But What About The Menz?
Oct. 19th, 2011 04:01 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
desertvixenDear dumbass in my class,
Perhaps the reason that there is no mention of what men did about the prices of necessities like food during the Depression Era is that the 2 article we read are, respectively, about black women in Detroit forming the Housewives' League of Detroit in an effort to keep black-earned money in the black community and working-class housewives organizing in various urban areas.
Just possibly.
The Great Depression however endangered that home and left them feeling threatened which means that women had to have a way to lash out to fix or attempt to fix situations that were normally beyond their control. Though what interests me is the fact neither mentions men playing a rather large role in their groupings to help fix the situation unless it is possible that I missed something but surely even men would take an interest in the price of food since they require it to live.
I get that sometimes we're scraping for a question to fill out the discussion post, but really, did you have to ask "What about the MEN?"
Yours perpetually in annoyance,
DV
Perhaps the reason that there is no mention of what men did about the prices of necessities like food during the Depression Era is that the 2 article we read are, respectively, about black women in Detroit forming the Housewives' League of Detroit in an effort to keep black-earned money in the black community and working-class housewives organizing in various urban areas.
Just possibly.
The Great Depression however endangered that home and left them feeling threatened which means that women had to have a way to lash out to fix or attempt to fix situations that were normally beyond their control. Though what interests me is the fact neither mentions men playing a rather large role in their groupings to help fix the situation unless it is possible that I missed something but surely even men would take an interest in the price of food since they require it to live.
I get that sometimes we're scraping for a question to fill out the discussion post, but really, did you have to ask "What about the MEN?"
Yours perpetually in annoyance,
DV
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 01:11 am (UTC)But, beyond that, screw you dumbasss, women -- even in the 1930s -- didn't need men around to make their problems more valid. Ass!
no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 02:39 am (UTC)But, beyond that, screw you dumbasss, women -- even in the 1930s -- didn't need men around to make their problems more valid.
And this is why I love you!
no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 03:16 am (UTC)actually, could I get sources for those articles? they sound potentially useful for my current endeavors. *steeples fingers*
Sources!
Date: 2011-10-20 03:21 pm (UTC)Annelise Orleck, “We Are That Mythical Thing Called the Public”: Militant Housewives during the Great Depression” in Feminist Studies, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Spring 1993)
The Orleck article is pretty entertaining...
Re: Sources!
Date: 2011-10-20 06:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 03:55 am (UTC)AGAIN!
no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 03:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 03:23 pm (UTC)We're online, so no looking at them. :(
He did get smacked a little by our professor, but that's because 8 weeks into the course he can't remember how to phrase a question.
no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 03:35 pm (UTC)Good that the prof is onto it. Seems like in online classes such things could get out of control quickly.
no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 07:12 pm (UTC)It could. Mostly I think the people who are annoyed just stop reading him...
no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 06:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 03:26 pm (UTC)That was last week's reading, actually - basically how women did a lot of the shaping of the field of labor standards, but then the New Deal would have let them regulate the men! We can't have that, men are important! Don't forget the side dish of "awww, you pretty little girls are so naive, you just don't understand how things work out here in the big world" or its counterpart where women get accused of subversion.
Funny how the story never changes...
Historical sexism FTL.
no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 07:15 pm (UTC)I am still distraught.
no subject
Date: 2011-10-21 09:04 pm (UTC)The things with this guy is that the class is social movements in American history, so we'll get back to the men in a week or so. This week's reading is about evil, evil Leftists and their plans to infiltrate the youth of American through children's lit. (So far it's pretty good!)
no subject
Date: 2011-10-20 10:58 pm (UTC)Based on what I know of history, women have born the primary responsibly for the children and that gives a person (at least me) a pretty damn good reason to try and improve the world. Men usually were the ones who owned the stores, tenements, etc and creating the inequality.
Ever see "Iron Jawed Angels"? Those women were tough!
--Kel
no subject
Date: 2011-10-21 09:14 pm (UTC)There's enough of us in the class that I don't have to engage with him on the discussion board. There are a few people who I read but never respond to because they have a problem with obviousness.
Also, women did a lot of the social reform work because they could justify it as women's work inside the domestic sphere.
I got to see most of it, but I'm familiar with the history. We got to screen it for Women's Equality Day last year.
no subject
Date: 2011-10-21 03:58 am (UTC)I saw this picture floating around on facebook with a female soldier hugging her kid in the airport and she was showing a lot of emotion. Maybe you've seen it. The picture is really moving. Annyways.... someone said how nice it was to see females finally getting recognition instead of men all the time. Some stupid "Army girlfriend" got on there, tripping out about how how people should recognize everyone's sacrifice equally and not to give special emphasis to women. I was like ......what? Is she for real?
no subject
Date: 2011-10-21 09:21 pm (UTC)I haven't seen it, but I can definitely sympathize with you.
It's not wanting more recognition/importance put on a mom being separated from her child, oh "Army girlfriend", it's about acknowledging that women are in the military.
It irritates me that they sell the "Army Wife: Don't confuse your rank with my authority" shirt here. Some of the trainee's wives I've met have been very special - haven't had any crazy husbands yet.
no subject
Date: 2011-10-28 06:35 am (UTC)