For each question, answer the question completely using proper English and make sure to proofread! You must also respond to at least one other student post to receive full credit.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Chapter Five-Realizing: Civilians and the Work of Mourning
Why did men during the Civil War dress in mourning far less than women? What is your opinion about how Americans during the Civil War handled the process of mourning?
"The work of mourning is largely allocated to women."(pg.148) Women would dress in mourning more often than men. A widow would mourn for up to two and a half years while a widower would only be expected to mourn for about three months. The women wore the mourning garments out of respect for the dead. "Mourning garb was...an outward and visible sign of an inward invisible state."(pg.149) Women went through the stages of mourning to help themselves move on. It helped them handle their grief and honor the dead. I think at first, Americans handled the process of mourning very well. As the war went on and deaths became so numerous and a soldier's identity could be lost forever, they lost control. Especially in the south. Women worked so hard just to try to find clothing to wear to show they were mourning. it seems as though the process of mourning was the only thing they held onto.
Both men and women grieved the loss of a loved one by observing certain rituals - such as dressing in mourning - which were required by society during a mourning period. Men dressed in mourning less than women, but they did wear "tokens of mourning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes" (148), and did this for only a few months. Women dressed in mourning much more - "By convention, a mother mourned for a child for a year. . . a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years, moving through the prescribed stages and accoutrements of heavy, full, and half mourning, with gradually loosening requirements of dress and deportment" (148). The social expectations placed on women during a period of mourning were lifted slightly during the War, as death was happening constantly and fashion was not a first priority; however, women still dressed in mourning as much as possible because "formal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe that they could move through their despair" (149). Dressing in mourning was a way for women to deal with grief, and I think that it also allowed them to let others know what had happened without having to tell them, and to give others the opportunity to help without having to ask them. "A community of friends and relatives shared this ritual affirmation of loss and marked the new status of each mourner" (153). Women could grieve publicly, allowing them to accept condolences and comfort from people within their communities. Men, on the other hand, were expected to grieve more privately, and in a much shorter time. "A widower . . . was expected to mourn only for three months, simply by displaying a black crape on his hat or armband" (148). I think that people in the Civil War were far less equipped to handle death than we are today, although all deaths are difficult for loved ones in any time period. "The particular circumstances created by the Civil War often inhibited mourning, rendering it difficult, if not impossible, for many bereaved Americans to move through the stages of grief. . . . In such conditions the temptation to distrust and resist bad news was all too alluring and the capacity for the genuine consolations of mourning severely compromised" (144). The frequency of death, the manner by which people were dying, and the lack of information about each death made accepting the death of a loved one extremely difficult, and the grieving and healing processes even more so. I think people during the Civil War handled death as best they could, but it was far different from today where death is not such a constant, and unlimited sources for help are available - such as grief counseling, therapy, or even the support of a community.
Women largely were the ones who mourned. Men, too, wore tokens of mourning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes just like the women would would wear.(pg.148) By convention, a mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years, moving through prescribed stages and accoutrements of heavy, full, and half mourning, with gradually loosening requirements of dress and deportment. (pg.148) A widower, by contrast, was expected to mourn only for three months. (pg.148) Women dressed in mourning was their way to show others their loss without having to ask. Too the amount of time they mourned allowed others to know who they were mourning for. I believe men mourned for shorter periods of time and mourned more behind closed doors. As it has always been known, even today, that men are to be stronger and that men believe that its not cool to publicly show their feelings. People during the Civil War handled the mourning of their loved one the best they could with the limited resources that they had.
Men in the Civil War mourned less than the women. The most obvious reason why is because it was “a display of unmanliness.” (p.167) Henry Bowditch sought concealment to hide himself and his feelings from others because he was “ill fitted to see anyone” and was embarrassed by a lack of masculinity. (p. 167) Also, during the time of the Civil War, men were usually the heads of households. The men made the money that would support their families. If they were (too) caught up in grief, the families would not have money for the basic necessities. Men were also supposed to mourn less than women; “A widow mourned for two and a half years…” and “A widower … was expected to mourn only for three months.” (p.148) Civilian women were also less likely to die because they were not fighting in the war. Thus, they would be more likely to mourn. “Formal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe they could move through despair… ” (p.149) I think for the most part that Americans handled mourning well. They respected the dead and tried to move on. However, I think people became too caught up in “fashions for mourning.” I don’t think it matters how good you look when you are mourning, just the fact that you are (mourning).
In response to Blake: You brought up a good point by quoting a part of the text that referred to mourning by men as "a display of unmanliness." I think this was a main reason why men did not mourn as much or as long as women. I also think that today we still have this same societal standard that says men are supposed to be strong in the face of death. This shows how cultural stereotypes and social rituals are often upheld over hundreds of years through many generations; while we don't necessarily dress in mourning, we do traditionally wear black to funerals, and while it is far more socially acceptable today for men to show emotion when suffering a loss, I think we still expect men not to do so.
Everybody seemed to be equally sad and equally melancholy, but “[t]he work of mourning was largely allocated to women,” (pg148). Everybody expressed their sadness with clothing to some degree. Men “wore tokens of mourning, armbands for the lost kin badges and rosettes,” (pg 148) and that’s about it. Women, on the other hand, dragged it out until so much time had gone by that there couldn’t possibly be any sadness left inside that could be expressed by clothes. All that dressing in mourning really is, is an “outward and visible sign of an inward invisible state,” (pg 149), and men have, do, and probably will continue to not openly express themselves to the same degree as women—that’s just how the human mind tends to be configured. I think that it helped women of that era to rid themselves of sad feeling by displaying and releasing their emotion in the form of clothing. Men didn’t dress in mourning so much because that is not what men do. Men tend to handle their emotions differently, and, although present, emotions tend to be held inside and dressing in mourning for men may display some kind of weakness. A more simple explanation of this scenario can be seen by watching http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn_Ap5O0LYw. I think mourning isn’t so much anything to be criticized: mourning is just a natural reaction to sadness, and society has a lot less to do with it than it may seem.
Men during the Civil War dressed in mourning clothes far less than women because they thought that if they showed sorrow "it's implications of loss of control and of weakness, greif seemed to challenge and erode masculinity." [pg. 167] They thought if people saw them crying or showing any feeling that people would think that they are unmanly. Instead of dressing in black when they mourned, they would wear " tokens of mourning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes." I think that it is strange how the women would mourn more than the men. Also how the women had a certain amount of time to mourn and dress in mourning clothes. "A mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned mourned for two and a half years, moving through prescribed stages and accountrements of heavy, full, and half mourning, with gradually loosing requirements of dress and deportment. A widower, by contrast, was expected to mourn only for three months, simply by displaying black crape on his hat or armband." [pg.148] I don't understand why they only had a ceratin time slo to mourn.
Women and men both mourned in the civil war but in different ways and for different times. Women believed if they dressed differently it would help them move through their dispair."mourning created a sence of process, encouragement the bereaved to blieve they could move through their despair, which might evolve through stages of grief represented by their changing clothing."(149). Men would wear tokens of mourning like badges, armbands, and rosettes. Also men would mourn for a smaller amount of time.(a widow mourned for two and a hlf years.....a widower, by contrast was expected to mourn only for three months."(148). In other words mourning was done more by women than men. My opinion about the americans during the cival war and them mourning is they are similar than people today. When people lose someone they cared for one of the only reactions is to mourn their loss, its only natrual to be sad or depressed.
During the time period of the civil war: “The work of mourning was largely allocated to women”. [148] This was largely because during this time period, It was believed that the women did not have the emotional constitution that the men did. While widows would openly mourn for two and a half years, it was judged “un-manly” for a man to cry at the sight of his son’s lifeless body. “He judged himself ‘ill fitted to see anyone’ and was distressed by his ‘display of unmanliness’” [167] Men during the civil war did not mourn as openly as women because “In its implications of loss of control and of weakness, grief seemed to challenge and erode masculinity”. [167] In my opinion, I believe that for the time period, the mourning process was very practical. Had it been implemented today, it would have been extravagant and called a waste of time.
I agree with you in thinking that it was strange for the women to mourn more than the men, however, in this time period, it was not okay for boys to cry. In the case of Henry Bowditch who had just lost his son to the war, he was embarrassed that he had cried. “He judged himself ‘ill fitted to see anyone’ and was distressed by his ‘display of unmanliness’. In its implications of loss of control and of weakness, grief seemed to challenge and erode masculinity”. [167] This man was embarrassed by the fact that he was crying at the sight of his son’s body. Women on the other hand were considered next to helpless, they were not expected to contain their emotions, and therefore, they showed them. Today, it has been said many times that “he is so sensitive!” the fact that men tried to so hard to hide their emotions during the civil war is therefore nearly incomprehensible to us.
Although everyone was suffering from losses of loved ones, women were more likely to display there mourning. This includes women displaying their phase of mourning through garments worn depending on, “heavy, full, and half mourning, with gradually loosening requirements of dress…” (148) Men, although displaying mourning through “tokens of mourning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes…” (148) were less likely to display their true feelings for the simple reason: unmanliness. Men are not known to display their feelings, such as women are able to, and be comfortable with this display. Therefore, during the time of the Civil War, men did not dress in mourning as often, and as long for, as women. Mourning became so common among women that, “advertisements in northern papers announced far greater variety and availability of [mourning] ware both in specialty stores and in more general establishments like New York’s Lord & Taylor, which opened its own mourning department in April 1863.” (151-152) I think Americans during the Civil War handled the process of mourning rather courageously. During the trying times of war they managed to honor the dead, through their own ways, and were still able to move forward. I found interesting how during the war, the attire of mourning was so common and crucial. This display would not be found in today’s society, and probably not accepted. However, the process was crucial to that time and therefore overall, this process to them was perfect.
The act of mourning is mostly carried out my women. Men probably feel that mourning reveals emotional weakness. So instead of displaying their thoughts and emotions to the real world, men stay reserved and keep their emotions to themselves. Men chose to stay reserved to keep there emotional toughness and reputation. "The work of mourning was largely allocated to women."(148) However, men did respect the dead but in smaller ways than women. They "wore tokens of morning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes, like those displayed by Virginia Military Institute cadets and officers for a month after Stonewall Jackson's death."
I think Americans handled mourning in a respectful and acceptable way. Mourning and its extent should be up to the mourner. People deal with death in different ways and those ways should be respected.
