How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
This campaign ad appeals to citizens female and male by imposing Donald Trump as a secondary perpetrator of violence against women using implied imposition. After a long winded negative essay on her experience with early life rape, she states: "Donald Trump did this". While a strictly literal interpretation would associate this with Donald Trump's policy implications, there is an inference that transposes Donald Trump onto the malevolence of the actual perpetrator. This appeals to a political audience which is efficiently captivated by sentiments of blame, especially those affected by similar incidents. In this way it appeals to the public its argument for bodily autonomy by implying that those who stand in the way a woman's "right to choose" are as liable as rapists.
This week we connect the case of Thomas/Thomasine Hall in Colonial Virginia, to the legal history of the double standard in abortion cases, and to the strategy used by an Arawak woman enslaved in Salem, Massachusetts to defend herself against a witchcraft accusation in the Salem trials.
We will use these cases to extend our discussion of bodily autonomy and masculinity and to consider the politics of identity in the history of citizenship.
When reading about legal cases, what does the law tell us about cultural values and social hierarchy?
The law confers preferences to demographics that is at the top of the social hierarchy and what is culturally valued. Often these preferences are conferred in ambiguity or generalization. Particularly unvalued things or people are often isolated through specificity. For example, Thomas/ine was subjugated to multiple inspections of their genitalia in order to fulfill the court order/ law whereas Cisgender people were not. This confers a legal and cultural preference against Thomas/ine and towards Cisgender people. The responsibility for interrogation is also placed in the hands of the societally advantaged; all of Thomas/ines' inspectors were likely white.
Who is recognized as human? Who is objectified and dehumanized by the application of laws?
The people that were recognized as human were cisgender white males. The objectified persons are anyone that presented a challenge to the linear nature of that hierarchy. (Thomhas/ine, Arawak woman)
Who gets away with transgressions? Who is reassured and protected by the legal system?
Those instigating the proceedings are generally the people that get away with the transgressions and are reassured by the legal system which is most often white, cisgender males and females.
Nathaniel, your analysis of the campaign ad's connection between Trump and violence against women is powerful. It links political opposition to women's autonomy to personal trauma, creating an emotional appeal that resonates deeply with those affected by similar experiences.
Regarding the legal history, you effectively highlight how laws favor the dominant social hierarchy, specifically cisgender white males. Cases like Thomas/ine Hall and the Arawak woman illustrate how marginalized individuals were subjected to invasive scrutiny, reinforcing their dehumanization. This dynamic shows how laws protect those in power while punishing those who challenge societal norms, emphasizing the role of legal systems in maintaining existing power structures.
When reading about legal cases the law prioritizes white people over colored. Men are often protected by the legal system, as seen in Taking the Trade, the two men who killed a woman weren’t tried because at this point, she wasn’t seen as a “good” girl. The town tried to shame her because she was demonized for being pregnant out of marriage, but no one asked about who impregnated her. The men in this story were not brought to justice or penalized. Throughout history in many cultures woman are objectified and dehumanized, especially women of color. For example, Tituba was underestimated because she was a woman. Viewed as weak she used this to her advantage and talked her way out of being accused of witchcraft and executed. Tituba was very careful and calculative. When ready I was impressed that not only did, she manage to get out of her predicament, but she convinced the town that the ones responsible for witchcraft were white respected men. Often women were the ones accused of witchcraft, but she turned the tables. Tituba did what few (colored) women in history could and she got people to listen to her. It is sad to think the reason the townspeople were listening was because they were nosey, they wanted to watch her be punished. Unfortunately, they did not care about her well-being, but she overcame her situation and brought down the men who had done her wrong in life. Unlike with Sarah , these men were not protected by the legal system.
In regards to this week's readings, the concept of culture, social hierarchy and humanity are all interesting points to review. In the Thomas/Thomasine readings, we became aware of the act of "othering", of pointing out someone's differences in order to push one's self into a position above the person with differences. We can see this within the story of Thomas/Thomasine, and in other examples, such as the U.S. government and their othering of BIPOC people and communities.
