Difference between revisions of "328 2010--Week 2 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(Removing all content from page) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | == Comments/questions comparing the articles == | ||
| + | While reading this chapter, I see '''parallels between this article (by Elsa Barkley Brown), and the previous article we read, by Alice Fahs'''. The women of the Civil War were '''very family oriented''' and patriotic, and these were one in the same. When the men went off to fight, the families relied on one another to get through the tough times they were facing. It seems to be the same with the Black community. These Black communities were "family oriented" ('''''P. 156'''''), and were said to "provide a variety of support - physical, economic, emotional, and psychological." (P. 156) '''The family unit was a way to get through the tough times of the post Civil War, especially for African Americans.''' I agree with what Thomas Bayne said about the right to vote, and it being "inherently linked to freedom." (P. 161) '''I don't understand how the white delegate E.L. Gibson could refute the idea of suffrage being related to freedom.''' For African Americans at the time, the right to vote was a way for them to separate themselves from the bonds of slavery they once endured. Suffrage meant freedom; it meant that the Black community finally had a voice, which to them, was probably equal to freedom. --- Alex Mankarios | ||
| + | == Alice Fahs, “The Feminized Civil War: Gender, Northern Popular Literature, and the Memory of War, 1861-1900” == | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Based on a paper I wrote on the United States Sanitary Commission last semester, this was a very interesting essay to read. Fahs mentions that the war still follows the "masculanized culture" that was in place at the time and through my research I discovered the same things. '''Much of the standard literature was centered around the fighting and the man's roles on the battlefield, yet women's roles on and off the battlefield cannot be forgotten. It is interesting how literature giving credit to women must be labeled as "feminist" literature, when in reality, they should be given the same treatment as men'''. -- Afrisk | ||
| + | |||
| + | I also found it very interesting how she discusses the different type of surrering that women endured. Men endured the horrors of war and their suffering was very physical and visual. Women, however, also suffered but they experienced strictly emotional suffering. They were cut deeply by these emotional wounds of not knowing weather their loved-ones were safe on the battlefield and some argued that these wounds cut deeper than those of men. Where men simply died on the battlefield, women had to endure the death of a loved one, while still remaining strong, and now being forced to provide for themselves. -- Afrisk | ||
| + | |||
| + | It's interesting how Civil War literature shifted from a focus on the tribulations of northern women to those of southern women. And '''despite a strong emphasis on realistic literature, southern women and antebellum plantation life was highly romanticized. This probably came in part from a desire to both remember a time when the nation was united (which can also be seen in the popularity of stories centered around the Revolution)and to try to create a new identity centered around northern and southern reconciliation and "white" ideals.''' - Alice W | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''I can't help but think about "Gone With the Wind" whenever they mentioned southern woman's literature after the war (which they eventually did mention in the reading)''' | ||
| + | I know that the depiction found within that novel is unrealistic, but the romanticizing of the civil war and the southern woman's role in it IS interesting to read and find relations to even in today's non-antebellum southern world..... -Ssellers | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''I think it is important to keep in mind that literature is largely written for an audience, and yet, this literature is what shapes the public memory of an event'''. The dominant forms of fiction at the outset of the war were women’s domestic novels. This impacts what type of literature was written during the war. It should come as no surprise that during the war, “the literary marketplace supported an outpouring of popular literature portraying women’s domestic participation in the war.” This domestic participation includes working, sacrifice, and loss, some even argue that the women sacrificed more than the men who were fighting. '''However, there was a shift in literature with the rise of Civil War veterans organizations. This led to a shift in who were the bearers of the war’s memory from women to veterans.''' It is amazing how the Civil War has become, “a white male conflict, rather than a cataclysmic event that rent and remade the fabric of life for all Americans.” – Erin Sanderson | ||
| + | |||
| + | Throughout the reading on the Feminized Civil War, I kept asking myself where the women had gone; it was as if their memory of the Civil War had disappeared entirely. I was pleased when I came across Mary Livermore who, in 1887, spoke out against where the literature about the civil war was going. She argued that the story of Northern women was missing. Then, in 1889 Edward Bellamy, stated that, “many pictures of battles have been painted, but no true one yet, for the pictures contain only men. The women are unaccountably left out.” Finally, there was Elizabeth Stuart Phelps who actually “undermined stereotypes of veterans” and “challenged the veteran dominated culture of remembrance itself.” I was just happy to see that women were not entirely forgotten in the decades following the Civil War. '''I am curious as to how the majority of women felt when their impacts on the war became largely overlooked, especially after all of the pain and loss that they had experienced.''' –Erin Sanderson | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''It seems as time moved on after the Civil War it increasingly became to be defined as a "Man's War", specifically a "White Man's War".''' All of the domestic issues women faced, such as caring for children, the home, and earning a living, faded with the passage of time. It appears that a romanticized portrait of the war was painted in which much of the heart-ache and problems women faced on an everyday basis were pushed to the wayside in favor of remembering the great battles and generals of the day. This is yet another example of how women were forgotten in the shadow of their men. --Anna Holman | ||
