The Feminine Mystique

Friedan explains functionalism, a popular school of sociology and anthropology during her era. Functionalists attempt to explain how the world operates without using value judgments. However, their observations inevitably lead to prescriptions. Adherents of functionalism note that the majority of American women limit themselves to domestic roles and identify themselves in relation to their families. Observing this, functionalists then speak of ways that women who do not fit this mold might “adjust” themselves in order to keep society running smoothly. In other words, functionalists have a bias toward the status quo; they take for granted that however a society functions is how it should continue to function.

Next, Friedan moves on to anthropologist Margaret Mead, who studied societies in the South Pacific and Southeast Asia. According to Mead, these societies’ norms surrounding adolescence, sex, and gender were starkly different from those of Western societies, showing that culture—not just biology—plays a formative role in human development. Mead indicates that one New Guinean society considers women dominant and reveres them for their ability to have children. Mead treats this as something from which Western women could take encouragement; since many peoples view the ability to bear children with great respect, it should be something on which women can pride themselves.

Friedan objects to Mead’s suggestion that women feel empowered by their ability to bear children rather than by their intellectual abilities. Moreover, Friedan points out a certain level of hypocrisy in Mead’s work: Mead herself enjoyed a fulfilling career outside the home, frequently traveling to distant lands for her work and receiving critical acclaim, yet she preaches a life of domesticity to other women. As a woman with no experience at full-time homemaking, she does not fully understand what she is encouraging. 

Friedan explains that in the years after World War II many high schools and colleges began expanding course offerings on domestic tasks, such as home economics. This reinforced the message of the feminine mystique and furthered the idea that women did not need intellectual training so much as housework training.

While many such institutions used survey data from their female students and alumni to justify these choices, Friedan argues that women ask for such courses because they have learned to expect a life of housewifery, not because they have no interest in other subjects. Such courses further preclude women from imagining a future for themselves outside of the home. As a result, women often do not take their years of post-secondary education seriously, treating their college years as merely a holding pen before marriage or as a place to find a husband.