“Written out” does not mean that you haven’t being seen. It means that you were seen once but now your name has been erased. That happened with fifteen women, whose names were once recognized and well-known by the public and now forgotten. I believe that the reason for all this is because “men” ruled the world back then. Women were only to do laundry, take care of the house, children and being there whenever their husband needed it. Men to work and bring the money into the house to raise the family.
All of these women had the same idea and knew each others work. But each had their own style. All these women were well known and were friends with many of their contemporaries. They all knew that they were part of a larger movement to create a science of society. The women vary in terms of the particular inequality focused on: gender, class, race, and more. Although on that moment those women were just writing, and showing their potential, work and love for sociology.
It is important that we recognize women sociology because they worked hard to be forgotten out of nowhere. Of course that we will never be compare as men because they are stronger than us, but we are just trying to work as hard as them, to get our independency. Now those women have to be remembered, because they made great changes in the early days, and because of that it is important for us to recognize their job.
To say women have been written out of sociology’s history suggests that although women played an important role in the development of the field, their contributions aren’t recognized or appreciated as much as the male founders of the generation. This period of time far preceded the Women’s Rights Movement and the early female “movers and shakers” in any field weren’t valued as much as their male counterparts.
These founding women had several common ideas including helping others, promoting equality, and being an active part in the study of people and their surroundings. Marianne Weber was a leading figure in the German feminist movement helping women to attain equality, Wells-Barnett headed national anti-lynching campaigns, and Jane Addams established the Hull House. Some even later collaborated to plan cooperative housing for working women. Each of these figures was focused on studying some aspect of the human situation and was a part of the movement that brought the study of sociology to where it is today.
These influential women were instrumental in the development of sociological ideas—such as sex is a social force, viewpoint is important, and the relevance of sympathetic knowledge to name a few. Sex continues to be a strong social force today with women’s salaries still falling short of a man’s with a similar position. The feminist viewpoint continues to be strongly considered in reference to society. Sympathetic knowledge and its relevance are still used today. It is even employed as a research method. Though at one point these contributions were strongly undervalued, even the existence of this particular text in chapter three of this book shows that today these contributions are strongly embraced.
Women And The Birth OF Sociology
After reading the excerpt from, “Women and the Birth of Sociology” by Patricia Madoo Lengermann and Jill Niebrugge-Brantley, we know that the fifteen women were all well known public figures in their lifetime. They contributed to the creation of social theory and were recognized by their male counterparts as significant social analyst. The article says that these women were erased from sociology that means that they were once recognized and then forgot about. All the women in the history of sociology have in common that they all knew each other and knew each others work. It seems that all these women were published authors. They all were involved with the hull house in Chicago. At the time the women were writing sociology as much as the men they were just forgot about. It is important to recognize the contribution of women in sociology because without them we would never have seen the importance of social inequality.
Women of Sociology
1) From what I gathered reading the article “Woman and the birth of sociology” in our book that woman were “written out” of the sociology history meant that they were once a presence in the early stages of sociology and then their male counter parts took the glory. The reason Jane Addams, Anna Julie Cooper and Harriet Martineau and so many others may have been written out was at the time it was considered an all white male agency and women by society were over looked.
2) Most of the women in sociology had many things in common; most were well known public figures, they created their own social theories and built upon or worked with other male sociologists theories. They founded or set up programs to help people who were in need. Most notable was the Hull House, started in Chicago by Jane Addams, a place where women involved in sociology could come and express their ideas and theories.
3) To not recognize the accomplishments of the women involved in sociology in the past who did such a unique service for society with their hard work is a travesty. These women deserve the same recognition as their male counterparts. In today’s society more and more woman are breaking boundaries that have kept them in check. We are seeing woman break the glass ceiling and achieving goals that their sisters of the past could only dream of. I have two daughters who I believe can do anything they set their sights on, they are not limited to yesterdays stereo typing and they know no bounds. I look forward to witnessing the day we have a female president and maybe it will be one of my girls.
