Library Design Showcase
Library History and Women’s History: An Ongoing Convergence
How the storied struggle for women’s rights dovetails with library history
Posted Wed, 02/29/2012 - 13:22
The convergence of women’s history and library history at the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition heralded the beginnings of a tradition of advocacy that would shape our profession for the next 100 years and beyond. As American women entered librarianship in the late 19th century, they focused on issues of professional equity, on services to women among the general public, and on the importance of preserving the history and writings of women themselves.
We may think this activism began in the 1970s. Some may assume it began during the Progressive Era of the 1920s. But, in fact, this advocacy is documented at least as early as 1892, thanks to a wonderfully prescient article in the August 1892 Library Journal that describes a “woman’s meeting” at the 14th ALA conference in Lakewood, New Jersey, likely motivated by the work already underway for the Woman’s Building Library. Belying the stereotype some may have of those early women librarians as complacent, those proceedings note that Mary Cutler presented the results of a salary survey she had undertaken, concluding that “women rarely receive the same pay for the same work as men.” As Lakewood conference drew to a close, a resolution was passed to appoint a committee to organize a Woman’s Section of the ALA. This strategy was as controversial then as it was decades later: Librarian Tessa Kelso wrote in November 1892 to object strongly to such a unit.
For whatever reasons, the movement to organize around women’s issues in ALA would not come to fruition until the second wave of the women’s movement in the late 1960s and early 1970s. By that time, an outpouring of feminist publishing and organizing was occurring in the United States and Great Britain, and the role of women in the professions took a definitive turn. Perhaps the signal event within ALA was the founding of the Task Force on Women in 1970. The TFW became the incubator and instigator for a host of other committees and units across the Association that focused on such issues as professional status and employment equity, pay equity legislation, women administrators, services for women library users, racism and sexism in subject headings, collection development for the growing field of women’s studies, and women in technology. With the establishment of the Council-level Committee on the Status of Women in Librarianship in 1976, the TFW could declare a more activist role and renamed itself the Feminist Task Force. It continues to this day with a broad agenda that addresses women’s professional and political concerns across all types of library work.
The internationalism of the Woman’s Building in 1893 also marked a permanent trend in the profession generally, and in the organizing of women librarians specifically. ALA sought engagement with librarians in other countries from its earliest days, as did (separately) the American women’s movement. The international focus for women librarians continued to develop and went beyond simply working on individual projects and exchanges. This became most evident by the mid-1980s, when an array of women’s libraries were in existence and various national associations held recurring programs on related topics. The Round Table on Women’s Issues in the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions was created in 1990, and currently IFLA’s Women, Information, and Libraries Special Interest Group promotes a strategic framework formed by the UN treaties, programs, and initiatives related to women and information to create a fruitful link between IFLA and relevant international organizations.
The Woman’s Library at the World’s Columbian Exposition achieved a milestone and was an impressive harbinger for the intersection of librarianship, women’s history, community service, public policy, and international relations.
SARAH M. PRITCHARD is dean of libraries and Charles Deering McCormick University Librarian at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois.
Trending Now
Current Issue
American Libraries Magazine | 50 East Huron | Chicago, IL 60611 | 2013© American Library Association | Staff Login









Comments
Same pay as men's
Many if not most feminists and union leaders say employers are greedy and profit-obsessed.
If such employers could get away with paying women less than men in the same work, not one man would have a job.
No law yet has closed the gender wage gap — not the 1963 Equal Pay for Equal Work Act, not Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, not the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act, not the 1991 amendments to Title VII, not affirmative action (which has benefited mostly white women, the group most vocal about the wage gap - http://tinyurl.com/74cooen), not diversity, not the countless state and local laws and regulations, not the horde of overseers at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and not the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act…. Nor will a “paycheck fairness” law work.
That’s because pay-equity advocates continue to overlook the effects of female AND male behavior:
Despite the 40-year-old demand for women’s equal pay, millions of wives still choose to have no pay at all. In fact, according to Dr. Scott Haltzman, author of “The Secrets of Happily Married Women,” stay-at-home wives, including the childless who represent an estimated 10 percent, constitute a growing niche. “In the past few years,” he says in a CNN report at http://tinyurl.com/6reowj, “many women who are well educated and trained for career tracks have decided instead to stay at home.” (“Census Bureau data show that 5.6 million mothers stayed home with their children in 2005, about 1.2 million more than did so a decade earlier….” at http://tinyurl.com/qqkaka. If indeed more women are staying at home, perhaps it’s because feminists and the media have told women for years that female workers are paid less than men in the same jobs — so why bother working if they’re going to be penalized and humiliated for being a woman. If “greedy, profit-obsessed” employers could get away with paying women less than men for the same work, they would not hire a man – ever.)
As full-time mothers or homemakers, stay-at-home wives earn zero. How can they afford to do this while in many cases living in luxury? Because they’re supported by their husband, an “employer” who pays them to stay at home.
Feminists, government, and the media ignore what this obviously implies: If millions of wives are able to accept no wages and live as well as their husbands, millions of other wives are able to accept low wages, refuse overtime and promotions, work part-time instead of full-time (“According to a 2009 UK study for the Centre for Policy Studies, only 12 percent of the 4,690 women surveyed wanted to work full time”: http://bit.ly/ihc0tl See also an Australian report: http://tinyurl.com/862kzes), take more unpaid days off, avoid uncomfortable wage-bargaining (http://tinyurl.com/3a5nlay) — all of which lower women’s average pay.
Women are able to make these choices because they are supported or anticipate being supported by a husband who must earn more than if he’d chosen never to marry. (Still, even many men who shun marriage, unlike their female counterparts, feel their self worth is tied to their net worth.) This is how MEN help create the wage gap. If the roles were reversed so that men raised the children and women raised the income, men would average lower pay than women.
See “Will the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Help Women?” at http://malemattersusa.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/will-the-ledbetter-fair-p…
By the way, The Next Equal Occupational Fatality Day is in 2020. Year 2020 is how far into the future women must work to experience the same number of work-related deaths that men experienced in 2009 alone. http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2010/04/equal-occupational-fatality-death-da…
Post new comment