The Impact of the Nineteenth-Century Ideal of True Womanhood - Essay Example

? The Impact of the Nineteenth-Century Ideal of ‘True Womanhood’ Word Count 750 (7 pages) Introduction The historical, ist, and racial worldviews in Barbara Welter’s “Cult of Domesticity,” also known as the Cult of True Womanhood—had far-reaching and long-lasting consequences which are key flashpoints in today’s feminist era in the 21st century. As will be demonstrated, these are key elements impacting the definition of womanhood. The Historical View Historically, women have been thought of as “the gentle sex.” Also, historically, women have been put down and made to feel like they were not worth much—when, in modern times, women make up for more than half the work force. In the past, the four virtues of piety, purity, submission, and domesticity were considered premier attributes of the True Woman.1 According to Welter’s tale, one would have thought that women still should adhere to these austere values of what womanhood really looks like. Of course, this article was written in the late 60s. Women had only had the right to vote for a few years, and it was still rather unheard of for women not to get married right out of high school. In fact, women who went out of the household to work during the late 60s were seen somewhat as rule-breakers. These rule-breakers, in effect, ended up changing the way we think about society and womens’ roles within it. If these daring women had not stood up and made a case for why they should have been able to go out of the home and work, many women today would not have had the chance to do the same—because these initial women took a risk. In some ways, having women stay at home is great because they can multitask from home. There are some good things about the historical values that have been placed on women. Women are generally thought to be gentle, kind people. Of course, this is not always the case—but women who are very feminine are seen as more highly valued in society because it sticks to that core virtue of piety. Women are also thought to be more “pure” than men—for whatever reason this is, probably one will never know except to say that this is probably more likely true than not, even though it is a stereotype. Third, women are seen as more submissive than men. This can also be a stereotype—but being submissive is not necessarily a bad quality unless one has to stand up for one’s rights. Fourth, it should be noted that women, as ‘domestic engineers’ of the home—also known as homemakers—are privy to the same kinds of stereotypes that govern the opposite side of the coin, the world of men. The Classist View Women becoming more independent was not something that men wanted to hear about. “[Men] spoke…of religion as a kind of tranquilizer for the many undefined longings which swept even the most pious young girl, and about which it was better to pray than to think.”2 Religious ideations did not cloud, but rather helped, the minds of young girls and women. The view that was held that women were delicate and frail and needed someone to help them was a societal view held by Anglo-Saxon men, and this was definitely some sort of classist view. Black women were not regarded as such by white men, and that idea will be explained, entertained, and dissected in the next portion of this piece. However, white women were fair game for being seen as being in need of assistance. In the early 1970s a modern version of feminism shook American medicine to its foundations and buttressed its sister movement, the patient’s rights movement. Both movements attempted to take patients’ decisions about their bodies and lives away from physicians –especially male physicians – and gave women and patients control. The landmark book was Our Bodies, Ourselves, by a group of women patients in Boston who had access to one of the grandest – some would say, most self-satisfied – medical centers in the world, Harvard. Because they couldn’t get the information they wanted in down-to-earth, patient-friendly language, they published a “how-to” manual covering everything from breast cancer to abortions. Successive editions sold millions upon millions of copies and gave rise to the areas of publishing now called “alternative medicine” and “self-help”. During the 1980s, feminist philosophers began to question whether many ways of knowing were the ways or merely male ways. Contractarianism, Kantianism, and utilitarianism all looked like male theories, too abstract, too intellectual, and largely false to the ordinary experience of many women. What was missing was emphasis on values such as cooperation, nurturing, and bonding. Harvard education professor Carol Gilligan showed that many women analyzed ethical dilemmas differently from men. Subsequently, feminist theorists articulated theories of ethics whose central notions were not rights or universalization but caring, trust, and relationships. This so-called “ethics of care” may be considered a branch of virtue ethics that promotes the “female” virtues of caring, nurturing, trust, intimate friendship, and love. Even among feminist theorists, this statement is controversial because some theorists believe that such virtues are not inherent in women by nature but exist only because they are encouraged in most women by traditional, sexist gender roles. One might view the ethics of care as a corrective to the previous emphasis in ethical theory on abstract, quasi-legalistic concepts. Alternately, one might consider the ethics of care as reflecting a modern turning inward to the family and to those around one, fighting battles close at hand and letting far-off concerns such as world hunger take care of themselves. Finally, one might view this approach as taking a more modest, minimalist approach to morality – a kind of “within-my-circle-of-relationships” approach – in which moral concerns usually arise among those one knows. Perhaps