A Women’s Place is NOW Everywhere

     Chapters 18 through the Epilogue, of Gail Collins’ America’s Women, cover the “evolution” of women from the 1950s to the 1970s.  Women seemed to gain some freedom and independence in the first half of the twentieth century, but lost traction in the 1950s.  After World War II, returning veterans replaced women in the workforce and sent them back to the home.  The economy was still booming and, due to generous governmental benefits for veterans, couples were able to marry, have children, and purchase a home in suburbia; experiencing all this at a much younger age.  The role of women suffered a transition back to wife, mother, and homemaker.  As the decade went on, television communicated the tightening of gender roles and McCarthyism stifled any efforts towards social progress for women.  The cultural and social revolution was slow to arrive, but when it did it was with a vengeance.  With the publication of Sex and the Single Girl, which approved of sex prior to marriage, and The Feminine Mystique, which urged married women to work outside the home, there was a huge shift towards liberating women.  With the governmental benefits of the 1950s and the new legislation and political turmoil of the Vietnam War during the 1960s and 1970s, women’s roles were primarily influenced by political factors over this 30 year period.     

   

  World War II was instrumental in jump starting the economy out of the Depression in the early 1940s.  With men called to duty to serve in the military, Government propaganda began marketing to women to fill positions formerly worked by men.  Due to the severe shortage of workers in the defense companies, women of all color were called upon to join the workforce in high numbers.  The defense workplace offered women economic opportunities and improved social status.  This new status didn’t last long.  After the war, women were let go to open up positions for the returning veterans and once again told their place was in the home where they were expected to “cheerfully sacrifice their intellectual and occupational aspirations for the more satisfying achievement of getting a husband and helping him to succeed.”[1]  The post war economy continued to be strong and the government offered generous benefits to returning veterans, making it “possible for very young couples to marry while the husband was still in school, buy a house without any savings, have several babies right away, and continually ratchet up their standard of living.”[2] Political factors such as the GI Bill and the VA loan created financial opportunities for this generation that were unprecedented and set the stage for the economic and cultural changes of the 1950s. 

     The 1950s was a cornucopia of economic and cultural changes.  The American Dream became a reality for the 60 percent of middle-class families who were able to purchase their own home in Suburbia, USA.[3]  Housekeeping became easier for women with the invention of the automatic washing machine and dryer, frost-free refrigerators, and dishwashers.[4]  The television became a critical addition to American homes and considered “the single greatest cultural influence of the postwar era.”[5]  Consumerism was promoted with advertisements for bigger and better appliances and gender roles were simulated by TV families such as the Cleavers in Leave It to Beaver and comedies such as I Love Lucy. While abortions were easier prewar, the 1950s made it more difficult for women; forcing them to obtain illegal abortions by untrained individuals. 

     Senator Joseph McCarthy was a political force in the 1950s who terrorized and frightened the American people.  So widespread were his accusations of Communism that people were in fear of being different.  Societal pressures of McCarthyism forced women into silence and helpless conformity.  Margaret Chase Smith, a Republican Senator from Maine, told the Senate:  “Freedom of speech is not what it used to be in America, it has been so abused by some that it is not exercised by others.”[6]     

    Civil rights groups were forming and tensions accelerating when in 1955 women were ready to take on the bus system by organizing a boycott. The Women’s Political Council called for a one-day boycott of the city buses as a result of the arrest of Rosa Parks for not relinquishing her seat so a white person could have it.  The boycott ended up lasting a year.[7]  Many African American women fought discrimination and suffered violent consequences as a result of their courage.

     The FDA approval of the first contraceptive pill was probably the most significant and influential factors in the liberation of women.  The pill allowed women to have the same sexual freedom as men.  “Things still might have moved more slowly if the civil rights movement had not sensitized people to issues of fair play and even handedness.”[8]   Gloria Steinem’s first magazine article, “The Moral Disarmament of Betty Coed,” in 1962 shared women’s rejection of sexual discrimination with letting the world know that “nice girls do.”[9] The subsequent publications of Sex and the Single Girl and Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique, paved the way for both feminism and the women’s movement.  Women were hearing a different message and on the brink of substantial social change.

