Difference between revisions of "Week 2 Questions/Comments-327 09"
From McClurken Wiki
Amankarios (Talk | contribs) (→Samuel de Champlain, 1616) |
Amankarios (Talk | contribs) (→Samuel de Champlain, 1616) |
||
| Line 76: | Line 76: | ||
I agree that the difference between Native American and European men when it comes to children is amazing. Champlain writes about how when a woman has children, her preceeding husbands come visit and claim the child is his. In Europe, women wouldn't have had so many ex-husbands, if they even had one ex. If the paternity of a child was questioned, his mother and the child would be stigmatized. I understand why Champlain was so interested in this, it is completely different from the practices he was used to. -Katelyn Lease | I agree that the difference between Native American and European men when it comes to children is amazing. Champlain writes about how when a woman has children, her preceeding husbands come visit and claim the child is his. In Europe, women wouldn't have had so many ex-husbands, if they even had one ex. If the paternity of a child was questioned, his mother and the child would be stigmatized. I understand why Champlain was so interested in this, it is completely different from the practices he was used to. -Katelyn Lease | ||
| − | This reading of Samuel de Champlain was a stark contrast to the readings of other European settlers/observers that I read in the Woloch reading. Champlain believes women to be servants to the men, and he says "they follow their husbands from place to place in the fields, where they serve as mules for carrying the baggage." (Page 25) He also noticed that the men "do nothing" except for hunting and other simple tasks, which are in no comparison as difficult as the women's tasks. I wonder what made the observations/accounts so different between Champlain and say, Roger Williams. Was it just a personal bias/values that made the articles so different? Or was another factor in play also? | + | This reading of Samuel de Champlain was a stark contrast to the readings of other European settlers/observers that I read in the Woloch reading. Champlain believes women to be servants to the men, and he says "they follow their husbands from place to place in the fields, where they serve as mules for carrying the baggage." (Page 25) He also noticed that the men "do nothing" except for hunting and other simple tasks, which are in no comparison as difficult as the women's tasks. I wonder what made the observations/accounts so different between Champlain and say, Roger Williams. Was it just a personal bias/values that made the articles so different? Or was another factor in play also? --- Alex Mankarios |
Did anyone get the impression that maybe there was a hint of jealousy among the Europeans when it came to the courtship of Native Americans? Perhaps they resented being so sexual restricted within their own communities, and felt that the only proper way to address those feelings were to pass negative judgments upon a culture they could not understand. After all, doesn't our culture resemble the pre-colonial Native Americans when it comes to modern day dating and marriage? Now days, it practically unheard of to marry a person you have not already lived with for a while. When a couple splits, the children usually go with the mother, or whoever is the more secure "bread winner." American's today divorce over the slightest irreconcilable differences, and there is little to no stigma on divorcees anymore, they way there had been in the past. Men court women with expensive gifts, and women usually turn to their family and network or "village" of best friends to help them decide if they should marry a man. It is really not much different from how the Native American's approached marriage several hundred years ago. So, I suppose that after all the Europeans effort to assimilate Native Americans into their way of life, modern day Americans have assimilated to the Native American way of life.--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 07:22, 3 September 2009 (MDT) | Did anyone get the impression that maybe there was a hint of jealousy among the Europeans when it came to the courtship of Native Americans? Perhaps they resented being so sexual restricted within their own communities, and felt that the only proper way to address those feelings were to pass negative judgments upon a culture they could not understand. After all, doesn't our culture resemble the pre-colonial Native Americans when it comes to modern day dating and marriage? Now days, it practically unheard of to marry a person you have not already lived with for a while. When a couple splits, the children usually go with the mother, or whoever is the more secure "bread winner." American's today divorce over the slightest irreconcilable differences, and there is little to no stigma on divorcees anymore, they way there had been in the past. Men court women with expensive gifts, and women usually turn to their family and network or "village" of best friends to help them decide if they should marry a man. It is really not much different from how the Native American's approached marriage several hundred years ago. So, I suppose that after all the Europeans effort to assimilate Native Americans into their way of life, modern day Americans have assimilated to the Native American way of life.--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 07:22, 3 September 2009 (MDT) | ||
