¶ 11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 however to stay in prehistory would be a mistake women is not a “transhistroical creature” she is marked by specificities constructed by history, such as class and race
¶ 13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 they then shift to a chornological explanation of how the “caste” concept has function for women in history as opposed to in women’s history highlighting the limitaitons of this perspective for women as a group. This allows them to lead into a criticism of latter day proponents of women as caste who erroneously assume that women, “because their hands are clean from the blood profit and power with which men have ruled the world” will “make the revolution.” In this gloss on what sounds a lot like V. Woolf in the three guineas, the authors conclude that this positions women as “outside of history” and tht the entry into histoy will come from that outsider status. (sameness v difference argument here). The foundation of the view of women as a caste is a belif in their shared oopression. While the authors acknowledge the oppression of women, they desire greater historical specificity “oppression has mean different hings at different times to different groups ad classes of women” as their example of the black slave and the white mistress makes clear.