Slave men and women had a more egalitarian relationship than free white men and women. That is because slave men did not possess the power and authority of free men. So, power is inherently corrupting? At least, this is what Dill's description of gender relations in antebellum America suggest. I wish, as a professor of sociology, Dill could have made more direct relations with the present (describing history just for the sake of history is the job of historians). I also wish, she could have allotted as much space to the story of Chinese-Americans that she does to White, African-American, and Chicano families. But I still admired this essay because it powerfully tells how society often subjects women to double or triple burdens. In colonial and antebellum America, the society was racist. But nonwhite women bore a double...

As she explains, the harsh economic conditions forced nonwhite women to work in the occupations reserved for men, which means these women had to help their men in earning livelihood but also do the household chores. Moreover, it was considered immoral for women to enter the productive workforce. On the one hand, these women were forced into the productive workforce; on the other hand, they were chastised for entering it. How often do we remember that these women built America, that they were invisible founding mothers of the United States? And how often do we ponder about "our mothers' grief" and try to build a society that does not treat women in this manner today?
References

Andersen, M.L, & Collins, P.H. (2010) Race, Class & Gender: An Anthology, 7th Edition. Wadsworth Publishing.