Response to Mckenzie, I also agree with your point of "boys not crying" Men tried to show the least amount of emotional weakness as possible. However, Henry Bowditch's case does show that men still did feel as distraught as women were. Men just felt an urge to stay contempt.
Response to Blake: I agree with your point on unmanliness. I liked how you brought up Henry Bowditch to make your point. “Men were usually the heads of households” is true, however, I don’t understand how, “if they were (too) caught up in grief, the families would not have money for the basic necessities.” Men were grieving and although it would be dreadful to work, wouldn’t they understand that they had to? Also, I agree with your statement on how, “people became too caught up in ‘fashions for mourning’” but, it was part of the culture of the time.
"The work of mourning was largely allocated to women."(148) Men did dress in mourning, but far less than women. Most men wore only a black armband, badge, or rosette for lost family or friends. The period of mourning for a widower was only about three months, and he was expected only to display it by wearing "black crape" on his hat or as an armband. Women, however, would mourn "for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years." Women moved through different stages of mourning: heavy, full and half. Each different stage gradually loosened restrictions on clothing and behavior. The stages of mourning came to represent how the woman was feeling; as she moved from heavy, or deep, mourning, to full mourning, and then to half mourning, her clothing became a symbol of how she was coping with her loss. As the time increased after the soldier's death, the woman's mourning would lessen, and so would restrictions on her clothing. I think that while the stages of dress were very strict, the mourning process helped bring some structure to the loss and grief that the women felt. I think American's handled mourning as well as they could, given the circumstances under which they were mourning. Women were mourning for men whose funerals may not have happened, if a body was even found. In the Civil War, death was so common that many women spent the whole war dressed in mourning. But because it offered structure and relief, the dress requirements were a good thing for the women of the time, and it helped them to handle the deaths in a respectful and practical way.
Men probably were afraid to mourn openly, and so their mourning period was shorter than a woman's. If men thought that, by mourning, they would become less manly, or would be weaker, they wouldn't mourn. I agree with your comment that "men are not known to display their feelings, such as women are able to, and be comfortable with this display." It makes them feel uncomfortable to be openly weepy and mournful, even if it is how they feel.
After a death both men and women would partake in the custom of mourning, where men would wear black on their hat, or as an armband, and women would dress in various dark shades. So the custom of mourning can be best described as a change in clothing that was supposed to reflect one’s feelings after a death. I agree with the many posts before mine that men mourned less than women because they didn’t want to be seen as too emotional, whereas women didn’t mind expressing their true emotions through mourning. Many men probably disliked showing their emotions because by being in the middle of a war they were supposed to be seen as tough and to many men displaying their emotions countered that attitude. Well with that said, I think the process of mourning during the war was definitely odd, and too drawn out. I think it’s rather odd for people to dress a certain way, and expect to get over their loss by doing so. Wouldn’t some one get over a loss quicker by focusing on new things rather than the death that they were grieving? I think by mourning for 2 ½ years women lost sight of why they were mourning. The reader can see that loss of interest in the obsession over who could mourn the most fashionably. I think because mourning was drawn out for so long it eventually morphed into a fashion show for many people. Some mourning is fine, but after awhile I would think people would want to focus on something else rather than the past, and move on from their loss.
Of course after a loved one has passed away, everyone will mourn no matter if they're a man or a woman. I think that the reason that men mourned for a shorter period than women is simply because they didnt want to be looked upon as weak and unable to deal with death. "By convection, a mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years, moving through prescribed stages loosing requirements of dress and deportment. A widower, by cotrast, was expected to mourn only for three months, simply by diplayig black crape on his hat or armband."(pg. 148) This shows that women were simply expected to mourn for a much longer period of time then a man. In order for a women to morn, she would wear a black dress. "Many women stuggled to find garments that would enable them to participate in this rite of passage and display of respect. Fformal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe they could move through the despair, which might evolve through stages of grief represented by their change of clothing" This process seemed to be a really goo way of mourning during the Civil War. It helped the women to have a step by step process to get through any grief they were feeling. They could move through different types og clothing in order to send a message of their mourning to others. I think that this also was a good thing for the women to all be together during this hard time, they were never alone in mourning, everyone around them was also wearing black and that became a connection for all of them. "There were so many ladies here, all dressed in deep mourning, that we felt as if we were at a convent and formed a sisterhood."(pg.149) This quote really showed that this was a good way for women to mourn during the Civil War.
In Response to Ben Grote: In agree with most your post, I think that the fashion of mourning became a bigger deal than the actually mourning itself. But, I think this could've been a good thing to help keep the women distracted from their loss and intrested in something and actually doing something, rather than staying in their homes and mourning alone which could cause even more grief. So therefore I think that this was something to distract them.
During the times of the Civil War, society largely associated mourning apparel with women. Women spent large amounts of money to be dressed in mourning, whether it was full or half. Whereas, men were required to mourn for a much smaller amount of time, only wearing wristbands or small badges. [pg.148]Women on the other hand, would mourn for very long periods of time; some women even went into mourning for the rest of their lives. An example of this is when Mrs. Lincoln went into mourning for the rest of her life when Abraham died after their young son. In my opinion, women mourned more than men for two reasons. The first, being the cultural pressure. Mourning caught on during the war and therefore most women mourned and men did not. The second reason is that men wanted to keep their masculinity. In that culture, the men were the ones to fight, and therefore many felt that if they were sad and emotional, then they would have been looked at in the same way that people viewed women. I think that Americans handled the process of mourning the only way they could, with great sadness and honor. The point of mourning was to remember and honor the lost, and this, in my opinion, was exactly what they did.
In response to Orion: Orion brings up a good point when he says that men did not mourn as much because they needed to display emotional toughness to keep their reputation. Men were the guardians of the nation, and laid down their lives for what they believed in. Men were viewed as the leaders, and during that time, weren’t supposed to show much emotion. That is why they mourned for a much shorter period of time than the women. I completely agree with Orion when he says that “so instead of displaying their thoughts and emotions to the real world, men stay reserved and keep their emotions to themselves. Men chose to stay reserved to keep there (sic) emotional toughness and reputation.”
In response to McKenzie: You said in your response to Amber that during that time it was not okay for men to cry. I agree with that. They thought it was embarrassing. What I disagree with you is that now as man myself its still embarrassing for men to cry at any time. If I cry because my friend died I actually felt embarrassed. To cry to a man does not look good among his male peers still today.
During the time of the civil war mourning was a very important and well known ritual for families to do in honor of a lost loved one. Both men and women mourned, but the women mourned longer and showed their mourning a lot more than men. It is said, "a mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same,and a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years. A widower was expected to mourn only for three months."(pg148) The women displayed their mourning in full black dresses. In contrast, the men simply displayed a black crape on his hat or an armband to show their dispair. The men and women also showed their emotions quite differently. Women were allowed to cry because they were thought of as hopeless, whereas men were looked down upon them if they cried. Many of the traditions of mourning are still used today, but with a much smaller scale. Today many show mourning by wearing wrist bands with words on them to remember a lost loved one. Mourning is also displayed in tattoos that people get in rememberance.
During the civil war the women dressed in morning far more than the men did because the men that were out fighting had been around dead people and people dieing far more than the women. Pg.145 "Death does not seem half so terrible as it did long ago. We have grown use to it. This statement on page 145 is a way of saying that the men have been around it so much that it just doesn't get to them any more. "One can get use to anything." "Death had become too commonplace even to take note of", this last quot was taken from a nurse at one of the hospitals she had noticed that the men that were supposed to keep track of the deaths that were occurring had stopped doing they're jobs. Death was everywhere and everyone was forgetting they're responsibilities to they're fellow men. I feel that morning means a lot to someone that has lost a loved one. People during the civil war need to be able to morn. Many of the ways people acted lead them to even more distress because they didn't do what they should have like working. I felt that the way they mourned is normal if you lose a loved one you wont be up to doing anything.
In response to Evan I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. I agree with you about women showing they're emotions more because even now we do its how women are made our feeling are strong and women are not afraid to show it. But when you said that men were looked down upon when they show emotion I disagree. Men were around death all the time they were killing each other almost every day. If the men held on to every man they knew that had died and fought they would just go insane. All that death around them they were forced to put all emotions to the side. I believe that the men all shared the same feelings a friend, son, father, uncle, some one in they're lives had died every human being shares sadness and mourning is one very important way of showing that sadness. Men had to just push out very signal every thought of depression in order to get through the war.
Response to Samantha: In your reply you made a good point that by focusing on the fashion part of mourning many women may have diverted their attentions from their loss, and towards their clothes. Although it may provide a distraction for some women, and a little more reasoning to the practice of mourning, focusing on clothes, and then calling it mourning still seems a little odd to me. Also in your post wrote how women made a positive connection with each other through their clothes in mourning. I agree with that, it probably was beneficial for women to connect with each other through mourning. Your posts showed me that there were more benefits to dressing in mourning than I originally thought, but those benefits don’t change my opinion too much, and I still think that 2 1/2 years is too drawn out, and dressing in certain colors to move on from a loss is a little odd.
In general, women tend to pay more attention to their emotions as well as to the way they dress. Dressing the same as others often places them into a group together. Just look around the halls of any high school today. It is very easy to tell what people are friends by the way they dress. In a similar way, women often dressed in mourning to share their grief. Men, on the other hand, do not tend to care as much about their attire in general and do not need to be wearing the same thing as their friends to show that they belong together. Also, women often show their emotions more than men. They are always known to be the ones "wearing their heart on their sleeve," literally in this case. Overall, I think that mourning was too generalized. Everyone did the same thing. In my opinion, mourning is a personal process and should have been treated as one rather than a public formula that everyone followed.
During the Civil War both men and women mourned for the death of family members. In respect towards the dead and fallen women would wear black garments for months or years at a time through the grieving process. Men also mourned wearing armbands or other apparel but in much shorter time lengths. This difference in mourning can be related to men’s role in society versus women’s role. Men where off fighting in the war and supporting a family making little time to mourn. Furthermore, it brought feelings of grief and weakness which is held back by men. “In its implications of loss of control and of weakness, grief seemed to challenge and erode masculinity. Men would find it especially difficult to acknowledge their sorrow and truly mourn (167).” The soldiers and men would resist these feelings while the women openly vented them out. For the amount of dead and grief the mourning process went well for the Americans. The dead were respected and the country as a whole moved on. However, the mass amounts of dead disrupted this process and made it almost too much to bear for many people.
in response to Samantha C: Although I think the fashion of mourning grew out of proportion of actual mourning I agree with Samantha C. that it served as a distraction from their grief and losses. It brought them closer as a community and united them in their loss instead of dividing them. It also served to honor the dead and make their grief more bearable. However, excessive fashion over mourning doesn’t seem respectful to the fallen soldiers. In response to Ben G. I agree that two and a half years is too long to mourn over a fallen family member as well as dressing differently for such a long period of time. They should accept their loss and move on. Dragging it out like that would seem to make it harder to deal with when you’re reminded every day.
