The Misperception of Women in the Postwar Era

The Misperception of Women in the Postwar Era In the years between 1945 and 1960, modern history's typical view of American women is that of a subordinated, suppressed and acquiescent group struggling to obtain the ideas of domesticity and conservatism portrayed by popular culture. Many assumptions are made about changing gender roles and their affects upon women as a whole during this period. To us, women in the postwar era are most easily and commonly represented by the image of the ideal wife and mother, who spends her days maintaining the perfect household in which she lives and caring for the family she loves. Much is made of the changes that occurred during World War II, when women occupied a large portion of the workforce, and in the 1960's, when the feminist movement came to fruition. The changes that took place between these periods are often neglected or simply not noticed, but more often they are overshadowed by the dominating stereotype of the homemaker. Many women of the time did not fit the mold of housewife, and were actually continuing the feminist movement that was given new life with symbolic figures, such as Rosy the Riveter, during World War II. Contrary to popular belief, the feminist movement saw great changes in the 1950's. In Not June Cleaver, Joanne Meyerowitz says "historians have long acknowledged that increasing numbers of women sought and found wage work, albeit in traditionally female jobs, in the postwar era." The feminist movement did not simply disappear after women returned to their homes at the end of the war, but rather remained as a somewhat underground fixture of the cultural climate. According to William H. Chafe, author of The American Woman: Her Changing Social, Economic, and Political Roles, 1920-1970, "the most striking feature of the 1950's was the degree to which women continued to enter the job market and expand their sphere." Though these changes did in fact occur, they seem to have been disregarded in favor of the victimized image of women that we know today, party due to such popular books as The Feminine Mystique, by Betty Friedan. Though The Feminine Mystique was an astounding accomplishment as a protagonist for the feminist movement, it used the stereotype of the submissive woman of the time to force social change and inadvertently became the widely-accepted version of events. According to Friedan, postwar cultural influences urged women to retreat into the home and give up the accomplishments gained during the war, and few protested.
In researching the postwar era, I have discovered that this version of events is not entirely accurate, that it is actually more of a gross misconception than a simple generalization. Many magazines, which were all very popular and widely read at the time, contained interpretations of gender and women's role in society and challenged traditional ideologies; many of these were written by men as well as women. They reached hundreds of thousands of Americans and were read by members of many demographics. Though magazines of the 1950's can also be used to paint the opposite picture and seem repressive rather than progressive, this only adds to the contradictory nature of the times and further suggests that they were times of change. Some of these articles supported women's presence in the home and duties of motherhood, while others encouraged women to seek public success. The fact that both sides of the debate were being argued displays the fallacy of Betty Friedan's generalizations; women were not being forced into domesticity, but given the opportunity to obtain professional recognition. Though many women did choose to remain in the home, a significant number were part of the workforce and actively participated in the furthering of the women's movement as well.
In a review of The Feminine Mystique, featured in the New York Times Book Review, Lucy Freeman states, "despite the baby boom and despite discrimination in employment, education, and public office, married women, black and white, joined the labor force in increasing numbers, and both married and unmarried women participated actively in politics and reform." It is my belief that women were much more diverse in their choices and that their role in society was much more complex than is often acknowledged.
In a sample of articles written in the 1950's, collected by Joanne Meyerowitz, many concerns were expressed regarding the postwar economy, but journalists repeatedly defended paid employment for women. One article began with the statement, "most American working women need their jobs. That's the stark and simple reason why hiring and firing policies arbitrarily based on sex discrimination don't make sense."4 The argument for women's wage work was often supported by the plain and simple fact that they needed money, but by the 1950's, encompassed both personal satisfaction and economic benefits. Articles commonly promoted part-time and full-time work and included opportunities for older women. According to one article, "a part-time job can bring a feeling of full-time usefulness and satisfaction." Another article suggested tax breaks for child-care expenses and flexible hours for working mothers.5 These articles supported paid employment and represented it in a positive light for both women and society. Many articles described the rewarding job possibilities and the practically unlimited opportunities supposedly available to women.
