Ancient World Readings in Social and Cultural History Book

Denise Riley begins her book by quoting Sojourner Truth “Ain’t I a Woman” and offering her alternative “Ain’t I a fluctuating Identity”(pg. 1). It is this dichotomy of ideas Riley discussed in the book Am I That Name. A better explanation may come later when Riley states “Is ‘women’ then an eternally compromised noun”(pg. 98), this is the central theme to the book. Riley believes the very designation of ‘women’ is problematic in the overarching goal of feminism in reaching the equality of women. To further explain, the very term ‘women’ assumes a difference between men and women as a part of the human species and in order for true equality to exist this designation must disappear.
Riley’s book promises a discussion of the history of feminism and she does take us chronologically through the history of feminism through the lense of ‘woman’. Historians hoping for a copious study of the history of feminism will be disappointed as she spends the first chapter introducing the reader to the concept of ‘woman’ as a word that inherently creates a situation where people view women as something different to, and therefore, unequal to men. The key concept here is to see that by creating an identity around ‘women’ we instantly assume differences within the human species instead of focusing on clear similarities between both men and women. The second chapter begins Riley’s foray into the realm of history as she begins to construct a discussion about the history of feminism. Here Riley creates the identity of women as “enlightened” figures would have seen women. Riley takes us back to the time of Augustine where we see women as inferior in the world but through the grace of god are given equal status in the afterlife. It is in this chapter we are introduced to a variety of different early feminist writers including Christine de Pizan, Marguerite Porete, and Mary Astell who all argue in defence of women within the constriction of the societies they were forced to live within. The demon of this chapter is Jean Jacques Rousseau who’s ideas late in the period of the Enlightenment argued against the ability for women to be rational in thought. The third chapter identifies new ideas and thought which pits women against men as a way to earn equality, the view here being one within society as being a constant struggle and in order for one to achieve equality the other has to lose something. Riley tends to focus here on the growing construct of the role of women within the family as being one who is loses out to the needs of man. An interesting anecdote from this chapter is the idea posited that women had a hard time fighting for equality after World War I because they did not suffer the casualties that men did while fighting for their respective countries. The fourth chapter takes the reader into the differing opinions on women’s suffrage offering us varying viewpoints on the ability of women to use the right to vote. Women and men both fought for or against the right of women to vote for varying reasons, women would only mimic the vote of their husbands or they did not have the mental ability to be a part of the political process. Riley emphasises here the differences between women who have education or are from an elevated social class and those of the working class showing the reader it is impossible for all women to possess the same political ideals or goals and therefore creating a view of women as a political entity should be considered impossible and even problematic toward feminist ideals as was demonstrated during the most basic of women’s goal in the right to vote. The final chapter in the book summarizes the ideas put forth throughout the book and can possibly be best summarized by Riley herself when she says “A true independence here would only be possible when all existing ideas of sexual difference had been laid to rest; but then ‘woman’, too would be buried”(pg. 107).