In response to Michelle McClurg: You make a very good point when you say that the men were the ones who were around death more and so had become desensitized to it. Women were not exposed to war the way their husbands were and therefore each death was a personal experience for them. The men, however, had been off fighting and so had witnessed more deaths. The men simply could not mourn the death of every friend or they would be in a perpetual state of mourning.
Response to Ben Grote I agree with you that men needed to keep up their image so they mourned less. The whole mourning process was drawn out and lost sentimental value however; this is what they held on to. Mourning, although it became a fashion, was how the people remembered the soldiers who sacrificed themselves for their country. The whole process took so long because those women wanted to give their soldiers the proper respect they deserved. Of course if they focused on new things they would get over the deaths quicker. However, they did not want to get over it. They wanted to hold on to their soldiers as long as they could and they did that through mourning.
Men were not expected to be in mourning nearly as long as women during the Civil War mainly for two reasons. First of all, there were the rules of society. "A widow mourned for two and a half years, moving through prescribed stages... with gradually loosening requirements of dress and deportment. A widower, by contrast, was expected to mourn only for three months, simply by displaying black crape on his hat or armband." (pg.148) This quote shows how society was influenced by culture. For a man to only mourn for three months while a woman was expected to mourn for two and a half years is a huge contrast. Society played a large role in how much more women mourned then men, but i also believe that feelings played a large role too. Women tend to express their feeling outwardly more than men because its a was a way for them to get over their feelings. Susan Caldwell was forbidden to go into mourning for her son and she said that she "longed for a way to express her sorrow." (pg. 150) This shows how women are eager to express their sorrow rather than contain it. Nannie Haskins said, "I wear mourning because it corrosponds with my feelings." (pg. 149) I believe that when Nannie said this, that she spoke for all women who were in mourning. I believe that Americans handled the process of mourning rather well other than the rules of society. People should go into mourning because they really want it or need it, not because society tells them to. I believe that when death comes, one should react the way they need to, not the way society needs them to to make it look good.
The mourning process was a cultural tradition. Everybody knew the rules about what to wear and for how long. There was heavy, full, and half mourning for women. They would dress in mourning for a year for a child, six months for a brother, and two and a half years for a husband. Men, on the other hand, would wear black on armbands, badges, and rosettes to dress for mourning. They wore mourning for three months. Women wore mourning to show respect and show their feelings. “Formal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe they could move through their despair, which might evolve through stages of grief represented by their changing clothing,” (149). Nannie Haskins of Tennessee wrote, “I wear mourning because it corresponds with my feelings.” (149). The women didn’t mind dressing in mourning because they felt that they could express their feelings. However, men wanted to be seen as masculine so they would not express their feelings the same way women did. Also, men didn’t feel the need to express their feelings through clothes. They were off fighting and were very used to the idea of death. I partly agree with this process of mourning because I think that the men could have honored family more by wearing the black on the armbands longer. It would not have been against their masculinity it wouldn’t have brought them down. Although, this process was a cultural tradition and it seems that nobody had problems with the differences between the genders.
In response to Kaylie: I have to disagree with you in a few parts of your response to the question. I don’t think that women “pay more attention to their emotions,” I think that they just let their emotions out more. I also don’t think that the women wore the mourning clothes to dress like their friends. They mostly just wanted to express their feelings since death was a common thing during the war. However, I do agree with you that the mourning should have been treated as a more personal process instead of a process that everybody followed. Death hits everybody differently and people might go through the grieving process longer or less than others depending on the person. Therefore, the process should not have been so exact about length.
Men and women during the Civil War expressed their grief for a loss by dressing in appropriate garments. Women dressed in varieties of colors depending on their stages of grief. They would mourn from one year up to two and a half years. Men, however, "wore tokens of mourning, armbands for loss kin, badges and rosettes" (pg. 148). A widower would only mourn for 3 months. Men expressed their sorrow far less than women for the reason of acting tough. During this time period, men acted stronger and showed little weakness. "...grief seemed to challenge and erode masculinity" (pg. 167). They wanted to show society and the enemy that war did not affect them. In addition,"men would find it expecially difficult to acknowledge their sorrow and truly mourn" (pg. 167). Women, on the other hand, wanted to respect the customs of mourning and show to the public that they are in the process. To my opinion, Americans during the Civil War planned to much out of the work of mourning. A man or women should not need to follow a certain way in order to properly mourn or follow a time period on how long to mourn.
Men in the Civil War dressed in mourning far less than women simply because of their masculinity. The men in that society believed that showing too much emotion was a sign of weakness. So by "mourning too much," men were seen as weak individuals. That was a sign of lost control, which was not okay back then. The "excessive" mourning stripped them of their manliness (or so society thought). The men "found it difficult to acknowledge their sorrow and truly mourn" pg. 167. I believe that they mourned differently back then than they do now. Women mourned following too many social guidelines. Mourning should be an individual process that people go through freely and on their terms. I also think that men didn't mourn freely either. They mourned for a very short period, and stayed closed up and didn't let go of their grief. I think men and women have the same rights to mourn however they want.
In response to Kaylie- I do not believe that men mourned less because they didn't care what they wore, or if they matched their friends. It wasn't about that. I think society just thought it was "wrong" for men to show too much emotion because it socially emasculated them. Although, you were right when you said the women paid more attention to way they dress because of the half-mourning, full, etc. attire that they wore.
Response to Kaylie: I think women do give more attention to their emotions and how they dress too. I agree with you about how women dress to “places them into a group together” to speed the passing of sadness. It made me think that women dressed just to be part of a group, and, if a fellow widow, or really anybody saw you not dressed in mourning, that they would understand that you are disrespecting the dead. I disagree with your argument that mourning is a personal process. I think that it is a very social thing that has to be done to pay full respect to the dead. On the other hand, I think coping with loss is a personal process. Yes, mourning is culturally forced upon a person when she is coping with her loss, but there are other things that she can do in addition to mourning on a much more personal level which can be done as much or as little as she wants.
When I mentioned the being too caught up in grief, I agree that it would be rather unlikely to happen. However, sometimes people can be so caught up in despair that they forget about everyone else: “They forget the afflictions of others … neglectful of responsibilities to others and personal health.” (p.166) People can become shocked from death and can barely function, but I would hope they could overcome this (or avoid it). I also completely understand that fashions for mourning were part of the culture, and it may have (somehow) comforted the mourners, I just thought it was somewhat ridiculous that people had to be fashionable in mourning.
in response to McKenzie As it was okay for women to show their emotions, it wasn't okay for men too as men held their emotions more to themselves. Women were able to mourn showing their feelings
Women mourned much more than the men during the Civil War. “Formal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe they could move through their despair,” (149) out of respect for the dead the women of the time mourned in some cases a few years. The relationship to the women to the dead determined how long she was to mourn. It was said, “A mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother, a widow mourned for two and half years.” (148) however it was a said a widower only would mourn for three months. In my opinion it could have been at the time the man of the house represented the “rock” so to say. He was supposed to be strong and bring his family through tough times. A big part of the mourning process was the clothing. As the war went on products became scarce. It was hard for the women to find appropriate clothing to wear. Because of this reason I think it became tougher for the women to show they were mourning. They didn’t want to disrespect the dead but it became harder and harder. If you compare it to situations today people are never expected to mourn for a year. Everyone has their own way of getting through hardships like seeing a loved one pass. Back in the 1800’s there was a process the women were expected to go through. However things at that period of time for women were so much different than it is today. Some of the Women could have gone through the process and it really did help them while others could have possibly acted like they were going through the process because their society told them to. On the other hand with the high death toll during the civil war this process may have been incredibly important. I think the mourning process during the civil war was a bit excessive but at the same time helpful.
Women dressed in mourning more than men in the Civil War. Widows were to be in mourning for about 2 and half years. Men only mourned 3 months. Men mourned less because it was unmanly to show emotion for so long. Men usually showed their mourning and respect by wearing small tokens like armbands, badges, etc. Women on the other hand went through different stages of clothing for mourning. This became a big trend in both the North and South. This was important for women. If they couldn't find clothing that showed their mourning, made it. That shows how much it meant to them.
I do agree with you. Men didn't mourn less because they didn't care, they just didn't show to much emotion. It still seems that way with modern society. There are times when men show less emotion than women because they believe that it emasculates them.
The women in the Civil War had dressed in mourning more than the men. The men believed it was "a display of unmanliness." (p.167) Since the men were usually the head of the household during this time, they thought if they were in mourning their respect level would go down. “A widow mourned for two and a half years…” and “A widower … was expected to mourn only for three months.” (p.148) This shows the difference between the two. The women were not the ones dieing in the war. The men were, so the women were most likely in mourning more than men. The women then wore the mourning garments out of respect for the dead. This was done partly to help them move on, and honor the dead. At the beginning of the war Americans, in my opinion, handled mourning very well. Then as the war grew longer and more soldiers died, many with loss of identity, mourning had become about the fashion. The women would look for just the right outfit to show they were in mourning. They had lost control. Although they had tried to handle it as best they could.
I like how in your post you talked more about the men's reasons for not being in mourning as much. It makes you think differently about why they hadn't mourned as much as women.
Women are known to mourn more than men, as this quote states, "The work of mourning was largely allocated to women."(148) Widows went through stages of mourning in the span of two and a half years, and this was mainly presented through her clothing. However, a widower was only to mourn for three months "by displaying black crape on his hat or armband." (148) I think that during the Civil War American's, especially women, were limited to mourning, due to the lacking amount of garments and money. To avoid the so called "disrespect" when not dressed in formal mourning attire because of scarce amounts, citizens (mainly women) joined in public mourning together. Nannie Haskins explained "I don't wear black because it becomes me...I wear mourning because it corresponds with my feelings." (page 149) This is a great example of how women during the Civil War felt about mourning. I don't necessarily believe that men mourned less than women because it's a general idea that men are supposed to be "stronger" than women so they don't publicly display their emotions. Obviously, men had their reasons for mourning less and women were accustomed to mourning more.
