"We don't hire housewives." That is what Mimi Gladstein heard
when she asked about joining the faculty of the University of
Texas at El Paso, where she is now Associate Dean of Liberal
Arts.
Gladstein refused to be devalued as a human being because she
was a housewife. That "job" -- no less than teaching university
English -- expressed her worth and her competence. Even
more...being a housewife was the training ground where she
learned skills such as setting priorities and budgeting time.
Gladstein writes in an upcoming anthology "Women and Liberty"
(Ivan R. Dee, winter 2001), "All I really needed to know about
chairing a department, I learned by being a Jewish Mother."
In the 60's, a "Father Knows Best" image of the housewife
stereotyped women who stayed at home. Today, PC feminism creates
a stereotype that denigrates the housewife or, more accurately,
views her as a paradigm of how men politically oppress women.
In 1963, Betty Friedan's book, "The Feminine Mystique," spoke
of "the problem that has no name." Stated simply...Domesticity
denied to housewives their humanity and potential, making them
suffer both physically and mentally. Friedan described the
typical '50s family as a "comfortable concentration camp". The
book helped to spark a cultural revolution. It also cemented
into feminism the idea of housewifery as a pathology rather than
as a choice any healthy woman could make.
Recent works have thoroughly discredited Friedan's arguments
that exerted power through two basic means: her claims of
personal experience; and, the authorities she cited to support
her claims.
In his book "Betty Friedan and the Making of the Feminine
Mystique" (1998), Daniel Horowitz explored Friedan's background
and debunked the myth that she ever represented the typical
suburban housewife as she has persistently claimed. Friedan had
been a staunch political activist on the Communist left for
decades before her first book appeared.
In the Atlantic Monthly (09/99), Alan Wolfe devastated
both Friedan's interpretation of experts, such as sexologist
Alfred Kinsey, and the facts presented by those experts
themselves. Without their backing, Friedan's work does nothing
more than offer anecdotal evidence of the unhappiness of some
housewives as a way to define the reality of most.
Even the admiring biographer, Judith Hennessee, casts a
strangely critical light on Friedan. In her book, "Betty
Friedan: Her Life" (1999), Hennessee speaks of a feminist who
was often "rude and nasty", "who...did not even like women." Of
a wife who hurled and received so much violence in her marriage
that her three children required therapy "to distance themselves
from the emotional fallout."
And, yet, it is undeniably true: "The Feminine Mystique"
galvanized many women to whom it spoke the truth. For them,
being a housewife was a negation of their potential as human
beings.
These politically roused women created another mystique:
being a housewife meant to every woman what it meant to each of
them personally. They denied the reality of the many women who
found domesticity to be the best expression of who they were as
human beings.
At first, mainstream feminism aimed at the ideal of "equal
marriage" -- that is, a marriage in which men and women equally
shared responsibilities, including housework. Quickly, more
radical voices began to call for the abolition of the
traditional family. They did so for the very reason that the
family is usually defended: it is the basic building block of
society. Given that the radical feminists thought society was
inherently unjust, it is not surprising that they wished to kick
out the building blocks.
In the '80s, political correctness began to dominate feminism
and housewives were subjected to further political analysis. For
example, their work was labeled as "surplus labor" -- a Marxist
term that describes the unpaid labor stolen by capitalists from
workers. Housework became the labor that men steal from women.
It became another political injustice against women.
Such analysis is almost always phrased as a defense of the
"true" interests of housewives. If housewives disagree, if they
believe feminism is demeaning their choices, the disagreement is
ascribed to the political naivete of stay-at-home moms.
Gladstein's analysis of housewifery is like water in a
desert. She describes how being a housewife taught her to handle
taking over as Executive-Director of her University's Diamond
Jubilee celebration. She writes, "That job allowed me to use my
housewifery skills to create and manage events as diverse as
football half-times, city-wide street festivals, physics fairs,
student retention programs, Vietnam Memorial dedications, city
and university planning commissions and a year-long program of
national and internally renowned speakers." She learned the
necessary skills while giving parties and being a hostess at her
husband's business events.
I hope that feminism comes to understand that being a
housewife is an honorable option. For some women, it is
fulfillment. For others, it constitutes self-denial. In short,
domesticity is the same as any other choice women confront --
right for some and wrong for others.
Women who become housewives deserve the same response from
feminism as those who don't -- they deserve a bit of respect.