The article “A New Century of Struggle: Feminism and Antifeminism in the United States, 1920-Present” by Kristin Celello discusses the idea of feminism and how it has evolved in both action as well as portrayal and response. Celello argues that there are at least two main waves of feminism and explains how each wave developed around the social issues of its time and how they have built upon one another since. Celello also argues that feminism is an entity in and of itself and that it develops based on cultural times and instances.

Celello’s argument is compelling and gives an interesting perspective on the idea of feminism not only in the twentieth century, but also today as well. She argues that feminism is not only studied by the actions of feminists, but also by the response and action of people who are “anti-feminists” or traditionalists. She discusses how modern historians of feminism now also study the idea of antifeminism and treat it as another aspect of the entire idea. This brings her to the questions of what both feminism and antifeminism are and how each school of thought defines one another in and of itself.

Celello’s main argument over her text is the idea that feminism has occurred in waves over the course of the twentieth century, and that that is how it is, and should be, studied. She claims that boths waves have shaped one another and defined how each generation of feminists has responded to society and the overall idea of feminism. In fact, Celello argues that at one point, the term “feminism” become associated with such a negative connotation, that modern feminists prefer to not even be associated with the term.

Celello also discusses the idea of how some believe that feminism died off after World War II and that there was not another resurgence for nearly a decade. Celello argues that there was never an actual lull in feminism, but that feminists went about pursuing their goals in less prominent and more subtle ways. She also argues that the “lull” can be blamed upon the narrow focus of studying feminism as well. Celello mentions in her article that many historians of feminism fail to study the movement outside of the “white middle- and upper-class women” and that this is where the perceived lull in activism comes from.^[1] She argues that studying the working class and minority women of the twentieth century will actually show that these women were in fact still very much involved in their activism and actually campaigned for workplace gender equality and “protested (albeit unsuccessfully) their expulsion from jobs…at the end of the war”, where others argue that this was the beginnings of the lull in feminist activism.^[2] She also states that “labor feminists” of the time were actually a crucial part of the so-called second wave of feminism in the 1960s and 1970s.^[3]

Celello’s paper helps to bring forward the idea of feminism and how it is viewed modernly. She also brings about the idea of a possible third wave of feminism that will develop in the twenty-first century at the end of her piece and discusses how this wave will ultimately be developed by feminism’s past. This brings about the question of what people consider to be feminism today, and if people even consider it needed or useful in modern times. Celello also discusses how there are divided schools of thought within the movement itself, and how there is not one single type of feminist. She mentions how there are both radical and liberal feminists and that both stand on different ideas of what they believe are the core aspects of feminism. Liberal feminists organize in groups and work with the “traditional political system”, while radical feminists look to overthrow that system and were the later result of separating ideas from the original liberal feminist movement.^[4]

She further discusses how feminists are divided on ideas such as abortion as well. There are feminists who believe in the idea of pro-choice, and that women reserve the right to decide whether or not they want to be a mother. While some may not believe that feminists are pro-life, there are in fact activists who believe that being pro-choice undermines the idea of motherhood and that the ability to bear children is a key aspect of what it means to be a woman. Both ideas bring up important questions to ask about the idea of feminism, and whether or not “true” feminists believe in a woman’s right to choose or the responsibility of preserving a woman’s unique characteristic of childbearing.

Celello’s argument raises questions about not only the study of feminism, but the movement itself and how it is affected by its perception within the larger group of society. Her argument is important when discussing the idea of feminism, as it comes from multiple perspectives and how the movement itself has developed over time. It is an important article to study as we move into what she calls the “third wave” of feminism and how it will be perceived in the twenty-first century.

– Taylor McGoldrick

^[1] Kristin Celello, “A New Century of Struggle: Feminism and Antifeminism in the United States, 1920-Present,” in The Practice of U.S. Women’s History, ed. S. Jay Kleinberg, Eileen Boris, Vicki L. Ruiz (Rutgers University Press, 2007), 329-245.

^[2] Celello, A New Century of Struggle, 334.

^[3] Celello, A New Century of Struggle, 334.

^[4] Celello, A New Century of Struggle, 336.

“A New Century of Struggle: Feminism and Antifeminism in the United States, 1920-Present”-Kristin Celello (Critic)

In Kristin Celello’s piece, “A New Century of Struggle: Feminism and Antifeminism in the United States, 1920-Present” she focuses on many different aspects of the feminist movement and how it has been historically recorded.  The author aids the reader by limiting her analysis to post-suffrage feminism and specifically highlights the surge of the movement between each wave.  While these are important and interesting topics, it is unclear throughout the essay where she explores the problems with answering the recurring question, “What was (and is) feminism?” There was a lot of information on the movement itself as well as the availability of historical data to researchers, but it never returned to this central question.

A personally intriguing topic brought up was the nature of race throughout the movement.  She succeeded in identifying the presence of black and hispanic women in the second wave while distinguishing between those within and without white women’s organizations. However, it would have been helpful to find out more about why any progressive movement would have had integration issues.  The author specifically points out the split between white socialist feminists and black feminists, but does not cite the source of this divide.  She does bring up the Civil Rights Movement and how it’s patriarchal structure influenced some black women to join the feminists, but she could go more in depth about how these movements interacted as well.

Another section of the reading that could have been more detailed was that of antifeminism.  There was an issue in the lack of information presented on how these groups interacted and the uniformity of their values.  The anti-feminists are shown as placing extreme value on motherhood and the importance of wives, but there was no insight into how they viewed equality in other arenas.  This is also the problem in the feminist description of their support for abortion as a protestation of being defined solely as mothers and wives.  To me, this does not seem to address whether or not feminists looked down upon mothers and housewives, or they just wanted other options.  Painting feminists and anti-feminists as such simple opposites leaves one to wonder how accurate that is.  Including research on how their views crossed over and digging deeper into the source of this opposition would be helpful, especially since the chapter includes antifeminism as one of its’ main subjects.

One of the most interesting parts of the chapter was the relatively short section on third wave feminists.  The nature of feminism she attributes to them is still very prevalent today, with many who should have intrinsic ties to feminism believing that all problems regarding sexism have been fixed.  The rise of literature identifying how problematic single-minded feminism can be to the movement would have been an engaging topic to expand on.  Being able to take a step back and realize there are still major obstacles to overcome is vital to the success of any movement.

Overall, I found this to be a very compelling read, with admittedly only a few problems that do not seriously detract from the content of the piece.  Learning more about the waves of feminism and how even that analogy itself is becoming outdated was enjoyable.  There is definitely value in observing why women in the movement are so keen to distinguish themselves by these waves, and how efforts between these waves have unfortunately been overlooked.

– Meghan Madonna