| + | |||
| + | I along with the many agree that the Civil War was a white man's war fought for white man issues but I feel like the Civil War is taught in grade school as the War for emancipation. I think it's important not to forget the reasons in which our country was pushed into a civil war, with slavery being just one of the many issues. I also think one of the main reasons there was not much literature written about women was because they were not a part of politics and the economy of the time. -David Fitch | ||
| + | |||
| + | I agree with Anna Holman's approach that the Civil War had largely (and unfortunately) came to be defined as a "Man's War." I also found it interesting that they begin to recognize the importance of the woman in everyday life, thought the focus was only on the mother initially. '''On page 133, Fahs points out that, "women especially mothers, personalized the nation, that they link the private and public realms."''' Not only does Fahs point out that women were in a sense the backbone of the nation, but they were also able to tie together the separate spheres. --MDvorak | ||
| + | |||
| + | 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 was surprised to find out that the Civil War was so feminized during the war and directly following it. The war has definitely become masculine in the public memory, and it makes me want to take a look at how the public images of other wars have changed. '''Why was there a focus on the Northern women’s war in Civil War literature in the first place? Was it because they were the only ones around that had the opportunity to read it? Many Northern men would have been fighting, and in the South, both men and women would have had larger concerns than publishing and reading literature. How come when the war once again entered popular memory in the 1880s, it became focused on the masculine aspects of the war? The article mentions a shift away from Victorian feminine literature towards realist literature. Was there some sort of demographic change in readership?''' -- Taylor Brann | ||
| + | |||
| + | It seems as though the media played a larger role during and after the civil war. From the material read, it seemed to have expressed sadness, pride, and Patriotism of people’s experiences of the War. Women's writing was more prominent because the men were away in war. But when the men came home their stories needed to be told. I think this symbolizes men returning to the public sphere. I think the type of stories told says something about men and women's roles. In these stories about women you see the emotional side and in men's stories they were more about glory and valor. The change from fiction to more non-fiction stories is interesting. Could this have been because people had just dealt with real emotions, those including pain and sorrow, were ready for something real? Was it something they could better relate to? --Mhimes | ||
| + | |||
| + | I too was initially a little surprised to find that stories about women dominated much of the media at the time, but it really makes sense considering women were the ones remaining home and actually buying and reading the publications of the day. These women understandably wanted stories that they could relate to and that emphasized the importance of their own contributions to the war effort. '''''It also may have been a not so subtle nudge on behalf of the powers-that-be to encourage women, for purely practical reasons, to continue to support the men at war. After all, soldiers who had the support of their families, even if the women believed in the war effort for romanticized reasons, were less likely to desert or to not enlist at all. After the war was over, the pressing need to maintain that support base fell off, and so did the feminized literature.''''' -Mary Ann | ||
| + | |||
| + | I think Mary Ann makes a great point here. I think the emphasis on women's literature during the war was in part because men at the time were involved directly in the war. I think that in order to retain a captive audience, publications had to market to their demographic, primarily women with men away in war. I think the romanticized stories gave women something to relate on, especially those with husbands or sons away in war. I believe it would have instilled a sense of comforting, almost, to know that I was not the only woman at the time facing the same emotions. -abratchi | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''I really liked the Tony Horwitz quote that Fahs included (and not just because he might be one of my favorite authors). She said that in the late nineteenth century Americans "reclaimed a past of their own creation." It's so important for us to remember that collective memory is constantly changing.''' Perceptions of the Civil War changed with the changing attitudes about war and women of the time. It makes some sense that, postwar, women's stories might be pushed to the side in favor of more masculine stories about the front. '''Returning veterans were a very visible part of post-war life; women's suffering, while obviously still with them, was no longer front