home |
many pasts |
evidence |
www.history |
blackboard |
reference
talking history | syllabi | students | teachers | puzzle | about us
talking history | syllabi | students | teachers | puzzle | about us
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 19:04:47 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Kelly Schrum
Subject: Opening Statement from Estelle Freedman
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_IM4yKBqF+3Z1wfsBvIR0aA)"
--Boundary_(ID_IM4yKBqF+3Z1wfsBvIR0aA)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Dear Colleagues,
Welcome to the forum on "Feminist Movements in U.S. History."
I look forward to sharing our teaching strategies on this subject.
In this introduction I identify three challenges and I welcome others
as well. First, how do we define feminism - narrowly, to include only
the prime, public moments of Seneca Falls, suffrage, and women's
liberation, or more broadly, to include women's reform movements
ranging from social purity to pacifism, from birth control to the
arts? Second, how do we integrate feminism into the mainstream of
U.S. history teaching? Third, as in some past forums (e.g. religious
history), students bring to the classroom diverse personal and
political perspectives. How do we navigate among them, and use
history to sharpen analytic skills, convey knowledge, and encourage
open-minded discussion of differences?
1. In my teaching, I first acknowledge the historically specific
origins of feminism. (The term originated in late nineteenth century
Europe and came into use in the U.S. during the early twentieth
century through the younger, radical wing of the suffrage movement;
given its association with the National Woman's Party's single-minded
focus on the Equal Rights Amendment, to the exclusion of a broader
social justice agenda, few activists claimed the label until after
the 1960s.) But then I warn my students that I will use feminism as
an umbrella term to cover movements and activists who may not have
called themselves feminists at the time. I also present a working
definition that allows me to approach a broader historical terrain:
Feminism is a belief that women and men are inherently
of equal worth. Because most societies privilege men as
a group, social movements are necessary to achieve equality
between women and men, with the understanding that gender
always intersects with other social hierarchies.
(No Turning Back, p. 7)
Another way to phrase this definition is that any individual or group
effort to empower women - whether personally, economically, or
politically - can contribute to feminist history; the bottom line is
a belief in equal worth and a rejection of any hierarchy that
justifies male authority over women.
2. One major emphasis in my teaching is the way that the
political and economic history of the U.S. has produced feminist
responses; that means that the history of feminism is integral to the
larger story of American life. For one, feminism rests upon the
democratic principles of self-determination that gradually extended
beyond their initial white, male reference point to include the
rights of African Americans and women. Equally important, the shift
from family economies to wage labor gradually drew women into the
work force, where they encountered (along with minorities) second
class status, as well as the double duty of household labor. In
response to the gendered limits of both democratic politics and
economic opportunity, feminism articulated a goal of full political
and economic citizenship for women.
The historical questions I raise about these developments
include: Why do social movements for women's equality arise when they
do? What theories and strategies do feminists develop? Which women do
they address, and which women, and men, do they attract? Who opposes
them? How have race and gender politics influenced each other - when
in cooperation and when in conflict? How have feminist politics
changed over time (for example, when do arguments based on biological
difference or maternal authority predominate, and when do arguments
based on political ideals of equal rights predominate? How do these
intersect?)
With this broad overview, we can talk about where to locate
feminist history in our general courses. For example:
*** What, if any, impact did the American Revolution have on
women's consciousness of rights?
*** What role did literacy and educational institutions play in
creating feminist leaders and movements?
*** How did religious revivals and abolitionism empower women? To
what extent?
*** Why was the women's rights movement so unpopular in the
nineteenth century? What issues succeeded (property rights,
temperance vs. suffrage), and why?
*** What led to the proliferation of women's organizations and the
revival of suffrage by the early twentieth century? Why did women
gain suffrage when they did (or as Carl Degler has asked, why did it
take so long?)
*** What happened to feminism after suffrage? Did it recede,
regroup, transform? What do the splits over the Equal Rights
Amendment reveal about gender ideals in American culture?
*** What critical events - wars, demographic shifts, political
upheavals - help explain new feminist movements in the twentieth
century? How did these movements differ from earlier "waves"?
*** How has "second wave" feminism (since the 1960s) affected U.S.
political, social, and personal life? What issues remain
controversial and what do we now take for granted of the original
feminist agenda?
3. Whatever the subject matter, I find that introducing the term
feminism into a discussion can elicit stereotypes that pervade our
contemporary culture. Sometimes the terms parallel racial and ethnic
stereotypes about the body, sometimes they reflect homophobia, but
usually they rest upon a lack of historical understanding or a fear
of being associated with anything deemed militant or even
non-conformist. For these reasons I sometimes address directly the
fears raised by any critique of gender or sexual roles, possibly
using the example of nineteenth-century caricatures of suffragists,
male or female, portrayed as crossing and disrupting gender lines.
In lectures I try to include male feminists and to draw out
multiracial feminisms. I also emphasize the diversity of feminisms
to undermine single category understandings.
Aside from stereotypes, discussions of feminism can elicit
highly personal responses. I try to be aware when discussing topics
such as sexuality, reproduction, or violence that students bring
their own experiences to class, sometimes painful and sometimes
confused. I've witnessed much positive change occurring in the
process of studying history and demystifying these topics. But I
wonder if high school teachers feel more constrained in addressing
them because of student or parental resistance. Can you discuss, for
example, the birth control movement, lesbian feminism, abortion, or
the anti-rape movement from historical perspectives?
Finally, in addition to inviting you to join this
conversation on teaching, I want to announce a new web site that I've
developed about the history and future of feminism. You can find it
at http://noturningback.stanford.edu or http://ntb.stanford.edu/; go
to the Resource Site and you will find links to historical web pages
and documents, as well as to contemporary women's organizations
around the world, arranged for each section of my book, No Turning
Back: The History of Feminism and the Future of Women. Feel free to
suggest new links through the Contact page.
I look forward to our discussion.
Sincerely,
Estelle Freedman
Professor of History
Stanford University
--
--Boundary_(ID_IM4yKBqF+3Z1wfsBvIR0aA)
Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Opening Statement from Estelle
Freedman
Dear Colleagues,
Welcome to
the forum on "Feminist Movements in U.S. History." I look forward
to sharing our teaching strategies on this subject. In this
introduction I identify three challenges and I welcome others as well.
First, how do we define feminism - narrowly, to include only
the prime, public moments of Seneca Falls, suffrage, and women's
liberation, or more broadly, to include women's reform movements
ranging from social purity to pacifism, from birth control to the
arts? Second, how do we integrate feminism into the mainstream of U.S.
history teaching? Third, as in some past forums (e.g. religious
history), students bring to the classroom diverse personal and
political perspectives. How do we navigate among them, and use history
to sharpen analytic skills, convey knowledge, and encourage
open-minded discussion of differences?
1. In my teaching, I first
acknowledge the historically specific origins of feminism. (The
term originated in late nineteenth century Europe and came into use in
the U.S. during the early twentieth century through the younger,
radical wing of the suffrage movement; given its association with the
National Woman's Party's single-minded focus on the Equal Rights
Amendment, to the exclusion of a broader social justice agenda, few
activists claimed the label until after the 1960s.) But then I
warn my students that I will use feminism as an umbrella term
to cover movements and activists who may not have called themselves
feminists at the time. I also present a working definition that
allows me to approach a broader historical terrain:
Feminism is a belief that
women and men are inherently
of equal worth.
Because most societies privilege men as
a group, social movements
are necessary to achieve equality
between women and men,
with the understanding that gender
always intersects with
other social hierarchies. (No Turning Back, p. 7)
Another way to phrase this definition is that any individual or group
effort to empower women - whether personally, economically, or
politically - can contribute to feminist history; the bottom line is
a belief in equal worth and a rejection of any hierarchy that
justifies male authority over women.
2. One major emphasis in my teaching
is the way that the political and economic history of the U.S. has
produced feminist responses; that means that the history of feminism
is integral to the larger story of American life. For one,
feminism rests upon the democratic principles of self-determination
that gradually extended beyond their initial white, male reference
point to include the rights of African Americans and women. Equally
important, the shift from family economies to wage labor gradually
drew women into the work force, where they encountered (along with
minorities) second class status, as well as the double duty of
household labor. In response to the gendered limits of both
democratic politics and economic opportunity, feminism articulated a
goal of full political and economic citizenship for women.
The historical questions
I raise about these developments include: Why do social movements for
women's equality arise when they do? What theories and strategies do
feminists develop? Which women do they address, and which women, and
men, do they attract? Who opposes them? How have race and gender
politics influenced each other - when in cooperation and when in
conflict? How have feminist politics changed over time (for example,
when do arguments based on biological difference or maternal authority
predominate, and when do arguments based on political ideals of equal
rights predominate? How do these intersect?)
With this broad
overview, we can talk about where to locate feminist history in our
general courses. For example:
*** What, if any, impact did the American Revolution have
on women's consciousness of rights?
*** What role did literacy and educational institutions
play in creating feminist leaders and movements?
*** How did religious revivals and abolitionism empower
women? To what extent?
*** Why was the women's rights movement so unpopular in
the nineteenth century? What issues succeeded (property rights,
temperance vs. suffrage), and why?
*** What led to the proliferation of women's
organizations and the revival of suffrage by the early twentieth
century? Why did women gain suffrage when they did (or as Carl Degler
has asked, why did it take so long?)
*** What happened to feminism after suffrage? Did it
recede, regroup, transform? What do the splits over the Equal Rights
Amendment reveal about gender ideals in American culture?
*** What critical events - wars, demographic shifts,
political upheavals - help explain new feminist movements in the
twentieth century? How did these movements differ from earlier
"waves"?
*** How has "second wave" feminism (since the 1960s)
affected U.S. political, social, and personal life? What issues
remain controversial and what do we now take for granted of the
original feminist agenda?
3. Whatever the subject
matter, I find that introducing the term feminism into a
discussion can elicit stereotypes that pervade our contemporary
culture. Sometimes the terms parallel racial and ethnic stereotypes
about the body, sometimes they reflect homophobia, but usually they
rest upon a lack of historical understanding or a fear of being
associated with anything deemed militant or even non-conformist.
For these reasons I sometimes address directly the fears raised by any
critique of gender or sexual roles, possibly using the example of
nineteenth-century caricatures of suffragists, male or female,
portrayed as crossing and disrupting gender lines. In lectures I
try to include male feminists and to draw out multiracial feminisms.
I also emphasize the diversity of feminisms to undermine single
category understandings.
Aside from
stereotypes, discussions of feminism can elicit highly personal
responses. I try to be aware when discussing topics such as sexuality,
reproduction, or violence that students bring their own experiences to
class, sometimes painful and sometimes confused. I've
witnessed much positive change occurring in the process of studying
history and demystifying these topics. But I wonder if high
school teachers feel more constrained in addressing them because of
student or parental resistance. Can you discuss, for example, the
birth control movement, lesbian feminism, abortion, or the anti-rape
movement from historical perspectives?
Finally, in addition to
inviting you to join this conversation on teaching, I want to announce
a new web site that I've developed about the history and future of
feminism. You can find it at http://noturningback.stanford.edu
or http://ntb.stanford.edu/; go to the Resource Site and you
will find links to historical web pages and documents, as well as to
contemporary women's organizations around the world, arranged for
each section of my book, No Turning Back: The History of Feminism
and the Future of Women. Feel free to suggest new links through
the Contact page.