This narrative continues both throughout history, and throughout the rest of this week's readings, particularly in reference to the Salem witch trials. The Salem readings tell the story of the young indigenous woman and her narrow escape from the accusations of witchcraft that plagued her. In both stories, there is the concept of othering, although the Salem readings are utilized quite unconventionally. Tituba utilized the concept of "othering" in order to deter attention away from her and spur fear into a witch hunt. This tactic not only reversed (if only momentarily) the Puritan social order, culture, and hierarchy at the time, which I found to be absolutely fascinating.
Traditionally, when reviewing legal cases, we can tell that in America, the law favors white individuals and European/colonialist cultures over all others. There is an intersection of gender within this bias of course, as cis, heterosexual, white men were the most revered within the legal system, and allowed the most leeway within breaking laws/upholding them. Our society is built around culture, which in turn cultivates social norms and expectations. These expectations dictate how we dress, how we present gender, the way we speak, what we are allowed to partake in, etc., and the legal system is designed to uphold these norms.
This is why in the modern day AND previous history, we can see a focus on humanity being identified as the straight, cis, white man that founded Puritan societies so long ago. The duality of whiteness is that it is both a shield and a fragile object. It can protect an individual or a system, but also needs protection from the deviance of the socially labeled "others" (such as BIPOC and Queer/Trans people). Despite this, however, we can see marginalized people pushing back against the system. Thomas/Thomasine's mere existence stood in defiance of a white, binary, social system. Tituba pushed a similar narrative by weaponizing the fear of the devilish "other" against the white townspeople, effectively diverting their attention from her and saving her life.
As much as our social systems and institutions are designed to harm those who dare to be different, there will always be those who choose to forge their own path, rather than be beaten to the ground. I think the history of these people is so vitally important to the way we view ourselves today because it reminds us that resistance is not new. BIPOC and Queer/Trans people have always existed and will continue to. Systems are not designed to be perfect. We are at the point now where as students and historians we must ask ourselves if we would like to change the narrative, or simply close the book.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
In this campaign she talks about how difficult it was in her situation under the circumstances she was put in by her step father. It advocates for bodily autonomy by showing the different kinds of situations that happen unfortunately on a day to day basis that a good amount of people would never even think of considering. I feel that we need more campaign ads like this to show the groups of people who disagree that this is a very serious thing that many people need to have easy access to.
Dayton’s Taking the Trade: Abortion and Gender Relations in an Eighteenth-Century New England Village, Michael Gomez’s On Igbo Women from Exchanging Our Country Marks, and Elaine Breslaw’s Tituba's Confession: The Multicultural Dimensions of the 1692 Salem Witch-Hunt revolve around gender, power, and cultural conflict in the early American context. These texts each explore how women’s roles, agency, and bodies were sites of control, negotiation, and resistance within the intersecting pressures of gender expectations, race, and cultural hierarchies.
Dayton’s article on abortion and gender relations in colonial New England reveals the complexity of female autonomy in an era when patriarchal control dominated women’s lives. The story of Sarah Grosvenor, whose abortion led to her death, exposes the gendered power dynamics that governed intimate decisions in the 18th century. The role of male authority, both in medical decisions and social judgment, highlights how women’s bodies were controlled and regulated by community norms and expectations. The incident also shows how a woman’s reproductive choices were not solely personal but bound to the moral and social codes of the time, implicating not just the woman but everyone involved in the decision.
Similarly, in On Igbo Women, Gomez discusses how African women, particularly Igbo women, resisted and adapted to the dehumanizing conditions of the transatlantic slave trade. The essay emphasizes the gendered nature of slavery and how women’s labor, reproductive capacities, and social roles were shaped and exploited in the New World. However, Igbo women also retained aspects of cultural identity and agency through practices such as resistance to forced labor, preserving cultural customs, and maintaining spiritual practices. This example provides a contrast to the European colonial experience, showing how African women, though subjugated, navigated a complex web of gendered power dynamics that transcended their immediate oppression.