and center.''' So, perceptions shifted, and they continued to change with the country, eventually colliding with the force-to-be-reckoned-with that was Gone with the Wind. I think it's safe to say that many Americans hold certain ideas about the Civil War based on that novel alone, as well as ideas from all of the other Civil War books and movies produced over the past few decades. Not all of these memories are accurate, maybe most are not, but they represent something very real to the society that holds them as well as an interesting challenge to historians fighting to keep a semblance of reality, as experienced by women and men, both Northern and Southern, in the conversation. -Mary Ann | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | I really enjoyed finally reading something about how women's work and contributions were acknowledged and became part of a major event in US history. The essay said frequently that women's role in the war effort was vital and influential. The literature at the time included feminized literature that "involved a distinctive, sentimentalized patriotism." A good bit of the literature also centered on the woman's responsibility to "sacrifice their men for their country." The stories and articles seemed to focus on either persuading women to act patriotic to support their country or describe the emotions, struggles, and experiences of women or the "woman's war." It was sad to see that once the men came back from war the focus shifted more towards the masculinized war. Maybe it was to showcase the men for their bravery and patriotism for their country. -Amy Van Ness | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Before reading this, I had never thought about how much late 19th century Civil War literature focuses on Southern women, and not Northern women. Of course, this is probably mainly due to the fact that I had no idea just how important of a role Northern Women had played during the War.''' I can understand why their role was overshadowed after the war. After all, the war came to be redefined by the war stories of men and honoring great officers and soldiers. As for literature on Southern Women, I think it was appealing because it was greatly idealized, versus the more realistic literature from the North. However, I think that it is amazing that Historians have also been fooled in to this misconception in their analysis of the both the Civil War and the literature of the time. ''' We are not living in the 19th century, so we should have an objective point of view, right?''' -- CBrau | ||
| + | |||
| + | I agree with CBrau I myself was very suprised at the lack of literature we typically see for Northern women throughout the Civil War. '''I have only paid attention to literature from Southern women, due to the amount of fighting in the South and how their lives were completely destroyed, but women's lives in the North were strongly affected as well. The literature and quotes from Northern mothers hit home to me as I have watched my mom proudly tell family members and friends that her son will serve the United States.''' As stated by New York Times, a mother after shopping with her son for his military equipment said, " This, my son, is all that I can do. I have given you up to serve your country, and may God go with you! It is all a mother can do." I know this was stated by a Northern woman but I wondered if mothers felt this way all over the country and this unified them in their efforts to support not only the "woman's" war but the Civil War as well? ie. through sending supplies, flying flags in faces of opposing generals, etc. -Megan W. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''I find it super interesting how quickly the important contributions of women were forgotten.''' During the actual war it was fine for the media to have such a high percentage of feminized literature because the contributions that women were making were right there in front of them and not easily ignored. This might have also been because women probably dominated the audience, since they were the ones at home and able to get a magazine or paper. It seems that as the years passed after the end of the war, the emotions of the war were forgotten and men wanted to read about their battles and their leaders as opposed to the private and emotional battles that women fought, even if they were just as difficult and important. Fahs talks about how idealized southern white women's literature was more popular, and this was probably because people did not want to face the reality of what really happened in the war. -- Angie | ||
| + | |||
| + | I found this article very interesting, seeing as how I wasn't aware of how literature about the Civil War evolved. As someone else mentioned, it does make sense that during the war much of the literature produced was on and aimed at women, a main reason probably due to the fact that men were just not a viable market - they were off fighting. After the war, women, as often happens, are pushed to the back burner to focus on the "real" wartime victims - those in battle. This essay reemphasizes the idea that wartime memories change with the time period. Each study into a past war is dictated by what that generation is going through. - Christine L | ||
| + | |||
| + | The changing narratives following the war was not something that I was aware of. The literature during and just following the war focused a great deal on women's issues, yet changed in the 1880's and 1890's to a more masculinized story. '''I wonder why the Southern women's narrative has remained as the most compelling story of the Civil War to this day'''.-efritz | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''The author posits that women's suffering was equal to or greater than that of men fighting in the war. Although women suffered great emotional trauma with the loss of their spouses or children, I don't think that you can compare this emotional suffering to what the men were exposed to in battle. They all suffered in their individual way, but the emotional and physical toll the men faced daily cannot be compared to that of women's suffering back home.'''-efritz | ||
