# data[].attributes.headline
Second Wave Feminism--Reducing inequality at home, work, in family law, and overall power. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Second Wave Feminism--Reducing inequality at home, work, in family law, and overall power. 

# data[].attributes.body
1949: Simone de Beauvoir's book, The Second Sex, about male-centered ideology (women=other)
1960: FDA approves birth control pill
1963: Betty Friedan's book The Feminine Mystique, objecting to limitation of women as housewives
1964: Setting of The Secret Life of Bees
1973: Roe v. wade #NoMoreHangers
1982: Equal Rights Amendment dies by not meeting ratification deadline
1980-1996: Kidd's spiritual journey from Traditional Christianity to Feminist Theology

#ERAYes

# data[].attributes.body
Prior to WWII, women working women was uncommon, however, Rosie the Riveter, the iconic image of WWII, changed this. The poster was used as propaganda to get women to support the war effort at home, filling the jobs men left behind.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Rosie-the-Riveter

# data[].attributes.body
#HowRosieGotHerName #RosieTheRiveter #song

# data[].attributes.body
Post WWII women were again shut out of the work place and guided to be the picture perfect housewife.
#suburbs #uniformity #housewife

# data[].attributes.body
“The problem lay buried, unspoken, for many years in the minds of American woman. It was a strange strain, a sense of dissatisfaction, a yearning that woman suffered in the middle of the 20th century in the United States” ( Friedan 15).

Betty Friedan challenged women being pushed out of the workforce by coining the term “Feminine Mystique” as a way to describe from the sexist view that a women is fulfilled with her domestic duties of the household.

# data[].attributes.body
“If a woman had a problem in the 1950s and 1960s, she knew that something must be wrong with her marriage, or with her self. Other women were satisfied with their lives, she thought. What kind of woman was she if she did not feel this mysterious fulfillment waxing the kitchen floor?” (Friedan 19).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Three feminists from different generations revisit Betty Friedan's groundbreaking book on its 50th anniversary. How have things changed for women in 50 years? Plus, part one of the conversation.

Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique was published 50 years ago this month, all but bringing the nascent second-wave feminist movement to the national spotlight. We asked three feminists, each representing a different generation, to discuss the intellectual legacy of the book. Letty Cottin Pogrebin is a founding editor of the feminist Ms. Magazine; Alisa Solomon is a drama critic and a journalism professor at Columbia University; Jessica Bennett is the executive editor of Tumblr and a former Newsweek senior writer. In part two of the conversation, they examine how the feminist movement has changed in five decades.

Alisa: Today, the feminist discourse seems to me to have narrowed. All those magazine pieces that still come out bemoaning how women can't have it all seem to leave out the structural impediments to equality. Has 21st-century feminism so totally bought into the larger cultural insistence on individualism that we make no demands on the workplace or the state? Friedan helped teach us that the personal is political. Has the political now become completely personal?

Jess: I wonder how much of this has to do with the fact that feminism as a "movement" has waned. There are certainly young women who care about women's issues today, there are bloggers and writers and organizers. But there is no Gloria Steinem or Betty Friedan. There's no marching in the streets (at least not without our tops off). Is it harder to make demands on an institutional level if it doesn't feel like there's a movement behind us?

Today, the message is that you can be anything. Supreme Court justice. Secretary of State. Astronaut. President. And yet I've often wondered if that message is almost too rosy. Young women today are excelling in every way imaginable: better grades, better graduation rates, and so on. But does that only set them up for a shock? Gail Collins said in an interview with The Atlantic this week that young women who face discrimination today often "don't know what to do." The discrimination itself is subtle, and so when it does come up it's almost hard to recognize it. By the time I was in my 20s and starting my career, it was as if the idea of gender as an inhibitor was so passé that I'd never even considered it.

Alisa: There's no Big Sexist Jerk guarding the gates, thus, enormous challenges for any kind of movement building. Friedan encouraged women toward self-actualization-not abandonment of their families by any stretch, but widening of their worlds and aspirations. That ground shifted-and maybe resettled without the more difficult, sociopolitical reconfiguring that real equality would require. If it's no longer a "feminine mystique" that must be bared and examined, is it the old mystique of power, operating in ways that have come to appear anonymous and natural, that poses the problem? And how in heaven's name do you organize to change that?

Jess: Rather than fighting the system, or making demands on it, we're trying to work within it, individually, to get ahead. I'm reading Sheryl Sandberg's new book right now, Lean In, which argues (among other things) that women must learn to work within the system in their efforts to rise to power, even if they want to fight on a structural level-simply because it's what we can more easily control. I tend to agree, but this also strikes me as a particularly third-wave phenomenon, of fighting within the system, for ourselves, rather than banding together to fight the system as a whole. Whether it's effective or not, it's a very "me, then us" tactic. It actually pits women against each other.