I completely agree with your post. You explained how the male brain is just configured to keep in the emotions more or not have as much need to publicly display them, like women. Of course, neither of these traits are necessarily a bad thing they are just how men and women have acted since time began. For men, it is seen as an act of strength to keep emotions to themselves, while women believe that is respectful to express their emotions in a time of mourning. Neither, is incorrect it's just how the world works. I think your post had many great points.
According to Faust, “the work of mourning is largely allocated to women."(148). The women of the Civil War era dressed in specific clothing to express their losses, as did men, however not to the extent of the women. Men wore less mourning attire because it wasn’t a way they felt comfortable expressing themselves, in my opinion. To women wearing darker colours, was an unspoken way to tell the world how they felt. Women tend to be more social than men so I think they saw it as a way to break the news to their friends and be able to support each other without having to ask. Men on the other hand don’t really rely on other people to express themselves anyway, it was a more personal process for them. Men, “wore tokens of mourning, armbands for the lost kin” out of respect for the lost, not in order to be trendy. I of course believe that the mourning process could have been handled better. It should not have been about the fashion but more about the mourning process itself. But after all they were only human, and I think it was handled fairly well, considering.
Mourning than was much more of a women's work than a man's work. " A mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for s brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years.." (pg 148) Women everywhere during the war did their best to find appropraite mourning wear to show their honor for the dead as the men went on into battle.
I completely agree with everything you said. I mostly agree with what you said about the women wanting to be part of a group while the men didn't care. Also what you said about how women express their feelings more then men. The biggest part about mourning is to express one's feelings. I agree with what you said about mourning being a personal thing. If someone looses a family member of friend, its a personal relationship, not a community thing.
According to the author the mourning was a job that was left mostly to the women during the civil war era. They had set amounts of time which a person would mourn for different occasions. The woman's mourning time was always much longer than the man's. There were so many deaths during the Civil War that most people were in mourning. There was even a shortage of black dresses for the women to wear. I think the fact that they even tried to continue their traditions was epic. I couldn't see how the men that were doing the fighting could continue the whole mourning process. They were surrounded by so much death and loss that they would never change out of black clothes. In addition to the fact that they were very busy and didn't necessarily have time to look back on the dead, they had to worry about keeping themselves alive. Overall I believe they had a fair attempt at mourning successfully during the war and that compared to US citizens today they were leagues ahead.
Jonah- in response to Brenna Hjelle: I really like the way you looked at this question. I feel your answer answers the question very fully (much better than my answer did. I agree with you that the women wore more black clothing so people knew they were mourning and that the men didn't really need that attention while they mourned. Also that they should have treated it much less like a fashion statement even though I don't think they were really excited to get to wear black clothes.
In response to Gabby P I like how you acknowledged that as the war went on mourning became harder. You talked about how it was hard for the women because they were out of clothes but I think it was more than that. With so many deaths during the war it was hard for the women to handle all of it. It was probably hard on them to have to continue mourning. They were used to mourning for two years tops. If they did mourn for two years and another death occurred than they would have to continue to mourn. So I believe it went even farther than just the clothing to mourn for such a long time.
The men dressed in far less mourning than the women in the Civil War because the women had to watch their sons, husbands, brothers, etc. die in the war. They had to lose these people knowing that they could not have done anything to help and mourning for them enabled them to show a kind of respect. It clearly explains on pages 148 and 149 that the women did in fact dress in more mourning clothes than the men. The women wore alot of blacks, grays, and lavenders, during their mourning according to the amount of mourning they faced. Men only wore small things like armbands, badges, and rosettes during their mourning. My opinion on how America handled the process of mourning during the Civil War, is that it was very extraordinary. I thought it was a little awkward how America handled things. I find it sort of weird how there were stores for mourning and that there was a mourning line of clothing. Given the circumstances I think that the mourning was kind of handled in a strange way but I guess it kind of fit the expectations the war handed the country.
I agree with you when you say that the mourning should have been more about the mourning itself rather than about the fashion. I feel like there was a lot of time spent during the war, trying to produce clothes and fashions fit for mourning instead of the actual mourning and taking the time to overcome what was going on. Yet perhaps maybe the production of fashion for mourning took their minds off of the actual mourning itself.
Both men and women mourn the dead but as in all of soiciety women are almost all way more emotional than men. Or at least express thier emotions men keep it in and see expressing as a weakness. Also as Jonah said they didn't have time to mourn the had keep focused in the battle and staying alive. But the women were at home and had free time to feel sad. The author also stated that women are given a lot more time for mourning then men are.
I agree with you when you say that the soldiers didn't have time to look back at the dead. The soldiers didn't have time to mourn it would distract them an possibly get them killed. Also as you said they would have to always be wearing black because of the amounts of death they were exposed to and had to live with.
Women dressed in mourning far more than men because it was uncharacteristic for men to showcase their sense of loss for too long in these times. Men did show their grief because of it would be socially unacceptable. They would instead, after wearing mourning, carry tokens or items to remind themselves of their lost one. It appeared to the people of this time, that the men who lost someone should be better capable to handle grief than a woman. Considering that this war claimed 600,000 lives, everyone handled grief incredibly well. Sure there was a certain amount of grieving, but the fact that most people continued to press on in their lives shows how well they manage with their grief.
It was rare that you would see a man dressed in mourn back in that time period because their mourning periods were shorter and kind of private. If I was a man back in that time period, and I had lost someone dear to me.. then my mourning period would be short also, but the person I lost would still be in my heart. Mourning all-in-all is more of a lady thing, like most of the time at funerals (for example) you would see mostly the women really hurt and crying. As I recall back in the book it stated that "boys were not allowed to cry".
I also agree with Steven, "Women dressed in mourning far more than men because it was uncharacteristic for men to showcase their sense of loss for too long in these times".
Steven, that just made them more stronger indivuals to not showcase their sense of loss.
I think the men dressed in mourning far less than the women because the men were expected to be stronger. Also, the women were more dependent on the men than other men were. For example, if a women lost her husband, she would be in a much tougher spot than the same man's brother. I think that the Americans handled mourning very well, considering the amount of deaths that there were. If there were over 600,000 deaths in a war today, the mourning would last for an extremely long time.
I agree with what you said about men not really having a chance to look back and mourn as much. If they did mourn as long as the women, they would have spent the entire war in mourning, considering the amount of people that died. If the men would have mourned as much as the women, they wouldnt have been able to focus on the war as much.
Yes I think it does seem that the men in this time didn’t show much emotion because it would be a display of weakness. But I think that people in this time just generally didn’t showcase emotion. I also think that because of the submissive role women played, they didn’t work as much as men did so they had all day to think about their lost one. Whereas the men had farm work and jobs to do which help them not dwell to long on their loss.
"The work of mourning was largly allocated to women," states page 148, on the subject of grieving. Women wore much more extensive funeral wear and spent much longer to grieve as a standard. Perhaps the cause of this was the sudden distance war put between mothers and sons, sisters and brothers, and wives and husbands. The separation war created was both emotional and physical. It is plausable that family could feel lonely without a man's presence. Thus, recieving information that this presence would never be around again could not only be heartbreaking, but torturous.
As a rule, women hide their emotions much less than men, who, perhaps wrongfully, may hide greif behind indifference. However, in honor of their brothers, fathers, sons, and friends, men were know to wear "tokens of mourning" (pg 148) for fallen comrads. Costomarily, however, men's signs of grief ended before those of women.
Americans; men and women alike, may have found it easier to move on depending on their relationship with the dead. As states on page 148, it would seem that sisters or brothers mourned for the shortest amount of time, while wives morned for many years. However, as proven by a father who spend decades searching for information about his son (pg 134), family members mourned for long amounts of time despite the relationship with the deceased.
I agree with just about everything you said about the grieving process and why women may have mourned for a longer period than men. However, I do not believe that women mourned because it was the latest trend. When a man is killed, I believe whats "in" is the least important thing in anyone's mind. It is of little relevance whether others grieve more or less than oneself. Therefore, I do not believe cultural pressure extended or increased the intensity of mourning in any way.
Men during the Civil War dress in mourning far less than women because in the 1800s women we not allowed to wear jeans so they were already dressed up. Men also didn't want to show their emotions for long amounts of time because it was unmanly. Women were more into the emotions. They would mourn for much longer than the men.
Both men and women wore clothing that showed the loss of a loved one, but women often wore clothing of mourning. Women mourned more often than men because unlike men women were allowed to show their deep display of mourning because unlike men they were not fighting on the battle field, but instead were at home and mourned to show that they acknowledged their fallen kin in battle and sickness. I believe that Americans in the civil war handled the process of mourning a little extremely, because I don’t think that women should spend two and a half years of their lives mourning the loss of someone.
I think this comes down to how individuals mourn. And I guess that men didn’t need to mourn as much as the women did, or they just dealt with it in a different way. Also, if a man on the battlefront was showing that he was in mourning that would make him weak and there was no room for weak people. So I guess that since men had business to get done, like the war, they had no time to mourn, whereas all the women heard about was all the death.
Both men and women grieved at death and mourned in their own ways, women typically dressed in all black, dressy clothing to show respect for the loss of a loved one and they felt more attatched to the individual emotionally. Men didn't, and stiil don't, really wear their emotions, instead they keep them to themselves more or less. i believe that it is more individual mourning rather than segregated mourning. Also, in my opinion, during the Civil War, mourning was handled similarly to the way it is handled now with the exception of clothing.
In response to Gabby: I agree with you that the men were the ones dying and the women were the ones mourning. Because most men were in the war back then and if they weren't then they would feel less respected and manly, if they dressed in mourning. But I don't know if I agree that the women tried to mourn the best they could because they didn't know how to possibly mourn for such a big loss because it has never happened before.
"The work of mourning is largely allocated to women."(pg.148) Women would dress in mourning more often than men. A widow would mourn for up to two and a half years while a widower would only be expected to mourn for about three months. The women wore the mourning garments out of respect for the dead. "Mourning garb was...an outward and visible sign of an inward invisible state."(pg.149) Women went through the stages of mourning to help themselves move on. It helped them handle their grief and honor the dead. I think at first, Americans handled the process of mourning very well. As the war went on and deaths became so numerous and a soldier's identity could be lost forever, they lost control. Especially in the south. Women worked so hard just to try to find clothing to wear to show they were mourning. it seems as though the process of mourning was the only thing they held onto.
