On Thursday, Oct. 2, the Villanova University History Society hosted a teach-in on Gender, feminism and the patriarchy. This women’s history event was the first of the series of teach-ins this year.
Villanova history professor Dr. Gina Talley presented a Bartley classroom on women’s history and her experience with research in the field. At the University, Talley also teaches courses in U.S. history and History of American Women.
“American women’s history spoke to me in a way literally no other class had,” Talley said. “It was the first time I saw myself.”
At the teach-in, Talley discussed the ways in which women’s history goes unnoticed, and pointed to high school education as a prime example. Specifically, Talley pointed to the language used in Advanced Placement (AP) exams.
Talley showed the class data from the AP United States History exam in which “women” appeared a mere 17 times, “gender” was mentioned once and there was no mention of “feminism” throughout the entire exam.
From these results, Talley then queried the audience on how women’s history was taught in their own high schools. Most students concurred that these lessons were only happening during women’s history month, or not at all.
“I just remember a lot of Betsy Ross,” one student joked, “…nothing else.”
Likewise, students and faculty shared the discrepancies in textbooks. One student pointed to the fact that women are often “side barred,” and never a part of the assigned textbook material.
This conversation led to a quote grounded in much of Talley’s work from historian Gerda Lerner, which was displayed on the board to begin the lecture.
“Always ask what the women did while the men were doing what the textbook tells us was important,” Lerner had written.
Following this discussion, Talley dove into the origins of women’s history. Talley noted that its origins are rooted in college campuses, and the ways in which female students changed curriculums through their own activism.
“They were activists in the streets,” Talley said. “But also, they were activists in the archives.”
From here, Talley shed light on the idea of women’s history being centered around solely the “first and famous.” She rattled off figures such as Amelia Earhart and Susan B. Anthony, to further illustrate her point that ordinary women’s lives are often not given the same respect in history as men.
This led to her discussion on early women’s history, and the problematic view of universal womanhood. In explaining early work and research on women’s history, she explained the ways in which legacies of women of color were invisibilized due to a narrative built upon the experiences of only white women.
Talley explained the ways in which gender is not the only fault line, and pointed to the value of intersectional feminism as a way to better understand women’s experiences.
Intersectional feminism is a term coined by American advocate Kimberle Crenshaw, and reflects the notion that aspects of identity are not experienced separately.
Also critical in understanding women’s history is using it as a tool of analysis. Talley spoke on American historian Joan Scott’s 1985 article that argued in favor of using gender as a category of historical analysis. Rather than women’s history being simply “what the women were doing,” this analysis tool helps to better understand historical perspectives and events.
Talley also described the ways in which the field of women’s history was not an “inevitable,” and the challenging of the curriculums and the sources it took to get to a place where women’s history could be studied to the extent it is today.
This revolutionization of consciousness and culture is built upon the research and criticism of the status quo from women over the course of decades.
“Women’s history wasn’t inevitable,” Talley said. “The fact that I would be here conducting a women’s history lesson was not inevitable.”
Talley wrapped her teach-in by explaining the ways in which women’s history is incredibly relational, and the ways in which this helps define individuals’ thoughts and personal histories.
“Sometimes you talk to others and realize ‘oh this is not just me,’” Talley said. “This ultimately rests on the idea that the personal is political.”
