This blog is a platform for students to engage, interpret, and analyze the multiple forms of protest by Americans in the 20th-century United States. They seek to understand the historical events, issues, and peoples - through the lens of multiple perspectives - that shape concepts of a civil community, the common good, and the use of "legitimate" protest.

Wednesday, October 23, 2019

Women Strike for Peace






One night in September of 1961, a group of six women met in the house of Dagmar Wilson and talked of atomic war. These women were concerned with the arms race that threatened global destruction and the dangers of nuclear testing. They were devastated that nuclear testing contaminated milk supplies and caused radioactive compounds to be present in the bones of American children. The women who met in Wilson’s house identified as housewives, not political activists, however, they decided to make a bold stand and called upon women to stage a nationwide, one-day strike for peace. As mothers, they believed they had a natural role to protect life and felt it was their responsibility to campaign for peace. Six weeks after these women met in Wilson’s living room, on November 1, 1961, 50,000 housewives and mothers participated in a protest across 60 cities in the United States. This is the founding story of the Women Strike for Peace, a women’s activist group that played an important role during the nuclear age of the 1960s. This group represents one of many protests that took place in the United States during the twentieth century and provides insight to the concerns of some women during the Cold War.



Dagmar Wilson Addresses a WSP Rally in 1962,  New York Times, Image via Women Strike for Peace.

According to Jon Coburn, “Women Strike for Peace emerged in the fall of 1961 as a vehicle for women across the U.S. to call for global disarmament, with a ban on the testing of nuclear weapons seen as the first step toward that end”. The women who participated in the group were heavily concerned with the build up of nuclear weapons during the Cold War and saw this as dangerous to American society. Wilson and her original supporters called upon their female acquaintances and suggested that they “strike for peace” on November 1, 1961. This strike received positive press and public support and the founding members agreed to continue their efforts. After the passing of the Partial Test Ban Treaty in 1963, the group broadened its scope and became a visible part of the anti-Vietnam War movement, supported the women’s liberation movement of the 1970s, and participated in antinuclear activism in the 1980s. The group’s National Office closed in 1990, but some individual activists maintained the Women Strike for Peace presence into the 21st century. This activist group is important to examine because women had not been viewed as equal to men throughout American history, so the boldness of these women demonstrates the desire for their voice to be heard. 

The success of the Women Strike for Peace group was due largely to their image as housewives and mothers who were concerned about the safety of their children. The women chose to present themselves this way when in reality, many of them had been longtime activists for peace as well as other Left causes. They strategically chose to present themselves as mere housewives and mothers to attract sympathetic press and appeal to the average American mother. The group also cooperated with women from other groups and even refused to remove communists from the organization. The main goal of this cooperation was to maintain a common bond as mothers. The Women Strike for Peace was successful as the signing of the Nuclear Test Band Treaty in 1963 by the Soviet Union has been attributed to the efforts of this group. The Women Strike for Peace achieved their goal of receiving sympathy and they were successful as legislation was passed to solve the problem they were heavily concerned with.

 
Claire Collins Harvey Sitting at her Desk in 1939, Amistad Research Center, Image via Amistad Research Center.
Women Strike for Peace is one of many protest movements and groups that formed in the United States during the twentieth century. This group connects to Gaudium et Spes because these women likely felt that it was “legitimate for them to defend their own rights and the rights of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority”. The women who participated in this group were concerned with the well-being of American society as a result of the build up of nuclear weapons during the Cold War. They wanted to ensure the safety of their children and their families while simultaneously achieving political success by putting an end to the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Women Strike for Peace is one of many twentieth century United State protest groups and this provides insight to the role of protests in American society.


For more information on Women Strike for Peace, watch this video.




2 comments:

  1. I agree that this group definitely followed the ideals of "Gaudium et Spes", as they were fighting for peace with the goal of protecting their children. The women were also non-violent, so they did not divert from "Gaudium's" idea of legitimacy. This non-violence is, sadly, dissimilar to my blog topic on the Kent State Shooting. However, both protests are similar in the fact that both groups were protesting the actions of the U.S. government relating to violence and war. The women involved in the Women Strike for Peace for fighting for the protection of their children and advocating for peace. The Kent State students, and many other college students at the time, were advocating for American soldiers, especially peers that were drafted.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I also agree that these women followed the ideals of "Gaudium et Spes", since they wanted peace to protect their children. This group wanted to defend their rights against their authority that they thought was abusing them. This also goes with my blog post as well. Why they are two separate groups fighting for two different things. Both felt that the authority who was supposed to protect them, were actually just abusing them. Both groups wanted to be kept safe and know they were protected by the people who are supposed to be protecting them.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.