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::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($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=MarilynMcClurken Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-09-18T23:04:42ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.22.0https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_14_Questions/Comments328--Week 14 Questions/Comments2008-04-24T07:23:52Z<p>Marilyn: /* United States v. Virginia (1996), “Equal Protection Under the Law” [VMI case] – 1996 */</p>
<hr />
<div>MP, 459-469, 506-524<br />
<br />
== Roe v. Wade Decision (both Blackmun’s majority ruling and White’s dissent). ==<br />
I'll take the first whack, since nobody else is touching this yet. First let me say, that a woman's body is her own and should be fully respected. Justice Blackmun mentions the 14th Amendment not recognizing a fetus as a person. This is technically and legally correct. That being said, technology now gives us more information, which perhaps can make choices for women even more difficult. The abortion argument has centered, for quite some time, on one question: When does life begin? At conception, when a fetus is considered viable (22-24 weeks approximately) or at full term. This has been the subject of much debate. The most difficult part of the equation is the inherent EMOTION that will always be involved in this debate, whether one is pro-choice or pro-life. A big part ot the problem also is the extreme rhetoric used by both sides - example. - Pro-lifers screaming "baby Killers" at Planned Parenhood workers; Pro-choice women insisting that their bodies are essentially theirs and theirs alone, even though a 20 week old fetus is kicking her belly, and a 30 week old fetus can make her foot or hand visible on a mother's belly! Unfortunately, common sense in America rarely prevails. RU 486 is still a restricted drug. A pregnancy terminated in the first several weeks, I have no moral qualms with. However, I have to confess to this: I have attended over a dozen fetal ultrasound sessions with my wife, at least two for each of my children, the last many because of a prenatal problem. As of our last child (2006), Ultrasound technology could detect a visible FETAL HEARTBEAT at six to seven weeks gestation. The heartrate is over 150 beats per minute, and resembles a very quickly twinkling star, or almost like a twinkle light on a Christmas tree. Sorry to get emotional, but at this point, this IS A LIFE. At least as far as my wife and I were concerned, we were then charged with the responsiblity of protecting that life however we could. For my wife, it meant taking good care of herself and refraining from alcohol and reducing caffeine intake. For me, it meant stepping up the pace on my end with housework, taking out the cat litter all the time (toxic for pregnant women) and being patient when crying jags and nesting urges kicked in for my better half. But it was all worth it! - Phil Novalski<br />
<br />
I have to agree with Phil on the first several weeks part. At that point, the fetus is really nothing but a bunch of dividing cells. I honestly don't know how I feel about abortion. I think that it is important to be able to allow women who are fatally at risk to be able to have them, but I have some issues with the way some people use and treat abortion. The main problem that I have is when people use it as a form of birth control. When my mother first started working as a nurse, a woman called for a nurse to help her out of the bathroom. She assisted the lady, and then went back to flush the toilet for her. There was a bloody fetus in the toilet bowl. Needless to say, my mother freaked out. The nurses who had been there longer told her that that woman comes in every several months and has an abortion, and that she used it as birth control. Now, I know that this is not the norm, or at least I hope not, but instead of killing the child, take the care to prevent its conception first. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
== Lindsey Van Gelder reports on “Women vs. the NY Times” in Ms. in 1978. ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Connaught Marshner explains what social conservatives really want, 1988. ==<br />
<br />
I found this essay really interesting. I was shocked by how much this women feared divorce and female independence. Did she honestly think that women that were still "fulfilled" without a man around and raised children without a man in the house were actually ruining society? This was written in 1988!! - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
I agree with Cat, Marshner's opinions seem somewhat outdated today. But she also seems to be a product of Reagan and many popular opinion shifts of the 1980s. I think the increase in divorce rate as well as the family's decrease of importance "functions once served by the family are now provided by the government" brought about the resurfacing of issues like family and women's obligation to making the home a stable environment. I think that the issue of divorce and the effect it has on a single mother is still an issue today. But Marshner is very narrow minded by stating that traditional values work best. She is stuck in the white middle class ideal and fails to acknowledge that many successful families no longer operate by traditional manner. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
== Planned Parenthood versus Casey, 1992 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gloria Anzaldua soeakes about her identity, 1999 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Asma Gull Hasan, Pakistani-American, 2000 ==<br />
<br />
I learned a lot this week in the reading about "First- and Second- Generation Immigrant Women Speak of Living Inbetween Cultures," particularly about Asma Gull Hasan. I learned a great deal about the Muslim culture from her reading that I had only assumed before from the skewed material I've seen from the news. I did not realize that the Qur'an gave women that kind of status and honored them as much as they did. It really was an interesting reading and a learning experience at the same time! --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
<br />
== Kyoko Mori, Japanese-American, 2000 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Jamala McFadden’s Story of 1990s Welfare Assistance, 2002 ==<br />
This is a "feel good story". I love hearing about women beating the odds,for an education, with children no less. Welfare made a difference in McFadden's life because she had drive and ambition and used government assistance to better her life. This is what assistance if for. Too often we hear of people misusing welfare therefore giving a stereotype to its recipients. McFadden spoke of the changes made in the welfare system while she was still in college. She said she was lucky to be "grandfathered" in. I do feel that daycare assistance should be offered to women attending college. To me, this would be money better spent than on women who have a minimum wage jobs. The thought would be like McFadden, these education seeking women would break the chain. --Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
== Rebecca Walker on the 3rd Wave, 2005 ==<br />
<br />
== Ms.Magazine on 5 rights women could lose, 2005 ==<br />
<br />
Well, this is a frightening thought, however, if this was to happen.... move over Betty Friedan. We will have to make room in the history books for a new set of radicals. This country is not ready for the "Girl Power" we all have. <br />
In all seriousness, These rights will never be taken away. Fist of all, we may just have our first women President in office. There are too many women in powerful positions to loose these five rights Ms. Magazines speaks of. People such as Hillary Clinton, my mother-in-law, Dr. M and myself would not take women take a step back. Before taking this class, I really had no idea how far we've come....We've come too far to go back--Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
The problem with Nikole's statement is that the Supreme Court bases their decisions on how they interpret the Constitution, and not public opinion. I agree that there would be great public outcry if women did lose their rights to reproductive privacy, affirmative action, protection against gender-based discrimination, family and medical leave, and quality health-care services, but that wouldn't stop the court's decision, nor would it over-rule or overturn it. So I do believe that there is a danger to lose such rights depending upon the views of the Justices and their rulings in future cases. I also believe that it is unlikely that the last four will be lost soon, but the Roe v. Wade is extremely controversial, and may be overturned. The current administration is certainly against it, but then, the current administration is also about to leave. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
I agree with Nikole, we have gone too far to go back now. I don't see how we could possibly lose any of these rights, I think that too many people would put up a fight if it were to happen. It amazed me at how close these Supreme Court decision were to going the other way. At this time I don't see how it could be possible for someone to not allow a women to take leave for a new baby or to care for a sick family member. At the same time all of this is a little scary that with just a change is members of the Supreme Court and a new case brought forth all of this could change. I just hope that I never have to see the day. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
Well, I think that some of these rights are endanger (if that is the word for it). I mean, I am not sure how I feel about it, but I think there is an agreement to made both for and against Affirmative Action and Protection Against Gender-Based Discrimination. Will society ever reach such a progressive point that we won't need separate laws? If so... when? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
As far as gender based discrimination goes I read an interesting article about 6 months ago (of which i do not remember all the specifics) about how dental and medical schools in North Carolina were trying to seperate themselves from the public funded university and become private, so that they would not be controlled by qoutas set by the state. The reason they want to move away from these qoutas is so they don't have to accept as many women to their schools. I believe their reasoning was that professional women tend to work on average less than 15 years, while men work on average over 40 years. Apparently because of the high number of women that had been accepted to the dental and medical schools in the state, North Carolina had a shortage of dentists. Just something to think about - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Also, I think the other rights will remain protected. Men benefit from most of these rights as much as the women do. I am sure there would be plenty of distraught men if the right to sexual privacy got taken away. Also the rights dealing with familial leave and and quality health services would seem to help men just as much as the women. The affirmative action and the gender based discrimination rights are the only two that men have nothing to gain (from a selfish point of view) from. --Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I disagree with Landon on his point that men have nothing to gain on the affirmative action point. Example: UMW. We have a skewed gender ratio in our student population, something like 70% female to 30% male. The school is actively trying to get more male students, so that if they're looking at two students who have the same GPA and SAT scores, they're probably more likely to choose the male student over the female. It annoyed me when I was waiting to hear if I got accepted to Mary Wash that a guy in my class asked if I had gotten in yet, because he had. When I said I hadn't heard yet, he told me that because he was a guy, he was more likely to get in than me anyway. I got my acceptance letter later that week, but it really made me mad to hear him say that. The fact that he was smirking at me while saying it probably didn't help. So affirmative action doesn't mean that men have nothing to gain. Sometimes they do gain benefits. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
== US, 565-586 – Rebecca Tsosie, “Changing Women: The Crosscurrents of American Indian Female Identity.”—1988 ==<br />
Prior to reading Rebecca Tsosie's essay "Changing Women: The Crosscurrents of American Indian Feminine Identity," I had never known Native American literature to be so profoundly developed. After reading the article, I definitely have a deep respect for the Native American literature genre. Maybe I will read some of it someday.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Like Justin, I too never realized just how developed the Native American literature was... and it feels silly for it to just now be dawning on me from the stories I have read related to Native Americans and the stories, songs, poems, et cetera that were mentioned in the stories/articles. I wonder why we don't have more of the Native American literature in public school... we seem to have so much in the way of English and American.... --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I agree with Justin, I never realized the extent of Native American literature out there. I have read some picture books that were designed to teach lessons to children, but other than that it never really occurred to me to look to see what else was there. I also too was curious as to why we don't see more of this genre of literature in schools. We have so many varieties of literature in the schools, why not include a few more? --Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
“Changing Women…” by Rebecca Tsosie discusses the stereotypes that have been created about Indian women through literature and the media. On page 567 she states that “The princess/squaw dichotomy does not even approach the historical realities of Indian women…the primary factor in perceptions of both European women and Indian women became their definition in terms of their relationship with males.” I see her point, but it’s not something that’s special to Indian women. Stereotypes are developed and portrayed for almost any other type of way you can classify a person. In one of the first few weeks of class we read about how the views of Spanish-Mexican women were stereotyped and romanticized through the image that Barceló created for herself… --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
MAW, Chapters 11-13<br />
<br />
== Cathy Tuley, “Clerical Workers Unite,” 1976. ==<br />
Cathy Tuley's involvement in organizing clerical workers helped her personal development by becoming more assertive and self-reliant in the workplace. She refers to utilizing this new found assertiveness in her personal life saying "Sometimes it's kind of rough when you do that to your husband! 'Give me the fact,' you know. 'Prove what you just said.'" This made me think that their was a duality that women had to play between work and home. In work she could be somewhat assertive (depending on her position), and in the home she was expected to remain a subservient role to the man of the house.--LisaM<br />
<br />
== Crystal Lee Sutton, “The Real ‘Norma Rae’ Tells Her Story,” 1986. ==<br />
<br />
Reading "The Real 'Norma Rae' Tells her Story" by Crystal Lee Sutton sure does bring back memories. I remember the first time I dealt with someone like that and coming up with well-reasoned arguments and everything in an attempt to persuade them. It's weird, when someone is not doing what they are supposed to do, why would they actually extend to you common courtesies like honesty. It really doesn't make any sense.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I think it was great that the man JB Younts was so supportive for her to go to the Union meeting and possible join. It seems that the more support Lee got the more she fought for the Union. Did many women make a similar stand to how Lee did? –Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
I loved this essay. That certainly was a plucky lady. It's well written in a way that, I could almost picture the Big Bossman, grossly overweight, puffing a cigar, trying to intimidate her with his Southern drawl. I can cast his part! She stood up to him, and then had the guts to stand up on a table with a "Union" sign! Cool! Phil Novalski.<br />
<br />
== Susan Eisenberg, “Hard-Hatted Women,” 1988. ==<br />
<br />
I thought the "Hard-hatted Women" essay in MAW was amazing! To learn that she became an electrician and managed to hide her pregnancy for 6 months before finally going on maternity-type leaving was just incredible! I was sad that she had a miscarriage, but was really impressed with how her co-workers supported her. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I understand fully how Eisenberg felt. I found out I was pregnant with my my second son, Nathan, the week before 9/11. We lived in the NJ/NY area at the time and EVERYONE was in fear of loosing their jobs. My fear went a step further thinking if anyone would loose their jobs it would be me. I kept my pregnancy to myself for a while. Then I got over my new hormonal state and dared anyone to discriminate against me. Unlike Eisenberg, I was not in the construction industry and It was 2002. --Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
I appreciate your comment Nicole. This lady was very impressive. I can only empathize with your fears. Imagine how she must have felt, a pregnant woman on a construction site in the late 1970s? It's good that she did foster some better relationships with co-workers during subsequent pregnancies. Some of the insensitve remarks from her male co-workers were really nasty, but not surprising to me. I worked in trades and roofing some years ago. The thing to remember about men, is that at the end of the day, most of us are insecure little boys who still like to talk about sounds that emanate from our bodies, watch the Three Stooges hit each other with hard objects and laugh out loud, and still like to gawk and make immature noises at attractive women who walk by a work site... we really can't help ourselves as to our simple-mindedness in these areas and really don't mean anything by it. - Phil Novalski.<br />
<br />
== Jessie Lopez De La Cruz, “Organizing the Farm Workers,” 1980 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Johnnie Tillmon, “Women on Welfare,” 1972 ==<br />
The movie "Claudine" starring James Earl Jones and Diahann Carroll presents some of the issues raised in "Women on Welfare" by Johnnie Tillmon. When I saw it a few years ago, I remember thinking about how typically 70's it seemed. True it was released in '74, but what I mean is that it seemed to depict exactly what it meant to be black in the 1970's. Has anyone else seen it?--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I do not agree with the A.F.D.C that if a man is in the house, then the family cannot be supplied by welfare. As Johnnie stated, the man could not have a job and be living in the house; therefore he still cannot support his children. Welfare should be for any family that is financial unstable. Has much of the welfare requirements changed since then? <br />
–Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
"Welfare is a basic right of citizenship," and "housewives should get a legally determined percentage of their husbands income"????? They call this SOCIALISM. While acknowledging that our free-market ideology creates many inequities, these aren't answers either! Ms. Tillman obviously was not an economics major. It's like you guys on campus trying to get a living wage for the groundskeepers. Nice sentiment, won't work too well. Do you understand, that if everyone gets paid a LIVING WAGE for every job, then inflation kicks in, and the value of your $35,000 per year entry-level jobs after you graduate is NIL. Do you really believe its fair, as many are suggesting, that the UMW groundskeepers, janitorial staff, Johnnie Tillman's housewives, and everyone else, now would get a federally mandated minimum wage above the poverty line, say, $30,000 for a family of four? How do you feel now about working to get a degree and only earning a fraction more? Might as well have skipped college! - Phil Novalski.<br />
<br />
== Mariah Burton Nelson, “Sex and Sports” – 1994 ==<br />
I realize it is the point of the view of the author, but I honestly never thought there were so many lesbians in women sports leagues. I just never associated the two. Sure, I've heard other people associate women sports stars and lesbianism, but I never took them seriously. Wow, that's interesting.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I too was surprised to learn about how many women in sports were actually lesbians in this article. I had never heard anything ever reported on it. I did know that women fought hard to get recognition like the men did in their sorts. I remember watching a show on the women's US soccer team and how they fought for better pay like the male US soccer team as well as how Mia Hamm (sp?) was the one who helped them get that recoginition by doing the Pert shampoo commercials. Even when I think about it today, how many womens sports are actually on TV, I can think of plenty of male sports, like football, baseball, basketball, but women the only one or two I can think of is golf, and I think basketball, I could be wrong on that one though.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
This did not surprise me at all, I know of many female athletes that are lesbians. It was something that growing up with a sister in sports that my family really started to hear of all the lesbians out there. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I was also not surprised by this article. I think the reason most people are shocked by this information is because women sports are not covered to the same extent that men's sports are. Professional male athletes are idolized and hero-worshiped so when they are homosexual it becomes a really big deal. Professional female athletes however are no where near as popular so their sexuality is not as big a factor. - Christine W.<br />
<br />
<br />
In the introduction to this article it talked about how mens' sports receive 92% of all TV coverage and 81% of all newspaper coverage. The tone of the article seemed to suggest that this was in some way unfair, or that it was somehow based in sexism. Really, I think this has nothing to do with sexism. Male sports just sell better, from my experience they are more exciting to watch, and they obviously draw a larger audience of both male and female viewers alike. So I think that this is based more in business sense than it is in sexism. -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
== Marissa Navarro, “Becoming La Mujer” – 1998 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Nancy Mairs, “Women and Disabilities” – 1986 ==<br />
I found the Why me? Why not? portion of "Women and Disabilities" by Nancy Mairs to be fairly interesting. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I found myself able to relate to this reading because when I was in middle school my Mom was diagnosed with MS. And I honestly have to say that if my mom hadn't been my hero before, she definitely is now. However, unlike Nancy Mairs my mother would never call herself a cripple, or at least I've never heard her do so, and I believe that this is largely because of the fact that the term cripple makes it sound like you can't do something, and lord help you if you ever tell my mother she can't do something. So I think that one of the reasons that this story stood out to me the most is because I've seen this first hand, yes my Mom can't do half the things she used to be able to do, but she refuses to let it depress her, she's always fighting to keep going and keep walking, but at the same time she does face things that others don't, such as a difficulty getting up and down stairs, which makes it hard for her to do some of the things she used to do. Though I did find it interesting that disabilities weren't talked about much until the 80s. -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
== Abra Fortune Chernik, “The Voice of an Anorexic” – 1995 ==<br />
<br />
This story really saddened me, because of how this girl viewed her self for so long. I was just glad that it had a happy ending, and that she was lucky enough to have survived as long as she did with this disease. This article just goes to prove that every time period through out the history of women there is an expected stereotype that is portrayed in culture and especially media like for this woman. For example during WWII media portrayed women as working to help to the counry but as soon as the men returned home they were happy to go back to being house wives, which in many cases wasn't true. For Abra Chernik, magazines of pretty skinny models was the new portrait of women, and often still is today.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
== Eve Ensler, “The Vagina Monologues” – 1997 ==<br />
I have heard of "the Vagina Monologues" and I've even seen parts of it, but I never realized how much Ensler had actually been through herself. Being raped when you're such a young girl is traumatic and the fact that she took that and turned it into something positive is empowering. And I agree with her and her theory about the word "vagina." Even today people have a hard time saying the actual word when referencing female (and male) genatalia and they usually use other words or nicknames. It's kind of sad, actually, that even after having sexual education classes and making sure that students today know the parts of the body, people are still so scared to use the real words. Yes, there are publications and television shows and broadway plays that occasionally use the real words, but if you listen to those scripts as well and read those articles you'll notice that other words or phrases normally replace the actual word (unless it's a medical journal, of course.) That's where slang starts. It just goes to show, I guess, that some mind sets never change. --Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
This really isn't a salient point, but I think it's all due to the fact that our country was founded by a bunch of prude puritans. :) - Sarah<br />
<br />
Sorry I'm a little playful this week, but when Ms. Ensler mentions that her vagina represents her "second heart," I can only hope that some of the proceeds of her provacative and very popular script is going to a therapist. In the sake of fair play, when will UMW hold a PENIS Week, or "P" week? After all, I think the school is about 30% guys. I wonder what penises would say to one another. Would they drink beer and watch sports like the rest of us? - Phil Novalski. (On a serious note - her cause is a great one. PN.)<br />
<br />
== Susan Faludi, “The Backlash Against Feminism” – 1991 ==<br />
I thought it was interesting to read “The Backlash against Feminism” by Susan Faludi. In it, she points out that even though politicians and the media are continually boasting that women have indeed reached equality and every opportunity is open to them, there is another front that these people are overlooking, and that is emotional. Women still face continual pressure by the media to conform to what is expected of them. As a result there are increasing stories, such as the one by Abra Chernik, of “stress-induced disorders.” It seems as though we are now entering a time where politics may not influence a woman’s limitations in society as much as popular culture. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
== Anita Hill, “A Woman of Conscience” – 1991 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Katie Roiphe, “Date Rape: Hysteria or Epidemic?” – 1991 ==<br />
<br />
I had mixed feelings about this reading. I had never thought that the very concept of date rape could enforce the traditional stereotyped sexual roles that women always had of being the ones who don't want sex when men did. However, I also feel like Katie Roiphe, while she has good points, ignores the possibility that some of these women really didn't want sex with these men and instead she seems to have the idea that these women were using the cry of rape to excuse their sexual behaviour. While in some cases this might be true, I highly doubt this is the majority. -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Frankly this reading upset me and I disagree with Roiphe. I don't think that society or women use the term rape too lightly. I do think that cultural ideals do send messages to women that they shouldn't act sexual and when they do they should be ashamed of their actions. I believe that this is the issue that really needs to be addressed. The reality is that women are taken advantage of but men are taken advantage of as well. Rape is not one way and too often men are embarressed to admit being pressured into sexual situations because of their gender expectations. Roiphe's generalizing views are not really important when you take rape cases individually, because it's not as simple as "I went on a date and it resulted in sex and it was his fault because I was helpless." Not everyone lived through the same "date rape" situation and if they perceived they had been violated by another then their word should stand. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
Meredith brings up a good point. This is one situation where the sexual double standard actually hurts men. If a guy wakes up the next morning and realizes he slept with someone he did not want to, all he can really call it is a mistake. If a guy woke up and claimed that a girl raped him he would be laughed at (at least by the gentleman i know). I think now-a-days the biggest problem concerning date rape has to be alcohol, i bet very rarely does a sober date rape incident occur. -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Elizabeth, Meredith and Landon all bring up excellent points. The article did put me off a bit. Date rape education (and repoting) should be encouraged. I don't think women "like" to report being raped. I just read testimony in the paper yesterday from a girl at Annapolis that was raped by a fellow cadet and you could feel her pain coming out. I think rape is likely still very much an underreported crime. Landon's point about alcohol likely being involved quite often in date rape situations (especially on campuses) is a good one. - Phil Novalski<br />
<br />
== Christine Hoff Sommers, “Who Stole Feminism?” – 1994 ==<br />
"What has real feminism to do with sitting around in circles talking about our feelings and menstruation?" HAHAHA. First of all, I'd like to say that Ms. Hoff seems a little bitter about the way women's studies classes are being taught. That said, I think she does raise a valid concern. Most people today (women and men alike) hear the word "feminist" and a negative connotation is automatically thrown with it. Forget the fact that you do not have to be a bra-burning, man-hating, same-sex-loving hippie to be a feminist. Forget the fact that you can be a strong, independent, normal girl and be a feminist. Instead, most people hear "feminist" and automatically throw that first connotation right onto it, and men who admit to being feminists are normally mocked which is a shame. Unlike our dear author, I thought the rules that one class presents to it's students at the beginning of the semester was a fantastic idea. It forces the student to enter the class with an open mind and realize that feminism was a movement fighting oppression just like most other movements. One has to go into the class and acknowledge that oppression exists and that you have to respect your classmate's rights. I disagree with her statement that "anything said in the classroom should be repeatable outside." Yes, I believe that students should not be ashamed to speak their opinion, but when discussing such a tough topic, the fact that someone is voicing their opinion should be enough. If they don't want that repeated outside the walls of their classroom, they shouldn't have to worry about it. I believe it teaches students to respect and trust one another. To be honest, our dear Ms. Hoff kind of bugged me. --Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
== United States v. Virginia (1996), “Equal Protection Under the Law” [VMI case] – 1996 ==<br />
The Supreme Court case United States v. Virginia is probably the case that I am most passionate about because it literally hits home. I was born and raised in Lexington, home of Virginia Military Institute, and both my father and my brother graduated from VMI. Hearing the stories my dad tells about the Old Corps and witnessing my brother going through Hell Week and the Ratline, I came to understand how physically, mentally, emotionally, and academically demanding VMI is...or once was. Even though I was all of ten years old when this case was decided, I was against VMI being forced to admit women. I had a feeling that things would only become worse...and I was right. For the past two summers, I have gone to VMI for summer school, (which you do not have to be a cadet to attend) and I have taken classes with some of the female cadets that do attend VMI. I will be the first to admit that I am not the smartest woman in the world, but in a freshman level World History class that I took, we were asked to read aloud from the textbook, and honest to God, these girls could barely read! Not only that, but many of them were obviously not in top physical condition. I always heard my brother talking about how horrible the "shedets" were, but now I saw it with my own eyes. Because of United States v. Virginia, VMI was basically forced to lower its standards and accept any female applicants, regardless of their scholastic aptitude or physical prowess. Granted, I do know a select few female cadets who do exceed the academic and physical qualifications that the school lays out, and they have risen to prominent positions in the Corps, but an overwhelming majority of female cadets are not like this. So which is worse - not having females at a state supported school that has been an all-male school since its inception, or having to significantly lower standards of acceptance just so sub-par females can attend the school in the name of equality? VMI has had to make so many changes and sacrifices in order for women to attend. Barracks had to be renovated so that females could live there, and traditions like Hell Week, sweat parties, and other Ratline activities had to be modified to accommodate women. If the women who attended VMI after the case was decided really wanted things to be equal, then they would have attended the school under the rules of the Old Corps. They did not. Even with the relaxed physical and academic regulations for women, out of the approximately one hundred women who start the Ratline in August, probably only twenty have what it takes to make it through Hell Week, and the numbers tend to diminish after that. The fact that VMI has been forced to lower its standards to accommodate females has really lowered its reputation in the minds of both alumni and current cadets. It is not the same school my father went to, and now he jokingly says that the VMI my brother attended was a country club. The men that attend VMI today have been forced to sacrifice the experiences that the alumni had in the Old Corps...how is that for unequal? -Marilyn<br />
