womanâs world.â
As I listened to them, a German phrase echoed in my mindââ Kinder, Kuche, Kirche ,â the slogan by which the Nazis decreed that women must once again be confined to their biological role. But this was not Nazi Germany. This was America. The whole world lies open to American women. Why, then, does the image deny the world? Why does it limit women to âone passion, one role, one occupation?â Not long ago, women dreamed and fought for equality, their own place in the world. What happened to their dreams; when did women decide to give up the world and go back home?
A geologist brings up a core of mud from the bottom of the ocean and sees layers of sediment as sharp as a razor blade deposited over the yearsâclues to changes in the geological evolution of the earth so vast that they would go unnoticed during the lifespan of a single man. I sat for many days in the New York Public Library, going back through bound volumes of American womenâs magazines for the last twenty years. I found a change in the image of the American woman, and in the boundaries of the womanâs world, as sharp and puzzling as the changes revealed in cores of ocean sediment.
In 1939, the heroines of womenâs magazine stories were not always young, but in a certain sense they were younger than their fictional counterparts today. They were young in the same way that the American hero has always been young: they were New Women, creating with a gay determined spirit a new identity for womenâa life of their own. There was an aura about them of becoming, of moving into a future that was going to be different from the past. The majority of heroines in the four major womenâs magazines (then Ladiesâ Home Journal, McCallâs, Good Housekeeping, Womanâs Home Companion ) were career womenâhappily, proudly, adventurously, attractively career womenâwho loved and were loved by men. And the spirit, courage, independence, determinationâthe strength of character they showed in their work as nurses, teachers, artists, actresses, copywriters, saleswomenâwere part of their charm. There was a definite aura that their individuality was something to be admired, not unattractive to men, that men were drawn to them as much for their spirit and character as for their looks.
These were the mass womenâs magazinesâin their heyday. The stories were conventional: girl-meets-boy or girl-gets-boy. But very often this was not the major theme of the story. These heroines were usually marching toward some goal or vision of their own, struggling with some problem of work or the world, when they found their man. And this New Woman, less fluffily feminine, so independent and determined to find a new life of her own, was the heroine of a different kind of love story. She was less aggressive in pursuit of a man. Her passionate involvement with the world, her own sense of herself as an individual, her self-reliance, gave a different flavor to her relationship with the man.
The heroine and hero of one of these stories meet and fall in love at an ad agency where they both work. âI donât want to put you in a garden behind a wall,â the hero says. âI want you to walk with me hand in hand, and together we could accomplish whatever we wanted toâ (âA Dream to Share,â Redbook , January, 1939).
These New Women were almost never housewives; in fact, the stories usually ended before they had children. They were young because the future was open. But they seemed, in another sense, much older, more mature than the childlike, kittenish young housewife heroines today. One, for example, is a nurse (âMother-in-Law,â Ladiesâ Home Journal , June, 1939). âShe was, he thought, very lovely. She hadnât an ounce of picture book prettiness, but there was strength in her hands, pride in her carriage and nobility in the lift of her chin, in her blue