Betty Friedan and the Making of "The Feminine Mystique": The American Left, the Cold War, and Modern Feminism

Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond

by Daniel Horowitz

Ever since the 1963 publication of her landmark book, The Feminine Mystique , Betty Friedan has insisted that her commitment to women's rights grew out of her experiences as an alienated suburban housewife. Yet as Daniel Horowitz persuasively demonstrates in this illuminating and provocative biography, the roots of Friedan's feminism run much deeper than she has led us to believe. Drawing on an impressive body of new research―including Friedan's own papers―Horowitz traces the development of Friedan's feminist outlook from her childhood in Peoria, Illinois, through her wartime years at Smith College and Berkeley, to her decade-long career as a writer for two of the period's most radical labor journals, the Federated Press and the United Electrical Workers' UE News. He further shows that even after she married and began to raise a family, Friedan continued during the 1950s to write and work on behalf of a wide range of progressive social causes. By resituating Friedan within a broader cultural context, and by offering a fresh reading of The Feminine Mystique against that background, Horowitz not only overturns conventional ideas about "second wave" feminism but also reveals long submerged links to its past.

Genres: History, Feminism, Nonfiction, Politics, Biography, Gender Studies, 20th Century

388 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1998

About the author

Daniel Horowitz is a historian whose work focuses on the history of consumer culture and social criticism in the U.S. At Smith College (1989–2012), he directed the American studies program for 18 years and was, for a time, Sylvia Dlugasch Bauman Professor of American Studies. Before coming to Smith, he taught at Scripps College in Claremont, California (1972–88), where he eventually was Nathaniel Wright Stephenson Professor of History and Biography.
For 2010–11, he was the Ray A. Billington Visiting Professor of U.S. History at Occidental College and Huntington Library. He has also taught at the University of Michigan (1983–84), Carleton College (1980), Harvard (1964–66 and 1967–70), Skidmore College (1970–72), and Wellesley College (1966–67).
Among the honors Horowitz has received are two fellowships from the National Endowment for the Humanities and one from the National Humanities Center; an appointment as Honorary Visiting Fellow at the Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College, Harvard University; and for 2008–09 he received a fellowship from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. In 1997, the American Studies Association awarded him the Constance Rourke Prize for his 1996 article “Rethinking Betty Friedan and The Feminine Mystique: Labor Union Radicalism and Feminism in Cold War America,” American Quarterly. The American Studies Association awarded him its 2003 Mary C. Turpie Prize for “outstanding abilities and achievement in American Studies teaching, advising, and program development at the local or regional level.”
Among his publications are The Morality of Spending: Attitudes Toward the Consumer Society in America, 1875–1940 (1985), selected by Choice as one of the outstanding academic books of 1985; Vance Packard and American Social Criticism (1994); Betty Friedan and the Making of The Feminine Mystique: The American Left, The Cold War, Modern Feminism (1998); The Anxieties of Affluence: Critiques of American Consumer Culture, 1939–1979 (2004), selected by Choice as one of the outstanding books of 2004 and winner of the Eugene M. Kayden Prize for the best book published in the humanities in 2004 by a university press; Consuming Pleasures: Intellectuals and Popular Culture in the Postwar World (2012); On the Cusp: Yale College Class of 1960 and a World on the Verge of Change (2015); and Happier?: The History of A Cultural Movement That Aspired to Transform America (2018).
His book on the Reality TV show “Shark Tank” will be published by University of North Carolina Press in late 2020. He has edited two books for Bedford: Suburban Life in the 1950s: Selections from Vance Packard’s Status Seekers (1995) and Jimmy Carter and the Energy Crisis of the 1970: The “Crisis of Confidence” Speech of July 15, 1979.

Reviews

[Yellow Rose · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book outlines her life from her birth in Peoria Illinois. She was not "feminine" and not well liked by her peers not even her own mother(maybe that explains why she hated women so much and wanted to force them all out in the workforce?), therefore in her teenage years and childhood years she read a lot and was involved in a lot of organizations she worked in the schools newspaper. This type of activity was also prevalent in her college years.

Betty had a lot of personal problems from which she sought help from therapists. She wanted to further the causes of African Americans, working women and unions. Worked for radical newspapers, supported communism and "communities" in which families would band together and raise children together. She married Carl Friedan had a very bad marriage in fact as it says in the book Carl would complain that when he came back home dinner was not ready and Betty was working on her book. Which is understandable indeed. What if Betty had been a better wife maybe she would've not needed the reason to write such a book that caused so much uproar and social chaos? She also physically fought with her husband, which the author notes was usually for "power." How can we take a woman who is so unstable to actually physically fight for "power" with her husband seriously?