the ethics of care is best seen as an antidote to moral views that are cast only in terms of rights, utility, and duty. It is not yet a complete ethical theory, for it does not tell us how to treat people we do not know or care about. This is an important criticism in medical ethics because much of medicine is about treating strangers, at least when patients first meet a physician. It may be retorted that good physicians should care for all their patients, but the meaning of “care” gets too diluted when someone claims they care about everyone they meet. Nor does this theory yet tell us how to resolve conflicts among those we care about, such as when a female physician is torn between checking on a patient and being with her daughter at the birth of her first grandchild. This theory, however, is still very young and in coming decades, may have more to offer. The Racial View (668) The issue of race cannot be underestimated when it comes to talking about women—as not all women are created equal, in the eyes of the white man. Women of color are primarily targeted for race-based hatred. “One reason religion was valued was that it did not take a woman away from her ‘proper sphere,’ her home. Unlike participation in other societies or movements, church work would not make her less domestic or submissive, less a True Woman.”3 Church work was deemed appropriate for women of color, as well. Women of color were particularly esteemed in the Black church. The Black church was so large, that it had great amounts of power even though it might not have been politically. Human rights activists like Fannie Lou Hamer and others—came from the Black church of the 1960s, even though standards had been set for women of color in the early- and mid-nineteenth centuries. Just as standards were being set for white women towards the 1860s, this was close to the era of when slavery ‘officially’ ended in 1865. In 1865, this was at the end of the Civil War and when slavery was supposed to be over, because the North (the Union) won over the South (the Confederacy). Women of color were still looked upon as inferior by not only white men but men of color as well. They were not necessarily afforded any graces by their male counterparts of the same race. Indeed, much of what passes today for polite civility would simply not be found among white men towards Black women—although it is obviously clear that Black women were not totally repulsive to the white man, as many a white slave owner had relations with Black women who were slaves on his plantation(s). Thus, many white men profited handsomely from having relations with the slaves’ women. One of these benefits was having children from having had relations with Black women. This ensured that Black slave women were tied to the plantation, because if they had a child or children with the Master of the plantation, it was less likely that they would attempt to run away because they couldn’t thus bring their child or children with them. So, this not only reinforced the loyalty of the slaves, but it made sure that Black women would stay in their ‘place,’ according to what was taught in accordance with Scriptures—which were heavily regarded in the South. Of course, to have said that there were no racial motives behind the subjugation of women would have been false. One of the reasons Black women were held back was because of the mere fact that they were not only Black—but also women, which made them less than human. In fact, even Black men were seen for their inherent value—to some extent—as men. Whereas, in the case of the Black woman, she was not regarded as being anything more than chattel or a sort of second wife for a white man. Unfortunately, many Black women, as a result of this lopsided view of things, still have to stand up for themselves since they are not respected wherever they go, unlike what white women are used to having happen. Black women usually have to earn peoples’ respect, and prove that they add value—often needlessly feeling that they have to prove themselves over and over again to boot. Conclusion Barbara Welter’s The Cult of True Womanhood definitely serves as a warning and a beacon of hope to those who necessarily seek to either destroy or maintain the glass ceilings or walls that women find themselves coming up against in the 21st century. In light of what has been mentioned in this article, which was published in American Quarterly in 1966—it should be noted that, taking into account the historical, classist, and racial worldviews—that anyone who reads this article should look at this piece from those viewpoints. It’s important to note that what now passes for liberation in the womens’ movement is still not enough. Women must keep pushing boundaries in order to reach new heights and levels as they come to realize their true place in society—not as servants but as epitomes of society. Women have come to the place where they can have their cake and eat it, too. However, one must not let that attitude stop women from achieving their set goals. Young women should be encouraged to go to college and to keep earning good grades from elementary school on up. Young women should be encouraged to dress modestly and love moderately—and that they should have adequate education about all the things that concern them in life, not just domestic matters. Older women should be told to be examples for younger girls, and to teach them what they wish they had been taught when they were young. Little girls should still be told that they can grow up to do anything and be anything they want to be—whatever their hearts’ desires. Because, ultimately, it is what we read about what defines true womanhood that ultimately will shape generations of girls and women for a long time to come, that’s for certain. WORKS CITED Welter, Barbara. The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820-1860. American Quarterly 18 (2): 151-174. Read More