Why Does A Woman Have To Be "Remarkable" To Be Remembered?: Some Issues With Teaching Women's History
Have you ever noticed that women's history is dominated by the same kinds of women? It's always the top 100 important women in history or the "remarkable" story of this historical heroine. If she wasn't "brave," or "remarkable," or "influential," she rarely (if ever) gets a mention. This is a major bugbear of mine. Why does a woman have to conform to one of these labels to have a voice? Is her story not worth mentioning if she wasn't hugely influential, in some way or another? And another question: who defines these labels, anyway, and what does it actually mean to be "brave" or "remarkable?" Let me make something very clear from the start, though. I am not criticising the fact that we have so many books, articles, videos, TV shows dedicated to women from the past. Neither am I suggesting that we should stop celebrating women's achievements or significance. I just feel that we are always celebrating...