We Not Like Them: Complex Economic Intergenerational Trauma (CEIT) and Black Women’s Economic Resistance

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Line 48: Does the author mean "The economy is not natural"? If the author means what is written, then "natural what"? Unless, this is an economic term I'm unaware of in that field. Maybe rethink the word natural, otherwise.

Line 60-67 was beautiful context to the ontological understanding of Black women and economics. Excellent job!

The next paragraph is a great use of Hartman's work and engages what became the Virginia Slave Codes. It may be helpful to explain how that 1662 statute. Note: "statute" is missing a t in line 74.

It is important and healthy citation practices to cite Indigenous scholarship whenever you discuss historical trauma.

First sentence beginning at line 83 is a central argument. The remaining part of the paper should explicate, clearly, how this has been overlooked. Further, the author should offer their epistemology for the field, with clear examples of how it's been done and how that was challenging and how it can be with possible recommendations. Give examples of ancestral capital. Demonstrate to the reader how the comparisons fail Black women's lived context. 

Be aware your CFIT framing seems to incorporate and/or borrow from Black Feminist principles and Womanist modalities. Citing appropriate scholars are necessary to these points. This is the scholarship of ancestral capital and deserves the appropriate citations. It may be helpful to mention that, or rather, give some context with appropriate citations. This was done at the end with Audre Lorde, but the work isn't cited.

The weathering literature is vast, but it is necessary to cite the seminal literature (e.g., Geronimus), based on the paragraph starting with line 142.

The Rogers quote at line 160 is unclear, based on the citation, which is inconsistent with others (missing year). 

The paragraph beginning at line 167 is good but needs historical references, especially around "lazy," "marginalization," and "financial capital," as well as the other words in quotes in the next line. This is essential to the scholarship. Citations are critical.

This is a wonderful framing and has so much potential. Tell the reader how past framing of Black women's economics have failed because of a lack of this type of Black Feminist/Womanist framing. Offer examples. This will greatly strengthen your argument and contribute even more to the literature. I look forward to citing this work.

 

 

 

Author Response

Thank you for the feedback. I have responded to your suggestions. 

 

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

What a wonderful and deeply important paper. Thank you for this work. Can't wait to see it in print.

Author Response

Thank you for the feedback. I have made the necessary changes. 

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am deeply interested in the concept of ancestral capital; yet there is much work to be done still in substantiating this contribution by connecting it to current literature.  

 

There needs to be citations referencing specific attacks the authors are discussing throughout the paper, but especially within the first section and the dicussion of the tenet of ancestral captial. For example, authors mention “These attacks are not new and have persisted since the 26 start of American democracy”, which I agree with, however, there needs to be some citations to the relevant literature to support these claims. Otherwise, they seem like abstract speculations. Further, the author should cite the names of the lineage they are referring to be clear that they are referencing Black women when discussing how “we have lived and thrived outside the workings of the United States economy […]”

 

Further, while I appreciate the author positioning themselves in solidarity and identifying as a Black women through the use of “we”, it would seem more natural if there were an intention positioning/ positionality statement that situates the authors within the piece.  It would also help readers understand the use of “we” as all readers will probably not identify as a Black woman as well.  It should also be noted that the author switches to third person in the second section in discussing (i.e., “Black women are a fundamental part of the economy, as it was shaped by their forced reproduction”). There should be intentionality and/or consistency in the person used throughout.

 

What is meant by “The economy is not a natural.” ?

 

The piece overall would benefit from the use of headers to guide the readers through the work. There is also need for greater explanation/ rooting the tenets of ancestral capital in the literature. There is significant Black feminist literature that discussing topics around each of these tenets. Also, there is no mention of a theoretical framing for this work. Further, given the previous work that has been done on each of the tenets, the author should weave qualitative data/ narrative to illustrate what makes they understanding of the topics unique to her conceptualization of ancestral capital. Literature on Black feminist thought, Black feminist epistemologies and or something that connect Black women’s theories to the economy would be appropriate here.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There as some grammatical concerns in the paper such as:

"The economy is not a natural. However, its design is often unquestioned."

"Comments such as: “The economy is failing” or “The 50 economy is acting up” is often used to shift responsibility from the humans who created 51 it, maintained it, and caused it to react in the way that it does."

Author Response

Thank you for the suggestions. I have included some necessary evidence as suggested.