Louisa S. Cheeves McCord, “Review of Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” 1853 ==<br />
Personally, I liked McCords sarcasm, "Bravo! Mrs.Stowe! Your deductions are bold things, and override sense and reason with wonderful facility." She really attacked Stowe pretty hard with this review, though. And, I find it slightly suprising that she would be so pro-slavery, being that she grew up in the North. It seems to me that she should have been a little sympathetic towards slaves. But, perhaps she had slaves in the North too, and it wasn't much different to her than the South. I am curious to know if that may have been the case or not. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I also very much liked this piece. Louisa’s writing was smart, witty and fantastically snarky! I thought this was a great form of rebuttal, undermining the integrity of the argument presented as well as the author by sarcastically saying that Stowe was only perpetuating common ideas and lies about slavery. By over exaggerating several ideas in the book, such as: “The poor negro, astounded by the torrent of progress, which, bursting over the world, now hangs menacingly (for to the wild man is not civilization always menacing?) above him, would vainly follow with the stream, and is swept away in the current” Louisa discourages readers of Stowe to believe Stowes writing which Louisa shows to be fantastical and unreliable. -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Mary Boykin Chestnut’s diary, 1861 ==<br />
Mary Chesnut, a woman of very high social standing, smoked opium? “It enables me to retain every particle of mind or sense or brains I ever have, & so quiets my nerves that I can calmly reason & take rational views of things otherwise maddening.” (pg 221) She was very clear why she used the drug, but these statements made me curious about the popularity of opium. Did her friends use it too? Was it expensive or hard to obtain? Was there any social stigma against it? –Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I was also curious about Mary’s use of Opium. I know opium was used as medicine before morphine was popular, however I wonder as to how it was used. In her diary, Mary said: “I quickly took opium…”, does this mean it was still in its seed form or was it processed into a liquid or pill? Or was smoking an appropriate behavior for women? I was also very much intrigued by Mary’s very confusing ideas about slavery. In one section she writes that “ours is a monstrous system & wrong & iniquity” and in yet another that” my countrywomen are as pure as angels- tho surrounded by another race who are- the social evil!” She appears to think slavery is wrong, however at the same time she retains a very racist attitude that seems to oppose her earlier statement. Maybe she ought to lay off the opium before she begins to ponder theoretical issues... -- Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
Having a husband that was a lawyer and official in the Confederacy, Mary Boymin Chestnut may have visited Charleston which is port city having access to goods that may have been brought over from China which had just experienced the second opium war. Being in the upperclass, having disposable income, and having a rebellious nature (keeping a secret diary in a lock box to write whatever social commentaries she wants sounds a little rebellious for a lady at this time to me) and having an unhappy domestic life, seems to fit in with using opium in my opinion. She seemed like an interesting person to me, denouncing the clergy and arguing that slavery is a "curse" becuase of the bad that it brings out in people instead of the human rights that the slaves have as people. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
Like the previous posters I was rather confused/shocked by the casual mention of her using opium. I suppose I have the same question as above how often did people of her status use opium? Another thing that caught my attention was her saying “I was amused. Said Elizabeth was his /present/ wife.” this is an example of what we talked about earlier in the semester about “now wives” and such. –Megan M.<br />
<br />
== Rose Williams’s Story in the Federal Writers’ Project Interviews, 1941. ==<br />
The introduction to this narrative stated that it was in a slave woman’s best interest to have children because it decreased her likelihood of being sold. The benefits are not so clear in Rose Williams’s case because her owner did not let her choose her partner. I think this provides a good example to show that slavery could be a quid pro quo relationship. Rose’s owner did something nice for her, bought her along with her parents, and then used that as a bargaining tool to get what he wanted out of her. Of course the slaveholder always had the upper hand, but I think it is important to note that some bargaining occurred. As I was reading for another class, I came across a slave woman who remarked about her master: “I own him and he owns me.” The master-slave relationship was anything but simple. –Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison's statements and the second paragraph in this piece sums up slave women perfectly stating, "child-bearing increased her value as a slave..." (226). Slave women were less likely to be separated from their children because slave-owners wanted to keep the mother around for reprodution and to train her children to be the ideal slave for the master. But, in the case of Rose Williams, did she really profit from being sold alongside her parents? The slave-owners and slave relationship appeared to be a give and take, even though the owner normally won slaves learned from masters mistakes. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I agree with both Allison and Megan, the master/slave relationship was not simple. Not only did the masters control the work that the slaves did but dictated their lives in general. Rose Williams' is a good example of this. It is an interesting relationship because though every aspect of her life was controlled, she still felt like still owed it to her Mr. Hawkins to be with the man who he chose for her. Mr. Hawkins would be getting more slaves out of the deal, but what would Rose be getting? I guess the better question would be, what wouldn't Rose be getting? and that would be whipped. Rose states, "De nex' day de massa call me and tell me, "Woman, I's pay big money for you and I's done dat for de cause I wants yous to raise me chilllens. I's put you to life with Rufus for dat purpose. Now, if you doesn't want whippin' at de stake, yous do what I wants."" I think what stood out to me most in this reading is how Rose was treated. I realize that slaves were property, and owners could do what they wanted. But in my crazy mind, I imagined that slaves would do their work but would be able to have their own families or personal time once work was done, I didn't think that these families were forced upon women as means to get more slaves for their owners. I guess I always just assumed that slave women wanted families of their own, this definitely wasn't the case! --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
I assumed the same thing Erin did about slave women wanting families of their own. I enjoyed reading Rose Williams's story. Although her life was almost 100% dictated by her master, she found subtle ways to undermine his authority, like showing Rufus who was in charge when she was forced to live with him. Also, it was interesting to see the male/female relationship at work. Rose showed no respect to Rufus, and pretty much wore the pants in their relationship. But the male/female relationship was very different between Rose and her master. She did what he wanted, although she didn't agree with it. It just goes to show how white superiority was so strong while the way Blacks interacted with one another was so different. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Lucinda, a free woman, requests reenslavement, 1813 ==<br />
Reading this document made me sad. I can only imagine the turmoil going through Lucinda, deciding to give up her freedom so that she could be with her husband. She must have loved him very much. But I wonder, Perhaps Lucinda did not only stay because of her husband. I mean, that was a big part of it, but she may also have been scared to leave the area that she lived in for so long. Her husband may have been the major factor, but maybe she just really did not want to go to Tennessee. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I thought this was a really interesting, and unique, document- I'm sure there must not be many like it. Lucinda, like Kristina stated, must have deeply loved her husband- so much so that she requests to be reenslaved even when she has gained her freedom. Why would she do this? Even if she was reenslaved, there was always the possibility that her husband might be sold off and she would be separated from him then. Lucinda, however, takes this risk, which I think shows remarkable bravery and courage, as well as loyalty and devotion to her husband. I wonder what her previous experiences were with enslavement- maybe under her "late" mistress, Mary Matthews, she was treated fairly well and therefore had no real perception of how violent slavery under a different master or perhaps on a different plantation could be. I wonder whether this knowledge would have influenced her decision in any way? -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
It was very incredible to read that a slave would willingly be put back into slavery after being freed just to be with her husband. I think this qualifies as proof that love can make you stupid. This situation is a clear example of the many ways that slave owners could use family to keep control over slaves. While separating families (or the threat of it) and laws preventing freed blacks from living in the state controls blacks, but it also seems like it could be a check on other slave owners. If slave owners who considered the possibility of freeing their slaves after their deaths see that some of the freed slaves go right back to being slaves again, they’d probably be less inclined to bother. Also, freed blacks willingly entering slavery again helped reinforce the idea of paternalism. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
This petition was incredibly interesting in the fact that Lucinda refused freedom to be able to stay with her husband. She was asking to be re-enslaved since the state did not allow emancipated slaves to stay within the state. I find this remarkable. I would’ve thought she would have gone North, find work in whatever area she could and then save up some money to buy his freedom. However, she asked to be bought by her husband’s owner. I feel like this would probably have, as Taylor also mentions, convince white slave masters that slaves needed a father figure in their idea of paternalism. –Megan M<br />
<br />
I thought this account was kind of inspiring and sad at the same time. This woman achieved what most slaves only dreamed about-freedom. Once she attained it, however, she did not want it. She did not want to be free without her husband. I think it shows that love is very powerful and was still very much a part of people's marriages even in the 19th Century and even for slaves. I thought this woman was brave and romantic. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
== Connecticut woman asks other free black women to sign anti-slavery petitions, 1839 ==<br />
I felt the persuasion utilized in this argument was very compelling. I would have felt guilty if I had been a free Black woman and had not acted. She uses everything that women are supposed to care about(taking care of their family) as a reason for other women to get involved. Her descriptions are also very vivid and provide a picture of the hardships of slave women and their children. How common and how effective were these types of addresses in getting women involved?--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Mary Still, black abolitionist, along with other Philadelphia free women, forms “Female Publication Society” to promote the moral uplift of free and slave African Americans, 1861 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mrs. Virginia Hayes Shepherd’s memories, 1937 ==<br />
I found Mrs. Hayes recollection of slavery to be on the mark and amusing. The story of her youth is important to understanding what a former slave family had to go through after the Civil War, but the short paragraphs on Diana stood out the most to me. Diana appeared to be cunning and knew how to outwit the white man, when slaves were thought to be "child-like" Diana outsmarted her master. She knew she could not run away from slavery, but she knew how to manipulate it to her advantage and this proves any slave-owners theory on slaves as false in my eyes. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
After reading Mrs. Hayes account, I feel like her experience as a slave was quite different from the typical slave experience. Hayes writes about her master, saying, "He never bothered to collect their [slaves] wages himself. Our master allowed his slaves so much freedom that we were called free niggers by slaves on other plantations." (MP P. 181) Mrs. Hayes knew she had a decently good life for being a slave but was very aware of the plights of nearby slaves and was sympathetic to their troubles. The things Mrs. Hayes said about Diana and how she was treated by her master probably describes many female slaves lives. I thought it was interesting how the mistress was sympathetic towards Diana, after she was assaulted. I would have expected the opposite; that the mistress would have just ignored the problem. It was almost as though the mistress and Diana shared a similar experience, both being abused by the master/husband, sexually for Diana and physically for the mistress. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Thelma Jennings, “Sexual Exploitation of African American Slave Women,” 1990 ==<br />
I agree with Thelma Jennings that African American slave women were sexually exploited. Reading the stories they told of the atrocities imposed by white slave owners was horrifying and at sometimes difficult to read. Jennings stated that the ideology of race played a key role and explained the view white slave owners. Though some slaves were treated better than others, I think it’s important to remember that when slave owners bought a slave they became your property and were looked at as capital. It was the idea of investing in your capital to produce more then they could make more money. African American slaves - particularly women which Jenning’s referred to, were considered as an item not as a person. Though it is twisted to think people are property, they did then, and it allowed white slave owners to take advantage of their slaves in any and every way they could. -Marsha<br />
<br />
Thelma Jennings writes the sad tale of women who are sexually exploited. They were forced to have sex with other slaves so that there would me more slaves. Many white men gave no consideration to women who were married and would force them to have sex with others despite this. This is disturbing and I imagine that the women who were subject to this sexual abuse have a wealth of bitterness. I could never live under these conditions and I have respect for the endurance of these women. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
When Thelma Jennings wrote that slave women would go so far as to induce miscarriages and practice abortion in order "deprive" their owners of what they most wanted (more slaves in order to increase their productivity and therefore their wealth and social standing), I was astonished. I can understand it being a form of passive resistance, and slave women perhaps wanting to assert some control over their lives in any way that they could, but I can't imagine being so resentful and bitter (perhaps that is not the best word, but I can't think of a better one right now....) that a woman would take the life of her child. Did she feel it was in the child's best interests- maybe to prevent him/her from suffering the way that she felt she was suffering? I'm not sure. That statement just totally blew me away- it made me realize how far some slave women were really willing to go in order to demonstrate, in their own way, their contempt and hatred of the situation they were in. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I noticed in one of the testimonies that a woman whose father was a white slaver owner and her mother a slave described her mother as being very light skinned and favored amongst the white. That seemed to be a pattern in the literature on the south that I have read that those who were light skinned were more likely to be exploited into having sexual relations with their masters. Would women like her and mulatto children have been treated differently by their fellow slaves? I wonder if they would have been resentful and bitter towards these women and children even though they were almost always the victims. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I thought it was really sad to read about the exploitation of black women and slaves. These women seemed to be the last ones on the totem pole. They were described as genderless. Not only were they forced to have sex with white men, but they were also forced at times to mate with black men to reproduce the type of offspring that the master wanted. I think it's despicable that after a woman got pregnant that she was forced to work in the fields or forced to do work in general and at the same time received physical abuse. I did like the ending of the essay, however, that even though these women received such treatment they had faith that the future would be different. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
This article sheds light on the practice of sexual abuse of a slave by their owner. I found it surprising that, according to one line of questioning, "Twenty-two [interviewees'] ... fathers were white men" (Jennings, 186) and in another line of questioning, "Thirty-six of the interviewees ... noted that the master himself was guilty of interracial sex" (Jennings, 187). These interviews show that, not only sexual abuse, but slave breeding was a visible component to the institution of slavery. This article makes me wonder how the wives of slaveholders felt about their husbands extramarital affairs, since they ''must'' have been aware it was happening. Did they support their husbands actions from either a financial or social standpoint? -Seth Mintzer</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_9_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 9 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-22T13:45:53Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Eliza Ann Mulford, “Rules of the School,” 1814 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== '''General Questions''' ==<br />
<br><br />
<br><br />
<br><br />
<br><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
---------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 7 '''<br />
<br />
== Emma Willard, “Matrimonial Risks,” 1815 ==<br />
<br />
I think Emma is funny. I also find it very endearing that she was very concerned for her sister's matrimonial well-being. This highlights the new role of women being the nurturing, caring, raising type. Even as the old sister, she takes on the role of looking out for her younger sister. ''Also, it definitely shows the changing view in women's minds that they don't necessarily have to be married. I enjoy how she herself ended up being a cougar who enters a doomed marriage.'' - Christine<br />
<br />
'''I agree with Christine, I think this highlights a new role of women for the reasons Christine listed. I also think it shows how women perceived men at that time. I know that Emma had a bad experience with her husband who lost all of their money, so she had reason to be skeptical, but the stereotypes of men are very clear. The worries of Emma include, "the possibility of your lover's seeing some object that he will consider more interesting than you," and "his business will occupy his attention". These are very real fears of women at that time.''' --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
'''It's amazing how once women had more of a choice of who they were going to marry, how hesitant and cautious they became.''' From this essay, '''it also seems that maybe it was a good thing that they were.''' Emma married and some years later her husband's finances collapsed. When her younger sister had a suitor, she warned her to proceed with caution. Ironically, the advice she gave to her sister could have benefited her when a gold digger took all her money. Poor Emma. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I feel like Emma Willard's letter to her sister is paradoxical to the view of marriage a lot of women had during that time. This was a time when women were marrying for love and looking for romance in a relationship rather than status, etc. For such a time when women were finally able to have a choice in whom they married, Emma Willard was extremely pessimistic about her sister's marriage. '''She may have just been trying to be honest with her sister about what would happen in her marriage, but I feel like she completely disregarded the romanticized view of marriage.''' She was more realistically aware of the possibilities of "your lover's seeing some object that he will consider more interesting than you"(in regards to her sister's husband) (P. 144). While she may have been harsh in showing her sister the realities of marriage, Emma was probably only trying to protect her sister from her own naivety and reverie. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Caroline Gilman, “The Deferential Wife,” 1838 ==<br />
<br />
'''I found Gilman's story to be tragic. In a time when marriage was romanticized and a young women felt leaving her "paternal home" was not something to be dread; the story of Gilman's husband losing all of the romance from the beginning of their marriage is heart-wrenching.''' I also found that while strides had been made in married life, women such as Gilman, still bit their tongue instead of expressing an annoyance with their husband. The difference between the sexes is made apparent but I did enjoy Gilman stating she wanted marriage to remain romanticized. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
'''I feel like a lot of these expectations on women persisted well into the twentieth century. To some extent, wasn't this the sentiment (or the challenging of this sentiment) that was the basis for a lot of the marital humor that appeared on shows like I Love Lucy? I think that the negotiation of a "companionate marriage," or maybe more specifically, the meaning of marriage in general, continues in a lot of ways to today. ''' -erin b<br />
<br />
I agree with Erin. I felt there were a lot of modern connections in this article. I think Caroline's idea that a woman must defer in a relationship to the man's way of doing things could also be seen in any modern issue of Cosmo. -Allison Luthern <br />
<br />
I also agree with you guys. This story definitely has a connection to modern times. I know a woman, who's in her sixties, and she still barely even breathes without asking her husband. Anytime one of the kids would misbehave, there was always the threat of "I'm telling your dad". Like she was incapable of punishing them herself. I could definitely tell a difference between this story and most of the other writings that we have read. It's obvious this woman is a professional writer instead of a woman simply writing in her journal. She builds up her story and makes it seem so dramatic. I agree with LeAnn, Gilman annoyed me too a little. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
'''Caroline Gilman annoyed me. She basically says when men offend their wife they are surprised by it and yet she is saying she keeps her mouth shut when he did something to offend her.''' How is he to know that his wife was offended if she does not tell him? Then she says that when he does something she does not like she tells him calmly and if unreformed she just accepts it. She gives contrary information. I guess I just do not like it when women accept their lot and move on. I am so glad I am not her. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Catharine Beecher, “System and Order,” 1841 ==<br />
<br />
'''Were these books intended for women who had not gone to the womens academies at the time? or did Beecher just have a different view on how/when house work should be done which conflicted with what was taught at the schools?''' I found it interesting that unlike many previous articles we've read, the subject of equality is disregarded as a frivolous and impossible question to answer and "there would be no possible advantage in the decision." isnt this a subtle way of saying that men and women should be equal? -Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
'''''How did this get printed annually for 15 years? It seems alot like common sense so have a washing day for example. Or to have a trunk with things labeled in there for sewing.''''' The last paragraph also seemed like a joke to me, "She can have regular periods for reading, walking, visiting..." it's as if Beecher is giving them permission to do these things as if they needed it. -Megan M.<br />
<br />
I agree with Megan. I couldn't believe that this was printed annually for 15 years. But then again, I guess it makes sense. Honestly, what else would the women at this time read about? Especially during the time of the cult of domesticity. Women were probably interested in ways to be a better wife and homemaker. A lot of the stuff in this does seem like common sense, or at least things they probably already know. I found it interesting when Beecher said "The proper education of a man decides the welfare of an individual; but educate a woman and the interests of the whole family are secured". I think it's important to recognize that even though many of these women weren't doing amazing things, many worked hard to care for their families. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Catharine Sedgwick, “First to None,” 1828 ==<br />
<br />
When reading First to None I couldn’t help but feel sorry for Catharine Sedgwick. She spent her life surrounded by her friends and her family who she knew loved, admired, and respected her but she never felt like she was a first priority. '''She states, “I would not advise anyone to remain unmarried, for my experience has been a singularly happy one”. I think it is interesting that such a great writer of stories about the home and family had such a contradiction in her own life. Sedgwick was a successful author with close friends and family, and she was unhappy with her decision to remain unmarried.''' I can only imagine how the average women would handle a single existence in a society that was so focused on the family. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
As we discussed in class, '''there was an increase in unmarried ladies along the eastern seaboard, part of which was attributed to there being less men. In the case of Catharine Sedgwick, we see another part of that is a result of the idealization of marriage.''' Catharine bemoans her unmarried status, attributing it to her high standards and unwillingness to accept mediocre offers. Of course, Catharine could afford not to settle, as she had plenty of successful brothers who were willing to take care of her, at least early on. '''To what extent did the idealization of marriage impact how lower class women chose their husbands?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
== Sarah Connell Ayer, “The Widowed State,” 1832-33 ==<br />
<br />
'''Here we see not only the dependence of women economically, at the time, on men but in her diary entries we also see the signs of the level of romantic love that was popular at this time.''' She appears to have a very close nit family, which we can see in her letters to and from her children. maybe i missed something, but why was there a decrease in remarriage that was previously more prevalent? did they think that marriage absolutely had to be a romantic engagement and that the idea of a practical marriage was completely gone? - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I thought that this piece was really depressing. First, she looses four children, then her husband, and not long after both her and her youngest daughter die. But, it was interesting to see through her entries how much she loved and missed her husband. It is a sign of the times that she missed her husband because of the love they shared between them. '''One question though: what were the meetings that she wrote about? Is it a code for church?''' -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
Widowhood in the 19th century has several similarities to widowhood in earlier centuries. Women were dependent on their husbands, and without them they could lose their households and be left to rely on distant relatives for support. '''In the case of Sarah Connell Ayer, this state and the grief over her husband left her miserable and angst-ridden (not exactly prime material for remarriage!). I’m left wondering what effects companionate marriage had on widowhood for both men and women. If women and men looked for partners on the basis of love and affection, did the loss of those partners create even more grief?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I agree with Kristina that one cannot feel sorry for Sarah Ayer. Sarah mentions that "many years had elapsed" since she saw her family, and when she traveled to see them she "knew none of the passengers on board" (Woloch, 158); The distant relationship from her parents and siblings and her unfamiliarity with those who travel show the restrictions placed on a woman dedicated to her role in the domestic sphere. Also, '''in the spring after her husband's death, she spends a great deal of time (almost every entry in April) socializing with others in her community. This shows that the community provided support for her and, even with the loss of most of her immediate family, Sarah was not alone. ''' -Seth Mintzer <br />
<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 8 – School and Mill'''<br />
<br />
== Eliza Ann Mulford, “Rules of the School,” 1814 ==<br />
<br />
'''I enjoy the Rules for the School. They are exactly how I'd expect to to be at this time: focused on appearance, courteous sportment, industrious behavior, pious routines, and orderly habits. They are raising ladies that will be raising their own children and tending to their husbands and must be their educations must be crafted in a certain way. However, I would like to know what were rules at male schools of the time.''' - Christine<br />
<br />
I also thought that this was a really interesting piece. But, '''I wonder why Mulford copied the rules in the first place?''' Also, I thought it was very interesting that on the 5th rule it is said that if you missed church that you better have a very good excuse "at the day of Judgement." Does that mean that when they died they had better have a good excuse to god why they didn't make it to church that day? It seems like such a scary way of saying "don't skip church." And lastly, I just wanted to point out something that made me laugh: under the questions part, it is mostly just going back and asking if you followed all the rules, then at the very end it says, "'''have you eaten any green fruit during the week."''' I just found that really random and out of place. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
The student checklist at the end of Mulford's notebook entry depicts multiple components to an education that strengthen more than just one's mind. The expectations for students to have "combed hair ... cleaned teeth ... [and] eaten green fruit" and for students to have "attended public worship ... [and] prayed to that God" emphasizes strengthening one's body and soul, respectively, as well (Woloch, 164). '''These rules follow the guidelines that literature promoting female education, such as Benjamin Rush's Thoughts on Female Education, had set forth during the Revolution.''' The '''other aspect of Eliza's notebook I found interesting was that the religious structure taught at school was probably already practiced within the students' homes. Why was it necessary for the schools to reiterate behaviors that parents had already instilled?''' - Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
I thought it was funny that the 5th rule says if you missed church you better have a good excuse on Judgement day, like God would completely disown them if they missed a single day. I also found it to be interesting that basically every rule for this school was related to religion. Most of the questions were also about something religious. Except the green fruit one. That seemed a little random to me. The majority of these rules are rules that I would expect from a girls' school in NE. A lot of them seemed more like morals than rules. Especially "do unto others, as you would they should do unto you". -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Emma Willard, “A Rationale for Female Education,” 1819 ==<br />
'''I think this work is interesting because Emma Willard's goal was to educate women on the same subjects that were taught at men's colleges. She was profound in using such words as national prosperity, national and unparalleled glory, a nation wise, and to defend her liberties, to persuade members of the legislature. ''' I think she meant that it was essential to educate women in a way to maintain these liberties. I think when she refered to the shackles that the revolution removed from the nation she also compared the shackles to that on women. She made it evident that it was important to focus on educating women on moral and intellectual importance than frivolous things like dress and fashion. I think she thought women had an obligation to their children, family, and themselves and she took it very seriously - so should those determining education of women. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
== Miss Burnham’s Report, “A Choctaw Mission School,” 1824 ==<br />
'''As I was reading Miss Burnam's Report, I kept thinking why would the parents of the Native American children bring them to this school? ''' Choctaws were more civilized into American cultures than before but I don't think enough to want to send their children off with strangers that taught a different way of life. I think those parents (in order to survive) knew this was the only way to protect their children and to merge them into American society in a peaceful way. In Miss Burnam's report, she mentioned difficulties with some of the children. They would get emotional because they felt their brother or sister was not getting the same treatment as them. The children were compassionate and concerned for their families. Learning about God gave them a sense of being a sinner and being forgiven, and this made them feel guilty because in the eyes of what they were being taught, it meant their families were sinners. One of the girls said her family was all bad and another girl said her brother was stupid and she worried about him. I think these children were torn by what they learned as young children with their families and what was new and unknown. When your young it sometimes makes it easier to adapt. I think some of these girls adapted well, loved their teachers and attached themselves to them because that did not have their parents around. The teacher became more like a parent to them. - Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
<br />
'''After reading this report, I compared Native Americans leaving their children at the school to parents leaving their children at college. In both cases it is hard for child and parent, and for a first time generation college student it is even more of an eye opener, much like the Native American children. They were unfamiliar with customs, scared to leave parents, felt they had different treatment than other family memebers, and turned to teachers (college case professors) for guidance and someone to rely on when away from home.''' I agree with Marsha the children were torn and unsure how to react in a new place with strangers. With time I feel the girls adjusted well and were able to learn and feel comfortable with their surroundings. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
<br />
As Marsha mentioned above, the Choctaw kids would get very emotional when their parents would leave. Why was this so much more obvious than with white kids? Also like Marsha, I'm a little confused about why parents of a different faith and culture would be so eager to leave their kids with the missionaries. The only things I can think is that the Choctaws could have been hurting for money or resources, or else, exactly as it appears, the parents were simply hoping a christian education would lead to a more prosperous life in the new nation. -erin b<br />
<br />
== Letters from Teachers, “Reports on Western Schools,” 1847 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Rules of the Mill from Lowell and Lancaster, 1820-1840 ==<br />
'''Although the ability to seek work in a new town, independent of family could be seen as an advancement for young women of the early nineteenth-century, I thought the rules of the Lowell textile mills seemed to echo our old friend patriarchy.''' These female workers were clearly at the bottom of the power hierarchy beneath the factory management, overseer, and the boarding house keepers. They appeared to have very little freedom of movement or actions. '''I was curious if these rules would have been different if the Lowell factories had a male workforce.''' -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I found the phrasing for some of the rules a bit funny like "Each one to enter the house without unnecessary noise or confusion..." I also thought it interesting the sort of seniority in the rules for the women. Those that worked their longest sat at the head of the table and slept in the North room. Women who were newer would sit farther down the table, based on how long they'd been there and sleep in the South Chamber. '''Just wondering how old would some of the most senior women in these places be?''' -Megan M.<br />
<br />
== Harriet Farley, “A Letter from Lowell,” 1844 ==<br />
I found it interesting that Harriet Farley, who was a minister's daughter, was writing a fictional letter that made the mill look like a happy place to work. '''The timing of the letter shows the way the mill owners utilized the journal for their own benefit--perhaps to counteract the female labor reform movement. It was interesting that she asked in the letter if anyone was really content. So, it's not just the work at the mill that could be making someone discontent, but that no one is content no matter where they are or what kind of work they are doing.''' '''''Although the journal certainly could be considered as a "creative" outlet for the workers, how many people outside of the mill read it and how many were aware that the mill owner's owned and controlled the editorial policy?'''''--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== The Voice of Industry, “A Spirit of Protest,” 1846 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 9 – Western Frontiers'''<br />
<br />
<br />
== Amelia Stewart Knight, “Crossing the Plains,” 1853 == <br />
<br />
'''My favorite part about this entry was when she throws in at the end "my eighth child was born" Did I miss something???''' She doesn't mention being pregnant throughout the entire thing (as far as I could tell)Just one entry of being sick all night. But then all of a sudden she is giving birth and crossing the columbia river on a canoe! As if the oregon trail wasn't difficult enough she was pregnant and already had seven children? Oh my goodness I am horrified for her.-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Mary Ballou, “A Woman’s View of the Gold Rush,” 1852 ==<br />
<br />
'''I loved this letter to Selden. It was absolutly fascinating. I cannot believe she has a kitchen with no doors so the animals just walk in. I laughed when she said a rat jumped into bed with her.''' I think she is a very courageous woman to live the way she does. She is so hardworking I am amazed at the amount of activity she does in a day. I would be completely exhausted. I felt bad for her when she said that she was homesick. She talked to another woman who said she was so homesick she could die and I can image life was 20 times harder in California then it was in the more civilized east coast. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
While reading this I couldn't help but wonder what her husband was doing while she was busy being a peace maker, cook, laundress, seamstress etc. '''What were the chances of her husband being successful in his venture? Could he have been making money off the gold rush? It seemed to me that while the men were wildly seeking gold the women were actually making a living in the various different business ventures that they began.''' I was amazed at the amount of responsibility she had in the community, I wonder what kind of life she lead back home and if it had any resemblance to her lifestyle in california. I can't imagine that hogs would have been running through her kitchen though! Why did she leave though? Was it just meant to be a short venture to get more money? Her letter does show that women who lived in less settled communities on the frontier had more opportunities then there Eastern counterparts might have, however they lead very difficult lives. So who had it better?-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Petitions of the Cherokee Women’s Council on Removal, 1817, 1818 ==<br />
The Cherokee women who composed this address spoke of the great injustice of being forced to move beyond the Mississippi. These women said that they have done what white Americans had wanted: many converted to Christianity, they farmed, and educated their children, sometimes sending them to missionary schools. '''However, I think these women’s action of addressing the male leaders about a political issue is more reminiscent of Native American women’s traditional gender roles before contact.''' -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
'''When reading this document I wondered who the intended audience of this petition was.''' The first petition mentions their "duty as mothers" in the first paragraph and the Cherokees children are mentioned constantly throughout both. '''Could they be appealing more towards women, who would better understand their feelings of raising children, than towards men?''' In the last paragraph of the second petition the council describes the assimilated white men who become their enemies partly by not caring about their wives and their children. -John Rowley<br />
<br />
This petition reveals some interesting things about women in the early 1800s; more specifically, Indian women. These women were able to go before their chiefs or "government" to protest the U.S. government's taking of their land. The women made their case to the chiefs and elders of the tribe, evoking great emotion to argue their position. The way the women went to the chiefs, alone, shows that women's privileges within the tribe were either the same or had increased in some capacity from the 1600s. What is even more interesting is how the women were able to persuade the tribe to keep their land. '''It shows the distinctiveness between Indian women and white women. I feel that if a white women had to make a petition to their government, it would be overlooked.''' But here, within the tribe, the women proved themselves to have power and an opinion within the tribe. Maybe this petition could have been used as an example, to encourage white women to speak up and to encourage governments to be more encouraging of women's ideas and opinions. ----- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Sarah Winnemucca, “Life Among the Paiutes,” 1883 ==<br />