I look forward to
our discussion.
Sincerely,
Estelle Freedman
Professor of History
Stanford University
--
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Pete Haro
Subject: Re: Opening Statement from Estelle Freedman
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="MS_Mac_OE_3114019298_870377_MIME_Part"
> THIS MESSAGE IS IN MIME FORMAT. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3114019298_870377_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Dear Professor Freedman: I want to thank you for that very enlightening
introduction. I teach history at colleges and universities in the San Diego
area and I try to raise issues surrounding women's rights and feminism as
often as possible.
One question that I often pose to my students is the following; are women
better off today than at the turn of the century? Are they better off than
during the American Revolution? The question always seems to get a lot of
discussion started. Many automatically assume that the answer is yes. Women
are professionals of every kind and are no longer confined to the domestic
sphere. But then newspaper stories come out (See the August 26 issue of the
San Francisco Chronicle) which point out that, although women are now the
majority on college campuses throughout America, they still only earn 73
cents for every dollar a man earns and still tend to be over-represented in
such "traditional" occupations such as teaching, library science, nursing
and secretarial work. They are drastically under-represented in such
professions as engineering, medicine and finance. Women always seem to be
making one step forward and one step back. I would be very interested in
ways that I might move discussion in my classes beyond this question and
into new areas which not only raise historical issues regarding feminism and
women's rights, but also show some kind of connection between these issues
today and in the past. Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing
from all the forum participants.
Sincerely,
Peter D. Haro.
----------
From: Kelly Schrum
To: FEMINISMFORUM@ASHP.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU
Subject: Opening Statement from Estelle Freedman
Date: Sun, Sep 1, 2002, 4:04 PM
Dear Colleagues,
Welcome to the forum on "Feminist Movements in U.S. History." I look
forward to sharing our teaching strategies on this subject. In this
introduction I identify three challenges and I welcome others as well.
First, how do we define feminism - narrowly, to include only the prime,
public moments of Seneca Falls, suffrage, and women's liberation, or more
broadly, to include women's reform movements ranging from social purity to
pacifism, from birth control to the arts? Second, how do we integrate
feminism into the mainstream of U.S. history teaching? Third, as in some
past forums (e.g. religious history), students bring to the classroom
diverse personal and political perspectives. How do we navigate among them,
and use history to sharpen analytic skills, convey knowledge, and encourage
open-minded discussion of differences?
1. In my teaching, I first acknowledge the historically specific origins
of feminism. (The term originated in late nineteenth century Europe and came
into use in the U.S. during the early twentieth century through the younger,
radical wing of the suffrage movement; given its association with the
National Woman's Party's single-minded focus on the Equal Rights Amendment,
to the exclusion of a broader social justice agenda, few activists claimed
the label until after the 1960s.) But then I warn my students that I will
use feminism as an umbrella term to cover movements and activists who may
not have called themselves feminists at the time. I also present a working
definition that allows me to approach a broader historical terrain:
Feminism is a belief that women and men are inherently
of equal worth. Because most societies privilege men as
a group, social movements are necessary to achieve
equality
between women and men, with the understanding that gender
always intersects with other social hierarchies. (No
Turning Back, p. 7)
Another way to phrase this definition is that any individual or group effort
to empower women - whether personally, economically, or politically - can
contribute to feminist history; the bottom line is a belief in equal worth
and a rejection of any hierarchy that justifies male authority over women.
2. One major emphasis in my teaching is the way that the political and
economic history of the U.S. has produced feminist responses; that means
that the history of feminism is integral to the larger story of American
life. For one, feminism rests upon the democratic principles of
self-determination that gradually extended beyond their initial white, male
reference point to include the rights of African Americans and women.
Equally important, the shift from family economies to wage labor gradually
drew women into the work force, where they encountered (along with
minorities) second class status, as well as the double duty of household
labor. In response to the gendered limits of both democratic politics and
economic opportunity, feminism articulated a goal of full political and
economic citizenship for women.
The historical questions I raise about these developments include: Why
do social movements for women's equality arise when they do? What theories
and strategies do feminists develop? Which women do they address, and which
women, and men, do they attract? Who opposes them? How have race and gender
politics influenced each other - when in cooperation and when in conflict?
How have feminist politics changed over time (for example, when do arguments
based on biological difference or maternal authority predominate, and when
do arguments based on political ideals of equal rights predominate? How do
these intersect?)
With this broad overview, we can talk about where to locate feminist
history in our general courses. For example:
*** What, if any, impact did the American Revolution have on women's
consciousness of rights?
*** What role did literacy and educational institutions play in creating
feminist leaders and movements?
*** How did religious revivals and abolitionism empower women? To what
extent?
*** Why was the women's rights movement so unpopular in the nineteenth
century? What issues succeeded (property rights, temperance vs. suffrage),
and why?
*** What led to the proliferation of women's organizations and the revival
of suffrage by the early twentieth century? Why did women gain suffrage when
they did (or as Carl Degler has asked, why did it take so long?)
*** What happened to feminism after suffrage? Did it recede, regroup,
transform? What do the splits over the Equal Rights Amendment reveal about
gender ideals in American culture?
*** What critical events - wars, demographic shifts, political upheavals -
help explain new feminist movements in the twentieth century? How did these
movements differ from earlier "waves"?
*** How has "second wave" feminism (since the 1960s) affected U.S.
political, social, and personal life? What issues remain controversial and
what do we now take for granted of the original feminist agenda?
3. Whatever the subject matter, I find that introducing the term
feminism into a discussion can elicit stereotypes that pervade our
contemporary culture. Sometimes the terms parallel racial and ethnic
stereotypes about the body, sometimes they reflect homophobia, but usually
they rest upon a lack of historical understanding or a fear of being
associated with anything deemed militant or even non-conformist. For these
reasons I sometimes address directly the fears raised by any critique of
gender or sexual roles, possibly using the example of nineteenth-century
caricatures of suffragists, male or female, portrayed as crossing and
disrupting gender lines. In lectures I try to include male feminists and to
draw out multiracial feminisms. I also emphasize the diversity of feminisms
to undermine single category understandings.
Aside from stereotypes, discussions of feminism can elicit highly
personal responses. I try to be aware when discussing topics such as
sexuality, reproduction, or violence that students bring their own
experiences to class, sometimes painful and sometimes confused. I've
witnessed much positive change occurring in the process of studying history
and demystifying these topics. But I wonder if high school teachers feel
more constrained in addressing them because of student or parental
resistance. Can you discuss, for example, the birth control movement,
lesbian feminism, abortion, or the anti-rape movement from historical
perspectives?
Finally, in addition to inviting you to join this conversation on
teaching, I want to announce a new web site that I've developed about the
history and future of feminism. You can find it at
http://noturningback.stanford.edu or http://ntb.stanford.edu/; go to the
Resource Site and you will find links to historical web pages and documents,
as well as to contemporary women's organizations around the world, arranged
for each section of my book, No Turning Back: The History of Feminism and
the Future of Women. Feel free to suggest new links through the Contact
page.
I look forward to our discussion.
Sincerely,
Estelle Freedman
Professor of History
Stanford University
--
--MS_Mac_OE_3114019298_870377_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Re: Opening Statement from Estelle Freedman
Dear Professor Freedman: I want to thank you for that very enlightening int=
roduction. I teach history at colleges and universities in the San Diego are=
a and I try to raise issues surrounding women's rights and feminism as often=
as possible.
One question that I often pose to my students is the following; are women b=
etter off today than at the turn of the century? Are they better off than du=
ring the American Revolution? The question always seems to get a lot of disc=
ussion started. Many automatically assume that the answer is yes. Women are =
professionals of every kind and are no longer confined to the domestic spher=
e. But then newspaper stories come out (See the August 26 issue of the San F=
rancisco Chronicle) which point out that, although women are now the majorit=
y on college campuses throughout America, they still only earn 73 cents for =
every dollar a man earns and still tend to be over-represented in such "=
;traditional" occupations such as teaching, library science, nursing an=
d secretarial work. They are drastically under-represented in such professio=
ns as engineering, medicine and finance. Women always seem to be making one =
step forward and one step back. I would be very interested in ways that I mi=
ght move discussion in my classes beyond this question and into new areas wh=
ich not only raise historical issues regarding feminism and women's rights, =
but also show some kind of connection between these issues today and in the =
past. Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from all the for=
um participants.
Sincerely,
Peter D. Haro.
----------
From: Kelly Schrum <kschrum@GMU.EDU>
To: FEMINISMFORUM@ASHP.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU
Subject: Opening Statement from Estelle Freedman
Date: Sun, Sep 1, 2002, 4:04 PM
Dear Colleagues,
Welcome to the forum on &qu=
ot;Feminist Movements in U.S. History." I look forward to sharing our t=
eaching strategies on this subject. In this introduction I identify th=
ree challenges and I welcome others as well. First, how do we define femi=
nism - narrowly, to include only the prime, public moments of Seneca Fal=
ls, suffrage, and women's liberation, or more broadly, to include women's re=
form movements ranging from social purity to pacifism, from birth control to=
the arts? Second, how do we integrate feminism into the mainstream of U.S. =
history teaching? Third, as in some past forums (e.g. religious history), st=
udents bring to the classroom diverse personal and political perspectives. H=
ow do we navigate among them, and use history to sharpen analytic skills, co=
nvey knowledge, and encourage open-minded discussion of differences?
1. In my teaching, I first acknowledge the historic=
ally specific origins of feminism. (The term originated in late ninet=
eenth century Europe and came into use in the U.S. during the early twentiet=
h century through the younger, radical wing of the suffrage movement; given =
its association with the National Woman's Party's single-minded focus on the=
Equal Rights Amendment, to the exclusion of a broader social justice agenda=
, few activists claimed the label until after the 1960s.) But then I w=
arn my students that I will use feminism as an umbrella term to cover=
movements and activists who may not have called themselves feminists at the=
time. I also present a working definition that allows me to approach =
a broader historical terrain:
&nb=
sp; Feminism is a belief that women and men are=
inherently
&nb=
sp; of equal worth. Because most societies priv=
ilege men as
&nb=
sp; a group, social movements are necessary to =
achieve equality
&nb=
sp; between women and men, with the understandi=
ng that gender
&nb=
sp; always intersects with other social hierarc=
hies. (No Turning Back, p. 7)
Another way to phrase this definition is that any individual or group effor=
t to empower women - whether personally, economically, or politically - can =
contribute to feminist history; the bottom line is a belief in equal worth a=
nd a rejection of any hierarchy that justifies male authority over women.
2. One major emphasis in my teaching is the way that the =
political and economic history of the U.S. has produced feminist responses; =
that means that the history of feminism is integral to the larger story of A=
merican life. For one, feminism rests upon the democratic principles o=
f self-determination that gradually extended beyond their initial white, mal=
e reference point to include the rights of African Americans and women. Equa=
lly important, the shift from family economies to wage labor gradually drew =
women into the work force, where they encountered (along with minorities) se=
cond class status, as well as the double duty of household labor. In r=
esponse to the gendered limits of both democratic politics and economic oppo=
rtunity, feminism articulated a goal of full political and economic citizens=
hip for women.