Elaine Breslaw’s Tituba's Confession broadens the conversation by examining how racial and cultural identities intersected with gender in early America. Tituba, an enslaved woman of Indigenous and African heritage, became central to the Salem witch trials, and her confession reveals how women of color were uniquely vulnerable to accusations of witchcraft. Breslaw argues that Tituba’s multicultural background contributed to her being scapegoated in a way that reflected both gendered and racial fears within the colonial community. Tituba’s story shows how non-European women were marginalized and their identities distorted by dominant cultural narratives, often being forced into roles as “other” or “outsiders” to explain social anxieties.
Together, these texts illustrate how women's identities—whether defined by race, culture, or social status—were deeply politicized and shaped by larger societal forces in early America. Women’s bodies became sites of control, resistance, and cultural negotiation, while their roles in society were dictated by intersecting systems of power. From the policing of reproductive decisions in New England to the resistance of Igbo women against slavery to the racialized scapegoating of Tituba, these stories emphasize the centrality of gender in shaping experiences of oppression and resilience in early America. Through these accounts, we see how women’s actions and bodies were not only personal but emblematic of broader cultural and societal conflicts.
This campaign ad appeals to mothers and women in general because it's this beautiful young woman who went through something so horrible as a child and had no one to go to for help. It also pulls a people heartstrings because she talks about how when she needed an abortion as a child because of sexual abuse, she was able to get one but, in this day and age, she and other women in similar situations would not be afforded the same treatment; they would be denied care. In Sarah Grosvenor's case, she was a young woman who was in a relationship with an older man and when the product of unprotected sex showed itself, Amasa, her lover, decided that the best course of action would be to abort the fetus and not listen to Sarah's arguments. In the end, his decision resulted in her death, and when everything went to trial, he was able to walk away with no punishment and marry someone else within the next couple years. The double-standard between men and women is a large problem and unless people start to see it, nothing will ever get better.
When reading Sarah's case, society has always put men above everyone. In the case, her partner convince her get an abortion as a way to protect himself as they both weren't married yet to have a child. Because of this pressure, it led Sarah to get an abortion and as a result of it she dies from it. After her death, an investigation open and no punishment was made as the men were let off. I find it sad how society wasn't able to help women and especially Sarah but instead continue to see men more important.
I agree; the fact the Amasa was able to walk away scotch-free makes me mad every time I read the story. Men are seen as this glorified persona and that they can do no wrong is something that needs to be reevaluated in society and media.
From reading about these cases, it is clear that society puts white men above everyone else. With Thomas/Thomasine Hall’s case, the way they were allowed to present themselves was determined by the white, male judge. During the time period this case occurred, everything, including gender expression, was decided by white men. This case is proof of that. The men determine how men, women, and everyone in between and outside of those constructs were allowed to dress and act. Thomas/Thomasine Hall, although they often presented themselves as a man, lost all control over their own body because they did not fit into what the patriarchal society thought they should be. With Sarah’s case, men showed that they only care about themselves and other men. As a result of what men pressured her to do, Sarah died and the men got off with no punishment whatsoever. Society and the law seeks to protect white men and white men only.
Examining legal cases can offer valuable insights into a society's cultural values and social hierarchy. For instance, in Taking the Trade: Abortion and Gender Relations in an 18th Century New England Village, Cornelia Dayton reveals how legal practices reflect shifting generational attitudes towards gender and morality in early New England. Her work illustrates the evolving nature of these themes and how they were shaped by broader social and cultural changes.
For instance, the "generational conflict" regarding the prosecution of premarital sexual relations, particularly when a pregnancy occurred, reflects early New England's views on gender. Dayton notes that while men were often "off the hook," women faced severe ostracism for such actions. Furthermore, Dayton highlights the significance of these historical narratives in offering a chance to "rethink conventional interpretations of secularization in colonial New England," especially in relation to abortion and the decriminalization of premarital sex, initially benefiting men more than women.
