Second Wave: Do Torah and Feminism Go Hand in Hand?

The second wave of feminism emerged in the 1960s and continued into the 1980s. In some respects, this wave of feminism was a reaction to the traditional, happy homemaker, Stepford wife-type image and role of women of the 1950s. While the first wave of feminism primarily focused on legal rights and political representation, the second wave expanded its scope to address wider social, cultural, and political issues.

The Feminine Mystique, published by Betty Friedan in 1963, is often credited with sparking the second wave. In the book, Friedan questioned the assumption that women’s source of fulfillment is in becoming wives and mothers. Friedan writes, “I have heard so many women try to deny this dissatisfied voice within themselves because it does not fit the pretty picture of femininity the experts have given them.”  The second wave of feminism marked a shift away from seeing a woman’s identity as being defined by her social role and her relationship with other people (namely her husband and children). Attention was refocused on a woman’s identity solely in relation to herself and her personal satisfaction. 

One main focus of the movement was the critical examination of the concept of patriarchy – the social, cultural, and political system that privileges men’s power and dominance over women. They analyzed how patriarchy operated in various spheres of life and sought to challenge and dismantle its structures. This involved both looking at the workplace as well as the household and addressing things such as the uneven division of household labor. Feminists in the second wave advocated for equal pay, equal employment opportunities, and an end to workplace discrimination based on gender. They highlighted the challenges women faced in balancing work and family responsibilities.

When seeking to examine whether Torah thinking is compatible with feminism, quite often, we have to strike a balance by acknowledging the relative merits of feminist principles yet also realizing the areas in which they fall short. 

The point of “uneven division of household labor” is one such example of this. On the one hand, husband and wife enter into a union to support one another and build a home together. As such, it is completely normal for both of them to divide household responsibilities so that not everything falls upon the woman’s shoulders. This being said, we have to be careful that this doesn’t develop into a mentality of “I’ve done my share, now you do yours” since this would depart from Torah thinking. A loving relationship is about wanting to give to the other person and having a focus on what our obligations to them are, not what we feel they ought to do for us – “I’ll give to you on condition that you give to me.” 

…Being a wife and a mother are not the sole aspects of who she is and what her job is in this world. Women are (or at least ought to be) encouraged to have career aspirations, and throughout the Orthodox Jewish world, we can see women in successful positions of all types. Second Wave Feminist thinking ceases to be compatible with Torah, however, when being a wife and a mother starts being seen as something objectionable.

So, too, when it comes to a woman’s role. It is true that being a wife and a mother are not the sole aspects of who she is and what her job is in this world. Women are (or at least ought to be) encouraged to have career aspirations, and throughout the Orthodox Jewish world, we can see women in successful positions of all types. Second Wave Feminist thinking ceases to be compatible with Torah, however, when being a wife and a mother starts being seen as something objectionable. In 1970, in The Dialectic of Sex, Shulamith Firestone wrote, “the heart of woman’s oppression is her child bearing and child rearing role.” Motherhood becomes viewed as antithetical to liberation and independence, with the two being pitted against one another. The fact that raising children is something that involves the woman more than the man is seen as a point of injustice. So yes, women aren’t just wives and mothers, but from the Torah perspective, being a wife and mother is something to be celebrated, not rejected.

Turning to workplace equality, it goes without saying that no one should experience workplace discrimination based on gender, and women should be fairly paid for their work, especially when they are fulfilling the same role as a man. It is also a positive thing when companies acknowledge the challenges women face in balancing work and family responsibilities and provide things such as on-site childcare and nursing facilities to assist working women. 

If a woman wants to be an accountant, then there is no problem there. But can a woman be a mohel? A shochet? A Rosh Yeshiva? Clearly, in the Torah world, there are certain roles designated only to men. Men and women are equal, but equality doesn’t mean they are the same. Thus, equal employment opportunities could potentially be an area of conflict from a Torah perspective, depending on how one defines the term ‘equal.’

Second-wave feminists also fought for reproductive rights, including access to contraception and legal abortion. The movement’s efforts contributed to the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade (1973), which legalized abortion in the United States.

The topic of reproductive rights is a very complex one which we cannot examine in its entirety here. Needless to say, the “my body, my choice” approach to abortion is not compatible with Torah. While there are factors that would permit a woman to have an abortion, these are generally limited to things that would endanger a woman’s mental or physical health, and a Rabbinic authority must be consulted first.

In conclusion, from a Torah perspective, men and women are created equally, both in the Image of God. Second-wave feminism sought to put women on more of an equal footing with men in public life, which, in many ways, is in accordance with our tradition. This being said, Judaism does recognize a difference between the sexes, with the two having different roles, meaning that equality does not mean the same.