71. Reagin, Women's Movement, 185.
72. Raffael Scheck, “Women against Versailles: Maternalism and Nationalism of Female Bourgeois Politicians in the Early Weimar Republic,” German Studies Review 22(1) (1999): 33.
73. Ann Taylor Allen, Feminism and Motherhood in Germany, 1800-1914 (New Brunswick, NJ, 1991), 5; for a case like that described by Allen, see Renate Bridenthal, “‘Professional’ Housewives: Stepsisters of the Women's Movement,” in When Biology became Destiny: Women in Weimar and Nazi Germany (New York, 1984), 153-155, in which it is argued that “German bourgeois feminism meandered through the early twentieth century with an ideological profile so low as to bring its feminist credentials into question” (154) .
74. Allen, Feminism (1991), 11.
75. Margit Göttert, Macht und Eros: Frauenbeziehungen und weibliche Kultur um 1900—eine neue Perspektive auf Helene Lange und Gertrud Bäumer (Königstein, 2000), 10.
76. Repp, Reformers, 13.
77. Ibid., 14.
78. Ibid.
79. Archiv der Katholischer Deutscher Frauenbund, Nachlass Elisabeth Gnauck-Kühne, Ordnen 15; letter undated, context suggests 1912.
PART I
Der Frauenüberschuß
THE FEMALE SURPLUS
The surplus woman was a cultural icon of the Kaiserreich. The following four chapters describe the construction of her iconography by examining cultural and literary readings of the German old maid; the impact of the field of sexology on single women; the imagined demography behind the crisis of the bourgeois female surfeit; and the effort to convey the unwed female as a “spiritual,” if not biological, mother.
Chapter 1
THE ALTE JUNGFER
In mid-nineteenth century Prussia, an etiquette book for young ladies promised its readers that it would guide them toward acquiring the proper disposition necessary for a successful marriage. The author, Henriette Davidis, was a prolific writer of cookbooks and other forms of female prescriptive literature. Davidis offered an extraordinary range of counsel, instructing her readership on the importance of prayer and moral character, advocating a strict schedule (no more than twenty minutes spent on dressing in the morning; every Monday as laundry day), and detailing the steps toward keeping home and body clean and healthy. Davidis maintained that because of “the heightened demands and increasing requirements of our time, it is of decisive importance that the young lady fundamentally prepares herself for her later calling of a housewife”; if she did not, the prospective husband might well look elsewhere.1 If girls followed her advice, Davidis believed that competence would replace income as the most crucial factor in forming marriages: “With such a feminine education, respectable men without an income will be able to risk choosing disadvantaged daughters as life partners…And certainly such a choice would not be regretted!”2 Davidis' guidance sought to secure for each reader a family of her own.3
Most young middle-class German women in the second half of the nineteenth century anticipated that they would marry. Their education, both formal and informal, sought to prepare them for wedlock.4 Over thirty years after Davidis extended her recommendations, another book of guidance directed potential brides to develop skills that would attract exemplary husbands. These qualities included an “understanding reception of his opinions, sensitive consideration of his tastes and personal wishes in the questions which concern your mutual future, loving forethought on that which would embellish his strengths to achieve his life's destiny.”5 The primary purpose of female development was to mold the feminine nature toward embracing the beliefs and goals of the prospective husband. Marriage would be the central achievement of a woman's life. Advice book author Amalie Baisch asserted that the sole life objective of a female was “to wear the veil, to prevent the terrifying old maidenhood once and for all. She will have a husband at any price, and if the husband that she has dreamed about does not come, she will take just anyone who does.”6 Baisch warned against this sense of desperation and urged her readers to search responsibly for a husband. Still, the message was clear: marry, marry well, and marry young—in every way make oneself as desirable a future wife as possible.
In Imperial Germany, marriage—and marriagelessness—encompassed the category of womanhood, at least as far as the law was concerned. The German Civil Code of 1900 continued the centuries-old practice of defining women on the basis of marital status, making them legally beholden to husband or father.7 Independent single women did not have a fixed place in the German social order. Only 7 percent of Kaiserreich residences were classified as single-person households, with most of those headed by men.8 Female singles lived in the shadows of the bourgeois family ideal which, in an age of increasing industrialization and urbanization, seemed for many to offer a protective zone outside of the competitive sphere of public life.9 Law and society placed unwed independent women in a murky, marginalized realm.
The terrifying specter of the alte Jungfer, the German incarnation of the old maid, fueled the insistence on marriage as the fulfillment of the female destiny. The social and cultural construction of the old maid in Imperial Germany echoed centuries of Western thought on the proper female role. A woman belonged in the private sphere, economically dependent and physically controlled through the institution of marriage. Woman as a wife, subjugated to the husband financially and legally, secured the integrity of the family and the purity of the state. Woman unattached challenged the social order. Such ungoverned women had been subjected to various forms of persecution through the ages, including accusation of witchcraft and condemnation as moral threats. But in the nineteenth century, unwed women took on a new role: idleness. In the English context, historian Martha Vicinus has noted that “increased wealth and the consolidation of the bourgeois social values in the early nineteenth century condemned spinsters to unremitting idleness and to marginal positions in the home, church, and workplace.”10 In Germany as well, conventional anxieties young women might have had about remaining unmarried intensified as the bourgeois family model gained stature and economic advancement made redundant many of the traditional domestic activities of single family members. If the middle-class single woman could not find a place in her own home and family, she had no choice but to locate herself elsewhere. And if she did not inherit an income or earn a salary, she was fated to become something of a nuisance.
The dominant literary construction of the alte Jungfer in Imperial Germany was that of pariah. While many observers of the day expressed sympathy regarding the dilemmas that confronted single women and anticipated that derogatory depictions of old maids might become outmoded, the governing images of single women in literature and social commentary nonetheless served to label unwed females as outcasts. This form of marginalization intensified during the Kaiserreich due to the perceived displacement of the unwed woman from her stereotypical role as family helpmeet. As Katharina Gerstenberger found in a study of female autobiography at the turn-of-the-century, middle-class German women “assessed the modern age by measuring their own experience of family life against the bourgeois family ideal.”11 As women and their observers began to contemplate the challenges of a life led distant from that family ideal, the advances of the industrial era transformed archaic anxieties about the old maid into contemporary threats to the greater social order. This chapter considers the social and cultural constructions of the alte Jungfer by demonstrating the ways in which single women increasingly came to be portrayed as useless personages in turn-of-the-century rhetoric.12
Family Blossom Turned Family Burden
Raised to plan and hope for a future distinguished by love and protection, many young women who did not marry confronted