It is surprising to me that the issue of women mountaineering is even an issue worth debating- in terms of how appropriate it is for them to do so. The article, “Wanting the Children and Wanting K2” was the most surprising to me. i suppose that Alison Hargreaves’ death was in 1995, and the cultural situation must have been different at that time, because the discourse seems to have an air of sexism that would not be appropriate or accepted today. Notions such as “Leaving children to go to work was merely one way a woman could earn the rap ‘terrible mother.'” (486 Frohlick) do not seem like they would be acceptable today. So apparently, the discourse has changed dramatically over the last decade, which is in itself a good thing. However, she constantly jumps eras and compares more modern ascents and adventures to Hargreaves’ experience, and the global discourse and reactions to her mountaineering. Regardless, my assumption is that there has been considerable breakthroughs in discourse concerning women’s freedom outside the household. Concepts like the “sacrificial mother” don’t seem appropriate in today’s discourse, and she seems to cross exam ideas from different times. Elaborating on this concept, I began to wonder what actually is the discourse today concerning motherhood and and what is appropriate for a mother in today’s America. My view is that women should be no more beholden to her children than a father, and I am curious if this is the dominating notion among American intellectuals.

To me the discourse on antiquated motherhood expectations seemed sexist and narrow-minded, and did not require much more inquiry. However, the issue of parenthood in general, and the appropriateness of taking risks as a parent, no matter your sex, is much more interesting. In fact, the risk associated with mountaineering can be viewed as very selfish towards the people who love you, children or not. Are the risks that mountaineers take, at times something to be condemned. Is our reward and satisfaction worth the risk of leaving someone deprived of a friend or even a parent? Of course the answer is subjective and case dependent, but it’s something worth discussing in class.

It does seem true though about Frohlick’s interpretations of mountaineering discourses. Climbing Mount Everest has been depicted as an adventure away from the normalcy of everyday life, a home away from a home, with women very infrequently being mentioned. is this because we’ve been reading old sources, or is this how it has been since time immemorial up till now? Adventurers such as Claude Kogan get an under appreciation simply because they’re female. It’s true that our bodies our shaped differently, and female stamina is supposedly higher than a males under many circumstances. Completely regardless of physicality, it is cultural notions that define these attitudes. I can comment anecdotally from my experience in the rock climbing community, that there is no such attitude against women in the sport. In terms of rock climbing, women are at a general physical disadvantage, but that only makes their feats more impressive, instead of somehow less appropriate. Kogan’s ascent of the three highest peaks in the world would be received very differently among Bozeman’s climbing community than how it was achieved back in her time. Are these accomplishments in discourse at all to be attributed to women’s accomplishments upon mountain-tops, or can they only be attributed to intellectuals and scholars back on the ground? My hope is that the continued success of female mountaineers has worked to chip away against the grind that oppressed their freedom to explore mountains.