More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Amitai Etzioni

GET UPDATES FROM Amitai Etzioni
 

My Friend Betty Friedan

Posted: 02/22/11 12:50 PM ET

2011-02-22-freidan.jpg


I guess it is again open season on the author of The Feminine Mystique. In an article highlighting the importance of Betty Friedan's landmark feminist publication, the New Yorker's Louis Menard deviates from his literature review to report some of the criticism levied against Ms. Friedan. Her ex-husband Carl, whom she dismissed as a lightweight, is quoted as saying that Friedan "hated men." The article also states she is not the first to come up with feminist ideas -- which is quite true, but also irrelevant. There are very few grand new ideas. Betty's credit is that she not merely published a powerful brief for women's rights at the right time, but that she spent a lifetime helping turn a text into a major -- indeed worldwide -- social movement that already had and continues to have major socially-transforming effects.

Before I proceed, I should establish my personal knowledge of the subject at hand. Betty and I broke bread together often at meals in our respective homes -- first when we both lived in New York City, and later when we both moved to Washington, D.C. I was often a guest at her home in Sag Harbor and lost count of the times she, Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, William J. Goode, and I went out for dinner. Betty attended the bar mitzvah of my youngest son. I held her hand after she had heart valve surgery. She flattered me out of my wits when she told others that my book, The Active Society, influenced her book.

I'll be the first to admit Betty was no saint. You did not want to be between her and a TV camera. And she could go from zero to 75 more quickly than any sports car -- but also cool down just as rapidly. Betty used to chew me out during meetings of The Communitarian Network for supporting the traditional family, which she defined as a husband, a wife, and two children. However, once I reminded her that all I was pointing out was that children benefit when they have two deeply involved parents rather than one -- she was quick to make up.

The argument that Betty had hidden left leanings, rather than pure dedication to the cause of women, has an oddly ahistorical tone. We are talking about the 60s and early 70s. Liberalism, with mild left tinges, was widely embraced by most social activists, whether they championed minorities' rights (the civil rights moment), the counterculture, or later -- environmentalism. And liberals supported women's rights while conservatives opposed them.

The claim that The Feminine Mystique relied on scholarship that since has been contested misses the point on two grounds. First, scholarship is often contested. Just look at the challenges faced by those who show that the world's climate is heating up. Second, ideational briefs -- from Karl Marx to Martin Luther King, Jr. -- are not to be judged by the extent to which their works are properly footnoted, their regression analyses pan out, and other such metrics. The proper questions are whether their cause was just, whether they served or hindered those they sought to serve, and whether there is compelling evidence that their brief is counter to robust evidence. By these lights, my friend Betty shines.

Beyond history-making, The Feminine Mystique had a major effect that alone justifies its being listed among the small number of books whose authors ought to be celebrated rather than raked over the coals. Practically every time Betty and I were in public -- say, visiting the gallery of a Long Island sculpture she appreciated or participating in a meeting seeking housing for the poor in Amagansett -- women would approach Betty. They would tell her, often with tears in their eyes, "You changed my life," "Your book turned me around," and "If it was not for you, I would have never dared..." Betty found such evidence of her redemptive work embracing. She would mumble her thanks and divert her eyes. However, I found that these uncharacteristic moments of humility merely add to her stature as a person who did good.

For more, see Amitai Etzioni's My Brother's Keeper (Roman & Littlefield, 2003).

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 20
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
playflute2
flootz
10:19 AM on 02/23/2011
At the time that feminism began to really emerge, I was a state employee and worked with our state legislature primarily. I remember one day a legislator let the door go in my face and when I made a comment his reply was to the effect,'Well, I thought you 'ladies' wanted to do everything for yourselves now'. My reply was that I would have held the door for him had he been behind me. Betty Friedan did a lot to show women that we are so very capable and able to do anything we want, other than the old barefoot and pregnant idea. That was a good thing. As with any movement, there were the radical folk who took it a bit far, but I would hope that most women and men recognize the good things that she accomplished with her writing and with her day to day example of her life.
JEP57
To the right of Genghis Khan
09:16 AM on 02/23/2011
I'm all for women getting equal pay for equal work, not being discriminated against, being treated with respect, girls being taught that they can achieve what they want in life (within physical limits) and all that good stuff. But the radical feminist movement that sprung up in the 1960s and '70s can be reduced to one statement and one resentment: "I'm not going to be told what to do by some man", a big turn off to most people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
littleolwinemakerme
Put A Cork In It!
10:03 AM on 02/23/2011
"I'm not going to be told what to do by some man"

