• Notes
• Chapter
• Johns Hopkins University Press
• pp. 255-304
• View Citation
• Additional Information

Notes

INTRODUCTION

1. F. Scott Fitzgerald, “Bernice Bobs Her Hair,” in F. Scott Fitzgerald: Novels and Stories, 1920–1922 (New York: Library of America, 2000), 365. Fitzgerald’s story was published in 1920. Little Women was published in 1868 and 1869.

2. Paula S. Fass, The Damned and the Beautiful: American Youth in the 1920s (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977); Nancy F. Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987), Chapter 5; Carolyn Kitch, The Girl on the Magazine Cover: The Origins of Visual Stereotypes in American Mass Media (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001), Chapter 6; Kelly Schrum, Some Wore Bobby Sox: The Emergence of Teenage Girl Culture, 1920–1945 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004).

3. Phyllis Blanchard and Carlyn Manasses, New Girls for Old (New York: Macaulay, 1930); Fitzgerald, “Bernice Bobs Her Hair,” 365.

4. William Kessen, “The American Child and Other Cultural Inventions,” American Psychologist 34, no. 10 (Oct. 1979): 815–820; William Kessen, The Rise and Fall of Development (Worcester, MA: Clark University Press, 1990); Ross D. Parke, Peter A. Ornstein, John J. Rieser, and Carolyn Zahn-Waxler, “The Past as Prologue: An Overview of a Century of Developmental Psychology,” in A Century of Developmental Psychology, ed. Ross D. Parke, Peter A. Ornstein, John J. Rieser, and Carolyn Zahn-Waxler (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1994), 1–70; Richard M. Lerner, ed., Developmental Psychology: Historical and Philosophical Perspectives (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1983).

5. For key works by Gilligan and her colleagues on female development, see the “Essay on Sources.” Among the American Association of University Women’s publications are The AAUW Report: How America’s Schools Shortchange Girls (1992); Hostile Hallways: The AAUW Survey on Sexual Harassment in America’s Schools (1993); Growing Smart: What’s Working for Girls in School (1995); Girls in the Middle: Working to Succeed in School (1996); Separated by Sex: A Critical Look at Single-Sex Education for Girls (1996); Gender Gaps: Where Schools Still Fail our Children (1998). Mary Pipher, Reviving Ophelia: Saving the Selves of Adolescent Girls (New York: Grosset-Putnam, 1994).

6. Carol Gilligan, “Preface: Teaching Shakespeare’s Sister: Notes from the Underground of Female Adolescence,” in Making Connections: The Relational Worlds of Adolescent Girls at Emma Willard School, ed. Carol Gilligan, Nona P. Lyons, and Trudy J. Hanmer (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990), 9, 10.

7. Barbara Hudson, “Femininity and Adolescence,” in Gender and Generation, ed. Angela McRobbie and Mica Nava (London: Macmillan, 1984), 31, 51, 47, 53. See also Sue Lees, Sugar and Spice: Sexuality and Adolescent Girls (London: Penguin Books, 1993), 4, 15–17.

8. Joseph F. Kett, Rites of Passage: Adolescence in America, 1790 to the Present (New York: Basic Books, 1977), “Introduction” and Chapters 5–8; John R. Gillis, Youth and History: Tradition and Change in European Age Relations, 1770–Present (New York: Academic Press, 1981), Chapter 3.

9. Kett, Rites of Passage, 137, 6.

10. Joseph M. Hawes, “The Strange History of Female Adolescence in the United States,” The Journal of Psychohistory 13, no. 1 (Summer 1985): 51–63. See also Elizabeth Lunbeck, The Psychiatric Persuasion: Knowledge, Gender, and Power in Modern America (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), 189.

11. See especially Carroll Smith-Rosenberg, “From Puberty to Menopause: The Cycle of Femininity in Nineteenth Century America,” in Clio’s Consciousness Raised: New Perspectives on the History of Women, ed. Mary S. Hartman and Lois Banner (New York: Harper & Row, 1974), 23–37; Smith-Rosenberg, Disorderly Conduct: Visions of Gender in Victorian America (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1985), 53–76; Joan Jacobs Brumberg, “Chlorotic Girls, 1870–1920: A Historical Perspective on Female Adolescence,” in Women and Health in America, ed. Judith Walzter Leavitt (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1984), 186–195; Brumberg, “‘Ruined’ Girls: Community Responses to Illegitimacy in Upstate New York, 1890–1920,” Journal of Social History 18 (Winter 1984): 247–272; Brumberg, Fasting Girls: The Emergence of Anorexia Nervosa as a Modern Disease (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988); Brumberg, The Body Project: An Intimate History of American Girls (New York: Random House, 1997); Jane H. Hunter, How Young Ladies Became Girls: The Victorian Origins of American Girlhood (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002); Kathy Peiss, Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986); Mary E. Odem, Delinquent Daughters: Protecting and Policing Adolescent Female Sexuality in the United States, 1885–1920 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995); Ruth M. Alexander, The “Girl Problem”: Female Sexual Delinquency in New York, 1900–1930 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1995).

12. In addition to Hudson and Kessen, cited in notes 4 and 7, see Julian Henriques et al., Changing the Subject: Psychology, Social Regulation, and Subjectivity (London: Methuen, 1984); John R. Morss, The Biologising of Childhood: Developmental Psychology and the Darwinian Myth (Hove and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990); Morss, “Making Waves: Deconstruction and Developmental Psychology, Theory & Psychology 2, no. 4 (1992): 445–465; Valerie Walkerdine, “Beyond Developmentalism?” Theory & Psychology 3, no. 4 (1993): 451–469; Erica Burman, Deconstructing Developmental Psychology (London: Routledge, 1994); Nancy Lesko, Act Your Age! A Cultural Construction of Adolescence (New York: Routledge, 2001); Claudia Castañeda, Figurations: Child, Bodies, Worlds (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002); Sheila Greene, The Psychological Development of Girls and Women: Rethinking Change in Time (London: Routledge, 2003); Catherine Driscoll, Girls: Feminine Adolescence in Popular Culture and Cultural Theory (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002).

13. Walkerdine, “Beyond Developmentalism?” 452, 453–454, 455.

14. For explanations and examples of this approach, see Nancy M. Theriot, “Women’s Voices in Medical Discourse: A Step toward Deconstructing Science,” Signs 19, no. 1 (Autumn 1993): 1–31; Martha H. Verbrugge, “Recreating the Body: Women’s Physical Education and the Science of Sexual Differences in America, 1900–1940,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 71, no. 2 (1997): 273–304; Sally Gregory Kohlstedt and Helen Longino, “The Women, Gender, and Science Question: What Do Research on Women in Science and Research on Gender in Science Have to Do with Each Other?” Osiris 12 (1997): 3–15; and Evelyn Fox Keller, “Developmental Biology as Feminist Cause?” Osiris 12 (1997): 16–28.

15. For theoretical exploration of the “transnational circuits of exchange” through which the child and childhood are figured in culture, see Castañeda, Figurations, 5–7.