The historical questions I raise about =
these developments include: Why do social movements for women's equality ari=
se when they do? What theories and strategies do feminists develop? Which wo=
men do they address, and which women, and men, do they attract? Who opposes =
them? How have race and gender politics influenced each other - when in coop=
eration and when in conflict? How have feminist politics changed over time (=
for example, when do arguments based on biological difference or maternal au=
thority predominate, and when do arguments based on political ideals of equa=
l rights predominate? How do these intersect?)
With this broad overview, we can =
talk about where to locate feminist history in our general courses. For exam=
ple:
*** What, if any, impact did the American Revolution have on wo=
men's consciousness of rights?
*** What role did literacy and educational institutions play in=
creating feminist leaders and movements?
*** How did religious revivals and abolitionism empower women? =
To what extent?
*** Why was the women's rights movement so unpopular in the nin=
eteenth century? What issues succeeded (property rights, temperance vs. suff=
rage), and why?
*** What led to the proliferation of women's organizations and =
the revival of suffrage by the early twentieth century? Why did women gain s=
uffrage when they did (or as Carl Degler has asked, why did it take so long?=
)
*** What happened to feminism after suffrage? Did it recede, re=
group, transform? What do the splits over the Equal Rights Amendment reveal =
about gender ideals in American culture?
*** What critical events - wars, demographic shifts, political =
upheavals - help explain new feminist movements in the twentieth century? Ho=
w did these movements differ from earlier "waves"?
*** How has "second wave" feminism (since the 1960s) =
affected U.S. political, social, and personal life? What issues remain=
controversial and what do we now take for granted of the original feminist =
agenda?
3. Whatever the subject matter, I find that i=
ntroducing the term feminism into a discussion can elicit stereotypes=
that pervade our contemporary culture. Sometimes the terms parallel racial =
and ethnic stereotypes about the body, sometimes they reflect homophobia, bu=
t usually they rest upon a lack of historical understanding or a fear of bei=
ng associated with anything deemed militant or even non-conformist. For thes=
e reasons I sometimes address directly the fears raised by any critique of g=
ender or sexual roles, possibly using the example of nineteenth-century cari=
catures of suffragists, male or female, portrayed as crossing and disrupting=
gender lines. In lectures I try to include male feminists and to draw=
out multiracial feminisms. I also emphasize the diversity of feminisms to u=
ndermine single category understandings.
Aside from stereotypes, discussio=
ns of feminism can elicit highly personal responses. I try to be aware when =
discussing topics such as sexuality, reproduction, or violence that students=
bring their own experiences to class, sometimes painful and sometimes confu=
sed. I've witnessed much positive change occurring in the process of s=
tudying history and demystifying these topics. But I wonder if high sc=
hool teachers feel more constrained in addressing them because of student or=
parental resistance. Can you discuss, for example, the birth control moveme=
nt, lesbian feminism, abortion, or the anti-rape movement from historical pe=
rspectives?
Finally, in addition to inviting you to join =
this conversation on teaching, I want to announce a new web site that I've d=
eveloped about the history and future of feminism. You can find it at http://noturningback.stanford.edu or http://ntb.stanford.edu/; go to the Resource Site=
and you will find links to historical web pages and documents, as well as t=
o contemporary women's organizations around the world, arranged for each sec=
tion of my book, No Turning Back: The History of Feminism and the Future =
of Women. Feel free to suggest new links through the Contact page.
I look forward to our discussion.=
Sincerely,
Estelle Freedman
Professor of History
Stanford University
--
--MS_Mac_OE_3114019298_870377_MIME_Part--
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2002 21:42:43 -0700
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Estelle Freedman
Subject: Re: Opening Statement from Estelle Freedman
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Dear Pete,
Thanks for getting the conversation rolling. I have sometimes used a
variation on your language -- the phrase "two steps forward, one step
backward" -- to suggest we have had more change than continuity in women's
status, but that we are talking about a very slow process of change.
A key question implied in your comment about whether women are "better off"
is: what is "progress"? Students could use the women's rights movement's
goals to address that question - if feminists in the 1840s called for equal
access to education, jobs, and voting, along with a host of other items
(the list in the Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments would be a good
document to begin with), what measures do we have for each subsequent
generation on each count? Students could look up the percentage of women
with college degrees over time, work force participation rates, granting of
suffrage by states, percent of elected official who are female, and more.
Equally important, of course, is to ask both "why?" change occurs at
certain times, and "what aren't we measuring here"? For example, does mere
work force participation mean progress (you can bring in the sexually
segregated labor force and the wage gap and even set up debate over why
women wind up in certain jobs -- choice? or constraints? -- and how the
reasons change over time). Does suffrage mean equal representation? Is
elected office the only measure of women's political influence, or have
women gained other kinds of authority, certainly before suffrage but
perhaps after, as well?
Bringing the issues into the present can be a good starting and ending
point. I've often used an oral history assignment (interview your
grandmother or someone from her generation), which brings home change over
time. I've also used paper topics that ask students to compare three
generations of women in a family, which could be adapted to the question of
"how did the efforts of the early feminists affect each generation in this
family, and how did they not?"
I'd like to hear from secondary school teachers, too, about using any of
these techniques.
Sincerely,
Estelle
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 18:05:16 -0500
Reply-To: Victoria Brown
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Victoria Brown
Subject: Re: Opening Statement from Estelle Freedman
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear Conversants & Estelle,
At the risk of simplifying this discussion about women's progress, I
offer up what I call "the Deanna Whitfield rule." Deanna Whitfield was a
re-entry student in a Women's History night class I taught at San Diego
State about 20 years ago. Amid a discussion of whether some group of women
in the 19th century (I don't really remember the focus of that evening's
discussion) were "happy," Deanna turned and faced her fellow 45 students and
said, "Look, the issue isn't whether a woman is happy or not. Women in
every era have been happy or unhappy. The issue is whether a woman who is
unhappy with her circumstances has the legal and economy power to change her
circumstances." The discussion that ensued listed out the sorts of
questions that would need to be asked to flesh out Deanna's point: Can she
make enough to live on? Can she control her reproduction? Can she move
around unescorted, on her own? Can she get a divorce? Can she raise her
kids on her own? Can she bring charges of sexual mistreatment and be taken
seriously? Can she own her own property? Can she live in the society as an
independent person and not be regarded as a freak or a witch or a whore?
According to the Deanna Whitfield rule, women -- all categories of
women -- have made progress in U.S history. That progress isn't without
flaw, but the basic assumptions governing women's lives have fundamentally
changed and I think that's useful to keep in mind as we trace the steps
forward and back.
Victoria Brown
----- Original Message -----
From: "Estelle Freedman"
To:
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: Opening Statement from Estelle Freedman
> Dear Pete,
>
> Thanks for getting the conversation rolling. I have sometimes used a
> variation on your language -- the phrase "two steps forward, one step
> backward" -- to suggest we have had more change than continuity in women's
> status, but that we are talking about a very slow process of change.
>
> A key question implied in your comment about whether women are "better
off"
> is: what is "progress"? Students could use the women's rights movement's
> goals to address that question - if feminists in the 1840s called for
equal
> access to education, jobs, and voting, along with a host of other items
> (the list in the Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments would be a good
> document to begin with), what measures do we have for each subsequent
> generation on each count? Students could look up the percentage of women
> with college degrees over time, work force participation rates, granting
of
> suffrage by states, percent of elected official who are female, and more.
>
> Equally important, of course, is to ask both "why?" change occurs at
> certain times, and "what aren't we measuring here"? For example, does
mere
> work force participation mean progress (you can bring in the sexually
> segregated labor force and the wage gap and even set up debate over why
> women wind up in certain jobs -- choice? or constraints? -- and how the
> reasons change over time). Does suffrage mean equal representation? Is
> elected office the only measure of women's political influence, or have
> women gained other kinds of authority, certainly before suffrage but
> perhaps after, as well?
>
> Bringing the issues into the present can be a good starting and ending
> point. I've often used an oral history assignment (interview your
> grandmother or someone from her generation), which brings home change over
> time. I've also used paper topics that ask students to compare three
> generations of women in a family, which could be adapted to the question
of
> "how did the efforts of the early feminists affect each generation in this
> family, and how did they not?"
>
> I'd like to hear from secondary school teachers, too, about using any of
> these techniques.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Estelle
>
> This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at
http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
>
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 13:05:39 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: teresa murphy
Subject: feminism
I like the Deanna Whitfield rule! Where I run into problems these days,
however, is with one subset of those questions. Baldly put, can you be a
feminist if you don't believe abortion should be legal?
This question inevitably arises when I teach women's history. Students want
to know if they need to be feminists in order to study women's history. In
the discussion that ensues, a surprisingly high percentage of students often
claim they are not feminists because they don't believe abortion is morally
acceptable.
Terry Murphy
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 14:09:56 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Carrie Hoefferle
Subject: Re: feminism
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
My classes have also discussed the topic of whether you can be a feminist and oppose abortion. In my opinion, anyone who considers themselves a feminist
and supports gender equality IS a feminist. You can support abortion and not be a feminist, or be a feminist and not support abortion. I don't see them
as one and the same thing. Disagreements over specific issues (such as abortion) will arise in any movement. They aren't grounds for disqualifying
someone from a movement.
The abortion issue is a critical one for the feminist movement though. One we need to resolve amongst ourselves and somehow reach common ground because
it is one of the chief weapons used against women's rights and feminism today.
I'd really like to hear how other participants relate the abortion issue to feminism.
Carrie Hoefferle
teresa murphy wrote:
> I like the Deanna Whitfield rule! Where I run into problems these days,
> however, is with one subset of those questions. Baldly put, can you be a
> feminist if you don't believe abortion should be legal?
>
> This question inevitably arises when I teach women's history. Students want
> to know if they need to be feminists in order to study women's history. In
> the discussion that ensues, a surprisingly high percentage of students often
> claim they are not feminists because they don't believe abortion is morally
> acceptable.
>
> Terry Murphy
>
> This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 17:46:44 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Pennee Bender
Subject: Estelle Freedman's opening statement
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 16:12:26 -0700
To: FEMINISMFORUM@ASHP.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU
From: jmcclyme@eve.assumption.edu (John McClymer)
Subject: Estelle Freedman's opening statement
Greetings,
The discussion so far is largely about beginnings. Like Professor
Freedman, I want to help students see women's history as integral to
American history. I have created an exercise which works pretty well
and
which I use as the first class. It is called "Why is President Buchanan
Wearing a Dress?" and is online at
http://www.assumption.edu/users/McClymer/his260/IntroBuchanan.ht
ml. The
class begins with a cartoon called "Rotation in Office" which portrays
Buchanan as a domestic overturning a bench on which appointees
from the
Pierce administration had been sitting. The image provokes a good
deal of
discussion, to put it mildly, since students cannot imagine a
mainstream
publication of today portraying President Bush in women's clothes. We
then
look at some more examples, starting with one showing two
Democratic
newspaper editors seeking to woo Buchanan, "The rival coquettes."
Then we
go back to the first cartoon with a new question. The text has
Buchanan
saying: "Ye've been sittin' there long enough, an' there's some dacint
boys
wants your sates, an' a dale o' scrubbin' they'll need before they'll be
clane enough for 'em to sit on." Why is Buchanan portrayed as Irish?
