Abstract
Recent studies of feminist networks in the British Empire have highlighted the difficulties of reconciling universal claims of sisterhood with competing hierarchical categories of race, class and nation. Although the discourse of ‘imperial feminism’ which emerged in Britain in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries projected womanhood as a common basis of oppression and source of empowerment, many scholars have argued that British women’s reform movements legitimized the ‘civilizing mission’ through the oppositional image of non-white and working-class woman’s degradation, by claiming that only fellow women could rescue their sisters from the Indian zenana or the East End slum.1 Since feminists, philanthropists and missionaries could only establish their own authority outside the home by casting British womanhood against the uncivilized female ‘other’, white, middle-class women won their own emancipation at the expense of their ‘heathen’ sisters, preventing any real possibility of partnership between them. Scholars of gender and empire have thus underscored how these missions of sisterhood established a divisive legacy of British women ‘speaking for’, rather than with, non-Western women.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Mothers Union Journal (MUJ), March 1930, 15. See also D. Marshall, Around the World in 100 Years: A History of the Work of the Mothers’ Union Overseas (London: Mothers’ Union, 1977).
See A. Davin, ‘Imperialism and Motherhood’, History Workshop Journal, V (1978) 9–66; C. Summers, ‘Intimate Colonialism: The Imperial Production of Reproduction in Uganda, 1907–1925’, Signs, XVI (1991) 787–807.
Maude to Gertrude King, 13 November 1912, MU/OS/005/13/08. In 1913, the Central Council in London passed the resolution that (1) ‘as a result of experience … Native Branches should be run on a communicant basis’, and that (2) divorce would disqualify any potential or standing member from MU membership, ‘even if the disciplinary laws of the Church admitted her to Communion at the end of an interval of years.’ In conveying this development to Bishop King, the central secretary added that ‘the passing of this minute was really due to the example set by Madagascar’. Maude to George King, 13 March 1914, MU/OS/005/13/08; see also Violet B. Lancaster, A Short History of the Mothers’ Union (London: Mothers’ Union, 1958), p. 119.
Further reading
Allman, J., S. Geiger, and N. Musisi, eds. Women in African Colonial Histories. (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2002).
Bowie, F., D. Kirkwood, and S. Ardener, eds. Women and Missions: Past and Present, Anthropological and Historical Perspectives (Oxford: Berg, 1993).
Burton, A. M. Burdens of History: British Feminists, Indian Women, and Imperial Culture, 1865–1915 (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1994).
Francis-Dehqani, G. Religious Feminism in an Age of Empire: CMS Women Missionaries in Iran, 1869–1934 (Bristol: Center for Comparative Studies in Religion and Gender, 2000).
Huber, M. T. and N. C. Lutkehaus, eds. Gendered Missions: Women and Men in Missionary Discourse and Practice (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1999).
Levine, P., ed. Gender and Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004).
Midgley, C., ed. Gender and Imperialism (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998).
Morgan, S., ed. Women, Religion, and Feminism in Britain, 1750–1900 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002).
Semple, R. A. Missionary Women: Gender, Professionalism, and the Victorian Idea of Christian Mission (Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, 2003).
Strobel, M. and N. Chaudhuri, eds. Western Women and Imperialism: Complicity and Resistance (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1992).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2008 Elizabeth E. Prevost
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Prevost, E.E. (2008). From African Missions to Global Sisterhood: The Mothers’ Union and Colonial Christianity, 1900–1930. In: Carey, H.M. (eds) Empires of Religion. Cambridge Imperial and Post-Colonial Studies Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230228726_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230228726_12
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-30262-8
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-22872-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)