Letty: The trouble is once they get power, they seem to change things for themselves-the female elites-but they don't change policies for everyone and make sure systemic change holds for the future. Furthermore, change doesn't trickle down because they don't make common cause with women who are the company's receptionists, file clerks, and office cleaners.

Alisa: That's the same lack of common cause among women that Friedan herself was criticized for: she pretty much ignored class and race. Working-class women have always had jobs outside the home, of course, and a second shift in the home. Gender discrimination and prevailing assumptions about women's domestic responsibilities certainly impinged those lives, but Friedan didn't seem interested in-or know how to discuss-ways the "mystique" worked on them. I wonder, too, whether The Feminine Mystique played into the emerging vilification of poor African-American women at the time. I'm thinking of the notorious Moynihan Report that came out just a year or so after Friedan's book and basically blamed black people for the consequences of poverty. The argument went that single-mother households-"matriarchies" as Moynihan termed them-emasculated men in the community, led to children's poor academic achievement, and even to high crime rates. To this day, the conservative answer to poverty has nothing to do with economics or jobs or housing or education. It's marriage!

Letty: Today's average young woman seems capable of reacting with appropriate outrage to injustices committed against her. What's missing is the macro-analysis, the impulse toward solidarity, the gut-level identification with one's "sisters"-including women of color, and poor and working-class women-and the willingness to organize or act collectively even if resistance makes you appear a tad unfeminine.

But generally speaking, unless their personal ox is being gored, few young women seem willing to make waves. (Block that mixed metaphor!) Maybe they don't want to be marked as troublemakers, or maybe they're afraid of reprisals, or maybe what we're seeing is the return of the "good girl," to borrow a phrase from Lynn Povich's book title, which brings us back to Jess's Newsweek story a couple years ago assessing the gender discrimination case from 1970 and its legacy.

Jess: I think to myself, couldn't this so easily be solved just by teaching women's history in schools?! I pretty much gave myself an education in our own history once I realized how little I knew-but it was only through discovering the story of the Newsweek women, and everything that was happening around them at the time, that even convinced me that I needed to know it. The problem wasn't just that I didn't learn things that I wish I'd known, it was that I genuinely didn't think I needed to know them.

Letty: Such an important point! What troubles me about the fact that The Feminine Mystique is not read in colleges anymore is that this is part of a clear social pattern (I almost said conspiracy) to alienate one generation from the other so that each generation is condemned to rediscover the same patriarchal injustices in new forms and fight the revolution all over again. I didn't know anything about what the suffragists did 40 years before I was born until I encountered a few paragraphs about them in my sixth-grade history textbook. The accompanying photos made them look like crazy ladies and discontented old maids. ( Plus ça change!) The language of the text suggested that "women were given the vote" rather than that women won the vote after a bravely sustained 60-year struggle- by chaining themselves to the White House gates, moldering in prison, maintaining hunger strikes (and being painfully force fed), and otherwise putting their lives and bodies on the line.

The women of each subsequent generation are encouraged/pressured to dissociate themselves from the radical heroism of the prior generation. Rather than today's young women feeling like the heirs to a glorious legacy, they disavow those who came before. Who wants to be one of "Them" when you can be new, cool, critical, and ironic?

Alisa: Does feminism require leaders in the 21st century? Organizing, yes. But can it happen in the messy, horizontal, DIY-Occupy style, without offices and boards of directors and spokespeople and fundraising campaigns? My two cents: it had better!

Jess: Great organizing can certainly happen in the messy, DIY-Occupy style, without the hierarchy of campaigns. And great organizing and protest can happen online, via massive petitions, via blogging, via Twitter campaigns and hashtags, and so forth. I'm thinking, say, of the campaign by three New Jersey young women to have a female moderator of the presidential debates, which earned 170,000 signatures on Change.org.

The problem, it seems, is that these examples are few and far between. Most of these campaigns deal in the specific over the institutional-i.e., a female moderator, which is fantastic but doesn't address the larger institutional problems of why there was no female moderator in the first place, or why there are so few women at the heads of news organizations, or businesses, and so on. It's certainly easier (and perhaps more effective) to focus on specific, targeted causes. But what about the larger problems? What about the problems that would really require a massive sense of anger, among women all across the country, to change?

Letty: I keep a New Yorker cartoon on my study's wall whose caption says: "The subject of tonight's panel is: Why are there no women on this panel?"

Alisa: Lest I leave off on a pessimistic note, I hasten to add: There is so much great local organizing being done in communities, workplaces, schools, religious institutions ... Maybe it's just a different model of movement making than we saw, and needed, 50 years ago, and one just has to plug in where she feels drawn and do the work.

I was so struck reading that 1997 addendum Friedan wrote for The Feminine Mystique by her apparent certainty that ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment was right around the corner. Could such legislation even pass Congress today?

