1. Within the discussion of middle class women’s movements, I found the part about Roussel very interesting. From her perspective, all women’s all women were oppressed—the “external victims”—and women of all classes should pursue the same goal—emancipation. She insisted that women had far more in common than men did of different classes because whatever their class, they shared a common oppression at the hands of men (Bridenthal 350.) Within the topic of working class women’s activism I found it interesting when the book talked about Bebel’s book. This book supported all the feminist demands of his day, including the right to vote, as well as the right for married women to own their own property. This book went even further than most feminists
…show more content…
The film mentioned that many people believed that Darwin’s laws had done natural selection, and explained/justified the global expansion of the great British race. It also talked about how there is a hierarchy in the plant and animal world, where each one fills a niche that another can’t occupy. They mentioned that people are the same ways and Englishmen are just like other organisms. They are successful because they are good at expanding. Social Darwinism had justified genocidal policies in the colonies and in the same years, it fueled new fears among the British elite, fears of other “dangerous races” living in their midst—the workding classes of their own cities. I think the most important thing from this reading was about how people related social Darwinism to race. I never thought about it that way, and I guess it makes sense, but it’s terrible that back then, people saw other races lower on the hierarchy scale and used social Darwinism as a term for it. 4. These materials helped me recognize that ideas/actions of states, nations, as well as individuals have consequences for others. In the discussion of racism, all it basically was about was putting different races on another lower level, less superior to white people. These consequences lasted a long time and had a negative effect for European scientific racism. It did this in the Darwinism as well by pointing out that it justified genocidal policies in the colonies it fueled new fears among the British elite, fears of other “dangerous races” living in their midst—the working classes of their own
The film mentioned that many people believed that Darwin’s laws had done natural selection, and explained/justified the global expansion of the great British race. It also talked about how there is a hierarchy in the plant and animal world, where each one fills a niche that another can’t occupy. They mentioned that people are the same ways and Englishmen are just like other organisms. They are successful because they are good at expanding. Social Darwinism had justified genocidal policies in the colonies and in the same years, it fueled new fears among the British elite, fears of other “dangerous races” living in their midst—the workding classes of their own cities. I think the most important thing from this reading was about how people related social Darwinism to race. I never thought about it that way, and I guess it makes sense, but it’s terrible that back then, people saw other races lower on the hierarchy scale and used social Darwinism as a term for it. 4. These materials helped me recognize that ideas/actions of states, nations, as well as individuals have consequences for others. In the discussion of racism, all it basically was about was putting different races on another lower level, less superior to white people. These consequences lasted a long time and had a negative effect for European scientific racism. It did this in the Darwinism as well by pointing out that it justified genocidal policies in the colonies it fueled new fears among the British elite, fears of other “dangerous races” living in their midst—the working classes of their own