Women's history as an approach to history is

built on the basic idea ihat

usually told tends to ignore women
the role that women have and women's contributions.Women's history history as 1t s
is the study ol
played in history, together with the
includes the study of the history of the growth methods needed to study womel.
recorded history, the examination of (and decline) of woman's rights throughe*
that historical events have had on individual women of historical significance, and the effect
that more traditional women. Inherent the study of women's history is the
in
women and ihe oftect thatrecordings of history have
minimized or ignored the
belieT
historical events had on women as awhole: in contributions oI
history is often a form of historical this respect, woman
historical consensus. revisionism, seeking to challenge or expand the
traditional
The formal course of study called
feinist thinking about women's issues. "womnen' s history" began in the 1970s with the riSe o
The main centers of scholarship have been the
Britain, where second-wave feminist historians, U.S. and
influenced
social nistory, led the way. As activists in the women's by the new approaches promoied b)
liberation, discussing
oppression and inequalities they experienced as women, they felt it imperativeand analyzing the
he lives of their foremothersand found very little to find out about
mainly by men and about men's activities in the public scholarship in print. History was wrillen
spherewar, politics, diplomacy ant
administration. Women are usually excluded and, when mentioned, are usually
stereotypical roles, such as wives, mothers, daughters and mistresses. History portrayed
in
is value ladenseXi:
igutu Ial Was consTuereu nisioNcal1y Wortny. These mstoriarns, mostly women, began to
offer courses or lectures that highlighted what history looked like, from a woman's perspecue
Thcse historians asked questions like, "What were women doing?" in various periods of history
As they uncovered nearly-forgotten history of women's struggles for equality and freedom, they
realized that a short lecture or single course wouldnot be adequate. Most of the scholars were
womnen's
surprised at the amounts of material that were, indeed, available. And so the fields of
of
studies and women's history were begun to seriously study not only the history and issues
forgotten.
women -- but also to try to keep the history from being once more

