First: I had technical difficulties! Sorry this post is a bit late!
What does it mean to say that women have been ‘written out’ of sociology’s history? Why did this happen? What issue or ideas did sociology’s women founders have in common? What is the importance of recognizing the contribution of sociology women founders?
Being “written out of history” is different from being invisible. When something or someone is invisible, it is never seen at all. According to author’s Patricia Madoo Lengermann and Jill Niebrugge-Brantley (Ch. 3, Seeing Ourselves), many of the contributors to the developing field of sociology, in the 19th and early 20th century were women: Harriet Martineau in England, Jane Addams and Anna Julia Cooper in the U.S., were all widely recognized as living, breathing, writing and working sociologists, in their day. However, even in our own class text book, when you turn to the chapter on the birth and history of sociology…. all the authors cited are men.
What’s going on? Patriarchy (privileging if not enshrining male bias) is almost certainly a big part of it. However, it seems possible to me that the tendency of the early women sociologists, to have been more interested in what we might call social activism (Anna Julia Cooper and her anti lynching and anti racism campaigns; Jane Addams’ Hull House, providing services to immigrant women and children) may also have had something to do with this “writing out of history” of the women sociologists. Whereas Comte, Durkheim and Marx were concerned with theoretical ideas, pertaining often to groups of men and their more public roles in life, a common thread can be found, in the work of the women sociologists, having to do with domestic and everyday living concerns of women and children. Theory seems to have been privileged, over the “work a day” concerns of how and where women, children, and “minority” groups like African Americans, were actually living their lives. The women sociologists seem to have been more concerned with activism, over theoretical predictions.
Why recognize women’s contribution to the field? In order to realize that there were several branches, if you will, on the growing tree of sociology. In order to realize that there were in fact more than just a few (mostly white) men, there at the beginning of the very field.
I find myself wondering: If these important early sociologists were “written out” of the history of the field, who or what other work might now be missing?
BY LAURA
I really like your idea that these pioneering women in sociology might have been less remembered in the academic world because, perhaps, they had less focus on theoretical arguments, and more focus on actually living out their beliefs, providing for the needy, creating social change by caring for people. I guess it’s hard to know what their intentions and desires were, and whether they intended their writing to be recognized as widely as their male peers, without reading more about them, and reading some of their work… but in any case, I really like the idea that these women (and other people who haven’t been as recognized and remembered through history) might have left a living legacy of social activism and awareness, even if it doesn’t necessarily have their names written all over it.