<br />
I think, personally, this may be the most interesting article I have read yet. This memoir has an obvious purpose as it continually asserts Piute morality and equality to White Americans in deliberately showing Piute female virtue, lack of war-dances, productivity, and honor. '''But it also has an obvious audience and secondary purpose as it educates (White Americans) about Piute life, such as female puberty rites, marriage rules, and council regulations. Because it has said audience, it is very enlightening and describes topics otherwise we might not have prior knowledge of, nor have access to, such as the ministration rites. I think this is a very valuable source for both women and Piute studies and can tell us about many social, political, and gender ideas that the Piute held during the 1800s.''' – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== A Sioux Tale, “A Woman Kills Her Daughter” ==<br />
<br />
This was the most amusing thing to read. I love reading Native American tales because you can learn about their cultures and ways of thinking/lives and there always seems to be some sort of lesson. The mother-in-law got what was coming disappearing in the abyss. -Christine<br />
<br />
<br />
I really liked this tale. It was crazy but funny. I couldn't believe the mother thought she could pretend to be the daughter; like the husband and brother wouldn't know it was her and not the daughter. I wonder if this ever really happened in a Native American tribe? I'm sure she didn't actually turn into a mermaid or the mother fall into the abyss but it seems like something that could be probable. The tale also seems to teach reinforce the lesson "blood is thicker than water." People in today's society could benefit from reading this. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Moral of story: If you’re going to be a cougar, don’t go after your son-in-law! No, but really, this was a very interesting story and it had several important points about Sioux cultural ideas that we can learn about with a little more research, in addition to describing gender rules and familial obligations. ''' First of all is the mother-in-law avoidance policy. I know the Navajo have such a rule of mother-in-law avoidance out of respect and honor to the mother of the wife, and head matriarch, but I was not familiar with Sioux mother-in-law avoidance and would be interesting to study further to see if this is similar or different to the Navajo policy and its purpose. The second idea is the creation of a mermaid figure of the woman / half fish creature. I am not sure what this means / represents within Sioux culture, but again I think this would be a very interesting research topic. As an Anthropology major, I would love to unpack this tale for its symbolic and cultural significance, but I think in general, this story has a lot to tell us about Sioux pastimes (swimming / swinging - for children only?), gender roles (birthing, nursing and preparing food), and family interaction (mother-in-law avoidance) that was thought important enough to be included in this story. –Elyse Lawrence</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_9_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 9 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-22T13:38:34Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Catharine Beecher, “System and Order,” 1841 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== '''General Questions''' ==<br />
<br><br />
<br><br />
<br><br />
<br><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
---------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 7 '''<br />
<br />
== Emma Willard, “Matrimonial Risks,” 1815 ==<br />
<br />
I think Emma is funny. I also find it very endearing that she was very concerned for her sister's matrimonial well-being. This highlights the new role of women being the nurturing, caring, raising type. Even as the old sister, she takes on the role of looking out for her younger sister. ''Also, it definitely shows the changing view in women's minds that they don't necessarily have to be married. I enjoy how she herself ended up being a cougar who enters a doomed marriage.'' - Christine<br />
<br />
'''I agree with Christine, I think this highlights a new role of women for the reasons Christine listed. I also think it shows how women perceived men at that time. I know that Emma had a bad experience with her husband who lost all of their money, so she had reason to be skeptical, but the stereotypes of men are very clear. The worries of Emma include, "the possibility of your lover's seeing some object that he will consider more interesting than you," and "his business will occupy his attention". These are very real fears of women at that time.''' --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
'''It's amazing how once women had more of a choice of who they were going to marry, how hesitant and cautious they became.''' From this essay, '''it also seems that maybe it was a good thing that they were.''' Emma married and some years later her husband's finances collapsed. When her younger sister had a suitor, she warned her to proceed with caution. Ironically, the advice she gave to her sister could have benefited her when a gold digger took all her money. Poor Emma. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I feel like Emma Willard's letter to her sister is paradoxical to the view of marriage a lot of women had during that time. This was a time when women were marrying for love and looking for romance in a relationship rather than status, etc. For such a time when women were finally able to have a choice in whom they married, Emma Willard was extremely pessimistic about her sister's marriage. '''She may have just been trying to be honest with her sister about what would happen in her marriage, but I feel like she completely disregarded the romanticized view of marriage.''' She was more realistically aware of the possibilities of "your lover's seeing some object that he will consider more interesting than you"(in regards to her sister's husband) (P. 144). While she may have been harsh in showing her sister the realities of marriage, Emma was probably only trying to protect her sister from her own naivety and reverie. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Caroline Gilman, “The Deferential Wife,” 1838 ==<br />
<br />
'''I found Gilman's story to be tragic. In a time when marriage was romanticized and a young women felt leaving her "paternal home" was not something to be dread; the story of Gilman's husband losing all of the romance from the beginning of their marriage is heart-wrenching.''' I also found that while strides had been made in married life, women such as Gilman, still bit their tongue instead of expressing an annoyance with their husband. The difference between the sexes is made apparent but I did enjoy Gilman stating she wanted marriage to remain romanticized. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
'''I feel like a lot of these expectations on women persisted well into the twentieth century. To some extent, wasn't this the sentiment (or the challenging of this sentiment) that was the basis for a lot of the marital humor that appeared on shows like I Love Lucy? I think that the negotiation of a "companionate marriage," or maybe more specifically, the meaning of marriage in general, continues in a lot of ways to today. ''' -erin b<br />
<br />
I agree with Erin. I felt there were a lot of modern connections in this article. I think Caroline's idea that a woman must defer in a relationship to the man's way of doing things could also be seen in any modern issue of Cosmo. -Allison Luthern <br />
<br />
I also agree with you guys. This story definitely has a connection to modern times. I know a woman, who's in her sixties, and she still barely even breathes without asking her husband. Anytime one of the kids would misbehave, there was always the threat of "I'm telling your dad". Like she was incapable of punishing them herself. I could definitely tell a difference between this story and most of the other writings that we have read. It's obvious this woman is a professional writer instead of a woman simply writing in her journal. She builds up her story and makes it seem so dramatic. I agree with LeAnn, Gilman annoyed me too a little. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
'''Caroline Gilman annoyed me. She basically says when men offend their wife they are surprised by it and yet she is saying she keeps her mouth shut when he did something to offend her.''' How is he to know that his wife was offended if she does not tell him? Then she says that when he does something she does not like she tells him calmly and if unreformed she just accepts it. She gives contrary information. I guess I just do not like it when women accept their lot and move on. I am so glad I am not her. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Catharine Beecher, “System and Order,” 1841 ==<br />
<br />
'''Were these books intended for women who had not gone to the womens academies at the time? or did Beecher just have a different view on how/when house work should be done which conflicted with what was taught at the schools?''' I found it interesting that unlike many previous articles we've read, the subject of equality is disregarded as a frivolous and impossible question to answer and "there would be no possible advantage in the decision." isnt this a subtle way of saying that men and women should be equal? -Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
'''''How did this get printed annually for 15 years? It seems alot like common sense so have a washing day for example. Or to have a trunk with things labeled in there for sewing.''''' The last paragraph also seemed like a joke to me, "She can have regular periods for reading, walking, visiting..." it's as if Beecher is giving them permission to do these things as if they needed it. -Megan M.<br />
<br />
I agree with Megan. I couldn't believe that this was printed annually for 15 years. But then again, I guess it makes sense. Honestly, what else would the women at this time read about? Especially during the time of the cult of domesticity. Women were probably interested in ways to be a better wife and homemaker. A lot of the stuff in this does seem like common sense, or at least things they probably already know. I found it interesting when Beecher said "The proper education of a man decides the welfare of an individual; but educate a woman and the interests of the whole family are secured". I think it's important to recognize that even though many of these women weren't doing amazing things, many worked hard to care for their families. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Catharine Sedgwick, “First to None,” 1828 ==<br />
<br />
When reading First to None I couldn’t help but feel sorry for Catharine Sedgwick. She spent her life surrounded by her friends and her family who she knew loved, admired, and respected her but she never felt like she was a first priority. '''She states, “I would not advise anyone to remain unmarried, for my experience has been a singularly happy one”. I think it is interesting that such a great writer of stories about the home and family had such a contradiction in her own life. Sedgwick was a successful author with close friends and family, and she was unhappy with her decision to remain unmarried.''' I can only imagine how the average women would handle a single existence in a society that was so focused on the family. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
As we discussed in class, '''there was an increase in unmarried ladies along the eastern seaboard, part of which was attributed to there being less men. In the case of Catharine Sedgwick, we see another part of that is a result of the idealization of marriage.''' Catharine bemoans her unmarried status, attributing it to her high standards and unwillingness to accept mediocre offers. Of course, Catharine could afford not to settle, as she had plenty of successful brothers who were willing to take care of her, at least early on. '''To what extent did the idealization of marriage impact how lower class women chose their husbands?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
== Sarah Connell Ayer, “The Widowed State,” 1832-33 ==<br />
<br />
'''Here we see not only the dependence of women economically, at the time, on men but in her diary entries we also see the signs of the level of romantic love that was popular at this time.''' She appears to have a very close nit family, which we can see in her letters to and from her children. maybe i missed something, but why was there a decrease in remarriage that was previously more prevalent? did they think that marriage absolutely had to be a romantic engagement and that the idea of a practical marriage was completely gone? - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I thought that this piece was really depressing. First, she looses four children, then her husband, and not long after both her and her youngest daughter die. But, it was interesting to see through her entries how much she loved and missed her husband. It is a sign of the times that she missed her husband because of the love they shared between them. '''One question though: what were the meetings that she wrote about? Is it a code for church?''' -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
Widowhood in the 19th century has several similarities to widowhood in earlier centuries. Women were dependent on their husbands, and without them they could lose their households and be left to rely on distant relatives for support. '''In the case of Sarah Connell Ayer, this state and the grief over her husband left her miserable and angst-ridden (not exactly prime material for remarriage!). I’m left wondering what effects companionate marriage had on widowhood for both men and women. If women and men looked for partners on the basis of love and affection, did the loss of those partners create even more grief?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I agree with Kristina that one cannot feel sorry for Sarah Ayer. Sarah mentions that "many years had elapsed" since she saw her family, and when she traveled to see them she "knew none of the passengers on board" (Woloch, 158); The distant relationship from her parents and siblings and her unfamiliarity with those who travel show the restrictions placed on a woman dedicated to her role in the domestic sphere. Also, '''in the spring after her husband's death, she spends a great deal of time (almost every entry in April) socializing with others in her community. This shows that the community provided support for her and, even with the loss of most of her immediate family, Sarah was not alone. ''' -Seth Mintzer <br />
<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 8 – School and Mill'''<br />
<br />
== Eliza Ann Mulford, “Rules of the School,” 1814 ==<br />
<br />
'''I enjoy the Rules for the School. They are exactly how I'd expect to to be at this time: focused on appearance, courteous sportment, industrious behavior, pious routines, and orderly habits. They are raising ladies that will be raising their own children and tending to their husbands and must be their educations must be crafted in a certain way. However, I would like to know what were rules at male schools of the time.''' - Christine<br />
<br />
I also thought that this was a really interesting piece. But, '''I wonder why Mulford copied the rules in the first place?''' Also, I thought it was very interesting that on the 5th rule it is said that if you missed church that you better have a very good excuse "at the day of Judgement." Does that mean that when they died they had better have a good excuse to god why they didn't make it to church that day? It seems like such a scary way of saying "don't skip church." And lastly, I just wanted to point out something that made me laugh: under the questions part, it is mostly just going back and asking if you followed all the rules, then at the very end it says, "'''have you eaten any green fruit during the week."''' I just found that really random and out of place. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
The student checklist at the end of Mulford's notebook entry depicts multiple components to an education that strengthen more than just one's mind. The expectations for students to have "combed hair ... cleaned teeth ... [and] eaten green fruit" and for students to have "attended public worship ... [and] prayed to that God" emphasizes strengthening one's body and soul, respectively, as well (Woloch, 164). '''These rules follow the guidelines that literature promoting female education, such as Benjamin Rush's Thoughts on Female Education, had set forth during the Revolution.''' The '''other aspect of Eliza's notebook I found interesting was that the religious structure taught at school was probably already practiced within the students' homes. Why was it necessary for the schools to reiterate behaviors that parents had already instilled?''' - Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Emma Willard, “A Rationale for Female Education,” 1819 ==<br />
'''I think this work is interesting because Emma Willard's goal was to educate women on the same subjects that were taught at men's colleges. She was profound in using such words as national prosperity, national and unparalleled glory, a nation wise, and to defend her liberties, to persuade members of the legislature. ''' I think she meant that it was essential to educate women in a way to maintain these liberties. I think when she refered to the shackles that the revolution removed from the nation she also compared the shackles to that on women. She made it evident that it was important to focus on educating women on moral and intellectual importance than frivolous things like dress and fashion. I think she thought women had an obligation to their children, family, and themselves and she took it very seriously - so should those determining education of women. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
== Miss Burnham’s Report, “A Choctaw Mission School,” 1824 ==<br />
'''As I was reading Miss Burnam's Report, I kept thinking why would the parents of the Native American children bring them to this school? ''' Choctaws were more civilized into American cultures than before but I don't think enough to want to send their children off with strangers that taught a different way of life. I think those parents (in order to survive) knew this was the only way to protect their children and to merge them into American society in a peaceful way. In Miss Burnam's report, she mentioned difficulties with some of the children. They would get emotional because they felt their brother or sister was not getting the same treatment as them. The children were compassionate and concerned for their families. Learning about God gave them a sense of being a sinner and being forgiven, and this made them feel guilty because in the eyes of what they were being taught, it meant their families were sinners. One of the girls said her family was all bad and another girl said her brother was stupid and she worried about him. I think these children were torn by what they learned as young children with their families and what was new and unknown. When your young it sometimes makes it easier to adapt. I think some of these girls adapted well, loved their teachers and attached themselves to them because that did not have their parents around. The teacher became more like a parent to them. - Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
<br />
'''After reading this report, I compared Native Americans leaving their children at the school to parents leaving their children at college. In both cases it is hard for child and parent, and for a first time generation college student it is even more of an eye opener, much like the Native American children. They were unfamiliar with customs, scared to leave parents, felt they had different treatment than other family memebers, and turned to teachers (college case professors) for guidance and someone to rely on when away from home.''' I agree with Marsha the children were torn and unsure how to react in a new place with strangers. With time I feel the girls adjusted well and were able to learn and feel comfortable with their surroundings. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
<br />
As Marsha mentioned above, the Choctaw kids would get very emotional when their parents would leave. Why was this so much more obvious than with white kids? Also like Marsha, I'm a little confused about why parents of a different faith and culture would be so eager to leave their kids with the missionaries. The only things I can think is that the Choctaws could have been hurting for money or resources, or else, exactly as it appears, the parents were simply hoping a christian education would lead to a more prosperous life in the new nation. -erin b<br />
<br />
== Letters from Teachers, “Reports on Western Schools,” 1847 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Rules of the Mill from Lowell and Lancaster, 1820-1840 ==<br />
'''Although the ability to seek work in a new town, independent of family could be seen as an advancement for young women of the early nineteenth-century, I thought the rules of the Lowell textile mills seemed to echo our old friend patriarchy.''' These female workers were clearly at the bottom of the power hierarchy beneath the factory management, overseer, and the boarding house keepers. They appeared to have very little freedom of movement or actions. '''I was curious if these rules would have been different if the Lowell factories had a male workforce.''' -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I found the phrasing for some of the rules a bit funny like "Each one to enter the house without unnecessary noise or confusion..." I also thought it interesting the sort of seniority in the rules for the women. Those that worked their longest sat at the head of the table and slept in the North room. Women who were newer would sit farther down the table, based on how long they'd been there and sleep in the South Chamber. '''Just wondering how old would some of the most senior women in these places be?''' -Megan M.<br />
<br />
== Harriet Farley, “A Letter from Lowell,” 1844 ==<br />
I found it interesting that Harriet Farley, who was a minister's daughter, was writing a fictional letter that made the mill look like a happy place to work. '''The timing of the letter shows the way the mill owners utilized the journal for their own benefit--perhaps to counteract the female labor reform movement. It was interesting that she asked in the letter if anyone was really content. So, it's not just the work at the mill that could be making someone discontent, but that no one is content no matter where they are or what kind of work they are doing.''' '''''Although the journal certainly could be considered as a "creative" outlet for the workers, how many people outside of the mill read it and how many were aware that the mill owner's owned and controlled the editorial policy?'''''--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== The Voice of Industry, “A Spirit of Protest,” 1846 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 9 – Western Frontiers'''<br />
<br />
<br />
== Amelia Stewart Knight, “Crossing the Plains,” 1853 == <br />
<br />
'''My favorite part about this entry was when she throws in at the end "my eighth child was born" Did I miss something???''' She doesn't mention being pregnant throughout the entire thing (as far as I could tell)Just one entry of being sick all night. But then all of a sudden she is giving birth and crossing the columbia river on a canoe! As if the oregon trail wasn't difficult enough she was pregnant and already had seven children? Oh my goodness I am horrified for her.-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Mary Ballou, “A Woman’s View of the Gold Rush,” 1852 ==<br />
<br />
'''I loved this letter to Selden. It was absolutly fascinating. I cannot believe she has a kitchen with no doors so the animals just walk in. I laughed when she said a rat jumped into bed with her.''' I think she is a very courageous woman to live the way she does. She is so hardworking I am amazed at the amount of activity she does in a day. I would be completely exhausted. I felt bad for her when she said that she was homesick. She talked to another woman who said she was so homesick she could die and I can image life was 20 times harder in California then it was in the more civilized east coast. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
While reading this I couldn't help but wonder what her husband was doing while she was busy being a peace maker, cook, laundress, seamstress etc. '''What were the chances of her husband being successful in his venture? Could he have been making money off the gold rush? It seemed to me that while the men were wildly seeking gold the women were actually making a living in the various different business ventures that they began.''' I was amazed at the amount of responsibility she had in the community, I wonder what kind of life she lead back home and if it had any resemblance to her lifestyle in california. I can't imagine that hogs would have been running through her kitchen though! Why did she leave though? Was it just meant to be a short venture to get more money? Her letter does show that women who lived in less settled communities on the frontier had more opportunities then there Eastern counterparts might have, however they lead very difficult lives. So who had it better?-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Petitions of the Cherokee Women’s Council on Removal, 1817, 1818 ==<br />
The Cherokee women who composed this address spoke of the great injustice of being forced to move beyond the Mississippi. These women said that they have done what white Americans had wanted: many converted to Christianity, they farmed, and educated their children, sometimes sending them to missionary schools. '''However, I think these women’s action of addressing the male leaders about a political issue is more reminiscent of Native American women’s traditional gender roles before contact.''' -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
'''When reading this document I wondered who the intended audience of this petition was.''' The first petition mentions their "duty as mothers" in the first paragraph and the Cherokees children are mentioned constantly throughout both. '''Could they be appealing more towards women, who would better understand their feelings of raising children, than towards men?''' In the last paragraph of the second petition the council describes the assimilated white men who become their enemies partly by not caring about their wives and their children. -John Rowley<br />
<br />
This petition reveals some interesting things about women in the early 1800s; more specifically, Indian women. These women were able to go before their chiefs or "government" to protest the U.S. government's taking of their land. The women made their case to the chiefs and elders of the tribe, evoking great emotion to argue their position. The way the women went to the chiefs, alone, shows that women's privileges within the tribe were either the same or had increased in some capacity from the 1600s. What is even more interesting is how the women were able to persuade the tribe to keep their land. '''It shows the distinctiveness between Indian women and white women. I feel that if a white women had to make a petition to their government, it would be overlooked.''' But here, within the tribe, the women proved themselves to have power and an opinion within the tribe. Maybe this petition could have been used as an example, to encourage white women to speak up and to encourage governments to be more encouraging of women's ideas and opinions. ----- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Sarah Winnemucca, “Life Among the Paiutes,” 1883 ==<br />
<br />
I think, personally, this may be the most interesting article I have read yet. This memoir has an obvious purpose as it continually asserts Piute morality and equality to White Americans in deliberately showing Piute female virtue, lack of war-dances, productivity, and honor. '''But it also has an obvious audience and secondary purpose as it educates (White Americans) about Piute life, such as female puberty rites, marriage rules, and council regulations. Because it has said audience, it is very enlightening and describes topics otherwise we might not have prior knowledge of, nor have access to, such as the ministration rites. I think this is a very valuable source for both women and Piute studies and can tell us about many social, political, and gender ideas that the Piute held during the 1800s.''' – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== A Sioux Tale, “A Woman Kills Her Daughter” ==<br />
<br />
This was the most amusing thing to read. I love reading Native American tales because you can learn about their cultures and ways of thinking/lives and there always seems to be some sort of lesson. The mother-in-law got what was coming disappearing in the abyss. -Christine<br />
<br />
<br />
I really liked this tale. It was crazy but funny. I couldn't believe the mother thought she could pretend to be the daughter; like the husband and brother wouldn't know it was her and not the daughter. I wonder if this ever really happened in a Native American tribe? I'm sure she didn't actually turn into a mermaid or the mother fall into the abyss but it seems like something that could be probable. The tale also seems to teach reinforce the lesson "blood is thicker than water." People in today's society could benefit from reading this. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Moral of story: If you’re going to be a cougar, don’t go after your son-in-law! No, but really, this was a very interesting story and it had several important points about Sioux cultural ideas that we can learn about with a little more research, in addition to describing gender rules and familial obligations. ''' First of all is the mother-in-law avoidance policy. I know the Navajo have such a rule of mother-in-law avoidance out of respect and honor to the mother of the wife, and head matriarch, but I was not familiar with Sioux mother-in-law avoidance and would be interesting to study further to see if this is similar or different to the Navajo policy and its purpose. The second idea is the creation of a mermaid figure of the woman / half fish creature. I am not sure what this means / represents within Sioux culture, but again I think this would be a very interesting research topic. As an Anthropology major, I would love to unpack this tale for its symbolic and cultural significance, but I think in general, this story has a lot to tell us about Sioux pastimes (swimming / swinging - for children only?), gender roles (birthing, nursing and preparing food), and family interaction (mother-in-law avoidance) that was thought important enough to be included in this story. –Elyse Lawrence</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_9_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 9 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-22T13:32:36Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Caroline Gilman, “The Deferential Wife,” 1838 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== '''General Questions''' ==<br />
<br><br />
<br><br />
<br><br />
<br><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
---------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 7 '''<br />
<br />
== Emma Willard, “Matrimonial Risks,” 1815 ==<br />
<br />
I think Emma is funny. I also find it very endearing that she was very concerned for her sister's matrimonial well-being. This highlights the new role of women being the nurturing, caring, raising type. Even as the old sister, she takes on the role of looking out for her younger sister. ''Also, it definitely shows the changing view in women's minds that they don't necessarily have to be married. I enjoy how she herself ended up being a cougar who enters a doomed marriage.'' - Christine<br />
<br />
'''I agree with Christine, I think this highlights a new role of women for the reasons Christine listed. I also think it shows how women perceived men at that time. I know that Emma had a bad experience with her husband who lost all of their money, so she had reason to be skeptical, but the stereotypes of men are very clear. The worries of Emma include, "the possibility of your lover's seeing some object that he will consider more interesting than you," and "his business will occupy his attention". These are very real fears of women at that time.''' --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
<br />
'''It's amazing how once women had more of a choice of who they were going to marry, how hesitant and cautious they became.''' From this essay, '''it also seems that maybe it was a good thing that they were.''' Emma married and some years later her husband's finances collapsed. When her younger sister had a suitor, she warned her to proceed with caution. Ironically, the advice she gave to her sister could have benefited her when a gold digger took all her money. Poor Emma. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I feel like Emma Willard's letter to her sister is paradoxical to the view of marriage a lot of women had during that time. This was a time when women were marrying for love and looking for romance in a relationship rather than status, etc. For such a time when women were finally able to have a choice in whom they married, Emma Willard was extremely pessimistic about her sister's marriage. '''She may have just been trying to be honest with her sister about what would happen in her marriage, but I feel like she completely disregarded the romanticized view of marriage.''' She was more realistically aware of the possibilities of "your lover's seeing some object that he will consider more interesting than you"(in regards to her sister's husband) (P. 144). While she may have been harsh in showing her sister the realities of marriage, Emma was probably only trying to protect her sister from her own naivety and reverie. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Caroline Gilman, “The Deferential Wife,” 1838 ==<br />
<br />
'''I found Gilman's story to be tragic. In a time when marriage was romanticized and a young women felt leaving her "paternal home" was not something to be dread; the story of Gilman's husband losing all of the romance from the beginning of their marriage is heart-wrenching.''' I also found that while strides had been made in married life, women such as Gilman, still bit their tongue instead of expressing an annoyance with their husband. The difference between the sexes is made apparent but I did enjoy Gilman stating she wanted marriage to remain romanticized. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
'''I feel like a lot of these expectations on women persisted well into the twentieth century. To some extent, wasn't this the sentiment (or the challenging of this sentiment) that was the basis for a lot of the marital humor that appeared on shows like I Love Lucy? I think that the negotiation of a "companionate marriage," or maybe more specifically, the meaning of marriage in general, continues in a lot of ways to today. ''' -erin b<br />
<br />
I agree with Erin. I felt there were a lot of modern connections in this article. I think Caroline's idea that a woman must defer in a relationship to the man's way of doing things could also be seen in any modern issue of Cosmo. -Allison Luthern <br />
<br />
I also agree with you guys. This story definitely has a connection to modern times. I know a woman, who's in her sixties, and she still barely even breathes without asking her husband. Anytime one of the kids would misbehave, there was always the threat of "I'm telling your dad". Like she was incapable of punishing them herself. I could definitely tell a difference between this story and most of the other writings that we have read. It's obvious this woman is a professional writer instead of a woman simply writing in her journal. She builds up her story and makes it seem so dramatic. I agree with LeAnn, Gilman annoyed me too a little. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
'''Caroline Gilman annoyed me. She basically says when men offend their wife they are surprised by it and yet she is saying she keeps her mouth shut when he did something to offend her.''' How is he to know that his wife was offended if she does not tell him? Then she says that when he does something she does not like she tells him calmly and if unreformed she just accepts it. She gives contrary information. I guess I just do not like it when women accept their lot and move on. I am so glad I am not her. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Catharine Beecher, “System and Order,” 1841 ==<br />
<br />
'''Were these books intended for women who had not gone to the womens academies at the time? or did Beecher just have a different view on how/when house work should be done which conflicted with what was taught at the schools?''' I found it interesting that unlike many previous articles we've read, the subject of equality is disregarded as a frivolous and impossible question to answer and "there would be no possible advantage in the decision." isnt this a subtle way of saying that men and women should be equal? -Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
'''''How did this get printed annually for 15 years? It seems alot like common sense so have a washing day for example. Or to have a trunk with things labeled in there for sewing.''''' The last paragraph also seemed like a joke to me, "She can have regular periods for reading, walking, visiting..." it's as if Beecher is giving them permission to do these things as if they needed it. -Megan M.<br />
<br />
== Catharine Sedgwick, “First to None,” 1828 ==<br />
<br />
When reading First to None I couldn’t help but feel sorry for Catharine Sedgwick. She spent her life surrounded by her friends and her family who she knew loved, admired, and respected her but she never felt like she was a first priority. '''She states, “I would not advise anyone to remain unmarried, for my experience has been a singularly happy one”. I think it is interesting that such a great writer of stories about the home and family had such a contradiction in her own life. Sedgwick was a successful author with close friends and family, and she was unhappy with her decision to remain unmarried.''' I can only imagine how the average women would handle a single existence in a society that was so focused on the family. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
As we discussed in class, '''there was an increase in unmarried ladies along the eastern seaboard, part of which was attributed to there being less men. In the case of Catharine Sedgwick, we see another part of that is a result of the idealization of marriage.''' Catharine bemoans her unmarried status, attributing it to her high standards and unwillingness to accept mediocre offers. Of course, Catharine could afford not to settle, as she had plenty of successful brothers who were willing to take care of her, at least early on. '''To what extent did the idealization of marriage impact how lower class women chose their husbands?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
== Sarah Connell Ayer, “The Widowed State,” 1832-33 ==<br />
<br />
'''Here we see not only the dependence of women economically, at the time, on men but in her diary entries we also see the signs of the level of romantic love that was popular at this time.''' She appears to have a very close nit family, which we can see in her letters to and from her children. maybe i missed something, but why was there a decrease in remarriage that was previously more prevalent? did they think that marriage absolutely had to be a romantic engagement and that the idea of a practical marriage was completely gone? - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
I thought that this piece was really depressing. First, she looses four children, then her husband, and not long after both her and her youngest daughter die. But, it was interesting to see through her entries how much she loved and missed her husband. It is a sign of the times that she missed her husband because of the love they shared between them. '''One question though: what were the meetings that she wrote about? Is it a code for church?''' -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
Widowhood in the 19th century has several similarities to widowhood in earlier centuries. Women were dependent on their husbands, and without them they could lose their households and be left to rely on distant relatives for support. '''In the case of Sarah Connell Ayer, this state and the grief over her husband left her miserable and angst-ridden (not exactly prime material for remarriage!). I’m left wondering what effects companionate marriage had on widowhood for both men and women. If women and men looked for partners on the basis of love and affection, did the loss of those partners create even more grief?''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I agree with Kristina that one cannot feel sorry for Sarah Ayer. Sarah mentions that "many years had elapsed" since she saw her family, and when she traveled to see them she "knew none of the passengers on board" (Woloch, 158); The distant relationship from her parents and siblings and her unfamiliarity with those who travel show the restrictions placed on a woman dedicated to her role in the domestic sphere. Also, '''in the spring after her husband's death, she spends a great deal of time (almost every entry in April) socializing with others in her community. This shows that the community provided support for her and, even with the loss of most of her immediate family, Sarah was not alone. ''' -Seth Mintzer <br />
<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 8 – School and Mill'''<br />
<br />
== Eliza Ann Mulford, “Rules of the School,” 1814 ==<br />
<br />
'''I enjoy the Rules for the School. They are exactly how I'd expect to to be at this time: focused on appearance, courteous sportment, industrious behavior, pious routines, and orderly habits. They are raising ladies that will be raising their own children and tending to their husbands and must be their educations must be crafted in a certain way. However, I would like to know what were rules at male schools of the time.''' - Christine<br />
<br />
I also thought that this was a really interesting piece. But, '''I wonder why Mulford copied the rules in the first place?''' Also, I thought it was very interesting that on the 5th rule it is said that if you missed church that you better have a very good excuse "at the day of Judgement." Does that mean that when they died they had better have a good excuse to god why they didn't make it to church that day? It seems like such a scary way of saying "don't skip church." And lastly, I just wanted to point out something that made me laugh: under the questions part, it is mostly just going back and asking if you followed all the rules, then at the very end it says, "'''have you eaten any green fruit during the week."''' I just found that really random and out of place. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
The student checklist at the end of Mulford's notebook entry depicts multiple components to an education that strengthen more than just one's mind. The expectations for students to have "combed hair ... cleaned teeth ... [and] eaten green fruit" and for students to have "attended public worship ... [and] prayed to that God" emphasizes strengthening one's body and soul, respectively, as well (Woloch, 164). '''These rules follow the guidelines that literature promoting female education, such as Benjamin Rush's Thoughts on Female Education, had set forth during the Revolution.''' The '''other aspect of Eliza's notebook I found interesting was that the religious structure taught at school was probably already practiced within the students' homes. Why was it necessary for the schools to reiterate behaviors that parents had already instilled?''' - Seth Mintzer<br />
