This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/us-news-blog/2013/feb/20/pop-up-book-club-feminine-mystique

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Pop-up book club: The Feminine Mystique – day one Pop-up book club: The Feminine Mystique – day one
(7 months later)
The Guardian's pop-up book club discussion of The Feminine Mystique starts Wednesday at 3pm and will last for half an hour. The Guardian's pop-up book club discussion of The Feminine Mystique starts Wednesday at 3pm and will last for half an hour.
For our first chat, we'll be focusing on the first 100 pages, essentially the first four chapters. (We won't talk about Gail Collins's excellent intro, although I do recommend it. She does help put the book into perspective.)For our first chat, we'll be focusing on the first 100 pages, essentially the first four chapters. (We won't talk about Gail Collins's excellent intro, although I do recommend it. She does help put the book into perspective.)
Those of you who are up to speed will know that in the first part of the book, Friedan looks at the image and identity of the mid 20th-century woman, and how marketing and media manipulate that image. Obviously we'll be looking at how that's changed (or not), but I'd like to start with the title and the definition of the word "feminine".Those of you who are up to speed will know that in the first part of the book, Friedan looks at the image and identity of the mid 20th-century woman, and how marketing and media manipulate that image. Obviously we'll be looking at how that's changed (or not), but I'd like to start with the title and the definition of the word "feminine".
Friedan's explanation of the 50-year-old definition is that it's a young, middle-class, career-less homemaker.Friedan's explanation of the 50-year-old definition is that it's a young, middle-class, career-less homemaker.
Some questions to consider:Some questions to consider:
• Is "feminine" still a loaded word? What does it mean to you? Does marketing still have an effect on how we interpret the word? Do women's magazines?• Is "feminine" still a loaded word? What does it mean to you? Does marketing still have an effect on how we interpret the word? Do women's magazines?
• In the book Friedan makes a direct connection between motherhood and depression. Is that still valid today? I think it is. What do you think? Are middle-class mothers less depressed? If so, why? (Do you know any women who take anti-depressants, for example?)• In the book Friedan makes a direct connection between motherhood and depression. Is that still valid today? I think it is. What do you think? Are middle-class mothers less depressed? If so, why? (Do you know any women who take anti-depressants, for example?)
Join us!Join us!
Bookmark this page, then visit us at 3pm ET to add your thoughts to our discussion. To participate, use #newmystique on Twitter or add your thoughts in the comments below.Bookmark this page, then visit us at 3pm ET to add your thoughts to our discussion. To participate, use #newmystique on Twitter or add your thoughts in the comments below.
What we learned from the first 100 pages:What we learned from the first 100 pages:
Emma Keller:Emma Keller:
What's changed in 50 years? Blonde and thin is still presented to us as best. Full-time motherhood can be isolating and depressing. We have the vote, but remain shy about running for office. We don't have equal pay, and glass ceilings exist everywhere from Wall Street to St Peter's Square. But this is a better world for women than the empty one presented by Friedan. I'm not interested in whether or not we are happier; I find that a temporal, self-indulgent thought. My focus has always been on confidence, not happiness. And I would argue that the main difference between the climate of middle-class mid-20th-century America (as described by Friedan) and now is that not only do we have more choices, but we are more confident about making them.What's changed in 50 years? Blonde and thin is still presented to us as best. Full-time motherhood can be isolating and depressing. We have the vote, but remain shy about running for office. We don't have equal pay, and glass ceilings exist everywhere from Wall Street to St Peter's Square. But this is a better world for women than the empty one presented by Friedan. I'm not interested in whether or not we are happier; I find that a temporal, self-indulgent thought. My focus has always been on confidence, not happiness. And I would argue that the main difference between the climate of middle-class mid-20th-century America (as described by Friedan) and now is that not only do we have more choices, but we are more confident about making them.
Janine Gibson:Janine Gibson:
To my bewilderment, not as much has changed as you might hope. This leads me to, well, guilt, really. Instead of a sort of pleasing historical romp, an acknowledgement of how far we've come and a tribute to those who served (which I had expected), there were too many parallels. Two news stories I was following last night – Kelly Clarkson's row with arch-controller Clive Davis and the entirely manufactured outrage consuming the British tabloid press over Hilary Mantel's superb essay on the public's ownership of a royal body – seemed to me to suggest that not enough of our expectations of the way women should behave have changed. I wondered how much I help perpetuate. Emma tweeted "never reading another women's magazine"; I renounce the chic novelty of embracing domesticity (Nigella). When I look at the passages I highlighted and the notes I made, they're a depressing litany of seemingly stalled debates on women's issues. Abortion, harrassment, "forcible rape", equality, "58 ways to make your marriage more exciting". I wish more was new.To my bewilderment, not as much has changed as you might hope. This leads me to, well, guilt, really. Instead of a sort of pleasing historical romp, an acknowledgement of how far we've come and a tribute to those who served (which I had expected), there were too many parallels. Two news stories I was following last night – Kelly Clarkson's row with arch-controller Clive Davis and the entirely manufactured outrage consuming the British tabloid press over Hilary Mantel's superb essay on the public's ownership of a royal body – seemed to me to suggest that not enough of our expectations of the way women should behave have changed. I wondered how much I help perpetuate. Emma tweeted "never reading another women's magazine"; I renounce the chic novelty of embracing domesticity (Nigella). When I look at the passages I highlighted and the notes I made, they're a depressing litany of seemingly stalled debates on women's issues. Abortion, harrassment, "forcible rape", equality, "58 ways to make your marriage more exciting". I wish more was new.