<br />
== Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards, “A Third Wave Feminist Manifesta” – 2000 ==<br />
I LOVED the Third Wave Feminist Manifesta. To me, that is what feminism is all about, and that is what women today should be striving for. This is a manifesta for feminists our age and I believe that every point they raise is important. There is nothing outrageous about any of their plans and, in my opinion and as cheesy as this sounds, the list looks to make the world a better place for women. Everything from Point number 1 about outing unacknowledged feminists to point number 13 about passing the Equal Rights Amendment is important (one I love being point number 10 because I hate the demeaning nicknames 12 year olds use for each other these days.) It's a well thought out manifesta and it's kind of scary how much this applies to us. They're talking to our generation and it's just weird to see where the feminist movement has gone since the second wave movement in the 1960s and 1970s. --Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
== Charlotte Bunch, “Global Feminism” – 1995 [at the UN Beijing Women’s Conference] ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gloria Anzaldua, “The Borderlands” – 1987 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Wow, the head chef of the Roosevelt Hotel in New York City doesn't seem to be that prestigious, if Velma James's 1976 photograph "A Day in the Kitchen" means anything. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
It was kind of strange seeing the photo of Marion Jones in the book.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
<br />
Must have been strange being a Stanford graduate with a degree in psychology and being asked to go to charm school.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
<br />
I just have a general comment. It was surprising to me how recent some of these essays were dated. I guess I never thought of this time period as very relevant or active for women's rights... because I guess it is! I mean I would definitely describe myself as a feminists, but I guess I kind of feel that in this day and age... doesn't every women in my age bracket feel like a feminist? Are there actually people in the younger generation today that are advocating for women to be defined by their role of mother and that is it? I think it is great if a women chooses to stay home with her family, but really i just think ti is great if a women chooses whatever makes her happy, no matter what that is. Do all people in this generation not feel this way?- Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
To answer Cat's question, no not everyone in this generation feels that way. There are still debutants in the South who go to school to find a husband and take classes to be good housewives. I also had some girls on my floor freshman year who were forming a housewives club to learn how to cook and clean and be good housewives. - Chrisitne W.</div>Marilynhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_14_Questions/Comments328--Week 14 Questions/Comments2008-04-24T07:23:16Z<p>Marilyn: /* United States v. Virginia (1996), “Equal Protection Under the Law” [VMI case] – 1996 */</p>
<hr />
<div>MP, 459-469, 506-524<br />
<br />
== Roe v. Wade Decision (both Blackmun’s majority ruling and White’s dissent). ==<br />
I'll take the first whack, since nobody else is touching this yet. First let me say, that a woman's body is her own and should be fully respected. Justice Blackmun mentions the 14th Amendment not recognizing a fetus as a person. This is technically and legally correct. That being said, technology now gives us more information, which perhaps can make choices for women even more difficult. The abortion argument has centered, for quite some time, on one question: When does life begin? At conception, when a fetus is considered viable (22-24 weeks approximately) or at full term. This has been the subject of much debate. The most difficult part of the equation is the inherent EMOTION that will always be involved in this debate, whether one is pro-choice or pro-life. A big part ot the problem also is the extreme rhetoric used by both sides - example. - Pro-lifers screaming "baby Killers" at Planned Parenhood workers; Pro-choice women insisting that their bodies are essentially theirs and theirs alone, even though a 20 week old fetus is kicking her belly, and a 30 week old fetus can make her foot or hand visible on a mother's belly! Unfortunately, common sense in America rarely prevails. RU 486 is still a restricted drug. A pregnancy terminated in the first several weeks, I have no moral qualms with. However, I have to confess to this: I have attended over a dozen fetal ultrasound sessions with my wife, at least two for each of my children, the last many because of a prenatal problem. As of our last child (2006), Ultrasound technology could detect a visible FETAL HEARTBEAT at six to seven weeks gestation. The heartrate is over 150 beats per minute, and resembles a very quickly twinkling star, or almost like a twinkle light on a Christmas tree. Sorry to get emotional, but at this point, this IS A LIFE. At least as far as my wife and I were concerned, we were then charged with the responsiblity of protecting that life however we could. For my wife, it meant taking good care of herself and refraining from alcohol and reducing caffeine intake. For me, it meant stepping up the pace on my end with housework, taking out the cat litter all the time (toxic for pregnant women) and being patient when crying jags and nesting urges kicked in for my better half. But it was all worth it! - Phil Novalski<br />
<br />
I have to agree with Phil on the first several weeks part. At that point, the fetus is really nothing but a bunch of dividing cells. I honestly don't know how I feel about abortion. I think that it is important to be able to allow women who are fatally at risk to be able to have them, but I have some issues with the way some people use and treat abortion. The main problem that I have is when people use it as a form of birth control. When my mother first started working as a nurse, a woman called for a nurse to help her out of the bathroom. She assisted the lady, and then went back to flush the toilet for her. There was a bloody fetus in the toilet bowl. Needless to say, my mother freaked out. The nurses who had been there longer told her that that woman comes in every several months and has an abortion, and that she used it as birth control. Now, I know that this is not the norm, or at least I hope not, but instead of killing the child, take the care to prevent its conception first. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
== Lindsey Van Gelder reports on “Women vs. the NY Times” in Ms. in 1978. ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Connaught Marshner explains what social conservatives really want, 1988. ==<br />
<br />
I found this essay really interesting. I was shocked by how much this women feared divorce and female independence. Did she honestly think that women that were still "fulfilled" without a man around and raised children without a man in the house were actually ruining society? This was written in 1988!! - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
I agree with Cat, Marshner's opinions seem somewhat outdated today. But she also seems to be a product of Reagan and many popular opinion shifts of the 1980s. I think the increase in divorce rate as well as the family's decrease of importance "functions once served by the family are now provided by the government" brought about the resurfacing of issues like family and women's obligation to making the home a stable environment. I think that the issue of divorce and the effect it has on a single mother is still an issue today. But Marshner is very narrow minded by stating that traditional values work best. She is stuck in the white middle class ideal and fails to acknowledge that many successful families no longer operate by traditional manner. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
== Planned Parenthood versus Casey, 1992 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gloria Anzaldua soeakes about her identity, 1999 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Asma Gull Hasan, Pakistani-American, 2000 ==<br />
<br />
I learned a lot this week in the reading about "First- and Second- Generation Immigrant Women Speak of Living Inbetween Cultures," particularly about Asma Gull Hasan. I learned a great deal about the Muslim culture from her reading that I had only assumed before from the skewed material I've seen from the news. I did not realize that the Qur'an gave women that kind of status and honored them as much as they did. It really was an interesting reading and a learning experience at the same time! --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
<br />
== Kyoko Mori, Japanese-American, 2000 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Jamala McFadden’s Story of 1990s Welfare Assistance, 2002 ==<br />
This is a "feel good story". I love hearing about women beating the odds,for an education, with children no less. Welfare made a difference in McFadden's life because she had drive and ambition and used government assistance to better her life. This is what assistance if for. Too often we hear of people misusing welfare therefore giving a stereotype to its recipients. McFadden spoke of the changes made in the welfare system while she was still in college. She said she was lucky to be "grandfathered" in. I do feel that daycare assistance should be offered to women attending college. To me, this would be money better spent than on women who have a minimum wage jobs. The thought would be like McFadden, these education seeking women would break the chain. --Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
== Rebecca Walker on the 3rd Wave, 2005 ==<br />
<br />
== Ms.Magazine on 5 rights women could lose, 2005 ==<br />
<br />
Well, this is a frightening thought, however, if this was to happen.... move over Betty Friedan. We will have to make room in the history books for a new set of radicals. This country is not ready for the "Girl Power" we all have. <br />
In all seriousness, These rights will never be taken away. Fist of all, we may just have our first women President in office. There are too many women in powerful positions to loose these five rights Ms. Magazines speaks of. People such as Hillary Clinton, my mother-in-law, Dr. M and myself would not take women take a step back. Before taking this class, I really had no idea how far we've come....We've come too far to go back--Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
The problem with Nikole's statement is that the Supreme Court bases their decisions on how they interpret the Constitution, and not public opinion. I agree that there would be great public outcry if women did lose their rights to reproductive privacy, affirmative action, protection against gender-based discrimination, family and medical leave, and quality health-care services, but that wouldn't stop the court's decision, nor would it over-rule or overturn it. So I do believe that there is a danger to lose such rights depending upon the views of the Justices and their rulings in future cases. I also believe that it is unlikely that the last four will be lost soon, but the Roe v. Wade is extremely controversial, and may be overturned. The current administration is certainly against it, but then, the current administration is also about to leave. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
I agree with Nikole, we have gone too far to go back now. I don't see how we could possibly lose any of these rights, I think that too many people would put up a fight if it were to happen. It amazed me at how close these Supreme Court decision were to going the other way. At this time I don't see how it could be possible for someone to not allow a women to take leave for a new baby or to care for a sick family member. At the same time all of this is a little scary that with just a change is members of the Supreme Court and a new case brought forth all of this could change. I just hope that I never have to see the day. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
Well, I think that some of these rights are endanger (if that is the word for it). I mean, I am not sure how I feel about it, but I think there is an agreement to made both for and against Affirmative Action and Protection Against Gender-Based Discrimination. Will society ever reach such a progressive point that we won't need separate laws? If so... when? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
As far as gender based discrimination goes I read an interesting article about 6 months ago (of which i do not remember all the specifics) about how dental and medical schools in North Carolina were trying to seperate themselves from the public funded university and become private, so that they would not be controlled by qoutas set by the state. The reason they want to move away from these qoutas is so they don't have to accept as many women to their schools. I believe their reasoning was that professional women tend to work on average less than 15 years, while men work on average over 40 years. Apparently because of the high number of women that had been accepted to the dental and medical schools in the state, North Carolina had a shortage of dentists. Just something to think about - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Also, I think the other rights will remain protected. Men benefit from most of these rights as much as the women do. I am sure there would be plenty of distraught men if the right to sexual privacy got taken away. Also the rights dealing with familial leave and and quality health services would seem to help men just as much as the women. The affirmative action and the gender based discrimination rights are the only two that men have nothing to gain (from a selfish point of view) from. --Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I disagree with Landon on his point that men have nothing to gain on the affirmative action point. Example: UMW. We have a skewed gender ratio in our student population, something like 70% female to 30% male. The school is actively trying to get more male students, so that if they're looking at two students who have the same GPA and SAT scores, they're probably more likely to choose the male student over the female. It annoyed me when I was waiting to hear if I got accepted to Mary Wash that a guy in my class asked if I had gotten in yet, because he had. When I said I hadn't heard yet, he told me that because he was a guy, he was more likely to get in than me anyway. I got my acceptance letter later that week, but it really made me mad to hear him say that. The fact that he was smirking at me while saying it probably didn't help. So affirmative action doesn't mean that men have nothing to gain. Sometimes they do gain benefits. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
== US, 565-586 – Rebecca Tsosie, “Changing Women: The Crosscurrents of American Indian Female Identity.”—1988 ==<br />
Prior to reading Rebecca Tsosie's essay "Changing Women: The Crosscurrents of American Indian Feminine Identity," I had never known Native American literature to be so profoundly developed. After reading the article, I definitely have a deep respect for the Native American literature genre. Maybe I will read some of it someday.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Like Justin, I too never realized just how developed the Native American literature was... and it feels silly for it to just now be dawning on me from the stories I have read related to Native Americans and the stories, songs, poems, et cetera that were mentioned in the stories/articles. I wonder why we don't have more of the Native American literature in public school... we seem to have so much in the way of English and American.... --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I agree with Justin, I never realized the extent of Native American literature out there. I have read some picture books that were designed to teach lessons to children, but other than that it never really occurred to me to look to see what else was there. I also too was curious as to why we don't see more of this genre of literature in schools. We have so many varieties of literature in the schools, why not include a few more? --Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
“Changing Women…” by Rebecca Tsosie discusses the stereotypes that have been created about Indian women through literature and the media. On page 567 she states that “The princess/squaw dichotomy does not even approach the historical realities of Indian women…the primary factor in perceptions of both European women and Indian women became their definition in terms of their relationship with males.” I see her point, but it’s not something that’s special to Indian women. Stereotypes are developed and portrayed for almost any other type of way you can classify a person. In one of the first few weeks of class we read about how the views of Spanish-Mexican women were stereotyped and romanticized through the image that Barceló created for herself… --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
MAW, Chapters 11-13<br />
<br />
== Cathy Tuley, “Clerical Workers Unite,” 1976. ==<br />
Cathy Tuley's involvement in organizing clerical workers helped her personal development by becoming more assertive and self-reliant in the workplace. She refers to utilizing this new found assertiveness in her personal life saying "Sometimes it's kind of rough when you do that to your husband! 'Give me the fact,' you know. 'Prove what you just said.'" This made me think that their was a duality that women had to play between work and home. In work she could be somewhat assertive (depending on her position), and in the home she was expected to remain a subservient role to the man of the house.--LisaM<br />
<br />
== Crystal Lee Sutton, “The Real ‘Norma Rae’ Tells Her Story,” 1986. ==<br />
<br />
Reading "The Real 'Norma Rae' Tells her Story" by Crystal Lee Sutton sure does bring back memories. I remember the first time I dealt with someone like that and coming up with well-reasoned arguments and everything in an attempt to persuade them. It's weird, when someone is not doing what they are supposed to do, why would they actually extend to you common courtesies like honesty. It really doesn't make any sense.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I think it was great that the man JB Younts was so supportive for her to go to the Union meeting and possible join. It seems that the more support Lee got the more she fought for the Union. Did many women make a similar stand to how Lee did? –Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
I loved this essay. That certainly was a plucky lady. It's well written in a way that, I could almost picture the Big Bossman, grossly overweight, puffing a cigar, trying to intimidate her with his Southern drawl. I can cast his part! She stood up to him, and then had the guts to stand up on a table with a "Union" sign! Cool! Phil Novalski.<br />
<br />
== Susan Eisenberg, “Hard-Hatted Women,” 1988. ==<br />
<br />
I thought the "Hard-hatted Women" essay in MAW was amazing! To learn that she became an electrician and managed to hide her pregnancy for 6 months before finally going on maternity-type leaving was just incredible! I was sad that she had a miscarriage, but was really impressed with how her co-workers supported her. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I understand fully how Eisenberg felt. I found out I was pregnant with my my second son, Nathan, the week before 9/11. We lived in the NJ/NY area at the time and EVERYONE was in fear of loosing their jobs. My fear went a step further thinking if anyone would loose their jobs it would be me. I kept my pregnancy to myself for a while. Then I got over my new hormonal state and dared anyone to discriminate against me. Unlike Eisenberg, I was not in the construction industry and It was 2002. --Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
I appreciate your comment Nicole. This lady was very impressive. I can only empathize with your fears. Imagine how she must have felt, a pregnant woman on a construction site in the late 1970s? It's good that she did foster some better relationships with co-workers during subsequent pregnancies. Some of the insensitve remarks from her male co-workers were really nasty, but not surprising to me. I worked in trades and roofing some years ago. The thing to remember about men, is that at the end of the day, most of us are insecure little boys who still like to talk about sounds that emanate from our bodies, watch the Three Stooges hit each other with hard objects and laugh out loud, and still like to gawk and make immature noises at attractive women who walk by a work site... we really can't help ourselves as to our simple-mindedness in these areas and really don't mean anything by it. - Phil Novalski.<br />
<br />
== Jessie Lopez De La Cruz, “Organizing the Farm Workers,” 1980 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Johnnie Tillmon, “Women on Welfare,” 1972 ==<br />
The movie "Claudine" starring James Earl Jones and Diahann Carroll presents some of the issues raised in "Women on Welfare" by Johnnie Tillmon. When I saw it a few years ago, I remember thinking about how typically 70's it seemed. True it was released in '74, but what I mean is that it seemed to depict exactly what it meant to be black in the 1970's. Has anyone else seen it?--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I do not agree with the A.F.D.C that if a man is in the house, then the family cannot be supplied by welfare. As Johnnie stated, the man could not have a job and be living in the house; therefore he still cannot support his children. Welfare should be for any family that is financial unstable. Has much of the welfare requirements changed since then? <br />
–Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
"Welfare is a basic right of citizenship," and "housewives should get a legally determined percentage of their husbands income"????? They call this SOCIALISM. While acknowledging that our free-market ideology creates many inequities, these aren't answers either! Ms. Tillman obviously was not an economics major. It's like you guys on campus trying to get a living wage for the groundskeepers. Nice sentiment, won't work too well. Do you understand, that if everyone gets paid a LIVING WAGE for every job, then inflation kicks in, and the value of your $35,000 per year entry-level jobs after you graduate is NIL. Do you really believe its fair, as many are suggesting, that the UMW groundskeepers, janitorial staff, Johnnie Tillman's housewives, and everyone else, now would get a federally mandated minimum wage above the poverty line, say, $30,000 for a family of four? How do you feel now about working to get a degree and only earning a fraction more? Might as well have skipped college! - Phil Novalski.<br />
<br />
== Mariah Burton Nelson, “Sex and Sports” – 1994 ==<br />
I realize it is the point of the view of the author, but I honestly never thought there were so many lesbians in women sports leagues. I just never associated the two. Sure, I've heard other people associate women sports stars and lesbianism, but I never took them seriously. Wow, that's interesting.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I too was surprised to learn about how many women in sports were actually lesbians in this article. I had never heard anything ever reported on it. I did know that women fought hard to get recognition like the men did in their sorts. I remember watching a show on the women's US soccer team and how they fought for better pay like the male US soccer team as well as how Mia Hamm (sp?) was the one who helped them get that recoginition by doing the Pert shampoo commercials. Even when I think about it today, how many womens sports are actually on TV, I can think of plenty of male sports, like football, baseball, basketball, but women the only one or two I can think of is golf, and I think basketball, I could be wrong on that one though.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
This did not surprise me at all, I know of many female athletes that are lesbians. It was something that growing up with a sister in sports that my family really started to hear of all the lesbians out there. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I was also not surprised by this article. I think the reason most people are shocked by this information is because women sports are not covered to the same extent that men's sports are. Professional male athletes are idolized and hero-worshiped so when they are homosexual it becomes a really big deal. Professional female athletes however are no where near as popular so their sexuality is not as big a factor. - Christine W.<br />
<br />
<br />
In the introduction to this article it talked about how mens' sports receive 92% of all TV coverage and 81% of all newspaper coverage. The tone of the article seemed to suggest that this was in some way unfair, or that it was somehow based in sexism. Really, I think this has nothing to do with sexism. Male sports just sell better, from my experience they are more exciting to watch, and they obviously draw a larger audience of both male and female viewers alike. So I think that this is based more in business sense than it is in sexism. -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
== Marissa Navarro, “Becoming La Mujer” – 1998 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Nancy Mairs, “Women and Disabilities” – 1986 ==<br />
I found the Why me? Why not? portion of "Women and Disabilities" by Nancy Mairs to be fairly interesting. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I found myself able to relate to this reading because when I was in middle school my Mom was diagnosed with MS. And I honestly have to say that if my mom hadn't been my hero before, she definitely is now. However, unlike Nancy Mairs my mother would never call herself a cripple, or at least I've never heard her do so, and I believe that this is largely because of the fact that the term cripple makes it sound like you can't do something, and lord help you if you ever tell my mother she can't do something. So I think that one of the reasons that this story stood out to me the most is because I've seen this first hand, yes my Mom can't do half the things she used to be able to do, but she refuses to let it depress her, she's always fighting to keep going and keep walking, but at the same time she does face things that others don't, such as a difficulty getting up and down stairs, which makes it hard for her to do some of the things she used to do. Though I did find it interesting that disabilities weren't talked about much until the 80s. -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
== Abra Fortune Chernik, “The Voice of an Anorexic” – 1995 ==<br />
<br />
This story really saddened me, because of how this girl viewed her self for so long. I was just glad that it had a happy ending, and that she was lucky enough to have survived as long as she did with this disease. This article just goes to prove that every time period through out the history of women there is an expected stereotype that is portrayed in culture and especially media like for this woman. For example during WWII media portrayed women as working to help to the counry but as soon as the men returned home they were happy to go back to being house wives, which in many cases wasn't true. For Abra Chernik, magazines of pretty skinny models was the new portrait of women, and often still is today.--Michelle M.<br />
<br />
== Eve Ensler, “The Vagina Monologues” – 1997 ==<br />
I have heard of "the Vagina Monologues" and I've even seen parts of it, but I never realized how much Ensler had actually been through herself. Being raped when you're such a young girl is traumatic and the fact that she took that and turned it into something positive is empowering. And I agree with her and her theory about the word "vagina." Even today people have a hard time saying the actual word when referencing female (and male) genatalia and they usually use other words or nicknames. It's kind of sad, actually, that even after having sexual education classes and making sure that students today know the parts of the body, people are still so scared to use the real words. Yes, there are publications and television shows and broadway plays that occasionally use the real words, but if you listen to those scripts as well and read those articles you'll notice that other words or phrases normally replace the actual word (unless it's a medical journal, of course.) That's where slang starts. It just goes to show, I guess, that some mind sets never change. --Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
This really isn't a salient point, but I think it's all due to the fact that our country was founded by a bunch of prude puritans. :) - Sarah<br />
<br />
Sorry I'm a little playful this week, but when Ms. Ensler mentions that her vagina represents her "second heart," I can only hope that some of the proceeds of her provacative and very popular script is going to a therapist. In the sake of fair play, when will UMW hold a PENIS Week, or "P" week? After all, I think the school is about 30% guys. I wonder what penises would say to one another. Would they drink beer and watch sports like the rest of us? - Phil Novalski. (On a serious note - her cause is a great one. PN.)<br />
<br />
== Susan Faludi, “The Backlash Against Feminism” – 1991 ==<br />
I thought it was interesting to read “The Backlash against Feminism” by Susan Faludi. In it, she points out that even though politicians and the media are continually boasting that women have indeed reached equality and every opportunity is open to them, there is another front that these people are overlooking, and that is emotional. Women still face continual pressure by the media to conform to what is expected of them. As a result there are increasing stories, such as the one by Abra Chernik, of “stress-induced disorders.” It seems as though we are now entering a time where politics may not influence a woman’s limitations in society as much as popular culture. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
== Anita Hill, “A Woman of Conscience” – 1991 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Katie Roiphe, “Date Rape: Hysteria or Epidemic?” – 1991 ==<br />
<br />
I had mixed feelings about this reading. I had never thought that the very concept of date rape could enforce the traditional stereotyped sexual roles that women always had of being the ones who don't want sex when men did. However, I also feel like Katie Roiphe, while she has good points, ignores the possibility that some of these women really didn't want sex with these men and instead she seems to have the idea that these women were using the cry of rape to excuse their sexual behaviour. While in some cases this might be true, I highly doubt this is the majority. -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Frankly this reading upset me and I disagree with Roiphe. I don't think that society or women use the term rape too lightly. I do think that cultural ideals do send messages to women that they shouldn't act sexual and when they do they should be ashamed of their actions. I believe that this is the issue that really needs to be addressed. The reality is that women are taken advantage of but men are taken advantage of as well. Rape is not one way and too often men are embarressed to admit being pressured into sexual situations because of their gender expectations. Roiphe's generalizing views are not really important when you take rape cases individually, because it's not as simple as "I went on a date and it resulted in sex and it was his fault because I was helpless." Not everyone lived through the same "date rape" situation and if they perceived they had been violated by another then their word should stand. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
Meredith brings up a good point. This is one situation where the sexual double standard actually hurts men. If a guy wakes up the next morning and realizes he slept with someone he did not want to, all he can really call it is a mistake. If a guy woke up and claimed that a girl raped him he would be laughed at (at least by the gentleman i know). I think now-a-days the biggest problem concerning date rape has to be alcohol, i bet very rarely does a sober date rape incident occur. -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Elizabeth, Meredith and Landon all bring up excellent points. The article did put me off a bit. Date rape education (and repoting) should be encouraged. I don't think women "like" to report being raped. I just read testimony in the paper yesterday from a girl at Annapolis that was raped by a fellow cadet and you could feel her pain coming out. I think rape is likely still very much an underreported crime. Landon's point about alcohol likely being involved quite often in date rape situations (especially on campuses) is a good one. - Phil Novalski<br />
<br />
== Christine Hoff Sommers, “Who Stole Feminism?” – 1994 ==<br />
"What has real feminism to do with sitting around in circles talking about our feelings and menstruation?" HAHAHA. First of all, I'd like to say that Ms. Hoff seems a little bitter about the way women's studies classes are being taught. That said, I think she does raise a valid concern. Most people today (women and men alike) hear the word "feminist" and a negative connotation is automatically thrown with it. Forget the fact that you do not have to be a bra-burning, man-hating, same-sex-loving hippie to be a feminist. Forget the fact that you can be a strong, independent, normal girl and be a feminist. Instead, most people hear "feminist" and automatically throw that first connotation right onto it, and men who admit to being feminists are normally mocked which is a shame. Unlike our dear author, I thought the rules that one class presents to it's students at the beginning of the semester was a fantastic idea. It forces the student to enter the class with an open mind and realize that feminism was a movement fighting oppression just like most other movements. One has to go into the class and acknowledge that oppression exists and that you have to respect your classmate's rights. I disagree with her statement that "anything said in the classroom should be repeatable outside." Yes, I believe that students should not be ashamed to speak their opinion, but when discussing such a tough topic, the fact that someone is voicing their opinion should be enough. If they don't want that repeated outside the walls of their classroom, they shouldn't have to worry about it. I believe it teaches students to respect and trust one another. To be honest, our dear Ms. Hoff kind of bugged me. --Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
== United States v. Virginia (1996), “Equal Protection Under the Law” [VMI case] – 1996 ==<br />
