History/WSP331: Spring 1998

Women in American History: Take-Home Final Exam

DIRECTIONS: Answer one question from each section. This test is open-book; when necessary or appropriate, you should consult and/or refer to readings, class notes, etc. (While references to titles and/or authors are required, quotes and precise page numbers are NOT necessary, though they may be used.) Make your answers as substantive & persuasive as they can be, within the available space; they need not be typed, but they must be LEGIBLE and GRAMMATICAL. Your entire exam is to be no more than 2000 words in length--the equivalent of 8 double-spaced, typed pages with proper margins (this is an absolute outer limit; it can be shorter)--we will not read more than this (and your answers will be evaluated on the basis of what we can reasonably expect within such limits)! Note point values of questions in allocating your time and space.

This exam is due NO LATER THAN 11 a.m., Monday, May 4. THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE DEADLINE!! Please make sure you have followed all of the following instructions before turning it in:

1. Make sure each answer is labeled with part and question number.
2. Put your name on each page you turn in, and number the pages.
3. All pages must be firmly STAPLED (no paper clips or other fasteners).
4. Slide your exam underneath my (Prof. T's) office door--Room 526 Eggers. DO NOT leave it in either Beth's or Prof. T's mailbox, in the History or WSP office, or anywhere else.

[Note: It is against S.U. rules to return final exams. If you wish to receive an early grade report, please attach a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard to your paper.]

PART I (30 points).

1. In the "Introduction" to Where the Girls Are, Susan Douglas declares: "The truth is that growing up female with the mass media helped make me a feminist, and it helped make millions of other women feminists too, whether they take on that label or not…. here’s the contradiction we confront: the news media, TV shows, magazines, and films of the past four decades may have turned feminism into a dirty word, but they also made feminism inevitable." (pp. 7, 10)

How does Douglas explain this apparent contradiction? Do you find her explanation persuasive? If so, why; if not, why not? Please substantiate your answer with specific examples. It also will help your answer considerably if it includes a definition of "feminism" as part of the discussion.

2. Elsewhere in her "Introduction," Douglas says: "The war that has been raging in the media is not a simplistic war against women but a complex struggle between feminism and antifeminism that has reflected, reinforced, and exaggerated our culture’s ambivalence about women’s roles for over thirty-five years." (pp. 12-13)

How does Douglas develop this claim in her book and what does she identify as some of the causes of this ambivalence? Do you think she does a persuasive job of making her case? According to her, what dimensions of media coverage contribute most to this "struggle" (cite some examples to flesh out your discussion)?

PART II (30 points).

3. Modern (post-1960) feminism has encompassed two principal agendas. One has focused primarily on legal/institutional change; the other has emphasized change of personal consciousness. (a) What implicit or explicit critique does each of these suggest about the success or failure of the "first woman movement," which culminated in the 19th Amendment? (b) What do you perceive as the principal advantages and disadvantages of each approach? (c) Finally, how do you assess the influence or impact of each approach; on balance, in looking at changes in the lives of American women over the last quarter century, which route do you think has been more effective? Why? [There is, of course, no "one right answer" here, but you must be substantive in defending the position you take.]

4. One historian has written: "Women are the economy's principal pawns. They are drawn into the workplace when needed, and rejected when they are not. This has occurred because, traditionally, it has been assumed that women have no need or desire for a permanent place in the paid workforce—that 'normally' their economic needs will be taken care of by men, and thus that 'men come first' when employment priorities are determined."

Analyze this statement, focusing on the years from 1920 to the present, making sure to include the impact of the Depression, World War II, and the postwar years (as well as the modern, "feminist" and "postfeminist" periods) in your discussion. Have women been economic "pawns"—and, if so, has this remained consistently the case, or do you perceive change over time (and if so, when)? Alternatively, is this statement more reflective of social objectives than of actual employment patterns (that is, that women were expected to enter and leave the workforce at particular times, but in fact they did not)?

PART III (40 points).

5. You are a distinguished historian of American women. For that reason, a major publisher has asked you to supervise revision of its college-level U.S. history survey textbook—which, as it now stands, has very little coverage of women. Summarize your recommendations of the necessary changes and additions. Include in your report: (1) at least 4 major themes of particular relevance to women that should be traced through the entire text; (2) the names and brief descriptions of 8-10 biographical vignettes that might appear at various points in the survey (persons profiled may be "great," or typical but obscure—but together they should provide a representative sample of various significant types of American women, over time); and (3) at least 3 events in American history whose interpretation would be substantially altered if the roles of women in them—or their effects upon women--were included alongside the "traditional" (male-oriented) interpretations.

Remember, you want your suggestions to be adopted, so be as substantive and persuasive as you can be in your presentation of them. [In other words, explain and justify your selections!]

6. In describing the "state of women’s history," scholar Nancy Hewitt has written (in a piece we did not read for this course): "To date [women’s] historians have focused on the parallels in the establishment of women’s spheres across classes, races, and ethnic groups and have asserted certain commonalities among them, assuming their common origin in the modernization of society…. A closer examination now reveals that no such universal sisterhood existed…. It is now clear that privileged women were willing to wield their sex-specific influence in ways that, intentionally or unintentionally, exploited other women in the name of ‘true womanhood.’… Therefore diversity, discontinuity, and conflict were as much a part of the historical agency of women as of men."

In other words, to get a "true" picture of women’s history, we need to deal with differences among women as much as with their so-called "common sisterhood." In this essay, identify and discuss three issues or incidents—one of which must be located primarily in the period prior to 1900—that reflected significant tensions between or among different groups of women, due to race, class, or ethnicity. In these settings, did elite women exploit others as Hewitt suggests? If so, how—and how did those they tried to exploit attempt to resist those efforts? [NOTE: You will want to draw extensively upon Giddings in constructing this essay but, as always, feel free to use any relevant materials that we have encountered this semester.]

Have a good summer—and CONGRATULATIONS to all graduating seniors!!!!

Back to HST/WSP331 Homepage

Page maintained by Margaret Susan Thompson. Created: 4/27/98 Updated: 4/28/98