ReplyDeleteBoth men and women grieved the loss of a loved one by observing certain rituals - such as dressing in mourning - which were required by society during a mourning period. Men dressed in mourning less than women, but they did wear "tokens of mourning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes" (148), and did this for only a few months. Women dressed in mourning much more - "By convention, a mother mourned for a child for a year. . . a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years, moving through the prescribed stages and accoutrements of heavy, full, and half mourning, with gradually loosening requirements of dress and deportment" (148). The social expectations placed on women during a period of mourning were lifted slightly during the War, as death was happening constantly and fashion was not a first priority; however, women still dressed in mourning as much as possible because "formal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe that they could move through their despair" (149). Dressing in mourning was a way for women to deal with grief, and I think that it also allowed them to let others know what had happened without having to tell them, and to give others the opportunity to help without having to ask them. "A community of friends and relatives shared this ritual affirmation of loss and marked the new status of each mourner" (153). Women could grieve publicly, allowing them to accept condolences and comfort from people within their communities. Men, on the other hand, were expected to grieve more privately, and in a much shorter time. "A widower . . . was expected to mourn only for three months, simply by displaying a black crape on his hat or armband" (148). I think that people in the Civil War were far less equipped to handle death than we are today, although all deaths are difficult for loved ones in any time period. "The particular circumstances created by the Civil War often inhibited mourning, rendering it difficult, if not impossible, for many bereaved Americans to move through the stages of grief. . . . In such conditions the temptation to distrust and resist bad news was all too alluring and the capacity for the genuine consolations of mourning severely compromised" (144). The frequency of death, the manner by which people were dying, and the lack of information about each death made accepting the death of a loved one extremely difficult, and the grieving and healing processes even more so. I think people during the Civil War handled death as best they could, but it was far different from today where death is not such a constant, and unlimited sources for help are available - such as grief counseling, therapy, or even the support of a community.
ReplyDeleteWomen largely were the ones who mourned. Men, too, wore tokens of mourning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes just like the women would would wear.(pg.148) By convention, a mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years, moving through prescribed stages and accoutrements of heavy, full, and half mourning, with gradually loosening requirements of dress and deportment. (pg.148) A widower, by contrast, was expected to mourn only for three months. (pg.148)
ReplyDeleteWomen dressed in mourning was their way to show others their loss without having to ask. Too the amount of time they mourned allowed others to know who they were mourning for.
I believe men mourned for shorter periods of time and mourned more behind closed doors. As it has always been known, even today, that men are to be stronger and that men believe that its not cool to publicly show their feelings.
People during the Civil War handled the mourning of their loved one the best they could with the limited resources that they had.
Men in the Civil War mourned less than the women. The most obvious reason why is because it was “a display of unmanliness.” (p.167) Henry Bowditch sought concealment to hide himself and his feelings from others because he was “ill fitted to see anyone” and was embarrassed by a lack of masculinity. (p. 167) Also, during the time of the Civil War, men were usually the heads of households. The men made the money that would support their families. If they were (too) caught up in grief, the families would not have money for the basic necessities. Men were also supposed to mourn less than women; “A widow mourned for two and a half years…” and “A widower … was expected to mourn only for three months.” (p.148) Civilian women were also less likely to die because they were not fighting in the war. Thus, they would be more likely to mourn. “Formal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe they could move through despair… ” (p.149) I think for the most part that Americans handled mourning well. They respected the dead and tried to move on. However, I think people became too caught up in “fashions for mourning.” I don’t think it matters how good you look when you are mourning, just the fact that you are (mourning).
ReplyDeleteIn response to Blake:
ReplyDeleteYou brought up a good point by quoting a part of the text that referred to mourning by men as "a display of unmanliness." I think this was a main reason why men did not mourn as much or as long as women. I also think that today we still have this same societal standard that says men are supposed to be strong in the face of death. This shows how cultural stereotypes and social rituals are often upheld over hundreds of years through many generations; while we don't necessarily dress in mourning, we do traditionally wear black to funerals, and while it is far more socially acceptable today for men to show emotion when suffering a loss, I think we still expect men not to do so.
Everybody seemed to be equally sad and equally melancholy, but “[t]he work of mourning was largely allocated to women,” (pg148). Everybody expressed their sadness with clothing to some degree. Men “wore tokens of mourning, armbands for the lost kin badges and rosettes,” (pg 148) and that’s about it. Women, on the other hand, dragged it out until so much time had gone by that there couldn’t possibly be any sadness left inside that could be expressed by clothes. All that dressing in mourning really is, is an “outward and visible sign of an inward invisible state,” (pg 149), and men have, do, and probably will continue to not openly express themselves to the same degree as women—that’s just how the human mind tends to be configured. I think that it helped women of that era to rid themselves of sad feeling by displaying and releasing their emotion in the form of clothing. Men didn’t dress in mourning so much because that is not what men do. Men tend to handle their emotions differently, and, although present, emotions tend to be held inside and dressing in mourning for men may display some kind of weakness. A more simple explanation of this scenario can be seen by watching http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn_Ap5O0LYw. I think mourning isn’t so much anything to be criticized: mourning is just a natural reaction to sadness, and society has a lot less to do with it than it may seem.
ReplyDeleteMen during the Civil War dressed in mourning clothes far less than women because they thought that if they showed sorrow "it's implications of loss of control and of weakness, greif seemed to challenge and erode masculinity." [pg. 167] They thought if people saw them crying or showing any feeling that people would think that they are unmanly. Instead of dressing in black when they mourned, they would wear " tokens of mourning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes." I think that it is strange how the women would mourn more than the men. Also how the women had a certain amount of time to mourn and dress in mourning clothes. "A mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned mourned for two and a half years, moving through prescribed stages and accountrements of heavy, full, and half mourning, with gradually loosing requirements of dress and deportment. A widower, by contrast, was expected to mourn only for three months, simply by displaying black crape on his hat or armband." [pg.148] I don't understand why they only had a ceratin time slo to mourn.
ReplyDeleteWomen and men both mourned in the civil war but in different ways and for different times. Women believed if they dressed differently it would help them move through their dispair."mourning created a sence of process, encouragement the bereaved to blieve they could move through their despair, which might evolve through stages of grief represented by their changing clothing."(149). Men would wear tokens of mourning like badges, armbands, and rosettes. Also men would mourn for a smaller amount of time.(a widow mourned for two and a hlf years.....a widower, by contrast was expected to mourn only for three months."(148).
ReplyDeleteIn other words mourning was done more by women than men. My opinion about the americans during the cival war and them mourning is they are similar than people today. When people lose someone they cared for one of the only reactions is to mourn their loss, its only natrual to be sad or depressed.
During the time period of the civil war: “The work of mourning was largely allocated to women”. [148] This was largely because during this time period, It was believed that the women did not have the emotional constitution that the men did. While widows would openly mourn for two and a half years, it was judged “un-manly” for a man to cry at the sight of his son’s lifeless body. “He judged himself ‘ill fitted to see anyone’ and was distressed by his ‘display of unmanliness’” [167] Men during the civil war did not mourn as openly as women because “In its implications of loss of control and of weakness, grief seemed to challenge and erode masculinity”. [167] In my opinion, I believe that for the time period, the mourning process was very practical. Had it been implemented today, it would have been extravagant and called a waste of time.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Amber Pixley
ReplyDeleteI agree with you in thinking that it was strange for the women to mourn more than the men, however, in this time period, it was not okay for boys to cry. In the case of Henry Bowditch who had just lost his son to the war, he was embarrassed that he had cried. “He judged himself ‘ill fitted to see anyone’ and was distressed by his ‘display of unmanliness’. In its implications of loss of control and of weakness, grief seemed to challenge and erode masculinity”. [167] This man was embarrassed by the fact that he was crying at the sight of his son’s body. Women on the other hand were considered next to helpless, they were not expected to contain their emotions, and therefore, they showed them. Today, it has been said many times that “he is so sensitive!” the fact that men tried to so hard to hide their emotions during the civil war is therefore nearly incomprehensible to us.
Although everyone was suffering from losses of loved ones, women were more likely to display there mourning. This includes women displaying their phase of mourning through garments worn depending on, “heavy, full, and half mourning, with gradually loosening requirements of dress…” (148) Men, although displaying mourning through “tokens of mourning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes…” (148) were less likely to display their true feelings for the simple reason: unmanliness. Men are not known to display their feelings, such as women are able to, and be comfortable with this display. Therefore, during the time of the Civil War, men did not dress in mourning as often, and as long for, as women. Mourning became so common among women that, “advertisements in northern papers announced far greater variety and availability of [mourning] ware both in specialty stores and in more general establishments like New York’s Lord & Taylor, which opened its own mourning department in April 1863.” (151-152) I think Americans during the Civil War handled the process of mourning rather courageously. During the trying times of war they managed to honor the dead, through their own ways, and were still able to move forward. I found interesting how during the war, the attire of mourning was so common and crucial. This display would not be found in today’s society, and probably not accepted. However, the process was crucial to that time and therefore overall, this process to them was perfect.
ReplyDeleteThe act of mourning is mostly carried out my women. Men probably feel that mourning reveals emotional weakness. So instead of displaying their thoughts and emotions to the real world, men stay reserved and keep their emotions to themselves. Men chose to stay reserved to keep there emotional toughness and reputation. "The work of mourning was largely allocated to women."(148) However, men did respect the dead but in smaller ways than women. They "wore tokens of morning, armbands for lost kin, badges and rosettes, like those displayed by Virginia Military Institute cadets and officers for a month after Stonewall Jackson's death."
ReplyDeleteI think Americans handled mourning in a respectful and acceptable way. Mourning and its extent should be up to the mourner. People deal with death in different ways and those ways should be respected.
Response to Mckenzie,
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your point of "boys not crying" Men tried to show the least amount of emotional weakness as possible. However, Henry Bowditch's case does show that men still did feel as distraught as women were. Men just felt an urge to stay contempt.
Response to Blake:
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point on unmanliness. I liked how you brought up Henry Bowditch to make your point. “Men were usually the heads of households” is true, however, I don’t understand how, “if they were (too) caught up in grief, the families would not have money for the basic necessities.” Men were grieving and although it would be dreadful to work, wouldn’t they understand that they had to? Also, I agree with your statement on how, “people became too caught up in ‘fashions for mourning’” but, it was part of the culture of the time.
