Joan Scott and a Sexist “Herstory”

Joan Scott writes in chapter one of “Gender and the Politics of History” about certain historians attempts to read and study about women in history. They call this study “herstory.” The concept of “herstory” is ridiculous and perpetuates the sexism and chauvinism that the feminist historians are trying to abrogate. There is a certain Marxian tone to the concept that there needs to be an entirely separate history just for women. This notion is the opposite of chauvinism and is actually separating the sexes even further. Different methods exist for dealing with a type of history that only focuses on women, and most of these are also sexist. One approach is to try and collect information on historical women to demonstrate their similarity to men in history. This approach would have some semblance of egalitarianism if it did not intend to focus on women and not study men as historical actors. Another type tries to be revisionist in nature; this is not necessarily bad, but it looks at periods to try and demonstrate the men have continuously “subjugated” women. Yet another approach tries to bring together information about indigent and noble women in history while working under the assumption of female oppression in a patriarchal system.  The final approach looks at female culture and how women must live domestically instead of taking control of their lives. This fails to see the aspects of women’s culture that were enjoyed and actually encouraged by women during these times.

Scott asserts that “herstory” has had excellent results and contributions to the overall study of history. She writes, “By piling up the evidence about women in the past it refutes the claims of those who insist that women had no history, no significant place in stories of the past” (p20). Scott’s description is accurate, but it is also flawed. The problem with piling up the evidence for specifically women is that it does not relate the two sexes together. If people are to truly understand history then both men and women must be studied together to comprehend the mass complexity of times in which they do not live. This myopic approach to history will prevent true equality from happening. It is perfectly acceptable for certain historians to want to study specific aspects of history that are woman centered, but overall there needs to be an amalgamation of the information for equality in a historical view to happen. If historians only focus on “her-story” or “his-story” they will not see the complete picture that so enriches the “stories of the past” Scott discusses in her book. This is not to say that the study of women is not important because it is. However, equality can only be achieved if neither sex is valued above the other.