| On Women's History This was posted to an online group on August 31, 2004. |
| There has been an awful lot of discussion about Feminism and the roles of gender recently. In order to give some common background that people can refer to in any discussion about this, I thought I'd pull on everyone's ear for a while and provide some information that I got while going to college. I have a degree in History, and more than that, I consider myself a historian (albeit an amateur one since I don't earn any money from it). As part my history coursework, I took about 15 credits worth of classes that focused on the aspect of history that has been neglected by traditional historians up until about the 1970s (eg: the "soft" history, or social history) of the average person and how life was like through the ages for people who were not making headlines. Most of this centered on the study of the various roles that women played in whatever society they lived. Women's history is really the history of the family, of the home, of the cultural underpinnings of a society. This is different than the history of warfare, politics and technology. Each is important, though. It's just that until the last 25 years academia has virtually ignored the "softer" history, relegating it to a minor role where people who study it are thought of as a bunch of crazy harmless coots. Nowadays though, historians view this "softer" history as equally as valid a study as that of the study of politicians and generals. The most important thing that I learned during my studies in this field was the evolution of the roles that men and women played over the course of time in different societies. In other words, just how did we get to the point that the Feminist Movement took place in this country, and why did it happen? What patterns shaped the way our society is today. Without the background of this 5000-year historical perspective it is very easy to get caught up in the attention-grabbing headlines of today in regards to gender roles and relations. So I am going to attempt to encapsulate the history of women in as short a space as I can. *** In the Beginning... First off the theory that was popular during the 1970s that there was a matriarchal "Eden" during the time from the Pleistocene (the latest Ice Age) up to when humans invented agriculture has pretty much been debunked. It is most likely that the roles that women played in primitive societies were similar to the roles that Native American women of the Great Plains tribes had. Women probably held strong influence in certain areas of the power structure of the tribe (especially in regards to areas involving societal relationships, food distribution, resolving internal conflicts, etc.), but when it came to hunting or warfare it was generally the men who called the shots. The work was divided among the genders so that things that could be easily done around camp were done by women, while anything involving travel or huge muscle mass involved men. Women were able to do hunting and fighting sometimes (there is recent archaeological evidence of women participating in hunting at least, and traditionally women always fought to protect invaders of the tribal camp), and men sometimes performed camp chores (there were even "soft men" who acted as women - I personally know a modern-day Shoshone "soft man" in Idaho who lives on the Fort Hall Reservation). *** Patriarchy Starts Once humans began cultivating they settled into towns and "civilization" began. With this it was necessary to specialize, because farming took up a lot of time, and it was necessary to front a military, because not being nomadic meant that you were a standing target. If another hostile tribe came into the neighborhood, you couldn't pack up your barley field and move it to another area. Having a military meant that some people were not involved directly in the process of creating food and tools. This made it so that agrarian people specialized as to what their job was to be, unlike the nomadic people who were pretty much generalists. With this specialization of roles and jobs the gender roles became more solidly entrenched. Another outcome of the agricultural revolution was that the concept of seed was introduced. It became more evident that men were as responsible for the creation of a baby as women were, and so the status of women as being the creative goddesses that they had been viewed as by earlier beliefs changed. Both of these influences relegated women into restrictive roles in which only in special cases (such as temple priestesses or oracles) were they able to exert any influence over forces that directly effected their lives and the lives of their families. This was what most people regard as the beginning of Patriarchy. This word was actually used by the Romans to describe their society in which they lived. Things continued to become more restrictive for women over the course of time. By the time the Greeks spread their cultural influence over the civilized world, they had added another aspect to society's view of women that would influence people from India to England. This was that women are slaves to their emotions and passions. Plato, Socrates, Paul, and others continued to add to this concept with their writings. Keep in mind I am mostly discussing the role of women in the development of what is known as "Western Civilization", which is not totally restricted to the Mediterranean area. It is more of where the Greek and then the Roman empires were able to spread. This view of women is that because they are so emotional and have mood swings and are so passionate, they represent a threat to the structure of civilized society. It's like if society was to allow women to rant and carry on unchecked that the whole thing would collapse. So to keep order EVERY woman MUST be under the protective guidance of a man of some kind. Society shaped itself so that no woman would ever be alone by herself to live her life as she deemed proper. Widows who were young were remarried; old widows were shunted off to the corners of society unless one of their sons took them into his household. So even if a woman had to have her own son be her protective guardian against her own nature it was