The author of the primary source, “Native Life in a Johannesburg Slum Yard”, Ellen Hellmann, was a white woman who lived in Johannesburg, South Africa, during the early 1900s. She was married to a man who worked as a doctor in a local slum yard. Hellmann was an educated woman interested in the lives of the people in the slum yard. Her husband allowed her to conduct research in the slum yard, and she interviewed many of the residents.
Hellmann’s positionality regarding race, gender, and science was influenced by her ideologies, political views, and socioeconomic status. She was a white woman living in a time and place where white people held much power and privilege. Her husband’s occupation as a doctor also gave her a particular benefit. Hellmann’s (1935) views on race were shaped by the racist ideologies of the time, which saw black people as inferior to white people. She notes that women in Johannesburg are not allowed to vote and are expected to conform to strict social norms around gender roles and behaviors.
Hellmann’s views on race are shaped by her experiences growing up in a segregated society. She notes that the whites in Johannesburg live in “a world apart” from the black population and that there is little interaction between the two groups. Hellmann (1935) expresses surprise at the level of poverty and squalor in the black slum yards, and her attitudes towards the black population are paternalistic and condescending. For example, she notes that the black women in the slum yards are “ignorant” and “lack initiative” and that they are “content to lead a hand-to-mouth existence.”
Hellmann expresses surprise at the freedom and independence she experiences as a white woman in Johannesburg. The patriarchal society shaped her views on the gender she lived in, which saw men as the head of the household and women as subservient to men. Her attitudes towards the black women in the slum yards are condescending and sexist. For example, she notes that the black women in the slum yards are “content to lead a hand-to-mouth existence” and that they “lack initiative”.
Her experiences shape Hellmann’s views on science as a white woman in colonial society. She notes that white men dominate the scientific community in Johannesburg and that there is little interest in studying African cultures and societies. Hellmann’s (1935) attitudes towards science are colonialist and Eurocentric. For example, she notes that the black population in the slum yards is “ignorant” and that they lack “scientific knowledge.”
The journal was aimed at an academic audience, and the impact of the primary source would have been local, national, and global/transnational. At a local level, the primary source would have impacted how white people in Johannesburg thought about the black population. It would have also helped to reinforce the segregation between the two groups. At a national level, the primary source would have impacted how white people in South Africa thought about the black population. It would have also helped to reinforce the segregation between the two groups (Edwards, 2020). At a global/transnational level, the primary source would have impacted how people in other countries thought about the black population in South Africa. It would have also helped to reinforce the segregation between the two groups.
Class impacted global perspectives about “proper” gender and sexuality expression by shaping the way people thought about the role of women in society. For example, upper-class women were generally seen as more “proper” and “decorous” than lower-class women. On the other hand, color influenced “proper” gender and sexuality expression by shaping the way people thought about the role of women of color in society. For instance, white women were generally seen as being more “proper” and “decorous” than women of color (Edwards, 2020). Furthermore, the global view on race impacted women’s role in society. Black women were generally seen as more “promiscuous” and “sexual” than white women.
The use of sex and gender to define scientific hierarchies of class, color, and race globally can be seen in how these concepts are used to justify discrimination and oppression. In the United States, for example, race has long been used as a scientific justification for discrimination against black people. In South Africa, the idea of racial purity has been used to justify the apartheid system (Prichard, 2019). When it comes to the Caribbean, the concept of white supremacy has been used to justify the slave trade and colonization.
All of these examples show how sex and gender have been used to create hierarchies that oppress and discriminate against certain groups of people (Prichard, 2019). These hierarchies are based on the false idea that one group of people is superior to another. This is not only untrue, but it also leads to discrimination and violence. Using sex and gender to define scientific hierarchies is a way of justifying this discrimination and violence. It is important to challenge these hierarchies to create a more just and equal world.
References
Hellmann, Ellen. 1935. “Native Life in a Johannesburg Slum Yard.” Africa: Journal of the International African Institute 8 (1): 34–62.
Edwards, Zophia. “Applying the Black Radical Tradition: Class, Race, and a New Foundation for Studies of Development.” Political Power and Social Theory, 2020, 155–83.
Prichard, Robin. “From Color-Blind to Color-Conscious.” Journal of Dance Education 19, no. 4 (2019): 168–77.