Oh, wait, I said I wasn't going to be pessimistic ...

Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique was published 50 years ago this month, all but bringing the nascent second-wave feminist movement to the national spotlight. We asked three feminists, each representing a different generation, to discuss the intellectual legacy of the book. Letty Cottin Pogrebin is a founding editor of the feminist Ms. Magazine; Alisa Solomon is a drama critic and a journalism professor at Columbia University; Jessica Bennett is the executive editor of Tumblr and a former Newsweek senior writer. In part two of the conversation, they examine how the feminist movement has changed in five decades.

Alisa: Today, the feminist discourse seems to me to have narrowed. All those magazine pieces that still come out bemoaning how women can't have it all seem to leave out the structural impediments to equality. Has 21st-century feminism so totally bought into the larger cultural insistence on individualism that we make no demands on the workplace or the state? Friedan helped teach us that the personal is political. Has the political now become completely personal?

Jess: I wonder how much of this has to do with the fact that feminism as a "movement" has waned. There are certainly young women who care about women's issues today, there are bloggers and writers and organizers. But there is no Gloria Steinem or Betty Friedan. There's no marching in the streets (at least not without our tops off). Is it harder to make demands on an institutional level if it doesn't feel like there's a movement behind us?

Today, the message is that you can be anything. Supreme Court justice. Secretary of State. Astronaut. President. And yet I've often wondered if that message is almost too rosy. Young women today are excelling in every way imaginable: better grades, better graduation rates, and so on. But does that only set them up for a shock? Gail Collins said in an interview with The Atlantic this week that young women who face discrimination today often "don't know what to do." The discrimination itself is subtle, and so when it does come up it's almost hard to recognize it. By the time I was in my 20s and starting my career, it was as if the idea of gender as an inhibitor was so passé that I'd never even considered it.

Alisa: There's no Big Sexist Jerk guarding the gates, thus, enormous challenges for any kind of movement building. Friedan encouraged women toward self-actualization-not abandonment of their families by any stretch, but widening of their worlds and aspirations. That ground shifted-and maybe resettled without the more difficult, sociopolitical reconfiguring that real equality would require. If it's no longer a "feminine mystique" that must be bared and examined, is it the old mystique of power, operating in ways that have come to appear anonymous and natural, that poses the problem? And how in heaven's name do you organize to change that?

Jess: Rather than fighting the system, or making demands on it, we're trying to work within it, individually, to get ahead. I'm reading Sheryl Sandberg's new book right now, Lean In, which argues (among other things) that women must learn to work within the system in their efforts to rise to power, even if they want to fight on a structural level-simply because it's what we can more easily control. I tend to agree, but this also strikes me as a particularly third-wave phenomenon, of fighting within the system, for ourselves, rather than banding together to fight the system as a whole. Whether it's effective or not, it's a very "me, then us" tactic. It actually pits women against each other.

Letty: The trouble is once they get power, they seem to change things for themselves-the female elites-but they don't change policies for everyone and make sure systemic change holds for the future. Furthermore, change doesn't trickle down because they don't make common cause with women who are the company's receptionists, file clerks, and office cleaners.

Alisa: That's the same lack of common cause among women that Friedan herself was criticized for: she pretty much ignored class and race. Working-class women have always had jobs outside the home, of course, and a second shift in the home. Gender discrimination and prevailing assumptions about women's domestic responsibilities certainly impinged those lives, but Friedan didn't seem interested in-or know how to discuss-ways the "mystique" worked on them. I wonder, too, whether The Feminine Mystique played into the emerging vilification of poor African-American women at the time. I'm thinking of the notorious Moynihan Report that came out just a year or so after Friedan's book and basically blamed black people for the consequences of poverty. The argument went that single-mother households-"matriarchies" as Moynihan termed them-emasculated men in the community, led to children's poor academic achievement, and even to high crime rates. To this day, the conservative answer to poverty has nothing to do with economics or jobs or housing or education. It's marriage!

Letty: Today's average young woman seems capable of reacting with appropriate outrage to injustices committed against her. What's missing is the macro-analysis, the impulse toward solidarity, the gut-level identification with one's "sisters"-including women of color, and poor and working-class women-and the willingness to organize or act collectively even if resistance makes you appear a tad unfeminine.

But generally speaking, unless their personal ox is being gored, few young women seem willing to make waves. (Block that mixed metaphor!) Maybe they don't want to be marked as troublemakers, or maybe they're afraid of reprisals, or maybe what we're seeing is the return of the "good girl," to borrow a phrase from Lynn Povich's book title, which brings us back to Jess's Newsweek story a couple years ago assessing the gender discrimination case from 1970 and its legacy.

Jess: I think to myself, couldn't this so easily be solved just by teaching women's history in schools?! I pretty much gave myself an education in our own history once I realized how little I knew-but it was only through discovering the story of the Newsweek women, and everything that was happening around them at the time, that even convinced me that I needed to know it. The problem wasn't just that I didn't learn things that I wish I'd known, it was that I genuinely didn't think I needed to know them.