1. Generally speaking, when discussing the origins of a science or study, a frequently heard term is “the Founding Fathers”. This phrase right off the bat implies that the most important leading figures in that early history were males. Indeed while a large portion of notable sociologists were men there were 15 women whose names have been “edited from the text” so to speak. Though recognized and respected by their male contemporaries for the work they submitted and for their general high social standing, it would appear as if the following generations gradually lost more and more respect for their contributions until finally excluding them from the record all together. The text from Lengermann and Niebrugge-Brantley does not implictly state why these names were erased but in my opinion, implies a mixture of forgetfulness, lack of respect for women through the years, and of course, politics.
2. These women shared common issues and ideas that would play a crutial part in forming the young science of sociology and establishing its place in the sciences. Each of these women realized the importance of their work and that of their contemporaries. They often collaborated together to create essays and papers on issues of their times such as race and lynching. As American women in that time had yet to be given the rights they now enjoy, many of these women were involved with establishing cooperative housing for working women, gaining access to better employment, and overcoming the gender barriers that were all just a ‘normal’ part of life at that time. Though they all had their own sense of what the science of society should be, they understood the need to unite and made it their moral responsibility to do the most they could from their various walks of life.
3. Fortunately, while they may have been ‘written out’ of the standard history of sociology, we still have much information not to mention the thousands of books, essays, and articles written by these ‘Leading Ladies’. From the establishing of the Hull House by Jane Addams to the helping of organizing of the NAACP by Ida Wells-Barrnett to Women and Economics written by Charlotte Gilman, these accomplishments are well worth our study and respect. Indeed, much of the work done by these ladies is in the very basis and framework of what we know sociology to be today. It is every bit as much a development of women’s minds as is it men’s. Though erased in part, these women’s work will stand and speak for them for centuries to come.
When it is said that women have been “written out” of sociology’s history it is not to say that women have been non‑existent from the history but rather that somewhere along the way their existence was ignored. Early women sociologists were recognized as an integral part of their community and most of the prominent female figures were part of sociological associations and were even published. Sadly these women were victims of their time. Although these women gave so much to their community, because men dominated the world and their field at the time, the majority of the credit is given to their male counterparts.
Most of the early women of sociology were conflict theorist’s and concentrated on civil rights and gender issues. A majority of the women that have been “written out” were members of the American Sociological Association and worked hand and hand with the men that have been credited with having written sociological history.
It is important that today we recognize the women of sociology. Women like Jane Addams, Sophonisba Breckinridge, Marianne Webber, and Edith and Grace Abbott. These women worked tirelessly on the very inequalities that have kept them “written out” of sociologies history. To continue to write them out would be like saying that they never have existed and that their work was not important.
1. As with most accounts of history, it’s telling is at the mercy of the victor and the prevailing culture. Despite their contributions, fifteen prominent women were effectively erased, or “written out” of the history of the founding of sociology. The excerpt from “The Women Founders: Sociology and Theory, 1830 – 1930” by Patricia Madoo Lengermann and Jill Niebrugge-Brantley does not give any
specific date of this erasure only that at some point in time the names and contributions of these fifteen women were exsponged and credit given soley to the men assosiated with Sociology. Upon reflection, the reasoning behind such a crime of omission is not difficult to understand. Civilization has been a
patriarchal society since it’s inseption. Men, especially educated white men, were, and pretty much still are, the ruling class. Women were looked upon as “second-class” citizens who’s sole purpose in life was tend hearth and home, raise the children and be pleasing. The world of science was considered the domain of men. Men still constitute the greatest majority in most of the sciences. To recognize women as even partially responsible for the founding of any of the sciences would be tantamount to heresy.
