Ida B. Wells (1862-1931) was one of the foremost crusaders against black oppression. This engaging memoir tells of her private life as mother of a growing family as well as her public activities as teacher; lecturer; and journalist in her fight against attitudes and laws oppressing blacks."No student of black history should overlook Crusade for Justice."—William M. Tuttle; Jr.; Journal of American History"Besides being the story of an incredibly courageous and outspoken black woman in the face of innumerable odds; the book is a valuable contribution to the social history of the United States and to the literature of the women's movement as well."—Elizabeth Kolmer; American Quarterly"[Wells was] a sophisticated fighter whose prose was as though as her intellect."—Walter Goodman; New York Times"An illuminating narrative of a zealous; race-conscious; civic- and church-minded black woman reformer; whose life story is a significant chapter in the history of Negro-White relations."—Thelma D. Perry; Negro History Bulletin
#861451 in Books Mary Louise Roberts 1994-03-03Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.00 x 1.00 x 6.00l; 1.11 #File Name: 0226721221352 pagesCivilization Without Sexes Reconstructing Gender in Postwar France 1917 1927
Review
6 of 9 people found the following review helpful. No sex; please; we're FrenchBy Harry EagarFrom time to time; I pick up a feminist history; always hoping to find that novel approach the feminists promise; and almost always disappointed. "Civilization without Sexes" is not as disappointing as some; but nothing special either.The argument could have been explicated in 30 pages; but since this is a dissertation; Roberts pads it to a windy; repetitious 216 pages; to which are added a further 110 pages of chatty endnotes. If I had to choose one word to describe "Civilization without Sexes;" it would be tedious.We are to suppose that France was in a tizzy trying to decide what to think about women; who the commentariat (largely; here; novelists) divided; like Gaul; into three parts: the modern girl; the mother and the single working girl.These categories apply only to the middle and occasionally higher bourgeoisie; working class girls were not expected to be so complicated. Nor was it shocking that they went out to work.Supposedly; the French fighting man; home from the war; shellshocked and unmanned; was terribly confused about "gender" (in English; sexual) roles; which had changed during the war. Indeed they had; as had the place of men without worrying about women; as farm boys were led out into a world that; without a war; they would scarcely have bothered to get to know. The phenomenon has been remarked among almost all the combatants. There seems nothing peculiarly French about it.The modern girl is almost; but not quite; the same as the American flapper. Financially free from having to accept drudge work; with bobbed hair; cigarette and toy boys. French girls before the war -- at least from the strata that interest Roberts -- had been less open and free than a similar American girl. If little old ladies from Dubuque were scandalized; some French; including fathers; were shocked.It does not follow; though; that; outside novels; French men felt unmanned or uncertain of their own sexes. Perhaps uncertain of the sex of someone at the next table on the Left Bank; but hardly so mystified by their own. /At least; so far as Roberts is able to show.)Roberts is frank about limiting herself to literary and polemical evidence; but this is not very helpful. First; it appears that a lot of the literary works had limited audiences. There was one; constantly referred to; that had an enormous sale; Victor Margueritte's "La Garconne" (the "boyish girl"). It is not clear; though; that this book was any more reflective of any widespread form of French behavior or attitude than; say; Grace Metalious' "Peyton Place" could speak for American attitudes in the `50s. The French were prudish; too; and "La Garconne" was a sex novel.Next; the mother and her close ally; the tender nurse. Again; sappy commentary about the nobility of motherhood was not peculiar to France; nor unique in France to the postwar years. Anyhow; to suggest that motherhood stood for some sort of "gender" confusion is a stretch."Civilization without Sexes" starts to break down in the section on mothers; because of the (real enough) crisis about breeding. The wheels come off completely in the section on the single working girl (including old maids and young widows).Roberts several times states that she is not drawing conclusions about actual sociological conditions in France; only analyzing a corpus of more or less polemical statements. However; good feminist that she is; she cannot forbear taking sides.One of the big issues with "la femme seule" (the woman alone) was whether she should mate or breed. But; as Roberts reveals; this was not particularly a postwar issue. Leon Blum; of all people; had written a book about it a decade before the war; which went through innumerable editions. He advocated single motherhood.The birthrate had been an issue in France since even before 1870; and; again; there is no obvious reason to think that its continuation in the `20s had anything to do with Frenchmen's uncertainty about what sex they; or women; were.Roberts; adopting the "a woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle" ideology; cannot refrain from labeling the issue of the woman alone (or lonely woman) as a "so-called problem." Maybe to her. There seems evidence enough that real women in France thought it a problem.And here is where Roberts really goes off the rails. The debate about the birthrate was not only bound up in social; financial and familial expectations. For the nation; the shortage of French babies had been an issue since the time of Napoleon. (After a bloody battle; he shrugged that "one night of Paris will replace these men;" but he ran out of cannon fodder even before the campaign in Russia.)As seems to be the universal defect of feminist historians; Roberts maintains strong ideological opinions about military affairs; without any evidence that she understands them.The shortage of French men was obvious enough to Frenchmen; who had to serve three years as conscripts to German boys' two in order to keep the armies roughly equivalent. Roberts thinks that the concern about France's military demographic condition was based on "antiquated" notions of military power.She is wrong. When the next war came; it was the more populous nation that won in every case; and France did go down to defeat; just as the "natalists" had warned.Whether single women should have gone out and gotten pregnant; and whether the state should have made it easy and popular for them to do so; turned out to have been a matter of national life and death.1 of 2 people found the following review helpful. Good Start to Learning MoreBy Megan ColemanI found the book interesting; but sometimes I would find myself lost. I do not know French and knew very little about post war France to begin with; so I think that lead to my confusion when Roberts made cultural references. To be fair; she does explain the story lines of many of the books she uses to back up her thesis. I also enjoyed how the book is spilt up into three sections to represent the three different types of women in France in this time. (The modern woman; the mother; and the single woman). To me the section on the single woman was the most interesting and easiest to understand. I am sure that if one already has a general understanding of French/French culture; they would find the book an easier read than I did. Still it is worth checking out if you are interested in gender.2 of 5 people found the following review helpful. Well researched and Thought OutBy Mark PennerI used this book for a paper on feminism in post WWI France. It was amazing. Her book reads very well; and is well documented. She supports her facts with statistics; but also real life stories from the men at the front and the women holding down the fort. It was a great book for anyone interested in gender roles and identity in post WWI France.