Letty: Such an important point! What troubles me about the fact that The Feminine Mystique is not read in colleges anymore is that this is part of a clear social pattern (I almost said conspiracy) to alienate one generation from the other so that each generation is condemned to rediscover the same patriarchal injustices in new forms and fight the revolution all over again. I didn't know anything about what the suffragists did 40 years before I was born until I encountered a few paragraphs about them in my sixth-grade history textbook. The accompanying photos made them look like crazy ladies and discontented old maids. ( Plus ça change!) The language of the text suggested that "women were given the vote" rather than that women won the vote after a bravely sustained 60-year struggle- by chaining themselves to the White House gates, moldering in prison, maintaining hunger strikes (and being painfully force fed), and otherwise putting their lives and bodies on the line.

The women of each subsequent generation are encouraged/pressured to dissociate themselves from the radical heroism of the prior generation. Rather than today's young women feeling like the heirs to a glorious legacy, they disavow those who came before. Who wants to be one of "Them" when you can be new, cool, critical, and ironic?

Alisa: Does feminism require leaders in the 21st century? Organizing, yes. But can it happen in the messy, horizontal, DIY-Occupy style, without offices and boards of directors and spokespeople and fundraising campaigns? My two cents: it had better!

Jess: Great organizing can certainly happen in the messy, DIY-Occupy style, without the hierarchy of campaigns. And great organizing and protest can happen online, via massive petitions, via blogging, via Twitter campaigns and hashtags, and so forth. I'm thinking, say, of the campaign by three New Jersey young women to have a female moderator of the presidential debates, which earned 170,000 signatures on Change.org.

The problem, it seems, is that these examples are few and far between. Most of these campaigns deal in the specific over the institutional-i.e., a female moderator, which is fantastic but doesn't address the larger institutional problems of why there was no female moderator in the first place, or why there are so few women at the heads of news organizations, or businesses, and so on. It's certainly easier (and perhaps more effective) to focus on specific, targeted causes. But what about the larger problems? What about the problems that would really require a massive sense of anger, among women all across the country, to change?

Letty: I keep a New Yorker cartoon on my study's wall whose caption says: "The subject of tonight's panel is: Why are there no women on this panel?"

Alisa: Lest I leave off on a pessimistic note, I hasten to add: There is so much great local organizing being done in communities, workplaces, schools, religious institutions ... Maybe it's just a different model of movement making than we saw, and needed, 50 years ago, and one just has to plug in where she feels drawn and do the work.

I was so struck reading that 1997 addendum Friedan wrote for The Feminine Mystique by her apparent certainty that ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment was right around the corner. Could such legislation even pass Congress today?

Oh, wait, I said I wasn't going to be pessimistic ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'The Feminine Mystique' at 50, Part 2: Three Feminists on What It Means Today

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Three feminists from different generations revisit Betty Friedan's groundbreaking book on its 50th anniversary. How have things changed for women in 50 years? Plus, part one of the conversation. Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique was published 50 years ago this month, all but bringing the nascent second-wave feminist movement to the national spotlight.

# data[].attributes.headline
“I pointed to the honey jars. ‘Where did you get those?’ He thought the tone of shock in my voice was really consternation. ‘I know what you mean. A lot of folks won’t buy it ‘cause it’s got the Virgin Mary pictured as a colored woman, but see, that’s because the women who makes the honey is colored herself’” (Kidd 64).  

# data[].attributes.subject
“I pointed to the honey jars. ‘Where did you get those?’ He thought the tone of shock in my voice was really consternation. ‘I know what you mean. A lot of folks won’t buy it ‘cause it’s got the Virgin Mary pictured as a colored woman, but see, that’s because the women who makes the honey is colored herself’” (Kidd 64).  

# data[].attributes.body
August challenges societal standards

August is a black and a woman who own her own business

Her business image is a colored version of the Virgin Mary

She finds fulfillment outside of the home

August rises above societal views and uses her power to find fulfillment and succeed in her goals.

# data[].attributes.body
The civil rights movements and the women’s rights movements had close ties as they were both seeking change.

First wave feminism was inspired by the abolition movement, when the white women realized how powerless women were being unable to vote.

Second wave feminism worked with the civil rights movement to secure rights and increased equality for the two minorities.

# data[].attributes.body
“White feminists defined gender as the principal source of their exclusion from full participation in American life; Black women were forced to confront the interplay between racism and sexism and to figure out how to make Black men think about gender issues while making white women think about racial issues”

Black women had to be extra diligent because they were part of both minorities therefore making them a minority of a minority.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/feminism/The-second-wave-of-feminism#ref216012

# data[].attributes.body
Outlawed discrimination in employment, voting, and use of public facilities for

Race

Color

National origin and religion

Title VII = women

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WASHINGTON (AP) - On July 2, 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964, one of the most significant civil rights achievements in U.S. history. This new law made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; It ended school, work and public facility discrimination, and barred unequal application of voter registration requirements.