| + | |||
| + | While reading I found it interesting that women’s literature disappeared and “a newly masculinized literary marketplace” took place AFTER the Civil War. The literature in stories, essays, novels, poems, songs, newspapers, and magazines switched from primarily focused on the personalities, suffering, and trials of women to focus on the “real” or “actual” experience of the people during the War; that which men had during the battles, who the people where, (specifically generals), and the deaths /problems during the war. In addition to this we must remember who the media of the period are appealing to; the women during the Civil War were the only ones left at home to receive and read these magazines, so they would appeal to them first and foremost and then to the men once they came back from war. When the men came back from war, they came back into their dominating role of society. In response to this fact, the media began to print articles about what they thought would be appealing to the men that came home, “The Century magazine, begun in 1881, published its famous battles and Leaders of the Civil War series from November 1884 until November 1887.” These were stories of their battles and the trials they, the men, had faced. I don’t think that when the men came home they wanted to hear about how much the women in their lives had suffered, but what they had suffered to bring freedom to their country and the women in it; the feel heroic and that they had survived. -- (Morgan) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I also found the argument between the portrait of women encouraging the men to enlist and the effect of suffering because of sacrificing their men. Samuel Osgood explains his figure of women as “the good mother seated at the window from which floats the household flag, and watching intently the passing regiment and waving her handkerchief to some friend of kinsman…the nation seems to live in the person of this queen.” These women, especially mothers, appropriate roles are to sacrifice their sons and husbands for the good of the nation and, in this depiction, revel in their position in the military. “The patriotic mother and her daughter became a way of imagining personal obligation to the state.” In contrast, the picture of women suffering for their men is a truer reality than that of being happy during the war. Louise Chandler Moulton’s 1863 “One of Many” wrote “Is it not true that every bullet shoots double, and the shot which flies farthest makes the sorest wound?” In this sense a women is “wounded for far longer and far worse that the pain that the solider felt as he died and left her. I feel that '''Fanny Fern summed it up best in writing that she “who is giving her husband to her country, has given everything.”''' ---Morgan | ||
| + | |||
| + | This article made me think a little more about the relationship between literature and history. '''I have never read "The Red Badge of Courage", but it my high school it was not taught in history classes, only english classes. If it is considered "real literature of the Civil War" as Hemingway put it, is it because it beautifully portrayed the war or the nation's notions of what the war meant. Or maybe it just made for a better story.''' Though I do have a strong interest in women's history, I can't help but find a battlefield more appealing than a northern home for a piece of fiction. -John Rowley | ||
| + | |||
| + | One of the comments that struck me in the article was John Westbrook arguing that during World War II "the figure of the pinup girl personified 'what men were fighting for.'" This is surprising to me because a male is giving a woman masculine characteristics, somewhat of a rarity at this time. During the late 19th century, women are not supposed to possess masculine characteristics in any way, and typically outside of encouraging males to enlist or be patriotic, they are not typically involved outside of the domestic sphere. Secondly this is surprising because a male is giving these characteristics to a female.--MDvorak | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''"The idea of the war as a whites-only brotherhood masculinized the memory of the war in popular literature." Growing up, I always learned about the Civil War in such a context. So as I read, I was taken aback and impressed at how much attention was intially paid to the suffering of women during the war.''' I know it quickly wanned and was forgotten, but the fact that some authors conceded that the women at home may have suffered more than the soldiers dying on the battlefields was a real surprise to my 21st century mind.-- Kokeefe | ||
| + | |||
| + | In response to efritz's comment (about Southern women's experience being the dominant or iconic image of the Civil War), I have a completely different experience than efritz apparently has. When I think of the Civil War, I think first of the actual fighting--the names of battles that are drilled in previous schooling, the battlefields I've visited with no mention of women anywhere. '''I do not think as much of Gone With the Wind, which is the only Southern women's story I can recall, and which is itself a fiction, anyways. I understood Fahs as saying that this kind of presentation of viewpoints of the War is still the dominant one, saying that "this may well be a development sustained by a mode of thought set in motion over a century ago" (149). Her point is that it's worth looking at a women's or "feminized" lens on the war, and to set aside study for both Southern women and Northern women'''. --Sarah Smethurst | ||
| + | |||