"The work of mourning was largely allocated to women."(148) Men did dress in mourning, but far less than women. Most men wore only a black armband, badge, or rosette for lost family or friends. The period of mourning for a widower was only about three months, and he was expected only to display it by wearing "black crape" on his hat or as an armband. Women, however, would mourn "for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years." Women moved through different stages of mourning: heavy, full and half. Each different stage gradually loosened restrictions on clothing and behavior. The stages of mourning came to represent how the woman was feeling; as she moved from heavy, or deep, mourning, to full mourning, and then to half mourning, her clothing became a symbol of how she was coping with her loss. As the time increased after the soldier's death, the woman's mourning would lessen, and so would restrictions on her clothing. I think that while the stages of dress were very strict, the mourning process helped bring some structure to the loss and grief that the women felt. I think American's handled mourning as well as they could, given the circumstances under which they were mourning. Women were mourning for men whose funerals may not have happened, if a body was even found. In the Civil War, death was so common that many women spent the whole war dressed in mourning. But because it offered structure and relief, the dress requirements were a good thing for the women of the time, and it helped them to handle the deaths in a respectful and practical way.
ReplyDeleteResponse to Rachel Anderson:
ReplyDeleteMen probably were afraid to mourn openly, and so their mourning period was shorter than a woman's. If men thought that, by mourning, they would become less manly, or would be weaker, they wouldn't mourn. I agree with your comment that "men are not known to display their feelings, such as women are able to, and be comfortable with this display." It makes them feel uncomfortable to be openly weepy and mournful, even if it is how they feel.
After a death both men and women would partake in the custom of mourning, where men would wear black on their hat, or as an armband, and women would dress in various dark shades. So the custom of mourning can be best described as a change in clothing that was supposed to reflect one’s feelings after a death. I agree with the many posts before mine that men mourned less than women because they didn’t want to be seen as too emotional, whereas women didn’t mind expressing their true emotions through mourning. Many men probably disliked showing their emotions because by being in the middle of a war they were supposed to be seen as tough and to many men displaying their emotions countered that attitude. Well with that said, I think the process of mourning during the war was definitely odd, and too drawn out. I think it’s rather odd for people to dress a certain way, and expect to get over their loss by doing so. Wouldn’t some one get over a loss quicker by focusing on new things rather than the death that they were grieving? I think by mourning for 2 ½ years women lost sight of why they were mourning. The reader can see that loss of interest in the obsession over who could mourn the most fashionably. I think because mourning was drawn out for so long it eventually morphed into a fashion show for many people. Some mourning is fine, but after awhile I would think people would want to focus on something else rather than the past, and move on from their loss.
ReplyDeleteOf course after a loved one has passed away, everyone will mourn no matter if they're a man or a woman. I think that the reason that men mourned for a shorter period than women is simply because they didnt want to be looked upon as weak and unable to deal with death. "By convection, a mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years, moving through prescribed stages loosing requirements of dress and deportment. A widower, by cotrast, was expected to mourn only for three months, simply by diplayig black crape on his hat or armband."(pg. 148) This shows that women were simply expected to mourn for a much longer period of time then a man. In order for a women to morn, she would wear a black dress. "Many women stuggled to find garments that would enable them to participate in this rite of passage and display of respect. Fformal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe they could move through the despair, which might evolve through stages of grief represented by their change of clothing" This process seemed to be a really goo way of mourning during the Civil War. It helped the women to have a step by step process to get through any grief they were feeling. They could move through different types og clothing in order to send a message of their mourning to others. I think that this also was a good thing for the women to all be together during this hard time, they were never alone in mourning, everyone around them was also wearing black and that became a connection for all of them. "There were so many ladies here, all dressed in deep mourning, that we felt as if we were at a convent and formed a sisterhood."(pg.149) This quote really showed that this was a good way for women to mourn during the Civil War.
ReplyDeleteIn Response to Ben Grote:
ReplyDeleteIn agree with most your post, I think that the fashion of mourning became a bigger deal than the actually mourning itself. But, I think this could've been a good thing to help keep the women distracted from their loss and intrested in something and actually doing something, rather than staying in their homes and mourning alone which could cause even more grief. So therefore I think that this was something to distract them.
During the times of the Civil War, society largely associated mourning apparel with women. Women spent large amounts of money to be dressed in mourning, whether it was full or half. Whereas, men were required to mourn for a much smaller amount of time, only wearing wristbands or small badges. [pg.148]Women on the other hand, would mourn for very long periods of time; some women even went into mourning for the rest of their lives. An example of this is when Mrs. Lincoln went into mourning for the rest of her life when Abraham died after their young son. In my opinion, women mourned more than men for two reasons. The first, being the cultural pressure. Mourning caught on during the war and therefore most women mourned and men did not. The second reason is that men wanted to keep their masculinity. In that culture, the men were the ones to fight, and therefore many felt that if they were sad and emotional, then they would have been looked at in the same way that people viewed women.
ReplyDeleteI think that Americans handled the process of mourning the only way they could, with great sadness and honor. The point of mourning was to remember and honor the lost, and this, in my opinion, was exactly what they did.
In response to Orion:
ReplyDeleteOrion brings up a good point when he says that men did not mourn as much because they needed to display emotional toughness to keep their reputation. Men were the guardians of the nation, and laid down their lives for what they believed in. Men were viewed as the leaders, and during that time, weren’t supposed to show much emotion. That is why they mourned for a much shorter period of time than the women. I completely agree with Orion when he says that “so instead of displaying their thoughts and emotions to the real world, men stay reserved and keep their emotions to themselves. Men chose to stay reserved to keep there (sic) emotional toughness and reputation.”
In response to McKenzie:
ReplyDeleteYou said in your response to Amber that during that time it was not okay for men to cry. I agree with that. They thought it was embarrassing. What I disagree with you is that now as man myself its still embarrassing for men to cry at any time. If I cry because my friend died I actually felt embarrassed. To cry to a man does not look good among his male peers still today.
During the time of the civil war mourning was a very important and well known ritual for families to do in honor of a lost loved one. Both men and women mourned, but the women mourned longer and showed their mourning a lot more than men. It is said, "a mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same,and a sister six months for a brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years. A widower was expected to mourn only for three months."(pg148) The women displayed their mourning in full black dresses. In contrast, the men simply displayed a black crape on his hat or an armband to show their dispair. The men and women also showed their emotions quite differently. Women were allowed to cry because they were thought of as hopeless, whereas men were looked down upon them if they cried. Many of the traditions of mourning are still used today, but with a much smaller scale. Today many show mourning by wearing wrist bands with words on them to remember a lost loved one. Mourning is also displayed in tattoos that people get in rememberance.
ReplyDeleteDuring the civil war the women dressed in morning far more than the men did because the men that were out fighting had been around dead people and people dieing far more than the women. Pg.145 "Death does not seem half so terrible as it did long ago. We have grown use to it. This statement on page 145 is a way of saying that the men have been around it so much that it just doesn't get to them any more. "One can get use to anything." "Death had become too commonplace even to take note of", this last quot was taken from a nurse at one of the hospitals she had noticed that the men that were supposed to keep track of the deaths that were occurring had stopped doing they're jobs. Death was everywhere and everyone was forgetting they're responsibilities to they're fellow men. I feel that morning means a lot to someone that has lost a loved one. People during the civil war need to be able to morn. Many of the ways people acted lead them to even more distress because they didn't do what they should have like working. I felt that the way they mourned is normal if you lose a loved one you wont be up to doing anything.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Evan
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry but I must disagree with you. I agree with you about women showing they're emotions more because even now we do its how women are made our feeling are strong and women are not afraid to show it. But when you said that men were looked down upon when they show emotion I disagree. Men were around death all the time they were killing each other almost every day. If the men held on to every man they knew that had died and fought they would just go insane. All that death around them they were forced to put all emotions to the side. I believe that the men all shared the same feelings a friend, son, father, uncle, some one in they're lives had died every human being shares sadness and mourning is one very important way of showing that sadness. Men had to just push out very signal every thought of depression in order to get through the war.
Response to Samantha:
ReplyDeleteIn your reply you made a good point that by focusing on the fashion part of mourning many women may have diverted their attentions from their loss, and towards their clothes. Although it may provide a distraction for some women, and a little more reasoning to the practice of mourning, focusing on clothes, and then calling it mourning still seems a little odd to me. Also in your post wrote how women made a positive connection with each other through their clothes in mourning. I agree with that, it probably was beneficial for women to connect with each other through mourning. Your posts showed me that there were more benefits to dressing in mourning than I originally thought, but those benefits don’t change my opinion too much, and I still think that 2 1/2 years is too drawn out, and dressing in certain colors to move on from a loss is a little odd.
In general, women tend to pay more attention to their emotions as well as to the way they dress. Dressing the same as others often places them into a group together. Just look around the halls of any high school today. It is very easy to tell what people are friends by the way they dress. In a similar way, women often dressed in mourning to share their grief. Men, on the other hand, do not tend to care as much about their attire in general and do not need to be wearing the same thing as their friends to show that they belong together. Also, women often show their emotions more than men. They are always known to be the ones "wearing their heart on their sleeve," literally in this case. Overall, I think that mourning was too generalized. Everyone did the same thing. In my opinion, mourning is a personal process and should have been treated as one rather than a public formula that everyone followed.
ReplyDeleteDuring the Civil War both men and women mourned for the death of family members. In respect towards the dead and fallen women would wear black garments for months or years at a time through the grieving process. Men also mourned wearing armbands or other apparel but in much shorter time lengths. This difference in mourning can be related to men’s role in society versus women’s role. Men where off fighting in the war and supporting a family making little time to mourn. Furthermore, it brought feelings of grief and weakness which is held back by men. “In its implications of loss of control and of weakness, grief seemed to challenge and erode masculinity. Men would find it especially difficult to acknowledge their sorrow and truly mourn (167).” The soldiers and men would resist these feelings while the women openly vented them out. For the amount of dead and grief the mourning process went well for the Americans. The dead were respected and the country as a whole moved on. However, the mass amounts of dead disrupted this process and made it almost too much to bear for many people.