It is important to explore why men were often "off the hook" while women faced harsher penalties. Why did the law seem to protect men more? Sarah’s experience sheds light on how gender roles intersected with community views, class structure, and perceptions of gender in eighteenth-century New England. This highlights the different ways the law regulated men’s and women’s bodies and how crimes committed by each were treated during 18th century New England, a time when it seems there was a lack of separation of church and state.
However, this topic is neither monolithic nor static. It reveals that while abortion was legal, premarital sexual relations were not, and over time, lawmakers enacted laws that increasingly criminalized women's bodies. This issue deserves further exploration in class. One might assume that abortion would not have been legal during this period, but this historical narrative illustrates the nuanced and complex nature of early colonial American laws. It shows how new generations influenced legal changes through their secular and non-secular views.
I very much agree with you, because it’s sad to see how Hall was a human, living how they wanted to life and how they felt comfortable with themselves, only to be objectified by society because they didn’t like how Hall was a male and female.
I really enjoy your analysis in regards to systems of oppression and power here. I think that while we can all acknowledge that the bias is rooted within our systems, we so rarely enact change when we see it occur. Your reference to Trump and his numerous allegations is a perfect example. The comparison between a case today and one in the times of Puritan New England should have nothing in common and yet they mirror each other. I also loved your conceptualization of being "human" and that only those in a position of power are granted this label. Part of our system of violence is othering of those who threaten the colonialist systems set in place, exactly as you referenced.
I definitely agree with this! There is absolutely no space for anyone outside of traditional binaries in society. Unfortunately, a lot of people still think like this today. And even more unfortunately, some of those people are the ones who are leading or trying to lead our society. I also think the hierarchy you mentioned is still in place today. This is clear through how the law treats people now. It is much easier (for some unknown reason) for white, cis men to receive pity from judges and jurors in courtrooms. Because of this hierarchy and the prejudices that comes with it, the people that fit within the lower levels are treated unfairly by the law. Women and queer people are much more likely to lose their rights because much of society thinks they’re less than and therefore, undeserving of rights.
Even in after dying, Sarah was judged for having intercourse of of marriage and getting pregnant. Where as no one questioned who the man in this situation was. I agree with you, women had greater punishments for having sex than men, woman are often seen as pure but only if they're a virgin. They have to be pure for a husband but men didn't have to and could even have mistresses and affairs long after being wed. The double standards are crazy.
Hello, I agree with this. This element you're talking about where she's by herself is added to by the way the shots are under exposed. This brings a coldness to the image that assigns her some vulnerability. I noticed as she continues to go about her life normally as you describe (normally because of her claim abortion policies permitted this normalcy), the shots being normally or over exposed. This progression of vulnerability to relative openness is shared by the audience and aims to make the feel more empathetic. I also like the piece you mentioned about speaking truths as a means to gain community. I think this is a powerful commonality that is a continuity among many of the victim written readings we explore.
I would be careful personifying patriarchy, or confusing it in a vicarious manner with men (or specific men). The primary reason is that it is offensive to males like myself. Secondarily, the emotions that come with overly- personifying systemic problems limits the advocate's ability to be objective in reviewing and implementing effective change in a society. e.g. If a feminist blames problem x on the individual actions a, b, and c of specific men (maybe thinking heavily about specific circumstances in her life), then passes legislation that prevents those men from taking those actions, she may find that she was blindsided to systemic contributors g, e, and f to problem x. (systemic contributors could be availability of day after pill, infrastructure that favors certain heights, workplace policies, etc.)