| + | I think it was interesting how this chapter compared men and women's struggles and strifes during the Civil War. The fact that women believed their suffering to be equal to, or surpassing that of men's suffering is something I do not quite agree with. I think that women's suffering was more emotional, while men's suffering was physical. I understand the thought process, but I believe that the physical suffering of men definitely surpasses that of women. The men had to deal with the women pressuring them to fight in the first place, and then the actual fighting was just the icing on the cake for the men. I do respect the suffering wome nendured though. I can't imagine how these women went on, but I think it was interesting how the book said that women who had to deal with loss should "seek out benevolent work." (P. 143). --- Alex Mankarios | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''I found the comments posted here on the wiki far more interesting than the reading itself and it demonstrates to me some of the issues brought up by the entire concept of “women’s history” as we discussed last week.''' I remember reading a feminist historian from my 299 class that objected to what seems to be (in the case of Fahs as well as Brown, certainly not to the same extent) that '''feminist historians tend to more or less insert women into the historical narrative—basically to say “we were there too” rather than analyze the language that the historical discourse is carried out in.''' Even in a language that does not use feminine and masculine articles, English is replete with words/phrases that carry connotations of femininity and masculinity, usually denoted by passivity/action. | ||
| + | |||
| + | My own understanding of the Civil War has been that women’s roles both on and off the battlefield are far from forgotten. '''As much as I would like to try and stay neutral, I will take a very strong stance against Fah’s assertion (and some classmates as well) that the male experience during the war was somehow trivial—that “men simply died on the battlefield.” As a veteran and having seen it, there is absolutely nothing simple or easy about dying or watching death happen. I am not trivializing the pain and suffering women felt not only during the Civil War but throughout all conflicts, but to assert that men or women had it easier than the other is a statement that cannot be justified. Loss is internalized by individuals and to create such a dichotomy is only a perpetuation of a stereotype that can only hurt the cause of historians seeking objectivity.''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | In response to the evolution of an emphasis on the “reality” of the war in literature is, again, a trivialization of the experience of war as a whole—'''is the depiction of the battlefield more romantic or less realistic than the depiction of women at home, quietly suffering, enduring, remaining strong in the face of loss, etc. as Fahs illustrates?''' And '''was the Civil War not a “man’s war?” Is war not mostly a male venture in its actual execution?''' And '''Fahs’ point that women personalize the nation…linking private and public realms is nothing really new, at least I thi'''nk. Nations throughout history, America included, have usually been personified as the motherland, in feminine terms—the country “needs” you to serve in the military, “needs protection,” etc—all of which seems to indicate, for better or worse, a feminine quality about the nation that requires male defense. My thoughts are somewhat scattered, but returning to the rise in “realist” literature concerning the Civil War in the late nineteenth century and the depiction of the war as a “man’s war” seems to coincide with the rise of aggressive imperialist tendencies in Americans that would culminate in the Spanish American War and forays into overseas colonies. '''Perhaps what we are seeing here are astute publishers jumping on that bandwagon of a nation just coming into its own as an international power? How better to celebrate America’s entry into the world stage than to relive/rewrite stories of bravery and heroism?''' -schang | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | == Elsa Barkley Brown, “To Catch the Vision of Freedom: Reconstructing Southern Black Women’s Political History, 1865-1880” == | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''I beleive this is the most important question asked in this essay:''' After the war, should the enfranchisement of black women, or of all women take place? This question is central to many of the political struggles in the late 19th century. Black women almost seperated themselves into a community to bond, which made overall suffrage more difficult. | ||
| + | -Afrisk | ||
| + | |||
| + | Going along with the previous point I'm not sure if the black female community had worked less towards creating a homogenous community that they would have had an easier time gaining suffrage. It seemed however that it was a necessity for these womens to create these communities in order to survive the difficulties of post slavery life in the Reconstruction Era.---Emma | ||
| + | |||
| + | Going with the question of the enfranchisement of women... I really was encouraged by the fact that although the book explicitly states that Black men also felt that women were inferior to men in their social positions it was later stated that "serious discussion" regarding the suffrage of women was reliant upon the presence of black delegates in support of the woman's suffrage movement. -SSellers | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''I thought chapter 10 brought up a good question, which was how the transition from slavery to freedom was expected to function'''. If I remember correctly the majority of white Americans still viewed African Americans as inferior and it was mainly a small percentage of Northern Radicals that were trying to achieve equality for them in their meaning of freedom. As history shows it would still take a long time for freedom to mean anything for freed slaves. So my question is after the Civil War ended what kind of life could African Americans find without having any rights? ---David Fitch | ||
