A Discussion of "City of Women: Sex and Class in New York 1789-1860"
By
Christine Stansell
Christine Stansell focuses on gender and class relations in New York. She pays particular attention to the developing ideology of the "cult of domesticity" and the ramifications on lower-class and working-class women. Stansell states in the introduction her thesis.
"This book is about the misfortunes that laboring women suffered and the problems they caused. It examines how and why a community of women workers came into existence in America’s first great city; it analyzes the social conflicts in which laboring women were involved and the social pressures they brought to bear on others. It explores a city of women with its own economic relations and cultural forms, a female city concealed within the larger metropolis of New York."1
She asserts that women workers were a city of themselves within the larger context of New York. Her analysis attempts to define the role of working women in the formation of the working-class structure and their relationships to women outside of their own class.
My analysis of Stansell’s work will focus on this thesis and the development of her argument within the confines of her stated objective. The first sentence of her thesis sets up her entire argument. Her use of emotional terms such as "misfortunes" and "suffering" establish her sympathy for working women. Martha Saxton notes, "Her preference for the working-class sometimes impairs her detachment . . . ."2 Saxton further emphasizes the working-class bias that reverberates throughout Stansell’s book. The bias does not alter the significance of the role working-class women played in the emerging gender and class relations from 1789-1860.
Stansell organizes her argument into four main parts with each part containing two to three chapters. Chronologically, she addresses the changes of gender and class relationships during 1789-1860. The first main section, 33 pages, discusses briefly the social ideology of the time and the changes in employment that would lead to the redefining of women from 1789-1820. The second section, 63 pages, continues the discussion and elaborates on the specific roles of working-class women within the neighborhood. The third section, 63 pages, focuses on the specific changes and adjustments working women faced throughout 1789-1860. The fourth section, 50 pages, argues for a new conception of working women concerning their sexuality, way of life, and their options from 1850-1860. Overall, Stansell maintains that working-class women established a separate way of life unique to their position in society and at the mercy of bourgeoisie cultures and ideals.
Stansell uses primary and secondary sources in establishing the evidence to support her claims. Faye E. Dudden, Union College, points out, "She [Stansell] turned to the records of criminal courts, juvenile institutions, and the nascent labor movement, as well as to more conventional sources such as the newspapers and the extensive records of voluntary organizations devoted to fighting poverty."3 Stansell notes sources 612 times in this book, which averages to three notations per page. I questioned the amount of sources and for comparison chose four books from my collection of historical writings to determine if the source notation was adequate or excessive. Initially, I believed that the notation was excessive and set out to prove it. However, I discovered that this was not true. The four books I chose were written by female authors and discussed the historical roles of women.4 In each case, the notations averaged approximately three per page. Stansell’s use of notations is indicative of standard historical reference practice.
Stansell contends "When laboring women do appear in scholarship about the nineteenth century, it is usually as timid and downtrodden souls, too miserable and oppressed to take much of a part in making history."5
Stansell describes working-class women in the nineteenth century as "shrewd little girls, truculent housewives, feckless domestic servants, [and] astute trade unionists."7 Does she prove that working-class women are a class that responded differently than patriarchal men and middle-class women? Mary Drake McFeely, University of Georgia Lib., Athens, contends "Her [Stansell’s] study reveals a vigorous female culture that thrived in neighborhoods and in work groups."8 Susan Hirsch, Northwestern University, notes "Stansell reveals a very different culture developing among poor working women . . . ."9 McFeely and Hirsch both acknowledge that Stansell does succeed with proving that working-class women had a culture unique to their class and gender. I found that Stansell illuminated a class of women largely ignored for their unique contributions to society until more recently. Publications that are more recent have supported her contentions that working-class women did react to and adjust to the changes of the time in different and unique ways. They are not female versions of the working-class male or imitations of middle-class women.
Stansell’s discussion of prostitution illustrates significant differences in middle-class ideology and working-class ideology. She stresses prostitution as a sexual exchange. Stansell asserts that for young women it offered a way of asserting and maintaining independence from the family and a society that stressed female dependence on men. She argues persuasively that for many young women, "Prostitution was a relationship that grew directly from the double standard and men’s subordination of women. . . . Prostitution was one of a number of choices fraught with hardship and moral ambiguity."10 In contrast to middle-class ideology that saw prostitutes as victims or hardened criminals working-class women knew for some it was a means of survival, particularly, in this era of limited resources and changing economic and social structures. Stansell argues convincingly and coherently for prostitution as a choice for some young working-class women and others with limited economic opportunities. Mary Blewett, University of Lowell, supports this as she notes, "Her best and most convincing chapter is on the meaning and politics of prostitution for laboring women as they negotiated the realities of both economic dependency and sexual exploitation."11
Throughout the book, Stansell details a vital and compelling construction of the working-class woman and her role in the changing gender and class relations from 1789-1860. Although her sources do not include many sources directly from working-class women, this does not hurt her study as few sources exist. I found that in reviewing subsequent research, the four books noted above, Stansell’s work holds up well to the newly developing research, within the last decade or so, of the historical role of women. Especially noteworthy is her focus on the shift from home-based labor to wage-based labor outside the home for men and women. The economic consequences for women arguably increased opportunity and decreased opportunity at the same time.
The restructuring of society afforded new opportunities for women undeniably. It also brought about a new source of oppression for working-women. Economic necessity in a changing and evolving urban lifestyle demanded wage labor without providing adequate means for women to acquire unrestrained access to the labor market. Increasingly competing against working-class men for jobs and survival further complicated the social structure of the working-class. Stansell portrays the consequential turmoil within the working-class community as it struggled to adapt to the changing nature of work and increasing competition.
The experience of working-class women depicts the conflicting struggles and ideologies of newly emerging class structures and growing pains of the country as it shifted from a agriculturally based economy to a manufacturing economy. Significantly, Stansell interprets that middle-class women achieved more independence and power as a direct result of their involvement with reform societies that targeted poor working-class women and families to conform to an ideology that working-class women did not have the means to obtain. Kathy Peiss, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, notes, "In contrast to middle-class women who glorified privacy and domesticity, laboring women prized the exchange of resources, sharing of domestic routines, and sociability of the streets."12 Therefore, as the move to the "cult of domesticity" characterized the lives of middle-class women and increased their role in society, the same ideology was not present in the working-class struggling with survival.
Stansell contributes an important and illustrative vision of the working-class woman as a critical and unique aspect of antebellum society. Her thoughtful and serious interpretations and careful use of available resources contributes a new understanding to working-class relationships. Her comparison of working-class and middle-class ideologies and values are an extremely important contribution to the study of women. I found this book enjoyable and informative. Reading the book I gained a fuller understanding of antebellum working-class women and the gender and class changes that characterized antebellum society.
6.Odem, 1995; Glenn, 1990; Scobie, 1992; and Karlsen, 1987.
© 1997 [email protected]
Get your own Free Home Page