These Working Wives: Representation of the “Two-Job” Woman between the World Wars
Jane Marcellus
Abstract
Jane Marcellus
Abstract
Between 1920 and 1930, the number of married women who held paying jobs increased about 25 percent. While all employed women were controversial, married women were particularly so. The controversy intensified during the 1930s, when policies such as Section 213 of the 1932 Federal Economy Act forced many married women out of work. This paper looks at magazine coverage of the “two-job” wife, as married female workers were known. Examining popular magazines such as Ladies' Home Journal, Harper's, Forbes, and The American, as well as an alternative publication for employed women, it argues that the domestic role was reinforced, often by framing articles in terms of cultural change itself, which was seen by some as benefitting women and by others as victimizing them. Moreover, the paper supports Ruth Schwartz Cowan's argument that the “feminine mystique” was rooted in the interwar years, not the 1950s.
OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Between 1920 and 1930, the number of married women who held paying jobs increased about 25 percent. While all employed women were controversial, married women were particularly so. The controversy intensified during the 1930s, when policies such as Section 213 of the 1932 Federal Economy Act forced many married women out of work. This paper looks at magazine coverage of the “two-job” wife, as married female workers were known. Examining popular magazines such as Ladies' Home Journal, Harper's, Forbes, and The American, as well as an alternative publication for employed women, it argues that the domestic role was reinforced, often by framing articles in terms of cultural change itself, which was seen by some as benefitting women and by others as victimizing them. Moreover, the paper supports Ruth Schwartz Cowan's argument that the “feminine mystique” was rooted in the interwar years, not the 1950s.
Key concepts: Representation (politics), Political science, Sociology, Law, Politics