| + | |||
| + | I like David Fitch's point, but also think that it was because African Americans had no real rights that the battle for suffrage was so important.--Anna Holman | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''African American women saw the vote as a collective possession between men and women based on the belief within the African American community of collective responsibility'''. Republican black males supported this belief. Maybe I’m being too cynical, but the impression I got was that it wasn’t necessarily because they believed in any kind of “autonomy as one” thing but because the women could help keep black men from voting as Democrats, which helped keep the Republicans in power. -- Taylor Brann | ||
| + | |||
| + | -Taylor, would the men have voted Democratic if their wives hadn't insisted on Republican? I'm not sure, but I feel like many would have continued to vote Republican because of the party's strong ties to Lincoln. Perhaps the issue would have been whether they voted at all if their wives had not forced them to get to the polls. -Mary Ann | ||
| + | |||
| + | The idea of collective responsibility is very interesting. That it takes a whole family sometimes including fictive kin to survive. The idea that when one makes a decision it effects the whole family especially including political decisions. '''Did the importance of community and family stem from the fact that they had been divided in slavery?''' --Mhimes | ||
| + | |||
| + | Family stemmed from two things, in my opinion. Firstly, a large portion of family unity came from being divided in slavery. Secondly, after slavery, African Americans had no one to turn to, no one to gain sympathy from, and no one to support them in their actions or their decisions. The family was a unique place where African Americans could be united and create stronger, unbreakable bonds.--MDvorak | ||
| + | |||
| + | I found it really striking that African American women worked so hard to ensure that the men in their lives voted, and voted Republican. And that it was a family vote, not a man's vote on behalf of his family says a lot about the system of community many seemed to operate under. In answer to Mhimes, I would say that yes, a lot of the importance of family probably stemmed from generations of families being torn apart. Now that these individuals could house their families under one roof a strong desire to do everything they could to protect that family meant weighing every decision, including of course the political ones, carefully. '''And slaves, out of necessity, had long built families out of unrelated community members so I imagine that the same sense of self-preservation felt for blood relatives carried over for the community as a whole.''' The women did not want to see hard won freedom taken away by a lack of awareness and participation. And, as the author points out, some of the women's involvement was even to ensure the physical safety of the voting men. -Mary Ann | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''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 | ||
| + | |||
| + | In response to CBrau, not only were Black women voting before they were allowed to, white women were also doing that as well. In some nothern cities, women went to the polls and were allowed to vote (while others ended up getting arrested), all before the strict enforcement of not allowing females to vote. - christine l | ||
| + | |||
| + | I strongly agree with Amy's point, black men had suffered right alongside women the harsh reality of being a lower citizen in society and yet once they were allowed to vote they did not think it was the right place for a woman. Only men could be responsible for serious and political matters. Is this a reason why black women formed such close knit bonds with others? Were women more capable of supporting one another even if it only involved giving someone a roof over their head? I would have thought black men would of understood women's struggles but that appeared to be a difficult concept once men were able to make a mark. -Megan W. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I agree with Megan W.'s point, but also find it interesting that some black women thought that their husband's vote was their vote as well. This puts an interesting spin on a typically male dominated issue. --Anna Holman | ||
| + | |||
| + | I also think its really interesting that black women worked hard for their right to vote right after the war ended and also worked behind the scenes. Brown talks about how black women created their own organized groups such as the Rising Daughters of Liberty that played important roles in the political campaigns at the time. They also sent women from their communities to speak on their behalf at political meetings. These women were also willing to literally fight for their rights. Brown says that they took up weapons during political meetings so that their preferred delegates would not be intimidated. I think all of this shows that black women were among the first suffragettes and should be recognized as such. -- Angie | ||
| + | |||
| + | I found the idea of collective responsibility interesting, also. I agree with the point raised by Amy about black men and their role in supporting or not supporting black women's rights to vote. I found it interesting how the article tied in black women's impact on their husbands, especially in regards to voting Republican or Democrat. Would this had been the case if men had originally fully supported black women's right to vote, or was it because of their resistance that women tried to establish a sense of control over their husbands voting decisions? -abratchi | ||