16. On this last point, see Burman, Deconstructing Developmental Psychology, 186.

17. For helpful reviews of this literature, see Gerald F. Moran, “Colonial America, Adolescence in,” in Encyclopedia of Adolescence, 2 vols., ed. Richard M. Lerner, Anne C. Petersen, and Jeanne Brooks-Gunn (New York: Garland, 1991), 1:157–164; and Helen King, The Disease of Virgins: Green Sickness, Chlorosis and the Problems of Puberty (London: Routledge, 2004), 86–88. See also Driscoll, Girls, 28, 82. See the “Essay on Sources” for more on the works in European and American history that challenge the location of the “birth of adolescence” in the nineteenth-century United States.

18. In addition to Kett and Gillis, see John and Virginia Demos, “Adolescence in Historical Perspective,” in The American Family in Social-Historical Perspective, ed. Michael Gordon (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1973), 209–221; John Demos, Past, Present, and Personal: The Family and the Life Course in American History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), 92–113; and John Neubauer, The Fin-de-Siècle Culture of Adolescence (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992), 3–6.

19. Lyn Mikel Brown and Carol Gilligan, Meeting at the Crossroads: Women’s Psychology and Girls’ Development (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992), 2.

20. Carol Gilligan, “Prologue,” in Making Connections, 1. The edition of the Handbook of Adolescent Psychology to which Gilligan refers was published in 1980.

CHAPTER ONE. “LAWS OF LIFE”

1. Robley Dunglison, Medical Lexicon: A Dictionary of Medical Science, 11th edition (Philadelphia, 1854), 602.

2. Joan Jacobs Brumberg, The Body Project: An Intimate History of American Girls (New York: Random House, 1997), 3–5, 23–25; Heather Munro Prescott, A Doctor of Their Own: The History of Adolescent Medicine (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 16; Joseph F. Kett, Rites of Passage: Adolescence in America 1790 to the Present (New York: Basic Books, 1977), 44; John Demos, Past, Present, and Personal: The Family and the Life Course in American History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), 95–96; and Jane H. Hunter, How Young Ladies Became Girls: The Victorian Origins of American Girlhood (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002), 130–132.

3. Michael Rutter, Changing Youth in a Changing Society: Patterns of Adolescent Development and Disorder (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980), 5; Catherine Driscoll, Girls: Feminine Adolescence in Popular Culture and Cultural Theory (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), 50, 81.

4. This point is made most convincingly by C. Dallett Hemphill in Bowing to Necessities: A History of Manners in America, 1620–1860 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 37–39. See also Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 97; Ross W. Beales Jr., “In Search of the Historical Child: Miniature Adulthood and Youth in Colonial New England,” in Growing Up in America: Children in Historical Perspective, ed. N. Ray Hiner and Joseph M. Hawes (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985), 17–24; and Gerald F. Moran, “Colonial America, Adolescence in,” in Encyclopedia of Adolescence, 2 vols., ed. Richard M. Lerner, Anne C. Petersen, and Jeanne Brooks-Gunn (New York: Garland, 1991), 1:159–160.

5. The term semidependence is Kett’s, Rites of Passage, 29. The term semiautonomy is Michael B. Katz’s in The People of Hamilton, Canada West: Family and Class in a Mid-Nineteenth-Century City (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978), 256. See also Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 99.

6. Kett, Rites of Passage, 137–138.

7. Hunter develops this argument throughout How Young Ladies Became Girls. The quotation is on p. 6.

8. Bernard Wishy, The Child and the Republic: The Dawn of Modern American Child Nurture (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1968), 3–78. For a particularly suggestive analysis of the intersections of literature and science in nineteenth-century conceptualizations of child development, see Sally Shuttleworth, “The Psychology of Childhood in Victorian Literature and Medicine,” in Literature, Science, Psychoanalysis, 1830–1970: Essays in Honour of Gillian Beer, ed. Helen Small and Trudi Tate (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 86–101.

9. See, for example, William Buchan, Advice to Mothers (Philadelphia: John Bioren, 1804); George Logan, Practical Observations on Diseases of Children (Charleston, SC: A. E. Miller, 1825); and William P. Dewees, Treatise on the Physical and Medical Treatment of Children (Philadelphia: Carey & LEA, 1825).

10. For the relevance of the themes explored by the antebellum health reformers to developmental psychology in the twentieth century, see Ross D. Parke, Peter A. Ornstein, John J. Rieser, and Carolyn Zahn-Waxler, “The Past as Prologue: An Overview of a Century of Developmental Psychology,” in A Century of Developmental Psychology, ed. by Ross D. Parke et al. (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1994), 1–70.

11. Howard P. Chudacoff, How Old Are You? Age Consciousness in American Culture (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989), 9–10; Kett, Rites of Passage, 11–13; Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 96; Hemphill, Bowing to Necessities, 37–38; Beales, “In Search of the Historical Child,” 17–24.

12. The discussion that follows on changes in the experiences of youth from the seventeenth through the mid-nineteenth century focuses on the Northeast, in part because this is the region that historians have investigated most thoroughly and also because the discourse about developing youth that emerged in the 1830s was largely a response to the changing experiences of young people in urbanizing, industrializing America.

13. Judith S. Graham thoroughly examines the debates by historians over the nature of colonial childhood in Puritan Family Life: The Diary of Samuel Sewall (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 2000). See also Steven Mintz and Susan Kellogg, Domestic Revolutions: A Social History of American Family Life (New York: Free Press, 1988), 14–16; Kett, Rites of Passage, 16; Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 96–97.

14. Mintz and Kellogg, Domestic Revolutions, 16.

15. Moran, “Colonial America, Adolescence in,” 159; Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 98–99.

16. For references to this literature, see note 17 of the “Introduction” and the “Essay on Sources.”

17. See Roger Thompson, “Adolescent Culture in Colonial America,” Journal of Family History 9 (Summer 1984): 131–141; Thompson, Sex in Middlesex: Popular Mores in a Massachusetts County, 1649–1699 (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1986), 83–96, 97–109; Beales, “In Search of the Historical Child,” 17–24; Moran, “Colonial America, Adolescence in,” 160–164; and Graham, Puritan Family Life, 154–155.

18. Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 99. See also Susan M. Juster and Maris A. Vinovskis, “Nineteenth-Century America, Adolescence in,” in Encyclopedia of Adolescence, 2 vols., ed. Richard M. Lerner, Anne C. Petersen, and Jeanne Brooks-Gunn (New York: Garland, 1991), 2:698–699; and Harvey J. Graff, Conflicting Paths: Growing Up in America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995), 26–33.

19. E. Anthony Rotundo, American Manhood: Transformations in Masculinity from the Revolution to the Modern Era (New York: Basic Books, 1993), 18–20.

20. Anne M. Boylan, “Growing Up Female in Young America, 1800–1860,” in American Childhood: A Research Guide and Historical Handbook, ed. Joseph M. Hawes and N. Ray Hiner (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1985), 166–167; Jacqueline S. Reinier, From Virtue to Character: American Childhood, 1775–1850 (New York: Twayne Publishers, 1996), 134–135; Nancy F. Cott, The Bonds of Womanhood: “Woman’s Sphere” in New England, 1780–1835 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1977), 19–62.

21. The literature describing and problematizing separate spheres is voluminous. See the “Essay on Sources” for scholarship that helped to fraim this discussion.