This
leads to a quick look at stereotypes about "biddies," Irish servants,
and
then back to the first cartoon for a new reading based upon the
stereotypes
of Irish servants it evoked. Finally, we look at two cartoons, each of
which portrays a president as a schoolmistress trying to cope with
rebellious students, aka southern states, also portrayed as female.
First
there is Buchanan as the "old" schoolmistress who has lost control of
the
class and then Lincoln as the "provoked" schoolmistress.
The class concludes with this statement: Historians divide up their
subject into women's history and the history of sexualities and ethnic
history and political history and so on and so forth. The people living
that history, just like us as we live our own lives, encountered all of
human life in one continuous stream. We will, accordingly, cast our
nets
very widely in this course. We will not worry overmuch at the outset
how
things will fit together. We will instead operate on the assumption that,
if we are patient and persistent, some of these connections will fall
into
place for us.
This exercise works for several reasons, I think. One is that it is
funny, at least at the beginning. Another is that students start learning
immediately. There is no preamble. We just start. Our point of entry
comes
as a surprise but quickly establishes several points we will deal with
all
semester. One is the centrality of gendered thinking. Another is the
multitude of images of women (and men) that Americans carried (and
carry)
around with them. A third is that we will not try to figure out everything
all at once. We will return to themes, questions, and events over and
over
during the course. The class mirrors this by going back to look at the
first cartoon over and over as we discover new ways of questioning it.
John McClymer
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 17:48:21 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Jennifer Rosenberry
Subject: Re: feminism
You may "beat me up" for this, but I don't see how the issue of abortion
canbe "resolved" as a "feminist" issue. It's a matter of valuing human
life, not necessarily "having a right" or "not having a right."
I think a HUGE issue in the US is childcare. Why should I have to
choose between my family and my professional life? Why don't more
employers offer quality day care? Why doesn't the government
subsidize more quality day care?
Some employers say that women tend to earn less money because of
their "choice" to spend more time with their family -- maternity leave,
etc. Is that the truth, or is it, to put it mildly, a "crock"?
Jennifer Rosenberry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carrie Hoefferle"
To:
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: feminism
> My classes have also discussed the topic of whether you can be a
feminist
and oppose abortion. In my opinion, anyone who considers
themselves a
feminist
> and supports gender equality IS a feminist. You can support
abortion and
not be a feminist, or be a feminist and not support abortion. I don't see
them
> as one and the same thing. Disagreements over specific issues
(such as
abortion) will arise in any movement. They aren't grounds for
disqualifying
> someone from a movement.
>
> The abortion issue is a critical one for the feminist movement
though. One
we need to resolve amongst ourselves and somehow reach common
ground because
> it is one of the chief weapons used against women's rights and
feminism
today.
>
> I'd really like to hear how other participants relate the abortion issue
to feminism.
>
> Carrie Hoefferle
>
> teresa murphy wrote:
>
> > I like the Deanna Whitfield rule! Where I run into problems these
days,
> > however, is with one subset of those questions. Baldly put, can
you be
a
> > feminist if you don't believe abortion should be legal?
> >
> > This question inevitably arises when I teach women's history.
Students
want
> > to know if they need to be feminists in order to study women's
history.
In
> > the discussion that ensues, a surprisingly high percentage of
students
often
> > claim they are not feminists because they don't believe abortion is
morally
> > acceptable.
> >
> > Terry Murphy
> >
> > This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web
site at
http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S.
History.
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
> This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web
site at
http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S.
History.
>
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 21:48:18 -0700
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Estelle Freedman
Subject: Re: feminism
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Dear Forum:
It is gratifying to see a few threads of conversation emerging; I'd like to
comment on them and ask others to weigh in on the topics that we've raised,
and bring new ones, too.
At the outset, though, I'll weigh in on some questions about being a
feminist. First, I agree with Carrie that if you call yourself a feminist
and support equality, you are a feminist. But in answer to Terry's
students question, I would emphasize that you don't need to BE a feminist
to study women's or feminist history, any more than you need to be a
Southerner to study southern history, a pacifist to study peace movements,
or a Communist to study the history of communism. I try to stress in class
that the meaning of feminism changes over time, and that is the interesting
part - students need to learn about the past to think through their
positions in the present. (On birth control and abortion, for example,
nineteenth century feminists opposed both and twentieth century feminists
support both - Linda Gordon once wrote an essay about that and I'll find
the citation for my next comment).
Thanks, Victoria, for the contribution to the issue of "progress" (and the
Deanna Whitfield rule - I hope she is out there glowing as we invoke her
name). In response to our discussion question about how we measure
progress, Deanna's comment is to the point. When the class asked "were
women happy," she essentially refined the question to one of rights and she
raised, I think, a familiar set of values: life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness. I would add that implicit in her statement is "the same
rights that men have to pursue happiness." The class enumerated economic
means, bodily integrity, and other measures of self-determination, a core
value in American society. Perhaps the moral is that we measure women's
progress by the extent to which they share the same rights -- or lack of
rights -- to self-determination that men have at any given time.
We also might want to ask "what else besides rights?" What about
responsibilities from which rights may be derived (voting, jury duty,
military service)? Can we map those responsibilities shared by men and
women at any given time, and ask which ones are harder for Americans to
enact, and why?
And what about society's responsibilities to its members? Jennifer brought
up the issue of child care. Historically, as women gained the right to work
they often found (and find) themselves working a double day, or choosing
between wage labor and family care. Why has the U.S. provided so much less
public support for child care than most industrialized nations? Does our
ethos of individual rights in any way limit social responsibility?
And Jennifer also raises the question of choice - how do we know when women
(or men) choose certain jobs; when do labor markets and other factors limit
the choices? How do lower wages for women's work influence the "choice" not
to work? (World War II labor mobilization of women is one place to open up
this topic, and so is the Sears Case of the 1980s -- I can give you some
citations if anyone is interested.)
We could extend the question to why reproductive choice has become so
important to feminist politics since the 1960s. But here and in our other
discussions, I'd like to make these questions historical, rather than
debate them in the present. (I don't think we need to reach common ground
on this Forum and I'll restrain from getting into contemporary politics
here.) Rather than asking about feminists today (most of whom support
"choice" but would prefer to avoid the need for abortion and reduce the
extent of it), why not bring up the history of abortion (James Mohr's
classic study on why it was criminalized in the nineteenth century is very
even handed). Again, what do students need to understand about past
practice and policy to know why the issue is so heatedly debated
today. The issue of abortion can also be used to talk about when Americans
do and don't want to regulate private behavior.
John, I couldn't get onto that web link, but I love the exercise you do in
class. Great use of political cartoons to draw out, as you put it, "the
centrality of gendered thinking." (Along with ethnic/racial thinking,
too.) Starting with an image and rereading it throughout the discussion or
the course makes sense - I think I too often show cartoons and move on
quickly. I may borrow your technique.
I will be off-line for a few days. I'll be eager to catch up with these
threads towards the end of the week.
Best wishes to all,
Estelle
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2002 11:37:21 -0600
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Georgina Taylor
Subject: Re: Agrarian Feminism
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
To Estelle and others in the Forum,
I was very interested in your opening statement, Estelle, and have read
other contributions to the Forum with interest, even though I do not teach
women's history in the United States.
I am a historian from the Canadian prairies and I teach women's history
and other classes in Saskatchewan. I did my dissertation on Violet
McNaughton, an agrarian feminist from Saskatchewan and the leading farm
woman in Canada during the first half of the twentieth century. From the
American historical literature on farm women and feminism and from a
conference I attended in Minnesota about the history of farm women,
McNaughton seems to have been more radical than most rural feminists in the
United States.
I would be interested in learning from Estelle and other participants in
the Forum how they teach the history of farm women, how they deal with
rural feminism in their classes, and how they approach the question of
international comparisons.
Sincerely, Georgina Taylor
_____________________________
Georgina M. Taylor, Ph.D.
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
taylorgm@sk.sympatico.ca
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Ian Tyrrell
Subject: Re: Estelle Freedman's Openning Questions
I have only just had this debate drawn to my attention. I think that
Estelle Fredman's questions are excellent ones-they are very pertinent
and mirror nicely that questions I have asked and the themes I have
pursued in teaching a women's history course in Australia since
1986. However, in teaching this course from Australia, it always
seemed more sensible to teach it comparatively and transnationally.
Many of these questions also make more sense, or can be pursued in
a richer way in this framework.
I don't think a lot of time needs to be spent in a high school course in
pointing these things out, but it is vital that students see the
connections with events elsewhere, and that they realise that the
American achievement is not unique.
For example, what was it about the colonies in Australia and News
Zealand that enabled them to achieve women's suffrage so early
(1893 to 1902)? What things did these places have in common with
the western states of America that did give women the right to vote at
about the same time? What international movements such as the
World's WCTU aided in the dissemination of these ideas? Did
international work weaken or strengthen moves to achieve
empowerment of women in the US? Did it dissipate energies or
provide templates for domestic action?
Looking at the issue of suffrage comparatively helps us to understand
institutional and political blockages to achieving the vote nationally in
the US- posed by the federal system, and by the block of southern
states concerned with the issue of race. An interesting point is that in
Australia, federation more or less coincided with the granting of
women's suffrage, and this issue was present though hardly
dominant one in the federation negotiations in the late 1890s.
Federalism thus stimulated suffrage while suffrage stimulated
federalism (The WCTU in Australia was a strong supporter of
federation and was the first social reform society to form an Australia
wide union, ten years before political federation, in fact.) In the US the
timing of federal union was very different, and huge institutional
obstacles were created that, perhaps, only a war or other
circumstances could overcome. One would not want to make
everything of this argument of course but it does indicate the
importance of looking at the larger political and economic settings in
which suffrage is achieved. Clearly Freedman understands this.
References: Jane Rendall's Origins of Modern Feminism is useful in
setting the first half of the questions in broader perspective and
seeing the transatlantic connections for the later period, I do
something of the same, but centred around temperance in my
Woman's World Woman's Empire/ The Woman's Christian
Temperance Union in International Perspective. There are of course
many other relevant works.
In addition to all this, studying the subject comparatively encourages
us- perhaps makes it essential-to cast the net of "feminism" more
broadly-to see the variety of ways in which women seek to empower
themselves.
A final comment-long experience of teaching this subject to
audiences of 99 percent women reminds me how difficult it seems to
be to get men students (and staff) interested in this subject. I have
been fortunate in having been able to team teach this course with
women staff-at first with Professor Beverley Kingston, a noted authority
on the history of Australian women.
Ian Tyrrell
School of History,
Univ. of New South Wales
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 16:15:47 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Jen Rosenberry
Organization: Civil War Preservation Trust
Subject: Re: feminism
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
You may "beat me up" for this, but I don't see how the issue of abortion can
be "resolved" as a "feminist" issue. It's a matter of valuing human life,
not necessarily "having a right" or "not having a right."
I think a HUGE issue in the US is childcare. Why should I have to choose
between my family and my professional life? Why don't more employers offer
quality day care? Why doesn't the government subsidize more quality day
care?