Five hours after Congress approved the law, Johnson signed it, then turned and handed pens to various key figures in getting the legislation passed, including Attorney General Robert Kennedy. He went on to address the country in a nationally televised address, saying the law was a challenge for the United States to "eliminate the last vestiges of injustice in our beloved country."

READ MORE: UPDATE: Police Shootings Protest In Oakland Turns Violent; Windows Broken, Fires Ignited; Businesses Vandalized

In observing the law's 50th anniversary Wednesday, President Barack Obama said "few pieces of legislation have defined our national identity as distinctly, or as powerfully."

"It transformed the concepts of justice, equality, and democracy for generations to come," Obama said.

___

Here are five things to know about the Civil Rights Act of 1964:

HISTORY

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was not the first attempt by Congress to pass sweeping legislation aimed at ending discrimination.

According to Congresslink.org, legislation failed in the House and Senate every year from 1945 until 1957, when Congress passed, and President Dwight Eisenhower signed, a law allowing federal prosecutors to seek court injunctions to stop voting rights interference. That law, the Civil Rights Act of 1957, also created the Justice Department's civil rights section, and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, then a Democrat, filibustered the bill for 24 hours and 18 minutes, the longest one-man filibuster on record.

That law was followed by the Civil Rights Act of 1960, which introduced penalties for obstructing or attempting to obstruct someone's attempt to register to vote or actually vote, and for obstructing federal court orders in school discrimination cases.

PRESIDENTIAL POWER

President John F. Kennedy first suggested the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in a televised speech from the Oval Office. He said he would ask Congress "to make a commitment it has not fully made in this century to the proposition that race has no place in American life or law." Kennedy was assassinated before the bill could become law.

Johnson, in addressing a joint session of Congress on Nov. 27, 1963, said "no memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently honor President Kennedy's memory" than passing the civil rights bill.

WOMEN TOO ...

Rep. Howard Smith, D-Va., chairman of the House Rules Committee, advocated adding the word "sex" behind "religion" to the original bill to address gender equality. "I do not think it can do any harm to this legislation; maybe it can do some good," he said. Some suggested that Smith, a segregationist Democrat, was actually attempting to kill the bill; He said his intention was to ensure white women got the same protection.

Segregationists and conservative Democrats supported Smith's amendment. Northern Republicans - who supported the bill - opposed the amendment out of fear that it could kill the entire bill. One woman lawmaker, Rep. Edith Green, D-Ore., agreed, saying it was more important to secure rights for blacks first.

"For every discrimination that has been made against a woman in this country, there has been ten times as much discrimination against the Negro," Green said.

Rep. Martha Griffiths, D-Mich., opposed efforts to take women out. "A vote against this amendment today by a white man is a vote against his wife, or his widow, or his daughter or his sister," she said.

READ MORE: Kansas Camper Arrested In Connection With Boulder Creek Vegetation Fires

The House approved the amendment.

MARTIN and MALCOLM

Because of the Civil Rights Act, two civil rights activists with very different approaches, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, had their first and only face-to-face encounter. On March 26, 1964, King and Malcolm X were both in Washington for the Senate debate on the Civil Rights Act. According to Peter Louis Goldman, author of a book about Malcolm X, said the Muslim activist slipped into the back row of one of King's news conferences. When King left by one door, Malcolm X left by another and intercepted him.

"Well, Malcolm, good to see you," King said.

"Good to see you," Malcolm X replied.

They were photographed smiling warmly and shaking hands. As they parted, Goldman said, Malcolm X remarked jokingly: "Now you're going to get investigated."

In his autobiography, King said of the encounter: "Circumstances didn't enable me to talk with him for more than a minute."

SINCE THE LAW ...

Congress followed up with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which banned the use of literacy tests, added federal oversight for minority voters and allowed federal prosecutors to investigate the use of poll taxes in state and local elections. The law was prompted in part by the "Bloody Sunday" attack by police on marchers crossing a Selma, Alabama, bridge that year.

That same year, Johnson issued Executive Order 11246, which bans government contractors from discriminating in employment decisions, and requires them to "take affirmative action" to ensure that employees are treated without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, created as a result of the 1964 law, came into being in 1965 to enforce federal laws making it illegal to discriminate at work. Most employers with at least 15 workers are covered by the EEOC.

Seven days after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968, which provided equal housing opportunities regardless of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin.

