What is Feminism?

19-year-old Helena Muffly wrote exactly 100 years ago today:

Friday, June 19, 1914: Simply nothing.

Her middle-aged granddaughter’s comments 100 years later:

Nothing days are good days to contemplate deep questions. Did Grandma ever ask herself questions like: Do I believe that women should have more rights?. . . Am I a feminist? . . .

Here’s the beginning of an article on feminism that was in the May, 1914 issue of Good Housekeeping:

What is Feminism?

Has the question reached your hometown yet? If it has not, it soon will. And if the people in your home town are like the people in mine, the answers will be various and sundry—as many different answers probably as there are people.

“Femi-what?” your average citizen will venture. “Feminism? Something about women, isn’t it?”

“It’s the woman’s movement”—“It’s the furthering of the interests of women”—“It’s the revolt of the women”—”It’s the assertion of woman’s right to individual development”—“It’s the doctrine of freedom for women”—“It’s woman’s struggle for the liberation of her personality”—

The suggestions have crowded one on the heels of the other so rapidly, and so dogmatically, during this early part of the twentieth century, that the onlooker may be forgiven for deciding that there are a so many definitions of feminism as there are feminists.

Yet what distinguishes the contribution of the times on the subject is the really synthetic effort back of all the definitions, the effort to get “the woman question” assembled on a broader base than any from which it has as yet been projected. Higher education for women, economic opportunity for women, right of person and property for women, political enfranchisement for women—all begin as parts of something greater, vaster.

Whether or not we have found it in feminism is still an open question. Some draw back because they say, it means too much. Some don’t like it because they say it doesn’t mean enough. Some want the woman question to stay concentrated upon suffrage. . .

Wedding Decorations a Hundred Years Ago

19-year-old Helena Muffly wrote exactly 100 years ago today:

Sunday, June 14, 1914: Heard the details of a rather unusual wedding, which took place this morning. Lots of people went that weren’t invited. Ruth was one.

Attended church this afternoon. A supply preacher was there for the afternoon. He could make his eyes flash.

Photo Source: Ladies Home Journal (October, 1914)

Her middle-aged granddaughter’s comments 100 years later:

Hmm. . . Sunday morning seems like an odd time for a wedding. Why would people crash it?. . . Were the bride and groom very popular and friends of many of the young people? . . . Was there an awesome reception? . . . What were the wedding decorations like?

I wonder if Grandma’s sister Ruth kept a diary. If would be fun to read what she wrote about this unusual wedding.

1914-10-37 f — Bride’s bouquet with Bible or prayer book

___

What did Grandma mean when she said that the substitute pastor made his eyes flash? Was he preaching about hell, fire and brimstone?

Dr. Price’s Vanilla Extract Advertisement

19-year-old Helena Muffly wrote exactly 100 years ago today:

Saturday, June 6, 1914: Same as ever.

Her middle-aged granddaughter’s comments 100 years later:

Since Grandma didn’t write much a hundred years ago today, I’ll share this advertisement for vanilla extract that appeared in the April, 1914 issue of Ladies Home Journal.

1914 Bridal Veils

19-year-old Helena Muffly wrote exactly 100 years ago today:

Thursday, June 4, 1914: Ditto

Her middle-aged granddaughter’s comments 100 years later:

Oh dear. . . another slow day. . . The previous day Grandma wrote, “Nothing doing.”

While Grandma was doing nothing, maybe she flipped through Ladies Home Journal and pored over the pictures of bridal veils—and selected her favorite veil, while dreaming that she’d someday have a storybook wedding. . . .Or maybe the pictures depressed her and made her worry that she’d never get married.

The New Bridal Veils

As old as the wedding ceremony itself is the custom of wearing the bridal veil. Of course the bridal veil need not be an expensive article, for, unless there is rare old lace in the possession of the brides’ family, it would be perfectly charming and dainty made of fine tulle or of sheer net. Fine lace may edge the veil, or form or trim the cap or head covering, but this is not essential for the beauty of the veil.

Trimming the veil with orange blossoms is likewise a custom of long standing. Still there is no reason why other white flowers or strings of pearl beads cannot be substituted should one’s fancy so dictate.

If you enjoyed these pictures and would like to see some more bridal veils from the same issue of Ladies Home Journal, go to Fashion a Hundred Years Ago. It is the companion site to this blog, and I posted several additional pictures there.

