Difference between revisions of "328 2010--Week 2 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Alice Fahs, “The Feminized Civil War: Gender, Northern Popular Literature, and the Memory of War, 1861-1900”) |
|||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
I agree with both Anna and MDvorak here. I found it interesting how the reading referred to the war as a "Man's War". Fahs focused a lot of attention on the emotional side of women during the war, but the connection of their emotions to the men in their lives and the country, I think, is most important. I believe it showed that the suffering aspect a of war produced a personal connection to the war for women, especially when they were not directly involved (on the battlefield, for instance). Also, I found the shift away from women after the war in publications was extremely important in understanding how people at this time, particularly men, viewed the war. -abratchi | I agree with both Anna and MDvorak here. I found it interesting how the reading referred to the war as a "Man's War". Fahs focused a lot of attention on the emotional side of women during the war, but the connection of their emotions to the men in their lives and the country, I think, is most important. I believe it showed that the suffering aspect a of war produced a personal connection to the war for women, especially when they were not directly involved (on the battlefield, for instance). Also, I found the shift away from women after the war in publications was extremely important in understanding how people at this time, particularly men, viewed the war. -abratchi | ||
| + | I also agree with the above three statements. I find it interesting that women were seen as the emotional backbone of the nation which would seem to imply that they were seen as an important aspect of the war-if the sons were not properly "sent off" or supported by the mother who they looked to for emotional strength then it would be hard to determine how they would have been able to survive the horrors of war even remotely emotionally intact. However, it seems as if this important contribution was greatly overshadowed by the carnage of war. It makes everyday strength and courage appear as a lesser virtue than uncommon courage in the face of sudden and inescapable danger. WHere did these men learn that strength? From the readings it would be the mother who taught this trait and yet the mother gets virtually no credit. -jmarshal | ||
I also completely agree with Erin Sanderson's statement in which she discusses how after men returned from the war, the literature market increasingly became dominated by men's war stories. The interests of women were again pushed away for those of men. --Anna Holman | I also completely agree with Erin Sanderson's statement in which she discusses how after men returned from the war, the literature market increasingly became dominated by men's war stories. The interests of women were again pushed away for those of men. --Anna Holman | ||
| Line 72: | Line 73: | ||
'''I thought it was interesting when the essay talked about how even though black men had finally gained rights to vote they still were not completely supportive of women having the right to vote. Maybe it is a stupid assumption but I would think that since they knew how it felt to have less rights than others they would show more sympathy towards women.''' They didn't think it was as absurd as white men did but why wouldn't they fight for them harder, especially if that meant all African American people would finally have their rights and freedoms? Amy Van Ness | '''I thought it was interesting when the essay talked about how even though black men had finally gained rights to vote they still were not completely supportive of women having the right to vote. Maybe it is a stupid assumption but I would think that since they knew how it felt to have less rights than others they would show more sympathy towards women.''' They didn't think it was as absurd as white men did but why wouldn't they fight for them harder, especially if that meant all African American people would finally have their rights and freedoms? Amy Van Ness | ||
| + | I think, perhaps, one reason that black men did not totally support a woman's right to vote is that they were as submerged in the time period as their white contemporaries. They saw how the white men saw "masculinity" and the gender roles that men and women had in the white society. Black men were most importantl men and they were recognized (finally and rightfully so) as men and not property which gave them the rights of men (obviously some white areas objected more to this in action and in law than others) and with that came the dominance and head of household ideaology that white men held onto. Also since this freedom was new, and the black men had been given the right to vote, it is possible that they feared that if they took to protesting for the right for women to vote all the progress they had just experienced may be taken away more than what it was in some places. -jmarshal | ||
I was surprised to see African American women's roles in voting before women's suffrage. Before college, we are taught that women were not able to vote, therefore they did not. However, Brown clearly contradicts this in her article. African American women in Richmond were publicly participating in politics, even voting at the community/local level, while others took it upon themselves to view their husband's right to vote as a collective, rather than individual, vote. These women were going to vote, whether or not they were legally able to do so. And yet, historians tend to look at this part of history as black and white; African American women were either able to physically vote in the polling booths, or they were not. Clearly, we need to look at the entire issue differently to understand the importance of African American women in 19th century politics. -- CBrau | I was surprised to see African American women's roles in voting before women's suffrage. Before college, we are taught that women were not able to vote, therefore they did not. However, Brown clearly contradicts this in her article. African American women in Richmond were publicly participating in politics, even voting at the community/local level, while others took it upon themselves to view their husband's right to vote as a collective, rather than individual, vote. These women were going to vote, whether or not they were legally able to do so. And yet, historians tend to look at this part of history as black and white; African American women were either able to physically vote in the polling booths, or they were not. Clearly, we need to look at the entire issue differently to understand the importance of African American women in 19th century politics. -- CBrau | ||