<br />
== Emma Willard, “A Rationale for Female Education,” 1819 ==<br />
'''I think this work is interesting because Emma Willard's goal was to educate women on the same subjects that were taught at men's colleges. She was profound in using such words as national prosperity, national and unparalleled glory, a nation wise, and to defend her liberties, to persuade members of the legislature. ''' I think she meant that it was essential to educate women in a way to maintain these liberties. I think when she refered to the shackles that the revolution removed from the nation she also compared the shackles to that on women. She made it evident that it was important to focus on educating women on moral and intellectual importance than frivolous things like dress and fashion. I think she thought women had an obligation to their children, family, and themselves and she took it very seriously - so should those determining education of women. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
== Miss Burnham’s Report, “A Choctaw Mission School,” 1824 ==<br />
'''As I was reading Miss Burnam's Report, I kept thinking why would the parents of the Native American children bring them to this school? ''' Choctaws were more civilized into American cultures than before but I don't think enough to want to send their children off with strangers that taught a different way of life. I think those parents (in order to survive) knew this was the only way to protect their children and to merge them into American society in a peaceful way. In Miss Burnam's report, she mentioned difficulties with some of the children. They would get emotional because they felt their brother or sister was not getting the same treatment as them. The children were compassionate and concerned for their families. Learning about God gave them a sense of being a sinner and being forgiven, and this made them feel guilty because in the eyes of what they were being taught, it meant their families were sinners. One of the girls said her family was all bad and another girl said her brother was stupid and she worried about him. I think these children were torn by what they learned as young children with their families and what was new and unknown. When your young it sometimes makes it easier to adapt. I think some of these girls adapted well, loved their teachers and attached themselves to them because that did not have their parents around. The teacher became more like a parent to them. - Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
<br />
'''After reading this report, I compared Native Americans leaving their children at the school to parents leaving their children at college. In both cases it is hard for child and parent, and for a first time generation college student it is even more of an eye opener, much like the Native American children. They were unfamiliar with customs, scared to leave parents, felt they had different treatment than other family memebers, and turned to teachers (college case professors) for guidance and someone to rely on when away from home.''' I agree with Marsha the children were torn and unsure how to react in a new place with strangers. With time I feel the girls adjusted well and were able to learn and feel comfortable with their surroundings. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
<br />
As Marsha mentioned above, the Choctaw kids would get very emotional when their parents would leave. Why was this so much more obvious than with white kids? Also like Marsha, I'm a little confused about why parents of a different faith and culture would be so eager to leave their kids with the missionaries. The only things I can think is that the Choctaws could have been hurting for money or resources, or else, exactly as it appears, the parents were simply hoping a christian education would lead to a more prosperous life in the new nation. -erin b<br />
<br />
== Letters from Teachers, “Reports on Western Schools,” 1847 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Rules of the Mill from Lowell and Lancaster, 1820-1840 ==<br />
'''Although the ability to seek work in a new town, independent of family could be seen as an advancement for young women of the early nineteenth-century, I thought the rules of the Lowell textile mills seemed to echo our old friend patriarchy.''' These female workers were clearly at the bottom of the power hierarchy beneath the factory management, overseer, and the boarding house keepers. They appeared to have very little freedom of movement or actions. '''I was curious if these rules would have been different if the Lowell factories had a male workforce.''' -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I found the phrasing for some of the rules a bit funny like "Each one to enter the house without unnecessary noise or confusion..." I also thought it interesting the sort of seniority in the rules for the women. Those that worked their longest sat at the head of the table and slept in the North room. Women who were newer would sit farther down the table, based on how long they'd been there and sleep in the South Chamber. '''Just wondering how old would some of the most senior women in these places be?''' -Megan M.<br />
<br />
== Harriet Farley, “A Letter from Lowell,” 1844 ==<br />
I found it interesting that Harriet Farley, who was a minister's daughter, was writing a fictional letter that made the mill look like a happy place to work. '''The timing of the letter shows the way the mill owners utilized the journal for their own benefit--perhaps to counteract the female labor reform movement. It was interesting that she asked in the letter if anyone was really content. So, it's not just the work at the mill that could be making someone discontent, but that no one is content no matter where they are or what kind of work they are doing.''' '''''Although the journal certainly could be considered as a "creative" outlet for the workers, how many people outside of the mill read it and how many were aware that the mill owner's owned and controlled the editorial policy?'''''--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== The Voice of Industry, “A Spirit of Protest,” 1846 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 9 – Western Frontiers'''<br />
<br />
<br />
== Amelia Stewart Knight, “Crossing the Plains,” 1853 == <br />
<br />
'''My favorite part about this entry was when she throws in at the end "my eighth child was born" Did I miss something???''' She doesn't mention being pregnant throughout the entire thing (as far as I could tell)Just one entry of being sick all night. But then all of a sudden she is giving birth and crossing the columbia river on a canoe! As if the oregon trail wasn't difficult enough she was pregnant and already had seven children? Oh my goodness I am horrified for her.-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Mary Ballou, “A Woman’s View of the Gold Rush,” 1852 ==<br />
<br />
'''I loved this letter to Selden. It was absolutly fascinating. I cannot believe she has a kitchen with no doors so the animals just walk in. I laughed when she said a rat jumped into bed with her.''' I think she is a very courageous woman to live the way she does. She is so hardworking I am amazed at the amount of activity she does in a day. I would be completely exhausted. I felt bad for her when she said that she was homesick. She talked to another woman who said she was so homesick she could die and I can image life was 20 times harder in California then it was in the more civilized east coast. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
While reading this I couldn't help but wonder what her husband was doing while she was busy being a peace maker, cook, laundress, seamstress etc. '''What were the chances of her husband being successful in his venture? Could he have been making money off the gold rush? It seemed to me that while the men were wildly seeking gold the women were actually making a living in the various different business ventures that they began.''' I was amazed at the amount of responsibility she had in the community, I wonder what kind of life she lead back home and if it had any resemblance to her lifestyle in california. I can't imagine that hogs would have been running through her kitchen though! Why did she leave though? Was it just meant to be a short venture to get more money? Her letter does show that women who lived in less settled communities on the frontier had more opportunities then there Eastern counterparts might have, however they lead very difficult lives. So who had it better?-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Petitions of the Cherokee Women’s Council on Removal, 1817, 1818 ==<br />
The Cherokee women who composed this address spoke of the great injustice of being forced to move beyond the Mississippi. These women said that they have done what white Americans had wanted: many converted to Christianity, they farmed, and educated their children, sometimes sending them to missionary schools. '''However, I think these women’s action of addressing the male leaders about a political issue is more reminiscent of Native American women’s traditional gender roles before contact.''' -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
'''When reading this document I wondered who the intended audience of this petition was.''' The first petition mentions their "duty as mothers" in the first paragraph and the Cherokees children are mentioned constantly throughout both. '''Could they be appealing more towards women, who would better understand their feelings of raising children, than towards men?''' In the last paragraph of the second petition the council describes the assimilated white men who become their enemies partly by not caring about their wives and their children. -John Rowley<br />
<br />
This petition reveals some interesting things about women in the early 1800s; more specifically, Indian women. These women were able to go before their chiefs or "government" to protest the U.S. government's taking of their land. The women made their case to the chiefs and elders of the tribe, evoking great emotion to argue their position. The way the women went to the chiefs, alone, shows that women's privileges within the tribe were either the same or had increased in some capacity from the 1600s. What is even more interesting is how the women were able to persuade the tribe to keep their land. '''It shows the distinctiveness between Indian women and white women. I feel that if a white women had to make a petition to their government, it would be overlooked.''' But here, within the tribe, the women proved themselves to have power and an opinion within the tribe. Maybe this petition could have been used as an example, to encourage white women to speak up and to encourage governments to be more encouraging of women's ideas and opinions. ----- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Sarah Winnemucca, “Life Among the Paiutes,” 1883 ==<br />
<br />
I think, personally, this may be the most interesting article I have read yet. This memoir has an obvious purpose as it continually asserts Piute morality and equality to White Americans in deliberately showing Piute female virtue, lack of war-dances, productivity, and honor. '''But it also has an obvious audience and secondary purpose as it educates (White Americans) about Piute life, such as female puberty rites, marriage rules, and council regulations. Because it has said audience, it is very enlightening and describes topics otherwise we might not have prior knowledge of, nor have access to, such as the ministration rites. I think this is a very valuable source for both women and Piute studies and can tell us about many social, political, and gender ideas that the Piute held during the 1800s.''' – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== A Sioux Tale, “A Woman Kills Her Daughter” ==<br />
<br />
This was the most amusing thing to read. I love reading Native American tales because you can learn about their cultures and ways of thinking/lives and there always seems to be some sort of lesson. The mother-in-law got what was coming disappearing in the abyss. -Christine<br />
<br />
<br />
I really liked this tale. It was crazy but funny. I couldn't believe the mother thought she could pretend to be the daughter; like the husband and brother wouldn't know it was her and not the daughter. I wonder if this ever really happened in a Native American tribe? I'm sure she didn't actually turn into a mermaid or the mother fall into the abyss but it seems like something that could be probable. The tale also seems to teach reinforce the lesson "blood is thicker than water." People in today's society could benefit from reading this. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Moral of story: If you’re going to be a cougar, don’t go after your son-in-law! No, but really, this was a very interesting story and it had several important points about Sioux cultural ideas that we can learn about with a little more research, in addition to describing gender rules and familial obligations. ''' First of all is the mother-in-law avoidance policy. I know the Navajo have such a rule of mother-in-law avoidance out of respect and honor to the mother of the wife, and head matriarch, but I was not familiar with Sioux mother-in-law avoidance and would be interesting to study further to see if this is similar or different to the Navajo policy and its purpose. The second idea is the creation of a mermaid figure of the woman / half fish creature. I am not sure what this means / represents within Sioux culture, but again I think this would be a very interesting research topic. As an Anthropology major, I would love to unpack this tale for its symbolic and cultural significance, but I think in general, this story has a lot to tell us about Sioux pastimes (swimming / swinging - for children only?), gender roles (birthing, nursing and preparing food), and family interaction (mother-in-law avoidance) that was thought important enough to be included in this story. –Elyse Lawrence</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_8_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 8 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-14T16:13:00Z<p>KatelynLease: </p>
<hr />
<div>I was surprised when reading about the antenuptial contracts. I have never heard of these contracts existing during this time period. I thought that these contracts were a more "modern" idea. The antenuptial contracts during this time made a lot more sense to me after I read some of the stipulations that they entailed. For instance, Woloch says that a well-off father could seek an antenuptial contract for his daughter. Although this contract would protect the women and her property, it still was initiated by a man. In the case of Ann Allen, her children (from a previous husband) could retain their inheritances upon her new husband's death. What if her children had reached adulthood prior to Mr. Jewett's death? -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
It was interesting to read about the feme sole laws in Pennsylvania and South Carolina. Pennsylvania allowed women whose husbands would not support them to become feme soles. That was definitely a positive gain for women whose husbands deserted them or were bankrupt. It makes sense that the women may have had to use their earnings to pay off their deadbeat husband's debts because that is basically like marriage today. If one spouse goes into debt then they are both in debt. I also found in interesting that South Carolina did not specify who could or could not be a feme sole. Of course, a married woman who wanted to become a feme sole would have needed to have written permission from their husband. Still, the idea of allowing a married woman to participate in business shows that South Carolina was pretty liberal at this time. I find it funny that South Carolina was liberal back then, but isn't exactly known for being liberal today. -Katelyn Lease</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_8_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 8 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-14T16:05:48Z<p>KatelynLease: New page: I was surprised when reading about the antenuptial contracts. I have never heard of these contracts existing during this time period. I thought that these contracts were a more "modern" id...</p>
<hr />
<div>I was surprised when reading about the antenuptial contracts. I have never heard of these contracts existing during this time period. I thought that these contracts were a more "modern" idea. The antenuptial contracts during this time made a lot more sense to me after I read some of the stipulations that they entailed. For instance, Woloch says that a well-off father could seek an antenuptial contract for his daughter. Although this contract would protect the women and her property, it still was initiated by a man. In the case of Ann Allen, her children (from a previous husband) could retain their inheritances upon her new husband's death. What if her children had reached adulthood prior to Mr. Jewett's death? -Katelyn Lease</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_6_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 6 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-01T13:15:39Z<p>KatelynLease: /* "On the Importance of the Obstetrick Art" by Catherine Scholten */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Susanna Haswell Rowson, ''Charlotte: A Tale of Truth'', 1794 ==<br />
<br />
'''So, this novel was the most popular in America for almost ''sixty years''? Wow. This one's a real bodice ripper, folks. Here we have the 18th century version of the Harlequin novel and a good plot for a Lifetime Original Movie. I would almost call it the worst thing I’ve ever read that's been published, except it was so entertaining'''. '''''However, I don’t think I was entertained in the same way that 18th century women were (and I very much hope that it was mostly women reading this).''''' I thought it was interesting how the preface says the novel is based on a true story, but the people involved are all dead and the names are changed, and, of course, the “Tale of Truth” bit in the title. Well, it’s nice to know people have been using ''that'' one for so long. Apparently, this book was replaced in popularity by ''Uncle Tom’s Cabin'', so it’s interesting that women seem to have a lot of success with novels in America. Does it have to do with the audience, which I presume is more often women than men? In the case of ''Uncle Tom's Cabin'', I imagine part of the reason it was successful was because it was so controversial. Was ''Charlotte'' considered controversial in it's time? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
This was such I great read I have to comment it on it more! So, what have I learned from this exceptional piece of literature? Do not under any circumstances disobey your parents or you will live a horrible life and then die (God might forgive you though, if you're repentant). If you do promise yourself to a man at the disapproval of your parents, don’t go back on your word or the once dashing officer will turn into Snidely Whiplash and kidnap you to another country, take advantage of you (but it’s not rape if you enjoy it), neglect you, and leave you pregnant and in poverty, and it will be all YOUR fault, because YOU forced him to take action due to your indecisiveness even if he’s the one that manipulated you into agreeing to be with him in the first place. Isn’t it so great that women can be just as and sometimes even more misogynistic than men? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I have to agree with Taylor's comments after reading this piece I was reminded of a modern day soap opera, filled with betrayal, love/lust, and desertion of a husband to take care of the children. I have to ask though how many women of the eighteenth century read this novel, and much less were literate? For a novel that was popular for 60 years I assume it did well, but I do think "Charlotte" was typical of women at the time. She went from the supervision of her father to a world run by her husband and was confined to the home. How did women feel about the novel? Did they agree their lives followed ideals of romance? And child rearing? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I agree with Taylor and Megan. This did remind me of a soap opera. It was entertaining, but Charlotte was starting to irritate me. She couldn't make up her mind. "Oh I love you...No wait I love my family". I can understand why it was so popular for so long. As funny as we think it is, it was probably very interesting to the women of her time because they probably hadn't seen anything like this before. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
This document did a good job of keeping me entertained and interested. I probably would have been one of many who read this book during the time. Charlotte's character annoyed me a little. At first I wanted her to be with the man, but then when she started saying how she did not want to dishonor her family and respected them too much to leave, I thought those were good points also. One minute she's on her way to tell him she is not going with him and the next thing you know he is picking her up and putting her in the carriage to take her away. Were men in reality really this suave and cunning to be able to change a women's mind so quickly? She seemed to be determined and knew what she wanted but she sure threw that out the window. It's cool to see how a situation like this can also be seen today in modern times, when men are able to work their charm to capture womens' hearts. The endings can be quite sad sometimes, however. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
Regarding what Amy says, about Charlotte's indecisiveness: I think Susanna Rowson's story might be considered an example of what we discussed in class on Tuesday- that men of the "New Republic" did not consider women "fit" for politics because they had "weak" minds and, further, thought them to be incapable of even making their own decisions without the assistance or guidance of their male relatives (either husband, or father, etc.). Thus, the "dependency" of women is reinforced. I think this thought process is exhibited in "Charlotte: A Tale of Truth". As Amy states, Charlotte starts out determined but then quickly changes her mind and opinions throughout the story. As a result, I think Rowson's piece ultimately might have had a negative impact and influence on women in the long run, because it reinforced the ideas of male superiority and female dependence. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison. Susanna Haswell Rowson was not acting exactly in a typical ladylike manner when she wrote a novel. You can tell that she is conscious of this in the preface. Susanna Haswell Rowson almost seems to be apologizing for stepping out of her sphere, justifying it by saying that she was writing to teach young women to guard their virtue. Again reinforcing female dependency and inferiority, she argued that her work was important because it enabled women to continue to exercise a moralizing influence over men. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I feel like Susanna Haswell Rowson was attempting to get a point across through this story. I feel she was trying to warn girls about what might happen if they were to decide to step out of the bounds of socially acceptable behavior. She portrayed Charlotte as a young woman who was very protected in her world, but it was a world that was aligned with the idea of women at the time. She went to boarding school, and was very proper. Then she met a boy and deserted her family, which at the time I'm sure was frowned upon greatly, and ran away with him. While it seemed romantic that she followed her heart, Rowson instantaneously portrays Charlotte as unhappy with her current life with Montraville. She regretted her decision especially when she became ill and was without Montraville. I feel Rowson displayed Charlotte in this way to show her readers/fans how easy it was for a woman to become blinded by love, how easy it was to throw away all social responsibility, and how it would end up in a disappointing life. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex. It is also important to note that Charlotte was only 15 years old at the time and in the supposed care of a girl's school. The part that her teacher plays in this story is also significant because not only is she being pressured by a man, but also by an influential female. It definitely serves as a warning to girls about men. Could it have also affected the way the girl's schools were viewed, especially concerning the character of the teachers at these schools?--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
I really did not like how she said her no one would censure her because the story was she is a moral woman and her story promoted good morals. Why does she feel the need to tell us that. Then she talks to the mothers who are reading her work not to worry again as if her work was raunchy. Her story was ridiculous. Charlotte was annoying, always crying and waiting for a man who does not love her. Then she dies as soon as her parents find her. The moral of the story is to obey your parents or you will be the most miserable person in the world and then you will die. I guess its nice that she was trying to warn girls about loving the wrong man but the story was melodramatic. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Is it bad that I loved this?? Is there a sequel! Who was the consumer for this book? Mothers who read it aloud to their daughters as a warning? I was surprised of the nature of this story when I read the short bio about the author Susanna Rowson I was expecting something a little more controversial. I mean I suppose this was controversial but Charlotte was such a weak female character that it almost seemed to cancel anything else out. The fact that Rowson was a female novelist seemed to be pretty substantial and impressive considering the time period but maybe the reason why she was so popular is because she wasn't encouraging any other bad behaviors amongst women. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
Ok wait on a side note I was just looking at the article again and in the little bit about the author it says she returned to England in a prisoner exchange? Did I miss something? that seems kind of out of the ordinary was she a prisoner? Actually everything about her bio seemed rather different from that of the typical woman. She was an actress and a playwright! Why would such a seemingly accomplished and educated woman want to write something like this work? When I read the bio I was expecting a seriously scandalous read....I have to admit Charlotte fell a little short but I would still read more of it!-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Judith Murray, “The Story of Margaretta,” ==<br />
<br />
In the piece by Judith Murray, “The Story of Margaretta,” In the introduction it states, “The maze of gender identities created as the views of a girl and a women are filtered through the perspective of a man, who is himself a fictional creation of a woman, adds another layer of meaning to the story.” So in reading this piece, I kept this layer of meaning in mind. I had a hard time reading some sections were blurred out. However, it seemed to me that the male view of Margaretta and her intelligence and education was positive. I am sure this probably wasn’t the overarching view that most males would have had at the time, so I am curious if this would have any impact on the readers at the time. What was Judith Murray going for? --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
In "The Story of Margaretta," I am not sure if she is writing through the eyes of a man because she thinks it would be read by more people or her agenda was to show Mr. Vigillius view on educating women in hopes that it would have changed things for women. In the story, a reference was made about Mary not being concerned with a women's dress though she was still a "complete housewife," showed that it was more important for Margaretta to be taught things that made her more intellectual. I think this made her more the exception. Mary had an extensive plan for Margaretta's education. Her education went outside the realm of housewifery duties which Mr. Vigillius stated Margaretta did with proficiency. Mr. Vigillius was not fond of Mary's education plans for Margaretta but he let the matter go. Through Mr Vigillius eyes, he thought in the long run Margaretta will be more intellectual for the education she received, after all a woman was to "inform the future man." I think Mr. Vigillius was also an exception because he admitted that in the long run Margaretta's extensive education would make her life more distinguished. -Marsha H<br />
<br />
I think Judith Murray was writing as a man because women generally did not publish their work. In "The Study of Margaretta" she talks about educating women. I am all for that especially the languages and actual education outside being a house wife. I was a little annoyed that it was assumed she would be conceited because of her education. Her parents had to cultivate a good woman and had to watch out that she would not become conceited in her superior knowledge. Educations does not equate to being conceited.It also annoyed me that they were talking about her virtues and how basically she was the perfect woman. She should not be eager for other people admiration's. Who would even think about that? It almost seemed to me that Margaretta should not want people to be envious but people should because she is such a good woman. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
I was surprised about the wide variety of aspects in which women were expected to "perfect." Not only did girls need to learn housewifery skills like their mothers did when they were young, this new generation also learned more academic subjects so that they could teach their sons. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I think Murray might be justifying women's education in a more subtle manner. Mr. Vigillins views on women's education shows some reluctance along with acceptance. The ''Story of Margaretta'' seems to attempt to gradually change people's minds on women's education than demand equal education. Do you think this would be a more effective approach for the time? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
The Story of Margaretta was an interesting read. Being written by a woman, it was obvious the emphasis on the benefits of education for women (children) as shown by the appraisal of Margaretta’s accomplishments, however it was put through the lens of men and so many of the benefits of the education was described in terms such as making her more valuable, more amiable, a pleasing and instruction companion (134) and her accomplishments as an accountant (135) all of which a man would most likely applause. The rant about eradicating conceit also would seem to be a male point of view, for fear of a woman knowing too much might cause her to have too large of an idea about her general place within society. All in all though, it is often times almost obvious that this was written by a woman due to her extreme knowledge of sewing accomplishments, her fashion skills, and her overall accomplishments as a lady and all that it entails that I don’t know a man would possess such understanding of the subject. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
Allison’s comment brought to mind a scene from Pride and Prejudice where Darcy is describing what accomplished women should know “A woman must have a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing, and the modern languages… and to all this she must yet add something more substantial, in the improvement of her mind by extensive reading.” <br />
As with Darcy, Mr. Vigillius in “The Story of Margaretta” expected much of women. However, I wonder, if Vigillius’ desire for his adoptive daughter to know a wide range of subjects was a wish of the author, Judith Sargent Murray, for women to be able to receive an education in the many scholarly subjects that interested them rather than just housewifery. The character Margaretta showed a certain skill in learning all these things why couldn’t other women. <br />
-Megan Mc<br />
<br />
== "On the Importance of the Obstetrick Art" by Catherine Scholten ==<br />
<br />
The change in childbirth from 1760 to 1825 was dramatic and changed the medical field forever. I found the inclusion of men into the field of childbirth as early as the 1750s with Dr. William Shippen Jr. suprising. But I do agree that it led to childbirth becoming more of a private matter rather than one that involved society. The portion of the reading that stood out to me was the exclusion of women in childbirth. Men believed women could no longer be midwives due to their lack of understanding "throughly the profession of medicine as a whole." But men chose to leave out that women were not allowed to attend medical school thus losing any status they had in society when men overtook the practice of childbirth. I do wonder if labor became more private due to women being embarassed with having a male physician or due to husbands threatening doctors if they looked at their wives? To answer my own question I think it became a private matter due to embarassment of a man other than their husband participating in the intimate activity of childbirth. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
On page 79 of the piece by Catherine Scholten what stood out for me was the section where Scholten argued that birth became increasingly regarded as a medical problem to be managed by physicians. This is a complete 180 from the women in the colonial period of the 17th centuries that were expected to have as many children as possible until their death. This is a crucial turning point, from childbirth being celebrated to childbirth being a medical problem. This goes to show that what are considered norms are only a function of society at that particular time. -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I found this piece interesting because the one thing women had some control over and dominated was then being transferred to men. All because physician were men during that time. This piece raises many questions in my mind. You have trained midwives and fill in midwives. Then you have women in suburban areas where midwives delivered most of the babies because there was no doctor around. In urban areas, there was doctor available if there were any problems arose during childbirth. Then there was the problem of women being concerned with the presence of a "man" looking at a woman in this "delicate" way. Another point, it that when you have a midwife with years of a experience delivering babies and a man who is "medically trained" with little experience, what would you feel most comfortable with? There was a large transition here from women to men in childbirth. During this time, you had women being more educated and they may have felt they had more choices. In making these choices do they oust other women out of the arena? -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I did not know how much birth used to be a "spectator's sport". All these women standing around trying to soothe the woman who is giving birth and going through extreme amounts of pain. I guess I understand that a joke might ease the mood, but I am personally glad men stepped into the picture. I think it would be a little awkward having people stand around even if they were all females. Most of the time, the midwives were not even trained that well. I like the idea of having a doctor who is medically trained and knows what he is doing involved in the process of birth.I thought it was a little comical how prude people were and did not want the male physician to look at the female as much as possible. No wonder "things" got cut off on occasion. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I feel that the idea of men taking over midwife positions was an infringement to women's rights. As midwives, women had a responsibility, and a respectable one at that. Many women worked within their own homes, but these midwives were in the business of helping women outside of their own homes. When male physicians entered the scene, female midwives slowly lost their jobs. At the time, I believe female midwives would have been better than male physicians because the midwives understood the female body, and could sympathize with the women they helped. Also, Scholten talks about how the male physicians could not even look at specific parts of the woman's body... I'm sure that made giving birth even more unsafe than it already was. It just seemed contradictory because people believed that male physicians made childbirth safer because they knew more about medicine and had pain relief, etc, yet they were constrained in their duties by social norms, which sometimes put the woman or baby in danger.I also thought it was interesting how the women supported one another in child birth. It goes back to the idea of women forming bonds with one another through similar experiences, and childbirth was definitely one of those bonding experiences among women, especially how they would take up the pregnant woman's chores and would give moral support. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I also found this piece extremely interesting, as well as thought provoking. I don't think, however, that Catherine Scholten did a very good job of explaining exactly why such a transformation in the childbirth experiences of women occurred when it did. She states that similar changes undoubtedly would have taken place even without the American Revolution, but that "heightened concern with establishing 'American' institutions and expertise speeded the development of medical schools and professional associations in the New Republic." (p.78)I'm still not really convinced. I feel as if this is explaining the changes in terms of the "male" perspective, and while Scholten does include many details as to how women going through childbirth with the assistance of a male physician rather than a midwife felt (such as their initial reservations about the use of "instruments", as well as their embarrassment at being attended to by a person of the opposite sex), I wish she had articulated her argument better and provided more thorough explanations and reasoning. I'm not sure if I'm even articulating my thoughts very well, but at the end of the piece I did feel as if she left several questions unanswered. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
This article was incredibly interesting probably because it brings to light just how different childbirth used to be. Nowadays babies delivered by midwives at home are a rather rare event, though it appears to be an increasing “fad.” The view of childbirth shifted from a rather social event to a medical one. The reason for the pain of child birth was from Eve’s betrayal but slowly the idea changed so that they began to believe the woman did not have to suffer. What stuck out at me most in this article was the fact women were not allowed to put their feet on the ground for weeks after giving birth for fear of getting a cold and the fact that hooks would be used to dismember the baby if the unfortunate thing got stuck in the birth canal. It just goes to show the change in medical practices and beliefs from the time. What I found rather ironic was the idea that the “moral character [of women] disqualified them from medical practice” such as childbirth when for years and years they had been the ones delivering the babies.<br />
-Megan Mc<br />
<br />
I thought that it was particularly interesting how she mentions that women had some degree of power. When they were midwives, which was true. They were governed at every turn in every aspect of their lives by fathers and husbands, but in the field of child birthing, they were in control. They were the only ones knowledgeable, through both experience and readings, up to the mid 1700's when men began to take their places. As was already mentioned above, I am kind of surprised that men would kick midwives out of the birthing process so much, claiming that they were not knowledgeable. And, what is also odd to me is the fact that a man at the time would even consider being kind of a male midwife. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
The article “On the Importance of the Obsterick Art” was very interesting and covered general concepts of childbirth (such as positions, people present, the association with medicine, etc) we take for granted today that were not so in early America. I personally found it interesting that women did not lie in bed to deliver until the male midwife came into practice and was for modesty, rather than comfort or ease. I was also horrified at many of the tales of when deliveries went wrong such as on page 84, jerking the child out, dismembering the infant with hooks, and page 88 of accidental mutilations of the infant by “blind” male midwifes. I am frankly surprised as many children and women survived as they did, though it definitely makes more since for explaining to the high death rates! Yeiks! I thought the author could have spend more time on the explanation of the transition of birth to being a medical issue, as well as tying the concepts together such as birth being medical, medical being male role due to the incapability of the female mind, to changes in the understanding of the necessity of pain for females, and changes in ideas of decorum and male interaction in the delivery room. I thought this all could have been analyzed better as well as further explaining the concept of how childbirth is related to nation building and new national identities as talked about on page 78 which I don’t think she explained very well if at all. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
I thought this article was very interesting. When I read about Cotton Mather's pamphlet he gave to midwives for distribution it made me laugh. He wrote that "your death has entered into you" and basically described pregnancy as a lethal condition. I understand that a lot of women died in childbirth but it's hard to believe that Mather actually distributed that pamphlet. Was he trying to scare the local women out of having children? I'm pretty sure if I was a woman at this time, and someone gave me the pamphlet, I would have been scared to death. Especially since the most women were uneducated and even those that were educated probably knew little to nothing about obsterics. -Katelyn LEase<br />
<br />
== Headline text ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_6_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 6 Questions/Comments-327 092009-10-01T13:07:04Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Susanna Haswell Rowson, ''Charlotte: A Tale of Truth'', 1794 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Susanna Haswell Rowson, ''Charlotte: A Tale of Truth'', 1794 ==<br />
<br />
So, this novel was the most popular in America for almost ''sixty years''? Wow. This one's a real bodice ripper, folks. Here we have the 18th century version of the Harlequin novel and a good plot for a Lifetime Original Movie. I would almost call it the worst thing I’ve ever read that's been published, except it was so entertaining. However, I don’t think I was entertained in the same way that 18th century women were (and I very much hope that it was mostly women reading this). I thought it was interesting how the preface says the novel is based on a true story, but the people involved are all dead and the names are changed, and, of course, the “Tale of Truth” bit in the title. Well, it’s nice to know people have been using ''that'' one for so long. Apparently, this book was replaced in popularity by ''Uncle Tom’s Cabin'', so it’s interesting that women seem to have a lot of success with novels in America. Does it have to do with the audience, which I presume is more often women than men? In the case of ''Uncle Tom's Cabin'', I imagine part of the reason it was successful was because it was so controversial. Was ''Charlotte'' considered controversial in it's time? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
