It happened again.

[Hollandmichigan]

(04-23-2012 09:18 PM)Persnickety Polecat Wrote:  

(04-23-2012 09:11 PM)Hollandmichigan Wrote:  The religous aspect to marriage aside, culture in the 1920s was definitely much more centered around male dominance... A woman with a career would have been unheard of, let alone an unmarried woman living independently.

i

That's nonsense. You're buying into rewritten history. Why do you suppose so many women died in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire (long before 1925, incidentally)? Do you think they were there -- what? -- shopping? No. They were working. Unmarried, young women, working. Maybe middle and upper-middle class women submitted to the patriarchy, but the average working class woman *worked*. It wasn't anywhere near as abnormal as the history books would have you believe.

Incidentally, my grandmother worked full-time as an editor of a newspaper -- and she was firmly in the middle class -- and married AND had children. But that was a bit past 1925.

Marriage was about children. Family. Property. Not providing for women. If it was only about providing for women, then only patriarchal cultures would have the institution, and that's not the case. Every culture has some form of marriage.

Wow it looks like i need to educate myself as well! Of course ive always known this (e.g. Amelia earhart) i just never made the connectiin in my mind. Thanks!