But unlike other feminists she actually was not a "man basher" she actually wanted marriages that worked and she believed children were important, except that she wanted an egalitarian marriage, which Carl obviously did not agree too. Also in the 70s she objected to the radical feminists who wanted to get rid of men by saying that they were utterly useless,feminists like Greer and Steinem. She objected to this and actually believed that men and women should be united in the cause. Betty also speculated government interference in the movement.

I seem to get the idea from this book that she was not a Communist by choice but I think she was persuaded by her communist professors such as Douglas, mentioned in the book to actually believe that communism gave equal treatment for women and men. Now this is one of those big lies that communism says in fact no respect increased for women in the USSR. They were still considered mothers, cooks and maids when it came to cleaning and housework, but now they were forced to work outside the home. Leaving the children behind, who were indoctrinated by communist dogma and propaganda, which essentially killed the family. This phenomenon can clearly be seen in the post communist countries were families are completely disintegrated and the lack of morals or social orders is actually destroying many countries in the former Soviet Union.

Also, Betty was a hypocrite she and Carl lived in an 11 room mansion with maids serving them and cleaning the house. Yet Betty had the decency to complain how horrible Capitalism is, that woman was living and prospering in Capitalism. Thanks to Capitalism her book feminine mystique and her later books brought her so much success. Look at her telling women to go to work, most middle class women did not have a chance to have a maid that would serve their household chores. Most middle class women came back from work and had to do all of the household chores, this double burden is highly unfair to women. Betty obviously never experienced this double burden she was reaping the glory of Capitalism.

Very interesting and an informative book it is a bit dated written in 1998, because a lot more new information has come out about Betty in the past few years. However, this book is still important since it outlines her early years that were crucial in forming her personality and belief system that led her to become a feminist. Highly recommended to anyone interested in the topic.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

AN ‘INTELLECTUAL HISTORY’ PERSPECTIVE ON THE ROOTS OF HER, AND HER FIRST BOOK

Daniel Horowitz is professor of American studies and history at Smith College. He wrote in the Introduction of this 1998 book, “In 1951, a labor journalist with a decade’s experience in left-wing movements… wrote a pamphlet, ‘UE Fight for Women Workers,’ which in 1993 the historian Lisa Kannenberg… called ‘a remarkable manual for fighting wage discrimination that is, ironically, as relevant today as it was in 1952.’ … The labor journalist and pamphlet writer was Betty Friedan. Yet in 1973 Friedan remarked that until she started writing ‘The Feminine Mystique’ (1963) ‘I wasn’t even conscious of the woman problem.’ … Although at one point in the 1970s, she alluded, in often vague terms, to a more radical past, even then she left the impression that her landmark book emerged principally from her own captivity by the very forces it described. When she entered the limelight… [her] claim that she came to political consciousness out of a disillusion with her life as a suburban housewife was part of her reinvention of herself as she wrote and promoted ‘The Feminine Mystique.’ …

“Friedan’s version of her life… hid from view the connection between her union activity of the 1940s and early 1950s and the feminism she articulated in the 1960s. Her story made it possible for white suburban women readers to identify with its author and thereby enhanced the book’s appeal… Friedan’s knowledge of the dangers of McCarthyism of the 1950s prompted her to minimize her work as a labor journalist… a longer-term perspective makes clear the book’s origins go back much farther---to her youth in Peoria, her education at Smith College, and her experiences in labor unions in the 1940s and 1950s… An exploration of her experiences as a young radical are crucial to understanding Friedan’s life and the history of modern feminism.” (Pg. 1-2)

He continues, “The primary task of this book is to offer the story of Betty Friedan’s life, focusing on what enabled her to make two extraordinary contributions: to write ‘The Feminine Mystique’ and then to help launch the feminist movement of the 1960s. I seek to enrich our understanding of the origins of 1960s feminism by locating one of the routes to that movement in left-wing labor union activity… I have not written a biography in any usual sense of that word. As an intellectual historian, I am interested in where ideas come from, how they develop, and what forces shape and reshape them.” (Pg. 5) Later, he adds, “The relationship between Ms. Friedan’s life, McCarthyism, and the Popular Front is a central theme of the story I tell. Starting in 1940 and for at least a dozen years thereafter, Frieidan was part of a movement best identified as the Popular Front of progressive feminism.” (Pg. 10)

