The traditional sociology narrative often overlooks the pivotal contributions of Jane Addams, Du Bois, and Ida B. Wells-Barnett due to gender and race biases entrenched in the discipline’s historical framework. The rationale behind this exclusion is that they pose radical ideas that challenge conventional social perspectives. Addams was dismissed because of her opposition to elitism and patriarchy; on the other hand, Du Bois and Wells-Barnett were subjected to marginalization based on their color. The exclusion of Jane Addams, Du Bois, and Ida B. Wells-Barnett from the traditional narrative of sociology stems from gender and race biases, hindering diverse perspectives essential for a comprehensive understanding of societal issues.
Jane Addams was excluded as a sociologist despite her contributions to sociology. Addams was an early sociologist who specialized in criticizing society’s economic structure and constraints imposed on women (Deegan 2017:2). Having been expelled from the arena of sociology, she was a renegade who denounced the basic assumptions of academic sociology, elitism, masculinity, and intelligence (Deegan 2017:.8). Unconventionally, her radical approach aimed to deviate from the standard way to go for the discipline.
Moreover, a widespread misinterpretation of Jane Addams’ work added to the complexity of her exclusion from the field of sociology. Such confusion that would be caused concerning her concepts would later make it easy for her to find herself among the margins of sociology. Her non-conformist views did not entirely explain this exclusion, fueled by gender bias. After all, according to Deagan (2017:8), “Sociology was a sex-segregated system.” It is worth noting that this was a regrettable oversight of her invaluable contributions. Hence, she was excluded because of her differing views and her sex.
Conversely, W.E.B. Du Bois found himself marginalized within the field of sociology. He faced exclusion based on his racial background and ideological perspectives. Such treatment was based on the color of his skin by most of the academic and intellectual circles in America, including sociologists (Morris 2015:24). Du Bois’s views of race made him more distant from his white contemporaries. Besides, his ideas did not conform to the dominant theoretical stance of sociology. Du Bois argued that “…there were no universal laws that governed the behaviors of humans” (Morris 2015:27). Du Bois had to contend with opposition within the sociology academia for two reasons: one was because of their race, while another was because he held unconventional opinions, unlike others.
On the other hand, Ida B. Wells-Barnett was left out of the first sociology narrative due to her ideas and racial profile. She was mostly excluded due to her being very vocal against the vice of lynching, and she had also fallen apart with white sociologists (Lengermann and Gillian 2006:20). She touched on lynching, a common practice against black offenders, which white sociologists highly supported. Ida B. Wells-Barnett faced exclusion as a minority due to her gender and race, navigating a system that was both segregated and biased against blacks.
Moreover, Lengermann and Gillian (2006:9-11) present compelling evidence reinforcing the rationale for excluding specific authors. Female scholars in a sociology context became sidelined, and their essential contributions were minimized. Lengermann and Gillian (2006:10) assert that despite the critical contributions of female scholars in sociology and social theory, intentional sidelining occurred for figures like Jane Addams and Ida B. Wells-Barnett. Soon, their presence faded away in the discipline with their existence. In addition, Deegan (2017:3) asserts that for Jane Addams, “…her authorship of great works has been obliterated from the annals of the discipline, and many of her ideas were only selectively used, thereby distorting them.” Thus, this exclusion, marginalization, and denial of women sociologists led to diminishing credits attached to the significant contributions of feminist scholars.
Furthermore, Addams’ noteworthy contribution, “Hull House Maps and Papers,” has been overshadowed and erased from the discipline’s historical accounts (Deegan 2017:55). Initially, she was considered one of the recognized leaders in the sociological community. However, her academic attainments were later excluded from the history records (Deegan 2017:2; Lengermann and Gillian 2006:3). Hence, the discipline should revisit and acknowledge Addams’ significant work, ensuring her legacy receives the recognition it deserves.
However, while Jane Addams and Ida B. Wells-Barnett faced visibility challenges, W.E.B. Du Bois and other male African-American scholars grappled with a sense of invisibility (Lengermann & Gillian, 2006). According to Morris (2015:23), “Du Bois was not invited or consulted in the Congress to chart new directions for sociology,” showing his marginalization and, therefore, invisibility.” The lack of invitation or consultation showcases Du Bois’s invisibility and marginalization within the discipline.
Despite their exclusion as scholars in sociology, Jane Addams, Du Bois, and Ida B. Wells-Barnett have made positive contributions to the discipline through their works on race, feminism, and justice. Jane Addams is a prominent social theorist presenting her radical ideas who, according to Deagan (2017:14), “…interpreted American life, its heritage, and values”. Her works, such as “Respect for the Law,” are against patriarchy, particularly the chivalry related to it, and call for upholding laws for everyone alike (Addams 1901:3). Ida B. Wells-Barnett also contributed greatly to the discipline of sociology through her scholarly writings, particularly “the major analysis of lynching” (Lengermann and Gillian 2006: 4). In her work “Lynching and the Excuse for it,” Wells-Barnett vehemently opposes lynching, emphasizing ‘race prejudice’ and its detrimental impact on black lives, while advocating for justice (3-4). In collaboration with Cooper, she also created a genuine “American non-Marxian conflict theory” (Lengermann and Gillian 2006:5).
