Difference between revisions of "328--Week 8 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Kennedy's "'But We Would Never Talk about it': The Structures of Lesbian Discretion in South Dakota, 1928-1933") |
(→Kennedy's "'But We Would Never Talk about it': The Structures of Lesbian Discretion in South Dakota, 1928-1933") |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
The second part that I thought was the most interesting was her encounter with Amelia Earhart. It shows how cautious girls were towards other girls. I feel that these women were so unsure about themselves that they really had to question others more. Especially since this was one of her earlier encounters, it shows that in the beginning Julia was very timid about her sexuality. Since she was shy about her self, she wasn't going to go out and put the moves on every girl, especially not Earhart. But as she gets older her "sense" gets stronger, through all the trips she took with her father. She could tell which woman was the "odd" one of the bunch, I also feel that over the years other women started to feel a little more comfortable with being gay and showing it a little more. Which made it easier for women like Julia to point out the "odd" girl. My only question was were there women like today who went through these phases of lesbians and then just turned straight and marry? Or was it because society was starting to see lesbians for what they were and women felt pressured to become straight live the way society wants them to? -- Amanda Taub | The second part that I thought was the most interesting was her encounter with Amelia Earhart. It shows how cautious girls were towards other girls. I feel that these women were so unsure about themselves that they really had to question others more. Especially since this was one of her earlier encounters, it shows that in the beginning Julia was very timid about her sexuality. Since she was shy about her self, she wasn't going to go out and put the moves on every girl, especially not Earhart. But as she gets older her "sense" gets stronger, through all the trips she took with her father. She could tell which woman was the "odd" one of the bunch, I also feel that over the years other women started to feel a little more comfortable with being gay and showing it a little more. Which made it easier for women like Julia to point out the "odd" girl. My only question was were there women like today who went through these phases of lesbians and then just turned straight and marry? Or was it because society was starting to see lesbians for what they were and women felt pressured to become straight live the way society wants them to? -- Amanda Taub | ||
| + | |||
| + | In response to Amanda's comment about Julia's encounter with Amelia Earhart, I don't think Julia was show about entering into a sexual relationship because she was gay, but rather shy because she was young and inexperienced and in awe of the presence of a famous role model. I am sure I would be quite shy myself in the presence of Brad Pitt. ~Juliann Boyles | ||
Kennedy uses the case of Julia to discuss the discretion of lesbianism in the early 1900’s. There were, however, many other aspects to Julia’s identity than just her sexuality. This is pointed on page 415, when Kennedy states “she came into her womanhood as a lesbian, as a college student, as the daughter of a father who was prominent citizen and business owner, and as the daughter of a mother who was strongly independent yet part of an established small-town protestant family.” Given this, the discretion of Julia’s sexuality may have been because it would have been a trait that overshadowed the others; it may have become her only identifying factor in the public eye as opposed to just one of many. Could there have been any other traits during this time that people felt the need to cover-up, other than sexuality? And how true is this still today? --Jessica Kilday | Kennedy uses the case of Julia to discuss the discretion of lesbianism in the early 1900’s. There were, however, many other aspects to Julia’s identity than just her sexuality. This is pointed on page 415, when Kennedy states “she came into her womanhood as a lesbian, as a college student, as the daughter of a father who was prominent citizen and business owner, and as the daughter of a mother who was strongly independent yet part of an established small-town protestant family.” Given this, the discretion of Julia’s sexuality may have been because it would have been a trait that overshadowed the others; it may have become her only identifying factor in the public eye as opposed to just one of many. Could there have been any other traits during this time that people felt the need to cover-up, other than sexuality? And how true is this still today? --Jessica Kilday | ||