ReplyDeletein response to Samantha C:
ReplyDeleteAlthough I think the fashion of mourning grew out of proportion of actual mourning I agree with Samantha C. that it served as a distraction from their grief and losses. It brought them closer as a community and united them in their loss instead of dividing them. It also served to honor the dead and make their grief more bearable. However, excessive fashion over mourning doesn’t seem respectful to the fallen soldiers. In response to Ben G. I agree that two and a half years is too long to mourn over a fallen family member as well as dressing differently for such a long period of time. They should accept their loss and move on. Dragging it out like that would seem to make it harder to deal with when you’re reminded every day.
In response to Michelle McClurg:
ReplyDeleteYou make a very good point when you say that the men were the ones who were around death more and so had become desensitized to it. Women were not exposed to war the way their husbands were and therefore each death was a personal experience for them. The men, however, had been off fighting and so had witnessed more deaths. The men simply could not mourn the death of every friend or they would be in a perpetual state of mourning.
Response to Ben Grote
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that men needed to keep up their image so they mourned less. The whole mourning process was drawn out and lost sentimental value however; this is what they held on to. Mourning, although it became a fashion, was how the people remembered the soldiers who sacrificed themselves for their country. The whole process took so long because those women wanted to give their soldiers the proper respect they deserved. Of course if they focused on new things they would get over the deaths quicker. However, they did not want to get over it. They wanted to hold on to their soldiers as long as they could and they did that through mourning.
Men were not expected to be in mourning nearly as long as women during the Civil War mainly for two reasons. First of all, there were the rules of society. "A widow mourned for two and a half years, moving through prescribed stages... with gradually loosening requirements of dress and deportment. A widower, by contrast, was expected to mourn only for three months, simply by displaying black crape on his hat or armband." (pg.148) This quote shows how society was influenced by culture. For a man to only mourn for three months while a woman was expected to mourn for two and a half years is a huge contrast. Society played a large role in how much more women mourned then men, but i also believe that feelings played a large role too. Women tend to express their feeling outwardly more than men because its a was a way for them to get over their feelings. Susan Caldwell was forbidden to go into mourning for her son and she said that she "longed for a way to express her sorrow." (pg. 150) This shows how women are eager to express their sorrow rather than contain it. Nannie Haskins said, "I wear mourning because it corrosponds with my feelings." (pg. 149) I believe that when Nannie said this, that she spoke for all women who were in mourning. I believe that Americans handled the process of mourning rather well other than the rules of society. People should go into mourning because they really want it or need it, not because society tells them to. I believe that when death comes, one should react the way they need to, not the way society needs them to to make it look good.
ReplyDeleteThe mourning process was a cultural tradition. Everybody knew the rules about what to wear and for how long. There was heavy, full, and half mourning for women. They would dress in mourning for a year for a child, six months for a brother, and two and a half years for a husband. Men, on the other hand, would wear black on armbands, badges, and rosettes to dress for mourning. They wore mourning for three months. Women wore mourning to show respect and show their feelings. “Formal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe they could move through their despair, which might evolve through stages of grief represented by their changing clothing,” (149). Nannie Haskins of Tennessee wrote, “I wear mourning because it corresponds with my feelings.” (149). The women didn’t mind dressing in mourning because they felt that they could express their feelings. However, men wanted to be seen as masculine so they would not express their feelings the same way women did. Also, men didn’t feel the need to express their feelings through clothes. They were off fighting and were very used to the idea of death. I partly agree with this process of mourning because I think that the men could have honored family more by wearing the black on the armbands longer. It would not have been against their masculinity it wouldn’t have brought them down. Although, this process was a cultural tradition and it seems that nobody had problems with the differences between the genders.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kaylie:
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with you in a few parts of your response to the question. I don’t think that women “pay more attention to their emotions,” I think that they just let their emotions out more. I also don’t think that the women wore the mourning clothes to dress like their friends. They mostly just wanted to express their feelings since death was a common thing during the war. However, I do agree with you that the mourning should have been treated as a more personal process instead of a process that everybody followed. Death hits everybody differently and people might go through the grieving process longer or less than others depending on the person. Therefore, the process should not have been so exact about length.
Men and women during the Civil War expressed their grief for a loss by dressing in appropriate garments. Women dressed in varieties of colors depending on their stages of grief. They would mourn from one year up to two and a half years. Men, however, "wore tokens of mourning, armbands for loss kin, badges and rosettes" (pg. 148). A widower would only mourn for 3 months. Men expressed their sorrow far less than women for the reason of acting tough. During this time period, men acted stronger and showed little weakness. "...grief seemed to challenge and erode masculinity" (pg. 167). They wanted to show society and the enemy that war did not affect them. In addition,"men would find it expecially difficult to acknowledge their sorrow and truly mourn" (pg. 167). Women, on the other hand, wanted to respect the customs of mourning and show to the public that they are in the process. To my opinion, Americans during the Civil War planned to much out of the work of mourning. A man or women should not need to follow a certain way in order to properly mourn or follow a time period on how long to mourn.
ReplyDeleteMen in the Civil War dressed in mourning far less than women simply because of their masculinity. The men in that society believed that showing too much emotion was a sign of weakness. So by "mourning too much," men were seen as weak individuals. That was a sign of lost control, which was not okay back then. The "excessive" mourning stripped them of their manliness (or so society thought). The men "found it difficult to acknowledge their sorrow and truly mourn" pg. 167.
ReplyDeleteI believe that they mourned differently back then than they do now. Women mourned following too many social guidelines. Mourning should be an individual process that people go through freely and on their terms. I also think that men didn't mourn freely either. They mourned for a very short period, and stayed closed up and didn't let go of their grief. I think men and women have the same rights to mourn however they want.
In response to Kaylie-
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that men mourned less because they didn't care what they wore, or if they matched their friends. It wasn't about that. I think society just thought it was "wrong" for men to show too much emotion because it socially emasculated them. Although, you were right when you said the women paid more attention to way they dress because of the half-mourning, full, etc. attire that they wore.
Response to Kaylie:
ReplyDeleteI think women do give more attention to their emotions and how they dress too. I agree with you about how women dress to “places them into a group together” to speed the passing of sadness. It made me think that women dressed just to be part of a group, and, if a fellow widow, or really anybody saw you not dressed in mourning, that they would understand that you are disrespecting the dead. I disagree with your argument that mourning is a personal process. I think that it is a very social thing that has to be done to pay full respect to the dead. On the other hand, I think coping with loss is a personal process. Yes, mourning is culturally forced upon a person when she is coping with her loss, but there are other things that she can do in addition to mourning on a much more personal level which can be done as much or as little as she wants.
In response to Rachel:
ReplyDeleteWhen I mentioned the being too caught up in grief, I agree that it would be rather unlikely to happen. However, sometimes people can be so caught up in despair that they forget about everyone else: “They forget the afflictions of others … neglectful of responsibilities to others and personal health.” (p.166) People can become shocked from death and can barely function, but I would hope they could overcome this (or avoid it). I also completely understand that fashions for mourning were part of the culture, and it may have (somehow) comforted the mourners, I just thought it was somewhat ridiculous that people had to be fashionable in mourning.
in response to McKenzie
ReplyDeleteAs it was okay for women to show their emotions, it wasn't okay for men too as men held their emotions more to themselves. Women were able to mourn showing their feelings
Women mourned much more than the men during the Civil War. “Formal observance of mourning created a sense of process, encouraging the bereaved to believe they could move through their despair,” (149) out of respect for the dead the women of the time mourned in some cases a few years. The relationship to the women to the dead determined how long she was to mourn. It was said, “A mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for a brother, a widow mourned for two and half years.” (148) however it was a said a widower only would mourn for three months. In my opinion it could have been at the time the man of the house represented the “rock” so to say. He was supposed to be strong and bring his family through tough times. A big part of the mourning process was the clothing. As the war went on products became scarce. It was hard for the women to find appropriate clothing to wear. Because of this reason I think it became tougher for the women to show they were mourning. They didn’t want to disrespect the dead but it became harder and harder. If you compare it to situations today people are never expected to mourn for a year. Everyone has their own way of getting through hardships like seeing a loved one pass. Back in the 1800’s there was a process the women were expected to go through. However things at that period of time for women were so much different than it is today. Some of the Women could have gone through the process and it really did help them while others could have possibly acted like they were going through the process because their society told them to. On the other hand with the high death toll during the civil war this process may have been incredibly important. I think the mourning process during the civil war was a bit excessive but at the same time helpful.
ReplyDeleteWomen dressed in mourning more than men in the Civil War. Widows were to be in mourning for about 2 and half years. Men only mourned 3 months. Men mourned less because it was unmanly to show emotion for so long. Men usually showed their mourning and respect by wearing small tokens like armbands, badges, etc. Women on the other hand went through different stages of clothing for mourning. This became a big trend in both the North and South. This was important for women. If they couldn't find clothing that showed their mourning, made it. That shows how much it meant to them.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Nicole:
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you. Men didn't mourn less because they didn't care, they just didn't show to much emotion. It still seems that way with modern society. There are times when men show less emotion than women because they believe that it emasculates them.
The women in the Civil War had dressed in mourning more than the men. The men believed it was "a display of unmanliness." (p.167) Since the men were usually the head of the household during this time, they thought if they were in mourning their respect level would go down. “A widow mourned for two and a half years…” and “A widower … was expected to mourn only for three months.” (p.148) This shows the difference between the two. The women were not the ones dieing in the war. The men were, so the women were most likely in mourning more than men. The women then wore the mourning garments out of respect for the dead. This was done partly to help them move on, and honor the dead. At the beginning of the war Americans, in my opinion, handled mourning very well. Then as the war grew longer and more soldiers died, many with loss of identity, mourning had become about the fashion. The women would look for just the right outfit to show they were in mourning. They had lost control. Although they had tried to handle it as best they could.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Blake:
ReplyDeleteI like how in your post you talked more about the men's reasons for not being in mourning as much. It makes you think differently about why they hadn't mourned as much as women.