This was such I great read I have to comment it on it more! So, what have I learned from this exceptional piece of literature? Do not under any circumstances disobey your parents or you will live a horrible life and then die (God might forgive you though, if you're repentant). If you do promise yourself to a man at the disapproval of your parents, don’t go back on your word or the once dashing officer will turn into Snidely Whiplash and kidnap you to another country, take advantage of you (but it’s not rape if you enjoy it), neglect you, and leave you pregnant and in poverty, and it will be all YOUR fault, because YOU forced him to take action due to your indecisiveness even if he’s the one that manipulated you into agreeing to be with him in the first place. Isn’t it so great that women can be just as and sometimes even more misogynistic than men? -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I have to agree with Taylor's comments after reading this piece I was reminded of a modern day soap opera, filled with betrayal, love/lust, and desertion of a husband to take care of the children. I have to ask though how many women of the eighteenth century read this novel, and much less were literate? For a novel that was popular for 60 years I assume it did well, but I do think "Charlotte" was typical of women at the time. She went from the supervision of her father to a world run by her husband and was confined to the home. How did women feel about the novel? Did they agree their lives followed ideals of romance? And child rearing? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I agree with Taylor and Megan. This did remind me of a soap opera. It was entertaining, but Charlotte was starting to irritate me. She couldn't make up her mind. "Oh I love you...No wait I love my family". I can understand why it was so popular for so long. As funny as we think it is, it was probably very interesting to the women of her time because they probably hadn't seen anything like this before. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
This document did a good job of keeping me entertained and interested. I probably would have been one of many who read this book during the time. Charlotte's character annoyed me a little. At first I wanted her to be with the man, but then when she started saying how she did not want to dishonor her family and respected them too much to leave, I thought those were good points also. One minute she's on her way to tell him she is not going with him and the next thing you know he is picking her up and putting her in the carriage to take her away. Were men in reality really this suave and cunning to be able to change a women's mind so quickly? She seemed to be determined and knew what she wanted but she sure threw that out the window. It's cool to see how a situation like this can also be seen today in modern times, when men are able to work their charm to capture womens' hearts. The endings can be quite sad sometimes, however. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
Regarding what Amy says, about Charlotte's indecisiveness: I think Susanna Rowson's story might be considered an example of what we discussed in class on Tuesday- that men of the "New Republic" did not consider women "fit" for politics because they had "weak" minds and, further, thought them to be incapable of even making their own decisions without the assistance or guidance of their male relatives (either husband, or father, etc.). Thus, the "dependency" of women is reinforced. I think this thought process is exhibited in "Charlotte: A Tale of Truth". As Amy states, Charlotte starts out determined but then quickly changes her mind and opinions throughout the story. As a result, I think Rowson's piece ultimately might have had a negative impact and influence on women in the long run, because it reinforced the ideas of male superiority and female dependence. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
I agree with Allison. Susanna Haswell Rowson was not acting exactly in a typical ladylike manner when she wrote a novel. You can tell that she is conscious of this in the preface. Susanna Haswell Rowson almost seems to be apologizing for stepping out of her sphere, justifying it by saying that she was writing to teach young women to guard their virtue. Again reinforcing female dependency and inferiority, she argued that her work was important because it enabled women to continue to exercise a moralizing influence over men. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I feel like Susanna Haswell Rowson was attempting to get a point across through this story. I feel she was trying to warn girls about what might happen if they were to decide to step out of the bounds of socially acceptable behavior. She portrayed Charlotte as a young woman who was very protected in her world, but it was a world that was aligned with the idea of women at the time. She went to boarding school, and was very proper. Then she met a boy and deserted her family, which at the time I'm sure was frowned upon greatly, and ran away with him. While it seemed romantic that she followed her heart, Rowson instantaneously portrays Charlotte as unhappy with her current life with Montraville. She regretted her decision especially when she became ill and was without Montraville. I feel Rowson displayed Charlotte in this way to show her readers/fans how easy it was for a woman to become blinded by love, how easy it was to throw away all social responsibility, and how it would end up in a disappointing life. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex. It is also important to note that Charlotte was only 15 years old at the time and in the supposed care of a girl's school. The part that her teacher plays in this story is also significant because not only is she being pressured by a man, but also by an influential female. It definitely serves as a warning to girls about men. Could it have also affected the way the girl's schools were viewed, especially concerning the character of the teachers at these schools?--Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
I really did not like how she said her no one would censure her because the story was she is a moral woman and her story promoted good morals. Why does she feel the need to tell us that. Then she talks to the mothers who are reading her work not to worry again as if her work was raunchy. Her story was ridiculous. Charlotte was annoying, always crying and waiting for a man who does not love her. Then she dies as soon as her parents find her. The moral of the story is to obey your parents or you will be the most miserable person in the world and then you will die. I guess its nice that she was trying to warn girls about loving the wrong man but the story was melodramatic. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
Is it bad that I loved this?? Is there a sequel! Who was the consumer for this book? Mothers who read it aloud to their daughters as a warning? I was surprised of the nature of this story when I read the short bio about the author Susanna Rowson I was expecting something a little more controversial. I mean I suppose this was controversial but Charlotte was such a weak female character that it almost seemed to cancel anything else out. The fact that Rowson was a female novelist seemed to be pretty substantial and impressive considering the time period but maybe the reason why she was so popular is because she wasn't encouraging any other bad behaviors amongst women. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
Ok wait on a side note I was just looking at the article again and in the little bit about the author it says she returned to England in a prisoner exchange? Did I miss something? that seems kind of out of the ordinary was she a prisoner? Actually everything about her bio seemed rather different from that of the typical woman. She was an actress and a playwright! Why would such a seemingly accomplished and educated woman want to write something like this work? When I read the bio I was expecting a seriously scandalous read....I have to admit Charlotte fell a little short but I would still read more of it!-Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Judith Murray, “The Story of Margaretta,” ==<br />
<br />
In the piece by Judith Murray, “The Story of Margaretta,” In the introduction it states, “The maze of gender identities created as the views of a girl and a women are filtered through the perspective of a man, who is himself a fictional creation of a woman, adds another layer of meaning to the story.” So in reading this piece, I kept this layer of meaning in mind. I had a hard time reading some sections were blurred out. However, it seemed to me that the male view of Margaretta and her intelligence and education was positive. I am sure this probably wasn’t the overarching view that most males would have had at the time, so I am curious if this would have any impact on the readers at the time. What was Judith Murray going for? --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
In "The Story of Margaretta," I am not sure if she is writing through the eyes of a man because she thinks it would be read by more people or her agenda was to show Mr. Vigillius view on educating women in hopes that it would have changed things for women. In the story, a reference was made about Mary not being concerned with a women's dress though she was still a "complete housewife," showed that it was more important for Margaretta to be taught things that made her more intellectual. I think this made her more the exception. Mary had an extensive plan for Margaretta's education. Her education went outside the realm of housewifery duties which Mr. Vigillius stated Margaretta did with proficiency. Mr. Vigillius was not fond of Mary's education plans for Margaretta but he let the matter go. Through Mr Vigillius eyes, he thought in the long run Margaretta will be more intellectual for the education she received, after all a woman was to "inform the future man." I think Mr. Vigillius was also an exception because he admitted that in the long run Margaretta's extensive education would make her life more distinguished. -Marsha H<br />
<br />
I think Judith Murray was writing as a man because women generally did not publish their work. In "The Study of Margaretta" she talks about educating women. I am all for that especially the languages and actual education outside being a house wife. I was a little annoyed that it was assumed she would be conceited because of her education. Her parents had to cultivate a good woman and had to watch out that she would not become conceited in her superior knowledge. Educations does not equate to being conceited.It also annoyed me that they were talking about her virtues and how basically she was the perfect woman. She should not be eager for other people admiration's. Who would even think about that? It almost seemed to me that Margaretta should not want people to be envious but people should because she is such a good woman. LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
I was surprised about the wide variety of aspects in which women were expected to "perfect." Not only did girls need to learn housewifery skills like their mothers did when they were young, this new generation also learned more academic subjects so that they could teach their sons. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I think Murray might be justifying women's education in a more subtle manner. Mr. Vigillins views on women's education shows some reluctance along with acceptance. The ''Story of Margaretta'' seems to attempt to gradually change people's minds on women's education than demand equal education. Do you think this would be a more effective approach for the time? -John Rowley<br />
<br />
The Story of Margaretta was an interesting read. Being written by a woman, it was obvious the emphasis on the benefits of education for women (children) as shown by the appraisal of Margaretta’s accomplishments, however it was put through the lens of men and so many of the benefits of the education was described in terms such as making her more valuable, more amiable, a pleasing and instruction companion (134) and her accomplishments as an accountant (135) all of which a man would most likely applause. The rant about eradicating conceit also would seem to be a male point of view, for fear of a woman knowing too much might cause her to have too large of an idea about her general place within society. All in all though, it is often times almost obvious that this was written by a woman due to her extreme knowledge of sewing accomplishments, her fashion skills, and her overall accomplishments as a lady and all that it entails that I don’t know a man would possess such understanding of the subject. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
Allison’s comment brought to mind a scene from Pride and Prejudice where Darcy is describing what accomplished women should know “A woman must have a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing, and the modern languages… and to all this she must yet add something more substantial, in the improvement of her mind by extensive reading.” <br />
As with Darcy, Mr. Vigillius in “The Story of Margaretta” expected much of women. However, I wonder, if Vigillius’ desire for his adoptive daughter to know a wide range of subjects was a wish of the author, Judith Sargent Murray, for women to be able to receive an education in the many scholarly subjects that interested them rather than just housewifery. The character Margaretta showed a certain skill in learning all these things why couldn’t other women. <br />
-Megan Mc<br />
<br />
== "On the Importance of the Obstetrick Art" by Catherine Scholten ==<br />
<br />
The change in childbirth from 1760 to 1825 was dramatic and changed the medical field forever. I found the inclusion of men into the field of childbirth as early as the 1750s with Dr. William Shippen Jr. suprising. But I do agree that it led to childbirth becoming more of a private matter rather than one that involved society. The portion of the reading that stood out to me was the exclusion of women in childbirth. Men believed women could no longer be midwives due to their lack of understanding "throughly the profession of medicine as a whole." But men chose to leave out that women were not allowed to attend medical school thus losing any status they had in society when men overtook the practice of childbirth. I do wonder if labor became more private due to women being embarassed with having a male physician or due to husbands threatening doctors if they looked at their wives? To answer my own question I think it became a private matter due to embarassment of a man other than their husband participating in the intimate activity of childbirth. -Megan W.<br />
<br />
On page 79 of the piece by Catherine Scholten what stood out for me was the section where Scholten argued that birth became increasingly regarded as a medical problem to be managed by physicians. This is a complete 180 from the women in the colonial period of the 17th centuries that were expected to have as many children as possible until their death. This is a crucial turning point, from childbirth being celebrated to childbirth being a medical problem. This goes to show that what are considered norms are only a function of society at that particular time. -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I found this piece interesting because the one thing women had some control over and dominated was then being transferred to men. All because physician were men during that time. This piece raises many questions in my mind. You have trained midwives and fill in midwives. Then you have women in suburban areas where midwives delivered most of the babies because there was no doctor around. In urban areas, there was doctor available if there were any problems arose during childbirth. Then there was the problem of women being concerned with the presence of a "man" looking at a woman in this "delicate" way. Another point, it that when you have a midwife with years of a experience delivering babies and a man who is "medically trained" with little experience, what would you feel most comfortable with? There was a large transition here from women to men in childbirth. During this time, you had women being more educated and they may have felt they had more choices. In making these choices do they oust other women out of the arena? -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I did not know how much birth used to be a "spectator's sport". All these women standing around trying to soothe the woman who is giving birth and going through extreme amounts of pain. I guess I understand that a joke might ease the mood, but I am personally glad men stepped into the picture. I think it would be a little awkward having people stand around even if they were all females. Most of the time, the midwives were not even trained that well. I like the idea of having a doctor who is medically trained and knows what he is doing involved in the process of birth.I thought it was a little comical how prude people were and did not want the male physician to look at the female as much as possible. No wonder "things" got cut off on occasion. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I feel that the idea of men taking over midwife positions was an infringement to women's rights. As midwives, women had a responsibility, and a respectable one at that. Many women worked within their own homes, but these midwives were in the business of helping women outside of their own homes. When male physicians entered the scene, female midwives slowly lost their jobs. At the time, I believe female midwives would have been better than male physicians because the midwives understood the female body, and could sympathize with the women they helped. Also, Scholten talks about how the male physicians could not even look at specific parts of the woman's body... I'm sure that made giving birth even more unsafe than it already was. It just seemed contradictory because people believed that male physicians made childbirth safer because they knew more about medicine and had pain relief, etc, yet they were constrained in their duties by social norms, which sometimes put the woman or baby in danger.I also thought it was interesting how the women supported one another in child birth. It goes back to the idea of women forming bonds with one another through similar experiences, and childbirth was definitely one of those bonding experiences among women, especially how they would take up the pregnant woman's chores and would give moral support. --- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I also found this piece extremely interesting, as well as thought provoking. I don't think, however, that Catherine Scholten did a very good job of explaining exactly why such a transformation in the childbirth experiences of women occurred when it did. She states that similar changes undoubtedly would have taken place even without the American Revolution, but that "heightened concern with establishing 'American' institutions and expertise speeded the development of medical schools and professional associations in the New Republic." (p.78)I'm still not really convinced. I feel as if this is explaining the changes in terms of the "male" perspective, and while Scholten does include many details as to how women going through childbirth with the assistance of a male physician rather than a midwife felt (such as their initial reservations about the use of "instruments", as well as their embarrassment at being attended to by a person of the opposite sex), I wish she had articulated her argument better and provided more thorough explanations and reasoning. I'm not sure if I'm even articulating my thoughts very well, but at the end of the piece I did feel as if she left several questions unanswered. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
This article was incredibly interesting probably because it brings to light just how different childbirth used to be. Nowadays babies delivered by midwives at home are a rather rare event, though it appears to be an increasing “fad.” The view of childbirth shifted from a rather social event to a medical one. The reason for the pain of child birth was from Eve’s betrayal but slowly the idea changed so that they began to believe the woman did not have to suffer. What stuck out at me most in this article was the fact women were not allowed to put their feet on the ground for weeks after giving birth for fear of getting a cold and the fact that hooks would be used to dismember the baby if the unfortunate thing got stuck in the birth canal. It just goes to show the change in medical practices and beliefs from the time. What I found rather ironic was the idea that the “moral character [of women] disqualified them from medical practice” such as childbirth when for years and years they had been the ones delivering the babies.<br />
-Megan Mc<br />
<br />
I thought that it was particularly interesting how she mentions that women had some degree of power. When they were midwives, which was true. They were governed at every turn in every aspect of their lives by fathers and husbands, but in the field of child birthing, they were in control. They were the only ones knowledgeable, through both experience and readings, up to the mid 1700's when men began to take their places. As was already mentioned above, I am kind of surprised that men would kick midwives out of the birthing process so much, claiming that they were not knowledgeable. And, what is also odd to me is the fact that a man at the time would even consider being kind of a male midwife. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
The article “On the Importance of the Obsterick Art” was very interesting and covered general concepts of childbirth (such as positions, people present, the association with medicine, etc) we take for granted today that were not so in early America. I personally found it interesting that women did not lie in bed to deliver until the male midwife came into practice and was for modesty, rather than comfort or ease. I was also horrified at many of the tales of when deliveries went wrong such as on page 84, jerking the child out, dismembering the infant with hooks, and page 88 of accidental mutilations of the infant by “blind” male midwifes. I am frankly surprised as many children and women survived as they did, though it definitely makes more since for explaining to the high death rates! Yeiks! I thought the author could have spend more time on the explanation of the transition of birth to being a medical issue, as well as tying the concepts together such as birth being medical, medical being male role due to the incapability of the female mind, to changes in the understanding of the necessity of pain for females, and changes in ideas of decorum and male interaction in the delivery room. I thought this all could have been analyzed better as well as further explaining the concept of how childbirth is related to nation building and new national identities as talked about on page 78 which I don’t think she explained very well if at all. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Headline text ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_5_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 5 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-24T13:28:07Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Thomas Jefferson’s Slaves Join the British, 1781 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Comparative questions or comments ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Phillis Wheatley, 1768, An address to George III ==<br />
<br />
I think Phillis Wheatley had an extremely rare story. She was a slave who was taught by her owners to read and write, she was sent to Europe to publish her poems and was freed upon her return.''' What is more rare is that Phillis was not only literate but aware of the politics of the time, as shown in her address to George III'''. As a slave who was owned I wonder what parallels she drew between that and the colonies that were owned by England. – Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I do like Phillis Wheatley's story. I'm sure it was very rare to even have such education and praise, and to be sent to England to publish poetry for a white woman, so for a slave to achieve such heights is quite remarkable. '''I also find the subject of her poem rather shocking, seeing as how she is/was a slave'''. To speak out against the king (or anyone) for that matter and be black AND a woman must have taken real courage. - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
== Eliza Wilkinson, Carolina Patriot, 1782 ==<br />
This reading was very interesting. I felt that Eliza painted the British in a very harsh light (which I know was the point), but '''she just seemed like a bit of a hypocrite. One sentence really caught my eye: "The Americans are obliged to commit unavoidable acts of cruelty; the defense of their country requires it; you seek their lives and liberties, and they must either kill or be killed." So, its ok for the Americans can be mean and cruel, but if the English are then that’s ten times worse?''' Also in this reading, Eliza tells a bit of a story some man told her about someone, (I'm assuming the someone is an analogy for the British and his farm is an analogy for the Americans), encroaching on his farm taking more and more from him. And, at the end he asks, "is this not slavery?" Now that is pretty ridiculous because as a North Carolina planter, I'm sure he had slaves, or at the very least, neighbors who had slaves. '''So, as long as the Americans are not treated like slaves, then it is fine, but they can still have slaves of their own.'''<br />
One more sentence in this reading really caught my eye, When Eliza is talking about Homer and she says, "what contemptible EARTH WORMS these authors make us!" She is expressing her displeasure over not even having the liberty to think, and she says that that is all she wants. She writes of how the men would not want women to be a part of political matters, and she does not care. She wishes only to think for herself. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
'''The Revolution seems to mark a period where women can start voicing political opinions without being attacked for it.''' Eliza Wilkinson, at least in her letters, claimed the right to express her political sentiments and rages about how authors make women out to be weak and fit for nothing more than menial tasks, or in more visceral language, appearing as “contemptible ''earth worms'' (124).” '''Interestingly, she apparently had political discussions not just with her female friends, but with males as well. She talks about a conversation with a Patriot officer. Whether or not he took her opinions seriously, I don’t know, but the fact that he was willing to talk with her about politics suggests a change in attitude from earlier colonial times.''' Of course, Eliza is an elite with a fair amount of power, giving her the opportunity and station to speak up. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
Eliza Wilkinson is rather bloodthirsty when she talks about how it is acceptable for "Americans" to be cruel to the enemy. I think it is funny how she talks about how everyone is equal but Americans are at the same time superior. I did like how she said that men should not restrict a woman's right to think for herself. I liked her patriotism and the fact that she spoke her mind about what she thought of the revolution despite the fact that women are not supposed to think about such things. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Grace Galloway’s diary, 1778-79, Philadelphia ==<br />
I thought '''it was rather interesting that Grace Galloway "resented the intrusion of politics into her personal life."''' I feel like this may be the reason why it took women so long to start getting involved in "men's affairs" because many women, like Grace, did not care for it. They would rather just be housewives and be content with that. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed Grace Galloways entry she seemed so stubborn and defiant! I loved it. '''It was interesting to read her entry in comparison to that of Eliza Wilkinson. Both women although on opposing sides had very strong opinions and seemed to have no qualms with sharing them.''' I was impressed by the fact that Grace stayed behind when her husband and daughter left for England (even her reasons might have been selfish!) The fact that Grace was penalized for her views was interesting '''I wonder if they would have persecuted her even if she had been apolitical just because of her husbands tory status which she would have been automatically associated with.''' <br />
--Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Grace Galloway's diary entries. Especially since she was alone, her strength in standing up for what she believed is admirable. There was a qoute in the introduction before the entries that spoke volumes concerning how she felt about her marriage: ''''"Liberty of doing as I please makes even poverty more agreeable than any time I spent since I was married."' Hmm, maybe not a content housewife. Her argument against her property being seized based on her husband's political opinions makes sense since women had no part in politics, why should they be held accountable? Given her circumstances of having everything confiscated, how did she and other women in her position survive?''' - Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Abigail Adams, Remember the Ladies, 1776 ==<br />
'''I love this letter'''. When Abigail wrote this letter to her husband she hoped that he would include women in the new code of laws. She wasn't afraid to say that if they were not recognized they would rebel. He laughed at her request for women to be included in those laws. She even wrote to her friend Mercy Warren, trying to get a petition going of their greviances. '''An interesting point was when Abigail wrote back to her husband and said, "we have it in our power not only to free ouselves but to subdue our masters."''' She was telling him that women had a lot more power than men realize. By the power of persuation and a woman's wit and charm, women could get their masters to submit to whatever they wanted. Abigail was very "saucy" and is not afraid to tell her husband what she thinks and admits she will fight against laws that have no representation for women. I like that Abigail saw this as a golden opportunity for women to seek out more liberties and express themselves in this new government these men were creating. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I particularly like how John writes, '''"But your letter was the first intimation that another tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented." I have the feeling that he is kind of mocking her''' by saying that this is the first he has ever heard of women being discontented with their social status. But, what he says about women being the biggest "tribe" of them all is correct because if all the women decided to ban together under one common goal, they could deny the men everything until they got what they wanted. '''This is unrealistic, though, because to make it effective, most if not all women would have to have a common goal to reform''', and (especially at that time), it appears that not all women cared enough to have a political say in things, etc. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
'''So, Abigail Adams is pretty much awesome, right?''' In these letters we’ve got her threatening to start a rebellion if the ladies are ignored. Obviously, she is joking to a certain extent, but '''her use of the patriot’s rhetoric is interesting: “we will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation (128).”''' Sounds familiar, but John Adams conveniently ignores her fair points, though he does pay the ladies a “compliment” about how their “Tribe is more numerous and powerful than all the rest.” He throws back a few snappy one-liners and shows he can use hot button words too, particularly about “the Despotism of the Peticoat.” '''Still, Abigail gets the best line: “That your sex are Naturally Tyrannical is a Truth so thoroughly established as to admit no dispute.” It seems that though it is acceptable for women to have political sentiment, it doesn’t mean men will necessarily take it seriously. How surprising. I’m sure Abigail was quite objectionable to that dismissal and quite loud about it too. Oh, to be a fly on the wall in the Adams household! I'll bring the popcorn!''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I didn’t realize Abigail Adams was such a strong women. In her correspondence to her husband, John Adams, she was determined that he “remember the ladies.” She argues that if attention is not paid to the ladies that they will foment a rebellion and not hold themselves bound by any laws in which they have no voice, or representation. This is an extremely strong stance to take and one for which I doubt many women could take. '''I am curious of how much leeway Abigail Adams had based on who she was and who she was married to, if a unknown poor colonial women had been so outward about her rights, what would have happened? At the same time, Abigail Adams had a great deal of power in her household when her husband was away, that had to have impacted her views as well'''. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I think Erin makes a really good point- I also wonder if Abigail's courage to voice her opinion and strength of character is a result of her social standing and also the fact that John was away from home for periods of time. I wonder if this is an example of the male head of household (in this case, John) giving his wife more liberty to run the farm (or plantation, maybe)while he was away, similar to what we talked about in class? '''I really also like Abigail as a person, and I think her marriage to John is very interesting, as revealed in the letters. I wonder how typical their marriage was of the period?''' They both seem to respect each other quite a bit, while not being afraid to be humourous or candid in their own individual opinions. One of my favorite lines is when John states, in response to Abigail's request that he "Remember the Ladies", "But your Letter was the first Intimation that another Tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented.- This is rather too coarse a Compliment but you are so saucy, I wont blot it out." Abigail seems to be a very determined and energetic woman- I think it would have been really neat and interesting to have known her. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
As much as this correspondence speaks to Abigail's "sauciness," I think '''it paints an interesting portrait of their relationship. They seem to have a very clever, teasing tone with one another. This sort of correspondence really seems to fit in with the archetypal perception of the era, with everyone feeling empowered by new freedoms, but I wonder how typical the Adamses were''' in the colonies. '''''Did everyone read the line about the "first intimation that another Tribe..." as being sort of jokingly mocking?''''' -- erin b<br />
<br />
Just wanted to say, I love Abigial Adams. Imagine if every woman of the time had her education, relationship with John, it'd be amazing. - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
I thought it was really neat that Abigail Adams was able to write to her husband with her terms. The fact that their relationship in that time period was on that level was interesting. Although John Adams shot her idea down, he gave it some thought. Not many men would even listen to their wives about political stuff such as this. Clearly, the Adams’ marriage was different from many of those in the Revolutionary time. I also enjoyed that the little section included the letter from Abigail to John and back, and then Abigail's letter to her friend Mercy.–Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Well it goes without saying that I loved these letters...I mean how could you not! But it was really refreshing to read '''the correspondence between John and Abigail it did not seem as dated and formal as some of the other correspondence we have read. There seemed to be a genuine ease and mutual respect for one another that was prevalent throughout'''; even when John gently shot her down basically. But I guess we can comfort ourselves with the hope that she probably gave him hell when he came home for not "remembering the ladies" I feel like every week the women become a bit more brazen in their correspondence and various writings, I love it!<br />
--Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Benjamin Rush, “Thoughts upon female education,” 1787 (Philadelphia) ==<br />
<br />
'''I found it interesting how Benjamin Rush considered a sound female education to be a "domestic education".''' He believed women needed to be "trained to manage efficient households, and as mothers, they had to raise virtuous citizens." (Woloch, 130) When he used the word "trained", he seemed to be implying that someone else would train women in their duties, meaning the men would. I found it ironic that Rush said, "It becomes us [the men] therefore to prepare them [women], by a suitable education, for the discharge of this most important duty of mothers." (Woloch, 131)''' What makes men so qualified to teach women how to do domestic and motherly duties, when they have no idea what those duties entail? Rush and other men felt it was their obligation to teach women to do jobs they were already doing.''' I also felt as though Rush assumed women could not do any of the jobs/talents he listed, such as learning the English language, or bookkeeping. I have a feeling that Rush and other men were under the impression that motherly and domestic duties were simple to understand and easy to do, yet I think Rush had never heard the saying "easier said than done." ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
'''I thought it was interesting how Benjamin Rush directed his argument and his speech to the "Gentlemen" in the audience, even though he was discussing female education''' and what he thought should be done or corrected in the present education systems in order to better prepare women for their roles as wives and mothers. I think this is evidence that the men were still thought to be "responsible" for their wives and daughters- society at this time still seems to be very much a patriarchal one by reading what Benjamin Rush has to say. I suppose it will still be a while (perhaps not until the early-to-mid 19th Century would be my guess, when you have a lot of reform movements, among them education reforms)before women have more of a "voice" in their own education. Here, the females seem to play a "secondary role" to that of the Gentlemen, even though they are the ones receiving the education. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
Thoughts upon Female Education is addressed (for the most part) to men, post Revolutionary War, advocating the increase in female education. '''Since it was addressed to men, the benefits of an educated female were directed towards the male concerns of economic, political, religious, and social logic that would thus persuade them that this education would be good (for the men).''' He stated that by educating females they would be helpful to their husbands in their business and personal affairs, '''they would be “an agreeable companion for a sensible man” (132), it would prevent superstition, they would be better suited for domestic affairs and rearing of the children, and that “the government of them will be easy and agreeable” (133).''' I also found it humorous that among these sensible arguments, the advocating for dance within education was important because it “promotes health and renders the figure and motions of the body easy and agreeable”. (132) Among these rational thoughts of intelligence, handiness, and, social morality, that a woman’s figure would be as important as the rest and ought to be addressed in their education was interesting and amusing. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Judith Sargent Murray, 1790, “on the Equality of the Sexes” ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Taylor & Duffin Report Molly Brant's Opinions and Influence, 1778 Daniel Claus assesses Molly Brant's Influence, 1779==<br />
'''Both Taylor and Duffin’s report and Daniel Claus’s assessment indicate that the British viewed Molly Brant as a vital political connection''' as she represented British interests to Native Americans. As seen in Taylor and Duffin’s report, the fact that the British gave Molly Brant all the money she wanted shows their high opinion of her. '''Brant was also powerful within Native American communities'''. She persuaded a fickle chief to reaffirm his alliance to the British. Molly must have been a very intelligent woman to command the respect of both English and Native American leaders. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I agree that the British viewed Molly Brant as a vital political connection. It's amazing that a woman was able to persuade and gain the respect of the British and Native American leaders. I also found it interesting that she had such a great influence in a time when most women were expected to be seen but not heard.--Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Esther DeBerdt Reed, “Sentiments of an American Woman,” 1780 ==<br />
I admire women during the American Revolution because they took this opportunity to try to change things for themselves. I think their experiences made them stronger and gave them a stronger sense of who they were outside of the home. They were not afraid to speak out. They knew the purpose of this war and supported their families - even if that meant throwing themselves into harm's way. Esther Deberdt Reed did not want women to go unnoticed for their bravery in this war. She doesn's take away the bravery of men but men were the ones who were looked at as "the hero." '''She said it beautifully when she wrote, "we should at least equal, and sometimes surpass them in our love for the public good."''' -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
'''I loved how Esther DeBerdt Reed spoke so strongly and patriotically. She believed that women could be as patriotic as men, even if they were not doing the same duties in the war.''' I agree with what Marsha about what Reed wrote about "surpass[ing] them in our love for the public good." She believed that through strong patriotism and support for the country, the women could be active participants in the war, since they were not allowed to fight or take part in other areas of the war effort. She believed the men needed to know that the women were offering their help in any way possible. '''At the end of her writing, she writes, "Receive with a free hand our offering, the purest which can be presented to your virtue."''' Although the women could not participate as much as they may have liked, they were still more than willing to support the men who were fighting for them, in any and all ways possible. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex that Esther DeBerdt Reed spoke very strongly. I feel like Reed made a great case for women in her writing. She discussed the influence of Volumnia and other Roman ladies on ancient Rome. She also writes about women from different countries supporting their country's war efforts. Reed also calls on women to behave the same way that they did at the beginning of the Revolution. She wants them to return to supporting the cause, sometimes with extreme measures. I also liked that she signed it "An American Woman". She probably did that partly so people would not criticize her and partly to inspire the other women of America.--Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Thomas Jefferson’s Slaves Join the British, 1781 ==<br />