I believe this is something we see in this video. The female has a truth to speak, but it is only considered an enabler for real world change because of specific and intentional political rhetoric that aided in the manufacture of the video. This political rhetoric was done with the intention of advocating for broader change (voting blue). For example, it is no mistake that the female in the video was from Arkansas. This was an attempt to humanize the abortion issue across party lines (Arkansas traditionally votes conservative). Even the most poignant anecdotes must be harnessed by logic and systemic consideration to have efficacy.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
This campaign ad appeals to citizens female and male by imposing Donald Trump as a secondary perpetrator of violence against women using implied imposition. After a long winded negative essay on her experience with early life rape, she states: "Donald Trump did this". While a strictly literal interpretation would associate this with Donald Trump's policy implications, there is an inference that transposes Donald Trump onto the malevolence of the actual perpetrator. This appeals to a political audience which is efficiently captivated by sentiments of blame, especially those affected by similar incidents. In this way it appeals to the public its argument for bodily autonomy by implying that those who stand in the way a woman's "right to choose" are as liable as rapists.
This week we connect the case of Thomas/Thomasine Hall in Colonial Virginia, to the legal history of the double standard in abortion cases, and to the strategy used by an Arawak woman enslaved in Salem, Massachusetts to defend herself against a witchcraft accusation in the Salem trials.
We will use these cases to extend our discussion of bodily autonomy and masculinity and to consider the politics of identity in the history of citizenship.
When reading about legal cases, what does the law tell us about cultural values and social hierarchy?
The law confers preferences to demographics that is at the top of the social hierarchy and what is culturally valued. Often these preferences are conferred in ambiguity or generalization. Particularly unvalued things or people are often isolated through specificity. For example, Thomas/ine was subjugated to multiple inspections of their genitalia in order to fulfill the court order/ law whereas Cisgender people were not. This confers a legal and cultural preference against Thomas/ine and towards Cisgender people. The responsibility for interrogation is also placed in the hands of the societally advantaged; all of Thomas/ines' inspectors were likely white.
Who is recognized as human? Who is objectified and dehumanized by the application of laws?
The people that were recognized as human were cisgender white males. The objectified persons are anyone that presented a challenge to the linear nature of that hierarchy. (Thomhas/ine, Arawak woman)
Who gets away with transgressions? Who is reassured and protected by the legal system?
Those instigating the proceedings are generally the people that get away with the transgressions and are reassured by the legal system which is most often white, cisgender males and females.
Nathaniel, your analysis of the campaign ad's connection between Trump and violence against women is powerful. It links political opposition to women's autonomy to personal trauma, creating an emotional appeal that resonates deeply with those affected by similar experiences.
Regarding the legal history, you effectively highlight how laws favor the dominant social hierarchy, specifically cisgender white males. Cases like Thomas/ine Hall and the Arawak woman illustrate how marginalized individuals were subjected to invasive scrutiny, reinforcing their dehumanization. This dynamic shows how laws protect those in power while punishing those who challenge societal norms, emphasizing the role of legal systems in maintaining existing power structures.
When reading about legal cases the law prioritizes white people over colored. Men are often protected by the legal system, as seen in Taking the Trade, the two men who killed a woman weren’t tried because at this point, she wasn’t seen as a “good” girl. The town tried to shame her because she was demonized for being pregnant out of marriage, but no one asked about who impregnated her. The men in this story were not brought to justice or penalized. Throughout history in many cultures woman are objectified and dehumanized, especially women of color. For example, Tituba was underestimated because she was a woman. Viewed as weak she used this to her advantage and talked her way out of being accused of witchcraft and executed. Tituba was very careful and calculative. When ready I was impressed that not only did, she manage to get out of her predicament, but she convinced the town that the ones responsible for witchcraft were white respected men. Often women were the ones accused of witchcraft, but she turned the tables. Tituba did what few (colored) women in history could and she got people to listen to her. It is sad to think the reason the townspeople were listening was because they were nosey, they wanted to watch her be punished. Unfortunately, they did not care about her well-being, but she overcame her situation and brought down the men who had done her wrong in life. Unlike with Sarah , these men were not protected by the legal system.
In regards to this week's readings, the concept of culture, social hierarchy and humanity are all interesting points to review. In the Thomas/Thomasine readings, we became aware of the act of "othering", of pointing out someone's differences in order to push one's self into a position above the person with differences. We can see this within the story of Thomas/Thomasine, and in other examples, such as the U.S. government and their othering of BIPOC people and communities.
