I’m not usually one for digital collage. I like paper. But current events have me disgusted and horrified, and this is what happened as a result.
Category Archives: Ladybusiness
A book on sketchbooks, written by a man, contains artwork mostly by men. Not at all surprising. Call them “visual journals” and the author will much more likely be a woman, and the artists represented will be mostly women. Art is for men, but craft is for ladypeople. I’m reminded of a Joanna Newsom interview in which she said that men were harpists and women were harp players. We don’t let women play in male spaces (still!), but we also devalue the spaces where women are allowed to play.
(I may not even have noticed, except I started to wonder how many drawings of teen boy sexual fantasies there would be in the book. A lot. And all of them drawn by men, so I looked at the artist bios and did a quick tally of the genders: 31 men, 10 women, and one non-binary person.)
That may not look exciting, but free tampons at the main university library? That’s kind of a big deal if you’re a ladyperson. I don’t know if this is going to be a campus-wide thing or library system-wide, or if it’s only being instituted at the main library, but it’s kind of amazing.
Ohio Department of Health, Division of Vital Statistics, death certificate 14238 (1948), Margaret B. Moorman; digital image, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “Ohio Deaths, 1908-1953,” FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ : accessed 26 Jan 2017). Rec. Date: 15 Oct 2016. Cit. Date: 26 Jan 2017.
I’m still working on the families of Nicholas and John Basquill, who settled in Jackson County, Ohio. Margaret is the daughter of John Basquill and Margaret Daughan. She married Elmer J. Moorman in 1869. As far as I can tell, they had no children.
I consider myself an unapologetic feminist, but today I had another reminder of just how insidious the patriarchy really is. We’re soaking in it, and it informs everything we do, whether we like it or not. We don’t have a choice in the matter.
As I was entering information from Margaret’s death certificate, I saw that her occupation was listed as “housewife.” I am ashamed to admit that, until today, I’d been neglecting to add that information to women in my database. It’s not a real job, right? Only I know it is a real job. I truly do. I can’t explain why I haven’t been giving these women credit for their work, but that’s going to change NOW.
I rather like the way the default occupation sentence reads, at the bottom of the screen: She worked as a housewife in 1948 in Springfield, Clark County, Ohio, United States.
I’ve felt a little silly, getting obsessed over figuring out what is going on with this family. I should have stopped researching when I figured out that Bridget Theresa was the daughter of Patrick Basquill and Ellen Cannon, and that she married Frank H. Shipman in Berlin, Wisconsin. There was no reason to take it any further, because the Shipman ancestors were only tangential.
However, it bugged me that a couple of the censuses for the father, Abiram Shipman, had unrelated people residing with him that looked like they should be related. And then there was a granddaughter in the 1880 census. She couldn’t be a blood relative of Abiram Shipman, because he only had one son (despite having been married four times!). That son, Frank, married just once, as far as I can tell–to Bridget Theresa Basquill. And even if he had been married previous to that marriage, he was far too young to be this grandchild’s father.
So I was puzzled about what to do with this kid. I needed to figure out who Abiram’s 4th wife was married to, before Abiram. And I did! It’s taken me several days, but I think I have it figured out. The grandchild was the daughter of Abiram’s 4th wife and her first husband, identified in the only census I could find him listed in as just H. H. Tucker. A little more digging turned up his first name, Hosea, and that he’d died and was buried in the same county where Abiram and wife number four were married: Geauga, Ohio.
That didn’t help with the name of Abiram’s fourth wife, though. Their marriage license listed her as Polly Tucker. But what was her maiden name? It took some more digging, but I turned up the marriage record for Hosea H. Tucker and Polly Larned. She was just fourteen. If the age at death on his headstone is to be believed, Hosea Tucker would have been 27 at the time of marriage. That’s heartbreaking. But at least I can now give her back her own name.
And here’s the exciting and weird part: In sorting all that out, I found that Abiram Shipman had two wives who were sisters. Their names were Harriet and Joann Hamilton.
I knew I had Hamiltons in my family tree already, on my maternal grandpa’s side. And they were in the right part of the country in the right time to be the same Hamiltons. And I’ll be damned if they aren’t! The father of the sister wives was Nathaniel Augustus Hamilton. Their mother was Nathaniel’s second wife, Frances Dolph. My grandfather is descended from Nathaniel’s brother, Andrew Hamilton.
So all that work wasn’t entirely pointless. And I managed to give a lost woman back her name, in the process.
I’m not any kind of serious gamer, but I have loved Zelda since day one. And look, a new Legend of Zelda is coming out. Yay! Oh, wait. When the producer was asked whether or no we’d finally get to play as a female character, he responded with this bucket of nonsense:
“We thought about it,” Aonuma told GameSpot through a translator, “and decided that if we’re going to have a female protagonist, it’s simpler to have Princess Zelda as the main character.” But that idea was shot down because “if we have Princess Zelda as the main character who fights, then what is Link going to do?”
Seriously, dude? You can’t allow folks to play as a female character, because if you did, WHAT WOULD THE MAN DO? Jesus wept. Maybe Link could be held prisoner and Zelda rescues him? IT COULD TOTALLY HAPPEN, RIGHT? No complicated gymnastics involved. Just literally flip the script. I promise, the world will not end if a woman rescues a man.
His comments about the Triforce are even more ridiculous.
On my way into the work this morning, I saw these stuck to the columns outside the library. It’s unforgivable that college women have to speak up about being mistreated, but at the same time, I’m glad to see them doing so. Sometimes I worry about “kids these days,” and other times, I think they’re just fine. It’s a mixed bag, but it always has been.
This one was a puzzle. A fun puzzle. From Hohenberger’s title, I knew Mrs. Knapp’s neighbors were the Deam family. One of the preceding photos in the set was of someone Hohenberger identified as Alberta Deam. Another photo showed an interior from the Deam home, with cabinets full of stacked papers and an open botanical specimen displayed on a desk. Knowing what I do of Hohenberger, the study likely belonged to a locally important botanist. So I searched for botanists named Deam and came up with Charles Deam. From there, I was able to figure out that the family was living in Indianapolis at the time of the 1910 census and that the daughter Hohenberger photographed was named Roberta.
This photo was taken in 1913, so there was a good chance the Deams and Mrs. Knapp were neighbors in 1910. And they were. I found Mrs. Knapp listed in the 1910 census, living at 304 Burgess Avenue. The Deams lived at 318 Burgess Avenue. The 1913 city directory for Indianapolis confirms that both families were living in the same homes in that year.
So with that, I give you Mrs. Sarah Ann Knapp, neé Goodwin, born 5 April 1831 and died 19 March 1915. This photo was taken, then, just two years before her death.
I’m delighted that I was able to properly identify her. It would have haunted me if I hadn’t. I mean, just look at that face! She is fabulous. And I’ve no doubt she’d be more than capable of haunting anyone she pleased.
(ETA: I added this to the genealogy category, because while these are not my ancestors, the research strategies are the same I’d use in identifying my own family members.)
This image is making the rounds of Facebook. It’s kind of amusing, until you look closely. Likely an honest mistake. I doubt whoever made the image even realizes that male and female pelvises are anatomically different. But they are, and this is just one more example of how male bodies are the default.
In this case, it’s exasperating but harmless. It can be dangerous to women, though, when we only study men’s bodies and then assume that women’s bodies behave just like men’s. Sometimes they do, but often they don’t.