The Supreme Court case United States v. Virginia is probably the case that I am most passionate about because it literally hits home. I was born and raised in Lexington, home of Virginia Military Institute, and both my father and my brother graduated from VMI. Hearing the stories my dad tells about the Old Corps and witnessing my brother going through Hell Week and the Ratline, I came to understand how physically, mentally, emotionally, and academically demanding VMI is...or once was. Even though I was all of ten years old when this case was decided, I was against VMI being forced to admit women. I had a feeling that things would only become worse...and I was right. For the past two summers, I have gone to VMI for summer school, (which you do not have to be a cadet to attend) and I have taken classes with some of the female cadets that do attend VMI. I will be the first to admit that I am not the smartest woman in the world, but in a freshman level World History class that I took, we were asked to read aloud from the textbook, and honest to God, these girls could barely read! Not only that, but many of them were obviously not in top physical condition. I always heard my brother talking about how horrible the "shedets" were, but now I saw it with my own eyes. Because of United States v. Virginia, VMI was basically forced to lower its standards and accept any female applicants, regardless of their scholastic aptitude or physical prowess. Granted, I do know a select few female cadets who do exceed the academic and physical qualifications that the school lays out, and they have risen to prominent positions in the Corps, but an overwhelming majority of female cadets are not like this. So which is worse - not having females at a state supported school that has been an all-male school since its inception, or having to significantly lower standards of acceptance just so sub-par females can attend the school in the name of equality? VMI has had to make so many changes and sacrifices in order for women to attend. Barracks had to be renovated so that females could live there, and traditions like Hell Week, sweat parties, and other Ratline activities had to be modified to accommodate women. If the women who attended VMI after the case was decided really wanted things to be equal, then they would have attended the school under the rules of the Old Corps. They did not. Even with the relaxed physical and academic regulations for women, out of the approximately one hundred women who start the Ratline in August, probably only twenty have what it takes to make it through Hell Week, and the numbers tend to diminish after that. The fact that VMI has been forced to lower its standards to accommodate females has really lowered its reputation in the minds of both alumni and current cadets. It is not the same school my father went to, and now he jokingly says that the VMI my brother attended was a country club. The men that attend VMI today have been forced to sacrifice the experiences that the alumni had in the Old Corps...how is that for unequal?<br />
<br />
== Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards, “A Third Wave Feminist Manifesta” – 2000 ==<br />
I LOVED the Third Wave Feminist Manifesta. To me, that is what feminism is all about, and that is what women today should be striving for. This is a manifesta for feminists our age and I believe that every point they raise is important. There is nothing outrageous about any of their plans and, in my opinion and as cheesy as this sounds, the list looks to make the world a better place for women. Everything from Point number 1 about outing unacknowledged feminists to point number 13 about passing the Equal Rights Amendment is important (one I love being point number 10 because I hate the demeaning nicknames 12 year olds use for each other these days.) It's a well thought out manifesta and it's kind of scary how much this applies to us. They're talking to our generation and it's just weird to see where the feminist movement has gone since the second wave movement in the 1960s and 1970s. --Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
== Charlotte Bunch, “Global Feminism” – 1995 [at the UN Beijing Women’s Conference] ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gloria Anzaldua, “The Borderlands” – 1987 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Wow, the head chef of the Roosevelt Hotel in New York City doesn't seem to be that prestigious, if Velma James's 1976 photograph "A Day in the Kitchen" means anything. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
It was kind of strange seeing the photo of Marion Jones in the book.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
<br />
Must have been strange being a Stanford graduate with a degree in psychology and being asked to go to charm school.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
<br />
I just have a general comment. It was surprising to me how recent some of these essays were dated. I guess I never thought of this time period as very relevant or active for women's rights... because I guess it is! I mean I would definitely describe myself as a feminists, but I guess I kind of feel that in this day and age... doesn't every women in my age bracket feel like a feminist? Are there actually people in the younger generation today that are advocating for women to be defined by their role of mother and that is it? I think it is great if a women chooses to stay home with her family, but really i just think ti is great if a women chooses whatever makes her happy, no matter what that is. Do all people in this generation not feel this way?- Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
To answer Cat's question, no not everyone in this generation feels that way. There are still debutants in the South who go to school to find a husband and take classes to be good housewives. I also had some girls on my floor freshman year who were forming a housewives club to learn how to cook and clean and be good housewives. - Chrisitne W.</div>Marilynhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_4_Questions/Comments328--Week 4 Questions/Comments2008-02-07T06:35:54Z<p>Marilyn: </p>
<hr />
<div>While reading the primary source documents of the ''Modern American Women'' I found it a bit disconcerting that the women were so similar to the women of today. It is kind of a shame that history repeats itself so fully. I suppose it is evidence that change is gradual and more of an evolution. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Although it was an interesting study, Linda Gordon's study "Black and White Visions of Welfare: Women's Welfare Activism, 1890-1945" came very close to simply listing the differences between the two races of activists. Her conclusions did not seem to have a lot of depth. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I have to agree with Justin Mattos on his comment about Linda Gordon's essay. I too felt that that she really just listed the differences and similarities without any real conclusion. However, I do believe to have a better sense of what was happening, it is good to know that just because welfare groups existed, they didn't all go after the same things. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
It does seem like she just listed the differences between the two groups of reformers, however once I saw the tables in the back I was impressed. Until I saw those tables it hadnt sunk in that Gordon actually went back and found real women activist and studied them. Maybe I am just not used to studying history but I thought that was pretty cool. After i saw those tables with the lists of actual women activists I looked at the reading in a whole different light. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
I also observed in the primary source documents of ''Modern American Women'' that the stereotypes of women have only changed slightly today. Women are still thought to be more fragile than men, and there is still a need to protect them from harm. It has only been within the last decade that the idea of a working women has gained mainstream acceptance. I wonder if this observation stems from the fact that the primary source documents that I read were from the perspective of educated women. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
Chapter 14 of Unequal Sisters deals with the differences in welfare activism between African American and white women. Gordon points out that white women had more of an ability to work politically and seek donations from those who would be more able to help (i.e. congressional representatives or other political figures) while the African American women focused their activities around the community and church. She continues, to point out that white women activists focused more on charity and relief while black women sought to provide for more universal needs such as education and health. If there were poor or unfortunate people in both groups (black and white), why is it that white women activists focused on particular people while black women activists focused on reform that is more general? Did societal norms during this time make it more inappropriate to provide individual charity to black women? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I found it interesting to read “Speaking out Against Lynching” by Ida B. Wells. She discusses the harsh punishments that African Americans were subjected to due to the stereotypes that white men and women held. On p age 15 she states, “With the Southern white man, any misalliance existing between a white woman and a colored man is a sufficient foundation for the charge of rape. The southern white man says that it is impossible for a voluntary alliance to exist between a white woman and a colored man, and therefore, the fact of an alliance is a proof of force.” Given this, would it also be considered rape if it were a black woman and a white man? Moreover, who would be at fault, would it be the man forcing himself onto the woman, or the woman because she is black? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I also thought the reading by Wells was interesting. She only discusses the accusations that black men were raping white women. She never mentions black women being raped. Was it just something that they didn't talk about or something that they just took as a fact of life during those times? I thought it interesting that discussing how black men were falsely accused of rape and lynched even when it was well known at the time that it was a concentual relationship, but then went on to say that even when the white man left for war he left the white women to be protected by the black men. So why all of a sudden is the lynching of black men on the rise? Was it because now they were free and more like competition to the whites than they had been before?~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
In response to Mary Beth, I do think that to some extent the lynching of black was due to competition, but also due to fear. Before the African Americans were free, white men had never considered them to be a threat. When they left home they trusted that they would return with their home and family in the same state. It never crossed their minds that it would be possible for their family to be in danger because there had never been any reason to mistrust. Wells states on page 15 that "the world has accepted the story that the Negro is a monster which the Southern white man has painted him." With this image that is created, when the African Americans are free, the white men thus see it as the release of "a monster" and they no longer feel safe and trustworthy as they did before, when "the monster" was contained. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I also found the reading on Wells interesting. In response to Mary Beth's point about the black women not officially being raped I believe it has some background in the idea that black women were naturally more passionate (less pure) than white women and therefore couldn't be raped because they would still be willing to have that relationship. I also agree with Jessica in that i think the lynching increased because there was a greater amount of fear now about the black community being free and the white community felt the need to use fear to control them. Likewise, in the South (where lynching was common) it might have been a way for the white community to maintain control and limit the amount of change that took place despite slavery being over. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In response to Jessica's question, I think that white women were able to focus more on specific groups, because unlike black women, white women just had to focus on issues of sexual inequality whereas black women had the issues of sexual AND racial inequality going against them, as well as establishing themselves in a newly free world. Chapter 14 of Unequal Sister does highlight that the two major focus point for black women groups was education and health care. These were issues that obviously had to be taken care of after slavery because the whites weren't going to provide it fully for them (yes, a lot of groups DID help) but they knew they had to rely on themselves(as the article shows) to fully develop and not remain stagnant and looked down upon by the white community.- Emely Amaya.<br />
<br />
I also found in interesting in Gordon's piece on Welfare that she notes one specific difference. She states that the white groups that were looking for reform were looking at people "other" than themselves. They saw themselves as helping people less fortunate than themselves but still with a "moral" aspect between who was the "worthy and the unworthy poor" (pg 225). In contrast the black groups focused on middle class and poor blacks. The black groups also focused more on education and health instead of charitys like the whites. ~~Mary Beth Conrad<br />
<br />
After reading ''Modern American Women'' I do agree with my classmates on how the perception of women has not changed drastically. It is now socially acceptable for a women to go off into the business world and make a name for herself. Even jobs such a teacher and a nurse that were considered women's work are still dominated today by women. Since I am an education major I go into a lot of elementary schools and the staff is female dominated. I think it is wrong that today where anyone can be anything, people still stereotype jobs and classify things as mens work or females work. This eve goes beyond the adults of the nation. We start these stereotypes early in children's lives. I have always remembered when I was younger and would go to Mc Donalds they would ask "would you like a girl toy or a boy toy?" Sometimes yeah I wanted the princess toy but other times I also wanted the hot wheels car. It is so disturbing to know that we are still dealing with this issue. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
After reading the article on Women's welfare activism,I too felt that she really just listed the differences and similarities without any real conclusion.However on the second page of the article, it talks about the differences of how white and black women were raising money. It says oh of course women raise money but they were also so busy attending White House conferences and correspondence with Supreme Court Justices and the black women it just states they organized bake sales, rummage sales and church dinners. I guess after reading this my biggest pet peeve is that yes white women did have more power in society. However, its not like there were no black women doing the same things. I just don't like how these women are talked down, for what they had their time was just as well spent as a white women. This really just made me feel that white women were more interested in their social lives or making them selves look better and black women worked as a team, they worked for the well being of everyone. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
While reading Chapter 14, I began to think about the possibly that the difference between the perspective of white women and black women on the poor that they helped was a matter of progression or evolution. As the black women received more power, it seemed that they became more like the white women and began to explicitly look down on the poorer black social classes. I saw this occurrence when the author talked about the views of the black poor by educated black women being the same as white women.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
While reading MAW, I came across an exert from Ida B. Wells, which in truth makes sense, but I didn't expect to see exert from something I have read in the past. There piece of the article here touched me almost as much as it touched me then. The black women were not treated equally in any light, and were not considered to be able to be 'raped' because they were not pure and pious like the white women. Part of that comes through in the last paragraph of the exert. It makes me mad to think that people once thought like this, but what is even more scary is some people still do. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
After reading a bit more in the Modern American Women book, I find myself getting emotionally involved with the information presented. I felt anger towards the father who was treating his daughter like a sack of trash in "An immigrant Daughter Awakens to the Possibilities of the New World." I felt heartbroke when he slapped her because she was leaving. At the same time I know this happened a lot towards women... and it breaks my heart to know what some women had to go through. I've been lucky to have a father who was supportive in everything I chose and only opposed my decisions when they were bad decisions. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I agree with Ashley. I also felt angry towards the father in "An immigrant Daughter Awakens to the Possibilities of the New World." But what I also thought was sad and telling from this piece was how the mother quietly gave the money to the daughter so that she could get away and start over fresh. We all know that parents want a better life for their children than they had themselves. I think that this is a perfect example of a mother wanting her daughter to have a better life than she herself had--almost as though she is hoping that she can live vicariously through her daughter's freedom. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I completely agree with Ashley since I was also touched by some of the readings in Modern American Women. I also was upset at the way the young girl was treated by her father in "An Immigrant Daughter Awakens to the Possibilities of the New World". I always knew parents treated their daughters in such a harsh way at times, but it was very hard to see how harshly she was treated. I have to say if I was in her position I also would have left home. Though I did enjoy how she points out that she got in so much trouble for taking the girls word that they would get the 2 cents she owed when she says her dad had given away a lot more merchandise without any payment at all. - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
Bertha Palmer's speech at the opening of the Women's Building was so progressive except for the part where she says: "It willing acknowledges that the industries, arts, and commerce of the world have been for centuries in the hands of men who have carefully trained themselves for the responsibilities devolving upon them, and who have, consequently, without question, contributed vastly more than women to the valuable thought, research, invention, science, art and literature, which have become the rich heritage of the human race." Does she actually believe this? Or is she catering to what the public will most except in order to support her movement? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
I found Anzia Yeziercka's (Immigrant Daughter) story very interesting as far as the existance of two worlds (old/new) for young immigrant women. I feel like today American woman still struggle with existing in between the Old and the New world. It is amazing how sometimes problems never get solved they just evolve. - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
Mary Harris seemed incredible against the predominant constructs of gender and the entire system of change in America. Clearly she has struggled greatly in her lifetime and criticized women's methods of change... yet she seems to offer now feasibly alternative route. - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
The difference between the white activism and the black activism discussed in Unequal Sisters was not very surprising to me. I figured that since black women were also fighting for civil rights their fight would be stronger. They seemed to have the largest networks of people working toward the cause. They held fundraising fuctions to help raise the money needed to fund their programs. It is easy to understand how these women bonded in the way that they did. The bond that these women grew amongst themselves was largely due to the having to rely on eachother so much. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I agree with Kellye about how it wasn't surprising about the differences between black and white activism. The black women had so much more to fight for, and not only that but how education was their most important area of activism instead of voting like for the white women.-- Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
I was impressed with the vast number of organizations that were formed as a result of the fundraising efforts of activist women. I was even more shocked to find the cost of maintaining these organizations and that these women were able to raise the money needed. ---Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting to learn how educated these women were. I knew some women were getting degrees but not this many and not African Americans. I also thought it was interesting to see how important, influential, or rich the parents of these women were even the African American women had wealthy parents. -- Christine Wuebker<br />
<br />
Another thing I found intersting was the view these women had about the role of women. I would have thought that since these women were out in the work force trying to bring about change they would have supported other women in the work place but they don't. It also was a surprise to learn about how many of the women were single, divorced, widowed, married, or living with a "partner." The interacting and sense of community created amoung these women is amazing. -- Christine Wuebker<br />
<br />
It surprises me that black women started to develop social classes just as the white women. Black women who started to gain power, like the power whites had, these black women started to treat the poor and less fortunate black women like a low class. This really bothers me because after everything these women have been through you would except them to try to help each other out, but instead they forget about them and treat them as peasants. What my question is, are these higher powered black women doing this because they are trying to be whiter? Do they care more about upper class societies views on them? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I was also surprised on how the black women started a social class just like the white women, but to try and answer your question(s) Amanda, I don't think they were trying to be whiter but maybe instead were so tired of the white social class they were instead competing now against them on what race was better as well as trying to gain the much wanted respect from white society they have wanted for so long. --Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Kind of going off of what both Amanda and Michelle said, I think we have to keep in mind that there was a social ideal that all women had to try to live up to. The domestic of separate spheres was still alive and well and I feel like some black women felt that they had to adhere to that doctrine in order to make some headway in the world. Now, I'm not saying that's how all black women felt or acted, but I'm sure it played some sort of part. But what upsets me the most, and it's talked about in Anna Cooper's piece, "Black Women Plan to Lead Their Race," is that black women were subjected to the bottom of the social hierarchy on two accounts: race AND gender. No matter which way they tried to advance, they always had someone trying to hold them back. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I agree with Cat and the Anzia Yeziercka's (Immigrant Daughter)piece. Women are stuck dealing with the old and the new world. The problem with todays society is that only some people truly believe in the modern day women however, a good amount of people are so stuck in the past. Its not fair how women have to fight for so much when people need to stop living in the past. --Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
Along with many other posts about the emotional involvement MAW commands of its readers, I found that "Margaret Sanger's Epiphany over Birth Control" opened my eyes to the desperate and difficult position of being a women with no control over her own body. Still today there are few practical birth control methods for the women that need it most. The pill and other hormonal methods are not cheap and condoms primarily place responsiblity on the male partner. It was heart-breaking to hear "a baby born dead, great relief - the death of an older child, sorrow but again relief" (86) as it must have been for Sanger. Sanger was not on a crusade to put a stop to child birth or to change the understanding that sex was for procreation, but rather to bring peace of mind to the women that so desperatly needed it. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I completely agree with Meredith's statements about birth control and the fact that a woman had no control over her own body. Even today, although many forms of birth control are much more readily available to prevent pregnancy, women still do not have complete control over their bodies due to the regulation of abortion under Roe v. Wade. -Marilyn<br />
<br />
<br />
I also was very touched by "Margaret Sanger's Epiphany over Birth Control". I knew that women had been attempting ways to control the number of children they had for a very long time but I had no idea that someone could self induce an abortion (especially since i really don't know how that works). I also found it so shocking that even married women didn't want to put faith in their husbands desire not to have any more children even though it would reduce the stress on his life and make paying bills easier. I would have thought they would also be glad to have less children to take care of. -Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In response to your comment Elizabeth, I'm not so sure it was the fact that they would have less children to take care of so much as the women would be in control of their own bodies and be making family altering decisions. Women were supposed to obey their husbands and if they took a stand and decided that they were going to prevent their family from increasing, then the husband would, in essence, lose a bit of power over his wife. I think that was what terrified them more than anything else. Some men actually were thrilled that their wives were looking into birth control. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
After taking History of Sexuality last semester and discussing Margaret Sanger I was not at all surprised with the "Margaret Sanger's Epihany over Birth Control." It was and still is hard to be a women when it comes to birth control. Women today are far better off than the women of Margaret Sanger's time. It is so much easier for women to obtain birth control today then ever before. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I was very suprised to learn when reading Edith Eudora Ammons' piece about life as a female homesteader that women were more successful in staying with their claims by 6%. As she recalled being driven further and further into the unsettled land I can only imagine how disconnecting and daunting that ride must have been. The Ammons sister's hard work is clear proof of a way in which American women were able to take a different route and break the social expectations. After reading about the women who went west with their husbands or in order to find a husband in the past weeks, it was very uplifting to read about the other opportunities the west had for women. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I thought "Wages for Housework" was the best essay, it made me laugh. I thought it was very interesting on how she capitalized certain sentences in order to show her frustration and to get her point across. I also thought this essay sounded very much like a modern day women and her frustration with being a house wife and how it is not looked at as being a job, because a lot more than just cleaning and cooking goes into taking care of a house and family. --Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In Nellie Bly's essay she says, "I had such a strong belief in the world's greeting me as I greeted it, that I refused to arm myself. I knew if my conduct was proper I should always find men ready to protect me,..." (pg6-7) She is amazing in the fact that she was going to attempt to fly around the world and the fact that she was a women was going to make this awesome, but in this quote she seems completely oblivious to the real world, and that not everyone you meet is going to like you, aswell as thinking any man would be willing to protect her. Its like she ready to be considered equal to man by doing this great thing but yet still depend on them for protection. --Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Gordon's essay in US as Kellye mentions as well as I have responded to her comment above about not being suprised about the differences in white and black women activism, but my question is why could women in general, black and white just come together and be the first ones to over look race and fight the cause of womens rights together? I think if they could have done that would of had a more dominate impact in getting what and where they wanted to be.--Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
was also very surprised by Edith Eudora Ammon's piece, but mainly that while they met some resistance in their journey west, they did not seem to get mistreated nearly has much as I would have expected. I would have thought that as two women going west to homestead they would have gotten scoffed at yet I don't recall this being mentioned in the recounting. Is this because it didn't happen or because they chose to ignore it?- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In the Unequal Sisters reading by Linda Gordon I found very interesting the concept of social motherhood among the black women's welfare reform groups. These women were mostly single and were not biological mothers yet the main issues they focused on were familial in nature. I do not necessarily think that this indicates the selfless mindset of these women, but rather points to how strongly the doctrine of seperate spheres and the middle classs status quo, affected everyones' decisions during this time period. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Another point worth mentioning from Gordon's essay was how incredibly interdependent these women were on each other. Ths interdependnce born out of necessity to survive eventually evolved into a powerful social and even political network. Some of these women's groups had real political power; distributing tax money etc. However, for a woman to be truly powerful within these groups she had to have connections to a powerful man, her husband, or father usually as is the case with Brandeis and Beyer. --- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
The speech by Palmer in Modern American Women brought up an excellent point. This was the point that most of the people in power equate life for everyone to what their own life is like. So to the men in power at the time, opening the workforce up to women seemed unnatural, dangerous, and threatening. However, this was because they were thinking about their own wives and daughters entering the workforce, which neither the men or most likely the women would have wanted, seeing as they come from upper class families. However, to the less fortunate, opening the workforce ot women was essential. These women needed to work in order to survive, alot of them did not have husbands who could or would support them. I think that this is still a mistake we all make today, not just the politicians, we fail to put ourselves in other peoples' shoes. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
In reading "The Fair Women, Chicago, 1893" in Modern American Women, I found it interesting how Bertha Palmer is obviously struggling with the conflict between the idealized woman and the reality that many women face. At one point she says that it is the board's "belief that every woman, who is presiding over a happy home, is fulfilling her highest and truest function, and could not be lured from it by temptations offered by factories or studios." And then a few sentences later she talks about how it is only the favored class that can live in these conditions and that the majority of women are living under much poorer conditions. In a way, it seems as though she is still holding those ideals of women, but recognizing that most women cannot live up to them. I guess I'm just wondering how that differs from the rest of the people who simply hold those ideals, and is it even any better to recognize that the majority of women can't live up to the ideals but still hold them anyways? --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
In reading "Speaking Out Against Lynching" in Modern American Women, the thing that struck me most is the obvious double standard that exists between sexual relations that happen between a black man and a white woman in comparison to those that exist between a white man and a black woman. I know that I may be looking at this from a present perspective, but it just strikes me that it is considered rape for a black man to have sex with a white woman, but nothing is said when a white man has sex with a black woman (which happened very often). I think that this double standard brings up issues with both race and gender. It brings up issues with gender because it indicates that white women are incapable of consenting to sexual interactions with a black man (but men can consent to sexual relations with a black woman). And it brings up issues of race because of the differential treatment between the races, and thinking about the likeliness that black women have of being raped. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I also thought "Wages for Housework" was a clever and humorous article. Conger-Kaneko seemed to denounce traditional women use her writing style. I thought it was very interesting, though not valid in every case, that she compared women's roles to those of slaves. I would imagine this would be a very persuasive arguement to move women towards equal rights after being compared to the slaves who had been freed for decades. I cannot imagine how women seeking to stay in their tradtional roles would argue against Conger-Kaneko's points? Although I imagine they were probably not interested in reading Progressive Woman. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