I'm a man & don't see anything wrong with the statement. Insecure much?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:13 AM on 02/23/2011
People think that "feminism" only affects women, and can often be harmful to men. The truth is that ALL aspects of modern society are improved and balanced by womens power. So that men benefit by living in a better society.

Look at unbalanced male dominated societies like the middle east. They are always in turmoil. Life is unpleasant for ALL people, men included. Whereas societies with powerful women like Sweden are prosperous and pleasant to live in.

ALL sexist male dominated societies are unpleasant for everyone. Savage and brutal and repressive. It is in the nature of the unbalanced male only group to behave in this way. Women civilize society. So men should encourage womens empowerment because life will become better for them too because of the healthy balance of male and female power.
ByAndForThePeople
and corporations aren't people!
10:22 PM on 02/22/2011
Sadly, when one has nothing to justify one's (negative) opinion, one resorts to ad hominem attacks. "She hates men." Hell, I'm a man and I hate (some) men. And (some) women. I was profoundly moved and educated by The Feminine Mystique and never once felt that "She hates men." What I did sense was that she hated the fact that so many men (then and, apparently, still) hate having wives who have brains and want to use them without assistance.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:08 PM on 02/22/2011
Well argued and very timely, Professor. We need these reminders, as so much of the progress made since the publication of this book has been systematically attacked and rolled back. Friedan, and so many of her generation (Piven) are under such vehemently violent attacks there is a need to re-introduce all of these works to new generations. We can no longer take their insights as given universals for American society.

I am constantly being reminded that "eternal vigilance is the price of freedom"; knowledge is constantly being contested and it falls to each generation to keep the flames alight.

- signed (a grateful former student of Amatai Etzioni in 1989 and now a professor taking up the fight)
09:57 PM on 02/22/2011
Betty Friedan, Naomi Klein, and the Pro-Choice League are far most interesting than Schlafly, Palin or Bachmann.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Barbara Hill Bissonnette
09:55 PM on 02/22/2011
I had two idols growing up, one was Betty and the other was Gloria Steinem. They're both still my heroes. Had I not read what these two brilliant women wrote, I would not have had the amazing career that I had. (I also married and had two daughters, --and am still married -- just in case Phyllis Schlaffly is monitoring this site looking for 'feminists:). As a matter of fact, when I picture God -- She looks a little like Gloria Steinem. :)
10:42 AM on 02/23/2011
Thank you! I was going to comment along those lines, but you are more eloquent than I could ever be. Betty and Gloria changed my life, all for the better.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Barbara Hill Bissonnette
05:43 PM on 02/23/2011
F&F!
09:33 PM on 02/22/2011
Remember the "I Love Lucy" show? Week after week, this was the number one rated show in America through much of the 1960s and 1970s. The plot that kept repeating was that Lucy wanted to be recognized as a star in her own right, like Ricky was. You cannot tell me that this feminist urge was artificially introduced to America. It was bubbling up within America's psyche for years and laughter was releasing this hidden tension.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:02 PM on 02/22/2011
For your consideration: This past weekend on C-SPAN2 BOOKTV. This author presented her book;
IMO an excellent presentation worth the viewing.

A Strange Stirring: The Feminine Mystique and American Women at the Dawn of the 1960s
Stephanie Coontz
About the Program

Stephanie Coontz, history and family studies professor at The Evergreen State College, reports on the generation of American women who were introduced to feminist politics in the early 1960s. Ms. Coontz focuses on the 1963 publication and readership of Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique as a transformative moment for many women who began to question their familial and professional roles. Stephanie Coontz discusses her book at the Tenement Museum in New York City.


