View source for Week 5 Questions/Comments-327 09

== Comparative questions or comments ==


== Phillis Wheatley, 1768, An address to George III ==

I think Phillis Wheatley had an extremely rare story. She was a slave who was taught by her owners to read and write, she was sent to Europe to publish her poems and was freed upon her return. What is more rare is that Phillis was not only literate but aware of the politics of the time, as shown in her address to George III. As a slave who was owned I wonder what parallels she drew between that and the colonies that were owned by England. – Erin Sanderson 

== Eliza Wilkinson, Carolina Patriot, 1782 ==
This reading was very interesting. I felt that Eliza painted the British in a very harsh light (which I know was the point), but she just seemed like a bit of a hypocrite. One sentence really caught my eye: "The Americans are obliged to commit unavoidable acts of cruelty; the defense of their country requires it; you seek their lives and liberties, and they must either kill or be killed." So, its ok for the Americans can be mean and cruel, but if the English are then that’s ten times worse? Also in this reading, Eliza tells a bit of a story some man told her about someone, (I'm assuming the someone is an analogy for the British and his farm is an analogy for the Americans), encroaching on his farm taking more and more from him. And, at the end he asks, "is this not slavery?" Now that is pretty ridiculous because as a North Carolina planter, I'm sure he had slaves, or at the very least, neighbors who had slaves. So, as long as the Americans are not treated like slaves, then it is fine, but they can still have slaves of their own.
One more sentence in this reading really caught my eye, When Eliza is talking about Homer and she says, "what contemptible EARTH WORMS these authors make us!" She is expressing her displeasure over not even having the liberty to think, and she says that that is all she wants. She writes of how the men would not want women to be a part of political matters, and she does not care. She wishes only to think for herself. -Kristina.S.

The Revolution seems to mark a period where women can start voicing political opinions without being attacked for it. Eliza Wilkinson, at least in her letters, claimed the right to express her political sentiments and rages about how authors make women out to be weak and fit for nothing more than menial tasks, or in more visceral language, appearing as “contemptible ''earth worms'' (124).” Interestingly, she apparently had political discussions not just with her female friends, but with males as well. She talks about a conversation with a Patriot officer. Whether or not he took her opinions seriously, I don’t know, but the fact that he was willing to talk with her about politics suggests a change in attitude from earlier colonial times. Of course, Eliza is an elite with a fair amount of power, giving her the opportunity and station to speak up. -- Taylor Brann



== Grace Galloway’s diary, 1778-79, Philadelphia ==
I thought it was rather interesting that Grace Galloway "resented the intrusion of politics into her personal life." I feel like this may be the reason why it took women so long to start getting involved in "men's affairs" because many women, like Grace, did not care for it. They would rather just be housewives and be content with that. -Kristina.S. 



== Abigail Adams, Remember the Ladies, 1776 ==
I love this letter.  When Abigail wrote this letter to her husband she hoped that he would include women in the new code of laws.  She wasn't afraid to say that if they were not recognized they would rebel.  He laughed at her request for women to be included in those laws.  She even wrote to her friend Mercy Warren, trying to get a petition going of their greviances.  An interesting point was when Abigail wrote back to her husband and said, "we have it in our power not only to free ouselves but to subdue our masters."  She was telling him that women had a lot more power than men realize.  By the power of persuation and a woman's wit and charm, women could get their masters to submit to whatever they wanted.  Abigail was very "saucy"  and is not afraid to tell her husband what she thinks and admits she will fight against laws that have no representation for women. I like that Abigail saw this as a golden opportunity for women to seek out more liberties and express themselves in this new government these men were creating.  -Marsha Himes

I particularly like how John writes, "But your letter was the first intimation that another tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented." I have the feeling that he is kind of mocking her by saying that this is the first he has ever heard of women being discontented with their social status. But, what he says about women being the biggest "tribe" of them all is correct because if all the women decided to ban together under one common goal, they could deny the men everything until they got what they wanted. This is unrealistic, though, because to make it effective, most if not all women would have to have a common goal to reform, and (especially at that time), it appears that not all women cared enough to have a political say in things, etc. -Kristina.S.
 