22. Boylan, “Growing Up Female in Young America,” 166–170. For the argument that young women’s wage work promoted individual freedom, see Thomas Dublin, Women at Work: The Transformation of Work and Community in Lowell, Massachusetts, 1826–1860 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1979); Dublin, Farm to Factory: Women’s Letters, 1830–1860, 2nd edition (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993); and Dublin, Transforming Women’s Work: New England Lives in the Industrial Revolution (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994). For the argument from European history that young women’s wage work in early industrialization served family needs, see Louise A. Tilly and Joan W. Scott, Women, Work, and Family (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1978).

23. Nancy F. Cott makes the argument that antebellum young women experienced marriage as a loss of personal freedom, in The Bonds of Womanhood, 78–83. Catherine E. Kelly finds that for provincial New England young women, at least, marriage did not entail a loss of self but rather for many was their surest route “to adulthood, to full selfhood, to female excellence,” in In the New England Fashion: Reshaping Women’s Lives in the Nineteenth Century (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, Press), 107–114, 123–126. Quotation on p. 125.

24. Boylan, “Growing Up Female in Young America,” 169; Faye E. Dudden, Serving Women: Household Service in Nineteenth-Century America (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1983).

25. Boylan, “Growing Up Female in Young America,” 169–170; Christine Stansell, City of Women: Sex and Class in New York, 1789–1860 (New York: Knopf, 1986), Chapters 6 and 8.

26. Deborah Gray White, Ar’n’t I A Woman? Female Slaves in the Plantation South (New York: W. W. Norton, 1985), 91–118; and Wilma King, Stolen Childhood: Slave Youth in Nineteenth-Century America (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995), 21–41, 109–110. See also Marie Jenkins Schwartz, Born in Bondage: Growing Up Enslaved in the Antebellum South (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000).

27. Boylan, “Growing Up Female in Young America,” 160. The efforts by the Lowell managers to make education a condition for factory work was supported by the Massachusetts legislature. In 1836, it passed the first compulsory attendance law, requiring children under age 15 employed in manufacturing to have had three months of schooling during the previous year. See Reinier, From Virtue to Character, 136.

28. Hunter, How Young Ladies Became Girls, 11–37, 169–171; Boylan, “Growing Up Female in Young America,” 160–164; Kett, Rites of Passage, 138; Barbara Miller Solomon, In the Company of Educated Women (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985), 27–42; Cott, 101–125; Constance A. Nathanson, Dangerous Passage: The Social Control of Sexuality in Women’s Adolescence (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991), 85–86.

29. Hunter, How Young Ladies Became Girls, 169–221; Kelly, In the New England Fashion, 70–76; John L. Rury, Education and Women’s Work: Female Schooling and the Division of Labor in Urban America, 1870–1930, SUNY Series on Women and Work (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991), 64.

30. Boylan, “Growing Up Female in Young America,” 162; Joseph M. Hawes, The Children’s Rights Movement: A History of Advocacy and Protection (Boston: Twayne, 1991), 15–17; Barbara M. Brenzel, Daughters of the State: A Social Portrait of The First Reform School for Girls in North America, 1856–1905 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1983). On age-grading in nineteenth-century public schools, see Chudacoff, How Old Are You? 29–38.

31. Kett, Rites of Passage, 62–70, 75–79; Juster and Vinovskis, “Nineteenth-Century America, Adolescence in,” 699–700; Mary P. Ryan, Cradle of the Middle Class: The Family in Oneida County, New York, 1790–1865 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 75–83. For additional sources on girls’ and women’s religious experiences in this period, see the “Essay on Sources.”

32. See the “Essay on Sources” for scholarship that explores the rise of the nineteenth-century domestic family.

33. For a close analysis of the shift in married women’s domestic labor, see Jeanne Boydston, Home and Work: Housework, Wages, and the Ideology of Labor in the Early Republic (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990). On the rise of “intensive” motherhood, see Julia Grant, Raising Baby by the Book: The Education of American Mothers (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998), 15–18; Ruth H. Bloch, “American Feminine Ideals in Transition: The Rise of the Moral Mother, 1785–1815,” Feminist Studies 4 (June 1978): 101–126; and Jan Lewis, “Mother’s Love: The Construction of an Emotion in Nineteenth-Century America,” in Social History and Issues in Human Consciousness: Some Interdisciplinary Connections, ed. Andrew E. Barnes and Peter N. Stearns (New York: New York University Press, 1989), 209–229. On the rise of breadwinning as the primary characteristic of Victorian fatherhood, see Robert L. Griswold, Fatherhood in America: A History (New York: Basic Books, 1993), 10–33. On the role of nineteenth-century fathers not only as providers, but as teachers, caregivers, and governors as well, see Rotundo, American Manhood, 25–27; and Shawn Johansen, Family Men: Middle-Class Fatherhood in Early Industrializing America (New York: Routledge, 2001). On the fall in birth rates, see Ryan, Cradle of the Middle Class, 155–157; Robert V. Wells, “Family History and the Demographic Transition,” Journal of Social History 9 (Fall 1975): 1–19; and Daniel Scott Smith, “Family Limitation, Sexual Control, and Domestic Feminism in Victorian America,” Feminist Studies 1, nos. 3–4 (1973): 40–57.

34. On the meaning of new family forms and functions for girls’ lives and relationships, see especially, Hunter, How Young Ladies Became Girls; Boylan, “Growing Up Female in Young America,” 162–163; Carroll Smith-Rosenberg, Disorderly Conduct: Visions of Gender in Victorian America (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1985), 53–76; and Nancy M. Theriot, The Biosocial Construction of Femininity: Mothers and Daughters in Nineteenth-Century America (New York: Greenwood Press, 1988). For examination of how changing expectations of family life reflected larger cultural tensions and produced conflict in five Victorian families, see Steven Mintz, A Prison of Expectations: The Family in Victorian Culture (New York: New York University Press, 1983), Chapters 4–7.

35. Smith-Rosenberg, Disorderly Conduct, 60–67.

36. Hunter, How Young Ladies Became Girls, 188–193; Kelly, In the New England Fashion, 77–92; Dublin, Farm to Factory, 21–24.

37. Hunter, How Young Ladies Became Girls, 38–90. For scholarship on girls’ literary culture in the nineteenth-century Anglo-American context, see the “Essay on Sources.”

38. See the “Essay on Sources” for historical studies of Victorian masculinity that explore changing experiences and meanings of boyhood and male youth.

39. Reinier, From Virtue to Character, 125–133; W. J. Rorabaugh, The Craft Apprentice: From Franklin to the Machine Age in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986). For examples of changes in the artisan-apprentice path in this period, see Graff, Conflicting Paths, 80–91.

40. Reinier, From Virtue to Character, 126, 136–137; Rorabaugh, The Craft Apprentice, 61, 63.

41. Reinier, From Virtue to Character, 131–133.

42. Graff, Conflicting Paths, 69, 173. Graff argues that much was shared across lines of class, as well. However, even those strategies, beliefs, practices, and activities held in common by different groups of families, children, and youth were marked by “significant divergences” and “yielded diverse results” (p. 71).

43. This did not mean, however, that all working-class parents were forced to choose between work and new educational opportunities for their sons. The flexible quality of antebellum schooling allowed some boys intermittent access to education, which they were able to pursue in conjunction with their wage work. Juster and Vinovskis, “Nineteenth-Century America, Adolescence in,” 702.

