That phrase seems vaguely familiar to me. I was a junior just last year (taking History of the Americas) and we used the text "The American Pageant." Were you in AP or IB classes? That might make a difference.

There wasn't really much about women's rights at ALL in our textbook; women were mostly mentioned as activists in moral movements (like prohibition and war protests). Thankfully though, we had an awesome teacher who spent a few days on the movement exclusively, including the history of birth control.

I don't recall any of my text books saying something like that but I do remember with clarity the "women in the box" phenomenon that seemed to be standard in my history textbooks. History was written by the winners & educated right, so it's typically been male dominated but then the authors of the text books go and put little tidbits about women in boxes so that we don't feel neglected. I think they did it for "minority" groups too. woohoo, we are no longer oppressed.

I was astonished that as a history major in college (a mere 3 years ago), women continued to be missing elements from the general curriculum. Women in the ancient history classes were particularly sparse. To make up for it, I usually chose a women-focused topic for my research papers when given the choice and decided to apply for an independent studies second major in women & gender studies (the year after I graduated they added it as an official major) so that I could learn more about what the hell women have done in the world!

Unfortunately, primary and secondary school textbooks are not only notoriously sexist, but racist, classist, pro-colonialist, heterosexist, and just about any other "ist" you can think of. (Remember those "special interest" boxes highlighting an African-American or female historical figure? As if women and people of color didn't have any place in the regular pages of your history textbook?) They also happen to be largely untruthful as well!

For a great deconstruction of how textbooks get history wrong, check out "Don't Know Much About History" by Kenneth Davis. Even better (if you have the time for a fatter book) is "A People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn.

I'm feeling thankful I didn't learn about the women's movements and civil rights movements from a textbook, just a grade school English teacher who I remember doing fair job at it. Only improvement could've been to have us make the conclusion that sexism and racism still exist today.
For now, it's great that there are uni courses that focus on the history of women but I kind of wish there wasn't a need and that "women's history" wasn't just a subject made for women who care to learn in in uni. Instead we're giving the impression that anything important in history is wars and politics and that was controlled mainly by men.

The special interest boxes you all mentioned were hilarious. As a woman, a child of immigrants, and a non-European, I was a triple threat; imagine how cool it was to see three boxes in a whole unit!

Here's what's not hilarious: judging from the texts I've looked at recently, the box/inset/sidebar version of "minority history" is still in force.

I hate that there must be "minority history." There is only history, as perceived by a multitude of different groups and interests. Texts that promote critical thinking and analysis also happen to be the ones that include a variety of perspectives--ethnic, class, gender, profession, geographical-- on the same historical events or issues.

I don't remember what the textbook said, but I do recall my 9th grade History teacher telling that to the class. I recall this as a not-so-subtle implication that women were (are?) too stupid and/or shallow to vote based on anything more substantial than a candidates looks, and isn't it a hoot how frivolous women are? Pissed me the fuck off. Wish I'd spoken up at the time, but my 'nads weren't so big back then. :P