This week's readings ask us to continue thinking about gender as social category, and they also introduce us to history (or historical methods) as a way to study our society. For this discussion...

This week's readings ask us to continue thinking about gender as social category, and they also introduce us to history (or historical methods) as a way to study our society. For this discussion board, I am interested in hearing about what you got from the readings as a whole. All of the authors are interested in the question "how do we do history"? The authors write about history as a field of study and how historians can examine gender. As such, they give us perspective on how we, in this class, might understand women's sport in the 20th century.

For your original post:

Please write 5-7 sentences about the concepts discussed by our authors. Last week we looked at the readings individually. This week, I want you to work on thinking about them together. You do NOT need to address all of the following questions. They are here to help get you started: Based on the readings, what might historical research on women's sport look like? How might scholars try to understand people and events of the past? Why is it important to think about gender as a social category and not just look at "women who play sport"? Try to put the readings "into conversation" -- what might one help us to understand about the other? Would the authors agree / disagree? As with last week's readings, some of the concepts and writing styles are complex. Was there anything you didn't understand? Anything you'd like to discuss further?

For your replies:

Please feel free to discuss ideas and concepts with anyone and/or about the specific readings you discussed in your original entry. Try to bring the readings together! (4-6 sentences)