After having read some of the above comments about Ida B. Wells' essay, I thought more about her argument and the social and political climate during the time of lynching. I do agree with Jessica that it was somewhat out of fear because the black men were no longer under the control of the white masters. Lynching was one of the ways they could exhibit their control over this sector of society. It obviously didn't have to do with whether black men were actually raping white women; for white men, it was about controlling that sector of society. In response to Mary Beth's comment about Wells' essay, the viewpoint of many white Southern men was not that they were raping black women. It was only their superiority over the inferior race, black women being the most inferior because they were black and women. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
The discussion about moving up by way of housework and domestic services was brought up in the readings, and I believe that it ties in very well with what we've learned about in class. You can see the same sort of thing happening with the end of the Civil War, and clerical work. Like we discussed, women took clerical positions while men were away fighting, but soon after the war ended, those who kept their jobs soon learned that their jobs had become "secretarial." Those who once had the opportunity to move up in the business world while they were clerks soon found themselves stuck in the same place since secretarial work didn't provide much opportunity to elevate. But I agree, the question is, who decides what makes a position honorable? -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I've decided that Nellie Bly is my new hero. The way she stood up to her boss and threatened to go to another paper if she wasn't allowed to "travel the world in 80 days" was incredible, especially for a woman of her time. What's even more interesting is how some of the stereotypes she faced still plague women today. For one, she's "too delicate" since she's a woman and would need protection. Second, her boss was concerned she'd have too much luggage, and if you think about women today (I know I, myself, am guilty of this) they pack much more than necessary. She even said herself, "Packing that bag was the most difficult undertaking of my life." It's just interesting to see the correlation and then quite impressive to see how she overcame gender stereotypes to beat "the man" at his own game. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I loved that the excerpt about bicycle riding by Frances Willard was included in the chapter. It's simplicity had the strongest message of encouragement for women to leave behind their usual constraints and go out into the world, to take control of their lives. She points out that for too long women have been constrained by their clothing and appearance. Willard asks women to take uncomplicated modern inventions and free themselves. My favorite quote from the piece was, "They that know nothing fear nothing." (p.18) It was a phrase that offered such quiet strength for the women of that time and even to women now. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I know a few other of my classmates have commented on it, but I felt that I should also comment on the birth control article too. I was also amazed at some of the ways women tried to have abortions. I have to agree though with Kelly that birth control was a way men would lose power over women, but I don't understand why the men wanted to have so many children to try to provide for in his home. Why not use condoms or pull out? Were the men so uncaring they ignored the pain of the female they married and the hunger of their children? --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
In response to Ashley W., I don't think the men of that time really thought about the pain of the female in child birth,etc. Just from researching my family, I found that my grandfathers father had 18 children from 2 different wives (the first wife died in childbirth) and birth control in that family was never an option. My grandfather is the youngest and was born in 1923. He told me that his father believed that the more children you had the better off you were because you had more people to work in the fields at harvest time and they felt you could have more livestock because there were more people to share the work. My grandfathers family was totally self sufficient and he says they barely noticed the depression because they were self sufficient. I think maybe a lot of men had the same mindset and didn't see their wives as "suffering" because it was the way they survived. That of course is a rural example I don't know if it would have been the same in the cities but I am sure it was somewhat different.~~MaryBeth C<br />
<br />
Based on chapter 14, about black and white women’s vision of welfare activism, the book states that white women mostly helped out with political work and donations. Black women were more interested in helping there community and their churches. Could this be because black women saw other people as one class level and will help anyone, while white women will help out the upper class with politics to gain more women’s rights? <br />
–Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
I agree with Landon about how women were successful in gaining political power, but how far did that power get you? Even today I feel like women are still seen as the only way of gaining power is by having a strong male influence in the business beside you. <br />
–Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
In the “Modern American Women” book, the documents of Jane Addams were very interesting. Jane Addams was unsure of what she wanted to do after college. Most women just get married and have children. She wanted to figure out a way to help people especially women by restoring balance in activities that were along the traditional lines. In 1889 Addams created the Hull House; a place where she developed social services and recreational programs to help the less fortune. If Addams was another woman to break down doors for more opportunities for other women why didn’t women’s ways of work life change? Also this shows that women do not have to get married right after college. <br />
-Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
"The Feminist Challenge to the Privatized Home" was an interesting perspective on the home. Instead of telling women they could do it all, she asks women to consider working together with the family and other women to help them combine work and home. It seems so different from the feminist perspective that prevails today where women can do it all: home, work, and family. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
In "Modern American Women" I found this quote "We feel therefore, obliged to state our believe that every woman who is presiding over a happy home, is fulfilling her highest and truest function, and could not be lured from it by temptations offered by factories or studies." All I have to say to this is wow have times changed since this was written. Women are making it a priority to be an asset to the workforce. --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I found it interesting to read about Alice Hamilton and how she got a medical degree from the University of MIchigan. (I am biased after growing up in Ann Arbor!) I thought it was interesting to read about her train of thought as to why a medical degree. She pursued medicine not because of an interest but because she knew she could excel in it even as a woman. --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I found this quote powerful and couldn't not post it. "We may convince the world that ability is not a matter of sex." --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
One thing I noticed from these reading is that these women are all they same. They all come from essentially the same place. They are women who are well educated, upper-middle class, and single or married later in life. Where are the accounts of the poorer working class women? -- Christine Wuebker<br />
<br />
While reading "A Woman Homesteader" the only thing that kept popping into my mind was that frustrating game of Oregon Trail. After playing that for hours on end in elementary school, I understand that making the journey westward was nothing but difficult. So reading the entry by Edith was fascinating when she and her sister discussed how easy it would be to "stick it out" on a piece of land for eight months. What I'm curious about, is was it typical for these women to go out by themselves like this? I know in class we talked about men going off on their own to start a new life and help their family, but I don't recall discussing that many women going on their own, especially for financial reasons. And would fathers have been that willing to let their daughters make their own choices, especially ones of this magnitude? It seems kind of out of character in my opinion. Nonetheless, rock on to both of them for being as gutsy as they were. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
It was so sad reading in Mamie Field's article about being African-American teachers along with her sister for African-American children. They got what was barely a building, no space, no blackboard and it was in such a bad location. The part that got to me the most was when she said that the white teachers never cared whether the black children came to school or not no matter waht the reason (poverty) and the fact that since these childrens' parents hadn't gone to school themselves, sometimes they didn't understand the great importance of getting their children educated. -Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
Like Kendall, I also liked the excerpt about Frances Willard riding her bike. A quote that stood out to me was, "I also wanted to help women to a wider world, for I hold that the more interests women and men have in common, in thought, in word, and deed, the happier it will be for the home." My interpretation of what Willard was saying is that it would be beneficial for everyone, both men and women, if women were allowed to experience the world outside the home the way men were allowed to. -Marilyn<br />
<br />
I thought the Jane Addams excerpt was inspirational. Even though she had no idea what she wanted to do after college, she created an organization that had such a huge impact on the community and the country. Not only did she help those who were less fortunate, but she also helped women like herself who did not want to marry and start a family immediately after college - they wanted to achieve something greater. -Marilyn</div>Marilynhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_3_Questions/Comments328--Week 3 Questions/Comments2008-01-31T04:44:09Z<p>Marilyn: </p>
<hr />
<div>The one thing that immediately struck me while I began reading the Castaneda piece was the classification between "Spanish" and "Mexican" and how, to me, that distinction seems to still be true, on a certain level, today. Castaneda points out how Spanish women were always purer and more mysterious; romanticized in a sense. The Mexican women on the other hand were impure on pretty much every count. Does anyone else feel that this stereotype between the two ethnicities still holds up today or is that just me? Based on general opinion, I feel as though this major difference still sticks out in people's minds (not saying that this distinction is right in any sense.) - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I was extremely impressed by the scale of the Cherokee Seminary school. For it's time, it seemed like an impressive operation for a people so tremendously discriminated against in America, excepting the multiple burnings down of the building! I was, however, struck by the authors constant use of the word "progressive", which to me is usually a positive word, meaning moving toward improved living/way of life and education for the public. The author used it so negatively though, as a way to describe the discriminating, racially-mixed Cherokee girls and their families usually. Looking at her writings from a historians perspective I see how the word might have been used by the people themselves as a justifier of their own belief of superiority, but the author should not have used it herself because it makes it seem as though she is drawing the line herself between the status of tradition verse progression and pure-blood verse mixed-blood.~Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
The readings this week largely had to do with how historians have struggled to characterize women by race and gender. Women of other races were frequently overlooked. As Castaneda points out in chapter four, when women were studied, it was either because of their significance in relation to someone important, such as a governor. The experiences of any other women would be generalized to stereotype women of that particular race overall. This is interesting to keep in mind when reading “The Life and Legend of Gertrudis Barceló in Nineteenth-Century Santa Fe” by Gonzalez, in which he discusses how the life of one woman (Dona Gertrudis Barceló) impacted the image that people held of Spanish-Mexican women. Why is it that the lives and experiences of minority women could see easily and readily be generalized? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting to read “Too Dark to Be Angels” by Mihesuah. The article described the all female seminary for Cherokee girls. When examining the experiences of Cherokee women in an all female setting, it easier to see the impact that race and economics played in their lives. You no longer have the issue of breaking down the study by gender and race, nor do you have the question of which plays a more significant role. In looking at the experiences of the Cherokee women in this school, it is easy to see that segregation occurred even when the playing field seemed to be leveled. The more white blood the females had, the more accepted they were by others. Additionally, it would be more likely that they would be able to marry and be economically and culturally successful. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I also thought the reading about the female seminary for the Cherokee girls was very interesting. It seems odd to me that there was such an emphasis placed on the percentage of cherokee vs white blood you had. It was an Indian school but it seems that to be accepted or what the girls felt was preferred was to be as "white" as possible, but yet they still talked about the percent, however small, of Cherokee blood they had. Most of the girls in the pictures to me did not "look" like a typical Cherokee and if the emphasis was on being as "white" as possible why did they even attend the seminary, why not go to a white school. Were they that segregated that even a small amount of Cherokee blood would prevent them from going to a white school, and who would know if you didn't say anything about what percent white you were? ~~Mary Beth C<br />
<br />
While reading "Gender, Race, and Culture: Spanish Mexican Women in the Historiography of Frontier California" and "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History" by Antonia I. Castaneda, I wondered whether it were true that only Westerners studied the history of Hispanic women until the 1970s or 1980s. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
After reading "The Life and Legend of Gertrudis Barcelo in Nineteenth-Century Santa Fe" by Deena J. Gonzalez, I found it interesting that during that time it was so easy to step outside the boundaries of the perceptions of the general populace. The case of interesting women like Barcelo is very similar to the inability of the Native Americans to see the ships of Cortez until Cortez's men pointed them out to them.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
It is strange that in the "Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-1876" "stone-woman" was considered a problem/disease. From what I understand, having sex through prostitution is not an enjoyable experience.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
My favorite reading out of all of these essays was "To Dark to Be Angels" by Devon Mihesuah, because my great grandmother was apparently 1/4 cherokee, so it was like reading apart of her history. But what I found so interesting about this essay was how these cherokee women were trying to live up to a white persons society, or "adapting to society's 'whiteness'."(187) For so many years the European society in America had tried to civilize Indians, and get them out of farming and hunting, and in this reading it was like they gave up their fight of keeping their heritage and decided to try and fit in to white society. Why? There was all of the sudden the whiter you looked the better off you were, and this often left the full blooded cherokee women feeling inferior to white yet still.<br />
--Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Deena Gonzalez's essay on Gertrudis Barcelo describes a very interesting women. She basically went against what all the other women in society were expected to be like. She was rich and most interesting was that she made her saloon the center of the town's social and economic life, as well as military and political people coming to her for advise (255). Wasn't that unheard of in those days? How was it that she was able to lead this life and other women didn't, or did they try? --Michelle Marduesz<br />
<br />
Castaneda's article caused me to think on how the problem with the history of CA and its residents before Anglos is a problem with many areas. What I mean by that is a history that does integrate race, gender, and culture or class as categories of historical analysis (page 71) is a problem are for many places. It just really strikes a bit harder when you read a little of the historiography on some of the problems of the already published and out there history. -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I was impressed and slightly confused on the essay by Mihesuah about the female Cherokee seminary. I was impressed because even though the school burned down they rebuilt it and it still exists (at least the ending made it sound that way). I was confused because if the whiter you were the better, why did full-blooded traditionalist Cherokees send their daughters there? Were they trying to get an upperhand on the white man? Even if it meant learning to write and read the language in order to better fight the white man? It had me confused. Also, if it was a Cherokee school, why girls go who were barely even Cherokee?, like the one mentioned on page 186 who was only 1/32 Cherokee. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
The essay "Too Dark to be Angels" concludes by stating that the seminary was a progressive success. I can not help but question this outcome based on what I read. I have no doubts that the seminary provided short term advantages to its attendees as it related to social and economic status however, it appears also that the women let petty matters of snobbery and ego undermine the overall mission of the seminary (which I imagine was to uplift the Cherokee nation through education). It seems that by attending this seminary Cherokees were destroying themselves from the inside out. The women learned to feel either superior or inferior and therefore they could not remain united as an ethnic group. Also, the fact that whites were put on such a high pedestal made the Cherokees vulnerable to manipulation in the future. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Bancroft's qoute "a race halfway between the proud Castillian and the lowly root digger." existing "halfway between savage and civilization." on page 59 of Casteneda's essay is reprehensible. It caused me to quesiton the root cause of such racism, and prejudice. What makes someone racist? Is it truly just because the other person looks different? Is it about pre-conceived notions or hearsay, turned hateful stereotypes? Could it be a morally corrupt individual looking for a way to dehumanize a group, in order to justify poor treatment (i.e. stealing Indian land or slavery)? It seems there has to be some underlying motive for racism, besides just the color of one's skin vs. antohers'. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
After doing the readings, "A Citizen Protests the Rape of Indian Women in California, 1862" attracted my attention the most, and I struggled to figure out why. I think this document raises a lot of questions about gender norms during the time period, in a substantially different way than the other documents in Major Problems. It's clear from the other readings that rape and domination of Native Americans was not uncommon. "A Citizen Protests" raises the questions about the response to these acts by average citizens. The author of the letter labels the rapists brutes, who should be punished "in justice to decency, humanity, and civilization." However, its clear the author's morals aren't widely shared, why else would his or her letter to the editor be anonymous? ~ Matt Struth<br />
<br />
I agree with Kelly and her thoughts on the Castaneda piece and how it described the classification between "Spanish" and "Mexican" and how the distinction seems to still be true, on a certain level, today. It is pointed out that Spanish women were always purer held higher up in societies eyes. The Mexican women on the other hand were impure in every way. Basically no matter how corny this sounds, Spanish women are classy and Mexican women are trashy. This is still seen today, even in my mind sometimes you think of Mexican you think lower class. However, when you think Spanish, you see a women wearing bright colors beautiful clothes.I wonder do we think this way because Spain is located in Europe and when Eurpoe comes to mind you think of places like Milan or Paris? --Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I had the same questions about the essay by Mihesuah about the female Cherokee seminary as Ashley. What I didn't understand was why whiter was better? I found it interesting that full-blood Cherokees were sending their children to this extremely expensive school to become whiter. Is it to try to become equals with white people or is it to pull ahead of them? What I really don't understand is why are the Cherokees trying to wipe out their culture. That is what happened when we first settled the Indians became "whiter" and look at where they are now, language has been lost, traditions stories the list goes on. To me it seems like this school was good for the purpose of education but I felt as if it took away culture. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
<br />
I think that Antonia Castaneda's essay makes some far-reaching claims that are not completely warranted. Castaneda credits the biased work of Bancroft with informing all later popular and scholarly works with specific stereotypes of Spanish women (pg 59). While perhaps not central to Castaneda's essay I don't understand how one, or even a few historical scholars could be solely responsible for passing on biased perceptions. I think Castaneda ignores other ways that negative stereotypes get passed on. The fact that these negative stereotypes persist in persons who are not scholars of history indicates that later scholars might not have adopted the same stereotypes that Bancroft did solely because he did, but because they embraced these stereotypes in their daily lives. ~ Matt Struth<br />
<br />
I found the documents about women in the Trans-Mississippi Frontier West incredibly interesting and shocking at the same time. The Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes were the most shocking of the collection. Was this a common phenomenon at this time? --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I agree with Amanda's points about the female Cherokee seminary. I feel that the Cherokees were attending this school in hopes of becoming 'whiter', which did result in a dilution of their culture. One must wonder if they saw this as a negative thing, however. They saw that whites had the money, the land, and the privilege. Is it possible that they willingly sacrificed their unique culture in hopes of attaining these things that whites had and they did not? --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I think Matt brings up an interesting point about "A Citizen Protests the Rape of Indian Women in California, 1862," in mentioning that the letter was anonymous. To our minds, the opinions shared seem to be the norm, but the simple fact that the writer of this letter felt the need to keep their opinions anonymous definitely demonstrates that these opinions were not the norm. This reflects a sad fact of race and gender norms of the time. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
As I was reading "Zitkala-Sa Travels to the Land of the Big Red Apples," a few things really struck me. First, I was amazed by the conflict between the young girl and her mother and that the young girl wanted to leave her family. I was also amazed that it was ultimately the mother's decision whether or not to send the young girl away, and in fact the father was not mentioned at all. I think that this highlights a cultural difference between the Dakotas and the white Americans. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I thought that an important and likely common racial and gender issue was highlighted in "Violet Cragg, Ex-Slave and Former Army Nurse, Requests an Army Pension, 1908." She mentioned that the father of her daughter was a white man. Sadly, I think that this was all too common, and denotes how white men took advantage of enslaved women. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
Mihesuah's piece about the diluded culture of the Cherokee women shows the power of the white, middle classed ideal. I thought the school's class system was very interesting and exposed how strong the force to wipe out Native American presence really was. I felt as if the Cherokee culture was breeded out with each new generation of students striving for white ideals. I wondered if perhaps within my own Eastern European ancestory a similiar process of acculturation took place. For now although I consider myself American I still have a sense of Polish pride, but after reading about the Cherokee seminary perhaps my ancestors strove to break apart from their cultural ties? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I found the article "Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes" to be extremely disturbing. As if it weren't bad enough to be sold to someone for my body the rules were absurd. I'm not sure which one was worse "if she concieves, she shall serve one year more" or "if she should escape and be recovered, then her time shall never expire." Who came up with these ideas and rules and how is this accepted in any society?? - Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
Growing up we've all been exposed to different stereotypes of various classifications of individuals. After doing the readings this week, it makes me question what did other races and genders think of whites? what were white femailes stereotyped as and has it changed throughout the years? It the perception change depending on who you talk to and do different backgrounds have varying perceptions? I'm curious as to how the "typical" white woman was portrayed. - Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
While reading Castaneda's article in the section "The Spanish Borderlands School" it became clear that the mention of Spanish Mexican women from Bolton and previous historians was often very political. Their place revolved around the rivalary of Mexican and Euro-American males. They were only significant when their lives involved or revolved around men. From a romanticized stereotype of Spanish women came the notion that they preferred white men. Realistically Americans wanted to hear of their superiority over Mexicans. Their role was to be an American conquest resulting in dominance over Mexican males. This proves Castandeda's point that the history of women needs to be reexamined under a lens unbiased by "Anglo North American(s)". -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I agree with Rose about the documents of Chinese prostitutes. I could not believe that women actually agreed to those rules such as if she is sick for fifteen days then she will serve another month or if she conceives then she will serve another year. The money they received must have been a good enough amount for them, but is it really worth it to lose your life by selling your body to someone? -Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
When reading Castaneda's article I couldn't help but think how we do romanticize the Spanish American women of the western frontier. Presented in movies and books, the Spanish woman in America has developed this myth of beauty and grace in the California frontier. On the other hand, the Mexican American woman is thought of as dirty and poor, perhaps a prostitute. Again there are modern images in movies and popular culture referencing that stereotyped past. When I was reading the article, the stereotypes of a romantic Spanish woman against the beggar-like figure of a Mexican woman from the western frontier were at the forefront of my thoughts. Like last week's articles, Castaneda's article shows how important it is to analyze all facets of women's history regardless of race. It also made me think how difficult it must be for historians to separate fact from fiction especially with these images of the old West still around today. -Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
When I read the Castaneda essay, it angered me that historians in the past stereotyped Mexican women as immoral and sexually and racially impure simply because they did not live under the norms of middle class white women - pure, pious, domestic, and submissive. It was also unfortunate in both Castaneda's essay as well as in the anonymous letter to the editor of the Beacon that Native women in the West were viewed as objects of sexual conquest by white soldiers and settlers. - Marilyn<br />
<br />
It was sad to read that the intent of the Cherokee seminary schools for females was to teach girls to conform to the ideals of white society instead of learning about and maintaining their own Cherokee heritage. -Marilyn<br />
<br />
In response to Kelly W's question regarding the two ethnicities, I believe that it does exist. I had the opportunity to visit Mexico a number of years ago and was surprised to hear the derogatory comments made by the Mexican workers in regard to the tourists from South America, which they referred to as "Spanish". There seems to be a perception or attitude within the hispanic (or Latino) community; namely, "Spanish" descent ranks high, Mexican follows, and then the Mayans. This order in hierarchy is not that much different from the one that existed in colonial Mexico and Middle America, which placed Spaniards on top, then Spanish born in Mexico, Mestizos (Spanish/native females), Indians, then Blacks.-LisaM<br />
<br />
One of the things that stood out to me in our reading "Genderm Race and Culture: Spanish Mexican Women in the Historiography of Frontier California" was the differentiation made between "Mexican" women and "Spanish" Women. This distinction reminded me a lot of the idea that many East Coast Americans held during this time period that "black" women were filled with lust and passion and thereful immoral while "White" women were pure and pious and the most moral of all. Only in this case the "Mexican" women were in the place of the black women and the "Spanish" women in the place of the white women".- Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
In Modern Problem I found it interesting that someone reported the raping of the native americans on the ranch in "A Citizen Protests the Rape of Indian Women in California". I had assumed that if the people felt that the natives were so unimportant that they wouldn't have bothered reporting or complaining about the treatment these women received even though it was appalling. I also found the reading on the Selling of Chinese Prostitutes interesting because the terms they were given were little better than the terms of slavery and even if they had an "end" in site it would get pushed back because every one gets sick and they would have a month added on for that and of course in the profession of prostitution the likelihood of getting pregnant is of course high, so that would be another year. What was the likelihood of these women ever actually gaining their freedom? -Elizabeth Frank</div>Marilynhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_3_Questions/Comments328--Week 3 Questions/Comments2008-01-31T03:27:07Z<p>Marilyn: </p>
<hr />
<div>The one thing that immediately struck me while I began reading the Castaneda piece was the classification between "Spanish" and "Mexican" and how, to me, that distinction seems to still be true, on a certain level, today. Castaneda points out how Spanish women were always purer and more mysterious; romanticized in a sense. The Mexican women on the other hand were impure on pretty much every count. Does anyone else feel that this stereotype between the two ethnicities still holds up today or is that just me? Based on general opinion, I feel as though this major difference still sticks out in people's minds (not saying that this distinction is right in any sense.) - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I was extremely impressed by the scale of the Cherokee Seminary school. For it's time, it seemed like an impressive operation for a people so tremendously discriminated against in America, excepting the multiple burnings down of the building! I was, however, struck by the authors constant use of the word "progressive", which to me is usually a positive word, meaning moving toward improved living/way of life and education for the public. The author used it so negatively though, as a way to describe the discriminating, racially-mixed Cherokee girls and their families usually. Looking at her writings from a historians perspective I see how the word might have been used by the people themselves as a justifier of their own belief of superiority, but the author should not have used it herself because it makes it seem as though she is drawing the line herself between the status of tradition verse progression and pure-blood verse mixed-blood.~Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
The readings this week largely had to do with how historians have struggled to characterize women by race and gender. Women of other races were frequently overlooked. As Castaneda points out in chapter four, when women were studied, it was either because of their significance in relation to someone important, such as a governor. The experiences of any other women would be generalized to stereotype women of that particular race overall. This is interesting to keep in mind when reading “The Life and Legend of Gertrudis Barceló in Nineteenth-Century Santa Fe” by Gonzalez, in which he discusses how the life of one woman (Dona Gertrudis Barceló) impacted the image that people held of Spanish-Mexican women. Why is it that the lives and experiences of minority women could see easily and readily be generalized? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting to read “Too Dark to Be Angels” by Mihesuah. The article described the all female seminary for Cherokee girls. When examining the experiences of Cherokee women in an all female setting, it easier to see the impact that race and economics played in their lives. You no longer have the issue of breaking down the study by gender and race, nor do you have the question of which plays a more significant role. In looking at the experiences of the Cherokee women in this school, it is easy to see that segregation occurred even when the playing field seemed to be leveled. The more white blood the females had, the more accepted they were by others. Additionally, it would be more likely that they would be able to marry and be economically and culturally successful. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