<br />
Although this article was not very long, nor really an article it provided a lot of clues about the slaves of Jefferson. '''This list definitely makes it appear as if Jefferson saw them as property.''' Especially when he includes in the list the children of some of his slaves instead of saying “Name, ____’s daughter” or something to that extent he simply writes “Hanah’s child.” The names also bring to mind what we talked about in class last week about the naming conventions. The names on the list are more Anglican than African with names like Patty, Sam, and Lucy. The name Quomina is the only one that seems to stick out. This shows that Virginia was more like the Northern states in that respect.–Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
I also noticed that most of the slave names were more Anglican than African. I thought it was interesting that so many of the slaves joined "the enemy". I would have thought that since they were Thomas Jefferson's slaves they would have joined the American side of the war. Why did so many slaves join the British side? Were they technically "allowed" to since they were owned by Jefferson? --Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Sarah Osborn, Camp Follower, Recalls the Revolution, 1837 ==<br />
I found the writings from Sarah Osborn effective in studying women's roles during the Revolutionary War. At a time when women were still seen as only belonging in the home, she followed her husband and the army throughout the colonies. '''She performed domestic duties such as cleaning, mending clothing, and cooking for soldiers but was also seen as a member of the army.''' The point I found most interesting was at the surrender in Yorktown when Sarah thought something bad had occurred, asked a question and recieved the reply, "Are not you soldier enough to know what it means?" I found this to mean the soldiers treated her as an equal and should know the rules of the army, "mans world". Sarah Osborn broke traditional ideas of womens work in the eighteenth century and was able to see first hand the building of America. -Megan W. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mary Jemison Views the Revolution ==<br />
I liked the article that featured Mary Jemison's views on the Revolution. The was in depth and described the actions of the Iroquois Indians in detail. I could tell that she accepted the Indians as her people when she said "my Indian brother", and '''when she said "...'''we''' sustained no loss in the war..." She felt she was a part of the tribe and they were her family.''' She describes how some Indians decided to go against the treaty that was made with the colonists to help the British fight. She describes many battles that were fought, and how ultimately many of her people suffered. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
Mary Jemison's view of the Revolution was really interesting especially since she shares the Indian perspective of the war. She points out how they broke their treaty with one side because the British told them the rebels would be beaten easily and gave them gifts. Mary basically implied that the Indians were bought with gifts to fight for the British. She states the Indians were "hired to commit depredations upon the whites, who had given them no offense. '''She does not seem to agree with the decision to fight for the British. She does accept the Iroquois as her people even if she does not agree with the things they do.'''- LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
'''For as much as Mary Jemison’s appearance of aligning herself with the Iroquois through her speech such as “our Indians”, it almost seems tenuous and superficial as she also interchangeably uses distancing words such as “the Indians” or just “they”. This fragile state of association is also shown by the fact that at first sign of food shortage, she quickly took her children and left the Iroquois. This paragraph (third from the bottom) says nothing about her husband, friends, or the connections she had formed with the people in the Iroquois village and her concern about how they would have fared, and also the fact that she never went back.''' I think this article was interesting to see how the Iroquois women viewed the American Revolution and part the Iroquois played, but just as much, '''''I think, maybe, that this article also should warn us about overstating her emotional connection to the Iroquois themselves?''''' – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Thomas Paine in 1775, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 288-289 ==<br />
'''As a modern reader, I found Thomas Paine’s essay very condescending. I also had difficulty locating the rights Thomas Paine admitted that women possessed, as indicated by the title. Paine spent most of the essay pitying women:''' “Cruel distempers attack their beauty- and the hour, which confirms their release from those, is perhaps the most melancholy of their lives. It robs them of the most essential characteristic of their sex (288).” This article did not acclaim a woman’s older years as a time of potentially more social respect and authority; instead Paine asserted that older women were very depressed because they lost their beauty. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
== An Anonymous Woman Claims Women's Rights in 1780, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 293-294 ==<br />
<br />
This passage while short in length summed up womens rights effectively stating women were stronger patriots then men. The writer is asking for equality even though women "[s]ometimes surpass them in our love for the public good." Women surpassed men in their love for country and fight for freedom by willingly allowing their sons and husbands to fight and maybe die for their country. Did all women feel the same as this writer that they were willing to give up vain items (hair accessories) at the end of the Revolution just as they were able to stop drinking tea at the start of the Revolution? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I liked the opinions of this woman who was defending her rights. She had good points to make including mentioning famous heroines and when she said "...women have been seen forgetting the weakness of their sex, building new walls.." She is describing how women are strong and not only take on the burdens and stress of being a female and living day to day but also taking care of their families and those around them. -Amy Van Ness</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_5_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 5 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-24T13:23:30Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Esther DeBerdt Reed, “Sentiments of an American Woman,” 1780 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Comparative questions or comments ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Phillis Wheatley, 1768, An address to George III ==<br />
<br />
I think Phillis Wheatley had an extremely rare story. She was a slave who was taught by her owners to read and write, she was sent to Europe to publish her poems and was freed upon her return.''' What is more rare is that Phillis was not only literate but aware of the politics of the time, as shown in her address to George III'''. As a slave who was owned I wonder what parallels she drew between that and the colonies that were owned by England. – Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I do like Phillis Wheatley's story. I'm sure it was very rare to even have such education and praise, and to be sent to England to publish poetry for a white woman, so for a slave to achieve such heights is quite remarkable. '''I also find the subject of her poem rather shocking, seeing as how she is/was a slave'''. To speak out against the king (or anyone) for that matter and be black AND a woman must have taken real courage. - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
== Eliza Wilkinson, Carolina Patriot, 1782 ==<br />
This reading was very interesting. I felt that Eliza painted the British in a very harsh light (which I know was the point), but '''she just seemed like a bit of a hypocrite. One sentence really caught my eye: "The Americans are obliged to commit unavoidable acts of cruelty; the defense of their country requires it; you seek their lives and liberties, and they must either kill or be killed." So, its ok for the Americans can be mean and cruel, but if the English are then that’s ten times worse?''' Also in this reading, Eliza tells a bit of a story some man told her about someone, (I'm assuming the someone is an analogy for the British and his farm is an analogy for the Americans), encroaching on his farm taking more and more from him. And, at the end he asks, "is this not slavery?" Now that is pretty ridiculous because as a North Carolina planter, I'm sure he had slaves, or at the very least, neighbors who had slaves. '''So, as long as the Americans are not treated like slaves, then it is fine, but they can still have slaves of their own.'''<br />
One more sentence in this reading really caught my eye, When Eliza is talking about Homer and she says, "what contemptible EARTH WORMS these authors make us!" She is expressing her displeasure over not even having the liberty to think, and she says that that is all she wants. She writes of how the men would not want women to be a part of political matters, and she does not care. She wishes only to think for herself. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
'''The Revolution seems to mark a period where women can start voicing political opinions without being attacked for it.''' Eliza Wilkinson, at least in her letters, claimed the right to express her political sentiments and rages about how authors make women out to be weak and fit for nothing more than menial tasks, or in more visceral language, appearing as “contemptible ''earth worms'' (124).” '''Interestingly, she apparently had political discussions not just with her female friends, but with males as well. She talks about a conversation with a Patriot officer. Whether or not he took her opinions seriously, I don’t know, but the fact that he was willing to talk with her about politics suggests a change in attitude from earlier colonial times.''' Of course, Eliza is an elite with a fair amount of power, giving her the opportunity and station to speak up. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
Eliza Wilkinson is rather bloodthirsty when she talks about how it is acceptable for "Americans" to be cruel to the enemy. I think it is funny how she talks about how everyone is equal but Americans are at the same time superior. I did like how she said that men should not restrict a woman's right to think for herself. I liked her patriotism and the fact that she spoke her mind about what she thought of the revolution despite the fact that women are not supposed to think about such things. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Grace Galloway’s diary, 1778-79, Philadelphia ==<br />
I thought '''it was rather interesting that Grace Galloway "resented the intrusion of politics into her personal life."''' I feel like this may be the reason why it took women so long to start getting involved in "men's affairs" because many women, like Grace, did not care for it. They would rather just be housewives and be content with that. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed Grace Galloways entry she seemed so stubborn and defiant! I loved it. '''It was interesting to read her entry in comparison to that of Eliza Wilkinson. Both women although on opposing sides had very strong opinions and seemed to have no qualms with sharing them.''' I was impressed by the fact that Grace stayed behind when her husband and daughter left for England (even her reasons might have been selfish!) The fact that Grace was penalized for her views was interesting '''I wonder if they would have persecuted her even if she had been apolitical just because of her husbands tory status which she would have been automatically associated with.''' <br />
--Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Grace Galloway's diary entries. Especially since she was alone, her strength in standing up for what she believed is admirable. There was a qoute in the introduction before the entries that spoke volumes concerning how she felt about her marriage: ''''"Liberty of doing as I please makes even poverty more agreeable than any time I spent since I was married."' Hmm, maybe not a content housewife. Her argument against her property being seized based on her husband's political opinions makes sense since women had no part in politics, why should they be held accountable? Given her circumstances of having everything confiscated, how did she and other women in her position survive?''' - Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Abigail Adams, Remember the Ladies, 1776 ==<br />
'''I love this letter'''. When Abigail wrote this letter to her husband she hoped that he would include women in the new code of laws. She wasn't afraid to say that if they were not recognized they would rebel. He laughed at her request for women to be included in those laws. She even wrote to her friend Mercy Warren, trying to get a petition going of their greviances. '''An interesting point was when Abigail wrote back to her husband and said, "we have it in our power not only to free ouselves but to subdue our masters."''' She was telling him that women had a lot more power than men realize. By the power of persuation and a woman's wit and charm, women could get their masters to submit to whatever they wanted. Abigail was very "saucy" and is not afraid to tell her husband what she thinks and admits she will fight against laws that have no representation for women. I like that Abigail saw this as a golden opportunity for women to seek out more liberties and express themselves in this new government these men were creating. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I particularly like how John writes, '''"But your letter was the first intimation that another tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented." I have the feeling that he is kind of mocking her''' by saying that this is the first he has ever heard of women being discontented with their social status. But, what he says about women being the biggest "tribe" of them all is correct because if all the women decided to ban together under one common goal, they could deny the men everything until they got what they wanted. '''This is unrealistic, though, because to make it effective, most if not all women would have to have a common goal to reform''', and (especially at that time), it appears that not all women cared enough to have a political say in things, etc. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
'''So, Abigail Adams is pretty much awesome, right?''' In these letters we’ve got her threatening to start a rebellion if the ladies are ignored. Obviously, she is joking to a certain extent, but '''her use of the patriot’s rhetoric is interesting: “we will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation (128).”''' Sounds familiar, but John Adams conveniently ignores her fair points, though he does pay the ladies a “compliment” about how their “Tribe is more numerous and powerful than all the rest.” He throws back a few snappy one-liners and shows he can use hot button words too, particularly about “the Despotism of the Peticoat.” '''Still, Abigail gets the best line: “That your sex are Naturally Tyrannical is a Truth so thoroughly established as to admit no dispute.” It seems that though it is acceptable for women to have political sentiment, it doesn’t mean men will necessarily take it seriously. How surprising. I’m sure Abigail was quite objectionable to that dismissal and quite loud about it too. Oh, to be a fly on the wall in the Adams household! I'll bring the popcorn!''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I didn’t realize Abigail Adams was such a strong women. In her correspondence to her husband, John Adams, she was determined that he “remember the ladies.” She argues that if attention is not paid to the ladies that they will foment a rebellion and not hold themselves bound by any laws in which they have no voice, or representation. This is an extremely strong stance to take and one for which I doubt many women could take. '''I am curious of how much leeway Abigail Adams had based on who she was and who she was married to, if a unknown poor colonial women had been so outward about her rights, what would have happened? At the same time, Abigail Adams had a great deal of power in her household when her husband was away, that had to have impacted her views as well'''. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I think Erin makes a really good point- I also wonder if Abigail's courage to voice her opinion and strength of character is a result of her social standing and also the fact that John was away from home for periods of time. I wonder if this is an example of the male head of household (in this case, John) giving his wife more liberty to run the farm (or plantation, maybe)while he was away, similar to what we talked about in class? '''I really also like Abigail as a person, and I think her marriage to John is very interesting, as revealed in the letters. I wonder how typical their marriage was of the period?''' They both seem to respect each other quite a bit, while not being afraid to be humourous or candid in their own individual opinions. One of my favorite lines is when John states, in response to Abigail's request that he "Remember the Ladies", "But your Letter was the first Intimation that another Tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented.- This is rather too coarse a Compliment but you are so saucy, I wont blot it out." Abigail seems to be a very determined and energetic woman- I think it would have been really neat and interesting to have known her. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
As much as this correspondence speaks to Abigail's "sauciness," I think '''it paints an interesting portrait of their relationship. They seem to have a very clever, teasing tone with one another. This sort of correspondence really seems to fit in with the archetypal perception of the era, with everyone feeling empowered by new freedoms, but I wonder how typical the Adamses were''' in the colonies. '''''Did everyone read the line about the "first intimation that another Tribe..." as being sort of jokingly mocking?''''' -- erin b<br />
<br />
Just wanted to say, I love Abigial Adams. Imagine if every woman of the time had her education, relationship with John, it'd be amazing. - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
I thought it was really neat that Abigail Adams was able to write to her husband with her terms. The fact that their relationship in that time period was on that level was interesting. Although John Adams shot her idea down, he gave it some thought. Not many men would even listen to their wives about political stuff such as this. Clearly, the Adams’ marriage was different from many of those in the Revolutionary time. I also enjoyed that the little section included the letter from Abigail to John and back, and then Abigail's letter to her friend Mercy.–Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Well it goes without saying that I loved these letters...I mean how could you not! But it was really refreshing to read '''the correspondence between John and Abigail it did not seem as dated and formal as some of the other correspondence we have read. There seemed to be a genuine ease and mutual respect for one another that was prevalent throughout'''; even when John gently shot her down basically. But I guess we can comfort ourselves with the hope that she probably gave him hell when he came home for not "remembering the ladies" I feel like every week the women become a bit more brazen in their correspondence and various writings, I love it!<br />
--Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Benjamin Rush, “Thoughts upon female education,” 1787 (Philadelphia) ==<br />
<br />
'''I found it interesting how Benjamin Rush considered a sound female education to be a "domestic education".''' He believed women needed to be "trained to manage efficient households, and as mothers, they had to raise virtuous citizens." (Woloch, 130) When he used the word "trained", he seemed to be implying that someone else would train women in their duties, meaning the men would. I found it ironic that Rush said, "It becomes us [the men] therefore to prepare them [women], by a suitable education, for the discharge of this most important duty of mothers." (Woloch, 131)''' What makes men so qualified to teach women how to do domestic and motherly duties, when they have no idea what those duties entail? Rush and other men felt it was their obligation to teach women to do jobs they were already doing.''' I also felt as though Rush assumed women could not do any of the jobs/talents he listed, such as learning the English language, or bookkeeping. I have a feeling that Rush and other men were under the impression that motherly and domestic duties were simple to understand and easy to do, yet I think Rush had never heard the saying "easier said than done." ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
'''I thought it was interesting how Benjamin Rush directed his argument and his speech to the "Gentlemen" in the audience, even though he was discussing female education''' and what he thought should be done or corrected in the present education systems in order to better prepare women for their roles as wives and mothers. I think this is evidence that the men were still thought to be "responsible" for their wives and daughters- society at this time still seems to be very much a patriarchal one by reading what Benjamin Rush has to say. I suppose it will still be a while (perhaps not until the early-to-mid 19th Century would be my guess, when you have a lot of reform movements, among them education reforms)before women have more of a "voice" in their own education. Here, the females seem to play a "secondary role" to that of the Gentlemen, even though they are the ones receiving the education. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
Thoughts upon Female Education is addressed (for the most part) to men, post Revolutionary War, advocating the increase in female education. '''Since it was addressed to men, the benefits of an educated female were directed towards the male concerns of economic, political, religious, and social logic that would thus persuade them that this education would be good (for the men).''' He stated that by educating females they would be helpful to their husbands in their business and personal affairs, '''they would be “an agreeable companion for a sensible man” (132), it would prevent superstition, they would be better suited for domestic affairs and rearing of the children, and that “the government of them will be easy and agreeable” (133).''' I also found it humorous that among these sensible arguments, the advocating for dance within education was important because it “promotes health and renders the figure and motions of the body easy and agreeable”. (132) Among these rational thoughts of intelligence, handiness, and, social morality, that a woman’s figure would be as important as the rest and ought to be addressed in their education was interesting and amusing. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Judith Sargent Murray, 1790, “on the Equality of the Sexes” ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Taylor & Duffin Report Molly Brant's Opinions and Influence, 1778 Daniel Claus assesses Molly Brant's Influence, 1779==<br />
'''Both Taylor and Duffin’s report and Daniel Claus’s assessment indicate that the British viewed Molly Brant as a vital political connection''' as she represented British interests to Native Americans. As seen in Taylor and Duffin’s report, the fact that the British gave Molly Brant all the money she wanted shows their high opinion of her. '''Brant was also powerful within Native American communities'''. She persuaded a fickle chief to reaffirm his alliance to the British. Molly must have been a very intelligent woman to command the respect of both English and Native American leaders. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I agree that the British viewed Molly Brant as a vital political connection. It's amazing that a woman was able to persuade and gain the respect of the British and Native American leaders. I also found it interesting that she had such a great influence in a time when most women were expected to be seen but not heard.--Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Esther DeBerdt Reed, “Sentiments of an American Woman,” 1780 ==<br />
I admire women during the American Revolution because they took this opportunity to try to change things for themselves. I think their experiences made them stronger and gave them a stronger sense of who they were outside of the home. They were not afraid to speak out. They knew the purpose of this war and supported their families - even if that meant throwing themselves into harm's way. Esther Deberdt Reed did not want women to go unnoticed for their bravery in this war. She doesn's take away the bravery of men but men were the ones who were looked at as "the hero." '''She said it beautifully when she wrote, "we should at least equal, and sometimes surpass them in our love for the public good."''' -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
'''I loved how Esther DeBerdt Reed spoke so strongly and patriotically. She believed that women could be as patriotic as men, even if they were not doing the same duties in the war.''' I agree with what Marsha about what Reed wrote about "surpass[ing] them in our love for the public good." She believed that through strong patriotism and support for the country, the women could be active participants in the war, since they were not allowed to fight or take part in other areas of the war effort. She believed the men needed to know that the women were offering their help in any way possible. '''At the end of her writing, she writes, "Receive with a free hand our offering, the purest which can be presented to your virtue."''' Although the women could not participate as much as they may have liked, they were still more than willing to support the men who were fighting for them, in any and all ways possible. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
I agree with Alex that Esther DeBerdt Reed spoke very strongly. I feel like Reed made a great case for women in her writing. She discussed the influence of Volumnia and other Roman ladies on ancient Rome. She also writes about women from different countries supporting their country's war efforts. Reed also calls on women to behave the same way that they did at the beginning of the Revolution. She wants them to return to supporting the cause, sometimes with extreme measures. I also liked that she signed it "An American Woman". She probably did that partly so people would not criticize her and partly to inspire the other women of America.--Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Thomas Jefferson’s Slaves Join the British, 1781 ==<br />
<br />
Although this article was not very long, nor really an article it provided a lot of clues about the slaves of Jefferson. '''This list definitely makes it appear as if Jefferson saw them as property.''' Especially when he includes in the list the children of some of his slaves instead of saying “Name, ____’s daughter” or something to that extent he simply writes “Hanah’s child.” The names also bring to mind what we talked about in class last week about the naming conventions. The names on the list are more Anglican than African with names like Patty, Sam, and Lucy. The name Quomina is the only one that seems to stick out. This shows that Virginia was more like the Northern states in that respect.–Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Sarah Osborn, Camp Follower, Recalls the Revolution, 1837 ==<br />
I found the writings from Sarah Osborn effective in studying women's roles during the Revolutionary War. At a time when women were still seen as only belonging in the home, she followed her husband and the army throughout the colonies. '''She performed domestic duties such as cleaning, mending clothing, and cooking for soldiers but was also seen as a member of the army.''' The point I found most interesting was at the surrender in Yorktown when Sarah thought something bad had occurred, asked a question and recieved the reply, "Are not you soldier enough to know what it means?" I found this to mean the soldiers treated her as an equal and should know the rules of the army, "mans world". Sarah Osborn broke traditional ideas of womens work in the eighteenth century and was able to see first hand the building of America. -Megan W. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mary Jemison Views the Revolution ==<br />
I liked the article that featured Mary Jemison's views on the Revolution. The was in depth and described the actions of the Iroquois Indians in detail. I could tell that she accepted the Indians as her people when she said "my Indian brother", and '''when she said "...'''we''' sustained no loss in the war..." She felt she was a part of the tribe and they were her family.''' She describes how some Indians decided to go against the treaty that was made with the colonists to help the British fight. She describes many battles that were fought, and how ultimately many of her people suffered. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
Mary Jemison's view of the Revolution was really interesting especially since she shares the Indian perspective of the war. She points out how they broke their treaty with one side because the British told them the rebels would be beaten easily and gave them gifts. Mary basically implied that the Indians were bought with gifts to fight for the British. She states the Indians were "hired to commit depredations upon the whites, who had given them no offense. '''She does not seem to agree with the decision to fight for the British. She does accept the Iroquois as her people even if she does not agree with the things they do.'''- LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
'''For as much as Mary Jemison’s appearance of aligning herself with the Iroquois through her speech such as “our Indians”, it almost seems tenuous and superficial as she also interchangeably uses distancing words such as “the Indians” or just “they”. This fragile state of association is also shown by the fact that at first sign of food shortage, she quickly took her children and left the Iroquois. This paragraph (third from the bottom) says nothing about her husband, friends, or the connections she had formed with the people in the Iroquois village and her concern about how they would have fared, and also the fact that she never went back.''' I think this article was interesting to see how the Iroquois women viewed the American Revolution and part the Iroquois played, but just as much, '''''I think, maybe, that this article also should warn us about overstating her emotional connection to the Iroquois themselves?''''' – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Thomas Paine in 1775, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 288-289 ==<br />
'''As a modern reader, I found Thomas Paine’s essay very condescending. I also had difficulty locating the rights Thomas Paine admitted that women possessed, as indicated by the title. Paine spent most of the essay pitying women:''' “Cruel distempers attack their beauty- and the hour, which confirms their release from those, is perhaps the most melancholy of their lives. It robs them of the most essential characteristic of their sex (288).” This article did not acclaim a woman’s older years as a time of potentially more social respect and authority; instead Paine asserted that older women were very depressed because they lost their beauty. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
== An Anonymous Woman Claims Women's Rights in 1780, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 293-294 ==<br />
<br />
This passage while short in length summed up womens rights effectively stating women were stronger patriots then men. The writer is asking for equality even though women "[s]ometimes surpass them in our love for the public good." Women surpassed men in their love for country and fight for freedom by willingly allowing their sons and husbands to fight and maybe die for their country. Did all women feel the same as this writer that they were willing to give up vain items (hair accessories) at the end of the Revolution just as they were able to stop drinking tea at the start of the Revolution? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I liked the opinions of this woman who was defending her rights. She had good points to make including mentioning famous heroines and when she said "...women have been seen forgetting the weakness of their sex, building new walls.." She is describing how women are strong and not only take on the burdens and stress of being a female and living day to day but also taking care of their families and those around them. -Amy Van Ness</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_5_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 5 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-24T13:16:55Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Taylor & Duffin Report Molly Brant's Opinions and Influence, 1778 Daniel Claus assesses Molly Brant's Influence, 1779 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Comparative questions or comments ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Phillis Wheatley, 1768, An address to George III ==<br />
<br />
I think Phillis Wheatley had an extremely rare story. She was a slave who was taught by her owners to read and write, she was sent to Europe to publish her poems and was freed upon her return.''' What is more rare is that Phillis was not only literate but aware of the politics of the time, as shown in her address to George III'''. As a slave who was owned I wonder what parallels she drew between that and the colonies that were owned by England. – Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I do like Phillis Wheatley's story. I'm sure it was very rare to even have such education and praise, and to be sent to England to publish poetry for a white woman, so for a slave to achieve such heights is quite remarkable. '''I also find the subject of her poem rather shocking, seeing as how she is/was a slave'''. To speak out against the king (or anyone) for that matter and be black AND a woman must have taken real courage. - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
== Eliza Wilkinson, Carolina Patriot, 1782 ==<br />
This reading was very interesting. I felt that Eliza painted the British in a very harsh light (which I know was the point), but '''she just seemed like a bit of a hypocrite. One sentence really caught my eye: "The Americans are obliged to commit unavoidable acts of cruelty; the defense of their country requires it; you seek their lives and liberties, and they must either kill or be killed." So, its ok for the Americans can be mean and cruel, but if the English are then that’s ten times worse?''' Also in this reading, Eliza tells a bit of a story some man told her about someone, (I'm assuming the someone is an analogy for the British and his farm is an analogy for the Americans), encroaching on his farm taking more and more from him. And, at the end he asks, "is this not slavery?" Now that is pretty ridiculous because as a North Carolina planter, I'm sure he had slaves, or at the very least, neighbors who had slaves. '''So, as long as the Americans are not treated like slaves, then it is fine, but they can still have slaves of their own.'''<br />
One more sentence in this reading really caught my eye, When Eliza is talking about Homer and she says, "what contemptible EARTH WORMS these authors make us!" She is expressing her displeasure over not even having the liberty to think, and she says that that is all she wants. She writes of how the men would not want women to be a part of political matters, and she does not care. She wishes only to think for herself. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
'''The Revolution seems to mark a period where women can start voicing political opinions without being attacked for it.''' Eliza Wilkinson, at least in her letters, claimed the right to express her political sentiments and rages about how authors make women out to be weak and fit for nothing more than menial tasks, or in more visceral language, appearing as “contemptible ''earth worms'' (124).” '''Interestingly, she apparently had political discussions not just with her female friends, but with males as well. She talks about a conversation with a Patriot officer. Whether or not he took her opinions seriously, I don’t know, but the fact that he was willing to talk with her about politics suggests a change in attitude from earlier colonial times.''' Of course, Eliza is an elite with a fair amount of power, giving her the opportunity and station to speak up. -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
Eliza Wilkinson is rather bloodthirsty when she talks about how it is acceptable for "Americans" to be cruel to the enemy. I think it is funny how she talks about how everyone is equal but Americans are at the same time superior. I did like how she said that men should not restrict a woman's right to think for herself. I liked her patriotism and the fact that she spoke her mind about what she thought of the revolution despite the fact that women are not supposed to think about such things. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Grace Galloway’s diary, 1778-79, Philadelphia ==<br />
I thought '''it was rather interesting that Grace Galloway "resented the intrusion of politics into her personal life."''' I feel like this may be the reason why it took women so long to start getting involved in "men's affairs" because many women, like Grace, did not care for it. They would rather just be housewives and be content with that. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed Grace Galloways entry she seemed so stubborn and defiant! I loved it. '''It was interesting to read her entry in comparison to that of Eliza Wilkinson. Both women although on opposing sides had very strong opinions and seemed to have no qualms with sharing them.''' I was impressed by the fact that Grace stayed behind when her husband and daughter left for England (even her reasons might have been selfish!) The fact that Grace was penalized for her views was interesting '''I wonder if they would have persecuted her even if she had been apolitical just because of her husbands tory status which she would have been automatically associated with.''' <br />
--Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading Grace Galloway's diary entries. Especially since she was alone, her strength in standing up for what she believed is admirable. There was a qoute in the introduction before the entries that spoke volumes concerning how she felt about her marriage: ''''"Liberty of doing as I please makes even poverty more agreeable than any time I spent since I was married."' Hmm, maybe not a content housewife. Her argument against her property being seized based on her husband's political opinions makes sense since women had no part in politics, why should they be held accountable? Given her circumstances of having everything confiscated, how did she and other women in her position survive?''' - Nancy Lee<br />
<br />
== Abigail Adams, Remember the Ladies, 1776 ==<br />
'''I love this letter'''. When Abigail wrote this letter to her husband she hoped that he would include women in the new code of laws. She wasn't afraid to say that if they were not recognized they would rebel. He laughed at her request for women to be included in those laws. She even wrote to her friend Mercy Warren, trying to get a petition going of their greviances. '''An interesting point was when Abigail wrote back to her husband and said, "we have it in our power not only to free ouselves but to subdue our masters."''' She was telling him that women had a lot more power than men realize. By the power of persuation and a woman's wit and charm, women could get their masters to submit to whatever they wanted. Abigail was very "saucy" and is not afraid to tell her husband what she thinks and admits she will fight against laws that have no representation for women. I like that Abigail saw this as a golden opportunity for women to seek out more liberties and express themselves in this new government these men were creating. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
I particularly like how John writes, '''"But your letter was the first intimation that another tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented." I have the feeling that he is kind of mocking her''' by saying that this is the first he has ever heard of women being discontented with their social status. But, what he says about women being the biggest "tribe" of them all is correct because if all the women decided to ban together under one common goal, they could deny the men everything until they got what they wanted. '''This is unrealistic, though, because to make it effective, most if not all women would have to have a common goal to reform''', and (especially at that time), it appears that not all women cared enough to have a political say in things, etc. -Kristina.S.<br />
<br />
'''So, Abigail Adams is pretty much awesome, right?''' In these letters we’ve got her threatening to start a rebellion if the ladies are ignored. Obviously, she is joking to a certain extent, but '''her use of the patriot’s rhetoric is interesting: “we will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation (128).”''' Sounds familiar, but John Adams conveniently ignores her fair points, though he does pay the ladies a “compliment” about how their “Tribe is more numerous and powerful than all the rest.” He throws back a few snappy one-liners and shows he can use hot button words too, particularly about “the Despotism of the Peticoat.” '''Still, Abigail gets the best line: “That your sex are Naturally Tyrannical is a Truth so thoroughly established as to admit no dispute.” It seems that though it is acceptable for women to have political sentiment, it doesn’t mean men will necessarily take it seriously. How surprising. I’m sure Abigail was quite objectionable to that dismissal and quite loud about it too. Oh, to be a fly on the wall in the Adams household! I'll bring the popcorn!''' -- Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