| + | |||
| + | I liked how such emphasis was placed on the community of newly freed slaves. They were all in the same boat together and recognized this fact. They banded together to achieve their common goals and knew that they would not be able to make it into mainstream American culture if they only functioned in respect to themselves. The community was such an important supporting factor for the freedmen that it should not be ignored by the history texts.--Anna Holman | ||
| + | |||
| + | Like what Anna said, I was also struck by and admired the sense of community. "Their fates were initimately tied together; individual freedom could only be achieved through collective autonomy." However, I think community as family had always been a part of African-American society. As slaves, they had to work together and look out for each other. After emancipation, in the face of an exciting but uncertain future, freed men and women continued the tradition of a strong community. It was beautiful to read how everyone banded together, especially in the case of Ann Lipscomb. -- Kokeefe | ||
| + | |||
| + | Many comments reflect the surprise that some black men were opposed to their female counterparts; however, i do not find it all that shocking. '''After the whole race spending their entire lives (and all the generations before) being so enslaved and emasculated, I can see some wanting to have some sort of dominance in their lives'''. - christine l | ||
| + | |||
| + | I think Christine makes an interesting point about the possibility that black men would embrace the idea of being dominant over something in their lives. It seems that since Slavery was so emasculating and degrading that the opportunity to be able to assert their role as a male figurehead over women would be difficult to resist. I think often we assume that because as a community they endured such hardships together they would band together in the struggle for equality. It reminds me of how in the womens suffrage movement often white and black women could not agree to work together for a common goal.---Emma | ||
| + | |||
| + | While reading I came to fully enjoy the idea of the African-American people, especially the women attending every Republican state convention and making a scene of it all. These people saw themselves as active participants and assumed as equal a right to be present and participate as the delegates themselves, even if they were not actually invited to be or wanted there, “disgusted at the scene, as well as unable to find seat, the conservative white Republican delegates removed to the Capitol Square to convene an outdoor session.” | ||
| + | |||
| + | When the discussion of a women’s right to vote did come up, South Carolina’s officials favored women’s suffrage and were open to the idea. I found it interesting that Thomas Bayne, a Virginian delegate, stated that “In Speaking of the right to women to vote, I thought it an inherent right, and that women were wrongfully deprived of it,” and yet then says “While I do not say that this is my opinion…I would simply say in answer that women’s right is a right to stay home.” Why even say that he approves a women’s right to vote and yet day it is more of a women’s right to stay home? Elsa Brown later says that “by stating domestic roles as “rights” he perhaps implies that his quarrel was not with those who supported women suffrage but those who would deny black women the right to domestic duties.” I see this as reasonable justification, but then why mention women’s suffrage at all? | ||
| + | |||
| + | The last point I thought worth noting of is the fact that African-American women, who could not vote, still took political events and issues to heart as if they themselves had any kind of a say to make their political ideals known. Through the men in their lives these women were able to make their political sentiments know though, by viewing “African-American men’s vote as equally theirs…as a collective possession.” In this sense African-American women took extreme measures to ensure that “their” vote voted “right” for the Republican Party. “Women reportedly initiated sanctions against men who voted Democratic. Some women left their Democratic husbands.” I found the notion of actually leaving and avoiding men who voted Democratic rather harsh. I understand that they wanted to vote Republican, for Lincoln’s party, because that is who gave them their “freedom” but actually chastising men for voting “wrong” is a bit extreme, I feel.--Morgan | ||
| + | |||
| + | I thought that this article was excellent! It mostly astounded me that everything was news to me; I could not remember having studied any of the details Brown presented in the article at any time in my history schooling, kindergarten through college. Brown presented large amounts of information and numerous varying viewpoints, but admirably refused to simplify anything. The most intriguing points for me included the idea of a collective freedom and political power, and the examples of armed women accompanying their husbands to the polls to ensure that their vote was cast correctly and fairly. The selflessness of the black Richmonders in creating their tight-knit community was amazing to read about, and the confusion with which it was received (i.e. Aunt Judy) was sad and shameful. --Sarah Smethurst | ||
| + | |||
| + | I agree with everyone in that the reading in and of itself was interesting, shedding some light on how African American women influenced the political arena post-emancipation/Civil War, but '''''those interesting tidbits seem to be just that''''', and '''I would like to discuss Brown's closing remarks concerning the development of "alternative political definitions" and terminology, which goes back to what I mentioned earlier in regards to the continued use of gendered language in our society.''' -schang | ||
