History and Sexism
It could just be a coincidence.
This semester I run two of ten tutorials for a very large first-year world history class that covers the years 1914-1945. There is an acknowledged Western perspective.
Last week there was one lecture (50 minutes) assigned to the topic “Women in the 20th Century.” This had been rubbing me since the beginning of the semester when I first got the syllabus. I had heard of the “add women & stir” approach to women’s history but had never seen it so boldly in action. This week the students read the first (and only) readings for the course written by women.
Message here:
- women only write about women
- women don’t write about the world in the 20th century
But that wasn’t where it ended. The prof wrote to the assistants a day before labs to say that covering only a few of the discussion questions would be adequate and mainly to concentrate on returning student papers and exams.
Message here:
- it is okay to dismiss the small bit of women’s history/feminist history included in the course
- what women say isn’t important — what women say isn’t as important as what men say
- women are not a significant part of 20th century history
Of course this is nothing new. History (patriarchy for that matter) is full of dismissing women’s thoughts, writings, and activities. I know I was sheltered living for four years inside of Women’s Studies, thinking that as I was opening my eyes to it so was the rest of the world. Since moving to the discipline of History I am frequently reminded why we still need women’s history.
Until women’s history is integrated in the survey course there is no equality.
What an interesting post. As I’m only a part time student I’ve only taken a few courses so far. I’m a women’s studies major, with a labour studies minor and I have planned lots of history courses thrown in to cover black history, aboriginal history, etc. So I guess I have to look forward to hearing all about only black men’s history and aboriginal men’s history! What a disappointment! Remind me why I somehow thought Adademia would be more enlightened?!
See Jacqui, thing is, this isn’t at all what I expected. I managed a minor in History but all of the History courses I took were either cross-listed with Women’s Studies or else they were women-emphasis. I didn’t take any of the generic survey courses. I think if I had I might not be here right now — they would have turned me right off.
She’s not at Windsor anymore, but I’ve heard that Dr. Nina Reid-Maroney’s American survey courses were well balanced. And any course taught by Dr. Tina Simmons (currently on sabbatical until next fall) is a good one to take because she also infuses multiple perspectives into the coursework. As far as the other profs go… can’t say I’ve seen or heard much of promise just yet. There’s a definite need for a women’s historian on campus this semester.