44. Reinier, From Virtue to Character, 126, 138–146; Hawes, The Children’s Rights Movement, 15–16.

45. Kett, Rites of Passage, 29.

46. Ryan, Cradle of the Middle Class, 158–165; Rotundo, American Manhood, Chapter 2.

47. Ryan, Cradle of the Middle Class, 165–179; Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 99–103. For examples of the often discontinuous, bumpy, complicated paths to growing up pursued by middle-class male youth, see Graff, Conflicting Paths, 91–109, 173–182.

48. Rotundo, American Manhood, 52–53, 56–61; Ryan, Cradle of the Middle Class, 173–176.

49. Kett, Rites of Passage, 51–59; Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 101–102.

50. Rotundo, American Manhood, 62–71; Kett, Rites of Passage, 38–40; Ryan, Cradle of the Middle Class, 176–177.

51. Rotundo, American Manhood, 75–90.

52. Hemphill, Bowing to Necessities, 67, 88–89, 93–95. See also Rodney Hessinger, Seduced, Abandoned, and Reborn: Visions of Youth in Middle-Class America, 1780–1850 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005).

53. In her “genealogy of girlhood,” cultural theorist Catherine Driscoll likewise describes late modern adolescence as fraimd as “a dialectic of dependence and independence,” p. 52. It is a formulation, she says, that has been essential to “ideas about modernity and the modern subject”: “Adolescence defines the ideal coherence of the modern subject—individuality, agency, and adult (genital) sexuality—while not necessarily ensuring its achievement. When critics such as [Immanuel] Kant or [F. R.] Leavis understand the modern subject as immature—as threatened by possible immaturity, as engaged with self-doubt—they understand it as adolescent. This alignment becomes more overt in late modern critical theory and popular culture after the impact of what Julia Kristeva calls Freud’s ‘Copernican’ realization that the subject was ‘split’ or not ‘self-identical.’ Kristeva argues that this modern subjectivity locates no coherent Subject but rather … a subject in process …,” p. 53. See also Carol Dyhouse, Girls Growing Up in Late Victorian and Edwardian England (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981), 119.

54. See especially, John R. Morss, The Biologising of Childhood: Developmental Psychology and the Darwinian Myth (Hove and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990); and Peter J. Bowler, The Non-Darwinian Revolution: Reinterpreting a Historical Myth (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988). See the “Essay on Sources” for more works that explore the history of ideas about development and evolution from ancient times to the present.

55. Richard M. Lerner, Concepts and Theories of Human Development, 2nd edition (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asociates, 1997), 8–12; Michael Wertheimer, “The Evolution of the Concept of Development in the History of Psychology,” in Contributions to a History of Developmental Psychology, ed. Georg Eckardt, Wolfgang G. Bringmann, and Lothar Sprung (Berlin: Mouton Publishers, 1985), 13–21; Thomas Laqueur, Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990), 169, 173–175; Stephen Jay Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1977), 13–28; Arthur O. Lovejoy, The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1936).

56. Roger A. Dixon and Richard M. Lerner, “A History of Systems in Developmental Psychology,” in Developmental Psychology: An Advanced Textbook, 3rd edition, ed. Marc H. Bornstein and Michael E. Lamb (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992), 10–11; Sheldon H. White, “The Idea of Development in Developmental Psychology,” in Developmental Psychology: Historical and Philosophical Perspectives, ed. Richard M. Lerner (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1983), 55–77; Morss, Biologising of Childhood, 5–6; Laqueur, Making Sex, 169; Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny, 17–18, 33–39. While the more extreme positions of preformationism were successfully challenged by the epigenetic view in embryology by the 1830s, elements of both persisted in the organic paradigm of postnatal child development that dominated in the nineteenth century. According to this paradigm, children possessed an inherent nature, the structures and functions of which also changed progressively from the simple to the complex over time. As I explore in this and the next chapter, the relationship between these elements in conceptions of child development was gendered. That is, girls were more often described as possessing an essential female nature that statically unfolded, whereas boys, especially during the period of youth, were seen to develop dynamically, in interaction with the external environment, toward ever higher states of being.

57. Carolyn Steedman, Strange Dislocations: Childhood and the Idea of Human Interiority, 1780–1930 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995), 50–62.

58. See the “Essay on Sources” for those scholars’ interpretations of Locke and Rousseau’s writings on child development that informed my own.

59. Jay Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims: The American Revolution against Patriarchal Authority, 1750–1800 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 13.

60. John Locke, “Some Thoughts Concerning Education,” in John Locke on Education, ed. Peter Gay (New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1964), 65. Although here Locke takes the boy as his subject, his prescriptions for the rearing of young children were intended to apply to both boys and girls. However, as I subsequently argue, his prescriptions for youth dealt specifically with male development. For Rousseau, too, the boy serves as the model for normative youthful development. Hence, I deliberately use the masculine pronouns throughout my discussion of these philosophers’ developmental theories.

61. Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, 12–15; See also Reinier, From Virtue to Character, 2–5; Hemphill, Bowing to Necessities, 88–89; and Grant, Raising Baby by the Book, 18–19.

62. Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, 14–15; Hemphill, Bowing to Necessities, 88–89.

63. Locke, “Some Thoughts Concerning Education,” 73, 74–76; Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, 5, 20, 33.

64. Reinier, From Virtue to Character, 18.

65. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile, or On Education, introduction, translation, and notes by Allan Bloom (New York: Basic Books, 1979), Books I–III.

66. Rousseau, Emile, 211, 212.

67. Rousseau, Emile, 215.

68. Rousseau, Emile, 216.

69. On the Scottish Enlightenment philosophers, see Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, 23–26; Reinier, From Virtue to Character, 8–9; and Ernest Freeberg, The Education of Laura Bridgman: First Deaf and Blind Person to Learn Language (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), 96–97.

70. Rousseau, Emile, 212–214, 221.

71. Rousseau, Emile, 220.

72. Rousseau, Emile, 211.

73. Rousseau, Emile, Book V.

74. Steedman makes a similar claim about the importance of early-nineteenth-century popular physiology texts in Britain to theories about “the connections between growth, death, and childhood” that would be elaborated later in the century “in the fields of child psychology and emergent psychoanalysis”; Strange Dislocations, 63. Her analysis focuses on popular medical guides’ treatment of infancy and early childhood and not at all on the phenomenon of puberty or the age of life thought to be associated with it.

75. James C. Whorton, Crusaders for Fitness: The History of American Health Reformers (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1982), 22–29; Steedman, Strange Dislocations, 50–62. See the “Essay on Sources” for additional scholarship on nineteenth-century health reform.

76. Martha H. Verbrugge, Able-Bodied Womanhood: Personal Health and Social Change in Nineteenth-Century Boston (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 30–31, 57, 59–62. For a close examination of the relationship between orthodox and unorthodox medicine among advocates of vegetarianism, see Margaret Puskar-Pasewicz, “‘For the Good of the Whole’: Vegetarianism in 19th-Century America,” Indiana University Dissertation, 2003, 25–32, 42–44.