Heidi Moore:Heidi Moore:
What surprised me most about re-reading The Feminine Mystique was the experience of traveling back through a wormhole: looking back at the complaints of a previous generation and seeing what sounds dated and what sounds new. What's dated: women aren't listless any more; they're filling up colleges and law schools. What's new, or at least current: in Friedan's time, as now, femininity is not an identity. Femininity is a sales pitch. To be woman is to be a consumer – and not just any consumer, but the ur-consumer, of every product, from the home to the expensive creams and clothes.What surprised me most about re-reading The Feminine Mystique was the experience of traveling back through a wormhole: looking back at the complaints of a previous generation and seeing what sounds dated and what sounds new. What's dated: women aren't listless any more; they're filling up colleges and law schools. What's new, or at least current: in Friedan's time, as now, femininity is not an identity. Femininity is a sales pitch. To be woman is to be a consumer – and not just any consumer, but the ur-consumer, of every product, from the home to the expensive creams and clothes.
Here's a great Friedan paragraph from page 70: "The [feminine] public image, in the magazines and television commercials, is designed to sell washing machines, cake mixes, deodorants, detergents, rejuvenating face creams, hair tints … As the motivational researchers keep telling the advertisers, American women are so unsure of who they should be that they look to this glossy public image to decide every detail of their lives."Here's a great Friedan paragraph from page 70: "The [feminine] public image, in the magazines and television commercials, is designed to sell washing machines, cake mixes, deodorants, detergents, rejuvenating face creams, hair tints … As the motivational researchers keep telling the advertisers, American women are so unsure of who they should be that they look to this glossy public image to decide every detail of their lives."
If you think those days are over, look at Pinterest, which is almost entirely composed of what women want to buy to define their identities. The women's magazines, as well, are run by women who increasingly espouse an impossibly glossy, sterile, dehumanized vision of women. Instead of twiggy 1960s doll-like languor, our models more often portray a kind of wolfish, predatory and materialistic vision, with $2,000 handbags and platform heels that make Chinese foot-binding look enlightened. It's impossible not to think of Mad Men – but not poor, dismal Betty. Was Don Draper the original feminist? Remember his old line on love: "What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons. You're born alone and you die alone, and this world just drops a bunch of rules on top of you to make you forget those facts." Friedan would probably have agreed.If you think those days are over, look at Pinterest, which is almost entirely composed of what women want to buy to define their identities. The women's magazines, as well, are run by women who increasingly espouse an impossibly glossy, sterile, dehumanized vision of women. Instead of twiggy 1960s doll-like languor, our models more often portray a kind of wolfish, predatory and materialistic vision, with $2,000 handbags and platform heels that make Chinese foot-binding look enlightened. It's impossible not to think of Mad Men – but not poor, dismal Betty. Was Don Draper the original feminist? Remember his old line on love: "What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons. You're born alone and you die alone, and this world just drops a bunch of rules on top of you to make you forget those facts." Friedan would probably have agreed.
Katie Rogers:Katie Rogers:
The first few chapters gave me a new understanding of the world my grandmothers lived in. They would've been young mothers when this book was written, and I wish now that I could ask them if they read this book. They were so different from each other, but I know they both felt the frustration Friedan details, and dealt with it by passing on a message of independence to younger generations. One of my grandmothers was a college-educated nurse who gave up her career and moved from New York to the midwest after marrying a doctor and having five daughters. The other was one of the fieriest, most alive women I've ever known, uneducated but clever and savvy – she married at 21 and promptly had four boys. Both of them were defined completely by their marriage and their motherhood, and I know both of them fiercely loved but were totally consumed by the families they had created. So much of the advice they gave me as I grew up boiled down to finding myself before I found love, and figuring out what I wanted out of life before making any permanent decisions about marriage or family. The motivation behind their advice makes so much more sense now. A highlighted passage that stood out to me and reminded me of them: "The problem is always being the children's mommy, or the minister's wife and never being myself."The first few chapters gave me a new understanding of the world my grandmothers lived in. They would've been young mothers when this book was written, and I wish now that I could ask them if they read this book. They were so different from each other, but I know they both felt the frustration Friedan details, and dealt with it by passing on a message of independence to younger generations. One of my grandmothers was a college-educated nurse who gave up her career and moved from New York to the midwest after marrying a doctor and having five daughters. The other was one of the fieriest, most alive women I've ever known, uneducated but clever and savvy – she married at 21 and promptly had four boys. Both of them were defined completely by their marriage and their motherhood, and I know both of them fiercely loved but were totally consumed by the families they had created. So much of the advice they gave me as I grew up boiled down to finding myself before I found love, and figuring out what I wanted out of life before making any permanent decisions about marriage or family. The motivation behind their advice makes so much more sense now. A highlighted passage that stood out to me and reminded me of them: "The problem is always being the children's mommy, or the minister's wife and never being myself."
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.