I didn’t realize Abigail Adams was such a strong women. In her correspondence to her husband, John Adams, she was determined that he “remember the ladies.” She argues that if attention is not paid to the ladies that they will foment a rebellion and not hold themselves bound by any laws in which they have no voice, or representation. This is an extremely strong stance to take and one for which I doubt many women could take. '''I am curious of how much leeway Abigail Adams had based on who she was and who she was married to, if a unknown poor colonial women had been so outward about her rights, what would have happened? At the same time, Abigail Adams had a great deal of power in her household when her husband was away, that had to have impacted her views as well'''. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I think Erin makes a really good point- I also wonder if Abigail's courage to voice her opinion and strength of character is a result of her social standing and also the fact that John was away from home for periods of time. I wonder if this is an example of the male head of household (in this case, John) giving his wife more liberty to run the farm (or plantation, maybe)while he was away, similar to what we talked about in class? '''I really also like Abigail as a person, and I think her marriage to John is very interesting, as revealed in the letters. I wonder how typical their marriage was of the period?''' They both seem to respect each other quite a bit, while not being afraid to be humourous or candid in their own individual opinions. One of my favorite lines is when John states, in response to Abigail's request that he "Remember the Ladies", "But your Letter was the first Intimation that another Tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented.- This is rather too coarse a Compliment but you are so saucy, I wont blot it out." Abigail seems to be a very determined and energetic woman- I think it would have been really neat and interesting to have known her. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
As much as this correspondence speaks to Abigail's "sauciness," I think '''it paints an interesting portrait of their relationship. They seem to have a very clever, teasing tone with one another. This sort of correspondence really seems to fit in with the archetypal perception of the era, with everyone feeling empowered by new freedoms, but I wonder how typical the Adamses were''' in the colonies. '''''Did everyone read the line about the "first intimation that another Tribe..." as being sort of jokingly mocking?''''' -- erin b<br />
<br />
Just wanted to say, I love Abigial Adams. Imagine if every woman of the time had her education, relationship with John, it'd be amazing. - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
I thought it was really neat that Abigail Adams was able to write to her husband with her terms. The fact that their relationship in that time period was on that level was interesting. Although John Adams shot her idea down, he gave it some thought. Not many men would even listen to their wives about political stuff such as this. Clearly, the Adams’ marriage was different from many of those in the Revolutionary time. I also enjoyed that the little section included the letter from Abigail to John and back, and then Abigail's letter to her friend Mercy.–Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Well it goes without saying that I loved these letters...I mean how could you not! But it was really refreshing to read '''the correspondence between John and Abigail it did not seem as dated and formal as some of the other correspondence we have read. There seemed to be a genuine ease and mutual respect for one another that was prevalent throughout'''; even when John gently shot her down basically. But I guess we can comfort ourselves with the hope that she probably gave him hell when he came home for not "remembering the ladies" I feel like every week the women become a bit more brazen in their correspondence and various writings, I love it!<br />
--Emma Peck<br />
<br />
== Benjamin Rush, “Thoughts upon female education,” 1787 (Philadelphia) ==<br />
<br />
'''I found it interesting how Benjamin Rush considered a sound female education to be a "domestic education".''' He believed women needed to be "trained to manage efficient households, and as mothers, they had to raise virtuous citizens." (Woloch, 130) When he used the word "trained", he seemed to be implying that someone else would train women in their duties, meaning the men would. I found it ironic that Rush said, "It becomes us [the men] therefore to prepare them [women], by a suitable education, for the discharge of this most important duty of mothers." (Woloch, 131)''' What makes men so qualified to teach women how to do domestic and motherly duties, when they have no idea what those duties entail? Rush and other men felt it was their obligation to teach women to do jobs they were already doing.''' I also felt as though Rush assumed women could not do any of the jobs/talents he listed, such as learning the English language, or bookkeeping. I have a feeling that Rush and other men were under the impression that motherly and domestic duties were simple to understand and easy to do, yet I think Rush had never heard the saying "easier said than done." ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
'''I thought it was interesting how Benjamin Rush directed his argument and his speech to the "Gentlemen" in the audience, even though he was discussing female education''' and what he thought should be done or corrected in the present education systems in order to better prepare women for their roles as wives and mothers. I think this is evidence that the men were still thought to be "responsible" for their wives and daughters- society at this time still seems to be very much a patriarchal one by reading what Benjamin Rush has to say. I suppose it will still be a while (perhaps not until the early-to-mid 19th Century would be my guess, when you have a lot of reform movements, among them education reforms)before women have more of a "voice" in their own education. Here, the females seem to play a "secondary role" to that of the Gentlemen, even though they are the ones receiving the education. -Allison Godart<br />
<br />
Thoughts upon Female Education is addressed (for the most part) to men, post Revolutionary War, advocating the increase in female education. '''Since it was addressed to men, the benefits of an educated female were directed towards the male concerns of economic, political, religious, and social logic that would thus persuade them that this education would be good (for the men).''' He stated that by educating females they would be helpful to their husbands in their business and personal affairs, '''they would be “an agreeable companion for a sensible man” (132), it would prevent superstition, they would be better suited for domestic affairs and rearing of the children, and that “the government of them will be easy and agreeable” (133).''' I also found it humorous that among these sensible arguments, the advocating for dance within education was important because it “promotes health and renders the figure and motions of the body easy and agreeable”. (132) Among these rational thoughts of intelligence, handiness, and, social morality, that a woman’s figure would be as important as the rest and ought to be addressed in their education was interesting and amusing. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Judith Sargent Murray, 1790, “on the Equality of the Sexes” ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Taylor & Duffin Report Molly Brant's Opinions and Influence, 1778 Daniel Claus assesses Molly Brant's Influence, 1779==<br />
'''Both Taylor and Duffin’s report and Daniel Claus’s assessment indicate that the British viewed Molly Brant as a vital political connection''' as she represented British interests to Native Americans. As seen in Taylor and Duffin’s report, the fact that the British gave Molly Brant all the money she wanted shows their high opinion of her. '''Brant was also powerful within Native American communities'''. She persuaded a fickle chief to reaffirm his alliance to the British. Molly must have been a very intelligent woman to command the respect of both English and Native American leaders. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
I agree that the British viewed Molly Brant as a vital political connection. It's amazing that a woman was able to persuade and gain the respect of the British and Native American leaders. I also found it interesting that she had such a great influence in a time when most women were expected to be seen but not heard.--Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Esther DeBerdt Reed, “Sentiments of an American Woman,” 1780 ==<br />
I admire women during the American Revolution because they took this opportunity to try to change things for themselves. I think their experiences made them stronger and gave them a stronger sense of who they were outside of the home. They were not afraid to speak out. They knew the purpose of this war and supported their families - even if that meant throwing themselves into harm's way. Esther Deberdt Reed did not want women to go unnoticed for their bravery in this war. She doesn's take away the bravery of men but men were the ones who were looked at as "the hero." '''She said it beautifully when she wrote, "we should at least equal, and sometimes surpass them in our love for the public good."''' -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
'''I loved how Esther DeBerdt Reed spoke so strongly and patriotically. She believed that women could be as patriotic as men, even if they were not doing the same duties in the war.''' I agree with what Marsha about what Reed wrote about "surpass[ing] them in our love for the public good." She believed that through strong patriotism and support for the country, the women could be active participants in the war, since they were not allowed to fight or take part in other areas of the war effort. She believed the men needed to know that the women were offering their help in any way possible. '''At the end of her writing, she writes, "Receive with a free hand our offering, the purest which can be presented to your virtue."''' Although the women could not participate as much as they may have liked, they were still more than willing to support the men who were fighting for them, in any and all ways possible. ---- Alex Mankarios<br />
<br />
== Thomas Jefferson’s Slaves Join the British, 1781 ==<br />
<br />
Although this article was not very long, nor really an article it provided a lot of clues about the slaves of Jefferson. '''This list definitely makes it appear as if Jefferson saw them as property.''' Especially when he includes in the list the children of some of his slaves instead of saying “Name, ____’s daughter” or something to that extent he simply writes “Hanah’s child.” The names also bring to mind what we talked about in class last week about the naming conventions. The names on the list are more Anglican than African with names like Patty, Sam, and Lucy. The name Quomina is the only one that seems to stick out. This shows that Virginia was more like the Northern states in that respect.–Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Sarah Osborn, Camp Follower, Recalls the Revolution, 1837 ==<br />
I found the writings from Sarah Osborn effective in studying women's roles during the Revolutionary War. At a time when women were still seen as only belonging in the home, she followed her husband and the army throughout the colonies. '''She performed domestic duties such as cleaning, mending clothing, and cooking for soldiers but was also seen as a member of the army.''' The point I found most interesting was at the surrender in Yorktown when Sarah thought something bad had occurred, asked a question and recieved the reply, "Are not you soldier enough to know what it means?" I found this to mean the soldiers treated her as an equal and should know the rules of the army, "mans world". Sarah Osborn broke traditional ideas of womens work in the eighteenth century and was able to see first hand the building of America. -Megan W. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Mary Jemison Views the Revolution ==<br />
I liked the article that featured Mary Jemison's views on the Revolution. The was in depth and described the actions of the Iroquois Indians in detail. I could tell that she accepted the Indians as her people when she said "my Indian brother", and '''when she said "...'''we''' sustained no loss in the war..." She felt she was a part of the tribe and they were her family.''' She describes how some Indians decided to go against the treaty that was made with the colonists to help the British fight. She describes many battles that were fought, and how ultimately many of her people suffered. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
Mary Jemison's view of the Revolution was really interesting especially since she shares the Indian perspective of the war. She points out how they broke their treaty with one side because the British told them the rebels would be beaten easily and gave them gifts. Mary basically implied that the Indians were bought with gifts to fight for the British. She states the Indians were "hired to commit depredations upon the whites, who had given them no offense. '''She does not seem to agree with the decision to fight for the British. She does accept the Iroquois as her people even if she does not agree with the things they do.'''- LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
'''For as much as Mary Jemison’s appearance of aligning herself with the Iroquois through her speech such as “our Indians”, it almost seems tenuous and superficial as she also interchangeably uses distancing words such as “the Indians” or just “they”. This fragile state of association is also shown by the fact that at first sign of food shortage, she quickly took her children and left the Iroquois. This paragraph (third from the bottom) says nothing about her husband, friends, or the connections she had formed with the people in the Iroquois village and her concern about how they would have fared, and also the fact that she never went back.''' I think this article was interesting to see how the Iroquois women viewed the American Revolution and part the Iroquois played, but just as much, '''''I think, maybe, that this article also should warn us about overstating her emotional connection to the Iroquois themselves?''''' – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Thomas Paine in 1775, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 288-289 ==<br />
'''As a modern reader, I found Thomas Paine’s essay very condescending. I also had difficulty locating the rights Thomas Paine admitted that women possessed, as indicated by the title. Paine spent most of the essay pitying women:''' “Cruel distempers attack their beauty- and the hour, which confirms their release from those, is perhaps the most melancholy of their lives. It robs them of the most essential characteristic of their sex (288).” This article did not acclaim a woman’s older years as a time of potentially more social respect and authority; instead Paine asserted that older women were very depressed because they lost their beauty. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
== An Anonymous Woman Claims Women's Rights in 1780, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 293-294 ==<br />
<br />
This passage while short in length summed up womens rights effectively stating women were stronger patriots then men. The writer is asking for equality even though women "[s]ometimes surpass them in our love for the public good." Women surpassed men in their love for country and fight for freedom by willingly allowing their sons and husbands to fight and maybe die for their country. Did all women feel the same as this writer that they were willing to give up vain items (hair accessories) at the end of the Revolution just as they were able to stop drinking tea at the start of the Revolution? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I liked the opinions of this woman who was defending her rights. She had good points to make including mentioning famous heroines and when she said "...women have been seen forgetting the weakness of their sex, building new walls.." She is describing how women are strong and not only take on the burdens and stress of being a female and living day to day but also taking care of their families and those around them. -Amy Van Ness</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_4_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 4 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-16T17:38:29Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Bridget Bishop convicted of witchcraft 1692; “Casco Girls” accuse George Burroughs, 1692 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Cross-source questions/comments ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Anne Bradstreet, “A Spiritual Autobiography,” ~1670 ==<br />
<br />
Anne Hutchinson is now one of my top 10 favorite women in history. The overall summary of her trial is stated on page 103: she was charged with dishonoring the community fathers, of holding meetings at her home in a manner inappropriate to her sex, and of insulting ministers at a private conference by accusing them of laboring under a Covenant of Works. Anne Hutchinson then admits having a revelation where God told her that he would destroy her prosecutors. This was considered heresy. Anne was then sentenced to banishment from the jurisdiction. Overall, I just found the trial to be hilarious. Some of the accusations were such a stretch. I especially enjoyed the accusation that Anne broke the law of the fifth commandment, honoring your mother and father. It took me a minute to figure out that that they actually thought that this meant honoring the “fathers of the commonwealth” (seriously!? …Yes) the governor states on page 105, “if they be the fathers of the commonwealth, and they of another religion, if you entertain them then you dishonor your parents and are justly punishable.” …wow….<br />
I was also surprised at how blunt the puritan men were about the status of women. When Anne Hutchinson was being sentenced, the governor states: “Mrs. Hutchinson, the sentence of the court you hear is that you are banished from out of our jurisdiction as ''being a women not fit for our society''….” Harsh words. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I had one main question when reading the trial, I had no idea what a Covenant of Works was. I googled it, and I came up with this definition:<br />
<br />
The covenant of works is God's promise to Adam. In return for perfect obedience, he would merit God's reward. The reward in this covenant does not result from grace; rather, it is a debt owed to Adam for keeping his part of the covenant. Unfortunately, Adam failed to keep the covenant and "after the fall, the free gifts on which salvation depends were withdrawn, and natural gifts corrupted and defiled" (Calvin). [[http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/novel_18c/defoe/puritanism.html#works]]<br />
<br />
However, I am still confused as to what Anne Hutchinson was being charged with. She was charged with accusing ministers of laboring under a Covenant of Works. What exactly does that mean? -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I was also confused about what that means. I know Dr. M said in class that she was charged with saying bad things about the ministers and going against the church so I'm guessing that is what that means. -- Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Anne Hutchinson’s trial, 1637 ==<br />
Regarding Anne Hutchinson's Trial<br />
I find it interesting that whenever the governor asks her a question that she rebukes it. In particular, when the governor asks her why she keeps a meeting at her house on a set day. She responds that is lawful for her to do so. Implying that she has not broken any law and then puts "unlawful act" in his lap by saying "can you find a warrant for yourself and condemn me for the same thing?" Meaning do you not have a religious meetings in your home. She is witty and clever with her words in proving her case. The governor seems to stumble to find fault towards her act of meeting. With each question the governor asked she has a rebuttal. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Lancashire, England Women’s Meeting structure, Quaker women in 1675 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== David Brainerd, 1746, account of the Great Awakening ==<br />
<br />
A Remarkable Instance of Awakening-Woloch Reading<br />
The ideas ministers had during the Great Awakening seize to amaze me, as in David Brainerd's case he really did believe he was saving the young Indian woman. "This was indeed a suprising day of God's power, and seemed enough to convince an atheist of the truth, importance, and power of God's word." He believed her not being able to control herself nor speak to anyone was a sign that God had reached her and the Anglo way of life was coming forward in Native American culture. My question is did Native Americans really wish to conform? Or did they see it as a way to avoid confrontation, when they were now outnumbered by the settlers? But overall did ministers think they were reaching all the people they saw as "uncivilized"? -Megan W. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Narrative of Old Elizabeth, published in 1863 when she was 97, about her religious conversion in the 1770s. ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Elizabeth Godman lawsuit (1653); Elizabeth Godman tried for witchcraft, 1655 ==<br />
<br />
I understand that it was a completely different time and that the Puritans and other early colonists believed in witchcraft. But, when I started reading this story it almost made me laugh. Mr. Atwaters had dreams about witches while his son was sick so that made him think that a witch made his son sick. It just seems so crazy to me. I was also surprised that Elizabeth could sue her neighbors for calling her a witch. I guess since this instance was before the 1692 witch trials in Salem Village, maybe it wasn't taken so seriously. Why do you think Elizabeth Godman's situation was different from the witch trials in Salem Village?--Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Bridget Bishop convicted of witchcraft 1692; “Casco Girls” accuse George Burroughs, 1692 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
The Salem witch trials I could not help but wonder where they came up with the ridiculous accusations, pigs dying after a visit from a women equaled her being a witch, did any of the citizens ever consider alternatives? I think the magistrate felt they were given a power and to secure general security they would convict a woman for looking at a child the wrong way or muttering a prayer seen as an incantation. In the case of Bridget Bishop, I did wonder did she wish to be seen as a witch?Or did all of the offenses against her make the claim of her being a witch come true? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
I agree that they really do jump to conclusions. It is like they think there could be no other possible reason why the pigs died. I think it goes back to what we talked about in class, that maybe the accusers were accusing people of witchcraft to show that they are holy. Because only the truly holy people could recognize evil? Religion is such a huge influence on the NE colonists. I think that cases like Bridget Bishop and George Burroughs show just how strong that influence was. --Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Elizabeth Sandwith Drinker, wealthy Philadelphia woman, diary – 1758-1794 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Landon Carter complains about his female slaves (1771-1773) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== George Washington's slave list (1786) and slave work assignments (1786-88) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Eulalia Perez Recalls her work in a mission in Spanish CA in early 19th Century (1877) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Karin Wulf, “Women’s Work in Colonial Philadelphia,” 2000 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_4_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 4 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-16T17:27:44Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Elizabeth Godman lawsuit (1653); Elizabeth Godman tried for witchcraft, 1655 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Cross-source questions/comments ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Anne Bradstreet, “A Spiritual Autobiography,” ~1670 ==<br />
<br />
Anne Hutchinson is now one of my top 10 favorite women in history. The overall summary of her trial is stated on page 103: she was charged with dishonoring the community fathers, of holding meetings at her home in a manner inappropriate to her sex, and of insulting ministers at a private conference by accusing them of laboring under a Covenant of Works. Anne Hutchinson then admits having a revelation where God told her that he would destroy her prosecutors. This was considered heresy. Anne was then sentenced to banishment from the jurisdiction. Overall, I just found the trial to be hilarious. Some of the accusations were such a stretch. I especially enjoyed the accusation that Anne broke the law of the fifth commandment, honoring your mother and father. It took me a minute to figure out that that they actually thought that this meant honoring the “fathers of the commonwealth” (seriously!? …Yes) the governor states on page 105, “if they be the fathers of the commonwealth, and they of another religion, if you entertain them then you dishonor your parents and are justly punishable.” …wow….<br />
I was also surprised at how blunt the puritan men were about the status of women. When Anne Hutchinson was being sentenced, the governor states: “Mrs. Hutchinson, the sentence of the court you hear is that you are banished from out of our jurisdiction as ''being a women not fit for our society''….” Harsh words. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I had one main question when reading the trial, I had no idea what a Covenant of Works was. I googled it, and I came up with this definition:<br />
<br />
The covenant of works is God's promise to Adam. In return for perfect obedience, he would merit God's reward. The reward in this covenant does not result from grace; rather, it is a debt owed to Adam for keeping his part of the covenant. Unfortunately, Adam failed to keep the covenant and "after the fall, the free gifts on which salvation depends were withdrawn, and natural gifts corrupted and defiled" (Calvin). [[http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/novel_18c/defoe/puritanism.html#works]]<br />
<br />
However, I am still confused as to what Anne Hutchinson was being charged with. She was charged with accusing ministers of laboring under a Covenant of Works. What exactly does that mean? -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I was also confused about what that means. I know Dr. M said in class that she was charged with saying bad things about the ministers and going against the church so I'm guessing that is what that means. -- Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Anne Hutchinson’s trial, 1637 ==<br />
Regarding Anne Hutchinson's Trial<br />
I find it interesting that whenever the governor asks her a question that she rebukes it. In particular, when the governor asks her why she keeps a meeting at her house on a set day. She responds that is lawful for her to do so. Implying that she has not broken any law and then puts "unlawful act" in his lap by saying "can you find a warrant for yourself and condemn me for the same thing?" Meaning do you not have a religious meetings in your home. She is witty and clever with her words in proving her case. The governor seems to stumble to find fault towards her act of meeting. With each question the governor asked she has a rebuttal. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Lancashire, England Women’s Meeting structure, Quaker women in 1675 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== David Brainerd, 1746, account of the Great Awakening ==<br />
<br />
A Remarkable Instance of Awakening-Woloch Reading<br />
The ideas ministers had during the Great Awakening seize to amaze me, as in David Brainerd's case he really did believe he was saving the young Indian woman. "This was indeed a suprising day of God's power, and seemed enough to convince an atheist of the truth, importance, and power of God's word." He believed her not being able to control herself nor speak to anyone was a sign that God had reached her and the Anglo way of life was coming forward in Native American culture. My question is did Native Americans really wish to conform? Or did they see it as a way to avoid confrontation, when they were now outnumbered by the settlers? But overall did ministers think they were reaching all the people they saw as "uncivilized"? -Megan W. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Narrative of Old Elizabeth, published in 1863 when she was 97, about her religious conversion in the 1770s. ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Elizabeth Godman lawsuit (1653); Elizabeth Godman tried for witchcraft, 1655 ==<br />
<br />
I understand that it was a completely different time and that the Puritans and other early colonists believed in witchcraft. But, when I started reading this story it almost made me laugh. Mr. Atwaters had dreams about witches while his son was sick so that made him think that a witch made his son sick. It just seems so crazy to me. I was also surprised that Elizabeth could sue her neighbors for calling her a witch. I guess since this instance was before the 1692 witch trials in Salem Village, maybe it wasn't taken so seriously. Why do you think Elizabeth Godman's situation was different from the witch trials in Salem Village?--Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Bridget Bishop convicted of witchcraft 1692; “Casco Girls” accuse George Burroughs, 1692 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
The Salem witch trials I could not help but wonder where they came up with the ridiculous accusations, pigs dying after a visit from a women equaled her being a witch, did any of the citizens ever consider alternatives? I think the magistrate felt they were given a power and to secure general security they would convict a woman for looking at a child the wrong way or muttering a prayer seen as an incantation. In the case of Bridget Bishop, I did wonder did she wish to be seen as a witch?Or did all of the offenses against her make the claim of her being a witch come true? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Elizabeth Sandwith Drinker, wealthy Philadelphia woman, diary – 1758-1794 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Landon Carter complains about his female slaves (1771-1773) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== George Washington's slave list (1786) and slave work assignments (1786-88) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Eulalia Perez Recalls her work in a mission in Spanish CA in early 19th Century (1877) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Karin Wulf, “Women’s Work in Colonial Philadelphia,” 2000 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_4_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 4 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-16T17:21:39Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Anne Bradstreet, “A Spiritual Autobiography,” ~1670 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Cross-source questions/comments ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Anne Bradstreet, “A Spiritual Autobiography,” ~1670 ==<br />
<br />
Anne Hutchinson is now one of my top 10 favorite women in history. The overall summary of her trial is stated on page 103: she was charged with dishonoring the community fathers, of holding meetings at her home in a manner inappropriate to her sex, and of insulting ministers at a private conference by accusing them of laboring under a Covenant of Works. Anne Hutchinson then admits having a revelation where God told her that he would destroy her prosecutors. This was considered heresy. Anne was then sentenced to banishment from the jurisdiction. Overall, I just found the trial to be hilarious. Some of the accusations were such a stretch. I especially enjoyed the accusation that Anne broke the law of the fifth commandment, honoring your mother and father. It took me a minute to figure out that that they actually thought that this meant honoring the “fathers of the commonwealth” (seriously!? …Yes) the governor states on page 105, “if they be the fathers of the commonwealth, and they of another religion, if you entertain them then you dishonor your parents and are justly punishable.” …wow….<br />
I was also surprised at how blunt the puritan men were about the status of women. When Anne Hutchinson was being sentenced, the governor states: “Mrs. Hutchinson, the sentence of the court you hear is that you are banished from out of our jurisdiction as ''being a women not fit for our society''….” Harsh words. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I had one main question when reading the trial, I had no idea what a Covenant of Works was. I googled it, and I came up with this definition:<br />
<br />
The covenant of works is God's promise to Adam. In return for perfect obedience, he would merit God's reward. The reward in this covenant does not result from grace; rather, it is a debt owed to Adam for keeping his part of the covenant. Unfortunately, Adam failed to keep the covenant and "after the fall, the free gifts on which salvation depends were withdrawn, and natural gifts corrupted and defiled" (Calvin). [[http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/novel_18c/defoe/puritanism.html#works]]<br />
<br />
However, I am still confused as to what Anne Hutchinson was being charged with. She was charged with accusing ministers of laboring under a Covenant of Works. What exactly does that mean? -- Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I was also confused about what that means. I know Dr. M said in class that she was charged with saying bad things about the ministers and going against the church so I'm guessing that is what that means. -- Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Anne Hutchinson’s trial, 1637 ==<br />
Regarding Anne Hutchinson's Trial<br />
I find it interesting that whenever the governor asks her a question that she rebukes it. In particular, when the governor asks her why she keeps a meeting at her house on a set day. She responds that is lawful for her to do so. Implying that she has not broken any law and then puts "unlawful act" in his lap by saying "can you find a warrant for yourself and condemn me for the same thing?" Meaning do you not have a religious meetings in your home. She is witty and clever with her words in proving her case. The governor seems to stumble to find fault towards her act of meeting. With each question the governor asked she has a rebuttal. -Marsha Himes<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Lancashire, England Women’s Meeting structure, Quaker women in 1675 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== David Brainerd, 1746, account of the Great Awakening ==<br />
<br />
A Remarkable Instance of Awakening-Woloch Reading<br />
The ideas ministers had during the Great Awakening seize to amaze me, as in David Brainerd's case he really did believe he was saving the young Indian woman. "This was indeed a suprising day of God's power, and seemed enough to convince an atheist of the truth, importance, and power of God's word." He believed her not being able to control herself nor speak to anyone was a sign that God had reached her and the Anglo way of life was coming forward in Native American culture. My question is did Native Americans really wish to conform? Or did they see it as a way to avoid confrontation, when they were now outnumbered by the settlers? But overall did ministers think they were reaching all the people they saw as "uncivilized"? -Megan W. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Narrative of Old Elizabeth, published in 1863 when she was 97, about her religious conversion in the 1770s. ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Elizabeth Godman lawsuit (1653); Elizabeth Godman tried for witchcraft, 1655 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Bridget Bishop convicted of witchcraft 1692; “Casco Girls” accuse George Burroughs, 1692 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
The Salem witch trials I could not help but wonder where they came up with the ridiculous accusations, pigs dying after a visit from a women equaled her being a witch, did any of the citizens ever consider alternatives? I think the magistrate felt they were given a power and to secure general security they would convict a woman for looking at a child the wrong way or muttering a prayer seen as an incantation. In the case of Bridget Bishop, I did wonder did she wish to be seen as a witch?Or did all of the offenses against her make the claim of her being a witch come true? -Megan W.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Elizabeth Sandwith Drinker, wealthy Philadelphia woman, diary – 1758-1794 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Landon Carter complains about his female slaves (1771-1773) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== George Washington's slave list (1786) and slave work assignments (1786-88) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Eulalia Perez Recalls her work in a mission in Spanish CA in early 19th Century (1877) ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Karin Wulf, “Women’s Work in Colonial Philadelphia,” 2000 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_3_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 3 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-09T14:39:32Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Advertisements, Gazettes of VA, PA, SC, NY – 1751-1776 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Overarching/comparative comments ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Katherine Kish Sklar article, “To Use her as His Wife” ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Benjamin Wadsworth, 1712 – Well-Ordered Family ==<br />
Wadsworth begins by talking about how a husband and a wife are supposed to love each other, take care of each other when they are sick..etc. I was surprised when I first read this because it seemed almost like an equal relationship. Of course, then I read the part about the husband being the wife's head and that he is meant to govern over her. Wadsworth says that the "husband's government ought to be gentle and easy, and the wife's obedience ready and cheerful". I think Wadsworth's choice of words is important. He makes it sound that like the husbands gently guide the wives along and that the wives are happy to be told what to do. The influence of religion on married life is very evident. Quarelling is "the Devil's work" and it dishonors God. Today, it's pretty clear that every married couple argues sometimes and that doesn't mean you are doing the "devil's work". -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Susanna Wesley, 1732, Evangelical Child-Rearing ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Eliza Pinckney, 1750s, To Improve in Every Virtue ==<br />
Eliza Pinckney's list of resolutions explains a lot about all of the roles that women were expected to fill in early America. Her first few resolutions are religious. She wanted to be a better Christian and to trust in God. Some of her other resolutions seem similar to many common resolutions today. When she says she wants "to be decent but frugal in my own expences", she sounds like many women who vow to stop spending so much money on themselves. She also vows to be a better wife, mother, daughter, and friend. These resolutions are probably the New Year's resolutions of women today. I think it was important to read the piece by Pinckney. It shows all of the different roles that women are expected to fill, many of which are still relevant today.- Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Esther Burr, 1756-57, Tied hand and foot ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Abigail Bailey, 1815, Abominable Wickedness ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== New Spain’s (New Mexico’s) moral code as dictated by the Spanish Crown in 1752 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Laws on Slave Descent in VA and MD, 1662, 1664, 1691, 1692 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Skilled slaves in Maryland, 1748-1763, Maryland Gazette ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Complaint of Elizabeth Sprigs, indentured servant, 1756 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Apprenticeship in PA, 1771-1773, Record of Indentures ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Advertisements, Gazettes of VA, PA, SC, NY – 1751-1776 ==<br />
I was surprised that there were so many advertisements for schools for young women. I found the ad for Mrs. Duneau's boarding school in South Carolina very interesting. Most of the other ads mentioned teaching needlework to the young ladies, but that was one of the only subjects that was taught. However, Mrs. Duneau's school taught French, English, math, geography, writing, and of course, needlework. I was also surprised that many of the school's included gentlemen and young women in their ads. This is probably because many of the schools were opened and operated by women. -Katelyn Lease</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_3_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 3 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-09T14:31:30Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Eliza Pinckney, 1750s, To Improve in Every Virtue */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Overarching/comparative comments ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Katherine Kish Sklar article, “To Use her as His Wife” ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Benjamin Wadsworth, 1712 – Well-Ordered Family ==<br />
Wadsworth begins by talking about how a husband and a wife are supposed to love each other, take care of each other when they are sick..etc. I was surprised when I first read this because it seemed almost like an equal relationship. Of course, then I read the part about the husband being the wife's head and that he is meant to govern over her. Wadsworth says that the "husband's government ought to be gentle and easy, and the wife's obedience ready and cheerful". I think Wadsworth's choice of words is important. He makes it sound that like the husbands gently guide the wives along and that the wives are happy to be told what to do. The influence of religion on married life is very evident. Quarelling is "the Devil's work" and it dishonors God. Today, it's pretty clear that every married couple argues sometimes and that doesn't mean you are doing the "devil's work". -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Susanna Wesley, 1732, Evangelical Child-Rearing ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Eliza Pinckney, 1750s, To Improve in Every Virtue ==<br />
Eliza Pinckney's list of resolutions explains a lot about all of the roles that women were expected to fill in early America. Her first few resolutions are religious. She wanted to be a better Christian and to trust in God. Some of her other resolutions seem similar to many common resolutions today. When she says she wants "to be decent but frugal in my own expences", she sounds like many women who vow to stop spending so much money on themselves. She also vows to be a better wife, mother, daughter, and friend. These resolutions are probably the New Year's resolutions of women today. I think it was important to read the piece by Pinckney. It shows all of the different roles that women are expected to fill, many of which are still relevant today.- Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Esther Burr, 1756-57, Tied hand and foot ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Abigail Bailey, 1815, Abominable Wickedness ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== New Spain’s (New Mexico’s) moral code as dictated by the Spanish Crown in 1752 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Laws on Slave Descent in VA and MD, 1662, 1664, 1691, 1692 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Skilled slaves in Maryland, 1748-1763, Maryland Gazette ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Complaint of Elizabeth Sprigs, indentured servant, 1756 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Apprenticeship in PA, 1771-1773, Record of Indentures ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Advertisements, Gazettes of VA, PA, SC, NY – 1751-1776 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_3_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 3 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-09T14:23:18Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Benjamin Wadsworth, 1712 – Well-Ordered Family */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Overarching/comparative comments ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Katherine Kish Sklar article, “To Use her as His Wife” ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Benjamin Wadsworth, 1712 – Well-Ordered Family ==<br />