This narrative continues both throughout history, and throughout the rest of this week's readings, particularly in reference to the Salem witch trials. The Salem readings tell the story of the young indigenous woman and her narrow escape from the accusations of witchcraft that plagued her. In both stories, there is the concept of othering, although the Salem readings are utilized quite unconventionally. Tituba utilized the concept of "othering" in order to deter attention away from her and spur fear into a witch hunt. This tactic not only reversed (if only momentarily) the Puritan social order, culture, and hierarchy at the time, which I found to be absolutely fascinating.
Traditionally, when reviewing legal cases, we can tell that in America, the law favors white individuals and European/colonialist cultures over all others. There is an intersection of gender within this bias of course, as cis, heterosexual, white men were the most revered within the legal system, and allowed the most leeway within breaking laws/upholding them. Our society is built around culture, which in turn cultivates social norms and expectations. These expectations dictate how we dress, how we present gender, the way we speak, what we are allowed to partake in, etc., and the legal system is designed to uphold these norms.
This is why in the modern day AND previous history, we can see a focus on humanity being identified as the straight, cis, white man that founded Puritan societies so long ago. The duality of whiteness is that it is both a shield and a fragile object. It can protect an individual or a system, but also needs protection from the deviance of the socially labeled "others" (such as BIPOC and Queer/Trans people). Despite this, however, we can see marginalized people pushing back against the system. Thomas/Thomasine's mere existence stood in defiance of a white, binary, social system. Tituba pushed a similar narrative by weaponizing the fear of the devilish "other" against the white townspeople, effectively diverting their attention from her and saving her life.
As much as our social systems and institutions are designed to harm those who dare to be different, there will always be those who choose to forge their own path, rather than be beaten to the ground. I think the history of these people is so vitally important to the way we view ourselves today because it reminds us that resistance is not new. BIPOC and Queer/Trans people have always existed and will continue to. Systems are not designed to be perfect. We are at the point now where as students and historians we must ask ourselves if we would like to change the narrative, or simply close the book.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
In this campaign she talks about how difficult it was in her situation under the circumstances she was put in by her step father. It advocates for bodily autonomy by showing the different kinds of situations that happen unfortunately on a day to day basis that a good amount of people would never even think of considering. I feel that we need more campaign ads like this to show the groups of people who disagree that this is a very serious thing that many people need to have easy access to.
Dayton’s Taking the Trade: Abortion and Gender Relations in an Eighteenth-Century New England Village, Michael Gomez’s On Igbo Women from Exchanging Our Country Marks, and Elaine Breslaw’s Tituba's Confession: The Multicultural Dimensions of the 1692 Salem Witch-Hunt revolve around gender, power, and cultural conflict in the early American context. These texts each explore how women’s roles, agency, and bodies were sites of control, negotiation, and resistance within the intersecting pressures of gender expectations, race, and cultural hierarchies.
Dayton’s article on abortion and gender relations in colonial New England reveals the complexity of female autonomy in an era when patriarchal control dominated women’s lives. The story of Sarah Grosvenor, whose abortion led to her death, exposes the gendered power dynamics that governed intimate decisions in the 18th century. The role of male authority, both in medical decisions and social judgment, highlights how women’s bodies were controlled and regulated by community norms and expectations. The incident also shows how a woman’s reproductive choices were not solely personal but bound to the moral and social codes of the time, implicating not just the woman but everyone involved in the decision.
Similarly, in On Igbo Women, Gomez discusses how African women, particularly Igbo women, resisted and adapted to the dehumanizing conditions of the transatlantic slave trade. The essay emphasizes the gendered nature of slavery and how women’s labor, reproductive capacities, and social roles were shaped and exploited in the New World. However, Igbo women also retained aspects of cultural identity and agency through practices such as resistance to forced labor, preserving cultural customs, and maintaining spiritual practices. This example provides a contrast to the European colonial experience, showing how African women, though subjugated, navigated a complex web of gendered power dynamics that transcended their immediate oppression.