Women are known to mourn more than men, as this quote states, "The work of mourning was largely allocated to women."(148) Widows went through stages of mourning in the span of two and a half years, and this was mainly presented through her clothing. However, a widower was only to mourn for three months "by displaying black crape on his hat or armband." (148) I think that during the Civil War American's, especially women, were limited to mourning, due to the lacking amount of garments and money. To avoid the so called "disrespect" when not dressed in formal mourning attire because of scarce amounts, citizens (mainly women) joined in public mourning together. Nannie Haskins explained "I don't wear black because it becomes me...I wear mourning because it corresponds with my feelings." (page 149) This is a great example of how women during the Civil War felt about mourning. I don't necessarily believe that men mourned less than women because it's a general idea that men are supposed to be "stronger" than women so they don't publicly display their emotions. Obviously, men had their reasons for mourning less and women were accustomed to mourning more.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Cameron Whiteside:
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your post. You explained how the male brain is just configured to keep in the emotions more or not have as much need to publicly display them, like women. Of course, neither of these traits are necessarily a bad thing they are just how men and women have acted since time began. For men, it is seen as an act of strength to keep emotions to themselves, while women believe that is respectful to express their emotions in a time of mourning. Neither, is incorrect it's just how the world works. I think your post had many great points.
According to Faust, “the work of mourning is largely allocated to women."(148). The women of the Civil War era dressed in specific clothing to express their losses, as did men, however not to the extent of the women. Men wore less mourning attire because it wasn’t a way they felt comfortable expressing themselves, in my opinion. To women wearing darker colours, was an unspoken way to tell the world how they felt. Women tend to be more social than men so I think they saw it as a way to break the news to their friends and be able to support each other without having to ask. Men on the other hand don’t really rely on other people to express themselves anyway, it was a more personal process for them. Men, “wore tokens of mourning, armbands for the lost kin” out of respect for the lost, not in order to be trendy. I of course believe that the mourning process could have been handled better. It should not have been about the fashion but more about the mourning process itself. But after all they were only human, and I think it was handled fairly well, considering.
ReplyDeleteMourning than was much more of a women's work than a man's work. " A mother mourned for a child for a year, a child for a parent the same, a sister six months for s brother. A widow mourned for two and a half years.." (pg 148) Women everywhere during the war did their best to find appropraite mourning wear to show their honor for the dead as the men went on into battle.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kaylie:
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with everything you said. I mostly agree with what you said about the women wanting to be part of a group while the men didn't care. Also what you said about how women express their feelings more then men. The biggest part about mourning is to express one's feelings. I agree with what you said about mourning being a personal thing. If someone looses a family member of friend, its a personal relationship, not a community thing.
According to the author the mourning was a job that was left mostly to the women during the civil war era. They had set amounts of time which a person would mourn for different occasions. The woman's mourning time was always much longer than the man's. There were so many deaths during the Civil War that most people were in mourning. There was even a shortage of black dresses for the women to wear. I think the fact that they even tried to continue their traditions was epic. I couldn't see how the men that were doing the fighting could continue the whole mourning process. They were surrounded by so much death and loss that they would never change out of black clothes. In addition to the fact that they were very busy and didn't necessarily have time to look back on the dead, they had to worry about keeping themselves alive. Overall I believe they had a fair attempt at mourning successfully during the war and that compared to US citizens today they were leagues ahead.
ReplyDeleteJonah- in response to Brenna Hjelle: I really like the way you looked at this question. I feel your answer answers the question very fully (much better than my answer did. I agree with you that the women wore more black clothing so people knew they were mourning and that the men didn't really need that attention while they mourned. Also that they should have treated it much less like a fashion statement even though I don't think they were really excited to get to wear black clothes.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Gabby P
ReplyDeleteI like how you acknowledged that as the war went on mourning became harder. You talked about how it was hard for the women because they were out of clothes but I think it was more than that. With so many deaths during the war it was hard for the women to handle all of it. It was probably hard on them to have to continue mourning. They were used to mourning for two years tops. If they did mourn for two years and another death occurred than they would have to continue to mourn. So I believe it went even farther than just the clothing to mourn for such a long time.
The men dressed in far less mourning than the women in the Civil War because the women had to watch their sons, husbands, brothers, etc. die in the war. They had to lose these people knowing that they could not have done anything to help and mourning for them enabled them to show a kind of respect. It clearly explains on pages 148 and 149 that the women did in fact dress in more mourning clothes than the men. The women wore alot of blacks, grays, and lavenders, during their mourning according to the amount of mourning they faced. Men only wore small things like armbands, badges, and rosettes during their mourning. My opinion on how America handled the process of mourning during the Civil War, is that it was very extraordinary. I thought it was a little awkward how America handled things. I find it sort of weird how there were stores for mourning and that there was a mourning line of clothing. Given the circumstances I think that the mourning was kind of handled in a strange way but I guess it kind of fit the expectations the war handed the country.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Brenna:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you say that the mourning should have been more about the mourning itself rather than about the fashion. I feel like there was a lot of time spent during the war, trying to produce clothes and fashions fit for mourning instead of the actual mourning and taking the time to overcome what was going on. Yet perhaps maybe the production of fashion for mourning took their minds off of the actual mourning itself.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBoth men and women mourn the dead but as in all of soiciety women are almost all way more emotional than men. Or at least express thier emotions men keep it in and see expressing as a weakness. Also as Jonah said they didn't have time to mourn the had keep focused in the battle and staying alive. But the women were at home and had free time to feel sad. The author also stated that women are given a lot more time for mourning then men are.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Jonah,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you say that the soldiers didn't have time to look back at the dead. The soldiers didn't have time to mourn it would distract them an possibly get them killed. Also as you said they would have to always be wearing black because of the amounts of death they were exposed to and had to live with.
Women dressed in mourning far more than men because it was uncharacteristic for men to showcase their sense of loss for too long in these times. Men did show their grief because of it would be socially unacceptable. They would instead, after wearing mourning, carry tokens or items to remind themselves of their lost one. It appeared to the people of this time, that the men who lost someone should be better capable to handle grief than a woman. Considering that this war claimed 600,000 lives, everyone handled grief incredibly well. Sure there was a certain amount of grieving, but the fact that most people continued to press on in their lives shows how well they manage with their grief.
ReplyDeleteIt was rare that you would see a man dressed in mourn back in that time period because their mourning periods were shorter and kind of private. If I was a man back in that time period, and I had lost someone dear to me.. then my mourning period would be short also, but the person I lost would still be in my heart. Mourning all-in-all is more of a lady thing, like most of the time at funerals (for example) you would see mostly the women really hurt and crying. As I recall back in the book it stated that "boys were not allowed to cry".
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Steven,
"Women dressed in mourning far more than men because it was uncharacteristic for men to showcase their sense of loss for too long in these times".
Steven, that just made them more stronger indivuals to not showcase their sense of loss.
I think the men dressed in mourning far less than the women because the men were expected to be stronger. Also, the women were more dependent on the men than other men were. For example, if a women lost her husband, she would be in a much tougher spot than the same man's brother. I think that the Americans handled mourning very well, considering the amount of deaths that there were. If there were over 600,000 deaths in a war today, the mourning would last for an extremely long time.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Ryan:
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about men not really having a chance to look back and mourn as much. If they did mourn as long as the women, they would have spent the entire war in mourning, considering the amount of people that died. If the men would have mourned as much as the women, they wouldnt have been able to focus on the war as much.
In response to Kinsey Gonzales
ReplyDeleteYes I think it does seem that the men in this time didn’t show much emotion because it would be a display of weakness. But I think that people in this time just generally didn’t showcase emotion. I also think that because of the submissive role women played, they didn’t work as much as men did so they had all day to think about their lost one. Whereas the men had farm work and jobs to do which help them not dwell to long on their loss.
"The work of mourning was largly allocated to women," states page 148, on the subject of grieving. Women wore much more extensive funeral wear and spent much longer to grieve as a standard. Perhaps the cause of this was the sudden distance war put between mothers and sons, sisters and brothers, and wives and husbands. The separation war created was both emotional and physical. It is plausable that family could feel lonely without a man's presence. Thus, recieving information that this presence would never be around again could not only be heartbreaking, but torturous.
ReplyDeleteAs a rule, women hide their emotions much less than men, who, perhaps wrongfully, may hide greif behind indifference. However, in honor of their brothers, fathers, sons, and friends, men were know to wear "tokens of mourning" (pg 148) for fallen comrads. Costomarily, however, men's signs of grief ended before those of women.
Americans; men and women alike, may have found it easier to move on depending on their relationship with the dead. As states on page 148, it would seem that sisters or brothers mourned for the shortest amount of time, while wives morned for many years. However, as proven by a father who spend decades searching for information about his son (pg 134), family members mourned for long amounts of time despite the relationship with the deceased.
In response to Austin Parr,
ReplyDeleteI agree with just about everything you said about the grieving process and why women may have mourned for a longer period than men. However, I do not believe that women mourned because it was the latest trend. When a man is killed, I believe whats "in" is the least important thing in anyone's mind. It is of little relevance whether others grieve more or less than oneself. Therefore, I do not believe cultural pressure extended or increased the intensity of mourning in any way.
Men during the Civil War dress in mourning far less than women because in the 1800s women we not allowed to wear jeans so they were already dressed up. Men also didn't want to show their emotions for long amounts of time because it was unmanly. Women were more into the emotions. They would mourn for much longer than the men.
ReplyDeleteBoth men and women wore clothing that showed the loss of a loved one, but women often wore clothing of mourning. Women mourned more often than men because unlike men women were allowed to show their deep display of mourning because unlike men they were not fighting on the battle field, but instead were at home and mourned to show that they acknowledged their fallen kin in battle and sickness. I believe that Americans in the civil war handled the process of mourning a little extremely, because I don’t think that women should spend two and a half years of their lives mourning the loss of someone.
ReplyDeleteI think this comes down to how individuals mourn. And I guess that men didn’t need to mourn as much as the women did, or they just dealt with it in a different way. Also, if a man on the battlefront was showing that he was in mourning that would make him weak and there was no room for weak people. So I guess that since men had business to get done, like the war, they had no time to mourn, whereas all the women heard about was all the death.
ReplyDeleteBoth men and women grieved at death and mourned in their own ways, women typically dressed in all black, dressy clothing to show respect for the loss of a loved one and they felt more attatched to the individual emotionally. Men didn't, and stiil don't, really wear their emotions, instead they keep them to themselves more or less. i believe that it is more individual mourning rather than segregated mourning. Also, in my opinion, during the Civil War, mourning was handled similarly to the way it is handled now with the exception of clothing.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Gabby:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the men were the ones dying and the women were the ones mourning. Because most men were in the war back then and if they weren't then they would feel less respected and manly, if they dressed in mourning. But I don't know if I agree that the women tried to mourn the best they could because they didn't know how to possibly mourn for such a big loss because it has never happened before.