Some employers say that women tend to earn less money because of their
"choice" to spend more time with their family -- maternity leave, etc. Is
that the truth, or is it, to put it mildly, a "crock"?
Jennifer Rosenberry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carrie Hoefferle"
To:
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: feminism
> My classes have also discussed the topic of whether you can be a feminist
and oppose abortion. In my opinion, anyone who considers themselves a
feminist
> and supports gender equality IS a feminist. You can support abortion and
not be a feminist, or be a feminist and not support abortion. I don't see
them
> as one and the same thing. Disagreements over specific issues (such as
abortion) will arise in any movement. They aren't grounds for disqualifying
> someone from a movement.
>
> The abortion issue is a critical one for the feminist movement though. One
we need to resolve amongst ourselves and somehow reach common ground because
> it is one of the chief weapons used against women's rights and feminism
today.
>
> I'd really like to hear how other participants relate the abortion issue
to feminism.
>
> Carrie Hoefferle
>
> teresa murphy wrote:
>
> > I like the Deanna Whitfield rule! Where I run into problems these days,
> > however, is with one subset of those questions. Baldly put, can you be
a
> > feminist if you don't believe abortion should be legal?
> >
> > This question inevitably arises when I teach women's history. Students
want
> > to know if they need to be feminists in order to study women's history.
In
> > the discussion that ensues, a surprisingly high percentage of students
often
> > claim they are not feminists because they don't believe abortion is
morally
> > acceptable.
> >
> > Terry Murphy
> >
> > This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at
http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
> This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at
http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
>
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 17:19:33 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Jane Gerhard
Subject: feminism
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Hi everyone, and Professor Freedman,
The issue of how to show the relevance of history to contemporary
issue (or as Estelle put it, "what do students need to understand
about past practice and policy to know why the issue is so heatedly
debated today,") does not come up in my classes around abortion, as
they have for others. In my experience, it comes up most saliently
in the conflation of feminism with lesbianism.
I surely don't need to recount the conflation for this group but I
find it quite palpable and a potential obstacle. I'd like to hear how
others tackle it.
In my classes, I teach both the accusation that feminists were
lesbians as part of the history of suffrage and post suffrage
activism. The accusation of feminists as being man hating lesbians
have long been a part of the anti-feminist arsenal, etc.
But I try to also teach the disruptive power of feminism by showing
the rise of lesbians as a more visible subculture as coming out of
the gains won by women's public activism. So link the social context
of 20's feminism and a modern lesbian identity historically. These
connections help us sort through 70s feminism and the emergence of
lesbian feminism with more nuance. But ideally, it helps students be
a bit more critical of their own fears of feminism.
These days my most favorite example of how hard teasing out
"Separatism as Strategy," feminism, and modern lesbianism from their
productive and messy tangle is Blanche W. Cook's biography of Eleanor
Roosevelt.
Jane Gerhard
Visiting Assistant Professor
Department of American Civilization
Brown University
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 21:48:53 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Adina Back
Subject: Re: Agrarian Feminism
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Georgina,
Your comment about farm women reminded me of oral histories with farm women
that I have read. Kathryn Anderson (see "Learning to Listen: Interview
Techniques and Analyses" in Women's Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral
History edited by Sherna Berger Gluck and Daphne Patai) talks about the
Washington Women's Heritage Project that she was involved in and her
specific focus on women's roles in northwest Washinton farming communities.
Oral narratives offer one set of sources from which to engage in
international comparisons. The narratives are also a useful reminder that
oral history has been an important methodology for studying the history of
women and feminism. Sincerely, Adina Back
----- Original Message -----
From: Georgina Taylor
To:
Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: Agrarian Feminism
> To Estelle and others in the Forum,
>
> I was very interested in your opening statement, Estelle, and have
read
> other contributions to the Forum with interest, even though I do not teach
> women's history in the United States.
> I am a historian from the Canadian prairies and I teach women's
history
> and other classes in Saskatchewan. I did my dissertation on Violet
> McNaughton, an agrarian feminist from Saskatchewan and the leading farm
> woman in Canada during the first half of the twentieth century. From the
> American historical literature on farm women and feminism and from a
> conference I attended in Minnesota about the history of farm women,
> McNaughton seems to have been more radical than most rural feminists in
the
> United States.
> I would be interested in learning from Estelle and other participants
in
> the Forum how they teach the history of farm women, how they deal with
> rural feminism in their classes, and how they approach the question of
> international comparisons.
>
> Sincerely, Georgina Taylor
> _____________________________
> Georgina M. Taylor, Ph.D.
> Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
> taylorgm@sk.sympatico.ca
>
> This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at
http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 09:43:14 -0500
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Janis Edwards
Organization: U of A College of Communication
Subject: Re: Estelle Freedman's opening statement
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
I was most interested in P. Bender's statement that her students
could not imagine a mainstream pub depicting Pres. Bush in
women's clothing. Oh my, they never see political cartoons do
they? Cartoonists routingly depict Pres candidates in dresses as
one of several means of poking fun at their masculinity-- perhaps
the most common topos they use during electrion time. The most
widely-syndicated cartoonist, Pat Oliphant, illustrated Pres Bush I
with a purse to signify contempt for particular policies or
pronouncements; sometimes he showed GHWB is full drag.
However, he "put the purse in a closet" during the Persian Gulf
War, so your students may be correct in the respect that during
war time satirists might not use that particular gender gag. Women
are not usually satirized in this fashion by cartoonists, but even a
short memory of Hillary Clinton recalls a conservative mag cover
depicting her as a dominatrix, and other demonsizing efforts. I'm
glad to see people are using historical cartoons as educational
tools. Your students might then take a look for themselves at
contemporary depictions. Sounds like they might be surprised.
Janis L. Edwards
Assoc. Professor
Dept. of Communication Studies
University of Alabama
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:40:01 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Beth Sparacino
Subject: Teaching U.S. Women's History in high school survey course
Professor Freedman,
Thank you for dedicating your life work to the teaching and
study of women's history.
As a high school history teacher I have been playing around
with ways to make women's history more palpable to my
students. (In order to avoid the repeated question as to
why we need to study women's history.) Currently, I am in the midst of a
comparative study of the American Revolution and women's fight for
suffrage. (To the kids it makes sense to study how white property owning
men got the right to vote and then to study how women fought for their
right to vote. Obviously with the 19th Amendment only certain women were
allowed to vote.)
The end result of our comparative study will be a project
where the kids demonstrate what they think are the
meaningful comparisons and contrast between the two
"revolutions".
So far I have emphasized
--methods of protest and the effectiveness of those methods in each movement
--qualities of leadership&
--organizations
for points of comparison and contrast.
I was hoping that people in the forum could offer their
suggestions, insights and points of information that may
make our study more meaningful.
I also hope that other high school teachers will share their
ideas for making women's history less "threatening" to
students in a general U.S. survey course. (I do not have
the luxury of saying this stuff will be on the national AP
test!)
Thank you for your time, consideration and insights.
Beth Sparacino
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 22:06:42 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: tmurphy
Subject: feminism and women's history
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I have been thinking about Ian Tyrell's suggestion that we teach the history
of women and the history of feminism comparatively and/or transnationally.
Ian brings up some important points of comparison around political sturctures.
From a transnational perspective we might want to consider the issue of
imperialism as well. There has been some excellent work on the way some white
British women embraced imperialism and feminism as related projects. (I'm
thinking here especially of work by Antoinette Burton.) Related issues are
being explored in U.S. women's history, especially in the area of race
relations. Are similar questions raised with respect to Australia and New
Zealand?
Jane Gerhard's point about the conflation of lesbianism and feminism also
raises some interesting questions. I don't encounter much of a concern with
lesbianism in my women's history course because I only teach the first half.
But the parallel charge in the early nineteenth century was of feminists being
"public women" or prostitutes - a charge that led some important discussions
about the way sexual branding was used for political purposes.
Terry Murphy
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 22:27:17 -0700
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Pete Haro
Subject: Re: Teaching U.S. Women's History in high school survey course
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Dear Beth: Could you elaborate further regarding your emphasis on methods of
protest, qualities of leadership and organizations? What do these points
illustrate? What are you trying to get students to see? Please elaborate.
Sincerely, Pete Haro.
----------
>From: Beth Sparacino
>To: FEMINISMFORUM@ASHP.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU
>Subject: Teaching U.S. Women's History in high school survey course
>Date: Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 6:40 PM
>
> Professor Freedman,
>
> Thank you for dedicating your life work to the teaching and
> study of women's history.
>
> As a high school history teacher I have been playing around
> with ways to make women's history more palpable to my
> students. (In order to avoid the repeated question as to
> why we need to study women's history.) Currently, I am in the midst of a
> comparative study of the American Revolution and women's fight for
> suffrage. (To the kids it makes sense to study how white property owning
> men got the right to vote and then to study how women fought for their
> right to vote. Obviously with the 19th Amendment only certain women were
> allowed to vote.)
>
> The end result of our comparative study will be a project
> where the kids demonstrate what they think are the
> meaningful comparisons and contrast between the two
> "revolutions".
>
> So far I have emphasized
> --methods of protest and the effectiveness of those methods in each movement
> --qualities of leadership&
> --organizations
> for points of comparison and contrast.
>
> I was hoping that people in the forum could offer their
> suggestions, insights and points of information that may
> make our study more meaningful.
>
> I also hope that other high school teachers will share their
> ideas for making women's history less "threatening" to
> students in a general U.S. survey course. (I do not have
> the luxury of saying this stuff will be on the national AP
> test!)
>
> Thank you for your time, consideration and insights.
> Beth Sparacino
>
> This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at
> http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 13:47:45 +1000
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Ian Tyrrell
Subject: Re: feminism and women's history
In-Reply-To: <3D8BFE22@webmail3>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="============_-1179613379==_ma============"
--============_-1179613379==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
I agree with Terry's comments. The question of imperialism ought to
be added to Estelle's questions. In fact, gender, imperialism and
internationalism is the subject of one of my seminars.
Yes,this subject is being researched in Australia, with special
reference to indigenous or Aborignal Australians, though more on
gender and race rather than specifically imperialism. However
imperialism is being explored, e.g. by Fiona Paisley and Patricia
Grimshaw. See Paisley's Loving Protection (Melbourne U.P., 2000); a
conference held at the ANU's Centre for Cross-Cultural Research in
October 2000, was particularly relevant. There are materials about
this conference on the web; typing in "New Comparisons/ International
Worlds" would bring it up. And Australian Feminist Studies no. 36,
Nov. 2001, edited by Paisley, is a special issue which had some of
the papers including one by Prof. Grimshaw.
This work is useful because it also includes material on anti-racism
and appealing to imperial power to achieve more humanitarian goals in
relation to indigenous people. However it must be kept in mind that
"humanitarianism" may be culturally insensitive or an instrument of
imperial power as well--as several works on the American side show.
For American students, exploring the related topics of gender,
internationalism and imperialism, could be done through the work of
various individuals, for example Ida Wells-Barnett, whose work on
anti-lynching had an international dimension.. One could easily
study a handful of missionary women through the pages of Notable
American Women. Jane Adams's internationalism and her peace work
also nicely intersects with her domestic reform-- and there are
widely available biographies and sketches of her as well as her
primary sources such as Newer Ideals of Peace (1907)
Ian Tyrrell
> I have been thinking about Ian Tyrell's suggestion that we teach the history
>of women and the history of feminism comparatively and/or transnationally.
