I want to start off by noting that a number of you did the incorrect assignment this week. In my announcement about the week, I linked to a folder with the piece by Goldberg Moses. This was not the assignment. It was a reference. The assignment, as indicated in the course schedule, was to read and watch the materials on the 19th-century movement for suffrage. While I can now see that this confused some of you, and I will still count your posts for this week, PLEASE ALWAYS CONSULT THE SCHEDULE FOR THE ASSIGNMENT. I hope this does not happen again.

Approach to history this semester

We begin the history unit of the course this week, with the 19th century and the readings and video on suffrage. Next week, we continue into the early 20th century with women’s role in the labor movement, as discussed through the example of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire, and the Equal Rights Amendment, which followed once the vote was won. We will take a somewhat chronological journey over the next few weeks, to understand how feminist thought has developed. Of course, this will not be a comprehensive history – there is another course for that and all history is partial. Rather, it will be a brief look at how one movement gave way to another.

You may be familiar with the idea of feminist waves. While there has been much debate about this metaphor and whether it is still useful, it does provide a way of teaching and learning about the development of feminist consciousness. Please know this is just one way to think about it. In reality, it is much messier, intersects with many ideas besides feminism, and nobody fully agrees on how to define the waves.

Throughout our study of the past we will observe 1.) Examples of women and LGBTQ+ people organizing for change 2.) activism to advance the interests of these communities and seek justice around identities 3.) activism to expose, challenge and destabilize hierarchies where one identity group is given more access to power.

Why study this history?

In the piece, “‘What’s in a Name?’ On Writing the History of Feminism” (2012). Claire Goldberg Moses analyses the history, scope, gains, and limitations that come from the collective term “feminism.” Moses emphasizes that the term “feminism” is not static or fixed. There is no singular definition for feminism. She explores which collective women’s activity has been included and excluded as “feminist” in order to illustrate that historians “construct a narrative of the past.” Moses provides a brief history of women who claimed the term feminist to describe their collective action. She connects the discussion of women claiming the title of feminist to contemporary times by writing about the narrowing of the usage of the term “feminist” since the 1990s. Although sexism outraged her students, they rarely claimed the label of feminist. Moses then argues that the name “feminism” is important because the periods when women made the most gains were when women claimed, “the word ‘feminism’ most broadly, imbuing it with multiple meanings, and thereby created the largest sense of belonging, a shared aspiration for women’s empowerment.” She claims that the name “feminist” does matter because “our history matters,” because it is important to historically understand women’s inequality, and because names give strength to global movements.  

If we want equality today, we have to understand the past. Feminist analysis has always recognized that rewriting and remembering history is central to the project of equity.  Considering history from a feminist point of view not only serves to correct to gaps, erasures, and misunderstandings of hegemonic master narratives we have been previously taught but also is a way for individuals to form a political consciousness and self-identity. Understanding the past can, for example, help us recognize that the current wave of new legislation regarding voting laws (most of which make it harder for people to exercise their right to vote) has a deep and nefarious history.

Due this week:

March 16 @ 11: 59pm Reading Reflection 6 & Discussion 7

March 18 @ 11:59 pm: Responses to Discussion 7

After a few weeks of exploring privilege and oppression, we now turn to activism. Activism is a major pillar of gender and women’s studies. The discipline itself grew out of the activism of the 1960s and 1970s. It is also how we address issues of privilege and oppression.

Please read excerpts from How to Think Like An Activist by Wendy Syfret. The reading looks like it is long, but there are a lot of pages in there that are bold-faced quotes. There are also “Action” and “Explainer” pages. These are inserts that provide examples of HOW to enact what the author is writing about in the rest of the book. You can feel free to skip them or come back to them later. Or you can read them as you go. I do find them useful.

You will also watch a film from this YouTube playlist. All of the films are really good, but choose one to view.

Discussion post 6 and Reading Reflection 5 are due Wednesday, March 9 by 11:59 pm. Responses to Discussion 6 are due Friday, March 11 by 11:59 pm.

This week you have two readings, each of which expands on the concepts of privilege and oppression from the week four readings. The Johnson reading addresses the fact that there are different levels of oppression and these levels influence one another. The Lorde reading addresses intersectionality, though she does not name it such in this piece.

Intersectionality, which we will continue to read about throughout the semester, is the idea that systems of oppression overlap and cannot be fully separated. Those systems socialize us as individuals with identities that are impacted. I use the contrasting analogies of a salad vs. a cake to explain intersectionality. We are not salads. We cannot take out the onions or the anchovies and either eat just them or have our salad without them. Instead, we are more like a cake made of flour, sugar, eggs, milk, baking powder, etc. We can never separate those ingredients into discreet parts because they all work together to create the cake.

Reflection #4 and Discussion Post #5 are due Wednesday, March 2nd by 11:59 pm/

Responses to three classmates’ discussion 5 posts are due Friday, March 4 by 11:59 pm.

A bit more about each reading:

Allan Johnson, “Patriarchy, the System: An It, Not a He, a Them, or an Us” (2014)

Allan Johnson explains that changes to the patriarchal system cannot come through an individualistic understanding of the system. As a society, individuals must understand how social systems perpetuate social problems—the system of patriarchy has been made and perpetuated by individuals, but it is not an individual. Johnson clarifies that we must understand the system of patriarchy in order to create a different system of socialization. While we all participate in social systems, we can change the system itself.

