Blog 13
1. After gaining so many strides in the workforce in WWII, women were expected to go back to domestic duties when the men returned, changing the balance of society once again. During the Cold War, the media and government used propaganda to reform the society, a society that placed women back in domestic duties at home and men in the workforce. Women who did continued to work were viewed negatively since it threatened the ego of man and his role as provider. Some women were able to continue to be in the public and political domain by working for organizations that helped find communists. The major impact on women resulting from the Cold War was one of going back to traditional gender norms where the women is expected to stay home, raise children, and stay out of the workforce, leaving many, I’m sure, dissatisfied.
2. Historians were forced to rethink Betty Friedan’s interpretation of the “feminine mystique” because Friedan focused only on upper white class women who stayed at home and were ‘slaves’ to their families. She did not address middle or lower class white women, or women of color. Friedan also didn’t discuss women who were active in the workforce and the community or those who actually enjoyed being at home. Having only focused on one group of women, her thoughts and ideas could not be applied to women in general making her book completely from one point of view only, leaving all others ignored.
3. The activists in the 1950’s were mostly white, middle class, women who were a part of the workforce. After losing jobs and enduring pay cuts, women rallied for equal pay and opportunities. All women faced many difficulties, but women of color faced not only gender discrimination, but racial discrimination as well. Many women of color also had the added limitation of a lesser education making it even more difficult to compete for jobs. White women who did have an education stepped up to fight for women of all color, with women of all color, becoming activists not only for the workforce, but also for racial equality as well.
4. Women’s role as “bridge” leader proves how important women’s participation was during the civil rights movement. As a “bridge” leader, women were able to actively serve the community in a political way, though always under the shadow of a man. Without formal recognition, women had to fight to be involved, focusing more on the community, which enabled them to gain influence and a role leadership. Women such as Ella Baker, worked with the community as an organizer for the SCLC, however only until a male could be found to replace her. This was often the position of the women during this time. However, some of the most influential civil rights activists of the era were women, proving that the role of “Bridge” leader was monumentally needed and successful.
3 comments:
Ruba, R # 1
Hi Rachel,
Women clearly felt the disappointment post World War II. Not only did men take over their old jobs back and many women faced being laid off, they were also expected to return to their homes and serve their husbands and children and make that their main duty. Women’s participation in the public did not completely diminish but the numbers were reduced by a great deal. As you mentioned, even the media found it necessary to intervene by placing such importance on a woman’s role as a mother and a wife and the need to fulfill her domestic duties. You made a great point about Friedan’s book and her point of view as she only discussed women who were unhappy with their lives and those who felt pressured to stay home and provide for their families. I, too, thought that her book was not very accurate as she failed to give the readers the complete picture of what all women, of all social classes and races, were going through. In addition, what historians found interesting was the fact that Betty Friedan was not her self a woman who had to stay home and be stuck with domestic duties but an activist who was very involved in the political scene. Nonetheless, her book is still considered a historical source that gives us an idea about some women’s lives during that time.
Reena’s R # 2-
Ruba was right when she said that women were disappointed to return to the traditional roles as being a house wife. Women workers were eventually laid off when men came back from the war, but not all women workers. Also, I liked the part where Rachel made a point on Friedman’s book about women and wives being unhappy and felt pressured to still provide for their families being home. What I found funny is that Friedman was a political activist and she was never a housewife. Another, Ruba mentioned, this book failed to show that this was of a particular class and not of the whole population. The book was bias towards a certain contention.
Eden R#2
Hi Rachel and Ruba.
Ruba, I like that you used the word 'disappointment" to describe what some women felt post World War II when returning back to domestic work. Many women did go back to taking care of the home, unwillingly, but what I believe one has to stress is that many people, women included, wanted to re-establish the traditional family where the husband works and the woman is responsible for care-taking, cooking, cleaning and such. More women were now getting married and more babies were born. The idea of a happy family attracted many Americans.
Both of you pointed out some valid and important points regarding Friedan's book. The lack of objectivity in her book is evident. She fails to present all women. She focused on a specific group which clearly can't be applied to all other women.
Post a Comment