While the Women Only Wept: Loyalist Refugee Women in Eastern Ontario // Review

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Janice Potter-MacKinnon
{"title":"While the Women Only Wept: Loyalist Refugee Women in Eastern Ontario // Review","authors":"Janice Potter-MacKinnon","doi":"10.2307/2081222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Historians have long - known that the American Revolution created Canada in a political sense as surely as it created the United States. Consequently any work that changes our understanding of the Loyalists, or of the way political ideas were formed in the revolutionary and post - revolutionary era, is of fundamental importance. These five quite different yet superb books provide interesting perspectives on the Loyalists, and on the way Loyalist Canadians saw their politics. To begin with, patriarchal values loomed large in Loyalist thought as it emerged after 1785. Historians, not recognizing this, have misread the history of Loyalism, perpetuated gender stereotypes and misconstrued an important thread in our understanding of political culture in Canada. As Janice Potter - MacKinnon convincingly demonstrates, Loyalist ideology was defined in exile, complete with short - term objectives and deliberate misrepresentation.Potter - MacKinnon wonders why women have been disadvantaged and ignored in the historiography of the Loyalists. Loyalist women played key roles in the decisions of families to become Loyalist. Often, they ran the family farms and businesses when husbands had to leave suddenly to avoid capture by the Patriots. During these periods the contributions of these women were recognized as valuable by their families, by the British authorities and by the American Patriots.Within the patriarchal conventions of the eighteenth century, women were treated as extensions of their husbands. While this was also true for Patriot women, it was at least possible to create legends around women who advanced the Patriot cause. For one thing, revolutionary rhetoric, unlike Loyalist rhetoric, lent itself to a loosening of the prevailing paternalism.For Loyalist women, the war tightened patriarchal values. In the early stages of the war, women could be independent as long as they remained where they were. Where they were, however, was increasingly behind the lines in a bitter civil war, open to abuse and mistreatment by their neighbours, especially if they were easily labelled as traitors. They lacked legal guarantees to their rights or properties; aside from dower rights, land and chattel were considered the property of their husbands. If the husband had left, or if he were considered an enemy, his property could be confiscated even while his wife and children occupied it.There was pressure on Loyalist women to leave, even at great sacrifice. However, in leaving they lost any semblance of independence. They often required permission from local committees of vigilance. Then, they needed aid and assistance from Indian and military guides to reach husbands stationed in military forts or in refugee camps. In these forts and camps, they were only significant as spouses; they were treated as dependents and as burdens. Now weak and dependent, they sought compensation for very real sacrifices from a British government only interested in helping those with military experience. Women's assistance was rarely considered militarily important, partly because of the limitations of language and ideology: male values had assertive qualities, females, submissive ones. Consequently, their petitions for assistance were couched in a language of submissiveness and paternalism: all sacrifices had to be translated in terms of husbands, for only husbands were likely to be compensated.The experience of exile framed a Loyalist culture and ideology. A female Loyalist ideology would have found strength from the decisions and sacrifices made before exile; in exile, the female experience was neither valued nor liberating. \"Loyalty, service, and sacrifice, as defined in Loyalist petitions, were all male concepts\" (126). Women had to write in the language of suffering and enfeeblement (151).Potter - MacKinnon makes a convincing case that women have been given short shrift by historians. The internal dynamics of the \"rebel - to - exile\" drama, coupled with the prevailing views of women's proper roles, deprived women of their independence. …","PeriodicalId":45057,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CANADIAN STUDIES-REVUE D ETUDES CANADIENNES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"1993-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/2081222","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF CANADIAN STUDIES-REVUE D ETUDES CANADIENNES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/2081222","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Historians have long - known that the American Revolution created Canada in a political sense as surely as it created the United States. Consequently any work that changes our understanding of the Loyalists, or of the way