|
1. Overall, how were female aviators treated
in the 1920s and '30s? How were all women defined during that era; what
were society's expectations for them?
2. Follow-up to Question 1: Did you find yourself becoming angry
as you read of the fly girls' treatment at the hand of males? Consider
the explanation about women crashing their planes (as did men): "Women
are lacking in certain qualities that men possess." Or consider the
debate about allowing women to fly while menstruating. What else did you
find demeaning? If you came of age before the woman's movement took hold
in the late 1960s and '70s, do any of those arguments sound familiar to
you?
3. Spend time talking about the women aviators. Of the five—Ruth
Nichols, Louise Thaden, Ruth Elder, Florence Klingensmith, and Amelia
Earhart—whose story most engaged you? Are some struggles more impressive
than others? Discuss the women's different backgrounds. Despite those
differences, however, what did they share in common?
4. The women were all connected in one way or another. Talk about their
relationships and the formation of the Ninety-Nines.
5. What was the state of aviation in the era between the two wars? Talk
about flight technology and the dangers all fliers faced.
6. When Louise Thaden became the first woman to win "The Powder Puff
Derby" (nice, huh?), Charles Lindbergh had little to say other than,
well... "I haven't anything to say about that." What is your reaction to
Lindbergh's response?
7. Author Keith O'Brien says of the fliers: "each of the women went
missing in her own way." Why does he make that observation, and what
does he mean by the word "missing" other than, like Amelia Earhart,
missing literally over the ocean? In what ways did the other fliers go
"missing."
8. In the New York Times Book Review, Nathalia Holt makes note of
the book's title, Fly Girls, pointing out that "girls" is an often
derogatory term used to equate serious, mature women with children. Do
you think O'Brien used the term "girls" without thinking (as well as the
fact that "girl" titles are a major publishing trend ?
Or maybe he meant the title ironically?
9. Holt also notices the way O'Brien describes the women's physical
attributes and the way their clothes drape their bodies or fit snugly.
She posits that the focus on women's appearances goes against the very
grain of the book. Is Holt overly sensitive …or has O'Brien fallen back
on a standard sexist trope? On the other hand, perhaps O'Brien is
providing the grainy details of good journalism—writing the same of
these women as he does of his male subjects (you know, how a man's suit
jacket drapes his torso).
10. How much has changed today for women? Clearly, females have been
accepted into jobs previously restricted to males. But what about the
choices women continue to struggle with regarding work and family? Has
that changed?
*Some questions from
LitLovers.
|
|