2. The founding women wrote about the issues of the day. Martineau wrote social analysis and translated the works of Comte. Ironic the translator of one of the “founding father’s” works should go unrecognized. Martineau wrote “How to Observe Morals and Manners” and published her
methodology. The focus of the women sociologists were as wide ranging as the issues of the periods they lived in. Trade unions, labor practices, the economy, slavery and immigration were just a few of
the issues they addressed. All these women were well known and well established in their field and were friends with many of their contemporaries such as Mead, Park and Thomas. Wells-Barnett was a
co-founder of the NAACP and together with Cooper, created an American version of Marx’s conflict theory to explain and illustrate their arguments concerning civil rights.
3. The importance today of recognizing the contributions of Sociologies women founders lies in
the concept and ideology of Sociology itself, that society and institutions evolve and change relative to the actions of the people within that society. It is not only antithetical to the principals of
sociology, it is illogical to base ones viewpoints on matters of society without including the female perspective. It is not only hypocritical, but a slap in the face of the science of sociology to
ignore the contributions of any member of that collective. If the women of sociology had not been there, had not made the significant contributions they made, we would be much less progressive as a
nation in terms of civil rights, womens rights, labor practices and our social health as a whole. The NAACP might not have been established, although I admit this is purely conjecture given the
limited scope of the article and I think the world would be a much poorer place without the literature published by these outstanding women.
Women have been written out of sociology’s history in that their contributions are no longer recognized despite having been influential and respected in their time. The early female sociologists were an integrated part of the community shaping the discipline’s eventual direction. They are not included among the historical founders of sociology alongside their male counterparts. In that way, they were more visible figures who have now been “written out” of sociology’s history.
This could have happened for many reasons all of which are ways to ignore the work of female sociologists outright or recast their work in a way that makes it much less influential in mainstream sociology than it might otherwise be. Some female sociologists are recognized historically but under the headings of other disciplines. They may be considered social reformers or political activists but not active sociologists. For example, Addams and Hull House are used as illustrations of immigrants rights movements and the problems of industrialization within the context of American History without mentioning the parts of Hull House that were a research institution.
Alternatively, some women’s work remained within sociology but was recast in ways that removed the female from it. Some female sociologists published alongside their husbands. Unfortunately, often, the work became entirely attributed to the husband. Marianne Weber worked with Max Weber or in some cases critiqued his work in her own. However, Max Weber went on to be considered one of sociology’s historical founders and Marianne Weber was written out of history. Webb and her husband co-authored many works but her role is easily ignored by accrediting them to him more strongly.
Sociology’s women founders all focused on issues related to social reform. They addressed different social or economic inequalities. Consequently, the particular focus of their reforms differed. Addams worked with immigrants and trade unions. Gilman worked on women’s rights and early feminism. Wells-Barnett was an anti-lynching and civil rights advocate.
The importance of recognizing the contribution of sociology’s women founders is threefold. First, women and did contribute in their time. In order to understand sociology as a discipline and its underpinnings, we must understand all its founding figures, including the women. Two, recognizing how women contributed to sociology and were then “written out” can lead to a sociological study of sociology itself. This can be used as an opportunity to study the impact of male dominance or male-centric view points in academia. Finally, bringing female theorists into the mainstream can produce a more integrated picture of where sociology has been and where it is going. It allows a chance to extend the range of perspectives, ideas and research available to sociology as a whole.
Having read Patricia Madoo Lengermann, and Jill Niebrugge-Brantley’s “Women and the Birth Of Sociology,” I really don’t understand why women were written out of the history of sociology. I suppose such a thing could have happened at the time when women wanted to move out of the home and get jobs in order to discourage such ventures, trying to show that women haven’t done much, or hide the fact that they have. The women talked about in the essay wrote about important things, mostly based in feminist ideals. The things most of the women had in common were, again, writing during the various feminist movements throughout the world and mostly writing about female-centric topics like motherhood and and how most professions at the time were occupied by men. It is important today to talk about the woman founders in Sociology because they made huge contributions. Harriet Martineau alone not only translated Comte, but also wrote plenty of her own findings. Women made a big impact in the early days of sociology not only in the field of feminism, but everywhere else.