>Ian brings up some important points of comparison around political sturctures.
> From a transnational perspective we might want to consider the issue of
>imperialism as well. There has been some excellent work on the way some white
>British women embraced imperialism and feminism as related projects. (I'm
>thinking here especially of work by Antoinette Burton.) Related issues are
>being explored in U.S. women's history, especially in the area of race
>relations. Are similar questions raised with respect to Australia and New
>Zealand?
>
>Jane Gerhard's point about the conflation of lesbianism and feminism also
>raises some interesting questions. I don't encounter much of a concern with
>lesbianism in my women's history course because I only teach the first half.
>But the parallel charge in the early nineteenth century was of feminists being
>"public women" or prostitutes - a charge that led some important discussions
>about the way sexual branding was used for political purposes.
>
>Terry Murphy
>
>This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web
>site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for
>teaching U.S. History.
--============_-1179613379==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Re: feminism and women's
history
I agree with Terry's comments. The
question of imperialism ought to be added to Estelle's questions. In
fact, gender, imperialism and internationalism is the subject of one
of my seminars.
Yes,this subject is being researched in
Australia, with special reference to indigenous or
Aborignal Australians, though more on gender and race rather than
specifically imperialism. However imperialism is being explored,
e.g. by Fiona Paisley and Patricia Grimshaw. See Paisley's
Loving Protection (Melbourne U.P., 2000); a conference held at the
ANU's Centre for Cross-Cultural Research in October 2000, was
particularly relevant. There are materials about this conference on
the web; typing in "New Comparisons/ International Worlds" would
bring it up. And Australian Feminist Studies no. 36, Nov.
2001, edited by Paisley, is a special issue which had some of
the papers including one by Prof. Grimshaw.
This work is useful because it also
includes material on anti-racism and appealing to imperial power to
achieve more humanitarian goals in relation to indigenous people.
However it must be kept in mind that "humanitarianism" may
be culturally insensitive or an instrument of imperial power as
well--as several works on the American side show.
For American students, exploring the
related topics of gender, internationalism and imperialism, could be
done through the work of various individuals, for example Ida
Wells-Barnett, whose work on anti-lynching had an international
dimension.. One could easily study a handful of missionary
women through the pages of Notable American Women. Jane
Adams's internationalism and her peace work also nicely intersects
with her domestic reform-- and there are widely available biographies
and sketches of her as well as her primary sources such as Newer
Ideals of Peace (1907)
Ian Tyrrell
I have been thinking about Ian
Tyrell's suggestion that we teach the history
of women and the history of feminism
comparatively and/or transnationally.
Ian brings up some important points of comparison around political
sturctures.
From a transnational perspective we might want to consider the
issue of
imperialism as well. There has been some excellent work on the
way some white
British women embraced imperialism and feminism as related projects.
(I'm
thinking here especially of work by Antoinette Burton.) Related
issues are
being explored in U.S. women's history, especially in the area of
race
relations. Are similar questions raised with respect to
Australia and New
Zealand?
Jane Gerhard's point about the conflation of lesbianism and feminism
also
raises some interesting questions. I don't encounter much of a
concern with
lesbianism in my women's history course because I only teach the first
half.
But the parallel charge in the early nineteenth century was of
feminists being
"public women" or prostitutes - a charge that led some
important discussions
about the way sexual branding was used for political purposes.
Terry Murphy
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site
at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S.
History.
--============_-1179613379==_ma============--
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 11:52:47 -0500
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Jennifer Imsande
Subject: revolution and imperialism
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_1844A06A.C0A1D93D"
--=_1844A06A.C0A1D93D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
There have been two conversational threads =AF the comparative "revolution"=
study that Beth Sparacino does in her high school classroom and the =
issues of race and imperialism =AF that actually knit together nicely. I =
like Beth's idea of analyzing and comparing the revolutions of 1776 and =
suffrage because when we talk about democratization and the development of =
rights in the United States, what becomes awfully clear awfully fast is =
that advancements for one group often come at the expense of another.=20
It is useful to compare how white men conceptualized the expansion of =
rights in the late eighteenth century with the racial/imperialism =
strategies employed by white women in the late nineteenth to secure =
political authority. Eighteenth century revolutionaries could not =
conceive of dismantling the system of coverture or race hierarchy. Those =
systems, in fact, were central to their republican conceptions of =
independence and liberty [see, inter alia, Linda Kerber's "The Paradox of =
Citizenship...: Martin vs. Massachusetts" and also Stephanie McCurry's =
work on republicanism in the antebellum South, Masters of Small Worlds]. =
Similarly, white women in the late nineteenth century effectively massaged =
images of female dependency into more useful images of racialized =
dependency. Just as race and gender hierarchy were compatible in the =
Founders' cosmology of nation, so too was race hierarchy compatible with =
suffragists' conception of rights and liberty in an imperial age. [For the =
U.S. counterpart to Antoinette BUrton's work on British suffragists and =
imperialism, see Louise Newman's White Women's Rights: The Racial Origins =
of Feminism in the United States]
So I like the idea of comparing [especially transnationally] how different =
groups intent on expanding democracy have conceptualized rights and =
independence. We must explore these issues or our students will continue =
to graduate with a sense that rights and liberty is a zero-sum game =AF =
rights for gays and lesbians must require the loss of rights for heteronorm=
ative partners, rights for children must require a loss of rights for =
parents, etc.
Jennifer Imsande
Department of History
Central Lakes College
501 West College Drive
Brainerd, Minnesota 56401
218-855-8167
--=_1844A06A.C0A1D93D
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="TEXT.htm"
There have been two conversational threads — the comparative
"revolution" study that Beth Sparacino does in her high school classroom and the
issues of race and imperialism — that actually knit together nicely. I
like Beth's idea of analyzing and comparing the revolutions of 1776 and suffrage
because when we talk about democratization and the development of rights in the
United States, what becomes awfully clear awfully fast is that advancements for
one group often come at the expense of another.
It is useful to compare how white men conceptualized the
expansion of rights in the late eighteenth century with the racial/imperialism
strategies employed by white women in the late nineteenth to secure political
authority. Eighteenth century revolutionaries could not conceive of
dismantling the system of coverture or race hierarchy. Those systems,
in fact, were central to their republican conceptions of independence and
liberty [see, inter alia, Linda Kerber's "The Paradox of
Citizenship...: Martin vs. Massachusetts" and also Stephanie McCurry's work on
republicanism in the antebellum South, Masters of Small
Worlds]. Similarly, white women in the late nineteenth century
effectively massaged images of female dependency into more useful images of
racialized dependency. Just as race and gender hierarchy were compatible
in the Founders' cosmology of nation, so too was race hierarchy compatible with
suffragists' conception of rights and liberty in an imperial age. [For the U.S.
counterpart to Antoinette BUrton's work on British suffragists and imperialism,
see Louise Newman's White Women's Rights: The Racial Origins of
Feminism in the United States]
So I like the idea of comparing [especially transnationally]
how different groups intent on expanding democracy have conceptualized rights
and independence. We must explore these issues or our students will
continue to graduate with a sense that rights and liberty is a zero-sum game —
rights for gays and lesbians must require the loss of rights for heteronormative
partners, rights for children must require a loss of rights for parents,
etc.
Jennifer Imsande
Department of History
Central Lakes
College
501 West College Drive
Brainerd, Minnesota
56401
218-855-8167
--=_1844A06A.C0A1D93D--
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 16:47:58 -0600
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Georgina Taylor
Subject: Re: Colonization and imperialism
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-7
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
I agree that using the idea of imperialism is one way to make
international comparisons. I also use the concept of colonization. An
excellent book to use for such international comparisons is:
Ruth Roach Pierson and Nupur Chaudhuri, eds. _Nation, Empire, Colony:
Historicizing Gender and Race_ (Bloomington: Indiana University Press,
1998).
It is a collection of papers that were presented at the fourth conference
organized by the International Federation for Research on Women's History
held in Montreal in August of 1995. Several of the essays deal with
feminism or suffragists.
Georgina Taylor
_____________________________
Georgina M. Taylor, Ph.D.
gmtaylor@sk.sympatico.ca
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 13:42:04 -0700
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Estelle Freedman
Subject: Re: Teaching U.S. Women's History in high school survey course
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Forum:
I was delighted to find several stimulating threads in our discussion of=20
teaching feminist history after returning from five days off-line. Thanks=
=20
for the contributions from both front line teachers and some of the=20
scholars whose work has influenced my own. Participants have been linking=20
these threads nicely, but I=92ll also offer my take on how they relate to=
our=20
topic.
First, I want to elaborate on Beth Sparacino=92s method of comparing the=20
American Revolution and the women=92s rights movement, which makes feminism=
=20
both less threatening and more central to the mainstream of the U.S.=20
history. It struck me that one could keep going with =93revolutions=94 as=
=20
either a framework or a recurrent theme (in addition to Independence and=20
women=92s rights, adding civil rights and sexual revolutions, as well as=20
economic ones=96transportation, industrial, communications.) In addition to=
=20
the categories of protest methods, leadership, and organizations, we could=
=20
ask how each extended, refined, or challenged the ideals of the American=20
Revolution (and keep asking how they affected different groups, e.g. women,=
=20
minorities). Note, too, the different teaching challenges for required=20
high school classes (more gender balanced) and elective college classes=20
(morewomen, mentioned by Ian Tyrrell). For elective courses, approaching=20
feminism in comparison to other revolutions/social justice movements could=
=20
draw more diverse students.
Ian also picked up the comparative thread tossed out by Georgina Taylor=20
re: rural feminisms. Are frontiers more open to women=92s rights and=20
suffrage? Also, I was struck by the way that =93rural feminism=94 is an=20
important corrective to the usual association of women=92s movements with=20
urban, middle-class organizational life. Internationally, both temperance=
=20
and missionary groups may have drawn rural women as much as urban dwellers,=
=20
and both did organize internationally on issues not always named as=20
=93feminist=94 but clearly a source of empowerment for women (keeping in=
mind,=20
of course, the question of "which women?" are empowered.)
On other international connections, I recommend Leila Rupp=92s WORLDS OF=20
WOMEN: THE MAKING OF THE INTERNATIONAL WOMEN=92S MOVEMENT, and Bonnie=20
Andersen=92s JOYOUS GREETINGS: THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL WOMEN=92S MOVEMENT,=
=20
1830-1860 (from the European perspective). I, too, agree, that the=20
legacies of colonialism are central to understanding feminist history, and=
=20
we can draw out links between race conflict within the U.S. and=20
anti-colonial movements elsewhere. (I have tried to summarize this=20
literature in chapters on =93Race and the Politics of Identity in U.S.=20
Feminism=94 and =93The Global Stage and the Politics of Location=94 in NO=
TURNING=20
BACK and I give other bibliographical references on each at the end of the=
=20
book.)
I also want to tie together the comments on political cartoons and those=20
on lesbianism, because both point to the power of fears about upsetting sex=
=20
and gender roles. Janis Edwards=92 reminder that political cartoons=
continue=20
to use caricatures of gender and sexual transgression provides a larger=20
context for exploring what is upsetting about breaking gender norms. If we=
=20
introduce the cross-dressing vilification of feminists (male and female) in=
=20
the nineteenth century, it can set the stage for understanding fear of=20
lesbians in the twentieth century. (I will definitely be doing more with=20
cartoons after this Forum!)