Although these articles suggest a consensus, a debate did exist concerning the ideals of achievement outside of the home versus domestic duties. While some authors recommended that women give up careers for their homes and motherhood, others encouraged them to seek public success. Careers themselves were not often discussed in detail, which indicates that postwar popular magazines rarely addressed controversial issues. Sometimes an article would warn readers not to sacrifice marriage for career, or offer a statement from an un-married career-woman such as "I like my life the way it is," but generally, serious consideration of the issue was avoided.6
More middle class women were entering the labor force by the 1950's, inciting journalists to look more closely at their concerns. Some journalists proposed a "modern woman's life cycle," assuming that mothers of young children would work part-time and pursue careers after their children had grown up or if they divorced. These journalists often discussed the difficulty of combining career and motherhood. Other authors suggested that women work for as long as they could because older women experienced difficulty in attempting to reenter the workforce.7 Of course, many acknowledged that married women would pursue a variety of interests in different periods of their lives.
Surprisingly, postwar magazines were, for the most part, in favor of women's participation in politics. The Ladies' Home Journal, not considered a feminist magazine of the times, was extremely positive in its view of women in politics. The magazine even began a monthly segment encouraging women's involvement in politics. One article, by activist Margaret Hickey, even went so far as to state, "Make politics your business. Voting, office holding, raising your voice for new and better laws are just as important to your home and your family as the evening meal or spring house cleaning."8 Margaret Hickey seems to rationalize women's political activism by relating its benefits to their domestic lives, but still stresses the importance of their participation outside of the home, beyond voting. Another article asked women to "enter actively into politics as a primary responsibility."9 Yet another article, titled "They Do It . . . You Can Too," directly appealed to mothers and housewives, commending women politicians who balanced their duties as mothers of babies or small children and still found "time and ways to campaign and to win elections." The same article also referred to the personal satisfaction gained from holding political office, claiming that "there is great pride of accomplishment and the satisfaction of ‘doing a job.'"10
The Ladies' Home Journal was so emphatic in its encouragement of women politicians that it even argued that inherent gender differences made women more proficient in government. Some authors claimed that women and mothers are better suited to the field of politics because they are more peaceful and "civilized" than men. They associated women's natural instinct as protectors and voices of morality with an affinity for peacekeeping and eradicating corruption. As one article stated, "cleaning house has always been a woman's job." Gender differences were used here to encourage women to move beyond the home rather than push them back into it.11 In the postwar American world, women's public participation was indeed incorporated into popular culture.
Individualism was sometimes mentioned in association with issues of domestic life and marriage. The conflict between domestic life and public life was expressed, by some authors, as a conflict between individuality and gender roles. Traditional gender roles, in which women were primarily devoted mothers and obedient wives, were pitted against modern roles in which women were individuals. Significantly, these authors did not always agree with the idea of women as submissive nurturers, as Betty Friedan may have led us to believe. They believed that an ideal marriage was an equal partnership, in which both partners exchanged the duties traditionally associated with either the man or the woman. One article, featured in a 1958 Coronet magazine, insisted "the healthy, emotionally well-balanced male . . . isn't alarmed by the fact that women are human, too, and have an aggressive as well as a passive side . . . He takes women seriously as individuals."12 This article, along with others, actually denounced men who behaved in a superior manner. As another article stated, "The dominating husband and submissive wife are things of the past."13 Although ideas such as this were expressed ardently, many also believed that individualism could be taken too far and disrupt modern marriage. Men may have taken on more domestic activities and women may have pursued work outside of the home, but men remained the main sources of income and women continued to be the keepers of the home. Generally, popular postwar