I also thought the reading about the female seminary for the Cherokee girls was very interesting. It seems odd to me that there was such an emphasis placed on the percentage of cherokee vs white blood you had. It was an Indian school but it seems that to be accepted or what the girls felt was preferred was to be as "white" as possible, but yet they still talked about the percent, however small, of Cherokee blood they had. Most of the girls in the pictures to me did not "look" like a typical Cherokee and if the emphasis was on being as "white" as possible why did they even attend the seminary, why not go to a white school. Were they that segregated that even a small amount of Cherokee blood would prevent them from going to a white school, and who would know if you didn't say anything about what percent white you were? ~~Mary Beth C<br />
<br />
While reading "Gender, Race, and Culture: Spanish Mexican Women in the Historiography of Frontier California" and "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History" by Antonia I. Castaneda, I wondered whether it were true that only Westerners studied the history of Hispanic women until the 1970s or 1980s. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
After reading "The Life and Legend of Gertrudis Barcelo in Nineteenth-Century Santa Fe" by Deena J. Gonzalez, I found it interesting that during that time it was so easy to step outside the boundaries of the perceptions of the general populace. The case of interesting women like Barcelo is very similar to the inability of the Native Americans to see the ships of Cortez until Cortez's men pointed them out to them.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
It is strange that in the "Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes, 1875-1876" "stone-woman" was considered a problem/disease. From what I understand, having sex through prostitution is not an enjoyable experience.--Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
My favorite reading out of all of these essays was "To Dark to Be Angels" by Devon Mihesuah, because my great grandmother was apparently 1/4 cherokee, so it was like reading apart of her history. But what I found so interesting about this essay was how these cherokee women were trying to live up to a white persons society, or "adapting to society's 'whiteness'."(187) For so many years the European society in America had tried to civilize Indians, and get them out of farming and hunting, and in this reading it was like they gave up their fight of keeping their heritage and decided to try and fit in to white society. Why? There was all of the sudden the whiter you looked the better off you were, and this often left the full blooded cherokee women feeling inferior to white yet still.<br />
--Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Deena Gonzalez's essay on Gertrudis Barcelo describes a very interesting women. She basically went against what all the other women in society were expected to be like. She was rich and most interesting was that she made her saloon the center of the town's social and economic life, as well as military and political people coming to her for advise (255). Wasn't that unheard of in those days? How was it that she was able to lead this life and other women didn't, or did they try? --Michelle Marduesz<br />
<br />
Castaneda's article caused me to think on how the problem with the history of CA and its residents before Anglos is a problem with many areas. What I mean by that is a history that does integrate race, gender, and culture or class as categories of historical analysis (page 71) is a problem are for many places. It just really strikes a bit harder when you read a little of the historiography on some of the problems of the already published and out there history. -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I was impressed and slightly confused on the essay by Mihesuah about the female Cherokee seminary. I was impressed because even though the school burned down they rebuilt it and it still exists (at least the ending made it sound that way). I was confused because if the whiter you were the better, why did full-blooded traditionalist Cherokees send their daughters there? Were they trying to get an upperhand on the white man? Even if it meant learning to write and read the language in order to better fight the white man? It had me confused. Also, if it was a Cherokee school, why girls go who were barely even Cherokee?, like the one mentioned on page 186 who was only 1/32 Cherokee. --Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
The essay "Too Dark to be Angels" concludes by stating that the seminary was a progressive success. I can not help but question this outcome based on what I read. I have no doubts that the seminary provided short term advantages to its attendees as it related to social and economic status however, it appears also that the women let petty matters of snobbery and ego undermine the overall mission of the seminary (which I imagine was to uplift the Cherokee nation through education). It seems that by attending this seminary Cherokees were destroying themselves from the inside out. The women learned to feel either superior or inferior and therefore they could not remain united as an ethnic group. Also, the fact that whites were put on such a high pedestal made the Cherokees vulnerable to manipulation in the future. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Bancroft's qoute "a race halfway between the proud Castillian and the lowly root digger." existing "halfway between savage and civilization." on page 59 of Casteneda's essay is reprehensible. It caused me to quesiton the root cause of such racism, and prejudice. What makes someone racist? Is it truly just because the other person looks different? Is it about pre-conceived notions or hearsay, turned hateful stereotypes? Could it be a morally corrupt individual looking for a way to dehumanize a group, in order to justify poor treatment (i.e. stealing Indian land or slavery)? It seems there has to be some underlying motive for racism, besides just the color of one's skin vs. antohers'. - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
After doing the readings, "A Citizen Protests the Rape of Indian Women in California, 1862" attracted my attention the most, and I struggled to figure out why. I think this document raises a lot of questions about gender norms during the time period, in a substantially different way than the other documents in Major Problems. It's clear from the other readings that rape and domination of Native Americans was not uncommon. "A Citizen Protests" raises the questions about the response to these acts by average citizens. The author of the letter labels the rapists brutes, who should be punished "in justice to decency, humanity, and civilization." However, its clear the author's morals aren't widely shared, why else would his or her letter to the editor be anonymous? ~ Matt Struth<br />
<br />
I agree with Kelly and her thoughts on the Castaneda piece and how it described the classification between "Spanish" and "Mexican" and how the distinction seems to still be true, on a certain level, today. It is pointed out that Spanish women were always purer held higher up in societies eyes. The Mexican women on the other hand were impure in every way. Basically no matter how corny this sounds, Spanish women are classy and Mexican women are trashy. This is still seen today, even in my mind sometimes you think of Mexican you think lower class. However, when you think Spanish, you see a women wearing bright colors beautiful clothes.I wonder do we think this way because Spain is located in Europe and when Eurpoe comes to mind you think of places like Milan or Paris? --Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I had the same questions about the essay by Mihesuah about the female Cherokee seminary as Ashley. What I didn't understand was why whiter was better? I found it interesting that full-blood Cherokees were sending their children to this extremely expensive school to become whiter. Is it to try to become equals with white people or is it to pull ahead of them? What I really don't understand is why are the Cherokees trying to wipe out their culture. That is what happened when we first settled the Indians became "whiter" and look at where they are now, language has been lost, traditions stories the list goes on. To me it seems like this school was good for the purpose of education but I felt as if it took away culture. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
I agree with you Amanda, but at the same time I can't help but wonder how much of a choice these Cherokee Indians had. I feel as though whites had such an influence when they began migrating west, that it was almost a means for survival. In order to compete with whites and be as successful as they appeared to be, they almost had to acclimate. I believe it was definitely a positive by way of education, but I'm just curious how much these Cherokee really wanted to become "whiter," if that makes sense. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I think that Antonia Castaneda's essay makes some far-reaching claims that are not completely warranted. Castaneda credits the biased work of Bancroft with informing all later popular and scholarly works with specific stereotypes of Spanish women (pg 59). While perhaps not central to Castaneda's essay I don't understand how one, or even a few historical scholars could be solely responsible for passing on biased perceptions. I think Castaneda ignores other ways that negative stereotypes get passed on. The fact that these negative stereotypes persist in persons who are not scholars of history indicates that later scholars might not have adopted the same stereotypes that Bancroft did solely because he did, but because they embraced these stereotypes in their daily lives. ~ Matt Struth<br />
<br />
I found the documents about women in the Trans-Mississippi Frontier West incredibly interesting and shocking at the same time. The Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes were the most shocking of the collection. Was this a common phenomenon at this time? --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I agree with Amanda's points about the female Cherokee seminary. I feel that the Cherokees were attending this school in hopes of becoming 'whiter', which did result in a dilution of their culture. One must wonder if they saw this as a negative thing, however. They saw that whites had the money, the land, and the privilege. Is it possible that they willingly sacrificed their unique culture in hopes of attaining these things that whites had and they did not? --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I think Matt brings up an interesting point about "A Citizen Protests the Rape of Indian Women in California, 1862," in mentioning that the letter was anonymous. To our minds, the opinions shared seem to be the norm, but the simple fact that the writer of this letter felt the need to keep their opinions anonymous definitely demonstrates that these opinions were not the norm. This reflects a sad fact of race and gender norms of the time. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
As I was reading "Zitkala-Sa Travels to the Land of the Big Red Apples," a few things really struck me. First, I was amazed by the conflict between the young girl and her mother and that the young girl wanted to leave her family. I was also amazed that it was ultimately the mother's decision whether or not to send the young girl away, and in fact the father was not mentioned at all. I think that this highlights a cultural difference between the Dakotas and the white Americans. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I thought that an important and likely common racial and gender issue was highlighted in "Violet Cragg, Ex-Slave and Former Army Nurse, Requests an Army Pension, 1908." She mentioned that the father of her daughter was a white man. Sadly, I think that this was all too common, and denotes how white men took advantage of enslaved women. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
Mihesuah's piece about the diluded culture of the Cherokee women shows the power of the white, middle classed ideal. I thought the school's class system was very interesting and exposed how strong the force to wipe out Native American presence really was. I felt as if the Cherokee culture was breeded out with each new generation of students striving for white ideals. I wondered if perhaps within my own Eastern European ancestory a similiar process of acculturation took place. For now although I consider myself American I still have a sense of Polish pride, but after reading about the Cherokee seminary perhaps my ancestors strove to break apart from their cultural ties? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I found the article "Bills of Sale of Chinese Prostitutes" to be extremely disturbing. As if it weren't bad enough to be sold to someone for my body the rules were absurd. I'm not sure which one was worse "if she concieves, she shall serve one year more" or "if she should escape and be recovered, then her time shall never expire." Who came up with these ideas and rules and how is this accepted in any society?? - Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
Growing up we've all been exposed to different stereotypes of various classifications of individuals. After doing the readings this week, it makes me question what did other races and genders think of whites? what were white femailes stereotyped as and has it changed throughout the years? It the perception change depending on who you talk to and do different backgrounds have varying perceptions? I'm curious as to how the "typical" white woman was portrayed. - Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
While reading Castaneda's article in the section "The Spanish Borderlands School" it became clear that the mention of Spanish Mexican women from Bolton and previous historians was often very political. Their place revolved around the rivalary of Mexican and Euro-American males. They were only significant when their lives involved or revolved around men. From a romanticized stereotype of Spanish women came the notion that they preferred white men. Realistically Americans wanted to hear of their superiority over Mexicans. Their role was to be an American conquest resulting in dominance over Mexican males. This proves Castandeda's point that the history of women needs to be reexamined under a lens unbiased by "Anglo North American(s)". -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I agree with Rose about the documents of Chinese prostitutes. I could not believe that women actually agreed to those rules such as if she is sick for fifteen days then she will serve another month or if she conceives then she will serve another year. The money they received must have been a good enough amount for them, but is it really worth it to lose your life by selling your body to someone? -Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
When reading Castaneda's article I couldn't help but think how we do romanticize the Spanish American women of the western frontier. Presented in movies and books, the Spanish woman in America has developed this myth of beauty and grace in the California frontier. On the other hand, the Mexican American woman is thought of as dirty and poor, perhaps a prostitute. Again there are modern images in movies and popular culture referencing that stereotyped past. When I was reading the article, the stereotypes of a romantic Spanish woman against the beggar-like figure of a Mexican woman from the western frontier were at the forefront of my thoughts. Like last week's articles, Castaneda's article shows how important it is to analyze all facets of women's history regardless of race. It also made me think how difficult it must be for historians to separate fact from fiction especially with these images of the old West still around today. -Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
Violet Cragg's request for an army pension almost reads like a biography. It seems like they requested very personal details of her life. I would be curious to read whether a white former nurse would be questioned the same way. -Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
When I read the Castaneda essay, it angered me that historians in the past stereotyped Mexican women as immoral and sexually and racially impure simply because they did not live under the norms of middle class white women - pure, pious, domestic, and submissive. It was also unfortunate in both Castaneda's essay as well as in the anonymous letter to the editor of the Beacon that Native women in the West were viewed as objects of sexual conquest by white soldiers and settlers. - Marilyn<br />
<br />
It was sad to read that the intent of the Cherokee seminary schools for females was to teach girls to conform to the ideals of white society instead of learning about and maintaining their own Cherokee heritage. -Marilyn</div>Marilynhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_2_Questions/Comments328--Week 2 Questions/Comments2008-01-24T07:12:52Z<p>Marilyn: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found it interesting that the concept of a separation between freedom and suffrage that existed during the Post-Civil War period is very well upheld assumption today. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
The gradual disenfranchisement and barring from political participation of black women seems to be an interesting example of white society's influence on black culture. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
What were the similarities between the political participation of black women and political participation of the women of immigrant groups and other minorities? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting in the reading where the author discussed the concept of family being the "unifying thread" that bound African Americans together. She says that "the notion of family members as having a mutual and continuing responsibility to help each other and to prepare for hard times" (pg 125). Wouldn't that have been true of any family during the reconstruction period, black or white? ~~Mary Beth C<br />
<br />
I agree with Justin that it is interesting to see how the African American women were gradually pushed out of the political arena after having been so active and vocal. I think it is funny how the women would "take sactions" (pg 135),such as abstaining from sexual relations, against men that voted for the Democratic party! ~~ Mary Beth C<br />
<br />
The concept that I found most intriguing overall in the reading was the conflicting views of freedom and suffrage being an individual possession versus communal. This led to the different treatment of people who voted against the popular view. To someone who thought individuals were responsible to only themselves they would view hostility against other voters as opposing the libreal democratic process whereas in the African American community, where suffrage was viewed as a collective possesion, it was right to be hostile towards those who threatened the well being of the whole community. -Karly Kovalcik<br />
<br />
Although the difference may be slight on paper, there is a huge difference between the African American woman's perspective that her husband votes for her in a way that represents her political beliefs and ideologies versus a white woman's perspective that her husband voted for her without consulting with her because he acted individually in a way that was best for his wife and children. -Karly Kovalcik<br />
<br />
After reading the article I made a decision that I had previously I had been flip-flopping between. I now believe that there needs to be subcategories of the women's history to include at least, but not limiting to, African American Women's history. The history seems to be so different just from the article we had to read. Such as, the black women feeling that they were equally part of the vote that the black men casted. I don't remember ever hearing about that before, at least with white women, but then again I haven't taken a women's history course before either -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I agree completely with Ashley. After reading this article, it has become clear to me that women's history needs definite subcategories. But that just makes me thing about how many subcategories can we really delve into? I mean, if you think of how many different subject classes are offered to us within our history department, all of which normally pertain to "men's history," do we need all of those categories for women's history as well? - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
The other thing I found interesting in the article by Elsa Brown was just how the women and men viewed the 'sense of the vote' at first. Such as the vote casted by the men was equally the women's vote, and how the black republican politicians were able to get (well, it seems like the article was meaning quite a few) many of the black women to reject black male democratic voters. Also, just the fact the black women to fight to even get to vote in Richmond's First African Baptist Church astounded me with the way the article was talking about community earlier on. It definitely feels like slowly, but surely, the women were losing the political say they had through their men. -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
In chapter 8, Brown gives examples of the freed African American trying to regain the importance of ''the family''. The church was impacted by the new seating integration, families lived together in support, and even none relatives were taken into homes that had room in racial solidarity. Single and widowed women lived together, sharing incomes and responsibility over child care. In a way, black women were improving and strengthening the idea of ''the family'' that white society held such virtue in. By living as sisters with none relatives, but former "fellow servants", African American women created an even stronger sense of female solidarity and sisterhood than white women. While many white women of the time looked down on excessive charity (even to single women with children), black women were united. I believe the lacking sense of sisterhood among all white women and failure to unite with African American women hurt them in the struggle for suffrage.--Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
The experience of slavery created a need to embrace other African Americans, so it is not surprising that they reached out to the community of African Americans during the Reconstruction Era and beyond. It was family and a sense of community that held African Americans together. "Whether one eats or starves in this setting depends on the available resources within the community as a whole."(126) This essay reminded me of a conversation that I had with a senior African American woman in Georgia, who told me that during the violence of the 1950s communities of African Americans posted neighborhood watches. According to the story, white males, sometimes intoxicated, would drive through black communities seeking victims. The men took on the responsibility of protecting the citizens within the community. This women said that they seldom left the neighborhood due to potential violence, and there was no need to because school, church, and markets were all within the perimeter of the black community.--LisaM<br />
<br />
The concept that the freedom and political liberty of U.S. citizens was not synonymous (130) seems a blatent contradition to present day eyes. As we all know, the black codes in the Reconstruction Era disenfranchised large populations of blacks. Brown's essay states that black women felt they had a stake in the man's choice in voting. I recall in Georgia history, the sizeable female black population was considered a threat if allowed to vote; black women were inclined to vote Republican, and the South were Democrats.--LisaM<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Karly about how there is a huge difference between the African American woman's perspective that her husband votes for her representing her political beliefs and to a white woman's perspective that the husband voted for her without consulting with her. That he voted for who he though was best for him and his wife and children. I think it shows that even though all men are superior when it comes to women, African American men have more respect to their wives then a white man does to his. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
Something that I found interesting in the reading was when it discussed how blacks were active participants throughout the state constitutional convention. African Americans both male and female crowded the galleries speaking their opinions letting their voices be heard. It says " White women, for example, certainly on occasion sat in the convention's gallery as visitors silently observing the proceedings..."(pg129). African American women were standing besides the men that "represented" them and took part in trying to make changes, while the white women sat there quietly letting their men make decisions for them. I just find this funny because you would think a white women would have a little more part in politics; but I guess an African American woman didn't have much to loose if she spoke out of turn or defended her own ideas. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting that Brown discussed the varying ways to interpret the word “freedom.” For black women, freedom was the ability to remain close to the community and help the family. She stated that for black women, “the charity of this penniless negress in receiving another poverty-stricken creature under her roof was characteristic of the freedmen” (p. 126). On the other hand, from the perspective of white men and women, freedom was the ability to get ahead and better oneself. For example, Brown states, “freedpeople should adopt naturally those habits of thrift, diligence, and acquisitiveness that were a cornerstone of free labor ideology” (p.127). This highlights an important difference in perspective. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
Brown talks a lot about the difference between freedom and political liberty. There was debate on whether or not civil right should be an “inherent corollary to freedom.” She mentions the views of Gibson when discussing this point, in which he suggests, “persons who had not yet learned to regulate their lives appropriately—to be thrifty, industrious, and diligent—were not yet capable of responsibly exercising liberty. Those not capable of political liberty would rely on those capable of it to protect their freedom” (p 130). In the time following the civil war, women did not have the right to vote, given this statement, is it because society did not view them as “capable of the responsibility?” Moreover, is this, to some extent true today, with the definition of “capable”, not applying to gender, but to age? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
In Browns essay I thought it was interesting on page 129 that during debates white women were silent and the African Americans were not. Instead they participated and loudly; however Brown doesn't say whether the African Amercians were men or women or both. Why were the white women silent? <br />
Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
What was also intersting to me in Browns essay was that Southern Black women and men debated the issue of woman suffrage (131). I assume this is because Black men were in the same boat as women in general because they didn't have much rights either so they understood the frustration of not having certain rights and in this case the right to vote. <br />
Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In response to your assumption Michelle, I'm going to agree somewhat, and say that black men also debated the issue of women's suffrage, because they too had to struggle to have a political voice. They had a difficult time obtaining the right to vote themselves, so they also had to persuade women to help them and back them up while trying to get a shot at the vote. This, of course, led to a massive debate over whether or not black men or women as a gender should be granted the right to vote first, and caused quite a stir when it was granted to men. There were quite a few men, though, like Frederick Douglass I believe, who supported the woman's right to vote. They understood what it was like to be considered politically naive, so I'm sure that helped in some way. - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that during the Reconstruction Era while men and women who had been slaves focused on finding the families that they had been separated from the white society surrounding these families found something wrong with the fact the black community latched onto the families they had around them. It seemed odd that they would have such a negative view on the fact that these people had such a strong desire to help out family members or even simply other people who experienced the difficulties of slavery with them. I would have thought that this would have been something that would have been admired instead of mocked. They were helping others out which was something that I had understood was the duty of any Christian, especially during this time period where the majority of the nation was Christian. Was it simply because they were a different skin color than them? Or was it because many white people during this period were so focused on improving their lot in life that they couldn't have cared less about how the others were doing? - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading how although the black women in communities were denied the right to actually cast a vote in elections they still made their political opinions known. I especially enjoyed reading that these women would threaten their husbands in order to insure they voted in a way that represented not only his opinions but also hers as well! - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
What I found interesting in Brown's essay was that while African Americans were TECHNICALLY exteneded all the freedoms and liberties afforded the white male populous, there were still social norms and restraints (that were more powerful than any amendment) that constrained their freedoms. These could be seen explicitly in the south, and more subtly in the North but they definetly existed. However, even in the time of Jim Crow laws, and a time when women (white or black) still could not vote, in the African American community black women had real power. On page 130 Brown talks about how black culture had both an internal and external political structure. In the internal structure black women had just as much power as the men. So why was this not the case with the white culture of the day? Did the conditions within slavery equalize black men and women, is this something that carried over from their culture in Africa, or were black women simply more strong willed and outspoken? - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Another point worth discussing from the reading was the incredibly gernerous and nuclear support system African Americans set up during reconstruction. Brown talks about how the ex-slaves would depend on one another, for food, shelter, and money. Sometimes they would even go so far as to share bank accounts. Although I admire their genorosity and envy their sense of community, I have to wonder if African American Society as a whole in the long run would not have been better off if the individuals would have put their extra money to a productive use for themselves individually, rather than dontating it to the poor. If families with extra money(time or space)would have invested this money - in businesses, or in education for their offspring the African American community may ascended to equality alot sooner than they did(assuming they have). - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
The white characterization of newly freed blacks as "lazy and shiftless" because of their sense of collective responsibility was simply ignorance of their own history. During the Revolutionary Period and Founding, it was not uncommon for people to quarter soldiers and economically help one another due to oppression from their common foe - the British. The individualistic and free labor ideology in white America really took hold with the opening of the frontier. As an oppressed people, it was only natural that the black community would bond in such a way in the face of the oppression and discrimination which they would continue to face for another 100+ years. Phil N.<br />
<br />
Another note from late 18th, early 19th century: As far as whites had been concerned at first, only the middle and upper classes of white males had access to the ballot box. Freedom and suffrage were not linked until this time, starting with the Jacksonian period. Before that, almost 200 years had elapsed in which the franchise being the domain of the upper classes was never seriously challenged. - Phil N.<br />
<br />
I think Brown's piece brings to light a clear division between Black and White women in this time period: active vs. passive. Black women were just as active in their communities as Black men were. Their work was respected and acknowledged in the community while White women were conforming to a societal ideal that discouraged the "work" that was alongside men. After the civil war there was a window for African Americans to actively shape their own place in American society and the women were a very strong force in that. I wondered while reading if this difference of racial culture from the post-civil war period is infiltrated into American culture today? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I agree with Amanda on how African American men treated their wives more respectively with voting than white men did. African American men consulted with their wives about who was best for the position for them and their children. White men just voted for whom they believed was best for the position without talking to their wives. Could the reason for this be because African Americans were treated unequally or naturally they just had more respect for their wives? –Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
What I also found interesting was how black Republican politicians in the south “took women’s participation seriously and publicly encouraged them to abstain from sexual relations with any man who voted Democratic.” I think that is getting too much into the personal life. Some women actually left their husbands or broke off the wedding until the election was over. Black Republican politicians in a way could brain-wash these women in the South. Could this be because the politicians are encouraging women to participate and are showing acknowledgment towards them? –Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