     “For young middle-class whites, the core of American political and cultural activity in the later sixties and early seventies was the war in Vietnam.”[10] The growing opposition to the war led to conflict with political leaders and authority in general.  “Anti-draft protesters marched with signs that announced ‘Girls say yes to men who say no.’”[11]      This highly publicized political rebellion helped to test the possibilities of “women’s right to all the chances for careers, adventures, and choice that men had.”[12]

      Political, economic, and cultural factors have influenced women’s role to varying degrees during the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s.  The booming economy of the 1950s would not have been so robust without a social system based on individual rights and free-market.  With the governmental support of capitalism, free enterprise, and freedom of speech (other than the McCarthy years); women have slowly moved forward to achieving legal equality and a well-earned social and cultural respect.  “The nation had accepted a radical new view of women’s place:  that it was everywhere.”[13]    

---

[1] Stephanie Coontz, A Strange Stirring:  The Feminine Mystique and AMERICAN WOMEN at the DAWN of the 1960s (New York, NY: Basic Books, 2012), 112.

[2] Gail Collins, America's Women: 400 Years of Dolls, Drudges, Helpmates, and Heroines. (New York: HarperCollins, 2003), 399.

[3] Collins. America’s Women. 399.

[4] Collins. America’s Women. 403.

[5] Collins. America’s Women. 410.

[6] Collins. America’s Women. 413.

[7] Collins. America’s Women. 417.

[8] Collins. America’s Women. 425.

[9] Collins. America’s Women. 425.

[10] Collins. America’s Women. 429.

[11] Collins. America’s Women. 427.

[12] Collins. America’s Women. 444.

[13] Collins. America’s Women. 447.

Increasingly Incidental

     In her book A Strange Stirring, Stephanie Coontz evaluates the controversy and intense reaction to the 1963 best seller The Feminine Mystique, by Betty Friedan.  Coontz reviewed countless letters to Friedan from readers of The Feminine Mystique, conducted numerous interviews and surveys, and completed extensive research of the era to determine and explain why Friedan’s book inspired and transformed so many American women.  In 1963 the normal woman was considered to be one who was happy in her role as wife, mother, and homemaker.  Any woman who did not feel fulfilled in this role was considered crazy and “clearly not normal.”[1]  The Feminine Mystique was more important to the intellectual and emotional level of women at the time of its publication, due to the dissatisfaction and extreme hopelessness experienced by this generation.

     A Strange Stirring takes us through the history and evolution of women from winning the right to vote in the 1920s and entering the workforce in the 1940s, to their loss of individual identity and a life limited to marriage and motherhood in the 1950s and early 1960s. After gaining an education and experiencing opportunities in the world of work, women were abruptly sent back into the home where they were expected to “cheerfully sacrifice their intellectual and occupational aspirations for the more satisfying achievement of getting a husband and helping   him to succeed.”[2]  Societal expectations dictated the role of the husband to be the breadwinner and the role of the wife to be the stay-at-home mother and homemaker.  “After World War II, the image of the American woman as a changing, growing individual in a changing world was shattered.  Her limitless world shrunk to the cozy walls of home.”[3]  The tightening of gender roles were perpetuated by the booming economy and validated by Freudian psychiatrists, educators, sociologists, women’s magazines and television.  The role of wife and mother was acted out daily on television by June Cleaver and Harriet Nelson, showing American families just how happy and content life should be.[4]  Women were considered at fault or inadequate if they were not happy as full-time housewives.  Strong societal pressures manipulated and forced women into a “helpless conformity.”[5] After a decade of women becoming “increasingly incidental,” it was perfect timing for Friedan to awaken women to the source of “the problem with no name” and help them to reclaim their lives by fulfilling their potential in life.  The problem was the societal role expectations of women which Friedan named the “feminine mystique.” 

     In 1963 women had very little legal rights within a marriage other than the right to be properly supported by her husband and her obligation to take care of the children and home.  The legal definitions of the law seemed to error on the side of the man.  Women were second-class citizens with little control or voice over the social and political injustices towards them.  The prevailing ideology for this generation was for women to get married and discard their own dreams and interests for the benefit of their husbands.  “Beneath the daily routines and surface contentment of most housewives’ lives lay a deep well of insecurity, self-doubt, and unhappiness that they could not articulate even to themselves.”[6]  Their life was much better than their parents and they didn’t have to work, so they felt guilty over the emptiness they were experiencing as housewives and helpless to change their situation.  Women were required to stifle their feelings of inadequacy and suffer alone; assuming they were the problem.  Stay-at-home wives were in a terrible state of mind when Betty Friedan first introduced The Feminine Mystique; giving these women the support, acceptance, and challenge they were looking for and greatly needed.