About the Author
Stephanie Coontz

Stephanie Coontz is a history and family studies professor at The Evergreen State College as well as the director of research and public education at the Council on Contemporary Families. She is the author of several books, including Marriage: A History. For more information, visit stephaniecoontz.com.
This will be repeated Feb 26, 8:45am. 1hr 15min.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lisalulu
I stand for Planned Parenthood.
08:59 PM on 02/22/2011
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and memories.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Kathleen Reardon
06:53 PM on 02/22/2011
I spent a lot of time with Betty while she was at USC. We taught together, worked at The Leadership Institute, spoke at events and enjoyed being friends. She is my daughter's godmother. She did not hate men. Quite the contrary. The quote in Menard's article reads: “She hates men,” Carl told a reporter after the divorce. “Let’s face it, they all do—all those activists in the women’s lib movement.” It was said in anger and is far from accurate. Betty angered people at times -- women and men alike. You couldn't be her friend without experiencing that directly, but she was open to learning and could take as good as she dished out. She was an inspiration both in her writing and her speaking. Your post, Amitai, captures the real Betty who, clearly, we both miss. Kathleen
05:02 PM on 02/22/2011
Thank you for your post. It was a lovely antidote to the report about Phyllis Schlafly's new book.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
maveet
Needed: DemFems 4 Congress
05:00 PM on 02/22/2011
Regardless what she may be criticized for, Betty Friedan created a small paperback book that could be carried around. And that book, in and of itself, opened our eyes to the environment in which we lived. Just as a fish in the sea has no idea of its environment until it finds itself gasping on the shore, we, in our full skirts and petticoats and girdles, finally had an alternate view of reality.

I was 20. How would I have had any ability to understand and critique the ways I was treated, the way I felt? That Betty was tv-hungry could only help us, as we had no one else to look toward. The later stuff, like the tensions between Friedan and Steinem, can never take away what she did for those of us who were young women. Finally someone willing and able to tell us the truth about our lives. Like the best godmother ever.

Thank you Mr. Etzioni for this article.
04:30 PM on 02/22/2011
Betty Friedan's work certainly resonated with a significant segment of American women, and should be remembered for that. As a very young radical lesbian feminist in the early 1970s, though, it did not resonate with me or with many others like me who viewed society through our particular lens. It's good, though, that she and other second-wave feminists are being remembered for their contributions to the overall many-faceted feminist movement. Many of her beliefs seemed--and probably were--short-sighted in terms of the radical changes some of us envisioned. We felt, and rightly so as I recall, that women like Friedan were too eager to put us at the back of the parade...somewhere behind the horses (literally in some cases). But we were the young, brash radical feminists, while Friedan and other mainstream feminists were the older guard that youth naturally rebels against. Maybe we confused them. Maybe they felt we were too controversial. Maybe they simply found us irrelevant. It's hard to say because none of the old mainstream feminist guard has to my knowledge ever addressed how they treated us during those halcyon days of rage. Good to see that Betty Friedan isn't forgotten, though, although her work does need to be seen in context of the times and of her own perspective.
03:42 PM on 02/22/2011
Betty Friedan's Feminine Mystique was a meaningful and magnificent part of an historical dialectic that allowed the women's movement to progress. She was part of a dialogue which included, among others, Simone de Beauvoir, Shulamith Firestone and sparked Second Wave Feminism. Dialectic necessarily contains both thesis and antithesis. So, it is natural that there were sometimes tensions within the body of scholarship (she and Simone, for example, did not see eye-to-eye on various philosophical issues, but still regarded one another with professional respect). We are currently living in a political period during which the advances of these pioneering feminists are being challenged. It is imperative that we don't lose sight of the value and integrity of their combined scholarship and activism. We owe a debt of gratitude to these women!