Wadsworth begins by talking about how a husband and a wife are supposed to love each other, take care of each other when they are sick..etc. I was surprised when I first read this because it seemed almost like an equal relationship. Of course, then I read the part about the husband being the wife's head and that he is meant to govern over her. Wadsworth says that the "husband's government ought to be gentle and easy, and the wife's obedience ready and cheerful". I think Wadsworth's choice of words is important. He makes it sound that like the husbands gently guide the wives along and that the wives are happy to be told what to do. The influence of religion on married life is very evident. Quarelling is "the Devil's work" and it dishonors God. Today, it's pretty clear that every married couple argues sometimes and that doesn't mean you are doing the "devil's work". -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
== Susanna Wesley, 1732, Evangelical Child-Rearing ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Eliza Pinckney, 1750s, To Improve in Every Virtue ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Esther Burr, 1756-57, Tied hand and foot ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Abigail Bailey, 1815, Abominable Wickedness ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== New Spain’s (New Mexico’s) moral code as dictated by the Spanish Crown in 1752 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Laws on Slave Descent in VA and MD, 1662, 1664, 1691, 1692 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Skilled slaves in Maryland, 1748-1763, Maryland Gazette ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Complaint of Elizabeth Sprigs, indentured servant, 1756 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Apprenticeship in PA, 1771-1773, Record of Indentures ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Advertisements, Gazettes of VA, PA, SC, NY – 1751-1776 ==</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_2_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 2 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-03T14:11:05Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Roger Williams Remarks on Narragansett women – 1643 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Cross-reading Questions -- These are particularly important... ==<br />
<br />
Just and observation I've made: '''the readings in Woloch about the rules and conduct that men and women should follow is a striking resemblence to social rules set forth by Confucius and his followers in China several hundred years prior to this.''' It just seems interesting to me that although the Europeans at this time always thought of themselves as superior to other peoples and cultures, that people in China hundreds of years before had already discussed and implemented these social rules. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
For the readings this week I came up with a question that related throughout all of the texts:<br />
1. '''Why did Native American women's roles offend the Europeans and do we think it still would today?''' Or have the perceptions the Europeans had of women shape women's traditional roles today?<br />
<br />
---I believe that the Europeans were offended primarily due to the differences in marital practices. First, the Native Americans had sexual relations with "potential" spouses BEFORE they were to be married. This violated a religious practice of pre-marital abstinance that Europeans followed. Christians in particular beleive that a woman should be pure and virginal at the time of marriage. Second, it offened Europeans that the Native Americans could "divorce" or change partners so readily. As John Heckwelder notes, "Marriage among the Indians are not, as with us, contracted for life" (MP pg. 30).--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 05:24, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
'''A common feature I noticed within the captive stories and whether they were able to adjust to their new lives appears to be their age and the roles in which they assumed.''' As with Mary Jemison and also John Tanner, they were both young without attachments, and could easily adapt into their new lives as made easier by being fully adopted into the tribe as a sister / daughter and son / brother. In the case of Mary R, she was a middle aged woman, set in her ways, having a husband back home as well as a church, friends, and a role within American society in which she was part of. These differences appear to have an effect on how the captives adjust to their new lives or not in these particular sources, and makes me wonder if this could be common to others as well or if there are other factors that were missed. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
Maybe I am just cynical because I have been in a few of Dr. McClurken's classes and have had to read many primary source documents (in fact many of these look familiar) but I find it very hard to trust a lot of these writings. Practically all of these writings are from a European perspective that was trying to make sense of what they were seeing through a distorted lens. This is not their fault of course because they did not have the advantage of Wikipedia to give them some background knowledge of what they were going to encounter. Just thinking about running into a culture that has had limited to zero contact with Europeans I can only wonder how both sides interpreted each other. The Europeans have the advantage in written history here so we get a very biased view of what is going on during this time. Even when the Europeans are attempting to be honest there is a perspective here that we are missing that I wish we had more access to. Even with my frustration (it is a good frustration mind you) reading primary source documents is a constant reminder that history does not come in neatly packaged text books we get in elementary school. It is the compilation of primary sources and the interpretation of each historian through time that makes history. /rant --[[User:Shauser|Shauser]] 07:24, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Roger Williams Remarks on Narragansett women – 1643 ==<br />
<br />
After reading the Roger Williams little excerpt about him and his findings on the language and the people on the Narragansett women, I am left wondering how does he seem to have such a different view than other Europeans of his time. He believes that the land belonds to the Native Americas; he even tries to live and learn from them, to study them, even going so far as to publish a dictionary on their language arranged topically. '''What makes his perspective so different from the other European documentations and studies?''' - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
I also thought it was interesting that Roger William's had such a different view than other Europeans at his time. Before reading this article, I expected more of a negative view of the Native Americans and their "heathen" lifestyle. I was surprised by the way he described their work. I agree with Caryn that the work sounded a lot more difficult the way that Williams described it.- Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
While reading Roger Williams' Narragansett Women, I noticed that his description of the labor that the females did was, in his mind, much more challenging than described by John Heckewelder and Mary Jemison. I also noticed a parallel between Mary Rowlandson and Williams opinion that as Williams put it, "Indian women has escaped Gods curse on Eve." Of course Rowlandson described these feeling in a negative light but the idea was certainly the same. - Caryn Levine<br />
<br />
== John Heckewelder’s 1819, Women’s Lives among the Delaware ==<br />
<br />
John Heckewelder describes the Native American women in Delaware. He comments about the differences and some of the aspects of lives between the Native Americans' lifestyles and the Europeans'. Among them are marriages: marriages among the Indians are not contracted for life. He also mentions the varying work men and women have. Men construct the house in which they are to live in, hunts, traps. Women take care of the home, sometimes become their husband's helpmate while he is hunting, tills the ground, gets the firewood, and pounds the corn in mortars. '''I think this group of Native American women followed the same kind of pattern that most European women followed at the time and would not offend most outsiders.''' Heckewelder's notes may prove that because most of the duties of the Native American women were similar to that of European women, there was no real reason to be shocked or offended. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting the way Heckewelder described marriage between Native Americans. It's the complete opposite of the way marriage was in Europe at the time. A Native American bride was usually not forced to marry or even to stay married. Native American women are not treated as much like the husband's property, as were the European women. I also found it interesting that Native American men would find whatever food that their pregnant or sick wife was craving.-Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
<br />
John Heckewelder’s description of Women’s Lives Among the Delaware is a much different account than from what other colonizers have described. While many Europeans have a biased view through ethnocentric eyes, Heckewelder seemed to empathize with the Native American way of life. Though I do think that he viewed his way of life as better and more civilized, he sees Native American way of life as understandable for a less civilized group. While he believes that Native American women’s work is difficult compared to women’s work in the civilized world, it is nothing compared to the work of the men. Heckewelder’s description of the women’s work as well as marriage practices seems much nicer than other descriptions from onlookers of the time who had a cynical view. The Native American family/societal structure seems like a nice way for women to live, to work cheerfully, to raise families, and to have the ability to leave when unhappy. I wonder if it is because John Heckewelder was able to live among the Indians for 15 years that he was able to see the true side of Native American life, rather then traders whose observations were short lived and distant. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
'''John Heckewelder's description of a woman's role in society is still seen through a Europeans eyes''' though I agree with Erin that it was less so then other European observers it is still bias. He still believes that women have no power where men have all the power in society. I liked that he grasped the fact that the women did not think they were being worked like slaves by farming. I would also like to note that Heckewelder when talking about marriages only mentioned that women will please her husband so that he will not leave her but said nothing about men pleasing their wives. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
John Heckewelder wrote of the differences in the daily lives of the men and women of the tribe he saw. '''What struck me most was particularly the word choice “The husband may put away his wife whenever he pleases, and the woman may in like manner abandon her husband.” Despite the fact that divorce was incredibly uncommon in Europe, he spoke of the men leaving their wife as if it was no big deal. Yet, he used the word /abandon/ when describing the wife leaving the husband which has a harsher connotation in my opinion.''' Another interesting thing I noticed was that Heckewelder said that the men’s job was to build the house which shows the Delaware tribe he was familiar with was not matrilocal- Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Pierre de Charlevoix, 1721, “Iroquois Women in Government” ==<br />
<br />
Pierre de Charlevoix's "Iroquois Women in Government" seemed on the surface to glorify the hierarchy which held women at the top but unraveled into an explanation of how Iroquois men only allowed the women to seem powerful. I wonder how much of Charlevoix's account was true and how much was a biased opinion based in Western ideals of the Patriarch Royalty. '''This piece prompts me to wonder if Charlevoix felt challenged by the reversal of gender empowerment and the implication and influence that could have on western women. ''' - Caryn Levine<br />
<br />
In this article Pierre de Charlevoix writes about how Iroquois women had a substantial role in their government. Even though it was rare for women to rise to the position of chief, the role of chief was inherited through the matrilineal line. As we discussed in class the older women of the tribe could unseat male chiefs. The Iroquois women had a lot more political opportunities than their European and fellow Indian counterparts. After reading the article I wonder why Native American Women had less political opportunities than the Iroquois. Nick Jesionka<br />
<br />
== Mary Rowlandson’s account (1681) and Mary Jemison’s account (1824) ==<br />
<br />
Also a topic I found important between the articles written by both "Mary's" were the differences/similarities of the women's experiences with the Eastern Woodland Native Americans. How each woman's experience varied based off tribe/age of capture/and release date (if released). -Megan<br />
<br />
'''I was particularly interested in the role religion played in their experiences, especially Mary Rowlandson.''' Her faith seemed to justify her experience, which in turn strengthened her sense of righteousness in the face of perceived barbarism. The topic of Christianity shaping the colonists' interactions with the native Americans seems important when looking at the overall experience. --Erin B.<br />
<br />
I think Erin raises a really good point about religion and the way it influenced or affected the experiences of the captives. I thought one of the major themes in Mary Rowlandson's captivity account, that of her trying to determine why God would allow and even help the "enemies" (the Native Americans)to survive and thereby inflict further injury on the English, resonates still with us today. I think many people still, in contemporary society, question God and his motives when they are faced with a troubling situation or a difficult time in their life- asking themselves, for example, why God would allow such things to happen. An individual's response (whether they believe it a test of faith and believe they will come out stronger because of it, or whether they take an entirely different approach) I think is highly individualistic and unique to the person. - Allison <br />
<br />
<br />
Mary Jemison provided an interesting point of view in which she is not entirely dis fond of living with the Indians. She was captured and lived with the Seneca Iroquois tribe for many years. '''I think this is an interesting example of another way that Europeans, especially European men, were shocked with the Native Americans and their lifestyle.''' Many white female captives were treated humanely, took up the duties of the women of the tribe, and may have been treated more equally than if they returned to white society. This decision was confusing to most white men. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed reading both of these accounts. They were both so varied that it was interesting to see the differences and similarities among the captive's situations. The main issue that caught my eye in the Rowlandson account was the employ of God during her whole captive experience. She would quote the bible and see situations through a very thick religious lens. I particularly liked how she commented on page 18 that "strangely did the lord provide for them." Essentially, wondering why, if God was on her (and the English peoples) side then why was he letting the "heathens" live? It is something that she brings up a couple of times through her account. But, what I found interesting was that she believed her God was watching over the Natives, even though they were not Christians. (at least that was how it seemed to me)<br />
In the Jemison account, I really liked how she talked about the benefits for women living among the Seneca tribe. And how she even compared, on the bottom of page 21, the Native woman’s life to that of an English woman’s.-Kristia S.<br />
<br />
The accounts of Mary Rowlandson and Mary Jemison who were captured by Native Americans were the most interesting things I read. '''I though it was fascinating in Rowlandsons account how one minute they were going to bash her head in and the next her master was giving her water to wash with and being kind.''' Mary Jemison had a more positive account of Native Americans and I liked how she said Native Americans were only cruel to their enemies but to their friends they were wonderful. That is not so different from the Europeans who were also cruel to their enemies. --LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Samuel de Champlain, 1616 ==<br />
<br />
'''The Champlain and Heckewelder readings provide as interesting contrast in the interpretations by Europeans regarding Native Americans. About a hundred years separates their accounts. Champlain was, of course, an explorer, and Heckenwelder was a missionary trying to convert the Indians to Christianity.''' Champlain comments on the figures of the Indians, with a special interest in the women’s appearances, including the fact that “their breasts hang down hardly at all.” Truly an important thing to note. He also tends towards the idea that the men are lazy and the women do most of the work. Heckewelder doesn’t bother commenting on appearances, perhaps due to his being a missionary, but he labels the women’s work as “quickly and easily performed.” Their fatigue is not comparable to the tireless work of the hunting men. Though the interpretations differ on the view of labor and gender roles (which may be a result of the particular tribe they visited and at what time of the year), both accounts are influenced by European thinking. Champlain writes the men off as lazy and unmanly because they appear to lie around while the women do the farming. Heckewelder completely dismisses women’s work, putting forth that the families depend solely on the men’s hunting. --Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
The article that Samuel de Champlain writes about Huron Women is good account of Native American Women. In the article he discusses the roles of women and men and how to him they women do a lot more work then the men do. He called the men lazy and described the women as really hard working and having most of the responsibilities. Overall it was a good account of the Huron tribe. Nick Jesionka<br />
<br />
'''Samuel de Champlain seemed to focus quite a bit of his attention on the courtship of the Natives.''' It was a big change compared to Europeans after all. He spoke of men and women running from cabin to cabin at night, enjoying whoever’s company they please. Then in the next paragraph he brings up the point of how the husband cannot be sure the child his wife bears is actually his. We talked about this in class, this is astonishing to Europeans as the “need” a male heir to carry on the family name or be the next in line to the throne (if they are royal.) –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
I agree that the difference between Native American and European men when it comes to children is amazing. Champlain writes about how when a woman has children, her preceeding husbands come visit and claim the child is his. In Europe, women wouldn't have had so many ex-husbands, if they even had one ex. If the paternity of a child was questioned, his mother and the child would be stigmatized. I understand why Champlain was so interested in this, it is completely different from the practices he was used to. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
Did anyone get the impression that maybe there was a hint of jealousy among the Europeans when it came to the courtship of Native Americans? Perhaps they resented being so sexual restricted within their own communities, and felt that the only proper way to address those feelings were to pass negative judgments upon a culture they could not understand. After all, doesn't our culture resemble the pre-colonial Native Americans when it comes to modern day dating and marriage? Now days, it practically unheard of to marry a person you have not already lived with for a while. When a couple splits, the children usually go with the mother, or whoever is the more secure "bread winner." American's today divorce over the slightest irreconcilable differences, and there is little to no stigma on divorcees anymore, they way there had been in the past. Men court women with expensive gifts, and women usually turn to their family and network or "village" of best friends to help them decide if they should marry a man. It is really not much different from how the Native American's approached marriage several hundred years ago. So, I suppose that after all the Europeans effort to assimilate Native Americans into their way of life, modern day Americans have assimilated to the Native American way of life.--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 07:22, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Mary Musgrove assists the Georgians in Dealing with the Choctaws, 1734 & Mary Musgrove Seeks aid for past service from GA, 1747 ==<br />
<br />
I can't say that I was surprised to read the 1747 letter written by Mary Musgrove, as historical evidence often shows that, the European settlers and traders often "went back" or renigged on promises, treaties, and debts that were made to the Native Americans. However, I did find the format of her letter interesting. Instead of just coming right out and asking for what she wants, she diligently lists all of the qualifying reasons why she is owed respect and currency first, and then she gets around to asking for what she wants secondly. It all sounded like something I would imagine a lawyer to do. Perhaps just saying "hey you owe me money" would not have sufficed. It's tragic that all of that explanation and justification was warranted, to seek out something that she and/or the people she represented were due anyways.--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 05:36, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Captive John Tanner in 1830 ==<br />
<br />
The major thought that came to my mind while reading this was how multiple Native American women wanted a young white son. I feel that if the roles were reversed and a white woman had a male Native captive, there wouldn't be any other woman who would want him or any hostility regarding it. I find it interesting that he was so valued that Net-no-kwa was so interested in having him. '''Did they find the whites valuable or was he simply filling the role of a son?''' - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
== Father Le Jeune on necessity of teaching native women, 1633 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Native women resist Jesuits, 1640 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Wamponoag women of Martha’s Vineyard, 1727 ==<br />
<br />
The readings provided some thoughtful insights into changing Native American lifestyles as colonists worked towards converting them to Christianity. '''Particularly interesting to me was determining the reasons why some women were easily converted (at least outwardly) and some women were very resistant.''' In one reading a women runs away, not “wishing to obey her husband” in his desire to convert, risking harsh retribution, while in another reading the women were more receptive and more pious than the men. The second reading also gives some possible reasoning why these women were easier to convert. I think the biggest factor was that many of the women were young and unlikely to be set in their ways, and therefore more receptive to conversion. Sarah Ahhaton's story provides support for this, as there were older women who were seemingly more traditionalist and subversive in their approach towards the English. --Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
As shown in the Pious Wampanoag Women of Martha’s Vineyard and the Adultery Trial of Sarah Ahhaton, the Europeans seem to be pushing their own ideas of woman morality upon the Native Americans that can be compared to as was made example by Eve from the bible. As is with the Adultery Trial and some of the conversions, women appear very susceptible to have a lapse in judgment where their passionate natures take them over. However they are being held accountable for their actions in ways that men are not due to the notion of woman’s virtue and their job of upholding and demonstrating social morals. '''I think it is possible that the hope of the Europeans is that should the women at least be successfully converted, the society and future generations will then follow suit''' and could be as believed half of the battle being already won such as was with the husband of Hannah Tiler who “overcame his evil by her goodness” (MP- Christianity p. 24). – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Sarah Ahhaton’s trial, 1668 ==<br />
<br />
'''The story of Sarah Ahhaton, a Native American woman, is one that shows the dynamics of the old, pre-colonization, ways of life and the new, Christian way of life'''. In looking at the French Explorer Samuel de Champlain’s description of the lives of Huron Women and Men in 1616, he describes the marriage practices of the Huron. In this pre-colonized society, marriage is much different than the “civilized” Europeans. Women and men were able to be intimate with different individuals without jealousy it was the standard practice. By 1668, when Sarah Ahhaton told her story of adultery, there was a change in marriage practices due to the influence of European colonizers and the spread of Christianity. The change in women’s roles in such a short period of time must have been difficult, and often confusing. In a society were women were highly regarded, their role shifted to one of subordination. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
== Ann Marie Plane's essay ==<br />
'''In the account of Sarah Ahhaton’s adultery, I was really struck by the double standard for men and women.''' The rift in her marriage began when her husband, William, was not treating her very well and possibly having an affair of his own. Sarah turned herself in for her crime, but William’s position as an interpreter and Christian minister meant it would not have been difficult for English officials to investigate or correct his behaviors. This response is likely a result of English culture, which viewed women as lascivious and unable to control their desires. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
'''I like how Plane described Native American women as the group whose lives were possibly the most radically changed by European contact.''' Before contact, Native American gender relations involved a certain amount of give and take. Men may have held leadership positions, but much of their power depended on the support of women. After contact, the power held by men increased and the power held by women decreased. This deprived women of the means to defend themselves, for example, against an abusive husband, as in Sarah Ahhatan’s case. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
<br />
I found the account of Sarah Ahhatons adultery to be extremely poignant. It truly showed in my opinion some of the negative effects the colonists had on the native americans. In many Native American societies women were highly respected and held a firm place in society and were allowed more freedoms within marriage. Yet Sarahs treatment exhibited none of that kind of treatment. It was evident the influence that the Europeans had on there culture at that point was a negative one. I found the part of the essay where the author discusses the negative aspects of european culture that the Native Americans picked up extremely interesting. Although the protestant marriage was supposed to be a well founded joining of two people in the faith in a happy marriage, women were often treated poorly by there husbands. So even though the Native Americans are being taught by the Christian doctrine they picked up the bad habits of the Europeans instead of the good habits. Also the double standards between men and women were particularly evident in her account of the trial because Joseph who was also married and had committed adultery presumably faced no punishment whatsoever. In addition the claims of adultery that were supposedly committed by her husband didn't seem to have been investigated any further. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I also found the double standard in the way Sarah Ahhaton was treated compared to both her husband and Joseph interesting -- and, not surprising.''' So, why did this happen? How did the change in the way Native American women and men viewed marriage occur? Were there some tribes who were more resistant to this than others? If so, why?''' -Nancy Lee</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_2_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 2 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-03T14:02:54Z<p>KatelynLease: /* Samuel de Champlain, 1616 */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Cross-reading Questions -- These are particularly important... ==<br />
<br />
Just and observation I've made: '''the readings in Woloch about the rules and conduct that men and women should follow is a striking resemblence to social rules set forth by Confucius and his followers in China several hundred years prior to this.''' It just seems interesting to me that although the Europeans at this time always thought of themselves as superior to other peoples and cultures, that people in China hundreds of years before had already discussed and implemented these social rules. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
For the readings this week I came up with a question that related throughout all of the texts:<br />
1. '''Why did Native American women's roles offend the Europeans and do we think it still would today?''' Or have the perceptions the Europeans had of women shape women's traditional roles today?<br />
<br />
---I believe that the Europeans were offended primarily due to the differences in marital practices. First, the Native Americans had sexual relations with "potential" spouses BEFORE they were to be married. This violated a religious practice of pre-marital abstinance that Europeans followed. Christians in particular beleive that a woman should be pure and virginal at the time of marriage. Second, it offened Europeans that the Native Americans could "divorce" or change partners so readily. As John Heckwelder notes, "Marriage among the Indians are not, as with us, contracted for life" (MP pg. 30).--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 05:24, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
'''A common feature I noticed within the captive stories and whether they were able to adjust to their new lives appears to be their age and the roles in which they assumed.''' As with Mary Jemison and also John Tanner, they were both young without attachments, and could easily adapt into their new lives as made easier by being fully adopted into the tribe as a sister / daughter and son / brother. In the case of Mary R, she was a middle aged woman, set in her ways, having a husband back home as well as a church, friends, and a role within American society in which she was part of. These differences appear to have an effect on how the captives adjust to their new lives or not in these particular sources, and makes me wonder if this could be common to others as well or if there are other factors that were missed. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
Maybe I am just cynical because I have been in a few of Dr. McClurken's classes and have had to read many primary source documents (in fact many of these look familiar) but I find it very hard to trust a lot of these writings. Practically all of these writings are from a European perspective that was trying to make sense of what they were seeing through a distorted lens. This is not their fault of course because they did not have the advantage of Wikipedia to give them some background knowledge of what they were going to encounter. Just thinking about running into a culture that has had limited to zero contact with Europeans I can only wonder how both sides interpreted each other. The Europeans have the advantage in written history here so we get a very biased view of what is going on during this time. Even when the Europeans are attempting to be honest there is a perspective here that we are missing that I wish we had more access to. Even with my frustration (it is a good frustration mind you) reading primary source documents is a constant reminder that history does not come in neatly packaged text books we get in elementary school. It is the compilation of primary sources and the interpretation of each historian through time that makes history. /rant --[[User:Shauser|Shauser]] 07:24, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Roger Williams Remarks on Narragansett women – 1643 ==<br />
<br />
After reading the Roger Williams little excerpt about him and his findings on the language and the people on the Narragansett women, I am left wondering how does he seem to have such a different view than other Europeans of his time. He believes that the land belonds to the Native Americas; he even tries to live and learn from them, to study them, even going so far as to publish a dictionary on their language arranged topically. '''What makes his perspective so different from the other European documentations and studies?''' - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
While reading Roger Williams' Narragansett Women, I noticed that his description of the labor that the females did was, in his mind, much more challenging than described by John Heckewelder and Mary Jemison. I also noticed a parallel between Mary Rowlandson and Williams opinion that as Williams put it, "Indian women has escaped Gods curse on Eve." Of course Rowlandson described these feeling in a negative light but the idea was certainly the same. - Caryn Levine<br />
<br />
== John Heckewelder’s 1819, Women’s Lives among the Delaware ==<br />
<br />
John Heckewelder describes the Native American women in Delaware. He comments about the differences and some of the aspects of lives between the Native Americans' lifestyles and the Europeans'. Among them are marriages: marriages among the Indians are not contracted for life. He also mentions the varying work men and women have. Men construct the house in which they are to live in, hunts, traps. Women take care of the home, sometimes become their husband's helpmate while he is hunting, tills the ground, gets the firewood, and pounds the corn in mortars. '''I think this group of Native American women followed the same kind of pattern that most European women followed at the time and would not offend most outsiders.''' Heckewelder's notes may prove that because most of the duties of the Native American women were similar to that of European women, there was no real reason to be shocked or offended. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting the way Heckewelder described marriage between Native Americans. It's the complete opposite of the way marriage was in Europe at the time. A Native American bride was usually not forced to marry or even to stay married. Native American women are not treated as much like the husband's property, as were the European women. I also found it interesting that Native American men would find whatever food that their pregnant or sick wife was craving.-Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
<br />
John Heckewelder’s description of Women’s Lives Among the Delaware is a much different account than from what other colonizers have described. While many Europeans have a biased view through ethnocentric eyes, Heckewelder seemed to empathize with the Native American way of life. Though I do think that he viewed his way of life as better and more civilized, he sees Native American way of life as understandable for a less civilized group. While he believes that Native American women’s work is difficult compared to women’s work in the civilized world, it is nothing compared to the work of the men. Heckewelder’s description of the women’s work as well as marriage practices seems much nicer than other descriptions from onlookers of the time who had a cynical view. The Native American family/societal structure seems like a nice way for women to live, to work cheerfully, to raise families, and to have the ability to leave when unhappy. I wonder if it is because John Heckewelder was able to live among the Indians for 15 years that he was able to see the true side of Native American life, rather then traders whose observations were short lived and distant. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
'''John Heckewelder's description of a woman's role in society is still seen through a Europeans eyes''' though I agree with Erin that it was less so then other European observers it is still bias. He still believes that women have no power where men have all the power in society. I liked that he grasped the fact that the women did not think they were being worked like slaves by farming. I would also like to note that Heckewelder when talking about marriages only mentioned that women will please her husband so that he will not leave her but said nothing about men pleasing their wives. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
John Heckewelder wrote of the differences in the daily lives of the men and women of the tribe he saw. '''What struck me most was particularly the word choice “The husband may put away his wife whenever he pleases, and the woman may in like manner abandon her husband.” Despite the fact that divorce was incredibly uncommon in Europe, he spoke of the men leaving their wife as if it was no big deal. Yet, he used the word /abandon/ when describing the wife leaving the husband which has a harsher connotation in my opinion.''' Another interesting thing I noticed was that Heckewelder said that the men’s job was to build the house which shows the Delaware tribe he was familiar with was not matrilocal- Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Pierre de Charlevoix, 1721, “Iroquois Women in Government” ==<br />
<br />
Pierre de Charlevoix's "Iroquois Women in Government" seemed on the surface to glorify the hierarchy which held women at the top but unraveled into an explanation of how Iroquois men only allowed the women to seem powerful. I wonder how much of Charlevoix's account was true and how much was a biased opinion based in Western ideals of the Patriarch Royalty. '''This piece prompts me to wonder if Charlevoix felt challenged by the reversal of gender empowerment and the implication and influence that could have on western women. ''' - Caryn Levine<br />
<br />
In this article Pierre de Charlevoix writes about how Iroquois women had a substantial role in their government. Even though it was rare for women to rise to the position of chief, the role of chief was inherited through the matrilineal line. As we discussed in class the older women of the tribe could unseat male chiefs. The Iroquois women had a lot more political opportunities than their European and fellow Indian counterparts. After reading the article I wonder why Native American Women had less political opportunities than the Iroquois. Nick Jesionka<br />
<br />
== Mary Rowlandson’s account (1681) and Mary Jemison’s account (1824) ==<br />
<br />
Also a topic I found important between the articles written by both "Mary's" were the differences/similarities of the women's experiences with the Eastern Woodland Native Americans. How each woman's experience varied based off tribe/age of capture/and release date (if released). -Megan<br />
<br />
'''I was particularly interested in the role religion played in their experiences, especially Mary Rowlandson.''' Her faith seemed to justify her experience, which in turn strengthened her sense of righteousness in the face of perceived barbarism. The topic of Christianity shaping the colonists' interactions with the native Americans seems important when looking at the overall experience. --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
Mary Jemison provided an interesting point of view in which she is not entirely dis fond of living with the Indians. She was captured and lived with the Seneca Iroquois tribe for many years. '''I think this is an interesting example of another way that Europeans, especially European men, were shocked with the Native Americans and their lifestyle.''' Many white female captives were treated humanely, took up the duties of the women of the tribe, and may have been treated more equally than if they returned to white society. This decision was confusing to most white men. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed reading both of these accounts. They were both so varied that it was interesting to see the differences and similarities among the captive's situations. The main issue that caught my eye in the Rowlandson account was the employ of God during her whole captive experience. She would quote the bible and see situations through a very thick religious lens. I particularly liked how she commented on page 18 that "strangely did the lord provide for them." Essentially, wondering why, if God was on her (and the English peoples) side then why was he letting the "heathens" live? It is something that she brings up a couple of times through her account. But, what I found interesting was that she believed her God was watching over the Natives, even though they were not Christians. (at least that was how it seemed to me)<br />
In the Jemison account, I really liked how she talked about the benefits for women living among the Seneca tribe. And how she even compared, on the bottom of page 21, the Native woman’s life to that of an English woman’s.-Kristia S.<br />
<br />
The accounts of Mary Rowlandson and Mary Jemison who were captured by Native Americans were the most interesting things I read. '''I though it was fascinating in Rowlandsons account how one minute they were going to bash her head in and the next her master was giving her water to wash with and being kind.''' Mary Jemison had a more positive account of Native Americans and I liked how she said Native Americans were only cruel to their enemies but to their friends they were wonderful. That is not so different from the Europeans who were also cruel to their enemies. --LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Samuel de Champlain, 1616 ==<br />
<br />