 

     Besides giving their problem a name, Friedan was able to help women understand their feelings and realize they were not crazy as suggested by their Freudian psychiatrists.  More importantly Friedan let these women know they were not alone in their feelings of hopelessness and guilt. One woman wrote that she was so depressed that she went to see a psychiatrist who told her she should be ashamed of herself.  She believed that, if not for Friedan’s book, she would have killed herself.[7]  Another woman wrote that she was relieved to find out she wasn’t crazy.  And yet another stated she had been seeing a psychiatrist for eight months with no success.  After reading the book she sent him a copy with a note telling him to “read it before he ever again told a woman that all she needed was to come to terms with her ‘feminine nature.’”[8]  Similar stories kept appearing that demonstrated the magnitude of the problem and the difference this book made in so many lives.  Most of the women interviewed by Coontz “started seeing their anxiety as a legitimate social grievance rather than an individual problem.  This insight gave them the courage to pursue their dreams.”[9] 

           While biased towards white, educated, middle-class women, The Feminine Mystique’s support of a woman’s right to work benefited all women; working-class, middle-class, black and white.[10]  Friedan focused on this class of privileged women for a couple of reasons.  First, Friedan herself was in this demographic and experienced the same frustrations and struggles as her audience.  She portrayed herself as a helpless conformer who was unhappy in her role and, therefore, could best identify with this audience and they could identify with her.  Secondly, since this group of privileged women experienced “more” in life prior to marriage they were most likely to be impacted by the “problem with no name.”  Their education and subsequent job experience made it hard to settle down and give up their intellectual and occupational aspirations.  This group tended to be the unhappiest about their situation and felt the most guilt as a result of their privileged life style; they had the choice to work or not.  Working-class women did not have a choice.  It took two incomes to survive and pay the bills.  However, working class women also experienced feelings of hopelessness and embraced The Feminine Mystique calling it “the most factual true book” and looking forward to more in life.[11]  Friedan spoke to all women by rejecting the view that women who worked or pursued an education would be harming their marriage or their children.[12] 

   Betty Friedan touched millions of women with her book. She was instrumental in rerouting attitudes and breaking down barriers that kept women from achieving their full potential in life.  In the years following the publication of The Feminine Mystique, the feminine movement began gaining traction once again.  While women of today are still plagued by discrimination, there are more choices afforded them in regards to employment and education opportunities.  Many of the issues outlined in the book are now socially acceptable.  For that reason, The Feminine Mystique appears outdated and insignificant by today’s standards.  Women have greater self-confidence and self-esteem to challenge mediocrity and reject any stereotypes of femininity.

    

---

[1] Stephanie Coontz, A Strange Stirring:  The Feminine Mystique and AMERICAN WOMEN at the DAWN of the 1960s (New York, NY: Basic Books, 2012), 69.

[2] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 112.

[3] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 36.

[4] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 22.

[5] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 37.

[6] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 18.

[7] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 83.

[8] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 81.

[9] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 85.

[10] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 138.

[11] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 105.

[12] Coontz, A Strange Stirring, 33.

Racially Ambiguous

     There’s no question that World War II was a catalyst for the cultural reform of all women in America.  Employment opportunities in the defense industry were unprecedented and drove the exponential increase of women in the workplace during this period of time.  Our historical readings about women in America have thus far been predominantly about white American women with some references to the greater hardships and discrimination of African American women. Very little has been covered about the experiences of Mexican American Women besides referencing them as the “other” minority.  In From Coveralls to Zoot Suits, Elizabeth R. Escobedo attempts to broaden our understanding of the experiences and contributions of Mexican American women during this liberating wartime era.  Using several archival sources and interviews from second generation women, Escobedo paints a picture of how Mexican American women dealt with both the opportunity and conflict of the wartime environment.[1]  Escobedo follows the transformation of Mexican American women as they challenge the social and cultural norms of family and society to establish a new identity for themselves; ultimately helping to shift the gender and racial ideologies in America.

     As a result of the war, defense companies were experiencing labor shortages and they increasingly had to broaden their recruiting efforts to include women of color.  Escobedo focuses primarily on Los Angeles due to its rapid industrial growth and the subsequent migration of workers to the area.  Los Angeles became a multi-cultural melting pot that included a large Mexican American population.  Labor shortages were so severe in 1942 that a predominantly Euro-American male workforce was transformed virtually overnight to an “Americans All” workforce.[2]  The “American All” campaign was developed by Federal agencies to draw more women of color, especially Mexican women, into the labor market by fostering an environment of racial harmony and home-front unity.[3] Federal leaders called on the media to assist with their efforts of portraying positive images of Mexicans and recognizing diversity and cultural tolerance.  In support of the war effort, the campaign marketed “nation over race” as a form of patriotism.

