From the Girl Boss movement of the 2010s, which was characterized by the use of tools by feminine individuals that were socially constructed as masculine, like dressing up in suits and having a severe attitude in order to seem successful, to the use in 2023 of femininity elements, such as the color pink and bows that aim to demonstrate that being feminine is not inferior, there has been a significant shift in how femininity is leveraged. Films like Barbie and Priscilla show how perceptions about femininity have changed; women are starting to connect with the clichés associated as feminine, viewing them as means of empowerment and resistance towards misogyny. Several movements in social media have echoed this, such as the coquette style, which prioritizes the sentiments of love and nostalgia, romanticizing femininity and trying to make you feel safe and powerful.
On the other hand, several trends and tendencies in social media that reinforce sexist stereotypes have been growing in the past months, especially in the United States (US). With statements like “stay-at-home girlfriend”, “I submit and serve my husband”, and “it is a blessing to be his helper”; that is how the content on the for-you-page in TikTok has evolved over the past years. This new American classified movement promotes a throwback to the women’s lifestyle of the 50s or 60s, and is supported by women who want to reproduce women’s roles from decades ago.
It is fascinating how this so-called lifestyle rejects all the feminist movements mentioned above with the simple argument that “it is not what women should be doing”, and criticizes all the women who do not follow them. It seems clear that there has been a shift. The re-centralization of femininity is used by two opposite groups: the feminists who want to feel safe and have the capacity to do everything proposed to themselves, and the members of this new back-to-tradition movement that see femininity as a way back to the submissive lifestyle of the 50s. So what exactly is the tradwife movement, and how do traditional-wife influencers reframe “femininity” to promote a lifestyle that looks less like personal choice and more like a return to 1950s gender norms?
Historical Development of gender roles
Feminists have based their arguments about housework as either a gender division of labor or as a social contract imposition, highlighting the socially constructed gender roles throughout history. John Stuart Mill had already noted in 1879 that the subordination of one sex to the other “was the principle that regulated social relations”. He criticized it because, following his perception, it slows human improvement. The subordination Mill refers to is done by the males to the females. As with almost all socially constructed ideas, he has supported it with historical and, mainly, natural reasons. However, the force of repression by men on women is primarily artificial. Historically, women have been positioned as the opposites, inferior self vis-a-vis men, as shown in myths like the creation of Eve from Adam’s rib, explained in the Bible. Beauvoir also analyzed the natural argument of the subordination of women. She referenced the above myths and expressed and stated that “humanity is male, and man defines women not in herself, but in relation to himself”. Her focus on the role of women in society implied that the role of women is a socially contracted imposition because they have to see themselves as the opposite of men. After examining the social imposition of chores for men and women, she concluded that this is more evident in the household.
“Man has only a middling interest in his domestic interior because he has access to the entire universe and can affirm himself in his projects. Woman, instead, is locked into the conjugal community: she has to change this prison into a kingdom,” said Beauvoir. This argument is used to explain why men live outside the home while women are forced to stay at home. This doesn’t mean that women particularly enjoy being housewives. They must find rewards in the household chores that they cannot find elsewhere; it can be said that they are forced to enjoy them. Mill brings light to the imposition of the social contract on the institution of marriage. He noted that men were not required to prove their validity to be husbands or even promise to serve the women. Meanwhile, women are “bond-servants” to their husbands, which means that they are the ones who will have to construct the best household for them. She will take care of the children and suppress her feelings to take care of his necessities. Taking these arguments, if she does other tasks outside the mentioned ones, she will be considered in society as an evil person. It is unimaginable that a woman will have a job because following the social contract is a man’s job. This is also linked to the gender division of labor.
The traditional division of labor that authors like Mill explain is where the husband brings the income to the household while the wife takes care of the domestic affairs. As mentioned before, she cares about her husband’s needs and tastes while he needs to work outside the house to bring money. Mill mentioned that Saint Paul said: “wives obey your husbands” (Ephesians 5:22- 4). Moreover, the division of labor, explained by Federici, causes individual inequalities. Silvia Federici explained that men are paid for their work, while women are not paid and suffer the imposition of power from her partner. The gender division is the only “institutionalized division of labor”. This is believed to be institutionalized by marriage. Furthermore, the division of labor presupposed the distinction of tasks by gender. The man works to create capital, while the woman provides support through a clean household and her attention to the male worker.