better than living on her own. All that mattered was that a man be present to be in charge of her life. Now, this condition is still very prevalent among many societies and cultures in the world, notably in Northern Africa, Asia and the Middle East (the Muslim culture borrowed heavily from the Greek culture that came before it). Why then did it change in Europe? There were several important factors that instigated this change. *** The Cult Of the Virgin Mary The first big movement to hit Europe to significantly change women's role in society was the introduction into Christianity from Germanic, Celtic and Slavic pagan beliefs of the concept of the Divine Feminine. This was brought over into Christianity by using the Virgin Mary as the embodiment of the pagan Goddess principle. This all started in Europe around the 300s or 400s, and it was the Germanic (or Gothic) tribes that spread this concept throughout the lands they conquered and settled into throughout the entire European continent. What this meant was that women were not just viewed anymore as pathetic slaves of their emotions and desires, but that they could also be divine. This was the beginning of the "Whore vs. Saint" syndrome that a lot of cultures and sub-cultures attribute to women. This black-and-white mentality is very prominent in the Mormon Culture, for instance. A woman is either a saint by living the precepts of the gospel, or if she blows it then she is a whore, because that was the mentality under this system. ***The Cult of Romantic Love Starting in about the 1200s traveling minstrels began singing songs whose lyrics were full of the concept of romance. Men and women had always loved each other, especially among the lower classes in Europe where people tended to fall in love as teenagers and as soon as a girl got pregnant her male relatives would force the boy at spear point to marry her. But for the aristocracy and bourgeois the norm was for people to have arranged marriages that often benefited the family's status more than the individual who was being married. The minstrels in the Middle Ages were akin to today's rock and roll stars. When a minstrel came to town or to a castle in the country EVERYONE stopped working and went to hear the music. It was usually quite the event to have a new minstrel come. And so the songs that were sung by these minstrels had quite a strong impact on society. The fate of the people in a lot of these songs didn't end in a happy way, but the listeners felt empathy and compassion for the songs' protagonists. What came of this was the idea that two people were destined by fate to find each other, that they were "soul mates". And what was more, that they might not be married to each other. In fact, given the situation of arranged marriages, it was almost guaranteed that they would not be married to each other. The result of this was that people began to feel that an individual's private feelings were as important if not more so than the role that society had cast them into. If a woman and man fell in love and they were already married to someone else, then there was a "higher", more spiritual duty upon discovering one's "soul mate" than the duties that society placed on them of marriage, family and social standing. People who ran off or had affairs with someone else with whom fate had placed together were viewed as not simply cheating on their spouses, but were judged more tenderly by the society. What this did to women was to give them the idea that they had a responsibility to their own destiny. It empowered them to be able to understand that they were not just either a whore or saint, but that there was this whole gray area of being in love with someone with whom one is not married to. It was the beginning of the idea that the individual counts for more than just merely a cog in the machine of society. It is important for the individual to have responsibility for their own fate rather than be an obedient servant to the role that society placed them in. ***The Age of Chivalry Coinciding with the Cult of Romantic Love, there was a new philosophy that began to also spread around Europe that has was called Chivalry. It is basically a code of honor for warriors. Chivalry at its best was a way of life that required men to quit acting like they had been raised in a barn (even if they had actually been raised in a barn), and start acting like people who one could hang around without wanting to run for the hills. This change in the way men behaved was long overdue. Up to this point in time most men in Europe of even the highest levels of society never bathed, ate with only their hands and a knife, wiped their faces on their clothing, slapped women and children around without thought, killed innocent defenseless people, raped, pillaged, sported with all manner of creation, etc etc etc. Basically they were brutes of the worst sort. Chivalry entered the picture and SLOWLY over the course of centuries men's behavior began to change as society placed stronger peer pressure and enacted laws that required that men quit behaving in the way that they had been for thousands of years. Even today men are still trying to live up to the tenets of chivalry. Part of the problem is that it's not really in the nature of the human animal to be confined and restricted, and this is true whether we're talking about men or women. But most people would agree that if we are to live together harmoniously it is imperative that men learn how to behave better than their brutish ancestors. The basic underlying philosophy of chivalry is that if a person has strength then it is the duty of that person to use his strength in ways that are "good", and not for "evil". If a man is truly strong, it is not necessary to always go around trying to show how strong he is, but rather by showing that he can be gentle and nurturing to women and children, he shows that he is confident enough in his strength and masculinity to be able to be gentle to others. Men who are bullies are not really strong, but are trying to compensate for their weakness by being brutish and putting up a fa�ade and a travesty of strength. This all was for the most part beneficial to women. However one of the disadvantages that