Reading this article just emphasizes how much more of a struggle African American women had, especially in the political realm. Some historians tend to forget that black women had to struggle because not only were they of another race, but they were also of the "weaker" gender. So reading about how much they actually did, and how active they were in politics, it shows just how impressive and how determined they were to make a stand and get something accomplished. Granted, things didn't happen overnight, but for those women who actively participated in making a voice for themselves they showed just how much some women really wanted to be able to have a say. I think that makes sense. If it doesn't, ask me in class. - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it interesting the different ways that women found to become involved in politics before they had the right to vote. It seems as though women became truly invested in their husband's political stance and tried to influence him. It seems much more as though the men had to think of the group when they cast their vote, rather than simply voting for themselves. It's almost as though the women held the men accountable for their votes. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I noticed that a sense of community seemed to be an important factor in discussing southern black women's political history. Community seems to be incredibly important to southern black women during this time. It is interesting to think of the many different communities to which they likely belonged, and the influence that they had on each of these communities. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I found it very interesting that freed slaves were NOT most enthused about the possibility to work for pay, but rather what meant more to them was mobility... and therefore to pursue the enjoyment of life by minimizing the "time spent at work." - Cat<br />
<br />
One thing this reading definitely highlights is that historians must be very vigilant about the reflection of their own social assumptions and political expectations in their work. - Cat<br />
<br />
I was surprised the author said women were "encouraged" to withhold sex and marriage in an effort to get their husbands to vote Republican. Who was encouraging them? I thought this type of female power wielding was looked down upon by society. - Cat<br />
<br />
As I was reading about the Black community and it's power over the individual I began thinking about collective women. Will it ever be possible to unite American women politically in a fashion similar to the Black community so that by voting the "wrong" way it would be a disgrace towards women of all races? That the Black community understood that "the issue...was not autonomy but responsibility" (136) played such a strong role in shaping the Reconstruction era. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
<br />
I may have missed it, but what were the views of the Democrats? Why were women so opposed to Democrats? Women were carrying weapons and withholding sex, and men feared them. One Woman said that “If a colored man votes the Democratic ticket he has sold himself”. I am interested to know what exactly the Democratic views were and why women were so disturbed with them. Was it just colored women or were white women opposed to the Democrats as well? <br />
Women have not always been able to vote, however we see in Brown’s essay that they make there feelings heard and well known.—Nikole Wellman <br />
<br />
Beverly Nash was a state senator in 1872 and proposed a woman’s suffrage amendment to the state constitution. Women were not allowed to vote yet but they are holding a political office. How is this so? --Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
What is a Whipper?—Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
I found the quote "Their fates were intimately tied together; individual freedom could be achieved only through collective autonomy" to be very frustrating. Not only is it bad enough a woman is considered a salve but in order for her to gain freedom everyone else must be freed as well. I can't even comprehend what that have been like. We're thankful to have atleast some individualism in society today. --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I found it quite ironic to read about Elizabeth Botume and Beaufort South Carolina which is where I'm from and my parents currently live. If you told me today that in the 2008 presidential election I could not vote due to my gender I'd most likely laugh and then scream in your face. --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I like that how even though women were not allowed to vote they still had a great influence over who won the elections. The power that they seemed to have over their husbands in certain areas was impressive. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I thought that it was interesting that the girls of Cherokee Female Seminary all identified themselves as Cherokee eventhough they had different social, economic and ancestral backgrounds, even with identifying the same they still created a class system from economic status. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I was really intrigued by the discussion of how those in power expected the free blacks to remain in one place and be a stable working force, but blacks worked against this by moving in order to be in places that they wanted to be or in order to be closer to their families. In African American history, we learned that movement was one thing that was really valued by slaves, and often used as a form of resistance. I wonder if the reason they moved around so much was that it was the only way they could truly feel free. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I agree with Kellye about the influential power of women. I feel that this is a power that women have wielded throughout the ages. One can see the influence that mistresses had over powerful kings in history, and even in our own history, you can see it in Abigail Adam's correspondence with her husband while he was at the constitutional convention. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I think that the reason that so many politicians were encouraging women to withhold sex from their husbands because they realized that it would be quite an effective way to make husbands pay attention and change their votes. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I wonder what or if the future of African Americans would've been different if the newly freed slaves had not been so mobile and settled down and fit into the white capitalistic model of earninig the highest wage possible. - Emely A.<br />
<br />
I found the quotation of Congressman Bayne very interesting. It did not initially sit well with me. I first felt that his view on women was just as misogynistic-ally characteristic of the time. But after a closer look, I agree with Brown, who says that it is impossible to know Bayne's true meaning/intent when talking about women's "right to stay home". But perhaps he was purposely fighting for a middle ground in order to help out women, and especially black women. By using this terminology, it could have been possible for him to trick or sway some narrow-minded white congressmen into the belief that women also share the inherent right of suffrage. --Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
<br />
I liked how at the beginning of her essay, Brown described the African American community as having a mutual responsibility to look out for one another, and this idea extended past just blood relatives. Everyone in the black community considered themselves brothers and sisters, and they knew that in order to overcome the many challenges they faced during and after Reconstruction, they must do so as a united community and not as individuals. -Marilyn<br />
<br />
Before reading Brown's essay, I didn't realize that African American women were as involved in politics as they were. Brown talks about the "internal political arena" that black women participated in by attending public forums, parades, rallies, and conventions. Brown states that, "African American women and men understood the vote to be a collective possession, not an individual one, and furthermore that African American women...viewed African American men's vote as equally theirs." (135) Like others have already said, it surprises me that African American men considered their wives' opinions concerning politics and voting. -Marilyn</div>Marilynhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_2_Questions/Comments328--Week 2 Questions/Comments2008-01-24T07:11:18Z<p>Marilyn: </p>
<hr />
<div>I found it interesting that the concept of a separation between freedom and suffrage that existed during the Post-Civil War period is very well upheld assumption today. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
The gradual disenfranchisement and barring from political participation of black women seems to be an interesting example of white society's influence on black culture. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
What were the similarities between the political participation of black women and political participation of the women of immigrant groups and other minorities? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I thought it was very interesting in the reading where the author discussed the concept of family being the "unifying thread" that bound African Americans together. She says that "the notion of family members as having a mutual and continuing responsibility to help each other and to prepare for hard times" (pg 125). Wouldn't that have been true of any family during the reconstruction period, black or white? ~~Mary Beth C<br />
<br />
I agree with Justin that it is interesting to see how the African American women were gradually pushed out of the political arena after having been so active and vocal. I think it is funny how the women would "take sactions" (pg 135),such as abstaining from sexual relations, against men that voted for the Democratic party! ~~ Mary Beth C<br />
<br />
The concept that I found most intriguing overall in the reading was the conflicting views of freedom and suffrage being an individual possession versus communal. This led to the different treatment of people who voted against the popular view. To someone who thought individuals were responsible to only themselves they would view hostility against other voters as opposing the libreal democratic process whereas in the African American community, where suffrage was viewed as a collective possesion, it was right to be hostile towards those who threatened the well being of the whole community. -Karly Kovalcik<br />
<br />
Although the difference may be slight on paper, there is a huge difference between the African American woman's perspective that her husband votes for her in a way that represents her political beliefs and ideologies versus a white woman's perspective that her husband voted for her without consulting with her because he acted individually in a way that was best for his wife and children. -Karly Kovalcik<br />
<br />
After reading the article I made a decision that I had previously I had been flip-flopping between. I now believe that there needs to be subcategories of the women's history to include at least, but not limiting to, African American Women's history. The history seems to be so different just from the article we had to read. Such as, the black women feeling that they were equally part of the vote that the black men casted. I don't remember ever hearing about that before, at least with white women, but then again I haven't taken a women's history course before either -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
I agree completely with Ashley. After reading this article, it has become clear to me that women's history needs definite subcategories. But that just makes me thing about how many subcategories can we really delve into? I mean, if you think of how many different subject classes are offered to us within our history department, all of which normally pertain to "men's history," do we need all of those categories for women's history as well? - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
The other thing I found interesting in the article by Elsa Brown was just how the women and men viewed the 'sense of the vote' at first. Such as the vote casted by the men was equally the women's vote, and how the black republican politicians were able to get (well, it seems like the article was meaning quite a few) many of the black women to reject black male democratic voters. Also, just the fact the black women to fight to even get to vote in Richmond's First African Baptist Church astounded me with the way the article was talking about community earlier on. It definitely feels like slowly, but surely, the women were losing the political say they had through their men. -- Ashley Wilkins<br />
<br />
In chapter 8, Brown gives examples of the freed African American trying to regain the importance of ''the family''. The church was impacted by the new seating integration, families lived together in support, and even none relatives were taken into homes that had room in racial solidarity. Single and widowed women lived together, sharing incomes and responsibility over child care. In a way, black women were improving and strengthening the idea of ''the family'' that white society held such virtue in. By living as sisters with none relatives, but former "fellow servants", African American women created an even stronger sense of female solidarity and sisterhood than white women. While many white women of the time looked down on excessive charity (even to single women with children), black women were united. I believe the lacking sense of sisterhood among all white women and failure to unite with African American women hurt them in the struggle for suffrage.--Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
The experience of slavery created a need to embrace other African Americans, so it is not surprising that they reached out to the community of African Americans during the Reconstruction Era and beyond. It was family and a sense of community that held African Americans together. "Whether one eats or starves in this setting depends on the available resources within the community as a whole."(126) This essay reminded me of a conversation that I had with a senior African American woman in Georgia, who told me that during the violence of the 1950s communities of African Americans posted neighborhood watches. According to the story, white males, sometimes intoxicated, would drive through black communities seeking victims. The men took on the responsibility of protecting the citizens within the community. This women said that they seldom left the neighborhood due to potential violence, and there was no need to because school, church, and markets were all within the perimeter of the black community.--LisaM<br />
<br />
The concept that the freedom and political liberty of U.S. citizens was not synonymous (130) seems a blatent contradition to present day eyes. As we all know, the black codes in the Reconstruction Era disenfranchised large populations of blacks. Brown's essay states that black women felt they had a stake in the man's choice in voting. I recall in Georgia history, the sizeable female black population was considered a threat if allowed to vote; black women were inclined to vote Republican, and the South were Democrats.--LisaM<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Karly about how there is a huge difference between the African American woman's perspective that her husband votes for her representing her political beliefs and to a white woman's perspective that the husband voted for her without consulting with her. That he voted for who he though was best for him and his wife and children. I think it shows that even though all men are superior when it comes to women, African American men have more respect to their wives then a white man does to his. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
Something that I found interesting in the reading was when it discussed how blacks were active participants throughout the state constitutional convention. African Americans both male and female crowded the galleries speaking their opinions letting their voices be heard. It says " White women, for example, certainly on occasion sat in the convention's gallery as visitors silently observing the proceedings..."(pg129). African American women were standing besides the men that "represented" them and took part in trying to make changes, while the white women sat there quietly letting their men make decisions for them. I just find this funny because you would think a white women would have a little more part in politics; but I guess an African American woman didn't have much to loose if she spoke out of turn or defended her own ideas. -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting that Brown discussed the varying ways to interpret the word “freedom.” For black women, freedom was the ability to remain close to the community and help the family. She stated that for black women, “the charity of this penniless negress in receiving another poverty-stricken creature under her roof was characteristic of the freedmen” (p. 126). On the other hand, from the perspective of white men and women, freedom was the ability to get ahead and better oneself. For example, Brown states, “freedpeople should adopt naturally those habits of thrift, diligence, and acquisitiveness that were a cornerstone of free labor ideology” (p.127). This highlights an important difference in perspective. --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
Brown talks a lot about the difference between freedom and political liberty. There was debate on whether or not civil right should be an “inherent corollary to freedom.” She mentions the views of Gibson when discussing this point, in which he suggests, “persons who had not yet learned to regulate their lives appropriately—to be thrifty, industrious, and diligent—were not yet capable of responsibly exercising liberty. Those not capable of political liberty would rely on those capable of it to protect their freedom” (p 130). In the time following the civil war, women did not have the right to vote, given this statement, is it because society did not view them as “capable of the responsibility?” Moreover, is this, to some extent true today, with the definition of “capable”, not applying to gender, but to age? --Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
<br />
In Browns essay I thought it was interesting on page 129 that during debates white women were silent and the African Americans were not. Instead they participated and loudly; however Brown doesn't say whether the African Amercians were men or women or both. Why were the white women silent? <br />
Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
What was also intersting to me in Browns essay was that Southern Black women and men debated the issue of woman suffrage (131). I assume this is because Black men were in the same boat as women in general because they didn't have much rights either so they understood the frustration of not having certain rights and in this case the right to vote. <br />
Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In response to your assumption Michelle, I'm going to agree somewhat, and say that black men also debated the issue of women's suffrage, because they too had to struggle to have a political voice. They had a difficult time obtaining the right to vote themselves, so they also had to persuade women to help them and back them up while trying to get a shot at the vote. This, of course, led to a massive debate over whether or not black men or women as a gender should be granted the right to vote first, and caused quite a stir when it was granted to men. There were quite a few men, though, like Frederick Douglass I believe, who supported the woman's right to vote. They understood what it was like to be considered politically naive, so I'm sure that helped in some way. - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that during the Reconstruction Era while men and women who had been slaves focused on finding the families that they had been separated from the white society surrounding these families found something wrong with the fact the black community latched onto the families they had around them. It seemed odd that they would have such a negative view on the fact that these people had such a strong desire to help out family members or even simply other people who experienced the difficulties of slavery with them. I would have thought that this would have been something that would have been admired instead of mocked. They were helping others out which was something that I had understood was the duty of any Christian, especially during this time period where the majority of the nation was Christian. Was it simply because they were a different skin color than them? Or was it because many white people during this period were so focused on improving their lot in life that they couldn't have cared less about how the others were doing? - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
I enjoyed reading how although the black women in communities were denied the right to actually cast a vote in elections they still made their political opinions known. I especially enjoyed reading that these women would threaten their husbands in order to insure they voted in a way that represented not only his opinions but also hers as well! - Elizabeth Frank<br />
<br />
What I found interesting in Brown's essay was that while African Americans were TECHNICALLY exteneded all the freedoms and liberties afforded the white male populous, there were still social norms and restraints (that were more powerful than any amendment) that constrained their freedoms. These could be seen explicitly in the south, and more subtly in the North but they definetly existed. However, even in the time of Jim Crow laws, and a time when women (white or black) still could not vote, in the African American community black women had real power. On page 130 Brown talks about how black culture had both an internal and external political structure. In the internal structure black women had just as much power as the men. So why was this not the case with the white culture of the day? Did the conditions within slavery equalize black men and women, is this something that carried over from their culture in Africa, or were black women simply more strong willed and outspoken? - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Another point worth discussing from the reading was the incredibly gernerous and nuclear support system African Americans set up during reconstruction. Brown talks about how the ex-slaves would depend on one another, for food, shelter, and money. Sometimes they would even go so far as to share bank accounts. Although I admire their genorosity and envy their sense of community, I have to wonder if African American Society as a whole in the long run would not have been better off if the individuals would have put their extra money to a productive use for themselves individually, rather than dontating it to the poor. If families with extra money(time or space)would have invested this money - in businesses, or in education for their offspring the African American community may ascended to equality alot sooner than they did(assuming they have). - Landon Davis<br />
<br />
The white characterization of newly freed blacks as "lazy and shiftless" because of their sense of collective responsibility was simply ignorance of their own history. During the Revolutionary Period and Founding, it was not uncommon for people to quarter soldiers and economically help one another due to oppression from their common foe - the British. The individualistic and free labor ideology in white America really took hold with the opening of the frontier. As an oppressed people, it was only natural that the black community would bond in such a way in the face of the oppression and discrimination which they would continue to face for another 100+ years. Phil N.<br />
<br />
Another note from late 18th, early 19th century: As far as whites had been concerned at first, only the middle and upper classes of white males had access to the ballot box. Freedom and suffrage were not linked until this time, starting with the Jacksonian period. Before that, almost 200 years had elapsed in which the franchise being the domain of the upper classes was never seriously challenged. - Phil N.<br />
<br />
I think Brown's piece brings to light a clear division between Black and White women in this time period: active vs. passive. Black women were just as active in their communities as Black men were. Their work was respected and acknowledged in the community while White women were conforming to a societal ideal that discouraged the "work" that was alongside men. After the civil war there was a window for African Americans to actively shape their own place in American society and the women were a very strong force in that. I wondered while reading if this difference of racial culture from the post-civil war period is infiltrated into American culture today? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
I agree with Amanda on how African American men treated their wives more respectively with voting than white men did. African American men consulted with their wives about who was best for the position for them and their children. White men just voted for whom they believed was best for the position without talking to their wives. Could the reason for this be because African Americans were treated unequally or naturally they just had more respect for their wives? –Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
What I also found interesting was how black Republican politicians in the south “took women’s participation seriously and publicly encouraged them to abstain from sexual relations with any man who voted Democratic.” I think that is getting too much into the personal life. Some women actually left their husbands or broke off the wedding until the election was over. Black Republican politicians in a way could brain-wash these women in the South. Could this be because the politicians are encouraging women to participate and are showing acknowledgment towards them? –Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
Reading this article just emphasizes how much more of a struggle African American women had, especially in the political realm. Some historians tend to forget that black women had to struggle because not only were they of another race, but they were also of the "weaker" gender. So reading about how much they actually did, and how active they were in politics, it shows just how impressive and how determined they were to make a stand and get something accomplished. Granted, things didn't happen overnight, but for those women who actively participated in making a voice for themselves they showed just how much some women really wanted to be able to have a say. I think that makes sense. If it doesn't, ask me in class. - Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it interesting the different ways that women found to become involved in politics before they had the right to vote. It seems as though women became truly invested in their husband's political stance and tried to influence him. It seems much more as though the men had to think of the group when they cast their vote, rather than simply voting for themselves. It's almost as though the women held the men accountable for their votes. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I noticed that a sense of community seemed to be an important factor in discussing southern black women's political history. Community seems to be incredibly important to southern black women during this time. It is interesting to think of the many different communities to which they likely belonged, and the influence that they had on each of these communities. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
I found it very interesting that freed slaves were NOT most enthused about the possibility to work for pay, but rather what meant more to them was mobility... and therefore to pursue the enjoyment of life by minimizing the "time spent at work." - Cat<br />
<br />
One thing this reading definitely highlights is that historians must be very vigilant about the reflection of their own social assumptions and political expectations in their work. - Cat<br />
<br />
I was surprised the author said women were "encouraged" to withhold sex and marriage in an effort to get their husbands to vote Republican. Who was encouraging them? I thought this type of female power wielding was looked down upon by society. - Cat<br />
<br />
As I was reading about the Black community and it's power over the individual I began thinking about collective women. Will it ever be possible to unite American women politically in a fashion similar to the Black community so that by voting the "wrong" way it would be a disgrace towards women of all races? That the Black community understood that "the issue...was not autonomy but responsibility" (136) played such a strong role in shaping the Reconstruction era. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
<br />
I may have missed it, but what were the views of the Democrats? Why were women so opposed to Democrats? Women were carrying weapons and withholding sex, and men feared them. One Woman said that “If a colored man votes the Democratic ticket he has sold himself”. I am interested to know what exactly the Democratic views were and why women were so disturbed with them. Was it just colored women or were white women opposed to the Democrats as well? <br />
Women have not always been able to vote, however we see in Brown’s essay that they make there feelings heard and well known.—Nikole Wellman <br />
<br />
Beverly Nash was a state senator in 1872 and proposed a woman’s suffrage amendment to the state constitution. Women were not allowed to vote yet but they are holding a political office. How is this so? --Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
What is a Whipper?—Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
I found the quote "Their fates were intimately tied together; individual freedom could be achieved only through collective autonomy" to be very frustrating. Not only is it bad enough a woman is considered a salve but in order for her to gain freedom everyone else must be freed as well. I can't even comprehend what that have been like. We're thankful to have atleast some individualism in society today. --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I found it quite ironic to read about Elizabeth Botume and Beaufort South Carolina which is where I'm from and my parents currently live. If you told me today that in the 2008 presidential election I could not vote due to my gender I'd most likely laugh and then scream in your face. --- Rose Ferguson<br />
<br />
I like that how even though women were not allowed to vote they still had a great influence over who won the elections. The power that they seemed to have over their husbands in certain areas was impressive. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I thought that it was interesting that the girls of Cherokee Female Seminary all identified themselves as Cherokee eventhough they had different social, economic and ancestral backgrounds, even with identifying the same they still created a class system from economic status. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
I was really intrigued by the discussion of how those in power expected the free blacks to remain in one place and be a stable working force, but blacks worked against this by moving in order to be in places that they wanted to be or in order to be closer to their families. In African American history, we learned that movement was one thing that was really valued by slaves, and often used as a form of resistance. I wonder if the reason they moved around so much was that it was the only way they could truly feel free. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I agree with Kellye about the influential power of women. I feel that this is a power that women have wielded throughout the ages. One can see the influence that mistresses had over powerful kings in history, and even in our own history, you can see it in Abigail Adam's correspondence with her husband while he was at the constitutional convention. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I think that the reason that so many politicians were encouraging women to withhold sex from their husbands because they realized that it would be quite an effective way to make husbands pay attention and change their votes. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I wonder what or if the future of African Americans would've been different if the newly freed slaves had not been so mobile and settled down and fit into the white capitalistic model of earninig the highest wage possible. - Emely A.<br />
<br />
I found the quotation of Congressman Bayne very interesting. It did not initially sit well with me. I first felt that his view on women was just as misogynistic-ally characteristic of the time. But after a closer look, I agree with Brown, who says that it is impossible to know Bayne's true meaning/intent when talking about women's "right to stay home". But perhaps he was purposely fighting for a middle ground in order to help out women, and especially black women. By using this terminology, it could have been possible for him to trick or sway some narrow-minded white congressmen into the belief that women also share the inherent right of suffrage. --Jackie Reed<br />
<br />
<br />
I liked how at the beginning of her essay, Brown described the Arfican American community as having a mutual responsibility to look out for one another, and this idea extended past just blood relatives. Everyone in the black community considered themselves brothers and sisters, and they knew that in order to overcome the many challenges they faced during and after Reconstruction, they must do so as a united community and not as individuals. -Marilyn<br />
<br />
Before reading Brown's essay, I didn't realize that African American women were as involved in politics as they were. Brown talks about the "internal political arena" that black women participated in by attending public forums, parades, rallies, and conventions. Brown states that, "African American women and men understood the vote to be a collective possession, not an individual one, and furthermore that African American women...viewed African American men's vote as equally theirs." (135) Like others have already said, it surprises me that African American men considered their wives' opinions concerning politics and voting. -Marilyn</div>Marilynhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_1_Questions/Comments328--Week 1 Questions/Comments2008-01-17T07:17:23Z<p>Marilyn: </p>
<hr />
<div>This is not a real post.<br />
<br />
I agree.<br />
<br />
You're both wrong. -- Sarah H.<br />
<br />
<br />
I found it extremely interesting in "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" that fatherhood was not seen as a natural thing but instead was viewed as being "social". Yet for women being a mother was a "natural" phenomenon. I would have thought that it would have also been seen as natural for the man to also assume a fatherly role despite his involvement in the public sphere. Is this because the men were already doing so much that being a fatherly figure just couldn't always be an important role? Or is it because if they were expected to show a more emotional side of them they would be considered less of a man because they wouldn't be acting tough? - Elizabeth L. Frank<br />
