This is rather pedantic & beside the main point of this essay, but the "Appeal" which you link to, though consisting in large part of a comparison of contemporary American slavery with the historical forms which appear in the Bible, contains a surprising inaccuracy in the description, not only of ancient slavery, but of the American slave system which was contemporary with its writing. In comparing the means by which American slaveowners got their slaves to those permissible under the laws of ancient Israel, Grimke states: "I will now try the right of the southern planter by the claims of Hebrew masters over their heathen slaves. Were the southern slaves taken captive in war [by their current owners]? No! Were they bought from the heathen? No! for surely, no one will now vindicate the slave-trade so far as to assert that slaves were bought from the heathen who were obtained by that system of piracy." However, literal piracy, i.e. the direct kidnapping of Africans into slavery by slave-trading ships, was in fact rather rare; most African slaves were captured in Africa, usually as prisoners of war, & then bought from their African owners by European or American slave-traders; that is, most African slaves brought to America were enslaved in the same way as most ancient Mediterranean slaves, which Grimke admits was permitted by the laws of ancient Israel. Grimke's misunderstanding of a few aspects of ancient history (e.g. she says that the "servant" or "slave", τῶν δούλων ... εἷς, in Matthew 18 must not have been a slave because he owned property, although this was in fact permitted in the ancient Roman Empire, cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Rome#Peculium ) is understandable since she was not a historian, but I do not understand why she would have so clearly mischaracterized the trans-Atlantic slave trade, which, in her time, was still recent history (Grimke was born in 1805, three years before the US Congress banned international slave trading).
And that's partially why the few women who had accomplishments were either childless or wealthy enough to avoid the "looking after children" part of the deal. I was reading a bio of Mary Somerville the other day and this struck me big, tho obviously class- and sex- bound access to education was a huge factor -- but as you clearly show, not the only one.
One could argue that the contemporary obsessive emphasis on very close, super involved parenting is one way women nowadays (esp middle class women in affluent societies) are hampered even WITH contraception. Even those who could afford to outsource/share some of the drudgery.
I know this intimately. When I started becoming a feminist while still being Catholic, I couldn't figure out how to get around this problem. I knew lots of smart, accomplished women, and we were all mostly changing diapers and making dinner. Most men weren't actively denying us a voice—it's just that we were never in the rooms where it happened, because we were at home with the kids.
I think the solutions I ended up with were "more nuns" and "women should get married after 30." But I hadn't done either, because going without love is in fact really hard!
I am aware that you know this already, but I would like to state just for the record that successfully raising a child is a h--l of an accomplishment.
This is rather pedantic & beside the main point of this essay, but the "Appeal" which you link to, though consisting in large part of a comparison of contemporary American slavery with the historical forms which appear in the Bible, contains a surprising inaccuracy in the description, not only of ancient slavery, but of the American slave system which was contemporary with its writing. In comparing the means by which American slaveowners got their slaves to those permissible under the laws of ancient Israel, Grimke states: "I will now try the right of the southern planter by the claims of Hebrew masters over their heathen slaves. Were the southern slaves taken captive in war [by their current owners]? No! Were they bought from the heathen? No! for surely, no one will now vindicate the slave-trade so far as to assert that slaves were bought from the heathen who were obtained by that system of piracy." However, literal piracy, i.e. the direct kidnapping of Africans into slavery by slave-trading ships, was in fact rather rare; most African slaves were captured in Africa, usually as prisoners of war, & then bought from their African owners by European or American slave-traders; that is, most African slaves brought to America were enslaved in the same way as most ancient Mediterranean slaves, which Grimke admits was permitted by the laws of ancient Israel. Grimke's misunderstanding of a few aspects of ancient history (e.g. she says that the "servant" or "slave", τῶν δούλων ... εἷς, in Matthew 18 must not have been a slave because he owned property, although this was in fact permitted in the ancient Roman Empire, cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Rome#Peculium ) is understandable since she was not a historian, but I do not understand why she would have so clearly mischaracterized the trans-Atlantic slave trade, which, in her time, was still recent history (Grimke was born in 1805, three years before the US Congress banned international slave trading).
Man, I hope we'll have practical artificial wombs soon.
And that's partially why the few women who had accomplishments were either childless or wealthy enough to avoid the "looking after children" part of the deal. I was reading a bio of Mary Somerville the other day and this struck me big, tho obviously class- and sex- bound access to education was a huge factor -- but as you clearly show, not the only one.
One could argue that the contemporary obsessive emphasis on very close, super involved parenting is one way women nowadays (esp middle class women in affluent societies) are hampered even WITH contraception. Even those who could afford to outsource/share some of the drudgery.
I know this intimately. When I started becoming a feminist while still being Catholic, I couldn't figure out how to get around this problem. I knew lots of smart, accomplished women, and we were all mostly changing diapers and making dinner. Most men weren't actively denying us a voice—it's just that we were never in the rooms where it happened, because we were at home with the kids.
I think the solutions I ended up with were "more nuns" and "women should get married after 30." But I hadn't done either, because going without love is in fact really hard!