literature did not seem to challenge marriage or the sexual division of labor. Individualism may have been mentioned simply so that authors could dismiss it. In most popular magazines, strictly feminist or antifeminist views rarely appeared. Most articles drew from both positions and the majority did not fall into either side. The antifeminist view did appear occasionally, but so did the opposing "women's rights" stance. Antifeminist authors proclaimed that domesticity was a woman's only way to obtain fulfillment. They argued that women should not compete with men, but rather depend on them. These conservative antifeminists claimed that men and women are fundamentally different and that attempts to reduce or obscure this difference could only lead to unhappiness. They labeled ‘modern women' neurotic, narcissistic, unfeminine, domineering, nagging, lazy, materialistic and spoiled.14 The opinions expressed by these traditionalists were by no means typical. Only a small percentage of articles expressed such extreme views. Antifeminist sentiments were more often rejected than embraced. This was an era of positive thinking and magazines reflected this by commonly presenting more positive representations of women. "Women's rights," or feminist viewpoints, were also expressed. They observed women's subordinate treatment and sought to challenge this. While the antifeminists focused on traditional, domestic ideals, women's rights advocates promoted women's right to pursuits outside of the home. Strangely, both feminist and antifeminist authors recognized a decline in women's participation in domestic activities and described the modern housewife as unhappy. However, feminist articles denounced subordination to men and isolation in the home. They respected women who attained positions of public responsibility and leadership. They also sought out and fought against discrimination in the workplace and in politics. In a Harper's article, Agnes Rogers states "There would be a healthier distribution of civic energy if more attention were paid to individuals as such and if it were not assumed that men hold the executive jobs and women do what they are told."15 These articles paid less attention to gender roles and sometimes accused men of misogynistic behavior. Women's rights articles were not as common as their antifeminist counterparts, but could be taken to the same extremes and seem offensive to the opposing audience. Through the 1950's, neither position seems to dominate public opinion in popular magazines.
According to Betty Friedan, women's passionate search for individual identity ended in the late 1940's. She said that the postwar magazines subordinated women and kept them isolated in their homes by adopting a popular antifeminist view. My research suggests otherwise. Articles focusing on motherhood and marriage actually seem less common in the 1950's than those concerning women's journey into the workplace and out of the home. Women were, in fact, much more diverse in their choices and that their role in society was much more complex than is often acknowledged. This is just as evident if not more so than any opposing perspective. Maybe the success of The Feminine Mystique was that it struck a chord in women because the themes it presented were already present in the mass culture. Though many remain unaware, the feminist movement did indeed see great changes throughout the 1950's.

Bibliography

Joanne Meyerowitz, Not June Cleaver: Women and Gender in Postwar America, 1945-1960 (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1994), 4. William H. Chafe, The American Woman: Her Changing Social, Economic, and Political Roles, 1920-1970. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1972), 218. Lucy Freeman, review of Feminine Mystique by Friedan, New York Times Book Review, April 7, 1963, 46.
4 Frances J. Myers, "Don't Take it Out on the Women," Woman's Home Companion, January 1946, 12.
5 Millicent C. McIntosh, "Busy Women Have Time Enough," Ladies' Home Journal, June 1952, 47.
6 Evelyn Sager, "Profile of Success," Ladies' Home Journal, March 1952, 104.
7 Elsie McCormick, "When an Older Woman Wants a Job," Ladies' Home Journal, January 1954, 120.
8 Margaret Hickey, "What's the U.S. to You?," Ladies' Home Journal, April 1950, 23.
9 Margaret Hickey, "We Can't Let the Children Down," Ladies' Home Journal, March 1952, 104.
10 Margaret Hickey, "They Do It . . . You Can Too," Ladies' Home Journal, April 1956, 70.
11 Dorothy Thompson, "A Woman Says, ‘You Must Come into the Room of Your Mother Unarmed,'" Ladies' Home Journal, February 1946, 24-25.
12 John Kord Lagemann, "How to Pick a Mate," Coronet, February 1958, 116-117.
13 Gretta Palmer, "What Kind of Wife Has He?" Reader's Digest, March 1948, 37-39.
14 Marlene Cox, "How to Prepare Your Daughter for a Divorce," Ladies' Home Journal, May 1946, 174-175, 216-217.
15 Agnes Rogers, "The Humble Female," Harper's, March 1950, 59.