<br />
I was surprised to read in "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" that some Black Women scholars feel that even today the importance of black women and their roles in society are being overlooked in the fields of women's studies! I understood that it took a little while for scholars to realize that they had to look at the difference ethnicities differently as far as their experiences in society but I had no idea that there were aspects that were still being overlooked. I also liked the statement Leslie Alexander made in the first sentence of the last paragraph of the essay that in order to truly understand the experiences of women that scholars must become willing to explore the differences of the cultures instead of simply ignoring the fact that they are different. I thought that was a very good point. - Elizabeth L. Frank<br />
<br />
The theme of the four essays is to tackle the question, what is the meaning and importance in studying women’s history? In the first essay, Haulman points out that the study of women’s history has changed over time. It first focused on the measurable contributions of women to American society and then shifted to focus more on the private lives of women in their home life. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
It is interesting to note in the second essay that Bock brings up many different theories with which to compare the role of men and women in society. When examining the dichotomies suggested it is interesting to consider not only how women have affected society but also how the norms of society influenced the role of women. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
More than one of the essays point out that many subjects in American women’s history has been concentrated on white middle class women. It is important to look at the role of culture and ethnicity in women’s studies because all of these factors affect the experiences and challenges of women in society. The study of women is not static; it is changing, and shaped by many different factors, and it is important to consider more than one. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
In the essay "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History," I found it interesting that the women's liberation movement in the United States was mainly about gender oppression. The movements were middle class white women who wrote about the history of white women in the West. Though, women of color looked towards third-world liberation movements for support instead of women's liberation movements. Only if women of all different ethnicities joined together earlier would women's rights have developed earlier? Also women of color's gender oppression was different than white women's gender oppression in that colored women had to struggle with race and class unlike white women who mostly struggled with class. --Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
In the essay "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," I found it interesting in the first point Nature vs. Culture that fatherhood was not seen as natural but social. Women scholars challenged this by stating that women are therefore seen as "nature always having a social meaning" and nature and culture mean different things in different times. Women are the ones that physically have the baby, but that does not mean they have to be subject to the male sexes. Men are also taught to grow up as a strong non-emotional person. This could also be why fatherhood is seen as social instead of natural. <br />
--Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
In "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" Gisela Bock discusses how a woman's nature were child bearing, carring for the family, and taking care of things around the house originated from Europe; but what was once seen as nature is now seen as work. I I find this very true today, because a lot of stay home mothers consider their position as a mother and care taker of the home a job, however without pay as Bock mentions an "unpaid work." (pg 9) Also on the other hand there are many women that work and women for years have competed with the men in their wages but because of their sex and not who does the job best. Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Leslie M. Alexander's essay mostly discusses black women and how their history is different from that of white womens history, which it is, but in today's society of white and black women are they still that different? Is this generation of black women still largley influenced by past generations in how they view themselves as black women? She also goes on to say that in order to understand black women you have to understand the black community. (pg 21) I think understanding any comminity that in its self is a different culture you have to understand their culture and way of life before understanding that community of people. The United States is full of all kinds of culturally different people. Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" I found the second point, Work v. Family interesting because it looks at "women's work" and how it relates men as the "workers" and women as "non-workers". Women who are are non working mothers are still seen as "non-workers" today. I think that the stay at home mother profession should be given more respect in the professional world. Many stay at home mothers work just as hard if not harder than those in careers outside the home. --Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
In "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History" Castaneda discusses the problems faced by scholers of color in their work to properly show the history of thier ancestors. It was interseting that these scholars struggle to accurately portray these women and not let assumptions get in the way thier research. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
What I found interesting after reading all of the essays is that I still had no idea how historians should study women's history. From what I read I got the feeling that the study of women's history had the same problem as other thematic studies of history: how do you study the history of a single facet of society without studying the history of all of the other facets? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I agree completely with Justin. The editor raises a very valid point in the beginning before we even approach the essays, and that is "how do you study women's history?" After reading all of the essays, it's clear that it is very difficult to lump all of women's history together to study. There are so many different aspects of women's history to take into account that it almost seems impossible to study it all at once without leaving something out. Then again, isn't that what happens with history in general? When we're taught history, ignoring that men are typically the central characters, think of how much is left out so that we can stay on task for a single semester on a topic that could seem quite specific in the first place. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
An unfortunate conclusion from "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" was the need for the undermining of an important aspect of the Women's Movement in order for Women's History in order to be properly studied. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
After reading "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" by Gisela Bock, I realized how much of a connection our society's conception of women has with the writing of its history: how can women's history be properly studied without first changing our perceptions of women? If the study of women's history is part of the changing of our perception of women then should we expect its study to be apolitical? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
In Kate Haukman’s essay, she talks about the difficulty of studying women without examining gender history as well. If this is the case, which Bock also believed it is, then how can it be that the study of men’s history seems often less related to gender roles? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
In Bock’s essay, I found particularly interesting her comment that in today’s world we still reserve the terms “working women” and “working mother” for employed women only, overlooking, even with our language, the fact that being a mother is work. I guess this just goes to show you how truly slanted society still in is valuing men’s work over women’s. - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
Castaneda discusses the challenges of studying women of color. When to place a person within historical perspective, is it more important to explore their race or gender first? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
In her essay, "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History," Leslie Alexander makes a statement near the end saying, "The challenge remains for us to analyze Black women through their own eyes rather than through the lens of whiteness and opression." (p.22). My question, is does anyone think that is truly possible? Most of what scholars have on Black women's history has been recorded by whites, and for a great deal of time, by white men. I believe that now we as historians should be able to look at this history through the eyes of those who experienced it, but a large chunk of this history has been warped and skewed in some way. Does anyone think it's possible to correct that? Or, regardless of the tools and resources we have today, are things always going to be interpreted in a more biased sense than they should be? -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it extremely interesting in "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" that motherhood was a natural phenomenon, however fatherhood was not seen as a natural at all. That was seen as social. Yet for women being a mother was a "natural" phenomenon. I have always assumed that fatherhood was a natural phenomenon like motherhood despite their involvement in the social sphere. The child is just as much apart of him as it is the mother. My question is if this is because men were so involved in society there wasn't time? Or was it the fact that he could not show his nurturing/loving side? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
<br />
While reading the Dichotomies essay I found it amazing that fatherhood was seen as “social.” I always felt that motherhood and fatherhood were both ‘natural,’ but now I’m not sure. I have a feeling this was not worldwide though, since each culture is different. I’m curious how other cultures viewed mother- and fatherhood. –Ashley W.<br />
<br />
I did not realize until reading these essays just how many problems are in the field of women’s history. From the sounds of the essays there have been problems getting the field established and then getting the field of women’s history to cover all women, regardless of race and class. It sounded like it was getting better, but still has lots of room for improvement. – Ashley W.<br />
<br />
I found Bock's view of the sex and gender dichotomy to be particularly interesting. I never considered that the distincion of sex from gender would restate the nature versus nurture issue. I considered this distinction to be helpful to show that many feminine characteristics should not be considered inherent nor subordinate. Bock argues that these simple definitions only hurt by reinforcing the differences between the sexes and therefore polarizing the study of women. Like other studies of history, the study of women should be a continuous effort without the pause to separate a women's world into what is physiological from what is cultural. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
What I am already finding interesting with the study of women’s history versus other studies of history that I have made is its social and active participation in the present. I feel like the goal in my other history classes has been to recreate a time or event in the past, examine cause and effect, draw similarities, etc. but of things that happened in the past and stay in the past. Whereas so far I feel like women’s study is looking into the past as well but in the attempt to create “a change towards more freedom and justice” (Bock) in the present. -karly kovalcik<br />
<br />
I found Bock’s discussion of equality vs. difference really interesting. She wonders why it is that “difference” is attributed to women and “equality” to men. Which makes me wonder if establishing equality in history is the main goal of women’s history, does making it a “different” field facilitate this or just reinforce dichotomies? When the women suffragists were fighting for the right to vote they weren’t voting for a “woman’s” vote they were just looking for the right to vote. I think there are the same inherent problems that we found with segregation and the “separate but equal” philosophy. -karly kovalcik<br />
<br />
One question posed by Bock's essay that really stood out for me was the use of the words "equality" and "justice" when applied to separate genders. It was interesting that for men, these two words complement each other but for women, they are in opposition. The focus seems to be on their context in comparing history and then gender-focused history. In the traditional sense of history with a "male" focus, equality and justice are words with a positive focus, as words that have translated into positive action. When history is focused on women, equality and justice become negative, words that have been almost unachievable goals in that context. To me, it seems like it comes back to whether we are unwilling to look at history that shows us in an unfavorable light, just like the question with looking at racial minorities' history in America. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I never stopped to consider how feminism and women's history seems so focused on white middle-class women until I read Castaneda and Alexander's essays. There seems to be little representation of minority women when talking about American women's history. It seems like a race issue but is it more the case of white American women keeping minorities and race issues away from feminism or is it, as Alexander claims, that women, especially black women, are less concerned with their gender and more with race issues in history? --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I agree with many others who have mentioned that parenthood always seemed as if it should be natural for both parties, however it is seen as natural only for women. How much does this have to do with the unique experience of women in pregnancy? Pregnancy is a natural experience reserved only for women, which might be why women see parenthood as natural. However, for men, they do not get to experience pregnancy, and only bond with the child once it is born. This may help to create the sensation that parenthood is natural for women but not for me. --Angela Scott <br />
<br />
I found the essay "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" by Leslie M. Alexander to be both interesting and thought provoking. At one point Alexander points out that it is important to understand the Black community in order to understand the Black woman. I think that this denotes an importance of understanding culture that can be applied to studying all women. Isn't it important to understand the culture that a person comes from in order to understand the individual itself? All individuals exist within a given culture and are influenced by cultural norms and roles. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," I found the discussion of equality v. difference very interesting. How do you decide which is more important equality or difference between the sexes? It seems as though we need to find a happy medium where we can recognize that men and women are different but equal. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Karly's comment about how our study of women's history might affect the present. In studying women's history, I wonder how prior assumptions and ideas might change in knowing the true facts behind various women's movements. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
After reading all the essays, I have found that the field of women's history is not nearly as simplistic as I had thought. I never realized all the issues that could arise in the field of women's history, it is so much more than simply the study of women. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I thought Alexander's essay concerning race offered an interesting viewpoint. I agree that it is essential to consider race and culture first in order to understand how the concept of gender applies to the lives of African American women. I think this is an important point to keep in mind when evaluating women and the men they interact with throughout this course. Shouldn't the study of women take a multidimensional approach because of the labels other than "woman" that shape what direction their lives will take? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Kate Haulman in the point that studying women gave a new perspective on history. it's history through the eyes of a new group, a group that makes up half (arguably even more) of society. Women have always been there, at home, supproting their husbands and silently witnessing their activities. There is a lot that they have to say that gives us an even greater insight in events that we alread knew about. -Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I agree with Emely. Women's history is important, because life is not just about the big events, but about about the small, everyday moments that shape a person's life - and so is the way of history. If the study of history was only limited to major military or political victories or losses - and the men that had a part in them - a whole, deeper understanding of a culture would just be lost. Sometimes a look into the basic, ordinary events of life can be the most telling of a civilization, and women have always played a major part in that. ~Juliann<br />
<br />
I found several very interesting points in Haulman's essay. The most interesting and thought provoking for me was when she was discussing the definition of the word woman and female. What I gleaned from her discussion on this topic is that the word woman is constantly changing in meaning, as women socially evolve. For instance she gave the example of a man knitting. She said if a man knits is he really a man, for he has taken on "woman's work". I have always thought of man and woman in a strictly biological sense, so this really made me think.- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay I thought her section about intergration vs. autonomy was a little off base. If she is using the word autonomous to signify independence, I think that she would seriously be short changing the study of women's history. How could one completely divest women's history from that of mens'? Or mens' history from that of womens? It seems to me that you would need to be familiar with one to fully understand the other. -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Kate Haulman's essay argues that the term "woman" is a fluid concept, based on gender, who has defined it as a category, and who has claimed it as an identiy. If that is so, then should transsexuals who believe they are and/or identify themselves as "women" be included in studies of "women's history", even if biologically they have a Y chromosome and not two X chromosomes? Gisela Bock addressed this subject at a glance during her discussion of sex versus gender, but did not really illuminate it. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
In reference to Antonia I Castaneda writing, Women of Color and the rewriting of Western History, she states two facts that I found interesting. First of all, she states that most feminist scholars write on the history of white women in the west and secondly, that women scholars of color focus on women of third world countries.(p.15) The history of white and colored women has been told by primarily white men, I thought, because there may have not been enough primary sources from women of any color. There was a time when women were not educated and many could not read nor write, therefore not keeping memoirs or journals to tell their stories. For example, the history of women during the Colonial or Antebellum period was most likely taken from the journals of men about what they wrote in regards to women at that time. What, if any, impact did the lack of women’s skills have on the writing of women’s history? Secondly, wouldn’t it be more difficult to find primary sources on women of a third world country rather that women in America. –Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay, I found it interesting where the issue of equality vs difference was discussed. The argument that equality and justice go hand in hand for men but not women is really strange to me. I have always thought that women were equal but different so why is it so hard for equality to mean justice for women as well as for men. [[User:MaryBeth|MaryBeth]]<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting that in the essay by Alexander that she describes how the study of Black women has to include the study of the whole Black community in order to fully understand the role of Black women. Wouldn't that be true for all groups of women though? I think every woman is shaped by the community that they are a part of and in order to fully understand anyone you would need to be able to put them into context, and that includes understanding their roles in their community.<br />
[[User:MaryBeth|MaryBeth]]<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary Beth. Women of all races in the study of history have been underrepresented. But a woman is not just defined exclusively by her gender, but also her race and region. Just because a person is a female, does not mean that she has had the same experiences as all the other women of her time period. Race plays a major role in defining a woman's role in her community. ~Juliann<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with what both MaryBeth and Juliann say about women of all races having been underrepresented in history, particularly American history. But can't this observation also apply to men of every race? Most U.S. history books are overwhelmingly concerned with telling the stories of white men. So, which is the bigger problem - the fact that women as a group are being underrepresented or that men and women of so many different races are underrepresented? -Marilyn<br />
<br />
When Bock discusses the topic of work vs. family, this statement struck me: "Obviously, men's work is valued more highly than women's work." I think this is sad. In today's world, women who have both a job and children are expected to be everything to everyone 24 hours a day. In addition to her responsibilities in the workplace, at home, a woman is the cook, maid, nurse, chauffeur, accountant, etc., and she is always on duty. Yes, the man may have a demanding job outside of the home for which he is paid, but the job of wife and mother is just as difficult (if not more) and should be respected no less. Many women do not have to choose between work and family because they are successful at both. -Marilyn</div>Marilynhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_1_Questions/Comments328--Week 1 Questions/Comments2008-01-17T06:56:04Z<p>Marilyn: </p>
<hr />
<div>This is not a real post.<br />
<br />
I agree.<br />
<br />
You're both wrong. -- Sarah H.<br />
<br />
<br />
I found it extremely interesting in "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" that fatherhood was not seen as a natural thing but instead was viewed as being "social". Yet for women being a mother was a "natural" phenomenon. I would have thought that it would have also been seen as natural for the man to also assume a fatherly role despite his involvement in the public sphere. Is this because the men were already doing so much that being a fatherly figure just couldn't always be an important role? Or is it because if they were expected to show a more emotional side of them they would be considered less of a man because they wouldn't be acting tough? - Elizabeth L. Frank<br />
<br />
I was surprised to read in "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" that some Black Women scholars feel that even today the importance of black women and their roles in society are being overlooked in the fields of women's studies! I understood that it took a little while for scholars to realize that they had to look at the difference ethnicities differently as far as their experiences in society but I had no idea that there were aspects that were still being overlooked. I also liked the statement Leslie Alexander made in the first sentence of the last paragraph of the essay that in order to truly understand the experiences of women that scholars must become willing to explore the differences of the cultures instead of simply ignoring the fact that they are different. I thought that was a very good point. - Elizabeth L. Frank<br />
<br />
The theme of the four essays is to tackle the question, what is the meaning and importance in studying women’s history? In the first essay, Haulman points out that the study of women’s history has changed over time. It first focused on the measurable contributions of women to American society and then shifted to focus more on the private lives of women in their home life. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
It is interesting to note in the second essay that Bock brings up many different theories with which to compare the role of men and women in society. When examining the dichotomies suggested it is interesting to consider not only how women have affected society but also how the norms of society influenced the role of women. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
More than one of the essays point out that many subjects in American women’s history has been concentrated on white middle class women. It is important to look at the role of culture and ethnicity in women’s studies because all of these factors affect the experiences and challenges of women in society. The study of women is not static; it is changing, and shaped by many different factors, and it is important to consider more than one. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
In the essay "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History," I found it interesting that the women's liberation movement in the United States was mainly about gender oppression. The movements were middle class white women who wrote about the history of white women in the West. Though, women of color looked towards third-world liberation movements for support instead of women's liberation movements. Only if women of all different ethnicities joined together earlier would women's rights have developed earlier? Also women of color's gender oppression was different than white women's gender oppression in that colored women had to struggle with race and class unlike white women who mostly struggled with class. --Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
In the essay "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," I found it interesting in the first point Nature vs. Culture that fatherhood was not seen as natural but social. Women scholars challenged this by stating that women are therefore seen as "nature always having a social meaning" and nature and culture mean different things in different times. Women are the ones that physically have the baby, but that does not mean they have to be subject to the male sexes. Men are also taught to grow up as a strong non-emotional person. This could also be why fatherhood is seen as social instead of natural. <br />
--Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
In "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" Gisela Bock discusses how a woman's nature were child bearing, carring for the family, and taking care of things around the house originated from Europe; but what was once seen as nature is now seen as work. I I find this very true today, because a lot of stay home mothers consider their position as a mother and care taker of the home a job, however without pay as Bock mentions an "unpaid work." (pg 9) Also on the other hand there are many women that work and women for years have competed with the men in their wages but because of their sex and not who does the job best. Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Leslie M. Alexander's essay mostly discusses black women and how their history is different from that of white womens history, which it is, but in today's society of white and black women are they still that different? Is this generation of black women still largley influenced by past generations in how they view themselves as black women? She also goes on to say that in order to understand black women you have to understand the black community. (pg 21) I think understanding any comminity that in its self is a different culture you have to understand their culture and way of life before understanding that community of people. The United States is full of all kinds of culturally different people. Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" I found the second point, Work v. Family interesting because it looks at "women's work" and how it relates men as the "workers" and women as "non-workers". Women who are are non working mothers are still seen as "non-workers" today. I think that the stay at home mother profession should be given more respect in the professional world. Many stay at home mothers work just as hard if not harder than those in careers outside the home. --Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
In "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History" Castaneda discusses the problems faced by scholers of color in their work to properly show the history of thier ancestors. It was interseting that these scholars struggle to accurately portray these women and not let assumptions get in the way thier research. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
What I found interesting after reading all of the essays is that I still had no idea how historians should study women's history. From what I read I got the feeling that the study of women's history had the same problem as other thematic studies of history: how do you study the history of a single facet of society without studying the history of all of the other facets? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I agree completely with Justin. The editor raises a very valid point in the beginning before we even approach the essays, and that is "how do you study women's history?" After reading all of the essays, it's clear that it is very difficult to lump all of women's history together to study. There are so many different aspects of women's history to take into account that it almost seems impossible to study it all at once without leaving something out. Then again, isn't that what happens with history in general? When we're taught history, ignoring that men are typically the central characters, think of how much is left out so that we can stay on task for a single semester on a topic that could seem quite specific in the first place. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
An unfortunate conclusion from "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" was the need for the undermining of an important aspect of the Women's Movement in order for Women's History in order to be properly studied. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
After reading "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" by Gisela Bock, I realized how much of a connection our society's conception of women has with the writing of its history: how can women's history be properly studied without first changing our perceptions of women? If the study of women's history is part of the changing of our perception of women then should we expect its study to be apolitical? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
In Kate Haukman’s essay, she talks about the difficulty of studying women without examining gender history as well. If this is the case, which Bock also believed it is, then how can it be that the study of men’s history seems often less related to gender roles? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
In Bock’s essay, I found particularly interesting her comment that in today’s world we still reserve the terms “working women” and “working mother” for employed women only, overlooking, even with our language, the fact that being a mother is work. I guess this just goes to show you how truly slanted society still in is valuing men’s work over women’s. - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
Castaneda discusses the challenges of studying women of color. When to place a person within historical perspective, is it more important to explore their race or gender first? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
In her essay, "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History," Leslie Alexander makes a statement near the end saying, "The challenge remains for us to analyze Black women through their own eyes rather than through the lens of whiteness and opression." (p.22). My question, is does anyone think that is truly possible? Most of what scholars have on Black women's history has been recorded by whites, and for a great deal of time, by white men. I believe that now we as historians should be able to look at this history through the eyes of those who experienced it, but a large chunk of this history has been warped and skewed in some way. Does anyone think it's possible to correct that? Or, regardless of the tools and resources we have today, are things always going to be interpreted in a more biased sense than they should be? -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it extremely interesting in "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" that motherhood was a natural phenomenon, however fatherhood was not seen as a natural at all. That was seen as social. Yet for women being a mother was a "natural" phenomenon. I have always assumed that fatherhood was a natural phenomenon like motherhood despite their involvement in the social sphere. The child is just as much apart of him as it is the mother. My question is if this is because men were so involved in society there wasn't time? Or was it the fact that he could not show his nurturing/loving side? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
<br />
While reading the Dichotomies essay I found it amazing that fatherhood was seen as “social.” I always felt that motherhood and fatherhood were both ‘natural,’ but now I’m not sure. I have a feeling this was not worldwide though, since each culture is different. I’m curious how other cultures viewed mother- and fatherhood. –Ashley W.<br />
<br />
I did not realize until reading these essays just how many problems are in the field of women’s history. From the sounds of the essays there have been problems getting the field established and then getting the field of women’s history to cover all women, regardless of race and class. It sounded like it was getting better, but still has lots of room for improvement. – Ashley W.<br />
<br />