He reports, “Bettye Goldstein [her ‘maiden name’] arrived on the Smith campus … in the fall of 1939… already aware of issues involving anti-Semitism, fascism, and labor unions… Professors supported her intellectual ambitions, giving her a sense of what it meant to join a community of educated women and reinforcing her commitment to make a contribution beyond marriage and the family. Finally, what she learned placed her anti-fascism on a firm intellectual foundation.” (Pg. 42) He adds, “as a junior and senior [she] became fully radicalized… politics took hold of her life… [and] began to transform her anti-fascism into a concern for workers.” (Pg. 50) He adds, “She had made the crucial transition from being a believer in beauty and an ironic commentator to being a passionate writer and actor in the political arena.” (Pg. 68)

He notes, “Goldstein’s decision to leave Berkeley [in 1942-1943] was… more complicated than her account of giving up a prestigious fellowship in order to placate her boyfriend and embrace the feminine mystique.” (Pg. 99) Later, he adds, “At a time when left and right … were trying to protect the newspaper service from anti-communist unions, Goldstein’s radicalism posed serious problems… [She] was once again in danger of losing her ability to put her radicalism into print.” (Pg. 120)

He recounts, “Betty Friedan, age 26… entered the marriage with both hope and trepidation. She had what she later called a ‘pathological fear of being alone.’… She longed to develop a sense of wholeness through a heterosexual union, a desire intensified by watching many of her friends marry. Carl, she recalled, ‘made her feel not alone.’ … Her conventional longings … [were] bolstered by the postwar resurgence of what she later called the feminine mystique.” (Pg. 132)

He points out, “the problems in the marriage exacerbated her loneliness. According to Betty, ‘Carl’s vision of a wife was one who stayed home and cooked and played with the children.’ … Before long, violence marked their relationship… They fought in private and in public… in the Friedans’ case, each partner gave as well as took.” (Pg. 154)

He observes, “In her articles for women’s and family magazines, Friedan offered a critique of suburban America. As a writer and public figure she was finding her voice… she focused on women, often emphasizing their assertiveness, sense of community, and ambition for careers.” (Pg. 179)

He records, “she wrote articles based on a survey of her Smith classmates as they prepared for their 15th college reunion… she hoped the survey would disprove the notion that quality education made women frustrated… As she read over the [survey] answers, she later claimed, she discovered what she would call ‘The Problem That Has No Name,’ the deep-seated and confused dissatisfaction her classmates felt but could not fully articulate.” (Pg. 193)

In her book, “she used the horrors of the Bomb to drive home her point… More problematic was Friedman’s exploration of the parallels between the Nazi death camps and suburban homes as ‘comfortable concentration camps,’ an analogy that exaggerated what suburban women faced and belittled the fate of victims of Nazism. Although in the end she acknowledged such an analogy broke down, Friedan nonetheless spent several pages exploring the similarities.” (Pg. 205)

He explains, "Friedan’s largely negative conclusions contravened her original conception of the book… its main thrust, the way most people read it, was of frustration and thwarted possibility… Besides the shift from the positive and nuanced tone to a mainly negative one, the other major change in the book involved watering down of Friedan’s politics. The published book contained only hints of her political vision… In unpublished sections, she denounced established women leaders as Aunt Toms.” (Pg. 210-211) He continues, “[she] took pains to hide her own radical heritage… Friedan created a second narrative in order to avoid revelations about her radical past and to project a believable persona with which her readers could identify.” (Pg. 217)

He summarizes, “‘The Feminine Mystique’ has had a commanding impact on historical scholarship, cultural memory, and American feminism. The book’s reception also transformed Betty Friedan’s own life. It exacerbated strains in her relationship with Carl and eventually helped give her courage to divorce him. It established her role as a writer. Above all, it helped launch her second career as an activist.” (Pg. 224)

This book will be of great interest to those studying Friedan, and her first book.

[Billy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Freidan’s influential 1963 work The Feminine Mystique argued that the 1950s containment of the home, with separate spheres for men and women, was not a fulfilling life for her. Her personal experiences in the domestic sphere proved unrewarding. Horowitz reveals that Freidan was in fact a working journalist who covered radical women-led strikes in the late ‘40s and early 1950s. Freidan’s personal Feminine Mystique was in part a fiction that lent credibility and authenticity to Freidan’s arguments. Horowitz argues that Friedan recognized the power of McCarthyism and minimized her work as a labor journalist. Her early work in the radical left of unions shaped her intellectual views. Most historians cite Friedan and her book as verification that the women’s movement came from the containment and consensus culture of the domestic sphere during the 1950s. Horowitz disagrees. Friedan’s intellectual makeup came from anti-fascist leanings, radical ideas, and labor union activism during the 1940s. Horowitz notes that The Feminine Mystique helped to transform the “course of America’s political and social history [and that many:] mark it as the beginning of the modern women’s movement.” (4) With this book, Friedan found her voice and emerged as a leader in the burgeoning women’s movement. She helped to found and became president of the National Women’s Organization (NOW). The “Second Wave” of American Feminism was also referred to as “Women’s Liberation.” Friedan used her personal experiences in the sub-urban home to show how domestic life for women was unfulfilling. In short, the 1950s domestic sphere bred feminine unrest. “Liberation” referred to freeing oneself from the domestic sphere.