Phases of women's history

introduction of women's experience into historical study has developed in three phases.
The neglected, to replace stories of great powerful
men
of the
The first effort was to recover the lives women's history, "herstory" was parallel to socia!
phase of
with a focus om women. In this sources, writing of biographies, studies of specific groups of
history ingeneral. The recovery of danger is of separating off women's history into a separate
Women, all are very valuable. The profession, or of artificially splitting spheres of
male-dominated "affirmative
category, easily ignored by the public life. This approach was criticized as mere
lamily and home from action in
onlycelebrates heroes, and is not critical about its subjects.overcomes part of these
action" which movements related to women's issues,
political for women s
WO, examining especially outside Europe, the first voices arguing
literate elite. The
HhOns. In much of the world. because they were the
dominant
political
liberation were mainly male (China, Russia), attention, but in periods of
suffragist movement in England and the U.S. gets a lot of
 nal,wOnen more like was Somewomen history'shome? more shut historyweren't activities), play remember
was revealedApproaches lives literaryfocus the the exploitation movements).
ThePhase
victims movements; opening
Women's thein
housework an women Once norially
roles) In to Each analytical socially
argument
inmportant women's public looks on
reallyassumption are
memory How there the challenging first, criticism three of
to the elsewhere,
ibly the the what first historians stage male
basically functions out
more or be
were at actual to political constructedchanges (real Chris
language
did orandhistorians of thepresence included
indirect theyuntrue: women's tool is Politics
approach produces and oppression.
that
about as
women other women? opens as
more play more
educating social structures
the well public did. grew
post-structuralism, in the Giimartin
it similar
than evidence as that of
both reintroduces
is),
tural also roles. of concept
worthy women's reactedsame, as dynamics Women history
progressively
the a up subject
discriminated in contributions
Whywomen "history" is, that different historical men
from second, all
sodemands
ortant? children others? How women can of characteristic and
les? than and were (such the of of and from
work influentialto who traditional
the
different did that are be entire gender, women human Kay
in and form texts.
aare Why it history so as did arecalled "women" appeared
"discrimination"
teacher and against, develop defined many highlighted..
of more into Johnson
Howsomehow strong play
invisible historical heavily of
women's in women historical independently in of
agency
roles?
roles "women's ambitious, historical
the also It
some forgotten? is important their
did of purposefully acknowledged, that some rules theoretical historian's asphase (Sharon on
must An are only introduces a
womenyoungdoingvalue: times in profession. intimategroup into
activities uncoveredformallyThrough work: one women
approach underlying some study
result And roles history." if moving the Sievers
children'? are we of work,
"inferior" that mostly to
xercise countries, or
and working biological to and discussion. in
from or
women so forbidding direct don' t heavy "gender"
as who discourse-orientedfrom turns 20th on
women unconsciously
by the then or the
re-examination. public
assumption permissible "dis-covered." biographical style.doses
How work. pointing
discriminatory next evidentè hadbother
the
real "pushed a invisibility women century Meiji
doing women givens.
relations as
approach question a recovery Too
power were Is women real to of historical a democratic
traditional a out (W look theory onlyChinese
scientist
the excluded is back" were for
Omenimpact Using
It much
that that of means are
women, arises:
to from for of in into
from roles treat1men. permitted women especially shaped
men into women's wnt on them individual the gender category. focus
within passIVe pOntee wo
really trom public whai a
their that work and the and why aa third. neW
it or is as by o
 women' thsat writings
inhistory. journals were the in
othe:doinghistory Techniques studyof that termed
participatedattention
in for studying. the women notbut spheresiISsUming
TISng Spneres
objective
he
ljcehve the.Objectivity pre-1920 analyzed
Historians have. the Hence To instance roles
s. present sources women The
years forms public
realm. n study
books an ln th e
but byand a ofprimary
f or
are the limited
illeences
approach
istory
th at the period "integrated
must viewed value that
eir truth" and in the men of participated -- each
instance, third
and cover
between, magazines, were women's be are
women' s don' t options onhow
r,
sible? -- th e topic have. writing of paid from wil part
approach
since women's topics their lost always
history. history as the
society say
truthfuture hardly was history." be th e of part between
contributionsand by or history. to for
traditional
The historin
too. part developing -- times
acknowvledged Vietnam "doing that
t, unavailable.
Because at of many
as bythe inwere
in include In in
in one to
That's it tinme history women's 1970shough some has it
asat mighttelling uncOvering
history a public when But wonen's women detinedotten thesc
student history." "female"
a of no new. may women often
ways because War, larger
longer much from s
and women' approaches
stion about the
be history history.to have the needs often justifies
." first But material has and wil pieture, history, (and "male"
seen studied that some of private what so That role
e for been didn't that analyzed see
men'
n s thknown surprisingly to vwhat's to role much many
by Mostseveral were turn sources be evidence both is, und what without and real are
past. the ma y make most ways
the an much. creative: haven't
been was of the
historian, had
beginning preserved. to needed "women'
th e s
nmen). sonnetimes
injustices,
"enale"
sobjective,
rians A centuries, not times -- not the as vision happencd
goal journals it of there men examining
astutely. But sat have into and evidence part
historical seen
there in in to the
Herodotus, of history
the understand also is ofand history" is
o havehistorians or libraries of
been
Sometimes and official a in a of t0
issubtic.
by
are there the historical better women how the
unbiased, looking this larger of a men detending
been some collected
formal diaries material, acknowledged
before. history tim e "natural"
orhad women's integrated
tried documents picture whole. who seen isand enforcing Critics
sking has fascinating had been and records. what for when
observer. study women one -- what
t been to tossed
beenout as ways participated,
written as traditional of
division,
shed roles women of Thi s
loudly
booksrigorously letters,
of realizes way. one
anyhappened those the
to vwere and many
eto light on sourccs woncn's wrote that records.might historian essential
But te l written which special separatesimply"ditterent
since wre older men ways roles.
a for not that
is as beand to
the objective truth about history, usually left out the perspective of women: women who
an active role in the public events were otten forgotten quickly, and many
playcd
women playe:
behind-the-scencs role, working at hone. So, women's historians say, no history is really
objective. Histories are written by real people with their imperfections, and the histories are i
of conscious and unconscious errors. If women aren't assumed to be part of history, then the
nistorian won't look for evidence of women's role. One's assumptions help shape what evidence
one looks for. and therefore what evidence one finds. But women's history, in
questioning
whether histories have been conmplete without paying attention to the women, is also trying o
find a"truth." Women's history, essentially, values searching for more of the "whole truth" over
maintaining illusions that we already have found it.

In conclusion "women's history" is about new ways to see the evidence and new ways to
examine the assumptions of the historians they read. Retrieving newevidence, examnining old
evidence from the perspective of the women, looking even for what lack of evidence might speat
of in iis silence -- these are all important ways to fill in the "rest of the story.