Like Jane Gerhard, I confront the assumption that=20
feminism=3Dlesbianism=3Dman-hating. A tricky part about responding is not=
=20
affirming the fear by simply denying that all feminists are lesbians. I=20
like Jane=92s approach of teaching about the ways this accusation was used=
in=20
the past (dismantling the man-hating in the process), and then also showing=
=20
when and why some lesbians were in fact drawn to feminism. I would add that=
=20
it could be instructive to look at the change in liberal feminist attitudes=
=20
towards lesbians, from distancing and the =93lavender menace=94 in the 1960s=
to=20
the inclusion of lesbian rights in the National Organization for Women by=20
the 1980s. It provides one illustration of internal conflict, as well as=20
growth in response to challenge.
I look forward to further thoughts on these threads and on new ones as=20
well. What about using biography to teach about feminism (Jane Addams,=20
Eleanor Roosevelt, and others have come up so far)? And I've meant to give=
=20
the web link for the National Women's History Project catalogue - lots of=20
K-12 materials: http://www.nwhp.org/new_catalog/index.html
Best wishes,
Estelle
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 21:21:11 -0700
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Pete Haro
Subject: Re: Teaching U.S. Women's History in high school survey course
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Estelle: Interesting that you mention Jane Addams as a groundbreaking
feminist. How would you respond to the fact that her work was nevertheless
confined to a domestic sphere (i.e. childcare, primary education and some
aspects of city reform)? If I remember correctly, she wanted to become a
doctor but was barred from medical school because of her gender (please
correct me if I am wrong). I find it difficult to believe that women such a=
s
Addams had real choice with regards to careers. Historically, hasn't one wa=
y
to prevent any group from making real progress is to hold up a few examples
of achievement or overcoming adversity and proclaim that; "see, everything
is better after all"? I find it difficult to look at my female students and
proclaim that women have made real advancements when statistics (such as
from the U.S. Department of Labor) continue to show that most women in this
country are confined to jobs that are seen as acceptable and within the
domestic sphere. Any thoughts on how you would approach this topic? Pete
Haro.
----------
>From: Estelle Freedman
>To: FEMINISMFORUM@ASHP.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU
>Subject: Re: Teaching U.S. Women's History in high school survey course
>Date: Sat, Sep 21, 2002, 1:42 PM
>
> Dear Forum:
>
> I was delighted to find several stimulating threads in our discus=
sion
of
> teaching feminist history after returning from five days off-line. Thank=
s
> for the contributions from both front line teachers and some of the
> scholars whose work has influenced my own. Participants have been linking
> these threads nicely, but I=92ll also offer my take on how they relate to o=
ur
> topic.
>
> First, I want to elaborate on Beth Sparacino=92s method of comparin=
g the
> American Revolution and the women=92s rights movement, which makes feminism
> both less threatening and more central to the mainstream of the U.S.
> history. It struck me that one could keep going with =93revolutions=94 as
> either a framework or a recurrent theme (in addition to Independence and
> women=92s rights, adding civil rights and sexual revolutions, as well as
> economic ones=96transportation, industrial, communications.) In addition to
> the categories of protest methods, leadership, and organizations, we coul=
d
> ask how each extended, refined, or challenged the ideals of the American
> Revolution (and keep asking how they affected different groups, e.g. wome=
n,
> minorities). Note, too, the different teaching challenges for required
> high school classes (more gender balanced) and elective college classes
> (morewomen, mentioned by Ian Tyrrell). For elective courses, approaching
> feminism in comparison to other revolutions/social justice movements coul=
d
> draw more diverse students.
>
> Ian also picked up the comparative thread tossed out by Georgina
Taylor
> re: rural feminisms. Are frontiers more open to women=92s rights and
> suffrage? Also, I was struck by the way that =93rural feminism=94 is an
> important corrective to the usual association of women=92s movements with
> urban, middle-class organizational life. Internationally, both temperanc=
e
> and missionary groups may have drawn rural women as much as urban dweller=
s,
> and both did organize internationally on issues not always named as
> =93feminist=94 but clearly a source of empowerment for women (keeping in mind=
,
> of course, the question of "which women?" are empowered.)
>
> On other international connections, I recommend Leila Rupp=92s WORL=
DS OF
> WOMEN: THE MAKING OF THE INTERNATIONAL WOMEN=92S MOVEMENT, and Bonnie
> Andersen=92s JOYOUS GREETINGS: THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL WOMEN=92S MOVEMENT,
> 1830-1860 (from the European perspective). I, too, agree, that the
> legacies of colonialism are central to understanding feminist history, an=
d
> we can draw out links between race conflict within the U.S. and
> anti-colonial movements elsewhere. (I have tried to summarize this
> literature in chapters on =93Race and the Politics of Identity in U.S.
> Feminism=94 and =93The Global Stage and the Politics of Location=94 in NO TURNI=
NG
> BACK and I give other bibliographical references on each at the end of th=
e
> book.)
>
> I also want to tie together the comments on political cartoons an=
d
those
> on lesbianism, because both point to the power of fears about upsetting s=
ex
> and gender roles. Janis Edwards=92 reminder that political cartoons contin=
ue
> to use caricatures of gender and sexual transgression provides a larger
> context for exploring what is upsetting about breaking gender norms. If =
we
> introduce the cross-dressing vilification of feminists (male and female) =
in
> the nineteenth century, it can set the stage for understanding fear of
> lesbians in the twentieth century. (I will definitely be doing more with
> cartoons after this Forum!)
>
> Like Jane Gerhard, I confront the assumption that
> feminism=3Dlesbianism=3Dman-hating. A tricky part about responding is not
> affirming the fear by simply denying that all feminists are lesbians. I
> like Jane=92s approach of teaching about the ways this accusation was used =
in
> the past (dismantling the man-hating in the process), and then also showi=
ng
> when and why some lesbians were in fact drawn to feminism. I would add th=
at
> it could be instructive to look at the change in liberal feminist attitud=
es
> towards lesbians, from distancing and the =93lavender menace=94 in the 1960s =
to
> the inclusion of lesbian rights in the National Organization for Women by
> the 1980s. It provides one illustration of internal conflict, as well as
> growth in response to challenge.
>
> I look forward to further thoughts on these threads and on new on=
es as
> well. What about using biography to teach about feminism (Jane Addams,
> Eleanor Roosevelt, and others have come up so far)? And I've meant to gi=
ve
> the web link for the National Women's History Project catalogue - lots of
> K-12 materials: http://www.nwhp.org/new_catalog/index.html
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Estelle
>
> This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at
> http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. Histor=
y.
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:02:00 -0700
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Max Dashu
Subject: Re: groundbreaking feminist?
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>Interesting that you mention Jane Addams as a groundbreaking
>feminist. How would you respond to the fact that her work was
>nevertheless confined to a domestic sphere (i.e. childcare, primary
>education and some aspects of city reform)? If I remember correctly,
>she wanted to become a doctor but was barred from medical school
>because of her gender (please correct me if I am wrong). I find it
>difficult to believe that women such as Addams had real choice with
>regards to careers.
Certainly she faced limits on her choices. However, how does her
choosing to work in areas of concern to large groups of women rule
out her being a groundbreaking feminist? Addams supported and
advocated for women who lived under severe pressures and whose needs
were ignored by the dominant society. That qualifies for me.
> Historically, hasn't one way to prevent any group from making real
>progress is to hold up a few examples of achievement or overcoming
>adversity and proclaim that; "see, everything is better after all"?
Yes, but if feminists were to retreat from acting for fear of the
spin that would be put on our actions, we'd be immobilized. Another
angle to this question which has come up many times is the worth of
"cleaning up after patriarchy," helping the victimized, vs "creating
social change." Many have argued that empowering the oppressed is the
ground floor of creating social change. Some will see it as
reformist, and certainly Linda Gordon has shown how social "reforms"
are structured by the powers that be for ends of social control, but
I'd say that Addams did break important ground.
--
Max Dashu
Global Women's Studies
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:00:34 -0400
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Wendy Chmielewski
Subject: Re: groundbreaking feminist?
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
In 1881-1882 Jane Addams was enrolled as a medical student at the
Women's Medical College of Pennsylvania, one of the few institutions
in the US to grant medical degrees to women . She withdrew after the
first year because of health problems.
I would agree with Max Dashu that Addams' work at Hull House was
indeed ground breaking. It is unclear whether or not Addams would
have called herself a feminist, but she did campaign for suffrage and
work on other women's rights issues. She even appeared in an early
suffrage moving picture.
The current discussion on Addams ignores her tremendous work on
international peace issues which absorbed the last twenty-five years
of her life. Addams chose to work through the Women's International
League for Peace and Freedom, an organization, heavily dominated by
international suffrage leaders and professional women. In this work
Addams combined her experience from Hull House and the urban
environment of Chicago, her knowledge of, and support for, women's
issues, with what she saw as the need for reordering international
politics after the debacle of World War I. Addams' supporters and
detractors both, recognized the ground breaking aspect of this work
as well.
Wendy Chmielewski
--
Wendy E. Chmielewski, PhD.
Curator
Swarthmore College Peace Collection
500 College Ave.
Swarthmore, PA 19081 U.S.A.
E-mail: wchmiel@swarthmore.edu
Phone: (610) 328-8557
Fax: (610) 690-5728
Swarthmore Peace Collection World Wide Web site
************************************************************
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 09:43:12 +1000
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Ian Tyrrell
Subject: Re: groundbreaking feminist?
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="============_-1179125090==_ma============"
--============_-1179125090==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>I agree with these comments, but these points were not entirely
>neglected, at least by me. I've been off the list for a few days so
>haven't been able to see all comments, but I did write earlier--and
>I presume it was posted--as follows:
Jane Adams's internationalism and her peace work also nicely
intersects with her domestic reform-- and there are widely available
biographies and sketches of her as well as her primary sources such
as Newer Ideals of Peace (1907)
Ian Tyrrell
>In 1881-1882 Jane Addams was enrolled as a medical student at the
>Women's Medical College of Pennsylvania, one of the few institutions
>in the US to grant medical degrees to women . She withdrew after the
>first year because of health problems.
>
>I would agree with Max Dashu that Addams' work at Hull House was
>indeed ground breaking. It is unclear whether or not Addams would
>have called herself a feminist, but she did campaign for suffrage and
>work on other women's rights issues. She even appeared in an early
>suffrage moving picture.
>
>The current discussion on Addams ignores her tremendous work on
>international peace issues which absorbed the last twenty-five years
>of her life. Addams chose to work through the Women's International
>League for Peace and Freedom, an organization, heavily dominated by
>international suffrage leaders and professional women. In this work
>Addams combined her experience from Hull House and the urban
>environment of Chicago, her knowledge of, and support for, women's
>issues, with what she saw as the need for reordering international
>politics after the debacle of World War I. Addams' supporters and
>detractors both, recognized the ground breaking aspect of this work
>as well.
>
>Wendy Chmielewski
>
>
>--
>
>Wendy E. Chmielewski, PhD.