Elaine Breslaw’s Tituba's Confession broadens the conversation by examining how racial and cultural identities intersected with gender in early America. Tituba, an enslaved woman of Indigenous and African heritage, became central to the Salem witch trials, and her confession reveals how women of color were uniquely vulnerable to accusations of witchcraft. Breslaw argues that Tituba’s multicultural background contributed to her being scapegoated in a way that reflected both gendered and racial fears within the colonial community. Tituba’s story shows how non-European women were marginalized and their identities distorted by dominant cultural narratives, often being forced into roles as “other” or “outsiders” to explain social anxieties.
Together, these texts illustrate how women's identities—whether defined by race, culture, or social status—were deeply politicized and shaped by larger societal forces in early America. Women’s bodies became sites of control, resistance, and cultural negotiation, while their roles in society were dictated by intersecting systems of power. From the policing of reproductive decisions in New England to the resistance of Igbo women against slavery to the racialized scapegoating of Tituba, these stories emphasize the centrality of gender in shaping experiences of oppression and resilience in early America. Through these accounts, we see how women’s actions and bodies were not only personal but emblematic of broader cultural and societal conflicts.
This campaign ad appeals to mothers and women in general because it's this beautiful young woman who went through something so horrible as a child and had no one to go to for help. It also pulls a people heartstrings because she talks about how when she needed an abortion as a child because of sexual abuse, she was able to get one but, in this day and age, she and other women in similar situations would not be afforded the same treatment; they would be denied care. In Sarah Grosvenor's case, she was a young woman who was in a relationship with an older man and when the product of unprotected sex showed itself, Amasa, her lover, decided that the best course of action would be to abort the fetus and not listen to Sarah's arguments. In the end, his decision resulted in her death, and when everything went to trial, he was able to walk away with no punishment and marry someone else within the next couple years. The double-standard between men and women is a large problem and unless people start to see it, nothing will ever get better.
When reading Sarah's case, society has always put men above everyone. In the case, her partner convince her get an abortion as a way to protect himself as they both weren't married yet to have a child. Because of this pressure, it led Sarah to get an abortion and as a result of it she dies from it. After her death, an investigation open and no punishment was made as the men were let off. I find it sad how society wasn't able to help women and especially Sarah but instead continue to see men more important.
I agree; the fact the Amasa was able to walk away scotch-free makes me mad every time I read the story. Men are seen as this glorified persona and that they can do no wrong is something that needs to be reevaluated in society and media.
From reading about these cases, it is clear that society puts white men above everyone else. With Thomas/Thomasine Hall’s case, the way they were allowed to present themselves was determined by the white, male judge. During the time period this case occurred, everything, including gender expression, was decided by white men. This case is proof of that. The men determine how men, women, and everyone in between and outside of those constructs were allowed to dress and act. Thomas/Thomasine Hall, although they often presented themselves as a man, lost all control over their own body because they did not fit into what the patriarchal society thought they should be. With Sarah’s case, men showed that they only care about themselves and other men. As a result of what men pressured her to do, Sarah died and the men got off with no punishment whatsoever. Society and the law seeks to protect white men and white men only.
Examining legal cases can offer valuable insights into a society's cultural values and social hierarchy. For instance, in Taking the Trade: Abortion and Gender Relations in an 18th Century New England Village, Cornelia Dayton reveals how legal practices reflect shifting generational attitudes towards gender and morality in early New England. Her work illustrates the evolving nature of these themes and how they were shaped by broader social and cultural changes.
For instance, the "generational conflict" regarding the prosecution of premarital sexual relations, particularly when a pregnancy occurred, reflects early New England's views on gender. Dayton notes that while men were often "off the hook," women faced severe ostracism for such actions. Furthermore, Dayton highlights the significance of these historical narratives in offering a chance to "rethink conventional interpretations of secularization in colonial New England," especially in relation to abortion and the decriminalization of premarital sex, initially benefiting men more than women.
