Answer:
A) In The Bonds of Womanhood: “Woman’s Sphere” in New England, 1780–1835, Nancy Scott explains that the Industrial Revolution did in fact provide more economic opportunities to women in the 1830s. She supported this claim with facts such as how "new textile factories recruited a primarily female labor force," and "substantial numbers of young women left home to live and work with peers." She also explained how women participated in industrial strikes and entered a variety of reform movements.
In “The Lady and the Mill Girl: Changes in the Status of Women in the Age of Jackson”, Gerda Lerner explains that the Industrial Revolution did not provide more economic opportunities for women in the 1830s. Lerner explains that in the colonial era, women were expected to be self supporting and to work, but after the American Revolution, women were "by tacit concensus, excluded from the new democracy." She states that while women did benefit from increasing urbanization, their role an an economic and political society deteriorated. She even states that work for women during this time period was not only disapproved of, but condemned.
B) I feel that Nancy Scott has a stronger argument with stronger supporting evidence. Many of the claims made by Gerda Lerner were quite vague, and did not have many specific historical events to support them. Meanwhile, Scott supports her claim with historical events such as how strikes and reform movements occurred in which women could partake in.
Explanation: I apologize for how bad this is. I'm really sleep deprived right now, so I really didn't have the energy to put more effort into this. I still figured that I would post it here in case anyone finds it useful. Have a nice day :)
