Should I teach this class or no?

Ok, isnt one of the things you definitely teach in a women's history course "Ain't I a Woman?" which sort of implies to me that it has never been rigidly defined in terms of who gets respect or treated as such.

 

I bet those kids have NEVER even remotely heard of "Ain't I A Woman?"

Which is exactly why SwampBae (my spelling!) should teach this course =)

 

Again. What you are talking about is still documented history and not just your opinion. Ocoee actually happened. It isnt political in and of itself unless someone takes that road.

I think the class is worthwhile as a dad of 2 daughters (one headed to App State in the fall and one a junior in HS). I want them hearing about how far they have come and how they have these opportunities because of others willing to fight.

But I want it done with the written facts. Not a teacher tossing in political opinion to slant pov's.

My guess is as long as you have been doing this, that facts are important to you and you will do a great job.

 

OT but I'll never forget when I was a kid and saw some guy named Elvis Presley explode on the scene in his national TV debut (the Dorsey Brothers Show). He sang "I've Got a Woman."

 

Lol. Thats not exactly what I am saying. Pretty sure there is plenty of documentation as to "why".

 

Teach the written documented facts.

There are stories out there of teachers blaming conservatives for the plight of women or liberals for the plight of the nation. This is even more concerning in our politically charged climate.

These discussions can all be had openly and honestly without the generalized political opinions.

 

As long as you don't delve into the most iconic ladies of today, like Caitlyn Jenner and Lia Thomas, I'm sure you'll be okay.

 

Ever read one of the threads on statue removal & Confederate generals, etc.?

 

Anybody who wants to indoctrinate children in dumbed down versions of critical race theory and supports teaching sexual orientation to 1st graders is a human-sized garbage can.

 

The events are often documented subjectively and this thread is largely about teaching history (goes beyond telling and potentially increases the subjectivity). Let's be clear that subjectivity is not necessarily a bad thing, esp. in subjects where it's called for.

 

Okay.

 

The point I'm making, Tilly, is that it's not that simple. History is the weaving together facts into a narrative. It matters whose narrative is being told. That's what makes history inherently subjective. No, you don't need to get into conservatives and liberals. But you can anger people even without doing that.

 

Sometimes its not even that, since first hand accounts or records aren't necessarily "facts" they are merely privileged over secondary sources.

 

Should an effort to "objectively" teach about women's suffrage involve a teacher explaining why women had not been able vote and why many opposed that? Because I'm sure some would be upset if the teacher presented the opposition as being equally valid or on the other hand if the teacher was viewed as beating up America for its sexist past. Is the analysis different than whether a class on WWII requires a teacher to give the same amount of time explaining the reasoning and motivations of the Nazis? Or are teachers supposed to avoid the "why" questions and just offer a timeline of events and dates?

 

What people seem to react to most is any attempt to connect the past with the present, which defeats the whole purpose of teaching history. If you say, "back then men didnt want women to vote," no one really cares, people can treat it like some sort of curiosity or gawk at how ignorant people supposedly were (even though plenty of people thought women should vote back then). But if you are like "even today women face discrimination..." you have committed a sin, for you are questioning that whole myth of progress and how supposedly smart and enlightened we are compared to all those ignorant hicks of long ago.

 

I got in a short rabbit hole and just learned for the first time that Mississippi was the last state to ratify the 19th Amendment - in 1984.

 

That's an interesting point. I will have to chew on that. You may be correct in terms of what the academic standard should be or about the reactions. But I also think of that old quote about those who fail to learn from history are destined to repeat it. I'm not saying that negates your point about connecting the past and the present in a history class but just thinking out loud. I feel like we tend to assume that we will never go back to days when women couldn't vote, or when we had a king (dictator), etc; it's hard to imagine that ever happening here. But then I think about women's rights in Iran before and after the Islamic Revolution and wonder whether it's important to keep in mind that there's no guarantee that women will always have the same freedoms they do now.