So, Abigail Adams is pretty much awesome, right? In these letters we’ve got her threatening to start a rebellion if the ladies are ignored. Obviously, she is joking to a certain extent, but her use of the patriot’s rhetoric is interesting: “we will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation (128).” Sounds familiar, but John Adams conveniently ignores her fair points, though he does pay the ladies a “compliment” about how their “Tribe is more numerous and powerful than all the rest.” He throws back a few snappy one-liners and shows he can use hot button words too, particularly about “the Despotism of the Peticoat.” Still, Abigail gets the best line: “That your sex are Naturally Tyrannical is a Truth so thoroughly established as to admit no dispute.” It seems that though it is acceptable for women to have political sentiment, it doesn’t mean men will necessarily take it seriously. How surprising. I’m sure Abigail was quite objectionable to that dismissal and quite loud about it too. Oh, to be a fly on the wall in the Adams household! I'll bring the popcorn! -- Taylor Brann

I didn’t realize Abigail Adams was such a strong women. In her correspondence to her husband, John Adams, she was determined that he “remember the ladies.” She argues that if attention is not paid to the ladies that they will foment a rebellion and not hold themselves bound by any laws in which they have no voice, or representation. This is an extremely strong stance to take and one for which I doubt many women could take. I am curious of how much leeway Abigail Adams had based on who she was and who she was married to, if a unknown poor colonial women had been so outward about her rights, what would have happened? At the same time, Abigail Adams had a great deal of power in her household when her husband was away, that had to have impacted her views as well. –Erin Sanderson

I think Erin makes a really good point- I also wonder if Abigail's courage to voice her opinion and strength of character is a result of her social standing and also the fact that John was away from home for periods of time. I wonder if this is an example of the male head of household (in this case, John) giving his wife more liberty to run the farm (or plantation, maybe)while he was away, similar to what we talked about in class? I really also like Abigail as a person, and I think her marriage to John is very interesting, as revealed in the letters. I wonder how typical their marriage was of the period? They both seem to respect each other quite a bit, while not being afraid to be humourous or candid in their own individual opinions. One of my favorite lines is when John states, in response to Abigail's request that he "Remember the Ladies", "But your Letter was the first Intimation that another Tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented.- This is rather too coarse a Compliment but you are so saucy, I wont blot it out." Abigail seems to be a very determined and energetic woman- I think it would have been really neat and interesting to have known her. -Allison Godart

== Benjamin Rush, “Thoughts upon female education,” 1787 (Philadelphia) ==

I found it interesting how Benjamin Rush considered a sound female education to be a "domestic education". He believed women needed to be "trained to manage efficient households, and as mothers, they had to raise virtuous citizens." (Woloch, 130) When he used the word "trained", he seemed to be implying that someone else would train women in their duties, meaning the men would. I found it ironic that Rush said, "It becomes us [the men] therefore to prepare them [women], by a suitable education, for the discharge of this most important duty of mothers." (Woloch, 131) What makes men so qualified to teach women how to do domestic and motherly duties, when they have no idea what those duties entail? Rush and other men felt it was their obligation to teach women to do jobs they were already doing. I also felt as though Rush assumed women could not do any of the jobs/talents he listed, such as learning the English language, or bookkeeping. I have a feeling that Rush and other men were under the impression that motherly and domestic duties were simple to understand and easy to do, yet I think Rush had never heard the saying "easier said than done." ---- Alex Mankarios

I thought it was interesting how Benjamin Rush directed his argument and his speech to the "Gentlemen" in the audience, even though he was discussing female education and what he thought should be done or corrected in the present education systems in order to better prepare women for their roles as wives and mothers. I think this is evidence that the men were still thought to be "responsible" for their wives and daughters- society at this time still seems to be very much a patriarchal one by reading what Benjamin Rush has to say. I suppose it will still be a while (perhaps not until the early-to-mid 19th Century would be my guess, when you have a lot of reform movements, among them education reforms)before women have more of a "voice" in their own education. Here, the females seem to play a "secondary role" to that of the Gentlemen, even though they are the ones receiving the education. -Allison Godart

== Judith Sargent Murray, 1790, “on the Equality of the Sexes” ==




== Taylor & Duffin Report Molly Brant's Opinions and Influence, 1778 ==



== Daniel Claus assesses Molly Brant's Influence, 1779 ==



== Esther DeBerdt Reed, “Sentiments of an American Woman,” 1780 ==
I admire women during the American Revolution because they took this opportunity to try to change things for themselves.  I think their experiences made them stronger and gave them a stronger sense of who they were outside of the home. They were not afraid to speak out.  They knew the purpose of this war and supported their families - even if that meant throwing themselves into harm's way.  Esther Deberdt Reed did not want women to go unnoticed for their bravery in this war.  She doesn's take away the bravery of men but men were the ones who were looked at as "the hero."  She said it beautifully when she wrote, "we should at least equal, and sometimes surpass them in our love for the public good."  -Marsha Himes

I loved how Esther DeBerdt Reed spoke so strongly and patriotically. She believed that women could be as patriotic as men, even if they were not doing the same duties in the war. I agree with what Marsha about what Reed wrote about "surpass[ing] them in our love for the public good."  She believed that through strong patriotism and support for the country, the women could be active participants in the war, since they were not allowed to fight or take part in other areas of the war effort. She believed the men needed to know that the women were offering their help in any way possible. At the end of her writing, she writes, "Receive with a free hand our offering, the purest which can be presented to your virtue." Although the women could not participate as much as they may have liked, they were still more than willing to support the men who were fighting for them, in any and all ways possible. ---- Alex Mankarios

== Thomas Jefferson’s Slaves Join the British, 1781 ==



== Sarah Osborn, Camp Follower, Recalls the Revolution, 1837 ==
I found the writings from Sarah Osborn effective in studying women's roles during the Revolutionary War. At a time when women were still seen as only belonging in the home, she followed her husband and the army throughout the colonies. She performed domestic duties such as cleaning, mending clothing, and cooking for soldiers but was also seen as a member of the army. The point I found most interesting was at the surrender in Yorktown when Sarah thought something bad had occurred, asked a question and recieved the reply, "Are not you soldier enough to know what it means?" I found this to mean the soldiers treated her as an equal and should know the rules of the army, "mans world". Sarah Osborn broke traditional ideas of womens work in the eighteenth century and was able to see first hand the building of America. -Megan W. 



== Mary Jemison Views the Revolution ==
I liked the article that featured Mary Jemison's views on the Revolution. The was in depth and described the actions of the Iroquois Indians in detail. I could tell that she accepted the Indians as her people when she said "my Indian brother", and when she said "...'''we''' sustained no loss in the war..." She felt she was a part of the tribe and they were her family. She describes how some Indians decided to go against the treaty that was made with the colonists to help the British fight. She describes many battles that were fought, and how ultimately many of her people suffered. -Amy Van Ness

== Thomas Paine in 1775, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 288-289 ==
 


== An Anonymous Woman Claims Women's Rights in 1780, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 293-294 ==

This passage while short in length summed up womens rights effectively stating women were stronger patriots then men. The writer is asking for equality even though women "[s]ometimes surpass them in our love for the public good." Women surpassed men in their love for country and fight for freedom by willingly allowing their sons and husbands to fight and maybe die for their country. Did all women feel the same as this writer that they were willing to give up vain items (hair accessories) at the end of the Revolution just as they were able to stop drinking tea at the start of the Revolution? -Megan W.


I liked the opinions of this woman who was defending her rights. She had good points to make including mentioning famous  heroines and when she said "...women have been seen forgetting the weakness of their sex, building new walls.." She is describing how women are strong and not only take on the burdens and stress of being a female and living day to day but also taking care of their families and those around them. -Amy Van Ness