In addition, Du Bois also contributed significantly to the discipline of sociology. Du Bois founded scientific sociology in the United States (Morris 2015:16). According to Morris (2015:22), he also used “empirical research and data to discredit popular sociological beliefs about blacks, which stuck them to the bottom of civilization.” He created a sociology of race different from popular beliefs. He rejected social Darwinism, which was used to place blacks at the bottom of the social hierarchy (Morris 2015:26). Jane Addams, Du Bois, and Ida B. Wells-Barnett made significant contributions to sociology through scholarly writings on feminism, lynching, and race.
In response to the exclusion, it is essential to recover them and their perspectives as they provide a different point of view on sociological matters and tackle critical societal issues. A scholar like Jane Addams and her perspectives are linked to sociological research, social theory, and social reform (Lengermann and Niebrugge 2006:228). As Lengermann and Niebrugge (2006:229) state, Adam and other women in the Chicago Women’s School of Sociology “…formed a network for action and reform and can find use in the current feminism scholarship and reforms.” Addams’s work can thus bring social reforms and call for gender equality, making recovery vital.
Besides, African American scholars such as Ida B. Wells-Barnett and Du-Bois contribute to race theory and racial reforms through their sociological perspectives. Classical sociological perspectives and approaches such as Marxism do not touch on essential aspects of feminism and race, instead focusing on wage labor and capital (McIntosh 1997:48). It is necessary to recover the excluded scholars and their perspectives as they bring in different, more radical ideas that have not been given much attention yet can explain major societal problems.
I believeRecognizing and rectifying the exclusion of scholars like Jane Addams, Du Bois, and Ida B. Wells-Barnett is crucial for fostering a more inclusive and nuanced understanding of sociology. In contemporary society, overlooking diverse perspectives may reinforce biased viewpoints, hindering overall societal progress. For instance, modern movements such as black lives matter or feminist agendas indicate the need to involve different ideas in addressing structural problems. Through re-exploring the excluded scholars and bringing them on board within the Sociological theory, individuals can build a holistic perspective of society and eliminate biases that have been part of history.
Critics argue that Addams, Du Bois, and Wells-Barnett did not align with the foundational principles of sociology, pointing to their non-conformist ideas. For instance, Addams’ pacifist views during the aftermath of World War I contradicted the prevailing patriotic sentiments, and her opposition to elitism, patriarchy, and intellectualism challenged the core tenets of sociology (Deagan 2017:6, 8). Similarly, Du Bois’s rejection of the notion of universal laws governing human behavior set him apart from most scholars, and Wells-Barnett’s vocal stance against lynching diverged from the consensus that viewed it as a deterrent to crime. From this perspective, the exclusion of these scholars could be a consequence of their non-conformist ideas, which challenged the foundational beliefs of sociology.
However, this critique overlooks the substantial contributions made by these scholars to feminism, racial theory, and social justice, offering alternative perspectives that enrich the sociological discourse (Lengermann and Niebrugge 2006:229). Though their ideas strayed away from what was acceptable as far as the sociology theory was concerned, one has to acknowledge that all disciplines move on with time. Excluding such scholars may reflect the hegemonic frameworks and views common in those eras. In hindsight, their non-conformity may be viewed as a strength, challenging the discipline to broaden its scope and address critical societal issues often neglected.
In addition, contemporary movements such as Black Lives Matter and feminist agendas underscore the ongoing relevance of the perspectives offered by Addams, Du Bois, and Wells-Barnett. This neglect might affect future sociologists by hindering their abilities to build on existing frameworks of understanding sociology through an inclusive perspective relevant to a broader range of social issues. Recognizing the value of diverse perspectives, even those challenging the status quo is crucial for sociology’s continued growth and relevance in a rapidly changing world.
In revisiting the overlooked legacies of Jane Addams, Du Bois, and Ida B. Wells-Barnett, it becomes evident that their exclusion from the annals of sociology was not a mere historical oversight but a reflection of deeply ingrained biases. This paper has discussed that gender, race, and tradition contributed significantly towards relegating these thinkers’ contributions to oblivion. Recovering the perspectives of these scholars is not merely an act of historical correction; it is an urgent call to enrich sociology with diverse viewpoints. These individuals draw upon their experiences as well as their understandings of feminism, race theory, and social change that are influenced by unique interactions between their identities. Excluding their voice becomes more than a mistake about historical truth; it also stands as an obstacle to subjectivist sociology. It is crucial to recognize that it goes beyond academic rectification. Rather, it should be seen as an essential part of generating a subjectivist sociology representing varied human experiences in society for long. These walls that served historically to prevent many of us from seeing through the social world must crumble. Addams, Du Bois, and Wells-Barnett have provided some valuable lessons that extend beyond those pages of history and relate to current societal events. In today’s world, where movements like Black Lives Matter and feminist agendas strive for justice and equality, including these diverse perspectives becomes even more pertinent.
References
Addams, J. (1901) Respect for law. ProQuest.
Deegan, M. J. (2017). Jane Addams and the men of the Chicago School, 1892-1918. Routledge.
Lengermann, P. M., and Niebrugge, G. (2006). The women founders: Sociology and social theory 1830–1930, a Text/Reader. Waveland Press.
McIntosh, I. (Ed.). (1997). Classical sociological theory: A reader. NYU Press.
Morris, A. (2015). The scholar denied WEB Du Bois and the birth of modern sociology—University of California Press.
Wells-Barnett, I. B (1901). Lynching and the Excuse for it. ProQuest.
write