political ideas were formed in the revolutionary and post - revolutionary era, is of fundamental importance. These five quite different yet superb books provide interesting perspectives on the Loyalists, and on the way Loyalist Canadians saw their politics. To begin with, patriarchal values loomed large in Loyalist thought as it emerged after 1785. Historians, not recognizing this, have misread the history of Loyalism, perpetuated gender stereotypes and misconstrued an important thread in our understanding of political culture in Canada. As Janice Potter - MacKinnon convincingly demonstrates, Loyalist ideology was defined in exile, complete with short - term objectives and deliberate misrepresentation.Potter - MacKinnon wonders why women have been disadvantaged and ignored in the historiography of the Loyalists. Loyalist women played key roles in the decisions of families to become Loyalist. Often, they ran the family farms and businesses when husbands had to leave suddenly to avoid capture by the Patriots. During these periods the contributions of these women were recognized as valuable by their families, by the British authorities and by the American Patriots.Within the patriarchal conventions of the eighteenth century, women were treated as extensions of their husbands. While this was also true for Patriot women, it was at least possible to create legends around women who advanced the Patriot cause. For one thing, revolutionary rhetoric, unlike Loyalist rhetoric, lent itself to a loosening of the prevailing paternalism.For Loyalist women, the war tightened patriarchal values. In the early stages of the war, women could be independent as long as they remained where they were. Where they were, however, was increasingly behind the lines in a bitter civil war, open to abuse and mistreatment by their neighbours, especially if they were easily labelled as traitors. They lacked legal guarantees to their rights or properties; aside from dower rights, land and chattel were considered the property of their husbands. If the husband had left, or if he were considered an enemy, his property could be confiscated even while his wife and children occupied it.There was pressure on Loyalist women to leave, even at great sacrifice. However, in leaving they lost any semblance of independence. They often required permission from local committees of vigilance. Then, they needed aid and assistance from Indian and military guides to reach husbands stationed in military forts or in refugee camps. In these forts and camps, they were only significant as spouses; they were treated as dependents and as burdens. Now weak and dependent, they sought compensation for very real sacrifices from a British government only interested in helping those with military experience. Women's assistance was rarely considered militarily important, partly because of the limitations of language and ideology: male values had assertive qualities, females, submissive ones. Consequently, their petitions for assistance were couched in a language of submissiveness and paternalism: all sacrifices had to be translated in terms of husbands, for only husbands were likely to be compensated.The experience of exile framed a Loyalist culture and ideology. A female Loyalist ideology would have found strength from the decisions and sacrifices made before exile; in exile, the female experience was neither valued nor liberating. "Loyalty, service, and sacrifice, as defined in Loyalist petitions, were all male concepts" (126). Women had to write in the language of suffering and enfeeblement (151).Potter - MacKinnon makes a convincing case that women have been given short shrift by historians. The internal dynamics of the "rebel - to - exile" drama, coupled with the prevailing views of women's proper roles, deprived women of their independence. …
当女人只会哭泣:安大略东部的保皇派难民妇女//评论
历史学家早就知道,美国革命在政治意义上创造了加拿大,就像它创造了美国一样。因此,任何改变我们对保皇派的认识,或改变我们对革命时期和革命后政治思想形成方式的认识的工作,都是至关重要的。这五本截然不同却极好的书提供了关于保皇派的有趣视角,以及保皇派加拿大人看待他们政治的方式。首先,父权价值观在1785年之后出现的保皇派思想中显得很重要。历史学家没有认识到这一点,他们误读了保皇派的历史,延续了性别刻板印象,误解了我们理解加拿大政治文化的一条重要线索。正如贾尼斯·波特-麦金农令人信服地证明的那样,保皇派的意识形态是在流亡中被定义的,充满了短期目标和蓄意歪曲。波特-麦金农想知道为什么女性在保皇派的历史编纂中一直处于不利地位并被忽视。忠诚的女性在家庭成为忠诚者的决定中发挥了关键作用。通常,当丈夫们不得不突然离开以避免被爱国者抓住时,她们经营着家庭农场和企业。在这些时期,这些妇女的贡献被她们的家庭、英国当局和美国爱国者认为是宝贵的。在18世纪的父权习俗中,妇女被视为丈夫的延伸。虽然这对爱国者女性来说也是如此,但至少有可能为那些推动爱国者事业的女性创造传奇。首先,与保皇派的言论不同,革命的言论有助于放松盛行的家长式作风。对于保皇派女性来说,战争强化了父权价值观。在战争初期,妇女只要留在原地就可以独立。然而,他们在残酷的内战中越来越落后,受到邻国的虐待和虐待,特别是如果他们很容易被贴上叛徒的标签。他们的权利或财产缺乏法律保障;除了继承权,土地和动产也被认为是她们丈夫的财产。如果丈夫离开了,或者他被视为敌人,即使他的妻子和孩子占据了他的财产,他的财产也可以被没收。保皇派女性面临着离开的压力,即使付出巨大的牺牲也在所不惜。然而,离开后,他们失去了任何独立的表象。他们经常需要得到地方警备委员会的许可。然后,她们需要印度和军方向导的帮助,才能找到驻扎在军事堡垒或难民营里的丈夫。在这些堡垒和营地里,他们只是作为配偶才有意义;他们被视为依赖者和负担。现在,他们既虚弱又依赖他人,他们向英国政府寻求补偿,因为英国政府只对帮助那些有军事经验的人感兴趣。妇女的援助很少被认为具有军事上的重要性,部分原因是语言和意识形态的限制:男性的价值观具有自信的品质,而女性则具有顺从的品质。因此,她们的援助请求是用顺从和家长式的语言表达的:所有的牺牲都必须从丈夫的角度来解释,因为只有丈夫才可能得到补偿。流亡经历塑造了保皇派的文化和意识形态。女性保皇派意识形态会从流亡前的决定和牺牲中获得力量;在流放中,女性的经历既不被重视,也不被解放。“忠诚、服务和牺牲,正如保皇派请愿书中所定义的,都是男性的概念”(126)。妇女必须用痛苦和衰弱的语言来写作(151)。波特-麦金农提出了一个令人信服的理由,即历史学家对女性的忽视。“叛变流亡”戏剧的内在动力,加上对女性应有角色的主流观点,剥夺了女性的独立性。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信