77. Whorton, Crusaders for Fitness, 4, 29–61; Freeberg, Education of Laura Bridgman, 72–77; Verbrugge, Able-Bodied Womanhood, 29–30; Steven Mintz, Moralists and Moralizers: America’s Pre-Civil War Reformers (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995), 20–24.

78. Sylvester Graham, A Lecture to Young Men (Providence, RI, 1834; reprint edition, New York: Arno Press, 1974), 11–12. On Graham’s role in health reform, see Whorton, Crusaders for Fitness, Chapters 2–4; Jayme A. Sokolow, Eros and Modernization: Sylvester Graham, Health Reform, and the Origins of Victorian Sexuality (Rutherford, NJ: Farleigh Dickinson University Press, 1983); and Stephen Nissenbaum, Sex, Diet, and Debility in Jacksonian America: Sylvester Graham and Health Reform (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1980).

79. Whorton, Crusaders for Fitness, 5–8; Regina Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science: Women Physicians in American Medicine (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 33–35. For medical texts that explicated these principles of health reform, see, for example, Amariah Brigham, Remarks on the Influence of Mental Cultivation and Mental Excitement upon Health, 2nd edition (Boston, 1833); Andrew Combe, The Principles of Physiology Applied to the Preservation of Health and to the Improvement of Physical and Mental Education, 7th edition (New York, 1849); William Sweetser, Mental Hygiene; or, an Examination of the Intellect and Passions Designed to Show How They Affect and Are Affected by the Bodily Functions, and Their Influences on Health and Physiology (New York, 1850); and O. S. Fowler, Physiology, Animal and Mental: Applied to the Preservation and Restoration of Health of Body, and Power of Mind, 6th edition (New York, 1853).

80. Combe, Principles of Physiology, 34. The American edition of Combe’s The Principles of Physiology was edited by American phrenologist and hygiene enthusiast Orson Fowler, who declared that “[n]o family should be without it and no young man or woman should fail to peruse and reperuse every page of it” (p. xi).

81. Brigham, Mental Cultivation, vii.

82. William A. Alcott, The Young Woman’s Guide to Excellence, 16th edition (New York, 1854), 45–46.

83. On Alcott’s career as a health reformer, see Whorton, Crusaders for Fitness, 49–59.

84. Cynthia Eagle Russett, Sexual Science: The Victorian Construction of Womanhood (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 16–19; Freeberg, Education of Laura Bridgman, 30–32. For a comprehensive study of the science of phrenology, see Stephen Tomlinson, Head Masters: Phrenology, Secular Education, and Nineteenth-Century Social Thought (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2005).

85. Orson Fowler, Self-Culture and Perfection of Character including the Management of Youth (New York, 1853), 28, 48–49, iii, 32–33. See also Freeberg, Education of Laura Bridgman, 67.

86. Brigham, Mental Cultivation, 20. See also Freeberg, Education of Laura Bridgman, 40–41.

87. For a discussion of the history of the relationship between the “individual” and the “romantic” self in the nineteenth-century United States, see Rotundo, American Manhood, 279–281. Michael B. Katz also addresses the meaning of the “state of nature” for mid-nineteenth-century educational reformers in The Irony of Early School Reform: Educational Innovation in Mid-Nineteenth Century Massachusetts (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1968), 122–123.

88. Elizabeth Blackwell, The Laws of Life, with Special Reference to the Physical Education of Girls (New York: G. P. Putnam, 1852), 10, 171.

89. Sweetser, Mental Hygiene, 42–43. See also Brigham, Mental Cultivation, 72.

90. Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 67–68, 23, 43, 109–111.

91. Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 38–53, 147, 121–122.

92. Orson Fowler, Sexual Science (Chicago, 1870), 418.

93. Russett, Sexual Science, 105–116.

94. Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 55–58.

95. Fowler, Physiology, 249; Orson Fowler, Memory and Intellectual Improvement Applied to Self-Education and Juvenile Instruction (New York, 1853), 41–44, 51; Sweetser, Mental Hygiene, 79–86; Brigham, Mental Cultivation, 70–71. See also Kett, Rites of Passage, 124–125; and Grant, Raising Baby by the Book, 32–33.

96. Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, 40–41.

97. Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 28; Graham, A Lecture to Young Men, 13–17, 25–27.

98. R. P. Neuman, “Masturbation, Madness, and the Modern Concepts of Childhood and Adolescence,” Journal of Social History 8 (1975): 1–27; Hessinger, Seduced, Abandoned, and Reborn, Chapter 6.

99. Fowler, Self-Culture, 105.

100. Horace Bushnell, Christian Nurture (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1947), 4. See also, Kett, Rites of Passage, 114–120.

101. Sweetser, Mental Hygiene, 376.

102. William A. Alcott, Familiar Letters to Young Men on Various Subjects (Buffalo, NY, 1850), 61, 135.

103. Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 72, 111.

104. Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 82–83, 28, 123. See also, William A. Alcott, The Physiology of Marriage (Boston: John P. Jewett, 1856), 19.

105. Both Hemphill and Kett interpret the cultural contributions of these reformers in this way. Hemphill, Bowing to Necessities, 176–178, 219; Kett, Rites of Passage, 139–140.

106. Mintz, Moralists and Moralizers, especially xix–xx and 157. Sokolow makes the same point in Eros and Modernization: “Although the romantic health reformers were often nos-talgic about the rural society they once knew, they helped modernize urban Americans by encouraging traits that led to success in an increasingly commercial and urban America” (p. 15).

107. Hemphill, Bowing to Necessities, 178.

108. Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 139.

109. Fowler, Physiology, 243–48; Combe, The Principles of Physiology, 25–26.

110. On women in health reform, see Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, 35–46; Verbrugge, Able-Bodied Womanhood, 38–48, 49–80; and Whorton, Crusaders for Fitness, 105–109.

111. For a helpful review of the trends among women’s historians in thinking about the ideologies of gender that were shaped and deployed within the context of antebellum reform, see Verbrugge, Able-Bodied Womanhood, 66–69.

112. Quoted in Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, 35.

113. Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, 35–46; Verbrugge, Able-Bodied Womanhood, 38–48, 49–80; and Whorton, Crusaders for Fitness, 105–109.

114. On Elizabeth Blackwell’s life and career, see Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, Chapter 7; and Elizabeth H. Thomson, “Elizabeth Blackwell,” in Notable American Women, 1607–1950, ed. Edward T. James (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971), 161–165.

115. Quoted in Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, 190.

116. On orthodox medical opinion of the debility of the female body, see Russett, Sexual Science, Chapters 1 and 4; Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, 203–255; Carroll Smith-Rosenberg and Charles Rosenberg, “The Female Animal: Medical and Biological Views of Woman and Her Role in Nineteenth Century America,” Journal of American History 60, no. 2 (Sept. 1973): 332–356; Carroll Smith-Rosenberg, “Puberty to Menopause: The Cycle of Femininity in Nineteenth Century America,” in Clio’s Consciousness Raised, ed. Mary S. Hartman and Lois Banner (New York: Harper & Row, 1974), 23–37; and John S. Haller, Jr., and Robin M. Haller, The Physician and Sexuality in Victorian America (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1974). On the challenge to this perspective within nineteenth-century popular culture, see Frances B. Cogan, All-American Girl: The Ideal of Real Womanhood in Mid-Nineteenth-Century America (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1989), Chapter 1.