___

On the Net:

The Civil Rights Act of 1964: http://research.archives.gov/description/299891

Civil Rights Legislation: http://civilrights.lbjlibrary.org/

Senate history of the Civil Rights Act: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/CivilRightsAct1964.htm

MORE NEWS: Four Wounded In Overnight San Jose Shootings

House history of the Civil Rights Act: http://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/Civil-Rights/1964-Essay/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Things To Know About The Civil Rights Act Of 1964

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
WASHINGTON (AP) - On July 2, 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964, one of the most significant civil rights achievements in U.S. history. This new law made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; It ended school, work and public facility discrimination, and barred unequal application of voter registration requirements.

# data[].attributes.body
Women were added to the Civil Rights Act to prevent the act’s passage, because that would be even more radical and outrageous

#PsychYouThought #Passed #UnoReverse

# data[].attributes.headline
“I wandered in for lunch to find Rosaleen wearing a new dress and her hair freshly plaited [...] ‘ your dress is pretty’ I lied [...] ‘You going somewhere?’ I asked. ‘She sure is,’ said August, stepping into the room, smiling at Rosaleen. ‘I’m going to finish what I started, Rosaleen said, lifting her chin. ‘I’m going to register to vote’” (Kidd 281).

# data[].attributes.subject
“I wandered in for lunch to find Rosaleen wearing a new dress and her hair freshly plaited [...] ‘ your dress is pretty’ I lied [...] ‘You going somewhere?’ I asked. ‘She sure is,’ said August, stepping into the room, smiling at Rosaleen. ‘I’m going to finish what I started, Rosaleen said, lifting her chin. ‘I’m going to register to vote’” (Kidd 281).

# data[].attributes.body
Dressing up for the occasion shows how important the Civil rights act of 1964 was to Rosaleen

Showcases that although it is a special day, dressing nicely will help present a more put together image of the black community, combating the heathen stereotype

# data[].attributes.body
Timeline #Herstory

# data[].attributes.headline
First Wave Feminism--basic equal rights like voting

# data[].attributes.subject
First Wave Feminism--basic equal rights like voting

# data[].attributes.body
1848: Seneca Falls Convention

1872: Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting
1878: Fist women's suffrage amendment introduced to Congress

1920: Ratification of 19th amendment (all women gain the right to vote in America)
1948: Sue Monk Kidd is born

#VotesForWomen

# data[].attributes.body
With the passage of the Civil Rights Act, Rosaleen finds herself in the same position as suffragettes after the 19th amendment was passed: the government finally recognizes her as a valued member of a voting democracy.

However, her path is not easy, and she is physically attacked on her way to voter registration, which is analogous to the fact that feminist struggles were not over after the 19th amendment. #Suffragettes

It is also relevant that future waves of feminism emphasized intersectionality: the common threads between oppression of women and racial minorities.

# data[].attributes.body
The next three quotes are a continuous passage from the book.

# data[].attributes.headline
(1) “I decided against marrying altogether. There were enough restrictions in my life without someone expecting me to wait on him hand and foot. Not that I’m against marrying, Lily. I’m just against how it’s set up" (Kidd 145). 

# data[].attributes.subject
(1) “I decided against marrying altogether. There were enough restrictions in my life without someone expecting me to wait on him hand and foot. Not that I’m against marrying, Lily. I’m just against how it’s set up" (Kidd 145). 

# data[].attributes.body
August Boatwright is an entrepreneur as a woman of color, and owes that possibility to suffragettes dating back to the mid-1800s, who had to fight for many decades to get recognition as equal citizens in the USA, with all the rights going along with citizenship.

# data[].attributes.headline
(2) "I was thinking, Well, it’s not just marriage that’s set up like that. What about me waiting on T. Ray hand and foot, and we were just father and daughter? Pour me some more tea, Lily. Polish my shoes, Lily. Go get the truck keys, Lily. I sincerely hoped she didn’t mean this sort of thing went on in a marriage" (Kidd 145). 

# data[].attributes.subject
(2) "I was thinking, Well, it’s not just marriage that’s set up like that. What about me waiting on T. Ray hand and foot, and we were just father and daughter? Pour me some more tea, Lily. Polish my shoes, Lily. Go get the truck keys, Lily. I sincerely hoped she didn’t mean this sort of thing went on in a marriage" (Kidd 145). 

# data[].attributes.body
Lily shows a naïveté about marriage that may also symbolize a larger naïveté about gender issues (perhaps taking the fruits of first wave feminism for granted). In other words, a girl from 100 years earlier would be societally conditioned to know they would be waiting on a husband hand and foot after marriage

# data[].attributes.headline
(3) “Weren’t you ever in love?” I asked.“Being in love and getting married, now, that’s two different things. I was in love once, of course I was. Nobody should go through life without falling in love.”“But you didn’t love him enough to marry him?”She smiled at me. “I loved him enough,” she said. “I just loved my freedom more” (Kidd 146).  