Audre Lorde, “There Is No Hierarchy of Oppressions” (1983)

In “There Is No Hierarchy of Oppressions,” Audre Lorde completes an intersectional analysis of her identities and her status as a member of oppressed groups. She explains that sexism, heterosexism, and racism all function together as systems of oppression. Because all of these systems work together, Lorde argues, there is no hierarchy of oppression—we must fight all forms of oppression, not just a singular system. 

Expanding and Clarifying Concepts

Many of you pointed out that privilege and oppression interact. For example, you may be very proud of an aspect of your identity and yet experience oppression because of that same aspect. What feels like a privilege in one space may change in a different context. When one experiences privilege, someone else often experiences oppression. And when one experiences oppression, it is because there is a privilege that they don’t have access to.

A lot of you pointed out that access to water and shelter in some parts of the world is limited. I think it is important to note here that there are many places in this country, even in this city where people don’t have access to these things. This can be because they are unhoused or because their housing is not maintained. The city of Flint, MI has had contaminated water for years. Many indigenous people living on tribal lands that are now part of the US, don’t have access to clean running water either (see link).

Some of you noted that you didn’t realize some things were privileges, like waking up in the morning and opening your eyes. Many people complain about growing older, but aging is actually a privilege determined by many social factors including access to healthcare (health is a privilege), exposure to environmental hazards, violence in a community, etc. At the same time, age is a social factor in privilege and oppression. Children aren’t believed because of their age. Senior Citizens are often seen as a burden because they might move at a different pace. We value youth in this society, as evidenced by all of the ads for creams and tonics that can make you look ten years younger! While we value the wisdom of age, we value youthful non-disabled bodies as a society. It’s complicated.

This all brings me to levels of oppression. Depending on where you look, you will find different definitions/labels. They all get at the same thing and that is that oppression operates in various ways which all influence one another. Week five readings get more deeply into and provide examples without naming them. But, they are:

• Personal – Feelings, thoughts, beliefs about others and attitudes about differences (conscious and intentional or unconscious and unintentional).
• Interpersonal – Language, action, and behaviors.
• Institutional – Rules, policies practices and procedures, both written and unwritten, that an organization has that function to intentionally or unintentionally, advantage some individuals and disadvantage others.
• Cultural/Structural – What is considered “true,” “right,” “normal,” and “beautiful.”

General Reminders

• DO NOT USE “CATEGORY STICKY” on any of your posts. There should be nothing selected in this area. You should select the proper category from the “Categories” area, but ignore the “Category Sticky” area.
• When you are using text directly from the readings YOU MUST CITE IT. That means putting it in quotation marks and attributing it to the author. Please see this helpful guide from the BMCC library for more information.
• A lot of you write sentences like “I agree with privilege because…”. Privilege isn’t something you agree or disagree with. It is a concept. You can find the concept useful, helpful, problematic. You can experience privilege. But agree/disagree doesn’t really work in this context. Consider this with all concepts we explore this semester.
• Pay attention to publication dates. If something was written in the 1980s it will read differently than something written in the 2020s.

This week you have two readings. You should also complete your Reflection #3 and Discussion #4, as well as respond to three of your classmates’ Discussion #4 posts.

This week we move away from discussions and definitions of gender specifically, and attempt to understand the terms “oppression” and “privilege.” These are things many of us think we understand, but if asked to provide a clear definition we aren’t always able. I have also included an optional reading that demonstrates how these concepts actually operate in everyday life. “When Privilege and Oppression Intersect” by Joseph Mabry is a fairly quick read that I highly recommend checking out.

Required Reading

Marilyn Frye, “Oppression” (1983)

In “Oppression,” Marilyn Frye seeks to explain and clarify what oppression is and challenges the claim that men can be oppressed as men. Frye begins by exploring the root word of oppression and explains that oppression leads to double binds, such as women being expected to both be sexual and virginal. In double binds, the oppressed is punished for performing any of the options open to them. Frye also illuminates the ways in which oppression is a set of socially constructed systems. She emphasizes that oppression must be examined on a macroscopic level because analysis at the microscopic level obscures the structure and intent of oppression. Frye concludes this article by arguing that women are oppressed as women. While members of racial groups can be oppressed as members of that racial group and members of certain economic classes can be oppressed as members of that economic class, men are not oppressed as men.

Peggy McIntosh, “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” (1988)

Peggy McIntosh explores the ways in which white privilege is hidden and unacknowledged within culture and positions the discussion of white privilege within a feminist framework. McIntosh explains the way white people acknowledge the need for racial justice while refusing to acknowledge white privilege and the way privilege is set up to remain hidden within society. She brings white privilege into dialogue with feminism by comparing and contrasting it with male privilege. McIntosh makes a list of the ways she is privileged to make its definition less elusive and then analyzes those privileges. She then distinguishes between unearned power and earned strength, emphasizing that unearned power is disguised as strength within American culture. McIntosh concludes by illustrating how systems of privilege interlock to keep dominant groups in power and challenging readers to recognize the structure of these systems in order to change them.