Hundred-year-old French Twist Directions

19-year-old Helena Muffly wrote exactly 100 years ago today:

Sunday, May 31, 1914: <<no entry>>

Source: Ladies Home Journal (April, 1914)

Her middle-aged granddaughter’s comments 100 years later:

Sometimes on boring Sunday afternoons when I was a teen, I practiced creating glamorous hair styles shown in the flyer that came with Adorn hairspray.

Did Grandma also style her hair when she was bored? . . .

Since Grandma didn’t write anything a hundred years ago today, I’m going to share 1914 directions for how to do the latest hair style, the French Twist.

French Twist

This coiffure is no more difficult than any other but to be entirely successful the hair must be artificially waved or possess a natural undulation.

Part the hair high on the crown, almost on a line with the ears, as the greater portion of the hair must be in back. Plait the back hair loosely to hold in place until you comb back the side portions.

Then take a small portion of hair from the center front as shown in the illustration. Twist this in a loose knot temporarily and comb back each side portion of the hair, fastening halfway between the crown and lower hair-line, as indicated in the illustration.

Twist this in a loose knot temporarily and comb back each side portion of the hair, fastening halfway between the crown and the lower hair-line as indicated in the illustration.

Now unfasten the top portion which you knotted. Begin at the end and roll under, forming into a puff to be used as the foundation on which to pin the back portion. Unfasten the loose braid in back; brush and smooth this strand of hair, and taking the entire strand. Draw it upward.

Give it a single twist near the crown of the head, keeping the lower portion smooth and straight. Then begin to roll under the end as you did with the front section, fastening in a becoming line on the top of the head. Place the pins underneath, so they will be practically invisible. The comb may be placed in back or in a diagonal position in front , following the line of the twist. Comb the hair together at the partings and fasten with invisible pins.

Ladies Home Journal (April, 1914)

1914 Horse Sale Advertisement

19-year-old Helena Muffly wrote exactly 100 years ago today:

Sunday, May 24 – Thursday, May 28, 1914: Nothing much doing.

Her middle-aged granddaughter’s comments 100 years later:

Since Grandma didn’t write anything specific for this date, I thought that you might enjoy seeing this 1914 advertisement for horses in Grandma’s local newspaper, the Milton Evening Standard.

It’s hard to imagine how far agriculture has come in a hundred years—and that living horses were the primary providers of “horse power” in 1914.

The spring planting season would have been a busy time on the Muffly farm. I wonder how many horses Grandma’s father owned to help with the work.

Baby Hester’s Death Certificate

19-year-old Helena Muffly wrote exactly 100 years ago today:

Sunday, May 24 – Thursday, May 28, 1914: Nothing much doing.

Her middle-aged granddaughter’s comments 100 years later:

Sometimes posts just write themselves. This is one of those times.

This is the third of five days that Grandma lumped together into one diary entry. Her infant niece, the daughter of her sister Besse, died on May 23.

My readers are awesome. I owe Agnette a huge thank you for finding the death certificate for the baby. I’m still tingling with amazement that she took the time to search for it—and that she found it.

Sunday was a busy day—and I sat down to write the post for today at about 9 p.m. last night. I was unsure what to write—and then I glanced at the comments I’d recently received. There was Agnette’s comment and a link to the death certificate.

The death certificate affirms the information in the diary. I can’t quite make out the first listed cause of death—Does anyone have any ideas? –but was surprised that the second cause was Spina Bifida.

Grandma mentioned her sense of foreboding the day the infant was born—but did not indicate a serious congenial condition—and had seemed to think that the baby would be okay in the next diary entry. I’m surprised she didn’t mention something related to the Spina Bifida.

This makes me wonder if Besse’s first baby, who also died in infancy, had Spina Bifida. And, it makes me appreciate doctors’ recommendations today that women make sure that they get adequate amounts of folic acid prior to conception to help decrease the likelihood that the baby will have Spina Bifida.

The death certificate says that the baby was buried at River Church Cemetery. I wasn’t sure where it was—so I googled it. An Ancestry.com message board popped up. According the one of the comments on the message board:

The River Church is St. John’s Delaware Run Lutheran Church, located on Musser Lane, Watsontown. Because this is a rural area, it is actually closer to Dewart (about a mile) than Watsontown (about 2 1/2 miles).

I don’t know of any family connections to this church, but perhaps the Hesters’ attended it.

—

I’m still tingling—so many pieces of the puzzle are fitting together with this death certificate. Thanks again, Agnette!