Difference between revisions of "Week 1 Questions/Comments-327 09"
From McClurken Wiki
Caryn Levine (Talk | contribs) m (Gisela Bock) |
|||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
I found the essay about Women of Color and the rewriting of Western History very interesting for a couple of reasons. I thought that women of all races collaborated with one another during the Women’s movements of the 1960’s and 1970’s. As Castandeda states there were two different movements one being the women’s liberation movement and the second one being the third-world liberation movements. Women of color had a more difficult time obtaining equal rights than white middle class women because not only did they have to deal with the question of gender but also with race. -Nick Jesionka | I found the essay about Women of Color and the rewriting of Western History very interesting for a couple of reasons. I thought that women of all races collaborated with one another during the Women’s movements of the 1960’s and 1970’s. As Castandeda states there were two different movements one being the women’s liberation movement and the second one being the third-world liberation movements. Women of color had a more difficult time obtaining equal rights than white middle class women because not only did they have to deal with the question of gender but also with race. -Nick Jesionka | ||
| + | |||
| + | Gisela Bock's essay, ''Challenging Dichotomies in Women's History'' was fascinating for a few reasons. First of all, she begins her thesis by reminding us that the reason that Women's History is rendered visible is fundamentally due to subjection. This was a thought provoking statement because all American minority history begins with exploitation or subjection so I was quite intrigued. Bock's essay differed from Kate Haulman's in its use of definitions and the words that she chose to focus on. Mainly, her attention to Gender VS. Sex or biology. I found it interesting that her Equality Vs. Difference section tied directly into further examination of Sex vs Gender. It seemed ironic that in the battle for gender equality, in the public, private, and scholarly arena, Women's Studies runs the risk of becoming invisible yet again by "mainstreaming" because it has been turned into an amalgamation of Gender Studies. This in turn could characterize the word Woman as biological leaving it historically irrelevant. One would hope that Women's Studies does indeed receive the autonomy and examination that it truly deserves while exploring and remembering that both genders live and work reflexively with each other and thus influence each other immensely. - Caryn Levine | ||