Several feminist scholars tried to bring some light to resolve what they had demonstrated as the oppression of women in housework. Beauvoir focused on the Industrial Revolution in the US to explain that women can do what traditionally has been men’s work. She appealed to the “growth of consciousness” that women are equal to men. Women have already demonstrated that they are equal to men several times, and it is considered that they can do it again. Moreover, Beauvoir called all women to understand that they have their “own consciousness” to live in the world they choose without enslaving themselves to man’s arms.
Authors like Federici gave their opinions in the 1970s when women already had two jobs: the domestic and the economic. However, Federici pointed out that housework is not considered work because it does not provide a wage. Moreover, Federici explained that even though women have a second job, this one is “an extension of the housewife’s condition” and proceeds to mention the most common female jobs: nurses, maids, and secretaries. This association is made because everything is in line with women’s natural state of caregiving. Thus, it seems that men find it challenging to care for their homes since they believe it is a task best left to the care-oriented women. For her part, Federici claimed wages for housework, which is more than house cleaning; it is committing the women’s time after work to care for the children and the husband. Federici argued that “the family is essentially the institutionalization of unwaged labor”. Since women’s labor is crucial to providing care for current and future workers, the government should at least pay them for their work. The ultimate goal is to give women financial independence from men.
In sum, these are the two ways in which the feminist authors try to resolve the issue of oppression through the imposition of housework on women: through the achievement of the consciousness that they are equal to men and through the wages for this domestic work. In this view, housework is not a natural duty but a social imposition, enforced through the division of labor and legitimized by the social contract.
Misogyny, Religion, and Marriage
The anti-feminist movement in America grew during the 19th and 20th centuries. This movement opposed women’s suffrage, education, and other women’s rights. Susan Marshall highlighted that antisuffragist leaders also tend to be part of middle-class communities. The movement gained more popularity in the eastern states, not only for the religious population but also because of women in high classes who were not used to having a job and feared that the granting of these privileges would affect their social position. The anti-feminists were worried about losing the feminineprivilege of working only in their beloved domestic duties; they considered the house to be the women’s kingdom. Another argument they used is that if they have the right to participate in the political and social sphere, they will not have the time and the energy to do public work because they already have house chores and a husband to care for. The feminists were referred to as “half-women” by the antisuffragists, who mistakenly sought to learn about themselves through pursuing “masculine” tasks instead of learning how to be a woman for men.
Moreover, these anti-feminist groups have been linked to right-wing parties, especially Republicans, who appeal to the traditional family model, with women in the house taking care of the domestic duties. As Marshall noted, antisuffragists probably gained some political popularity with acts of self-patriotism. Moreover, political and religious involvement were the most vital determinants of anti-feminist attitudes. Religious scriptures, like the bible, have expressed how gender roles must be applied, and the women who were part of this movement followed them. An example of how women should behave is expressed in Proverbs 31, which doesn’t just explain how perfect women should behave (Proverbs 31:12-31), but also the man’s role (Proverbs 31:23).
The Women’s Protest, the official journal of the National Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage of the United States of America, was one of the most essential anti-suffragist and anti-feminist examples of the 20th century, where the ideas of the non-suffragist were reflected. This journal shows the different reasons why they opposed women’s votes. With several political stances arguing that suffrage “is not a question of right or of justice”, the anti-suffragist tried to demonstrate that the vote was not necessary. Moreover, they consider the house and domestic affairs to be the women’s place.
The anti-feminist movement in the US started as a way to prevent suffrage for women in America, defending the natural imposition of gender roles. This movement has evolved in recent years. Phyllis Schlafly is one of the most recognizable American anti-feminists. This conservative activist led a campaign, STOP ERA, in the 70s against the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). The STOP ERA campaign stated that this amendment would end social protections and the husband’s responsibility to support the wife, undermining the male authority that they argued was the base of a “well-functioning family”. The reasons were that Social Security was a necessity for women who were not part of the paid force; they worked, taking care of the children, their husbands, and the house. They claim that “working women don’t need ERA” since they work from home, and that ERA will end their social security payments.
Several books have been written following the anti-feminist ideas. “The Fascinating Womanhood” is one of them. Written by Helen Andelin in 1963, it gives practical advice on how to take care of the household and have a happy marriage. It can be said that this book is a statement in defence of the position of women inside the marriage, as the one that must look for happiness serving the man. The author’s daughter, Dixie Andelin Forsyth, declared to the “Stylist Magazine” that the growth of the anti-feminist movement is increasing because women worldwide already have enough of feminism.