'''The Champlain and Heckewelder readings provide as interesting contrast in the interpretations by Europeans regarding Native Americans. About a hundred years separates their accounts. Champlain was, of course, an explorer, and Heckenwelder was a missionary trying to convert the Indians to Christianity.''' Champlain comments on the figures of the Indians, with a special interest in the women’s appearances, including the fact that “their breasts hang down hardly at all.” Truly an important thing to note. He also tends towards the idea that the men are lazy and the women do most of the work. Heckewelder doesn’t bother commenting on appearances, perhaps due to his being a missionary, but he labels the women’s work as “quickly and easily performed.” Their fatigue is not comparable to the tireless work of the hunting men. Though the interpretations differ on the view of labor and gender roles (which may be a result of the particular tribe they visited and at what time of the year), both accounts are influenced by European thinking. Champlain writes the men off as lazy and unmanly because they appear to lie around while the women do the farming. Heckewelder completely dismisses women’s work, putting forth that the families depend solely on the men’s hunting. --Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
The article that Samuel de Champlain writes about Huron Women is good account of Native American Women. In the article he discusses the roles of women and men and how to him they women do a lot more work then the men do. He called the men lazy and described the women as really hard working and having most of the responsibilities. Overall it was a good account of the Huron tribe. Nick Jesionka<br />
<br />
'''Samuel de Champlain seemed to focus quite a bit of his attention on the courtship of the Natives.''' It was a big change compared to Europeans after all. He spoke of men and women running from cabin to cabin at night, enjoying whoever’s company they please. Then in the next paragraph he brings up the point of how the husband cannot be sure the child his wife bears is actually his. We talked about this in class, this is astonishing to Europeans as the “need” a male heir to carry on the family name or be the next in line to the throne (if they are royal.) –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
I agree that the difference between Native American and European men when it comes to children is amazing. Champlain writes about how when a woman has children, her preceeding husbands come visit and claim the child is his. In Europe, women wouldn't have had so many ex-husbands, if they even had one ex. If the paternity of a child was questioned, his mother and the child would be stigmatized. I understand why Champlain was so interested in this, it is completely different from the practices he was used to. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
Did anyone get the impression that maybe there was a hint of jealousy among the Europeans when it came to the courtship of Native Americans? Perhaps they resented being so sexual restricted within their own communities, and felt that the only proper way to address those feelings were to pass negative judgments upon a culture they could not understand. After all, doesn't our culture resemble the pre-colonial Native Americans when it comes to modern day dating and marriage? Now days, it practically unheard of to marry a person you have not already lived with for a while. When a couple splits, the children usually go with the mother, or whoever is the more secure "bread winner." American's today divorce over the slightest irreconcilable differences, and there is little to no stigma on divorcees anymore, they way there had been in the past. Men court women with expensive gifts, and women usually turn to their family and network or "village" of best friends to help them decide if they should marry a man. It is really not much different from how the Native American's approached marriage several hundred years ago. So, I suppose that after all the Europeans effort to assimilate Native Americans into their way of life, modern day Americans have assimilated to the Native American way of life.--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 07:22, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Mary Musgrove assists the Georgians in Dealing with the Choctaws, 1734 & Mary Musgrove Seeks aid for past service from GA, 1747 ==<br />
<br />
I can't say that I was surprised to read the 1747 letter written by Mary Musgrove, as historical evidence often shows that, the European settlers and traders often "went back" or renigged on promises, treaties, and debts that were made to the Native Americans. However, I did find the format of her letter interesting. Instead of just coming right out and asking for what she wants, she diligently lists all of the qualifying reasons why she is owed respect and currency first, and then she gets around to asking for what she wants secondly. It all sounded like something I would imagine a lawyer to do. Perhaps just saying "hey you owe me money" would not have sufficed. It's tragic that all of that explanation and justification was warranted, to seek out something that she and/or the people she represented were due anyways.--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 05:36, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Captive John Tanner in 1830 ==<br />
<br />
The major thought that came to my mind while reading this was how multiple Native American women wanted a young white son. I feel that if the roles were reversed and a white woman had a male Native captive, there wouldn't be any other woman who would want him or any hostility regarding it. I find it interesting that he was so valued that Net-no-kwa was so interested in having him. '''Did they find the whites valuable or was he simply filling the role of a son?''' - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
== Father Le Jeune on necessity of teaching native women, 1633 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Native women resist Jesuits, 1640 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Wamponoag women of Martha’s Vineyard, 1727 ==<br />
<br />
The readings provided some thoughtful insights into changing Native American lifestyles as colonists worked towards converting them to Christianity. '''Particularly interesting to me was determining the reasons why some women were easily converted (at least outwardly) and some women were very resistant.''' In one reading a women runs away, not “wishing to obey her husband” in his desire to convert, risking harsh retribution, while in another reading the women were more receptive and more pious than the men. The second reading also gives some possible reasoning why these women were easier to convert. I think the biggest factor was that many of the women were young and unlikely to be set in their ways, and therefore more receptive to conversion. Sarah Ahhaton's story provides support for this, as there were older women who were seemingly more traditionalist and subversive in their approach towards the English. --Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
As shown in the Pious Wampanoag Women of Martha’s Vineyard and the Adultery Trial of Sarah Ahhaton, the Europeans seem to be pushing their own ideas of woman morality upon the Native Americans that can be compared to as was made example by Eve from the bible. As is with the Adultery Trial and some of the conversions, women appear very susceptible to have a lapse in judgment where their passionate natures take them over. However they are being held accountable for their actions in ways that men are not due to the notion of woman’s virtue and their job of upholding and demonstrating social morals. '''I think it is possible that the hope of the Europeans is that should the women at least be successfully converted, the society and future generations will then follow suit''' and could be as believed half of the battle being already won such as was with the husband of Hannah Tiler who “overcame his evil by her goodness” (MP- Christianity p. 24). – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Sarah Ahhaton’s trial, 1668 ==<br />
<br />
'''The story of Sarah Ahhaton, a Native American woman, is one that shows the dynamics of the old, pre-colonization, ways of life and the new, Christian way of life'''. In looking at the French Explorer Samuel de Champlain’s description of the lives of Huron Women and Men in 1616, he describes the marriage practices of the Huron. In this pre-colonized society, marriage is much different than the “civilized” Europeans. Women and men were able to be intimate with different individuals without jealousy it was the standard practice. By 1668, when Sarah Ahhaton told her story of adultery, there was a change in marriage practices due to the influence of European colonizers and the spread of Christianity. The change in women’s roles in such a short period of time must have been difficult, and often confusing. In a society were women were highly regarded, their role shifted to one of subordination. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
== Ann Marie Plane's essay ==<br />
'''In the account of Sarah Ahhaton’s adultery, I was really struck by the double standard for men and women.''' The rift in her marriage began when her husband, William, was not treating her very well and possibly having an affair of his own. Sarah turned herself in for her crime, but William’s position as an interpreter and Christian minister meant it would not have been difficult for English officials to investigate or correct his behaviors. This response is likely a result of English culture, which viewed women as lascivious and unable to control their desires. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
'''I like how Plane described Native American women as the group whose lives were possibly the most radically changed by European contact.''' Before contact, Native American gender relations involved a certain amount of give and take. Men may have held leadership positions, but much of their power depended on the support of women. After contact, the power held by men increased and the power held by women decreased. This deprived women of the means to defend themselves, for example, against an abusive husband, as in Sarah Ahhatan’s case. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
<br />
I found the account of Sarah Ahhatons adultery to be extremely poignant. It truly showed in my opinion some of the negative effects the colonists had on the native americans. In many Native American societies women were highly respected and held a firm place in society and were allowed more freedoms within marriage. Yet Sarahs treatment exhibited none of that kind of treatment. It was evident the influence that the Europeans had on there culture at that point was a negative one. I found the part of the essay where the author discusses the negative aspects of european culture that the Native Americans picked up extremely interesting. Although the protestant marriage was supposed to be a well founded joining of two people in the faith in a happy marriage, women were often treated poorly by there husbands. So even though the Native Americans are being taught by the Christian doctrine they picked up the bad habits of the Europeans instead of the good habits. Also the double standards between men and women were particularly evident in her account of the trial because Joseph who was also married and had committed adultery presumably faced no punishment whatsoever. In addition the claims of adultery that were supposedly committed by her husband didn't seem to have been investigated any further. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I also found the double standard in the way Sarah Ahhaton was treated compared to both her husband and Joseph interesting -- and, not surprising.''' So, why did this happen? How did the change in the way Native American women and men viewed marriage occur? Were there some tribes who were more resistant to this than others? If so, why?''' -Nancy Lee</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_2_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 2 Questions/Comments-327 092009-09-03T13:57:18Z<p>KatelynLease: /* John Heckewelder’s 1819, Women’s Lives among the Delaware */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Cross-reading Questions -- These are particularly important... ==<br />
<br />
Just and observation I've made: '''the readings in Woloch about the rules and conduct that men and women should follow is a striking resemblence to social rules set forth by Confucius and his followers in China several hundred years prior to this.''' It just seems interesting to me that although the Europeans at this time always thought of themselves as superior to other peoples and cultures, that people in China hundreds of years before had already discussed and implemented these social rules. - Will Hechmer<br />
<br />
For the readings this week I came up with a question that related throughout all of the texts:<br />
1. '''Why did Native American women's roles offend the Europeans and do we think it still would today?''' Or have the perceptions the Europeans had of women shape women's traditional roles today?<br />
<br />
---I believe that the Europeans were offended primarily due to the differences in marital practices. First, the Native Americans had sexual relations with "potential" spouses BEFORE they were to be married. This violated a religious practice of pre-marital abstinance that Europeans followed. Christians in particular beleive that a woman should be pure and virginal at the time of marriage. Second, it offened Europeans that the Native Americans could "divorce" or change partners so readily. As John Heckwelder notes, "Marriage among the Indians are not, as with us, contracted for life" (MP pg. 30).--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 05:24, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
'''A common feature I noticed within the captive stories and whether they were able to adjust to their new lives appears to be their age and the roles in which they assumed.''' As with Mary Jemison and also John Tanner, they were both young without attachments, and could easily adapt into their new lives as made easier by being fully adopted into the tribe as a sister / daughter and son / brother. In the case of Mary R, she was a middle aged woman, set in her ways, having a husband back home as well as a church, friends, and a role within American society in which she was part of. These differences appear to have an effect on how the captives adjust to their new lives or not in these particular sources, and makes me wonder if this could be common to others as well or if there are other factors that were missed. – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
Maybe I am just cynical because I have been in a few of Dr. McClurken's classes and have had to read many primary source documents (in fact many of these look familiar) but I find it very hard to trust a lot of these writings. Practically all of these writings are from a European perspective that was trying to make sense of what they were seeing through a distorted lens. This is not their fault of course because they did not have the advantage of Wikipedia to give them some background knowledge of what they were going to encounter. Just thinking about running into a culture that has had limited to zero contact with Europeans I can only wonder how both sides interpreted each other. The Europeans have the advantage in written history here so we get a very biased view of what is going on during this time. Even when the Europeans are attempting to be honest there is a perspective here that we are missing that I wish we had more access to. Even with my frustration (it is a good frustration mind you) reading primary source documents is a constant reminder that history does not come in neatly packaged text books we get in elementary school. It is the compilation of primary sources and the interpretation of each historian through time that makes history. /rant --[[User:Shauser|Shauser]] 07:24, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Roger Williams Remarks on Narragansett women – 1643 ==<br />
<br />
After reading the Roger Williams little excerpt about him and his findings on the language and the people on the Narragansett women, I am left wondering how does he seem to have such a different view than other Europeans of his time. He believes that the land belonds to the Native Americas; he even tries to live and learn from them, to study them, even going so far as to publish a dictionary on their language arranged topically. '''What makes his perspective so different from the other European documentations and studies?''' - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
While reading Roger Williams' Narragansett Women, I noticed that his description of the labor that the females did was, in his mind, much more challenging than described by John Heckewelder and Mary Jemison. I also noticed a parallel between Mary Rowlandson and Williams opinion that as Williams put it, "Indian women has escaped Gods curse on Eve." Of course Rowlandson described these feeling in a negative light but the idea was certainly the same. - Caryn Levine<br />
<br />
== John Heckewelder’s 1819, Women’s Lives among the Delaware ==<br />
<br />
John Heckewelder describes the Native American women in Delaware. He comments about the differences and some of the aspects of lives between the Native Americans' lifestyles and the Europeans'. Among them are marriages: marriages among the Indians are not contracted for life. He also mentions the varying work men and women have. Men construct the house in which they are to live in, hunts, traps. Women take care of the home, sometimes become their husband's helpmate while he is hunting, tills the ground, gets the firewood, and pounds the corn in mortars. '''I think this group of Native American women followed the same kind of pattern that most European women followed at the time and would not offend most outsiders.''' Heckewelder's notes may prove that because most of the duties of the Native American women were similar to that of European women, there was no real reason to be shocked or offended. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting the way Heckewelder described marriage between Native Americans. It's the complete opposite of the way marriage was in Europe at the time. A Native American bride was usually not forced to marry or even to stay married. Native American women are not treated as much like the husband's property, as were the European women. I also found it interesting that Native American men would find whatever food that their pregnant or sick wife was craving.-Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
<br />
John Heckewelder’s description of Women’s Lives Among the Delaware is a much different account than from what other colonizers have described. While many Europeans have a biased view through ethnocentric eyes, Heckewelder seemed to empathize with the Native American way of life. Though I do think that he viewed his way of life as better and more civilized, he sees Native American way of life as understandable for a less civilized group. While he believes that Native American women’s work is difficult compared to women’s work in the civilized world, it is nothing compared to the work of the men. Heckewelder’s description of the women’s work as well as marriage practices seems much nicer than other descriptions from onlookers of the time who had a cynical view. The Native American family/societal structure seems like a nice way for women to live, to work cheerfully, to raise families, and to have the ability to leave when unhappy. I wonder if it is because John Heckewelder was able to live among the Indians for 15 years that he was able to see the true side of Native American life, rather then traders whose observations were short lived and distant. --Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
'''John Heckewelder's description of a woman's role in society is still seen through a Europeans eyes''' though I agree with Erin that it was less so then other European observers it is still bias. He still believes that women have no power where men have all the power in society. I liked that he grasped the fact that the women did not think they were being worked like slaves by farming. I would also like to note that Heckewelder when talking about marriages only mentioned that women will please her husband so that he will not leave her but said nothing about men pleasing their wives. - LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
John Heckewelder wrote of the differences in the daily lives of the men and women of the tribe he saw. '''What struck me most was particularly the word choice “The husband may put away his wife whenever he pleases, and the woman may in like manner abandon her husband.” Despite the fact that divorce was incredibly uncommon in Europe, he spoke of the men leaving their wife as if it was no big deal. Yet, he used the word /abandon/ when describing the wife leaving the husband which has a harsher connotation in my opinion.''' Another interesting thing I noticed was that Heckewelder said that the men’s job was to build the house which shows the Delaware tribe he was familiar with was not matrilocal- Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Pierre de Charlevoix, 1721, “Iroquois Women in Government” ==<br />
<br />
Pierre de Charlevoix's "Iroquois Women in Government" seemed on the surface to glorify the hierarchy which held women at the top but unraveled into an explanation of how Iroquois men only allowed the women to seem powerful. I wonder how much of Charlevoix's account was true and how much was a biased opinion based in Western ideals of the Patriarch Royalty. '''This piece prompts me to wonder if Charlevoix felt challenged by the reversal of gender empowerment and the implication and influence that could have on western women. ''' - Caryn Levine<br />
<br />
In this article Pierre de Charlevoix writes about how Iroquois women had a substantial role in their government. Even though it was rare for women to rise to the position of chief, the role of chief was inherited through the matrilineal line. As we discussed in class the older women of the tribe could unseat male chiefs. The Iroquois women had a lot more political opportunities than their European and fellow Indian counterparts. After reading the article I wonder why Native American Women had less political opportunities than the Iroquois. Nick Jesionka<br />
<br />
== Mary Rowlandson’s account (1681) and Mary Jemison’s account (1824) ==<br />
<br />
Also a topic I found important between the articles written by both "Mary's" were the differences/similarities of the women's experiences with the Eastern Woodland Native Americans. How each woman's experience varied based off tribe/age of capture/and release date (if released). -Megan<br />
<br />
'''I was particularly interested in the role religion played in their experiences, especially Mary Rowlandson.''' Her faith seemed to justify her experience, which in turn strengthened her sense of righteousness in the face of perceived barbarism. The topic of Christianity shaping the colonists' interactions with the native Americans seems important when looking at the overall experience. --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
Mary Jemison provided an interesting point of view in which she is not entirely dis fond of living with the Indians. She was captured and lived with the Seneca Iroquois tribe for many years. '''I think this is an interesting example of another way that Europeans, especially European men, were shocked with the Native Americans and their lifestyle.''' Many white female captives were treated humanely, took up the duties of the women of the tribe, and may have been treated more equally than if they returned to white society. This decision was confusing to most white men. -Amy Van Ness<br />
<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed reading both of these accounts. They were both so varied that it was interesting to see the differences and similarities among the captive's situations. The main issue that caught my eye in the Rowlandson account was the employ of God during her whole captive experience. She would quote the bible and see situations through a very thick religious lens. I particularly liked how she commented on page 18 that "strangely did the lord provide for them." Essentially, wondering why, if God was on her (and the English peoples) side then why was he letting the "heathens" live? It is something that she brings up a couple of times through her account. But, what I found interesting was that she believed her God was watching over the Natives, even though they were not Christians. (at least that was how it seemed to me)<br />
In the Jemison account, I really liked how she talked about the benefits for women living among the Seneca tribe. And how she even compared, on the bottom of page 21, the Native woman’s life to that of an English woman’s.-Kristia S.<br />
<br />
The accounts of Mary Rowlandson and Mary Jemison who were captured by Native Americans were the most interesting things I read. '''I though it was fascinating in Rowlandsons account how one minute they were going to bash her head in and the next her master was giving her water to wash with and being kind.''' Mary Jemison had a more positive account of Native Americans and I liked how she said Native Americans were only cruel to their enemies but to their friends they were wonderful. That is not so different from the Europeans who were also cruel to their enemies. --LeAnn Taggart<br />
<br />
== Samuel de Champlain, 1616 ==<br />
<br />
'''The Champlain and Heckewelder readings provide as interesting contrast in the interpretations by Europeans regarding Native Americans. About a hundred years separates their accounts. Champlain was, of course, an explorer, and Heckenwelder was a missionary trying to convert the Indians to Christianity.''' Champlain comments on the figures of the Indians, with a special interest in the women’s appearances, including the fact that “their breasts hang down hardly at all.” Truly an important thing to note. He also tends towards the idea that the men are lazy and the women do most of the work. Heckewelder doesn’t bother commenting on appearances, perhaps due to his being a missionary, but he labels the women’s work as “quickly and easily performed.” Their fatigue is not comparable to the tireless work of the hunting men. Though the interpretations differ on the view of labor and gender roles (which may be a result of the particular tribe they visited and at what time of the year), both accounts are influenced by European thinking. Champlain writes the men off as lazy and unmanly because they appear to lie around while the women do the farming. Heckewelder completely dismisses women’s work, putting forth that the families depend solely on the men’s hunting. --Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
The article that Samuel de Champlain writes about Huron Women is good account of Native American Women. In the article he discusses the roles of women and men and how to him they women do a lot more work then the men do. He called the men lazy and described the women as really hard working and having most of the responsibilities. Overall it was a good account of the Huron tribe. Nick Jesionka<br />
<br />
'''Samuel de Champlain seemed to focus quite a bit of his attention on the courtship of the Natives.''' It was a big change compared to Europeans after all. He spoke of men and women running from cabin to cabin at night, enjoying whoever’s company they please. Then in the next paragraph he brings up the point of how the husband cannot be sure the child his wife bears is actually his. We talked about this in class, this is astonishing to Europeans as the “need” a male heir to carry on the family name or be the next in line to the throne (if they are royal.) –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Did anyone get the impression that maybe there was a hint of jealousy among the Europeans when it came to the courtship of Native Americans? Perhaps they resented being so sexual restricted within their own communities, and felt that the only proper way to address those feelings were to pass negative judgments upon a culture they could not understand. After all, doesn't our culture resemble the pre-colonial Native Americans when it comes to modern day dating and marriage? Now days, it practically unheard of to marry a person you have not already lived with for a while. When a couple splits, the children usually go with the mother, or whoever is the more secure "bread winner." American's today divorce over the slightest irreconcilable differences, and there is little to no stigma on divorcees anymore, they way there had been in the past. Men court women with expensive gifts, and women usually turn to their family and network or "village" of best friends to help them decide if they should marry a man. It is really not much different from how the Native American's approached marriage several hundred years ago. So, I suppose that after all the Europeans effort to assimilate Native Americans into their way of life, modern day Americans have assimilated to the Native American way of life.--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 07:22, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Mary Musgrove assists the Georgians in Dealing with the Choctaws, 1734 & Mary Musgrove Seeks aid for past service from GA, 1747 ==<br />
<br />
I can't say that I was surprised to read the 1747 letter written by Mary Musgrove, as historical evidence often shows that, the European settlers and traders often "went back" or renigged on promises, treaties, and debts that were made to the Native Americans. However, I did find the format of her letter interesting. Instead of just coming right out and asking for what she wants, she diligently lists all of the qualifying reasons why she is owed respect and currency first, and then she gets around to asking for what she wants secondly. It all sounded like something I would imagine a lawyer to do. Perhaps just saying "hey you owe me money" would not have sufficed. It's tragic that all of that explanation and justification was warranted, to seek out something that she and/or the people she represented were due anyways.--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 05:36, 3 September 2009 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Captive John Tanner in 1830 ==<br />
<br />
The major thought that came to my mind while reading this was how multiple Native American women wanted a young white son. I feel that if the roles were reversed and a white woman had a male Native captive, there wouldn't be any other woman who would want him or any hostility regarding it. I find it interesting that he was so valued that Net-no-kwa was so interested in having him. '''Did they find the whites valuable or was he simply filling the role of a son?''' - Christine Leckner<br />
<br />
== Father Le Jeune on necessity of teaching native women, 1633 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Native women resist Jesuits, 1640 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Wamponoag women of Martha’s Vineyard, 1727 ==<br />
<br />
The readings provided some thoughtful insights into changing Native American lifestyles as colonists worked towards converting them to Christianity. '''Particularly interesting to me was determining the reasons why some women were easily converted (at least outwardly) and some women were very resistant.''' In one reading a women runs away, not “wishing to obey her husband” in his desire to convert, risking harsh retribution, while in another reading the women were more receptive and more pious than the men. The second reading also gives some possible reasoning why these women were easier to convert. I think the biggest factor was that many of the women were young and unlikely to be set in their ways, and therefore more receptive to conversion. Sarah Ahhaton's story provides support for this, as there were older women who were seemingly more traditionalist and subversive in their approach towards the English. --Taylor Brann<br />
<br />
As shown in the Pious Wampanoag Women of Martha’s Vineyard and the Adultery Trial of Sarah Ahhaton, the Europeans seem to be pushing their own ideas of woman morality upon the Native Americans that can be compared to as was made example by Eve from the bible. As is with the Adultery Trial and some of the conversions, women appear very susceptible to have a lapse in judgment where their passionate natures take them over. However they are being held accountable for their actions in ways that men are not due to the notion of woman’s virtue and their job of upholding and demonstrating social morals. '''I think it is possible that the hope of the Europeans is that should the women at least be successfully converted, the society and future generations will then follow suit''' and could be as believed half of the battle being already won such as was with the husband of Hannah Tiler who “overcame his evil by her goodness” (MP- Christianity p. 24). – Elyse Lawrence<br />
<br />
== Sarah Ahhaton’s trial, 1668 ==<br />
<br />
'''The story of Sarah Ahhaton, a Native American woman, is one that shows the dynamics of the old, pre-colonization, ways of life and the new, Christian way of life'''. In looking at the French Explorer Samuel de Champlain’s description of the lives of Huron Women and Men in 1616, he describes the marriage practices of the Huron. In this pre-colonized society, marriage is much different than the “civilized” Europeans. Women and men were able to be intimate with different individuals without jealousy it was the standard practice. By 1668, when Sarah Ahhaton told her story of adultery, there was a change in marriage practices due to the influence of European colonizers and the spread of Christianity. The change in women’s roles in such a short period of time must have been difficult, and often confusing. In a society were women were highly regarded, their role shifted to one of subordination. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
== Ann Marie Plane's essay ==<br />
'''In the account of Sarah Ahhaton’s adultery, I was really struck by the double standard for men and women.''' The rift in her marriage began when her husband, William, was not treating her very well and possibly having an affair of his own. Sarah turned herself in for her crime, but William’s position as an interpreter and Christian minister meant it would not have been difficult for English officials to investigate or correct his behaviors. This response is likely a result of English culture, which viewed women as lascivious and unable to control their desires. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
'''I like how Plane described Native American women as the group whose lives were possibly the most radically changed by European contact.''' Before contact, Native American gender relations involved a certain amount of give and take. Men may have held leadership positions, but much of their power depended on the support of women. After contact, the power held by men increased and the power held by women decreased. This deprived women of the means to defend themselves, for example, against an abusive husband, as in Sarah Ahhatan’s case. -Allison Luthern<br />
<br />
<br />
I found the account of Sarah Ahhatons adultery to be extremely poignant. It truly showed in my opinion some of the negative effects the colonists had on the native americans. In many Native American societies women were highly respected and held a firm place in society and were allowed more freedoms within marriage. Yet Sarahs treatment exhibited none of that kind of treatment. It was evident the influence that the Europeans had on there culture at that point was a negative one. I found the part of the essay where the author discusses the negative aspects of european culture that the Native Americans picked up extremely interesting. Although the protestant marriage was supposed to be a well founded joining of two people in the faith in a happy marriage, women were often treated poorly by there husbands. So even though the Native Americans are being taught by the Christian doctrine they picked up the bad habits of the Europeans instead of the good habits. Also the double standards between men and women were particularly evident in her account of the trial because Joseph who was also married and had committed adultery presumably faced no punishment whatsoever. In addition the claims of adultery that were supposedly committed by her husband didn't seem to have been investigated any further. -Emma Peck<br />
<br />
I also found the double standard in the way Sarah Ahhaton was treated compared to both her husband and Joseph interesting -- and, not surprising.''' So, why did this happen? How did the change in the way Native American women and men viewed marriage occur? Were there some tribes who were more resistant to this than others? If so, why?''' -Nancy Lee</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_1_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 1 Questions/Comments-327 092009-08-26T14:01:25Z<p>KatelynLease: </p>
<hr />
<div>Enter your questions & comments on the readings below.<br />
<br />
Dr. McClurken is awesome!<br />
* oh yeah I agree!<br />
<br />
<br />
Leslie Alexander’s essay “Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women’s History” does a great job explaining where Black women fit into Women’s Studies and feminism as a whole. What I found out was that Black women don’t fit in at all. When I think of the feminist movement I think of white, upper middle class women. And after reading Alexander’s essay, this is not surprising. Women’s studies have historically been modeled based on white women and have largely left out other categories such as race and class. This model does not work for Black women. Alexander argues that it is impossible to analyze Black women based solely on their gender, and any model that tries to do so will fail. This is because Black women have a culture in which they identify themselves with their community. Alexander goes on to argue the importance of grappling with issues such as race, culture, community, and class to further understand the lives of women. While discussing this flaw in Women's Studies, Alexander pushes for scholars to analyze Black women “through their own eyes rather than through the lens of whiteness and oppression." –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I agree that Black women do not fit into Women's Studies. When I think of the feminist movement or even of the idea of women's history, I also picture white upper middle class women. I always remember learning about women's history, and then learning about African-American history, but the two never seemed to cross paths in lessons. I liked what Kate Haulman said in her essay, "A woman who self-identified as Chinese American...was not Chinese American four days out of the week and a woman the other three- she was always both." I think that idea could be used in the case of Black women, and for women of all other races. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
<br />
When reading “Definining ‘American Women’s History'” by Kate Haulman, I was fascinated by how complex American Women’s History is just by looking at the separate words: “American” “Women’s” and “History.” Focusing on the “Women” aspect, Kate Haulman mainly looks at the word “women” in opposition to men and a lump category that all individuals who identify themselves as women fit into. Gisela Bock in “Challenging Dichotomies in Women’s History” looks at the word “women” in terms of the dichotomy of sex versus gender and how people identify themselves (“sex” being biological, “gender” being social). As I read Antonia Castañeda’s essay, “Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History” the definition of “women” became even more complex in very important ways because she argues that you can’t look at women as one lump category, you have to reject the idea of a common sisterhood, because such a thing does not exist. Castañeda states, “Women’s gender experiences and definitions were as divers as the cultures from which they came”. Based off of these readings it is clear that no two scholars have the same definitions, so it is important to realize that categories and definitions are dynamic, changing with time and interpretation. –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I found many interesting ideas in Gisela Bock's "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History". When she discussed the work versus family dichotomy, she mentioned that women have always worked. For many women, their family was their work. However, since they were not employed outside the home, or even compensated for their hard work, these women were not considered to be "workers". I like the term "paid versus unpaid work" better. -Katelyn Lease</div>KatelynLeasehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=Week_1_Questions/Comments-327_09Week 1 Questions/Comments-327 092009-08-26T13:53:39Z<p>KatelynLease: </p>
<hr />
<div>Enter your questions & comments on the readings below.<br />
<br />
Dr. McClurken is awesome!<br />
* oh yeah I agree!<br />
<br />
<br />
Leslie Alexander’s essay “Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women’s History” does a great job explaining where Black women fit into Women’s Studies and feminism as a whole. What I found out was that Black women don’t fit in at all. When I think of the feminist movement I think of white, upper middle class women. And after reading Alexander’s essay, this is not surprising. Women’s studies have historically been modeled based on white women and have largely left out other categories such as race and class. This model does not work for Black women. Alexander argues that it is impossible to analyze Black women based solely on their gender, and any model that tries to do so will fail. This is because Black women have a culture in which they identify themselves with their community. Alexander goes on to argue the importance of grappling with issues such as race, culture, community, and class to further understand the lives of women. While discussing this flaw in Women's Studies, Alexander pushes for scholars to analyze Black women “through their own eyes rather than through the lens of whiteness and oppression." –Erin Sanderson<br />
<br />
I agree that Black women do not fit into Women's Studies. When I think of the feminist movement or even of the idea of women's history, I also picture white upper middle class women. I always remember learning about women's history, and then learning about African-American history, but the two never seemed to cross paths in lessons. I liked what Kate Haulman said in her essay, "A woman who self-identified as Chinese American...was not Chinese American four days out of the week and a woman the other three- she was always both." I think that idea could be used in the case of Black women, and for women of all other races. -Katelyn Lease<br />
<br />
<br />
When reading “Definining ‘American Women’s History'” by Kate Haulman, I was fascinated by how complex American Women’s History is just by looking at the separate words: “American” “Women’s” and “History.” Focusing on the “Women” aspect, Kate Haulman mainly looks at the word “women” in opposition to men and a lump category that all individuals who identify themselves as women fit into. Gisela Bock in “Challenging Dichotomies in Women’s History” looks at the word “women” in terms of the dichotomy of sex versus gender and how people identify themselves (“sex” being biological, “gender” being social). As I read Antonia Castañeda’s essay, “Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History” the definition of “women” became even more complex in very important ways because she argues that you can’t look at women as one lump category, you have to reject the idea of a common sisterhood, because such a thing does not exist. Castañeda states, “Women’s gender experiences and definitions were as divers as the cultures from which they came”. Based off of these readings it is clear that no two scholars have the same definitions, so it is important to realize that categories and definitions are dynamic, changing with time and interpretation. –Erin Sanderson</div>KatelynLease 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