It is important to explore why men were often "off the hook" while women faced harsher penalties. Why did the law seem to protect men more? Sarah’s experience sheds light on how gender roles intersected with community views, class structure, and perceptions of gender in eighteenth-century New England. This highlights the different ways the law regulated men’s and women’s bodies and how crimes committed by each were treated during 18th century New England, a time when it seems there was a lack of separation of church and state.
However, this topic is neither monolithic nor static. It reveals that while abortion was legal, premarital sexual relations were not, and over time, lawmakers enacted laws that increasingly criminalized women's bodies. This issue deserves further exploration in class. One might assume that abortion would not have been legal during this period, but this historical narrative illustrates the nuanced and complex nature of early colonial American laws. It shows how new generations influenced legal changes through their secular and non-secular views.
I very much agree with you, because it’s sad to see how Hall was a human, living how they wanted to life and how they felt comfortable with themselves, only to be objectified by society because they didn’t like how Hall was a male and female.
I really enjoy your analysis in regards to systems of oppression and power here. I think that while we can all acknowledge that the bias is rooted within our systems, we so rarely enact change when we see it occur. Your reference to Trump and his numerous allegations is a perfect example. The comparison between a case today and one in the times of Puritan New England should have nothing in common and yet they mirror each other. I also loved your conceptualization of being "human" and that only those in a position of power are granted this label. Part of our system of violence is othering of those who threaten the colonialist systems set in place, exactly as you referenced.
I definitely agree with this! There is absolutely no space for anyone outside of traditional binaries in society. Unfortunately, a lot of people still think like this today. And even more unfortunately, some of those people are the ones who are leading or trying to lead our society. I also think the hierarchy you mentioned is still in place today. This is clear through how the law treats people now. It is much easier (for some unknown reason) for white, cis men to receive pity from judges and jurors in courtrooms. Because of this hierarchy and the prejudices that comes with it, the people that fit within the lower levels are treated unfairly by the law. Women and queer people are much more likely to lose their rights because much of society thinks they’re less than and therefore, undeserving of rights.
Even in after dying, Sarah was judged for having intercourse of of marriage and getting pregnant. Where as no one questioned who the man in this situation was. I agree with you, women had greater punishments for having sex than men, woman are often seen as pure but only if they're a virgin. They have to be pure for a husband but men didn't have to and could even have mistresses and affairs long after being wed. The double standards are crazy.
Hello, I agree with this. This element you're talking about where she's by herself is added to by the way the shots are under exposed. This brings a coldness to the image that assigns her some vulnerability. I noticed as she continues to go about her life normally as you describe (normally because of her claim abortion policies permitted this normalcy), the shots being normally or over exposed. This progression of vulnerability to relative openness is shared by the audience and aims to make the feel more empathetic. I also like the piece you mentioned about speaking truths as a means to gain community. I think this is a powerful commonality that is a continuity among many of the victim written readings we explore.
I would be careful personifying patriarchy, or confusing it in a vicarious manner with men (or specific men). The primary reason is that it is offensive to males like myself. Secondarily, the emotions that come with overly- personifying systemic problems limits the advocate's ability to be objective in reviewing and implementing effective change in a society. e.g. If a feminist blames problem x on the individual actions a, b, and c of specific men (maybe thinking heavily about specific circumstances in her life), then passes legislation that prevents those men from taking those actions, she may find that she was blindsided to systemic contributors g, e, and f to problem x. (systemic contributors could be availability of day after pill, infrastructure that favors certain heights, workplace policies, etc.)
I believe this is something we see in this video. The female has a truth to speak, but it is only considered an enabler for real world change because of specific and intentional political rhetoric that aided in the manufacture of the video. This political rhetoric was done with the intention of advocating for broader change (voting blue). For example, it is no mistake that the female in the video was from Arkansas. This was an attempt to humanize the abortion issue across party lines (Arkansas traditionally votes conservative). Even the most poignant anecdotes must be harnessed by logic and systemic consideration to have efficacy.
Cheers and thank you for your post Grace!