Editorial: History months important, not enough for change

As our calendars flip from February to March, our country transitions from honoring one oppressed group to another.

Most people probably realize that February was Black History Month — fewer may know that March is Women’s History Month. Both of these months are designed to provide recognition for the contributions of historically marginalized groups.

But the stories of these people — and others, from groups that aren’t afforded their own chunks of the year — aren’t just sectioned off pieces of American history. It’s the whole narrative.

Leaning on symbolism does not make up for diminishing that fact.

Of the two, Women’s History Month’s precursor has existed the longest, with the first Women’s Day taking place on Feb. 28, 1909. Women’s Day grew into an international day of observance, before the National Women’s History Project pushed for expansion to a week in 1978. The Women’s National History Project successfully lobbied Congress in 1987 to pass a proclamation establishing Women’s History Month.

Black History Month’s roots reach back to 1926. Carter G. Woodson and the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History dubbed the second week of February, “Negro History Week.” In 1976, President Gerald Ford officially expanded the week into Black History Month.

While both provide an opportunity to appreciate and reflect upon the struggles these groups have faced, their expansion has not led to a better representation of those struggles in American culture.

Perusing a high school history textbook shows just how unbalanced the scale is. The women’s history we are supposed to be celebrating seems to start and end with the fight for suffrage.

Anissa Moore, a City Council member from Long Beach, New York, and a communications professor at Nassau Community College, expressed frustration with African-American representation in a guest column for the Long Island Herald Monday:

“My K-12 classroom experience never affirmed my racial and cultural background. I can vividly remember a picture of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on the back cover of my textbook. My rich history was mentioned with reference to the slaves during Civil War discussion. I was also told that George Washington Carver discovered numerous uses for the peanut.”

That this remains largely true is ironic, and disheartening, considering that Woodson started Negro History Week specifically to expand representation of black figures in public school systems.

As black artist Niv Acosta told Vice in February, “It’s sort of like black history for white people, or as told by the victor.”

Women’s Day similarly spread through schoolhouse celebrations, with an eye toward expanding awareness. On both fronts, our progress has stalled. According to 2014 research from Social Studies and the Young Learner, only 10 percent of figures highlighted in elementary school history textbooks were women, and just last October, major textbook publisher McGraw-Hill came under attack for calling slaves “workers” in its high school textbooks.

Pigeonholing accomplishments as accessories to our broader history — rather than integral to it — is unacceptable. Continuing to present unbalanced perspectives of history casts the stories of these groups as relevant only in relation to white men.

“Black history is American history,” actor Morgan Freeman told the Toronto Star in 2013.

These months are times to focus on how far we have come and look toward what is left. Both women and minorities continue to face systemic inequality, with no end in sight. Having months that shine a light on underrepresented people is important because it provides an opportunity to share cultural backgrounds and recognize the struggles of pioneers. But we must do more than pass this off as enough.

Instead of waving around a single calendar page, it’s time to rewrite our books.