I found Bock's view of the sex and gender dichotomy to be particularly interesting. I never considered that the distincion of sex from gender would restate the nature versus nurture issue. I considered this distinction to be helpful to show that many feminine characteristics should not be considered inherent nor subordinate. Bock argues that these simple definitions only hurt by reinforcing the differences between the sexes and therefore polarizing the study of women. Like other studies of history, the study of women should be a continuous effort without the pause to separate a women's world into what is physiological from what is cultural. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
What I am already finding interesting with the study of women’s history versus other studies of history that I have made is its social and active participation in the present. I feel like the goal in my other history classes has been to recreate a time or event in the past, examine cause and effect, draw similarities, etc. but of things that happened in the past and stay in the past. Whereas so far I feel like women’s study is looking into the past as well but in the attempt to create “a change towards more freedom and justice” (Bock) in the present. -karly kovalcik<br />
<br />
I found Bock’s discussion of equality vs. difference really interesting. She wonders why it is that “difference” is attributed to women and “equality” to men. Which makes me wonder if establishing equality in history is the main goal of women’s history, does making it a “different” field facilitate this or just reinforce dichotomies? When the women suffragists were fighting for the right to vote they weren’t voting for a “woman’s” vote they were just looking for the right to vote. I think there are the same inherent problems that we found with segregation and the “separate but equal” philosophy. -karly kovalcik<br />
<br />
One question posed by Bock's essay that really stood out for me was the use of the words "equality" and "justice" when applied to separate genders. It was interesting that for men, these two words complement each other but for women, they are in opposition. The focus seems to be on their context in comparing history and then gender-focused history. In the traditional sense of history with a "male" focus, equality and justice are words with a positive focus, as words that have translated into positive action. When history is focused on women, equality and justice become negative, words that have been almost unachievable goals in that context. To me, it seems like it comes back to whether we are unwilling to look at history that shows us in an unfavorable light, just like the question with looking at racial minorities' history in America. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I never stopped to consider how feminism and women's history seems so focused on white middle-class women until I read Castaneda and Alexander's essays. There seems to be little representation of minority women when talking about American women's history. It seems like a race issue but is it more the case of white American women keeping minorities and race issues away from feminism or is it, as Alexander claims, that women, especially black women, are less concerned with their gender and more with race issues in history? --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I agree with many others who have mentioned that parenthood always seemed as if it should be natural for both parties, however it is seen as natural only for women. How much does this have to do with the unique experience of women in pregnancy? Pregnancy is a natural experience reserved only for women, which might be why women see parenthood as natural. However, for men, they do not get to experience pregnancy, and only bond with the child once it is born. This may help to create the sensation that parenthood is natural for women but not for me. --Angela Scott <br />
<br />
I found the essay "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" by Leslie M. Alexander to be both interesting and thought provoking. At one point Alexander points out that it is important to understand the Black community in order to understand the Black woman. I think that this denotes an importance of understanding culture that can be applied to studying all women. Isn't it important to understand the culture that a person comes from in order to understand the individual itself? All individuals exist within a given culture and are influenced by cultural norms and roles. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," I found the discussion of equality v. difference very interesting. How do you decide which is more important equality or difference between the sexes? It seems as though we need to find a happy medium where we can recognize that men and women are different but equal. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Karly's comment about how our study of women's history might affect the present. In studying women's history, I wonder how prior assumptions and ideas might change in knowing the true facts behind various women's movements. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
After reading all the essays, I have found that the field of women's history is not nearly as simplistic as I had thought. I never realized all the issues that could arise in the field of women's history, it is so much more than simply the study of women. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I thought Alexander's essay concerning race offered an interesting viewpoint. I agree that it is essential to consider race and culture first in order to understand how the concept of gender applies to the lives of African American women. I think this is an important point to keep in mind when evaluating women and the men they interact with throughout this course. Shouldn't the study of women take a multidimensional approach because of the labels other than "woman" that shape what direction their lives will take? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Kate Haulman in the point that studying women gave a new perspective on history. it's history through the eyes of a new group, a group that makes up half (arguably even more) of society. Women have always been there, at home, supproting their husbands and silently witnessing their activities. There is a lot that they have to say that gives us an even greater insight in events that we alread knew about. -Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I agree with Emely. Women's history is important, because life is not just about the big events, but about about the small, everyday moments that shape a person's life - and so is the way of history. If the study of history was only limited to major military or political victories or losses - and the men that had a part in them - a whole, deeper understanding of a culture would just be lost. Sometimes a look into the basic, ordinary events of life can be the most telling of a civilization, and women have always played a major part in that. ~Juliann<br />
<br />
I found several very interesting points in Haulman's essay. The most interesting and thought provoking for me was when she was discussing the definition of the word woman and female. What I gleaned from her discussion on this topic is that the word woman is constantly changing in meaning, as women socially evolve. For instance she gave the example of a man knitting. She said if a man knits is he really a man, for he has taken on "woman's work". I have always thought of man and woman in a strictly biological sense, so this really made me think.- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay I thought her section about intergration vs. autonomy was a little off base. If she is using the word autonomous to signify independence, I think that she would seriously be short changing the study of women's history. How could one completely divest women's history from that of mens'? Or mens' history from that of womens? It seems to me that you would need to be familiar with one to fully understand the other. -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Kate Haulman's essay argues that the term "woman" is a fluid concept, based on gender, who has defined it as a category, and who has claimed it as an identiy. If that is so, then should transsexuals who believe they are and/or identify themselves as "women" be included in studies of "women's history", even if biologically they have a Y chromosome and not two X chromosomes? Gisela Bock addressed this subject at a glance during her discussion of sex versus gender, but did not really illuminate it. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
In reference to Antonia I Castaneda writing, Women of Color and the rewriting of Western History, she states two facts that I found interesting. First of all, she states that most feminist scholars write on the history of white women in the west and secondly, that women scholars of color focus on women of third world countries.(p.15) The history of white and colored women has been told by primarily white men, I thought, because there may have not been enough primary sources from women of any color. There was a time when women were not educated and many could not read nor write, therefore not keeping memoirs or journals to tell their stories. For example, the history of women during the Colonial or Antebellum period was most likely taken from the journals of men about what they wrote in regards to women at that time. What, if any, impact did the lack of women’s skills have on the writing of women’s history? Secondly, wouldn’t it be more difficult to find primary sources on women of a third world country rather that women in America. –Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay, I found it interesting where the issue of equality vs difference was discussed. The argument that equality and justice go hand in hand for men but not women is really strange to me. I have always thought that women were equal but different so why is it so hard for equality to mean justice for women as well as for men. [[User:MaryBeth|MaryBeth]]<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting that in the essay by Alexander that she describes how the study of Black women has to include the study of the whole Black community in order to fully understand the role of Black women. Wouldn't that be true for all groups of women though? I think every woman is shaped by the community that they are a part of and in order to fully understand anyone you would need to be able to put them into context, and that includes understanding their roles in their community.<br />
[[User:MaryBeth|MaryBeth]]<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary Beth. Women of all races in the study of history have been underrepresented. But a woman is not just defined exclusively by her gender, but also her race and region. Just because a person is a female, does not mean that she has had the same experiences as all the other women of her time period. Race plays a major role in defining a woman's role in her community. ~Juliann<br />
<br />
<br />
When Bock discusses the topic of work vs. family, this statement struck me: "Obviously, men's work is valued more highly than women's work." I think this is sad. In today's world, women who have both a job and children are expected to be everything to everyone 24 hours a day. In addition to her responsibilities in the workplace, at home, a woman is the cook, maid, nurse, chauffeur, accountant, etc., and she is always on duty. Yes, the man may have a demanding job outside of the home for which he is paid, but the job of wife and motheris just as difficult (if not more) and should be respected no less. Many women do not have to choose between work and family because they are successful at both. -Marilyn</div>Marilynhttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=328--Week_1_Questions/Comments328--Week 1 Questions/Comments2008-01-17T06:55:27Z<p>Marilyn: </p>
<hr />
<div>This is not a real post.<br />
<br />
I agree.<br />
<br />
You're both wrong. -- Sarah H.<br />
<br />
<br />
I found it extremely interesting in "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" that fatherhood was not seen as a natural thing but instead was viewed as being "social". Yet for women being a mother was a "natural" phenomenon. I would have thought that it would have also been seen as natural for the man to also assume a fatherly role despite his involvement in the public sphere. Is this because the men were already doing so much that being a fatherly figure just couldn't always be an important role? Or is it because if they were expected to show a more emotional side of them they would be considered less of a man because they wouldn't be acting tough? - Elizabeth L. Frank<br />
<br />
I was surprised to read in "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" that some Black Women scholars feel that even today the importance of black women and their roles in society are being overlooked in the fields of women's studies! I understood that it took a little while for scholars to realize that they had to look at the difference ethnicities differently as far as their experiences in society but I had no idea that there were aspects that were still being overlooked. I also liked the statement Leslie Alexander made in the first sentence of the last paragraph of the essay that in order to truly understand the experiences of women that scholars must become willing to explore the differences of the cultures instead of simply ignoring the fact that they are different. I thought that was a very good point. - Elizabeth L. Frank<br />
<br />
The theme of the four essays is to tackle the question, what is the meaning and importance in studying women’s history? In the first essay, Haulman points out that the study of women’s history has changed over time. It first focused on the measurable contributions of women to American society and then shifted to focus more on the private lives of women in their home life. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
It is interesting to note in the second essay that Bock brings up many different theories with which to compare the role of men and women in society. When examining the dichotomies suggested it is interesting to consider not only how women have affected society but also how the norms of society influenced the role of women. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
More than one of the essays point out that many subjects in American women’s history has been concentrated on white middle class women. It is important to look at the role of culture and ethnicity in women’s studies because all of these factors affect the experiences and challenges of women in society. The study of women is not static; it is changing, and shaped by many different factors, and it is important to consider more than one. -- Jessica Kilday<br />
<br />
In the essay "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History," I found it interesting that the women's liberation movement in the United States was mainly about gender oppression. The movements were middle class white women who wrote about the history of white women in the West. Though, women of color looked towards third-world liberation movements for support instead of women's liberation movements. Only if women of all different ethnicities joined together earlier would women's rights have developed earlier? Also women of color's gender oppression was different than white women's gender oppression in that colored women had to struggle with race and class unlike white women who mostly struggled with class. --Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
In the essay "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," I found it interesting in the first point Nature vs. Culture that fatherhood was not seen as natural but social. Women scholars challenged this by stating that women are therefore seen as "nature always having a social meaning" and nature and culture mean different things in different times. Women are the ones that physically have the baby, but that does not mean they have to be subject to the male sexes. Men are also taught to grow up as a strong non-emotional person. This could also be why fatherhood is seen as social instead of natural. <br />
--Ashley Scutari<br />
<br />
In "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" Gisela Bock discusses how a woman's nature were child bearing, carring for the family, and taking care of things around the house originated from Europe; but what was once seen as nature is now seen as work. I I find this very true today, because a lot of stay home mothers consider their position as a mother and care taker of the home a job, however without pay as Bock mentions an "unpaid work." (pg 9) Also on the other hand there are many women that work and women for years have competed with the men in their wages but because of their sex and not who does the job best. Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
Leslie M. Alexander's essay mostly discusses black women and how their history is different from that of white womens history, which it is, but in today's society of white and black women are they still that different? Is this generation of black women still largley influenced by past generations in how they view themselves as black women? She also goes on to say that in order to understand black women you have to understand the black community. (pg 21) I think understanding any comminity that in its self is a different culture you have to understand their culture and way of life before understanding that community of people. The United States is full of all kinds of culturally different people. Michelle Mardeusz<br />
<br />
In "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" I found the second point, Work v. Family interesting because it looks at "women's work" and how it relates men as the "workers" and women as "non-workers". Women who are are non working mothers are still seen as "non-workers" today. I think that the stay at home mother profession should be given more respect in the professional world. Many stay at home mothers work just as hard if not harder than those in careers outside the home. --Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
In "Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History" Castaneda discusses the problems faced by scholers of color in their work to properly show the history of thier ancestors. It was interseting that these scholars struggle to accurately portray these women and not let assumptions get in the way thier research. -- Kellye Sorber<br />
<br />
What I found interesting after reading all of the essays is that I still had no idea how historians should study women's history. From what I read I got the feeling that the study of women's history had the same problem as other thematic studies of history: how do you study the history of a single facet of society without studying the history of all of the other facets? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
I agree completely with Justin. The editor raises a very valid point in the beginning before we even approach the essays, and that is "how do you study women's history?" After reading all of the essays, it's clear that it is very difficult to lump all of women's history together to study. There are so many different aspects of women's history to take into account that it almost seems impossible to study it all at once without leaving something out. Then again, isn't that what happens with history in general? When we're taught history, ignoring that men are typically the central characters, think of how much is left out so that we can stay on task for a single semester on a topic that could seem quite specific in the first place. -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
An unfortunate conclusion from "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" was the need for the undermining of an important aspect of the Women's Movement in order for Women's History in order to be properly studied. --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
After reading "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" by Gisela Bock, I realized how much of a connection our society's conception of women has with the writing of its history: how can women's history be properly studied without first changing our perceptions of women? If the study of women's history is part of the changing of our perception of women then should we expect its study to be apolitical? --Justin Mattos<br />
<br />
In Kate Haukman’s essay, she talks about the difficulty of studying women without examining gender history as well. If this is the case, which Bock also believed it is, then how can it be that the study of men’s history seems often less related to gender roles? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
In Bock’s essay, I found particularly interesting her comment that in today’s world we still reserve the terms “working women” and “working mother” for employed women only, overlooking, even with our language, the fact that being a mother is work. I guess this just goes to show you how truly slanted society still in is valuing men’s work over women’s. - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
Castaneda discusses the challenges of studying women of color. When to place a person within historical perspective, is it more important to explore their race or gender first? - Cat Debelius<br />
<br />
In her essay, "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History," Leslie Alexander makes a statement near the end saying, "The challenge remains for us to analyze Black women through their own eyes rather than through the lens of whiteness and opression." (p.22). My question, is does anyone think that is truly possible? Most of what scholars have on Black women's history has been recorded by whites, and for a great deal of time, by white men. I believe that now we as historians should be able to look at this history through the eyes of those who experienced it, but a large chunk of this history has been warped and skewed in some way. Does anyone think it's possible to correct that? Or, regardless of the tools and resources we have today, are things always going to be interpreted in a more biased sense than they should be? -Kelly Wuyscik<br />
<br />
I found it extremely interesting in "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History" that motherhood was a natural phenomenon, however fatherhood was not seen as a natural at all. That was seen as social. Yet for women being a mother was a "natural" phenomenon. I have always assumed that fatherhood was a natural phenomenon like motherhood despite their involvement in the social sphere. The child is just as much apart of him as it is the mother. My question is if this is because men were so involved in society there wasn't time? Or was it the fact that he could not show his nurturing/loving side? -- Amanda Taub<br />
<br />
<br />
While reading the Dichotomies essay I found it amazing that fatherhood was seen as “social.” I always felt that motherhood and fatherhood were both ‘natural,’ but now I’m not sure. I have a feeling this was not worldwide though, since each culture is different. I’m curious how other cultures viewed mother- and fatherhood. –Ashley W.<br />
<br />
I did not realize until reading these essays just how many problems are in the field of women’s history. From the sounds of the essays there have been problems getting the field established and then getting the field of women’s history to cover all women, regardless of race and class. It sounded like it was getting better, but still has lots of room for improvement. – Ashley W.<br />
<br />
I found Bock's view of the sex and gender dichotomy to be particularly interesting. I never considered that the distincion of sex from gender would restate the nature versus nurture issue. I considered this distinction to be helpful to show that many feminine characteristics should not be considered inherent nor subordinate. Bock argues that these simple definitions only hurt by reinforcing the differences between the sexes and therefore polarizing the study of women. Like other studies of history, the study of women should be a continuous effort without the pause to separate a women's world into what is physiological from what is cultural. -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
What I am already finding interesting with the study of women’s history versus other studies of history that I have made is its social and active participation in the present. I feel like the goal in my other history classes has been to recreate a time or event in the past, examine cause and effect, draw similarities, etc. but of things that happened in the past and stay in the past. Whereas so far I feel like women’s study is looking into the past as well but in the attempt to create “a change towards more freedom and justice” (Bock) in the present. -karly kovalcik<br />
<br />
I found Bock’s discussion of equality vs. difference really interesting. She wonders why it is that “difference” is attributed to women and “equality” to men. Which makes me wonder if establishing equality in history is the main goal of women’s history, does making it a “different” field facilitate this or just reinforce dichotomies? When the women suffragists were fighting for the right to vote they weren’t voting for a “woman’s” vote they were just looking for the right to vote. I think there are the same inherent problems that we found with segregation and the “separate but equal” philosophy. -karly kovalcik<br />
<br />
One question posed by Bock's essay that really stood out for me was the use of the words "equality" and "justice" when applied to separate genders. It was interesting that for men, these two words complement each other but for women, they are in opposition. The focus seems to be on their context in comparing history and then gender-focused history. In the traditional sense of history with a "male" focus, equality and justice are words with a positive focus, as words that have translated into positive action. When history is focused on women, equality and justice become negative, words that have been almost unachievable goals in that context. To me, it seems like it comes back to whether we are unwilling to look at history that shows us in an unfavorable light, just like the question with looking at racial minorities' history in America. --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I never stopped to consider how feminism and women's history seems so focused on white middle-class women until I read Castaneda and Alexander's essays. There seems to be little representation of minority women when talking about American women's history. It seems like a race issue but is it more the case of white American women keeping minorities and race issues away from feminism or is it, as Alexander claims, that women, especially black women, are less concerned with their gender and more with race issues in history? --Kendall Haring<br />
<br />
I agree with many others who have mentioned that parenthood always seemed as if it should be natural for both parties, however it is seen as natural only for women. How much does this have to do with the unique experience of women in pregnancy? Pregnancy is a natural experience reserved only for women, which might be why women see parenthood as natural. However, for men, they do not get to experience pregnancy, and only bond with the child once it is born. This may help to create the sensation that parenthood is natural for women but not for me. --Angela Scott <br />
<br />
I found the essay "Rethinking the Position of Black Women in American Women's History" by Leslie M. Alexander to be both interesting and thought provoking. At one point Alexander points out that it is important to understand the Black community in order to understand the Black woman. I think that this denotes an importance of understanding culture that can be applied to studying all women. Isn't it important to understand the culture that a person comes from in order to understand the individual itself? All individuals exist within a given culture and are influenced by cultural norms and roles. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay "Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History," I found the discussion of equality v. difference very interesting. How do you decide which is more important equality or difference between the sexes? It seems as though we need to find a happy medium where we can recognize that men and women are different but equal. --Katie Nelson<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Karly's comment about how our study of women's history might affect the present. In studying women's history, I wonder how prior assumptions and ideas might change in knowing the true facts behind various women's movements. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
After reading all the essays, I have found that the field of women's history is not nearly as simplistic as I had thought. I never realized all the issues that could arise in the field of women's history, it is so much more than simply the study of women. --Angela Scott<br />
<br />
I thought Alexander's essay concerning race offered an interesting viewpoint. I agree that it is essential to consider race and culture first in order to understand how the concept of gender applies to the lives of African American women. I think this is an important point to keep in mind when evaluating women and the men they interact with throughout this course. Shouldn't the study of women take a multidimensional approach because of the labels other than "woman" that shape what direction their lives will take? -- Meredith Bojarski<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with Kate Haulman in the point that studying women gave a new perspective on history. it's history through the eyes of a new group, a group that makes up half (arguably even more) of society. Women have always been there, at home, supproting their husbands and silently witnessing their activities. There is a lot that they have to say that gives us an even greater insight in events that we alread knew about. -Emely Amaya<br />
<br />
I agree with Emely. Women's history is important, because life is not just about the big events, but about about the small, everyday moments that shape a person's life - and so is the way of history. If the study of history was only limited to major military or political victories or losses - and the men that had a part in them - a whole, deeper understanding of a culture would just be lost. Sometimes a look into the basic, ordinary events of life can be the most telling of a civilization, and women have always played a major part in that. ~Juliann<br />
<br />
I found several very interesting points in Haulman's essay. The most interesting and thought provoking for me was when she was discussing the definition of the word woman and female. What I gleaned from her discussion on this topic is that the word woman is constantly changing in meaning, as women socially evolve. For instance she gave the example of a man knitting. She said if a man knits is he really a man, for he has taken on "woman's work". I have always thought of man and woman in a strictly biological sense, so this really made me think.- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay I thought her section about intergration vs. autonomy was a little off base. If she is using the word autonomous to signify independence, I think that she would seriously be short changing the study of women's history. How could one completely divest women's history from that of mens'? Or mens' history from that of womens? It seems to me that you would need to be familiar with one to fully understand the other. -- Landon Davis<br />
<br />
Kate Haulman's essay argues that the term "woman" is a fluid concept, based on gender, who has defined it as a category, and who has claimed it as an identiy. If that is so, then should transsexuals who believe they are and/or identify themselves as "women" be included in studies of "women's history", even if biologically they have a Y chromosome and not two X chromosomes? Gisela Bock addressed this subject at a glance during her discussion of sex versus gender, but did not really illuminate it. - Sarah H.<br />
<br />
In reference to Antonia I Castaneda writing, Women of Color and the rewriting of Western History, she states two facts that I found interesting. First of all, she states that most feminist scholars write on the history of white women in the west and secondly, that women scholars of color focus on women of third world countries.(p.15) The history of white and colored women has been told by primarily white men, I thought, because there may have not been enough primary sources from women of any color. There was a time when women were not educated and many could not read nor write, therefore not keeping memoirs or journals to tell their stories. For example, the history of women during the Colonial or Antebellum period was most likely taken from the journals of men about what they wrote in regards to women at that time. What, if any, impact did the lack of women’s skills have on the writing of women’s history? Secondly, wouldn’t it be more difficult to find primary sources on women of a third world country rather that women in America. –Nikole Wellman<br />
<br />
In Bock's essay, I found it interesting where the issue of equality vs difference was discussed. The argument that equality and justice go hand in hand for men but not women is really strange to me. I have always thought that women were equal but different so why is it so hard for equality to mean justice for women as well as for men. [[User:MaryBeth|MaryBeth]]<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting that in the essay by Alexander that she describes how the study of Black women has to include the study of the whole Black community in order to fully understand the role of Black women. Wouldn't that be true for all groups of women though? I think every woman is shaped by the community that they are a part of and in order to fully understand anyone you would need to be able to put them into context, and that includes understanding their roles in their community.<br />
[[User:MaryBeth|MaryBeth]]<br />
<br />
I agree with Mary Beth. Women of all races in the study of history have been underrepresented. But a woman is not just defined exclusively by her gender, but also her race and region. Just because a person is a female, does not mean that she has had the same experiences as all the other women of her time period. Race plays a major role in defining a woman's role in her community. ~Juliann<br />
<br />
<br />
When Bock discusses the topic of work vs. family, this statement struck me: "Obviously, men's work is valued more highly than women's work." I think this is sad. In today's world, women who have both a job and children are expected to be everything to everyone 24 hours a day. In addition to her responsibilities in the workplace, at home, a woman is the cook, maid, nurse, chauffeur, accountant, etc., and she is always on duty. Yes, the man may have a demanding job outside of the home for which he is paid, but the job of wife and motheris just as difficult (if not more) and should be respected no less. Many women do not have to choose between work and family because they are successful at both.</div>Marilyn 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