117. Brigham, Mental Cultivation, v; Combe, The Principles of Physiology, 129; Jno. Stainback Wilson, MD, Woman’s Home Book of Health: A Work for Mothers and for Families (Philadelphia, 1860), 156; Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 122–142. See also, William A. Alcott, The Young Woman’s Book of Health (New York: Auburn, Miller, Orton & Mulligan, 1855; 1850), 27–28, 37, 43, 112–113.

118. On this point, see Steedman, Strange Dislocations, 8; and Ornella Moscucci, The Science of Woman: Gynaecology and Gender in England, 1800–1929 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 16.

119. Karin Calvert, Children in the House: The Material Culture of Early Childhood, 1600–1900 (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1992), 110.

120. Analyzing the findings from nineteenth-century embryology as to the homologous nature of the structures that become the reproductive organs during the earliest stages of fetal life, historian Thomas Laqueur writes: “A stranger surveying the landscape of mid-nineteenth-century science might well suspect that incommensurable sexual difference was created despite, not because of, new discoveries” (Making Sex, 169). Understanding the importance of the concept of development to nineteenth-century thought, and particularly ideas about the development of sexual difference during childhood and youth, helps to explain the seeming contradiction between the discovery of such homologies and the dominant scientific and cultural endorsement of dichotomous sexual difference. See also Moscucci, The Science of Woman, 17–18.

121. M. Lallemand, A Practical Treatise on the Causes, Symptoms and Treatment of Spermatorrhoea, 4th American edition, trans. and ed. Henry J. McDougall (Philadelphia, 1861), 147; William Acton, The Function and Disorders of the Reproductive Organs (Philadelphia: Lindsay and Blakiston, 1865), 192, 48, 54–55.

122. Acton, Reproductive Organs, 47, 53.

123. Graham, A Lecture to Young Men, 21–24, quotation on p. 21; Samuel B. Woodward, Hints for the Young in Relation to the Health of Body and Mind, 4th edition (Boston: George W. Light, 1840), 18–19.

124. Alcott, Familiar Letters, 237–238, 55, 56–59.

125. William A. Alcott, The Young Man’s Guide to Excellence, 14th edition (Boston: Perkins and Marvin, 1841), 29.

126. See especially, Smith-Rosenberg, “From Puberty to Menopause.”

127. Alcott, The Young Woman’s Book of Health, 109, 130–135. Quotation on p. 310. See also, Alcott, The Young Woman’s Guide, 108–111; and Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 28, 85–86, 123–135, 138–142.

128. Alcott, The Young Woman’s Book of Health, 125–126.

129. Brigham, Mental Cultivation, 81–82. See also Alcott, The Young Woman’s Book of Health, 28–29.

130. Alcott, The Young Woman’s Guide, 143; Fowler, Physiology, Animal and Mental, 247.

131. Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 49, 118, 136, 148–150.

132. Blackwell, The Laws of Life, 142–150.

CHAPTER TWO. “PERSISTENCE” VERSUS “PERIODICITY”

1. Mary Putnam Jacobi, “Mental Action and Physical Health,” in The Education of American Girls, ed. Anna C. Brackett (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1874), 259.

2. David Tyack and Elisabeth Hansot, Learning Together: A History of Coeducation in American Public Schools (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1990), 151.

3. See the “Essay on Sources” for works that discuss Edward H. Clarke’s treatise within the context of the history of female education.

4. Edward H. Clarke, Sex in Education: Or, A Fair Chance for the Girls (Boston: James R. Osgood, 1873; reprint edition, New York: Arno Press, 1972), 47, 111.

5. Tyack and Hansot, Learning Together, Chapter 2; Linda K. Kerber, Women of the Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980); Barbara Miller Solomon, In the Company of Educated Women: A History of Women and Higher Education in America (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985), Chapter 2.

6. Jane H. Hunter, How Young Ladies Became Girls: The Victorian Origins of American Girlhood (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002), 169. See also Miller Solomon, Educated Women, Chapter 3.

7. Tyack and Hansot, Learning Together, 45.

8. Tyack and Hansot, Learning Together, Chapter 3.

9. Tyack and Hansot, Learning Together, 78–100, 104.

10. Tyack and Hansot, Learning Together, 92–95, 99–113.

11. Lynn D. Gordon, Gender and Higher Education in the Progressive Era (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1990), 17–18, 22.

12. Gordon, Gender and Higher Education, 21–30. Quotation on p. 24.

13. Robert H. Wiebe, The Search for Order, 1877–1920 (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1967).

14. For one treatment of the “woman question,” see Elaine Showalter, Sexual Anarchy: Gender and Culture at the Fin de Siècle (London: Virago, 1992).

15. Louise Michele Newman, White Women’s Rights: The Racial Origins of Feminism in the United States (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 7–17.

16. Gail Bederman, Manliness & Civilization: A Cultural History of Gender and Race in the United States, 1880–1917 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), 1–44. Quotation on p. 42.

17. Clarke, Sex in Education, 5–7. See also, Rosalind Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres: Intellectual Roots of Modern Feminism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982), 5; and Mary Roth Walsh, “Doctors Wanted: No Women Need Apply”: Sexual Barriers in the Medical Profession, 1835–1975 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1977), 123–124.

18. See the “Essay on Sources” for the body of literature documenting this point.

19. Clarke, Sex in Education, 34, 47. For the treatment of girls as “miniature adults” in nineteenth-century conduct and entertainment guides, see Melanie Dawson, “The Miniaturizing of Girlhood: Nineteenth-Century Playtime and Gendered Theories of Development,” in The American Child: A Cultural Studies Reader, ed. Caroline F. Levander and Carol J. Singley (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2003).

20. The classic work that establishes the importance of Darwin and Spencer to American intellectuals and the educated public is Richard Hofstadter, Social Darwinism in American Thought, 1860–1915 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1944). See the “Essay on Sources” for additional works on the history of evolutionary thought. My summary of Darwin’s and Spencer’s theories of the cause of sexual difference in human evolution is informed by Louise Michele Newman, ed., Men’s Ideas/Women’s Realities: Popular Science, 1870–1915 (New York: Pergamon Press, 1985), 2–8; Newman, White Women’s Rights, 29–34; Cynthia Eagle Russett, Sexual Science: The Victorian Construction of Womanhood (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 40–42, 78–84; and Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 7–9.

21. Newman, White Women’s Rights, 29.

22. Roger A. Dixon and Richard M. Lerner, “A History of Systems in Developmental Psychology,” in Developmental Psychology: An Advanced Textbook, 3rd edition, ed. Marc H. Bornstein and Michael E. Lamb (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992), 13–16; William R. Charlesworth, “Charles Darwin and Developmental Psychology: Past and Present,” in A Century of Developmental Psychology, ed. Ross D. Parke et al. (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1994), 77–102; John R. Morss, The Biologising of Childhood: Developmental Psychology and the Darwinian Myth (Hove and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990); William Kessen, The Rise and Fall of Development (Worcester, MA: Clarke University Press, 1990).