# data[].attributes.subject
(3) “Weren’t you ever in love?” I asked.“Being in love and getting married, now, that’s two different things. I was in love once, of course I was. Nobody should go through life without falling in love.”“But you didn’t love him enough to marry him?”She smiled at me. “I loved him enough,” she said. “I just loved my freedom more” (Kidd 146).  

# data[].attributes.body
During first wave feminism, women fought for basic legal rights like owning property, voting, and some measure of independence from husbands regarding business matters.

#MissIndependent

# data[].attributes.body
Link #EveWasFramed

# data[].attributes.headline
“With woman integrated in the family and society, her magic is dissipated rather than transformed; reduced to the condition of servant, she is no longer than unconquered prey incarnating all the treasures of nature...marriage kills love...she becomes his property” (de Beauvoir 187). 

# data[].attributes.subject
“With woman integrated in the family and society, her magic is dissipated rather than transformed; reduced to the condition of servant, she is no longer than unconquered prey incarnating all the treasures of nature...marriage kills love...she becomes his property” (de Beauvoir 187). 

# data[].attributes.body
The quote above matches what August says to Lily about what she does not like about how marriage is set up.

This quote is from Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex (written in 1949, between the First and Second waves of Feminism)

# data[].attributes.body
During the 1960s and 1970s, in parallel with the civil rights movement, feminists called out inequalities in the workplace. August Boatwright is an entrepreneur, not dependent on men for her income. She is the boss of a male employee at her business (Zach). June works as a teacher, and her choice to marry or not marry is not constrained by economic considerations. May is able to keep a roof over her head without being controlled by a man, whether as an employer or family member.

# data[].attributes.body
The next three sections are a continuous passage.

# data[].attributes.headline
(1) "I had thought my real chance would come from going to charm school at the Women’s Club last spring. Friday afternoons for six weeks, but I got barred because I didn’t have a mother, a grandmother, or even a measly aunt to present me with a white rose at the closing ceremony. Rosaleen doing it was against the rules. I cried until I threw up in the sink" (Kidd 9)

# data[].attributes.subject
(1) "I had thought my real chance would come from going to charm school at the Women’s Club last spring. Friday afternoons for six weeks, but I got barred because I didn’t have a mother, a grandmother, or even a measly aunt to present me with a white rose at the closing ceremony. Rosaleen doing it was against the rules. I cried until I threw up in the sink" (Kidd 9)

# data[].attributes.body
Lily’s experience (rejection by the Women’s club because of her family situation) juxtaposes femininity (charm school) with the anti-feminism of not being inclusive to all females.

# data[].attributes.headline
(2) “You’re charming enough,” Rosaleen had said, washing the vomit out of the sink basin. “You don’t need to go to some high-falutin school to get charm" (Kidd 9)

# data[].attributes.subject
(2) “You’re charming enough,” Rosaleen had said, washing the vomit out of the sink basin. “You don’t need to go to some high-falutin school to get charm" (Kidd 9)

# data[].attributes.body
Second wave feminism emphasized the need for women to stop working against each other along lines of race, class, and social position.

# data[].attributes.headline
(3) “I do so,” I said. “They teach everything. How to walk and pivot, what to do with your ankles when you sit in a chair, how to get into a car, pour tea, take off your gloves” (Kidd 10). 

# data[].attributes.subject
(3) “I do so,” I said. “They teach everything. How to walk and pivot, what to do with your ankles when you sit in a chair, how to get into a car, pour tea, take off your gloves” (Kidd 10). 

# data[].attributes.body
when the second wave feminist Gloria Steinem started Ms. magazine, it was a stark contrast to the kind of magazine previously aimed at women (which would be concerned with the kinds of things Lily mentions as topics in charm school).

# data[].attributes.body
From Gloria Steinem's book: Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions (1983) #FishNeedsABicycle

# data[].attributes.headline
“The uncomfortable truth seems to be that the amount of talk by women has been measured less against the amount of men’s talk than against the expectation of female silence" (Steinem 332).

# data[].attributes.subject
“The uncomfortable truth seems to be that the amount of talk by women has been measured less against the amount of men’s talk than against the expectation of female silence" (Steinem 332).

# data[].attributes.body
This quote is relevant to the behavior of T. Ray and the men who attacked Rosaleen.

# data[].attributes.headline
“Power is being redefined. Women often explain with care that we mean power to control our lives, but not to dominate others" (Steinem 206).

# data[].attributes.subject
“Power is being redefined. Women often explain with care that we mean power to control our lives, but not to dominate others" (Steinem 206).

# data[].attributes.body
This quote is relevant to how the Boatwright sisters live their lives.

# data[].attributes.body
Image link #ERA #MsMagazine

# data[].attributes.headline
“For sad if obvious reasons, women (especially white women who are seduced by access to the powerful) are the only discriminated-against group whose members seem to think that, if they don’t take themselves seriously, someone else will" (Steinem 82).