[Jeanne · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've been wanting to read this book since about 2011 when I had the author as a professor in his final semester teaching. He mentioned the book in the class (which was amazing) and I've wanted to read it, but I waited until I finally managed to read the Feminine Mystique (which I would recommend).

Overall, I really enjoyed this book. VERY well researched yet still readable, and it was really the text I needed after finishing Friedan's book. The context was very helpful for reading the text and appreciating it as an historical artifact. The only reason I'm not giving it 5 stars is that I think it really could have used one more once over by an editor, some of the same phrases kept coming up and there were enough redundancies in places to be noticeable which got distracting. Still, I'm glad I finally read it!

4.5/5 stars

[Harlow]

This was the CCPLM Herstory book group April selection.

I’ve been spending so much time with Sonia and Sunny I have a few more pages to go. Betty Friedan was before my time and I haven’t read “The Feminine Mystique” (1963). Consciousness-raising groups became a thing. Friedan was the first president of NOW (1966).

Loved the black and white photos. What kind of woman are you?

Historian or biographer? Thanks to the author, who was generous with his time, and joined us virtually from California.

[Nancy Peiffer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating and thoroughly researched.

[David Bates · Rating 4 out of 5]

In an exploration published in 1998 of Betty Friedan’s past and the early drafts of The Feminine Mystique Daniel Horowitz found what he believed was an explanation for the narrow class bias of the work – the conscious choices of the author. Tracing Friedan’s time at Smith College in the early 1940s where she wrote anti-Fascist, pro-Labor editorials for the school paper, to her attendance at a two month summer program at the Highlander Folk School in Tennessee, to her work as a writer for the radical United Electrical Workers union until 1952, Horowitz attempts to reconstruct Friedan’s involvement in Popular Front politics and advocacy for working women. Using Friedan’s archived papers, but denied cooperation from Friedan herself who seemed to feel he was involved in red-baiting, Horowitz argues that second wave feminism was linked as much to the labor radicalism of the 1940s as the suburban captivity of middle class housewives in the 1950s. Indeed, early drafts of The Feminine Mystique had called for sweeping government action to provide healthcare, childcare and career training for women. Nevertheless, as the manuscript was rewritten and honed it became more focused on psychological issues, omitting references to class and race, and less traditionally leftist in its orientation. Either because of disillusionment with her youthful politics, fear of being smeared as a radical for past associations, or by a conscious choice of audience, Friedan gradually selected a message tailored to women who were well educated but confined. “If Rosa Parks refused to take a seat at the back of a segregated bus not simply because her feet hurt,” Horowitz observes “then Friedan did not write The Feminine Mystique simply because she was an unhappy housewife.” While the Women’s Movement almost certainly would have emerged with or without the book, it “nonetheless defined the perspective of a generation of white middleclass women with its argument that what trapped them was sexual passivity, limited career ambitions, and identity crises.”

[Jonathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Daniel Horowitz argues in this carefully constructed book that Betty Friedan's commitment to social change was originally a product of her Old Left background. Contrary to Friedan's own later assertions, she had been a vocal leftist before the McCarthy era and, as a part of her radical activism, had long been attentive to women's concerns.

As a left-wing student journalist at Smith College, for example, Friedan (née Goldstein) had opposed American involvement in World War II until the Pearl Harbor attack. In 1941, she spent a summer at the Highlander Folk School in Tennessee to learn the techniques of organizing. At Berkeley, where she worked briefly as a graduate student in psychology in 1942-3, she became romantically involved with David Bohm, a communist working on the Manhattan Project, and seems to have been associated with other radicals on campus. After Berkeley, she worked for nine years as a Popular Front labor journalist at the Federated Press and the UE News, making a reputation as an especially outspoken editor and writing several articles on the condition of women in the workforce. Surveying the literature of that time, Horowitz concludes that labor feminism provided Friedan with "key concepts, language, and tools of analysis that would shape what she wrote in The Feminine Mystique." Friedan's later work thus was not merely a product of her life in suburbia in the 1950s but rather was an extension of her commitment to the radical tradition of the Old Left.

Horowitz's book is a very thorough study of Friedan's known activities and publications, and although Friedan refused to grant Horowitz access to her sealed papers, his conclusions are difficult to dispute.

[Jill · Rating 3 out of 5]

*Read for school