To challenge Uni/Prof re Canon?

[Harriedharriet]

I am doing a few courses in Uni at the moment. They are history courses and the University is well known and respected. In both courses women are not mentioned before the 19th C. They did not exist it seems. Actually, apologies, prostitutes did.
I understand the issues and to some degree accept why there is not much more than a minor nod to women in the Canons/course work. However, I think there needs to be academic compensation, a caveat in ALL courses that state why that is.

A lecture on the laws, rules and regulations that were in place at the time to limit the participation of women would go a long way to compensate in my opinion.
AIBU to challenge the ProfA. (V intimidating prospect. 😬)

Who are "they"? Surely, as an undergraduate, it is up to you to find sources and to challenge their veracity as well as postulate about voices that might not be being heard and suggest why?

There were female slaves and slave owners. HTH

Didn't you check the course content before you applied?

as an undergraduate, it is up to you to find sources

If only. Not only do we find all their sources for them, we make them accessible so they don't have to do tiresome things like search journal sites. I think our students would pass out in shock if they were expected to find their own sources.

I'm still a bit fuzzy on what it is you're asking OP? Do you want your professor to name drop women into his lectures, or provide exam topics on women of the era, or what exactly?

For example, if I were to study the Industrial Revolution, it is likely that most of the people I will study for that would be men, as they were the main movers and shakers. There were very likely women involved too, but it would be fairly impossible to cover every single person from that time period in one course.

However, studying Greek Mythology would likely be a good mix as both genders were depicted as getting up to all sorts of shenanigans.

I think you are getting a hard time OP. Everyone on this thread is obviously perfectly okay with women hardly getting a mention in history. And yes, the canon should be questioned and it shouldn't have to be a women's history module either.

I am posting from an iPad and it is acting up. I am loosing most of my posts, the type writter stalls every so often and the page is reloading. I need to sign off and fix it.

Many thanks.

in the two history courses I have taken so far there are no women featured.

This is because women were not allowed to feature.

By law.

I think that should be acknowledged. Not spoon fed. Not specialized research. Not gender study. Not women's issue.

Part of the many descriptions of society and politics of the time.

It is important.

Hi Harried if you've found the sources, maybe you could introduce these in a seminar group / tutorial and expand upon the changes when the British took over, and how the role of women took a backwards step?

I'm not familiar with that period but if you have found sources to fill the gap then bring them up!

When it comes to politics in 18th century Britain they will have to include women as the likes of Mrs Crewe and Georgiana Duchess of Devonshire ran the "dining rooms" where a lot of the political intriguing went on; if you look at the Wars of the Roses then you will look at the roles of women such as Elizabeth Woodville, Margaret Beaufort and Henry VI's wife Margaret of Anjou; further back and you have Katherine Swynford and Edward II's wife Isabella of France. And there are a lot of previously unpublished journals etc. from medieval women being published - this area of research is growing.

It might simply be that you are really early in the course module and references to the changing role of women will be brought in as time passes; but you can always introduce this (as mentioned earlier) as compare / contrasts in essays - which will also show that you are reading around your subject.

TBF it's hard to mention women in a history of art module, other than as a footnote or their role as a muse / inspiration

Are you doing a specific degree? I'm not sure I understand what you mean by 'taking a few classes'
As it's something you feel strongly about you could always offer it as a dissertation proposal.
Fatherjemima I feel your pain (Uni library person here)

I'm not sure the OP has put it well but I think this is a serious problem.

"What was happening to women at this time/in this situation?" is a question that should be covered in EVERY history course, unless (unlikely) it's covering a time and place where no women where.

So if you're studying the history of New York, what kind of jobs were women doing? Notable women in the history of the city? Women who were leading campaigns for change? (Not just things like suffrage, but anti-slavery, pro-health campaigns - anything) If women weren't allowed to work, why was that? What were their home lives like and what was expected of them?

Basically all the same questions we ask about men. Just because the answers might be (not necessarily are) less interesting or varied than the answers about men, doesn't mean we shouldn't be asking them. And where men and women had shared experiences (e.g. as slaves) we should talk about both of them, and how they might have been different for the two sexes.

We as women deserve to know our history too. Knowing what women in e.g. 18th century industrial cities were doing is at least as relevant to me as knowing what happened at the Field of the Cloth of Gold or whatever.