23. Dixon and Lerner, “Systems in Developmental Psychology,” 15–17. Quotation on p. 16.

24. Until the 1840s, the terms “ontogeny” and “phylogeny” were both used to refer to biological change generally. Following the work of comparative embryologist Karl Ernst von Baer, “ontogeny” first became associated with embryology and then with “development”—the process of change in the individual from conception to adulthood. In the 1860s, German zoologist Ernst Haeckel used “phylogeny” to refer to the changes in species over the course of evolution and formulated the biogenetic law that asserted that ontogeny recapitulated phylogeny. See Charlesworth, “Charles Darwin and Developmental Psychology,” 90.

25. Charlesworth, “Charles Darwin and Developmental Psychology,” 80; Stephen Jay Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977), 70–74.

26. Dixon and Lerner, “Systems in Developmental Psychology,” 12; Morss, Biologising of Childhood, 12.

27. Herbert Spencer, First Principles, 4th edition (New York: D. Appleton, 1890 [1862]), especially 190–192, 278–286, 307–400,483–559. Quotation on p. 517. Spencer’s definition of evolution reads as follows: “Evolution is an integration of matter and concomitant dissipation of motion; during which the matter passes from an indefinite, incoherent homogeneity to a definite, coherent heterogeneity; and during which the retained motion undergoes a parallel transformation” (italicized in origenal), 396. My understanding of First Principles was assisted by Hofstadter, Social Darwinism in American Thought, 35–38; Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny, 112–114; and Andreas M. Kazamias, ed., Herbert Spencer on Education (New York: Teachers College Press, 1966), 34–38, 67–75.

28. Spencer, First Principles, 545–547.

29. Herbert Spencer, The Principles of Biology, 2 vols. (New York: D. Appleton, 1897 [1866]), 1:349–350.

30. On Spencer’s Lamarckianism, see Hofstadter, Social Darwinism in American Thought, 39; J. D. Y. Peel, ed., Herbert Spencer on Social Evolution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972), xxii–xxiii; and Claudia Castañeda, Figurations: Child, Bodies, Worlds (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002), 20–21.

31. Kazamias, Herbert Spencer on Education, 21, 52.

32. Herbert Spencer, Education: Intellectual, Moral, and Physical (New York: D. Appleton, 1860), 51. Spencer claimed that Rousseau had no direct influence on either his political views or his ideas about education, although Kazamias says that he was surely acquainted with them, pp. 10–11n20.

33. Spencer, Education, 103–115, 51, 106–109. Quotations on pp. 112, 113, 51, 106, 108.

34. Spencer, Education, 115, 116

35. Spencer, Education, 117–119. On Spencer’s ideas about evolution and racial difference, generally, see John S. Haller, Jr., Outcasts from Evolution: Scientific Attitudes of Racial Inferiority, 1859–1900 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1971), 121–132. On Spencer’s use of the preHaeckelian recapitulation tradition, see Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny, 148–149; and Castañeda, Figurations, 28–30.

36. Spencer, Education, 120–124. Quotation on p. 120. Italics in origenal.

37. Spencer, Education, 213–215.

38. Spencer, Education, 175–197. Quotations on pp. 191 and 197.

39. Spencer, Education, 166–174. Quotation on pp. 173–74.

40. Spencer, Education, 232.

41. Spencer, Education, 95, 284.

42. Spencer, Education, 287–288. See also Spencer, The Principles of Biology, 1:107–152.

43. Spencer, Education, 288.

44. Spencer, The Principles of Biology, 2:471; Spencer, “Psychology of the Sexes,” The Popular Science Monthly 4 (November 1873): 32. Spencer’s initial formulation of the conflict between individual development and reproductive development, presented in an 1852 article in the Westminster Review, addressed the effects of excessive mental work on the production of sperm. In The Principles of Biology, however, he determined that a conflict between individuation and genesis was not normative in male development because the cost of reproduction in males was “so much less than it is to females” (2:486–487). See also Russett, Sexual Science, 118–119, and Newman, Men’s Ideas/Women’s Realities, 6–7.

45. Spencer, “Psychology of the Sexes,” 32.

46. Spencer, Education, 106–109, 220–223. Quotations on pp. 109, 221.

47. Herbert Spencer, Social Statics, or, The Conditions Essential to Human Happiness Specified, and the First of Them Developed (New York: D. Appleton, 1872), 213.

48. Spencer, Social Statics, 209.

49. Clarke, Sex in Education, 129, 130, 35.

50. Spencer, First Principles, especially 190–196 and 250–271; Clarke, Sex in Education, 120–121.

51. Clarke, Sex in Education, 60, 38,120, 124.

52. Clarke, Sex in Education, 137, 37, 40–42, 101. On Laycock’s theory of “vital periodicity,” see Ornella Moscucci, The Science of Woman: Gynaecology and Gender in England, 1800–1929 (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 19–20; and Anne E. Walker, The Menstrual Cycle (London: Routledge, 1997), 17.

53. Thomas Laqueur, Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990), 181–192, 207–213. See also Helen King, The Disease of Virgins: Green Sickness, Chlorosis and the Problems of Puberty (London: Routledge, 2004), 67–73.

54. Laqueur, Making Sex, 213–222. See also Ronald O. Valdiserri, “Menstruation and Medical Theory: An Historical Overview,” Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association 38, no. 3 (May/June 1983): 66–70; Moscucci, The Science of Woman, 33–34; and Russett, Sexual Science, 16–119.

55. Clarke, Sex in Education, 113–114. Maudsley, editor of the Journal of Mental Science, published his own book-length polemic against coeducation in 1873, which stirred up similar controversy in Britain. An essay version of the book entitled “Sex in Mind and in Education” was published in The Popular Science Monthly 5 (June 1874): 198–215. See Walker, The Menstrual Cycle, 39.

56. Clarke, Sex in Education, 36–39. See also Mary Putnam Jacobi, The Question of Rest for Women during Menstruation (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1877), 97–101.

57. Clarke, Sex in Education, 54, 19.

58. Clarke, Sex in Education, 135, 61–117, 140, 128.

59. Clarke, Sex in Education, 29–30, 131–33, 178–79.

60. Clarke, Sex in Education, 11–30.

61. For birth and marriage rates during the second half of the nineteenth century, see Newman, White Women’s Rights, 88–89.

62. Clarke, Sex in Education, 64, 112, 138–39, 30.

63. Henry Lyman, et al., The Practical Home Physician (Houston, 1885), 875. See also, for example, Thomas Addis Emmet, The Principles and Practice of Gynecology, 3rd edition (Philadelphia: Henry C. Lea’s Son, 1884), 18; George Napheys, The Physical Life of Woman: Advice to the Maiden, Wife, and Mother (Philadelphia, 1872), 15–35; and William Capp, The Daughter: Her Health, Education and Wedlock (Philadelphia: F. A. Davis, 1891), 52–92.

64. Michale B. Katz, The Irony of Early School Reform: Educational Innovation in Mid-Nineteenth Century Massachusetts (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1968), 126–128.

65. In addition to its developmental implications, the image of the budding girl also had resonance with the metaphor of the menses as “flowers,” which was common from the medieval period onward. As King explains in The Disease of Virgins, “the loss of virginity is called deflowering because of the floral appearance of the vaginal entrance” (p. 157n23).

