Dan S. alerted us to an image, purportedly of an article from the May 13, 1955, episode of Housekeeping Monthly. In it there is a photo of a woman bending over an oven with a list of tips for being a good wife, such as “a good wife always knows her place.” We’ve gotten this image before and never posted on it, much like the list on “How to Be a Good Wife,” attributed around the web to a “1950s home economics textbook.”
So why haven’t we posted the image before? Because it’s a fake. According to Snopes, the list was circulating widely on its own long before it suddenly appeared with the damning image…which is a completely unrelated image from a cover of John Bull magazine (not Housekeeping Monthly) that appeared in 1957, not 1955. Notice the text along the upper right corner of the image–it says “Advertising Archives.” According to Snopes, no one has ever turned up the economics textbook the “How to Be a Good Wife” list supposedly comes from, either.
So what gives? Why do these hoax 1950s-era images/lists keep appearing? I think Snopes makes an interesting case:
It has become fashionable to portray outdated societal behaviors and attitudes — ones we now consider desperately wrongheaded — to be worse than they really were as a way of making a point about how much we’ve improved. When we despair over the human condition and feel the need for a little pat on the back, a few startling comparisons between us modern enlightened folks and those terrible neanderthals of yesteryear give us that. We go away from such readings a bit proud of how we’ve pulled ourselves up by our bootstraps and with our halos a bit more brightly burnished.
The juxtaposition of wonderful modernity with a tawdry past also serves to reinforce the ‘rightness’ of current societal stances by making any other positions appear ludicrous. It reminds folks of the importance of holding on to these newer ways of thinking and to caution them against falling back into older patterns which may be more comfortable but less socially desirable. Such reinforcement works on the principle that if you won’t do a good thing just for its own sake, you’ll surely do it to avoid being laughed at and looked down upon by your peers.
A typical vessel for this sort of comparison is the fabricated or misrepresented bit of text from the “olden days,” some document that purportedly demonstrates how our ancestors endured difficult lives amidst people who once held truly despicable beliefs.
Of course, as the Snopes article goes on to discuss, all kinds of very sexist stuff existed in the ’50s, and there were home-ec textbooks, magazines, etc., that included suggestions along the lines of those listed above.
Given that, it’s not shocking that when we see images of this sort, they immediately seem authentic, and get re-posted around the web despite the sketchy aspects of their origin stories. It’s not like we’ve never posted anything on Soc Images that we later figured out was a hoax (we also get things that we hope, desperately, are hoaxes but turn out to be real).
So there’s a truth behind the general gist of these types of lists, but many of the images themselves are fakes, created to make fun of our hopelessly, and hilariously, sexist past. And given how many real examples of sexist propaganda you could find from the 1950s, it’s worth pondering we find so many fake ones, and how, for some people, they may function to delegitimate concerns about gender inequality or sexism today, because come on, ladies — look how much better we have it than our grandmas did!
Gwen Sharp is an associate professor of sociology at Nevada State College. You can follow her on Twitter at @gwensharpnv.
Comments 26
AR — May 25, 2010
If you want to copy their text you just have to disable javascript; no need to bypass it with a screen cap, which, I might add, is completely invisible to those using screen readers due to you having alt-texted it merely as "Picture 1."
John Moore — May 25, 2010
I have used this in my teaching - a number of students have shown it to their Grandmothers who have all claimed to remember reading this in the 1950s!
siveambrai — May 25, 2010
I have a copy of the Betty Crocker cookbook that my grandmother got in the 50s or 60s and passed on to me when I got married. It has a similar section to it about how to take care of the house and your husband (make him a cocktail when he arrives home from work). I remember looking it over when she gave it to me and laughing at some of the extremely sexist references (that were totally normal at the time). It could be that some women are remembering that.
Anonymous — May 25, 2010
Sounds like my husband has been following this advice. Should I encourage him to assert himself and be more selfish? Maybe I should, but I don't think I will...
ampersand — May 25, 2010
If I could get a hold of the Bob Jones University home ec workbooks that I went through in the late nineties (as punishment for not being good enough at math), we could see a nice modern example that is used in homeschool curriculum.
Louche — May 25, 2010
Yeah... people are more interested in making up history than studying it. They do not want to look for real specimens, just to have an opinion.
Willow — May 25, 2010
Does the effort to phony-up past discrimination appear in other -isms as well? It seems to me that with other systems of oppression there is more of an effort to smooth it over; what do you all think?
Kelly — May 25, 2010
You said it so well. Thanks.
jota — May 25, 2010
This kind of fake propaganda might give us a -distorted- good impression of our present, but it also gives us a distorted image of what opression really is: a set of well accepted implicit rules that don't need to be publicly acknowledged to limit people's freedom.
Tips like these did not have to be published in order to influence women, just like the rules that are supposed to constrain our behaviours today are not published nor publicly explicited.
Larry — May 25, 2010
There are so many real examples (I post them regularly on latimes.com/dailymirror) I can't imagine why anyone would bother to fake them.
Nadia — May 27, 2010
Wow, absolutely ridiculous.
Marty — May 27, 2010
"And given how many real examples of sexist propaganda you could find from the 1950s, it’s worth pondering we find so many fake ones, and how, for some people, they may function to delegitimate concerns about gender inequality or sexism today, because come on, ladies — look how much better we have it than our grandmas did!"
Fakes can also be used to deligitimize concerns in the opposite way: An (in this case) anti-feminist, or something trying to prove that gender equality isn't so bad, can hold up the debunked material and say "See? Feminists are lying to you! The generate a false narrative of the past to convince women they are victims when really the social system the cluck about never existed!" Basically, having faulty sources (which in this case misrepresent the way the oppression in question was executed) is a lose-lose proposition.
Giovanni — May 28, 2010
"it’s worth pondering we find so many fake ones, and how, for some people, they may function to delegitimate concerns about gender inequality or sexism today"
Very interesting proposition, definitely worth exploring further. It reminds me of Mark Greif's critique of Mad Men.
In terms of hilarious and shocking (and not faked) I can't resist offering the following excerpt from a propaganda newsreel urging women to give up their wartime jobs. It's hard to imagine how anything could ever be faked that tops that.
Not about sexism, but also faked and of possible interest: the "They're happy because they eat lard" poster that routinely does the rounds, not just on the Web but also in newspapers and magazines.
Finally (sorry, I've got lots), there's the issue of whether or not this book was satirical. (I personally think not.)
snobographer — May 30, 2010
I have this old trunk my dad made back in the late 1960s that was lined with help wanted ads from a newspaper from the same time. The ads were distinctly, unabashedly sex-segregated. "Men wanted" for this (everything from manual labor to executive positions), "girls wanted" for that (secretarial and service jobs). The men's jobs and the "girls'" jobs were even on separate pages.
IBM Decides to Let Women Work after Marriage (1951) » Sociological Images — June 23, 2010
[...] is the type of thing that often turns out to be a hoax so I spent some time searching, but I can’t find any evidence that it isn’t [...]
Standards that Are Not Two-Way | It Smells Like Girl — August 5, 2010
[...] the grounds to throw up their hands and yell equality yet. We are still far from it. This, this, and this are fun historical reminders about how recently it was since women were allowed into the workforce [...]
Robert hewett — February 13, 2019
Bull. Snopes didn't claim similiar advice was given in home economics classes. You are perpetuating this lie.