wheels of change-the bicycle and women's rights

[niyad]

Wheels of Change: The Bicycle and Women’s Rights






In 1896, Susan B. Anthony affirmed that the bicycle “has done more to emancipate women than anything else in the world.” The year before, in her book A Wheel Within A Wheel: How I Learned to Ride the Bicycle, temperance reformer and suffragist Frances Willard asserted, “I began to feel that myself plus the bicycle equaled myself plus the world.”

May is National Bike Month. The time to celebrate the “many benefits of bicycling,” says its sponsor, the League of American Bicyclists. But one of the oft-unknown benefits of the bike is the unintentional influence it had on women’s rights. By sparking controversy, the bike inadvertently helped emancipate women toward the end of the 19th century.
When the League of American Bicyclists began in 1880, bicycles—the velocipede and the high-wheel to be specific—were limited to the male upper class. Within six years, however, when the Victor Safety bicycle (the earliest version of the bikes we see today) hit the U.S. by storm, the sport opened up to include the middle class and women. And by the start of the 20th century, the wheel was synonymous with the “New Woman.” How and why the seemingly sudden change? Largely because the Victor hit the American market at a pivotal moment in history, igniting a mixture of discussions on political and social issues that had been escalating for decades.

In the 1830s, temperance groups could be found all over the country. and their main supporters were women. Besides the fact that alcohol abuse was a root cause of domestic violence, the Cult of Domesticity (or True Womanhood) insisted women uphold piety (along with purity, domesticity and, the kicker, submissiveness) and the moral character of their homes and community. Similarly, as the debate over slavery intensified, women once again ventured out of their homes to support the cause. They attended meetings, wrote articles, spoke publicly. But as women shifted into the public sphere, they found they had little rights and little power to induce any real change. It was during this time that temperance reformers and abolitionists such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott and Susan B. Anthony began to organize the first seedlings of the women’s movement.

As promising as the 1848 Women’s Rights Convention was, it wasn’t until after the Civil War and the passing of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments that women’s rights regained momentum. Social reform and self-improvement were a huge part of the American psyche in antebellum America. Along with women’s rights, dress reform started making headway, particularly between 1870 and 1880. The movement, partly an attempt to challenge long-held beliefs about women and their place in society, called for more subdued, hygienic designs, meaning looser tops and bifurcated garments, or “bloomers” as many knew them (thanks to temperance activist and journalist Amelia Bloomer, who around 1851 debuted the new “costume” in her temperance newspaper, The Lily). The media had a field day. A woman upheld the notion of True Womanhood by wearing heavy skirts and tight and immobilizing corsets.

Women who did wear bifurcated garments were typically working women of the lower class. Gayle Fischer, who wrote a book on the subject titled Pantaloons and Power, explains “For women to take control of their appearance, to distance themselves from a primarily ornamental identity, primarily dependent on men and devoted to pleasing men, was intrinsically transgressive.” It wouldn’t be until the 1890s bicycle craze that bifurcated women’s apparel became popular. And, as Fischer notes, “just as it had 40 years earlier, the popular press reported on society’s shocked reactions to seeing women on bicycles in ‘bifurcated’ or ‘rational’ garments, and printed humorous cartoons, songs, and poems satirizing the female cyclist.”



. . . .

http://msmagazine.com/blog/2014/05/07/wheels-of-change-the-bicycle-and-womens-rights/

[Doctor_J]

1. Has GD merged with HoF and the BOG?

[NYC_SKP]

3. Nothing in the GD SOP supports your concern.

I recommended it, I think it's a good read for every DU member.

[AverageJoe90]

5. I don't have an issue with this, either.

I mean, we get stuff like this all the time, pretty much; even if it does come from Ms. Magazine, so what?

[niyad]

7. don't you know?? women's issues are ONLY supposed to be covered in women's groups1

heaven forfend that we should actually act like they matter GENERALLY.

[Habibi]

11. Indeed.

[niyad]

9. thank you.

[NYC_SKP]

2. Recommended. (nt)

[AverageJoe90]

4. Very interesting. Thanks for posting. nt

[niyad]

8. you are most welcome.

[niyad]

6. . . .

[cyberswede]

10. I don't think only HOF members are interested in women's rights

That was an interesting article.

[niyad]

12. but some people would like us restricted to a very narrow arena of expression--heaven

forfend that they should actually have to run across something like this.

[RainDog]

13. Velocipeding! omg!!

bloomers... scandalous!

rational dress??? ridiculous!

When women worse corsets, one fashion historian estimated corsets created from 21 (light-lacing) to 80 (tight-lacing) pounds of pressure per square inch. Female lung capacity was reduced by 20%. Internal organs were displaced above and below the waist and some people speculated that tight-lacing corsets was a way to force a miscarriage.

[niyad]

15. was just reading a series of books set in victorian england. talking about how the fashion

dictated that women's undergarments ended up weighing at least seven pounds, and, when one included all the undergarments, petticoats, and yards of fabric demanded in the style of dress--a woman could end up wearing THIRTY POUNDS of clothing. certainly impeded freedom of movement, and little things like breathing.

[RainDog]

16. yeah. no wonder women were "weak"

They were lifting weights every time they took a step! LOL.

What's also interesting, in terms of the ways dress change - during the Revolutionary era and just after - women weren't wearing all this heavy-duty "baggage" - tho both males and females of the upper classes dressed with lots of stuff that took up a lot of money and time to accomplish.

...so, the Revolution put an end to a lot of that sort of fashion.

the 1800s, in a lot of ways, in Europe, can be viewed as a backlash to the Revolutionary era - and the calls, at that time, for women to be included as part of humankind with rights equal to men.

in the U.S. - the revolution was working up to its second phase with the civil war. women who aligned with ending slavery also aligned with more sensible dress for women.