Joan Scott’s Gender and the Politics of History attempts to theorize gender and argues for its use as a category of analysis for both social and political history. Through discussions of language and meaning, Joan Scott challenges historians reconsider the way they think and write about gender. She aims to expand the historical definition of gender to include an understanding of the interrelationship of masculinity and femininity along with their relationship to social and political discourse.
A major point within Scott’s discussion of gender history is her claim that the substitution of the term gender history for women’s history is politically motivated. According to Scott, the word gender seems more neutral to its audience but still maintains …show more content…
According to Scott, earlier historians' attempts to create a theoretical framework for gender followed the patterns of social science and in her opinion that approach renders them unable to understand gender. Their understanding of gender is limited by the fact that "they tend to contain reductive or overly simple generalizations" that recognize the presence of certain relationships, but offers no critical examination or insight (31). For example, one of these historians might acknowledge the participation of women in the French Revolution but would not change their interpretation of how the revolution occurred to include the influence of gender on politics. I found this argument to be incredibly persuasive and I agree whole heartedly that discussions of women in history prior to the rise of feminist scholarship were often limited in their scope. These histories marginalized women by downplaying the degree of influence they had in terms of politics and power structures, by only discussing them in isolated groups, and by using them to enforce the concept of masculine identity. These inadequacies can be seen in the examples of Thompson’s The Making of the English Working Class that Scott provides such as his discussion of women in the textile industry. Thompson states that these women were a form of cheap labor …show more content…
She clearly defines sex as a physical difference and gender as a social construction, and then examines the power created by socially constructed categories. She explains how her theoretical framework differs from earlier scholarship and why the difference is critical to the field. Her arguments were persuasive and clearly organized, and her prose, though dense at times, is a pleasure to read. Scott did an excellent job of explaining the different opinions surrounding key issues like sexual equality and the role of gender in capitalism. I think the text could have benefitted from a discussion of gender and race, and how the expected characteristics differ between races. Other than that, I loved this
A major point within Scott’s discussion of gender history is her claim that the substitution of the term gender history for women’s history is politically motivated. According to Scott, the word gender seems more neutral to its audience but still maintains …show more content…
According to Scott, earlier historians' attempts to create a theoretical framework for gender followed the patterns of social science and in her opinion that approach renders them unable to understand gender. Their understanding of gender is limited by the fact that "they tend to contain reductive or overly simple generalizations" that recognize the presence of certain relationships, but offers no critical examination or insight (31). For example, one of these historians might acknowledge the participation of women in the French Revolution but would not change their interpretation of how the revolution occurred to include the influence of gender on politics. I found this argument to be incredibly persuasive and I agree whole heartedly that discussions of women in history prior to the rise of feminist scholarship were often limited in their scope. These histories marginalized women by downplaying the degree of influence they had in terms of politics and power structures, by only discussing them in isolated groups, and by using them to enforce the concept of masculine identity. These inadequacies can be seen in the examples of Thompson’s The Making of the English Working Class that Scott provides such as his discussion of women in the textile industry. Thompson states that these women were a form of cheap labor …show more content…
She clearly defines sex as a physical difference and gender as a social construction, and then examines the power created by socially constructed categories. She explains how her theoretical framework differs from earlier scholarship and why the difference is critical to the field. Her arguments were persuasive and clearly organized, and her prose, though dense at times, is a pleasure to read. Scott did an excellent job of explaining the different opinions surrounding key issues like sexual equality and the role of gender in capitalism. I think the text could have benefitted from a discussion of gender and race, and how the expected characteristics differ between races. Other than that, I loved this