chivalry introduced to society was for men to place women into a category of people that need protection. Men viewed themselves as being protectors of women and children and bunnies and anything too weak to protect themselves, and it was just another role that was placed on women in which they were unable to live authentic lives free of societal pressures. If women today reject the idea that they wish to be under the protection of a man, this can lead to a lot of miscommunication, marital discord, and even domestic violence in some cases. ***Cult of Motherhood Up to the time of the Industrial Revolution women were still viewed in Western Civilization with a mixture of all of the previously mentioned roles. In New England the Puritans still maintained a very rigid view that women should always be under the care of a man, and that they are the "weaker sex" in the sense that they were A) weak in the head, B) weak physically, and C) weak as far as being slaves to their passions and emotions. It was quite common in New England during the 1600s and 1700s for a woman to be put in the stocks in the town square with a tabard hanging from her neck announcing that she was guilty of being a "scold" (which in today's parlance would translate as being a "bitch"). Imagine having your mother put in the stocks for a couple of days just because she insisted that your father wipe his feet when he came in covered with mud. Once the Industrial Revolution began the structure of the family began to change. No longer was the father around during the day to help instruct the children in learning how to earn a living, helping to enforce the rules of the house, or to set an example to the kids. And when the father returned from a hard day's work he was usually too worn out to deal with a lot of things at home. Before the time when men went off to work at an office or factory they were equally involved with their wives with the raising of their children. After the Industrial Revolution this changed so that almost 100% of the responsibility of raising the children shifted to either the mother or the school system. When this happened suddenly society decided that it needed to elevate the status of women as the "shapers of society". It was women who raised the children who in turn would take on the responsibilities of leadership in society when they reached adulthood. As a result, women gained a level of status that they had not enjoyed since the time when humans first began to settle into agrarian villages. In fact, and here lies the rub, they actually gained TOO MUCH status. It was during this time that Mother's Day was created, that people started writing poetry, and creating dedicatory statues to mothers. Yet it was at its core simply yet another role that society was creating for women to be trapped in. Mothers were expected to behave in certain ways and to be certain kinds of people. The excerpt from the Ontario textbook on home economics that I posted to this site a couple of weeks ago about "How To Be A Good Wife" as an example of just how restrictive this role of motherhood can be. Another result of the Cult of Motherhood was that women no longer were viewed as carnal slaves of temptation and weakness, but instead the gender roles were actually reversed 180 degrees so that today men are viewed as slaves to their animal nature, and they need to have the moderating influence of a woman in their lives in order for them to be safe for society. ***Created Equal In the Declaration of Independence Jefferson borrowed the phrase that "All men are created equal". This set the destiny of the United States so that over the course of time that has come to mean "All white males who own property are created equal" to "All humans are created equal". We're still not there yet, but we have certainly come a long way in the 8 generations since the American Revolution. The social changes that took place in the latter half of the twentieth century had their beginnings in the global wars that took place in the first half. Blacks fought for the United States and came home to be treated as second-class citizens. Women worked in armaments factories to help win the war, only to return to the restrictive role of housewife after the war. These feelings of freedom and entitlement and the demand that each person be given his or her own responsibility over the destiny of his or her own life led to the social changes and upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s in the US. It wasn't pretty, and it wasn't always done in the best way, but the people in our country who were still being oppressed merely because an accident of birth made them female, black, or whatever, finally had had enough and the social revolutions of this time erupted all at once. For those who are too young to have lived through those times it is really hard to understand exactly why people who went through them behaved the way they did and continue to behave the way they still do. In the movie "Pleasantville" (which I recommend highly), a typical "generation X" boy yearns to enter the world of a 1950s sitcom in which everyone is "normal". But when he is "magically" put into that sitcom and its restrictive 1950s society, he realizes that it really sucks. The Feminist movement is not the NOW. It is much larger than that. Just as the Civil Rights movement is not the NAACP. Nor was the urge for freedom simply just the American Revolution. We are still fighting the war for independence, and it is not always pretty and not always done in the best way. But it is part of the evolution of our race that it is unfolding in this way. Eventually we will go on to fight for other things, but isn't it good to be alive at this time when so much is opening up for not just women, but for everyone who wishes to live a life that is authentic. We could spend a lot of bandwidth on debating whether Feminism has done the right thing or not. But the fact is that it too will go down as yet another stage in the evolution of the roles of gender that has gone before. Some of it will be for good, and some of it will be for bad. But it was (and still is) inevitable and unavoidable, as is change in general. Thank you for the bandwidth. ~~Curt Allred |