Footle

New keyboard, eveything seems to be in just the wrong place. As my job involves lits of typing... I am currently stuffed

StVincent.

Will you marry me? 😅😂

Thank you.

in the two history courses I have taken so far there are no women featured. This is because women were not allowed to feature. By law.

OP, do you mean that the courses are covering areas from which women were legally excluded or that legally your courses are not allowed to mention women? Both seem a touch unlikely, so do you mean something else?

Thank you Howyoualldoworkme, I can only imagine what you have to deal with on your side of things!

When I studied Medieval/Early Modern British History in the mid 90s at a very traditional university we had plenty of references to strong female historical figures, even from the stuffy older male professors. They were very keen for me to research one of them for my dissertation for example - Margaret Paston, Jaquetta of Luxemburg, Margaret Beaufort, Margaret of Anjou, and Cecily Neville were a few suggestions.

Sounds like your course content is a bit, er, behind the times.

StVincent - that information really is out there. Even OP has outlined some of it!

I still don't understand what I think that should be acknowledged. actually means, in practice.

OP seems to be asking for her course to come with a disclaimer that women's voices may not be loudly heard, due to, well, historical issues. Which are, presumably, the root and branch of what she has chosen to study!

I can believe this - Caroline Criado Perez researched the A-Level syllabus and found depressingly few mentions of women:

twitter.com/CCriadoPerez/status/775655146063859712

I've just started a creative writing MA and, out of probably about 15 novels, extracts and short stories we've read so far, there has been two paragraphs of Austen, all the rest by men. Contemporary writing too.

OP
I understand your concern, I really do. I did a Theology UG degree, and my lord did that feel one-sided. They cancelled the only Women in Theology module and replaced it with a module about Jesus in Film. Bizarre.
I would recommend setting up your own University History Club where you take an issue or a historical event and analyse it from a feminist perspective. I'm sure you will find others who would be interested in this - even those not on your course.

Indeed Fatherjemima Just awaiting the new year's onslaught. I'm married to a senior lecturer so I see both sides so to speak.
OP, what's your reading list like?

Yeah it may be out there, OurBlanche, but it should be in here i.e. mentioned and acknowledged in the course.

Women are not some tiny special interest group, obviously. We are 50% of the population and we have been part of every era and type of human civilisation.

When individual women or women's lives or experiences are not mentioned at all in history courses IT IS WEIRD.

Some on here are acting like it'd be a huge eyerolling pain and inconvenience for the people conducting the course to ensure they actually think about what the fuck 50% of the population did/experienced/were allowed to do in their period of history. Well, in that case I think it's time for an attitude change.

Not to say that every single lecture or group (or however it's taught) has to focus on women, collectively or en masse. Clearly if you're learning e.g. the history of philosophy, most of the "big names" were men. But to me - and I presume to the OP - it's not good enough to just let the women who WERE contributing, and the reasons why many more couldn't, go unstated.

It really, really isn't as simple as men made history, so it's natural we only study them.

Serious question: has anyone since about 1980 said it was? History isn't my area (mostly, though there are overlaps) but seen from outside gender, race, and queer history all seem to be pretty mainstream areas in UK and US universities.

Buffy you are right, of course. But there is so much being done at the moment to look at historical documents to find that hidden information.

The plethora of English royalty for instance. Not only are well known historical documents being re-examined but long ignored private correspondences etc. I now know so much more about Tudor women than I was taught at school in the 80s - and more is being found all the time.

That and, sometimes I think that pre-national curriculum learners, like myself, seem to have been given a lot more information on such topics. I remember lots of women across the whole history span we covered - Greeks, Romans, British royals and the special project, history of medicine. Even the Modern History - Arab/Israeli conflict had memorable women.

Maybe the National Curriculum squeezed women out of the 'canon'! Seems odd to me, but not at all unlikely!

However, OP needs to work this issue out for herself:

Does she want to confront her lecturers and university? If so, how? What does she want to change, specifically?
Does she want to make this her area of interest? If so, she needs to stop building her own brick walls and to make her interest explicit.

IIRC wasn't the Shirtwaist Triangle Fire in New York? Didn't that lead to more women becoming involved in labour movements?
Seminars are very good places to introduce these things. Talk to your fellow students and see if they've noticed anything.