Nowadays, several studies reflect a correlation between the supporters of Donald Trump and his anti-feminist beliefs, creating this political legitimacy for the movement. This new anti-feminist movement continues to defend housework, not only due to natural arguments but also because women have faced wage and treatment inequality in their jobs. The new anti-feminists claim that housework saved them from the terrifying outdoor world. They view housework as the only way for women to feel valued by their loved ones. This anti-feminist is also against other types of women’s rights, such as abortion, and still defends several religious and conservative beliefs. Marshall further highlights the increase of religious nationalism and the defense of patriarchal norms in several countries worldwide, highlighting the US. This anti-feminist movement has developed in new social media movements, such as the tradwives or homemakers, as they like to call themselves.
The tradwives
The tradwife is a “rehashes trend” that has recently gained popularity. A tradwife is a woman who does not have an outside job; she looks after her husband and her children, shares her lifestyle, and gives tips on social media. Some online newspapers define it as a white middle/high-class women’s movement that has gained popularity, especially in the US and UK. They present and give women tips to be a “fantastic wife” on all these channels.
Different statements are on the Tradwives Club Instagram account (@tradwivesclub). This Instagram account gives an overview of the habits women should have to be a homemaker, including clichés like cooking, always looking good, and speaking softly. It is relevant to see how they state that “wife life is better than girl bossing.” It can be said that girlbossing is no longer a trend, and the new social trends aim to embrace femininity. The tradwife movement has the “best advice” to become the perfect wife. @tradwivesclub decided to do an eight-point list of “how to embrace femininity in 2023” to achieve their beloved and desired lifestyle inspired by the 50s. Moreover, they defend the traditional roles of the husband and wife, stating that the woman must be “(their) husband’s biggest fan” and be pleased by his good comments on the results of her housework: “I love coming home – husband to the wife.”
In the TikTok account of the American Estee Williams, where she has more than 198.1k followers, she explains her daily life as a traditional wife. She gives several pieces of advice for a successful marriage and defends traditional values. In one of her pinned TikToks, she explained how to become a traditional wife: “Embracing ultra-traditional gender roles into your marriage. Date to marry. Learn how to cook, clean, and host. Upkeep your beauty maintenance”. All these have the final objective of a successful marriage, where the woman will be the homemaker while the man is the provider. Furthermore, “submit to your husband, lift him and believe in ‘for better or worse, not divorce,” is some of the advice that this traditional life influencer gives her followers who want to follow this lifestyle.
Finally, Alena Kate Pettitt is another famous American traditional wife influencer. Not only on her YouTube Channel but also on “The Darling Academy” website, she shares ideas and advises to “embrace the love for home and the role of the women in it”. On this website, you can find recommendations of books and articles about etiquette, how to live a slow life, and the women’s mission of transforming the home into a lovely living place.
As expressed in the above examples, the traditional social media trend promotes a return to the lifestyle of the 50s, when women were homemakers, while men were the providers. With their statements, it can be understood that these women do not express any wish to work outside the home or follow gender equality due to the ultra-traditional gender roles. Moreover, it can be noticed that all these influencers process religious beliefs that, through the bible’s lessons, aim to pursue their role that god has given them to serve.
Pink is not the problem
Femininity, once again, has become a battlefield. But the question is no longer whether women can wear pink, bake bread, or romanticize domesticity; the question is who benefits when those choices are framed as destiny rather than desire. The tradewife movement stuck itself in bows, Bible verses, and softness, but underneath the curated aesthetics, lies a familiar script: women as unpaid laborers and moral guardians for the comfort of men. This is a regression that is carefully repackaged for the algorithm.
Feminism has never argued against housework, motherhood, or love; it has argued against coercion disguised as virtue. When tradwife influencers frame submission as empowerment and economic dependency as freedom, they erase decades of feminist struggle that fought precisely to ensure that femininity could be a choice rather than a sentence.
As even mainstream fashion platforms such as Vogue have noted there has been a marked shift with the renewed fascination over the aesthetics and values of the 1950s and 1960s, and as the famous magazine says: “It’s scary”. Some embrace this return to vintage femininity as a form of empowerment and self-expression, while others use it to reinforce submission and rigid gender roles. But are we really moving forward, or just going backwards as an old crab?
Photo by ArtsyBee via https://pixabay.com/illustrations/retro-housewife-family-greeting-1321068/
