HST/WGS349: Examples of Thesis Statements for Paper One
[Note: All are presented anonymously, but with permission of their authors. None is
perfect, but all exemplify what we are looking for. Be aware that some citations are
based upon different editions or versions of the readings. Finally, it is definitely not
expected or recommended that anyone will “borrow” or copy these efforts but, rather,
that they will be read solely as examples of ways that others have articulated thesis
statements in the past.]
Example 1
The concept of “othering” is a contemporary term that has arisen from
studies delving into the history of women. It is explained as a power struggle
between various groups, where a certain group utilizes their differences to
dominate another. While “othering” takes place in a variety of contexts, Lerner
talks specifically about “othering” through gender differences. (Lerner pg. 134). A
class of men “dominate resources and allocate them” as they wish (Lerner pg.
134) thus causing a power relationship that continually favors the dominant male
group. Although many early feminists insisted “gender [was] the primary source
of oppression” (Hewitt pg. 299), it is not the only form of oppression women
faced. Women faced constant “othering” by each other as well. As Hewitt points
out there is no sisterhood that unites all women. Being female is just one
characteristic that makes up a woman. Class and race are just some of the
characteristics that play a large role in a woman’s identity. Many women feel
more connected with their male counterparts rather than other women from
different races and classes (Hewitt pg. 304). These differences inherently bring
“implications of hierarchy” (Kerber & DeHart pg. 5). It translated into a sense of
superiority by more affluent women. Women from different races felt indifferent or
even hostile to one another (Kerber & DeHart pg. 5). All of these feelings
ensured that there was no greater sisterhood that united all women together
under the umbrella of womanhood.
Example 2
The lack of historical documentation of women within the standard maleentrenched history textbook is not only wrong but also severely misleading and
inaccurate. Women in general have had to overcome numerous feats in
American history. However, within the biological context of womanhood, history
shows that there are exclusive hierarchies. The process of “othering” depends on
the acknowledgment and exploitation of differences between individuals. What is
always accentuated is “difference” and in response the individual is designated
as inferior (Lerner, 134). What makes the dominance that ensues acceptable is
putting a negative mark on difference (Lerner, 135). These differences can range
from skin color to sex, but always making one person stand out from another
more “normal person”: historically seen as a normative, white, high standing
male. However, the problem has not always been drawn along the lines of sex.
As Kerber & DeHart, Gerda Lerner, and Nancy Hewitt collectively illustrate,
“othering” is not exclusive to man-woman relationships or even black-white
relationships, but they also occur within the female realm as a whole. These
problems underscore the hierarchical, racial, and complicated relationships that
women exhibit throughout history.
Example 3
In the typical history textbook of a high school student there is a twodimensional story where males play the key roles in shaping history, while
females are limited to a few side bars. This is not history, at least, not a complete
one. As historian Gerda Lerner has noted, “women are and always have been
active participants in the shaping of events” (Lerner, 132). So, why is the account
of women’s history so limited? Lerner attributes this to a process that began long
ago in which differences among men and women were socially constructed and
exploited so that males, mostly white, wealthy males wielded power over all
those they had deemed inferior (Lerner, 132). However, these differences did not
just end with men exploiting women, but women themselves have used
exploitation against one another (Lerner, 134). “Othering,” a term that is
explained by Gerda Lerner, Jane De Hart, and Linda Kerber, describes how
women wielded power over each other.
Nancy Hewitt takes the idea of “othering” even further, offering evidence to
show how women “othered” each other by going beyond the issue of race, and
looking at sexuality, economic status, and occupation as a means of dominance
(Hewitt, 305). All of these scholars’ research points to a need to ask analytical
questions about women and their role in shaping events. If a re-conceptualization
of history (as Lerner calls it) is ignored, then we will continue to have a distorted
version of history (Lerner, 134) which will never reveal how men “othering”
women and women “othering” each other really affected the way events
unfolded.