     The L.A. newspapers were in the habit of sensationalizing crime stories that reflected poorly on Mexican Americans.  In many cases young Mexican Americans, clad in zoot suits, were falsely accused of criminal activities based on their dress and behavior.  Mexican American women adorned zoot suits “as a way to challenge ideas of respectability and to assert a distinctive identity.”[4]  In many ways, the female “zoot suiters” or “pachucas” resemble the flappers of the 1920s.  In both cases “the underlying impulse was freedom – from the mores of the past that required women to keep themselves in check, physically and emotionally.”[5] However, while the flappers were considered fun, strong, and free to enjoy themselves, the pachucas were considered defiant and associated with gang membership and delinquency and wrongly represented as such by the press.  Most of the Mexican American women simply liked the fashion style of the pachuca persona and considered it adventurous and liberating like the flappers.  While supported federally with the “American All” campaign, the local negative press was troubling to Mexican American women and they began to protest and request retractions of negative generalizations and false statements.  Their “contributions to wartime state gave them legitimacy to raise concerns about the effects of negative press on troop and civilian morale.”[6]  

     It was on the defense production lines that Mexican American women gained national recognition.  As mentioned earlier, the labor shortages created an opportunity for Mexican American women to fill positions, gain work-related experience and skills, and earn higher wages that improved their quality of life.  The Office of War Information (OWI) hired Ignacio Lopez as its Chief of Cultural Affairs to help fully integrate Mexican Americans in the workplace and recognize their special contributions through photographic depictions along with a series of “These Are Americans” radio shows.  This media campaign was meant to depict Mexican Americans favorably, call for acceptance and tolerance, and embrace young women of Mexican descent as Americans.  

     Why the focus on Mexican American Women when there were many other minorities in the workplace during wartime?  While many historical readings reference Mexican Americans as “other non-whites” or “other minorities,” Mexican Americans are legally “white.” This legal status was given to them as part of the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.[7]  As a result, Mexican Americans were categorized as white on employment records and afforded privileges and opportunities over African American women.[8]  With an “almost white” look and a legal claim to whiteness, there was a greater tolerance for Mexican American women in the workforce and “employers appear to have preferred the ‘racially ambiguous’ Mexican employees to their black counterparts.”[9]  Racial ambiguity provided more benefits than disadvantages for Mexican American Women during World War II.

---

[1] Elizabeth R. Escobedo, from COVERALLS to ZOOT SUITS: The Lives of Mexican American Women on the World War II Home Front (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2013), 12.

[2] Escobedo, from COVERALLS to ZOOT SUITS, 75.

[3] Escobedo, from COVERALLS to ZOOT SUITS, 45.

[4] Escobedo,  from COVERALLS to ZOOT SUITS,18.

[5] Gail Collins, America’s Women: 400 Years of Dolls, Drudges, Helpmates, and Heroines (New York: HarperCollins, 2003), 330.

[6] Escobedo, from COVERALLS to ZOOT SUITS, 70.

[7] Escobedo, from COVERALLS to ZOOT SUITS, 75.

[8] Escobedo, from COVERALLS to ZOOT SUITS, 75.

[9] Escobedo, from COVERALLS to ZOOT SUITS, 97.

Women's Role Defined By Economy

     Chapters 15 through 17, of Gail Collins’ America’s Women, cover the “evolution” of women from the 1920s to the 1940s.  Women experienced social and cultural changes over this 30 year period that altered their lives and the ever-changing attitudes towards them. The 1920s was an exciting and liberating time for women. “American women were transformed after World War I.”[1]  Having just earned the right to vote, the New Woman who emerged experienced a greater freedom and wanted to test her newfound independence.  The Great Depression, which dominated the 1930s, reversed any forward movement women may have gained in social status.  The average family experienced great difficulties and hardships during this time as a result of a 40 percent drop in income.[2]  With the decrease in jobs across America, women were forced to resign to open up positions for men.  Jobs were reserved for men and the women were expected to stay at home or take on subordinate roles in the workplace.  The 1940s was full of propaganda and mixed messages for women.  The first half of this decade was focused on promoting woman to volunteer for defense jobs to support World War II efforts, and the second half was focused on forcing them to give up their jobs after the war was over.[3]  While the country wanted to get back to normal, that would prove to be impossible.  Women had gone through great change during this period and experienced much more than ever before.[4] They were so affected by these experiences, they could no longer settle for less.  “They realized that they were capable of doing something more than cook a meal.”[5]