>Curator
>Swarthmore College Peace Collection
>500 College Ave.
>Swarthmore, PA 19081 U.S.A.
>E-mail: wchmiel@swarthmore.edu
>Phone: (610) 328-8557
>Fax: (610) 690-5728
>Swarthmore Peace Collection World Wide Web site
>
>************************************************************
>
>This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web
>site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for
>teaching U.S. History.
--============_-1179125090==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Re: groundbreaking feminist?
I agree with these comments, but these
points were not entirely neglected, at least by me. I've been off the
list for a few days so haven't been able to see all comments, but I
did write earlier--and I presume it was posted--as
follows:
Jane Adams's internationalism and her
peace work also nicely intersects with her domestic reform-- and there
are widely available biographies and sketches of her as well as her
primary sources such as Newer Ideals of Peace
(1907)
Ian Tyrrell
In 1881-1882 Jane Addams was enrolled as
a medical student at the
Women's Medical College of Pennsylvania,
one of the few institutions
in the US to grant medical degrees to women . She withdrew after
the
first year because of health problems.
I would agree with Max Dashu that Addams' work at Hull House was
indeed ground breaking. It is unclear whether or not Addams
would
have called herself a feminist, but she did campaign for suffrage
and
work on other women's rights issues. She even appeared in an
early
suffrage moving picture.
The current discussion on Addams ignores her tremendous work on
international peace issues which absorbed the last twenty-five
years
of her life. Addams chose to work through the Women's
International
League for Peace and Freedom, an organization, heavily dominated
by
international suffrage leaders and professional women. In this
work
Addams combined her experience from Hull House and the urban
environment of Chicago, her knowledge of, and support for,
women's
issues, with what she saw as the need for reordering international
politics after the debacle of World War I. Addams' supporters
and
detractors both, recognized the ground breaking aspect of this
work
as well.
Wendy Chmielewski
--
Wendy E. Chmielewski, PhD.
Curator
Swarthmore College Peace Collection
500 College Ave.
Swarthmore, PA 19081 U.S.A.
E-mail: wchmiel@swarthmore.edu
Phone: (610) 328-8557
Fax: (610) 690-5728
Swarthmore Peace Collection World Wide Web site
<http://www.swarthmore.edu/Library/peace>
************************************************************
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site
at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S.
History.
--============_-1179125090==_ma============--
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 20:52:36 EDT
Reply-To: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Cathy Stephenson
Subject: Re: groundbreaking feminist?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="part1_16f.14402ed3.2ac11154_boundary"
--part1_16f.14402ed3.2ac11154_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Greetings,
I am not a High School teacher but admired those of you who are. I would like
to find out if any of you have considered offering Gerda Lerner's two part
series of books, The Creation of Patriarchy and The Creation of Feminist
Consciousness as a resource to your Feminist course?
I just completed The Creation of Patriarchy and am now reading The Creation
of Feminist Consciousness. Although I would not be considered in your circle
of networking I believe I have some insight that is of importance in my class
situation.
You see I am a Union Carpenter, and have been for 13 years, I would be
considered on the lower end of the class line, but am very much aware of how
class plays a central role in those who get and those who don't. I am
grateful to those women who were among the elite, if only for the fact that
they were given an easier road like the men in their lives. I am also
interested in seeing women get an easier road no matter what class they fit
into, and hope at some point in my lifetime that men will stop the oppressive
behavior.
I am grateful for your book Estelle B. Freedman, No Turning Back, and I have
shared what I have learned from it on my Homepage to other women in the
construction industry, I am not sure that my Homepage is getting out, but I
will not stop sharing, caring and offering women what experience I have had
at my class level.
I am not one to stroke the elite and that encompasses both men and women, my
hope is that those in privileged positions will begin to empower women,
rather than to continue to stroke the males. Men already have a network and
a massive support system especially if women continue to value what they say
and do rather than support what women say and do. It is a wonderful tactic
that has worked through the life of human kind, how gullible we women are!
In Spirit,
Cathy, Union Carpenter, 13 years
--part1_16f.14402ed3.2ac11154_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Greetings,
I am not a High School teacher but admired those of you who are. I would like to find out if any of you have considered offering Gerda Lerner's two part series of books, The Creation of Patriarchy and The Creation of Feminist Consciousness as a resource to your Feminist course?
I just completed The Creation of Patriarchy and am now reading The Creation of Feminist Consciousness. Although I would not be considered in your circle of networking I believe I have some insight that is of importance in my class situation.
You see I am a Union Carpenter, and have been for 13 years, I would be considered on the lower end of the class line, but am very much aware of how class plays a central role in those who get and those who don't. I am grateful to those women who were among the elite, if only for the fact that they were given an easier road like the men in their lives. I am also interested in seeing women get an easier road no matter what class they fit into, and hope at some point in my lifetime that men will stop the oppressive behavior.
I am grateful for your book Estelle B. Freedman, No Turning Back, and I have shared what I have learned from it on my Homepage to other women in the construction industry, I am not sure that my Homepage is getting out, but I will not stop sharing, caring and offering women what experience I have had at my class level.
I am not one to stroke the elite and that encompasses both men and women, my hope is that those in privileged positions will begin to empower women, rather than to continue to stroke the males. Men already have a network and a massive support system especially if women continue to value what they say and do rather than support what women say and do. It is a wonderful tactic that has worked through the life of human kind, how gullible we women are!
In Spirit,
Cathy, Union Carpenter, 13 years
--part1_16f.14402ed3.2ac11154_boundary--
This forum is sponsored by History Matters--please visit our Web site at http://historymatters.gmu.edu for more resources for teaching U.S. History.
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 11:38:45 -0500
Reply-To: Victoria Brown
Sender: "History of Feminist Movements in the U.S."
From: Victoria Brown
Subject: Re: groundbreaking feminist?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0025_01C263BE.F0D2D440"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0025_01C263BE.F0D2D440
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am coming to this discussion after a few days' hiatus and hesitate to =
take away from Cathy Stevenson's excellent line of discussion to circle =
back to Jane Addams. Wendy Chmielewski and Ian Tyrell have already made =
good points. I just wanted to address Peter Haro's suggestion that, =
perhaps, Addams wasn't a feminist because she focused on "domestic =
issues." While I happen to agree with Wendy that we want to be careful =
about how we apply the term "feminist" to Addams, my caution is not =
based on her focus on "domestic issues." It is very much a feminist =
project to insist that government take seriously the housing conditions, =
the working conditions, the educational opportunities, the cleanliness =
of our streets/food/drugs, the wage scales, and the cultural life of the =
populace in a democracy. The insistence that such matters be on the =
public agenda, that they not be confined to private life, is central to =
feminism and central to an effort to redistribute wealth in a =
capitalist, but ostensibly democratic, society. Addams was very clear =
in arguing that a democracy depends on the maximum participation by its =
citizens and for citizens to be able to participate, as voters, as =
communicators with their representatives, then they must be educated =
have working hours that leave them time to read/be informed/participate =
in political gatherings, they must be well paid, well fed, decently =
housed and clothed, and have access to health services, clean water, =
clean food, clean streets. These are the very "domestic" fundamentals =
of a democratic society. Those are the issues to which Addams devoted =
her lifebefore becoming an international peace activist. We can =
certainly argue over whether she was a self-defined "feminist" -- tho I =
think this forum has other fish to fry -- but I would caution against =
dismissing her from feminist ranks becuase of her focus on "domestic" =
issues. On the contrary, I would argue that it is precisely that focuse =
that argues most strongly for including Addams among American feminists. =
=20
Victoria Brown
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Cathy Stephenson=20
To: FEMINISMFORUM@ASHP.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU=20
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 7:52 PM
Subject: Re: groundbreaking feminist?
Greetings,=20
I am not a High School teacher but admired those of you who are. I =
would like to find out if any of you have considered offering Gerda =
Lerner's two part series of books, The Creation of Patriarchy and The =
Creation of Feminist Consciousness as a resource to your Feminist =
course?=20
I just completed The Creation of Patriarchy and am now reading The =
Creation of Feminist Consciousness. Although I would not be considered =
in your circle of networking I believe I have some insight that is of =
importance in my class situation.=20
You see I am a Union Carpenter, and have been for 13 years, I would be =
considered on the lower end of the class line, but am very much aware of =
how class plays a central role in those who get and those who don't. I =
am grateful to those women who were among the elite, if only for the =
fact that they were given an easier road like the men in their lives. I =
am also interested in seeing women get an easier road no matter what =
class they fit into, and hope at some point in my lifetime that men will =
stop the oppressive behavior.=20
I am grateful for your book Estelle B. Freedman, No Turning Back, and =
I have shared what I have learned from it on my Homepage to other women =
in the construction industry, I am not sure that my Homepage is getting =
out, but I will not stop sharing, caring and offering women what =
experience I have had at my class level.=20
I am not one to stroke the elite and that encompasses both men and =
women, my hope is that those in privileged positions will begin to =
empower women, rather than to continue to stroke the males. Men already =
have a network and a massive support system especially if women continue =
to value what they say and do rather than support what women say and do. =
It is a wonderful tactic that has worked through the life of human kind, =
how gullible we women are!=20
In Spirit,=20
Cathy, Union Carpenter, 13 years=20
------=_NextPart_000_0025_01C263BE.F0D2D440
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am coming to this discussion after a =
few days'=20
hiatus and hesitate to take away from Cathy Stevenson's excellent line =
of=20
discussion to circle back to Jane Addams. Wendy Chmielewski and Ian Tyrell have =
already made good=20
points. I just wanted to address Peter Haro's suggestion that, =
perhaps,=20
Addams wasn't a feminist because she focused on "domestic issues." =
While I=20
happen to agree with Wendy that we want to be careful about how we apply =
the=20
term "feminist" to Addams, my caution is not based on her focus on =
"domestic=20
issues." It is very much a feminist project to insist that =
government take=20
seriously the housing conditions, the working conditions, the =
educational=20
opportunities, the cleanliness of our streets/food/drugs, the wage =
scales, and=20
the cultural life of the populace in a democracy. The insistence =
that such=20
matters be on the public agenda, that they not be confined to private =
life, is=20
central to feminism and central to an effort to redistribute wealth in a =
capitalist, but ostensibly democratic, society. Addams was very =
clear in=20
arguing that a democracy depends on the maximum participation by its =
citizens=20
and for citizens to be able to participate, as voters, as communicators =
with=20
their representatives, then they must be educated have working hours =
that leave=20
them time to read/be informed/participate in political gatherings, they =
must be=20
well paid, well fed, decently housed and clothed, and have access to =
health=20
services, clean water, clean food, clean streets. These are the =
very=20
"domestic" fundamentals of a democratic society. Those are the =
issues to=20
which Addams devoted her lifebefore becoming an international peace=20
activist. We can certainly argue over whether she was a =
self-defined=20
"feminist" -- tho I think this forum has other fish to fry -- but I =
would=20
caution against dismissing her from feminist ranks becuase of her focus =
on=20
"domestic" issues. On the contrary, I would argue that it is =
precisely=20
that focuse that argues most strongly for including Addams among =
American=20
feminists.
Victoria=20
Brown
----- Original Message -----
From:=20
Cathy=20
Stephenson