M aternal Ambivalence

The reception of psychology hastened the decline of maternalism and its exaltation of mother-love as a benevolent force in the family and society. For feminists this trend had mixed consequences. On the one hand, the tendency to make mothers responsible for all of the problems of society fueled the backlash against feminism, and could justify repressive measures designed to return women to their natural and God-given role. On the other hand, the demise of the idealized “angel in the house” could liberate the individual woman to decide against motherhood or to rebel against stereotyped expectations and look for new ways of mothering. Some envisaged the life — plan—including a briefly interrupted career, institutional child-care, an egalitarian division of parental labor, nonsexist methods of child-rearing, and the prospect of a “post-parental” phase—that was adopted and developed by the “new” feminists of the 1960s. But the elaboration of this complex strategy did not solve but heightened the maternal dilemma. For in the absence of social support, it could be realized by only the most energetic and privileged of women, and sometimes not even by them. The contrast between aspiration and reality highlighted the difficulties that faced a woman who wished to be both a mother and an autonomous individual. Under such circumstances, feminists’ interpretation of the maternal role increasingly emphasized ambivalence, discontent, and psychic conflict. And this theme would become even more prominent in the period after World War II.