     I believe the evolution of women over this 30 year period was primarily influenced by the economy.  During this time, there were many opportunities in America and the American dream was driven by an economic system which promoted individual ownership and success.  The rapid growth and industrialization in the 1920s led to the stock market crash and the Great Depression in the 1930s.  World War II brought America out of the Depression by creating jobs which once again boosted a market for capital goods.  The social and cultural changes experienced by women over these three decades were defined by the economy.

     The 1920s was a time of empowerment and freedom for women.  They finally won the right to vote and more women had joined the workforce.  The economy was booming where “everything that had anything to do with consumption was in style.”[6]  The increase in consumer goods and technology contributed to the rapid economic growth in America.  From automobiles and radios, to electricity and running water in homes, the 1920s were liberating for women.  With the invention of consumer products such as the refrigerator, washer, ranges, and irons, women started to have leisure time.  The 1920’s woman was free from the restraints of the past.  These “New Woman” were different and they wanted to exhibit this difference with a flare for fashion.  The flapper symbolizes the 1920’s woman.  She smoked, drank, cut her hair into a short bob, wore cosmetics, wore short skirts, and didn’t wear corsets.  With a semi-boyish look, she made a strong statement for wanting equality to men in every way.  These women were fun, strong, and free to enjoy themselves because “today’s woman gets what she wants.”[7]  While the New Woman may appear to be influenced by a cultural shift in America, it would never have happened without the influence of a booming economy.

  

   The stock market crash in 1929 led to the Great Depression that spanned the entire decade of the 1930s.  This economic downturn significantly influenced women as many were forced to resign to give up their jobs to men.  Men were supposed to work and women (once again) stayed home to deal with “endless little economies and constant anxieties.”[8]  As a result of the Depression, the marriage rate dropped and suddenly it was socially acceptable to be a spinster.[9]  The divorce rate declined due to the expense, but many wives were abandoned as an alternative.[10] Birth rates declined and birth control in the form of contraceptives also became socially acceptable.[11]

     The women of America had a strong advocate in Eleanor Roosevelt.  Eleanor lobbied hard for women’s rights.  One big issue was the banning of married women from working.  There was a federal law that “prohibited the employment of married persons whose spouses also worked for the government.”[12]  Eleanor was against this as many families required two incomes to survive (just as today).  Regardless of this law and other state laws introduced to prevent married women from working, “the number of married women who worked continued to increase.”[13]  While this may be considered an important cultural shift, I believe this was primarily driven by economic factors.[14]  Many women needed to work to survive.

   World War II was instrumental in pulling America out of the Depression and boosting the economy.  With our men at war, the women were called upon to assist in a very aggressive way.  Propaganda films targeted women, specifically the middle-class and married, to volunteer for defense jobs.[15] The army needed woman for clerical and other non-combat jobs, but “most of the top brass was adamant that the women should only be there temporarily and should not receive full military status.” [16]  So while the need was there from an economic standpoint, the culture hadn’t quite shifted to equality for women.

      While government, economy, and culture are inextricably intertwined, economic conditions seem to be the driving factor in the social and cultural changes of women during this 30 year period.  Society gradually accepted, kicking and fighting all the way, that women’s roles were changing and new norms were being established.      

---

[1] Gail Collins, America’s Women: 400 Years of Dolls, Drudges, Helpmates, and Heroines (New York: HarperCollins, 2003), 327.

[2] Collins, America’s Women, 353.

[3] Collins, America’s Women, 394.

[4] Collins, America’s Women, 396.

[5] Collins, America’s Women, 396.

[6] Collins, America’s Women, 327.

[7] Collins, America’s Women, 335.

[8] Collins, America’s Women, 353.

[9] Collins, America’s Women, 353.

[10] Collins, America’s Women, 354.

[11] Collins, America’s Women, 354.

[12] Collins, America’s Women, 363.

[13] Collins, America’s Women, 363.

[14] Collins, America’s Women, 363.

[15] Collins, America’s Women, 372.

[16] Collins, America’s Women, 373.