# data[].attributes.subject
“For sad if obvious reasons, women (especially white women who are seduced by access to the powerful) are the only discriminated-against group whose members seem to think that, if they don’t take themselves seriously, someone else will" (Steinem 82).

# data[].attributes.body
Both Lily and her mother seem, at times, to expect T. Ray to come to the realization that he must treat them better, though really there is no basis for expecting this.

# data[].attributes.headline
Third Wave Feminism--Validating the female experience and embracing individual identity

# data[].attributes.subject
Third Wave Feminism--Validating the female experience and embracing individual identity

# data[].attributes.body
1991: Anita Hill testimony during Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings
Early 90's: riot grrrl underground feminist punk movement
1994: Violence against women act passes
2002: The Secret Life of Bees published

#RiotGrrrl

# data[].attributes.body
Although the setting of the book precedes 1990s feminism, the author’s own spiritual journey toward feminist theology happens during the third wave. The emphasis on Mary as a female and a mother pushes back against centuries of patriarchy within Christianity. The history of the Church is male-dominated, but with the Black Madonna, Mary is reclaimed as an icon of protection, and in the book the Sisters create a female-led denomination. This is parallel to women entering and occupying formerly male-dominated cultural spaces like punk rock (riot grrrl) sports (rise of women’s professional teams), and the military.

# data[].attributes.headline
In third wave feminism, body and sex positivity are part of how activists reclaimed femininity as a source of power rather than weakness or shame. In addition, male-dominated spaces like religion were targeted as new horizons in seeking female equality.

# data[].attributes.subject
In third wave feminism, body and sex positivity are part of how activists reclaimed femininity as a source of power rather than weakness or shame. In addition, male-dominated spaces like religion were targeted as new horizons in seeking female equality.

# data[].attributes.body
“Pearled light poured through the the open window behind me, molding to my skin, giving me a true halo, not just around my head but across my shoulders, among my ribs and thighs. I was the last person to deserve a halo, but I studied the effect, cupping my hands under my breasts, studying my pinky-brown nipples, the thin curves of my waist, every soft and glowing turn. It was the first time I’d felt like more than a scraggly girl” (Kidd 134).

# data[].attributes.body
When Lily examines herself in the mirror, there is a mixing of symbolism across motifs of religion (halo as a symbol of goodness/purity) and womanhood (bodily curves as a symbol of reaching maturity).

By introducing this halo, Kidd refuses to connect the female nude form to sense of shame it traditionally receives in the context of Christian modesty. Feminist theology sees the maternal figure of Mary as being worthy of worship, but also as a point of identity with all females, which is why Kidd associates Lily’s body with the divine.

#QueenB

# data[].attributes.body
One of the most famous third wave feminists was Naomi Wolf; the body and sex positivity indicated in the passage with Lily looking in the mirror is also reflected in the following Naomi Wolf quotes:

# data[].attributes.headline
“For I conclude that the enemy is not lipstick, but guilt itself; that we deserve lipstick if we want it, AND free speech; we deserve to be sexual AND serious”

# data[].attributes.subject
“For I conclude that the enemy is not lipstick, but guilt itself; that we deserve lipstick if we want it, AND free speech; we deserve to be sexual AND serious”

# data[].attributes.body
(Wolf)

# data[].attributes.headline
“A cultural fixation on female thinness is. To an obsession about female beauty, but an obsession about female obedience”

# data[].attributes.subject
“A cultural fixation on female thinness is. To an obsession about female beauty, but an obsession about female obedience”

# data[].attributes.body
(Wolf)

#BrownieSundae #SpaghettiTacos
#CheezyDibbles

# data[].attributes.body
#LipstickLiberal

# data[].attributes.headline
Fourth wave feminism--Female empowerment, challenging gender norms, #MeToo movement

# data[].attributes.subject
Fourth wave feminism--Female empowerment, challenging gender norms, #MeToo movement

# data[].attributes.body
2012: Delhí gang rape in India
2016: Hillary Clinton runs for president (and loses) #NastyWoman
2017: Women's March and beginning of #MeToo
2021: Kamala Harris sworn in as Vice President.

#MeToo

# data[].attributes.body
#SupermodelProtest (link is also to an article)

# data[].attributes.headline
"A Mother who radiates self-love and self-acceptance actually VACCINATES her daughter against low self-esteem” (Wolf)

# data[].attributes.subject
"A Mother who radiates self-love and self-acceptance actually VACCINATES her daughter against low self-esteem” (Wolf)

# data[].attributes.body
This Naomi Wolf quote also summarizes the complicated relationship between Lily’s self-doubt and the absence of her mother (and also possibly the mental health of her mother before her death).

#DontBeAnAntiVaxxer #EmpoweredWomenEmpowerWomen

# data[].attributes.body
Virtual pitch