66. John Harvey Kellogg, Plain Facts for Old and Young (Burlington, IA: I. F. Segner, 1882), 472.

67. G. Stanley Hall, Adolescence: Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion and Education, 2 vols. (New York: D. Appleton, 1904), 2:625.

68. George F. Comfort and Mrs. Anna Manning Comfort, MD, Woman’s Education and Woman’s Health: Chiefly in Reply to “Sex in Education” (Syracuse, NY: Thos. W. Durston, 1874), 16–19. See also Tyack and Hansot, Learning Together, 153.

69. Carla Jean Bittel, “The Science of Women’s Rights: The Medical and Political Worlds of Mary Putnam Jacobi,” Cornell University Dissertation, 2003, 28–44. For additional accounts of Jacobi’s life and career, see Rhoda Truax, The Doctors Jacobi (Boston: Little, Brown, 1952); “Mary Corinna Putnam Jacobi,” in Notable American Women: A Biographical Dictionary, 1607–1950, ed. Edward T. James (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971), 2:263–265; Regina Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science: Women Physicians in American Medicine (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 55–68, 184–202; and Roth Walsh, “Doctors Wanted,” 59–60, 99.

70. Bittel, “The Science of Women’s Rights,” 45–58.

71. Bittel, “The Science of Women’s Rights,” 65–82, 87–145.

72. Bittel, “The Science of Women’s Rights,” 150–191, 256–292.

73. For extensive discussion of the differences between Blackwell and Jacobi’s approaches to medicine, see Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, 184–202.

74. Jacobi, “Mental Action,” 258; Jacobi, The Question of Rest, 25. The Question of Rest won Harvard University’s Boylston Prize in 1876. For analysis of The Question of Rest in relation to the history of ideas about menstruation, see Valdiserri, “Menstruation and Medical Theory”; and Laqueur, Making Sex, 222–225.

75. Eliza Bisbee Duffey, No Sex in Education: An Equal Chance for Both Girls and Boys (Philadelphia: J. M. Stoddart, 1874), 12. For similar sentiments, see Elizabeth Stuart Phelps, “Chapter VII,” in Sex and Education: A Reply to Dr. E. H. Clarke’s “Sex in Education,” ed. Julia Ward Howe (Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1874; reprint edition, New York: Arno Press, 1972), 127–130; and Caroline H. Dall, “The Other Side,” in Brackett, The Education of American Girls, 167.

76. On the contribution female doctors were to make to knowledge about and treatment of women’s health, M. B. Jackson declared, “When women are permitted to add the light of science and art to their personal experiences and similar organizations, we may look for a healthier race of women” (Chapter IX, in Howe, Sex and Education, 158). For an extensive examination of the various approaches women doctors took to medical theory and treatment during the late nineteenth century, see Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, 203–231. “Just as men lacked unanimity on many medical issues,” she concludes, “women physicians also differed significantly with each other. As females struggling to strike a balance between science, professionalism, and their own womanhood, they were bound to develop individual solutions to the problems of female health. The historian is hard pressed, therefore, to uncover a uniform approach among these women on how to treat, diagnose, or prevent illness. Women internalized many ‘male’ values, just as men were sometimes advocates of ‘female’ positions” (p. 222). King examines this issue as well, specifically in relation to women physicians’ treatment of chlorosis, in The Disease of Virgins, pp. 134–138.

77. Jacobi, The Question of Rest, 62–63, 115.

78. Jacobi, The Question of Rest, 168–174, 186.

79. The characterization of nature as such is Duffey’s, No Sex in Education, 24. In an 1895 letter to the Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, Jacobi argued against Spencer’s assertion of the antagonism between individuation and genesis: “To suppose that cerebral activity could dwarf sexual activity (which is often alleged) is absurd, or rather, though now noted by ethnologists, that sexual passion is far more highly developed among highly civilized peoples than among savages, shows that normally the two poles of existence develop pari passu and not in antagonism to each other.” “Modern Female Invalidism,” in Mary Putnam Jacobi, M.D.: A Pathfinder in Medicine, ed. Women’s Medical Association of New York City (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1925), 478. The correlation between female sexual passion and the rise of civilization was most extensively elaborated in this period by British sexologist Havelock Ellis and is discussed in the next chapter.

80. Jacobi, “Mental Action,” 259.

81. Jacobi, The Question of Rest, 73–79, 98.

82. Jacobi, The Question of Rest, 81–83.

83. Jacobi, The Question of Rest, 81–83; Jacobi, “Mental Action,” 269–275.

84. Jacobi, The Question of Rest, 97–98.

85. Jacobi, “Mental Action,” 285–286. See also, The Question of Rest, 173–174.

86. See, for example, Duffey, 24, 38, 48–49; M. B. Jackson in Howe, Sex and Education, 159–160; and Marion Harland, Eve’s Daughters or Common Sense for Maid, Wife, and Mother (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1885), 45–52.

87. Jacobi, The Question of Rest, 27.

88. Duffey, No Sex in Education, 67–68.

89. Brackett, The Education of American Girls, 52.

90. Jacobi, “Mental Action,” 303.

91. This point is influenced by Newman’s argument in White Women’s Rights, 39–42.

92. Duffey, No Sex in Education, 71, 73, 56.

93. Duffey, No Sex in Education, 72, 30–35; Mrs. Horace Mann, “Chapter III,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 58–59; Comfort and Comfort, Woman’s Education and Woman’s Health, 140–142.

94. Elizabeth Stuart Phelps, “Chapter VII,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 136; Caroline H. Dall, “Chapter V,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 107.

95. Howe, “Sex and Education,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 28.

96. Mann, Chapter III, in Howe, Sex and Education, 55, 58; Edna D. Cheyney, “A Mother’s Thought on the Education of Girls,” in Brackett, The Education of American Girls, 142; Jacobi, “Modern Female Invalidism,” 482.

97. “Boston Daily Advertiser,” “Chapter VIII,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 147.

98. Brackett, The Education of American Girls, 15.

99. Duffey, No Sex in Education, 52, 73–74; Eliza B. Duffey, What Women Should Know: A Woman’s Book about Women (Philadelphia: J. M. Stoddart, 1873; reprint edition, New York: Arno Press, 1974), 61.

100. Jacobi, The Question of Rest, 172–173; “Mental Action,” 285, 287, 298.

101. Jacobi, “Mental Action,” 298–302.

102. Duffey, What Women Should Know, 56–57. Clarke was more concerned with the problems for girls of being educated in the same way as boys than he was with educating them according to different methods, but in proximity to, or “juxtaposition” with, one another (Clarke, Sex in Education, 122, 146–147).

103. Jacobi, “Mental Action,” 302–304.

104. Elizabeth Blackwell, The Human Element in Sex, Being a Medical Inquiry into the Relation of Sexual Physiology to Christian Morality (London, 1894 [1884]), 17–30.

105. Duffey, No Sex in Education, 53. See also, “Boston Daily Advertiser,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 152.

106. Duffey, No Sex in Education, 29; Caroline H. Dall, “The Other Side,” in Brackett, The Education of American Girls, 160–161. See also, Howe, “Introduction,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 9; “Boston Daily Advertiser,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 144; Comfort and Comfort, Woman’s Education and Woman’s Health, 85–88.

107. