Difference between revisions of "Week 1 Questions/Comments-327 09"

From McClurken Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property _HWLDF_WordAccumulator::$_lines is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/diff/DairikiDiff.php on line 1166

Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property _HWLDF_WordAccumulator::$_line is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/diff/DairikiDiff.php on line 1167

Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property _HWLDF_WordAccumulator::$_group is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/diff/DairikiDiff.php on line 1168

Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property _HWLDF_WordAccumulator::$_tag is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/diff/DairikiDiff.php on line 1169

Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property _HWLDF_WordAccumulator::$_lines is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/diff/DairikiDiff.php on line 1166

Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property _HWLDF_WordAccumulator::$_line is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/diff/DairikiDiff.php on line 1167

Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property _HWLDF_WordAccumulator::$_group is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/diff/DairikiDiff.php on line 1168

Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property _HWLDF_WordAccumulator::$_tag is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/diff/DairikiDiff.php on line 1169
Line 35: Line 35:
 
In agreement, I do say that traditionally I think most people think of American Women's History as an upper (maybe at time middle) class white subject.  However, the problem lies in the fact that while there may be documentation (primary sources) on these white women due to their education and status levels, one might be hard-pressed to find the much lacking resources on Black women in history. For example, you may find plenty of information into the lives of a wealthy white woman plantation owner's wife, but you are not going to have the same time looking up her main house slave. I do believe the work should be done on elaborating American Women's History, it just seems that it would be a difficult task to take on. - Christine Leckner
 
In agreement, I do say that traditionally I think most people think of American Women's History as an upper (maybe at time middle) class white subject.  However, the problem lies in the fact that while there may be documentation (primary sources) on these white women due to their education and status levels, one might be hard-pressed to find the much lacking resources on Black women in history. For example, you may find plenty of information into the lives of a wealthy white woman plantation owner's wife, but you are not going to have the same time looking up her main house slave. I do believe the work should be done on elaborating American Women's History, it just seems that it would be a difficult task to take on. - Christine Leckner
  
The Castañeda and Alexander readings examine contributions women of different ethnic/racial backgrounds have made to the women’s studies field outside of the traditional and dominate women’s liberation, white middle-class approach taken by most scholars. These historians have challenged overlooking race and class as an influence on women, as well as the idea of looking at women of color as little more than doubly oppressed victims. However, I feel that Leslie Alexander does a little of what she accuses other scholars of women’s history of doing: generalizing women’s experiences. She argues that “although feminism is a useful paradigm for White women, the attempt to force Black women into the same interpretive model in not applicable, and has prevented full understanding of Black women’s lives [19].” The feminism she seems to be describing is very much based in white middle-class ideology, so it’s just as inaccurate to try to fit all White women into this paradigm as it is to try to fit Black women into it. I would’ve liked to have seen a small acknowledgement of the complexities and cultural differences that exist not just between women of different races, but also between women of the same race, both Black and White. --Taylor Brann
+
The Castañeda and Alexander readings examine contributions women of different ethnic/racial backgrounds have made to the women’s studies field outside of the traditional and dominate women’s liberation, white middle-class approach taken by most scholars. These historians have challenged overlooking race and class as an influence on women, as well as the idea of looking at women of color as little more than doubly oppressed victims. However, I feel that Leslie Alexander does a little of what she accuses other scholars of women’s history of doing: generalizing women’s experiences. She argues that “although feminism is a useful paradigm for White women, the attempt to force Black women into the same interpretive model in not applicable, and has prevented full understanding of Black women’s lives [19].” The feminism she seems to be describing is very much based in white middle-class ideology, so it’s just as inaccurate to try to fit ''all'' White women into this paradigm as it is to try to fit Black women into it. I would’ve liked to have seen a ''small'' acknowledgment of the complexities and cultural differences that exist not just between women of different races, but also between women of the same race, both Black and White. --Taylor Brann
  
 
== Antonia Castañeda’s“Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History” ==
 
== Antonia Castañeda’s“Women of Color and the Rewriting of Western History” ==

Revision as of 01:25, 27 August 2009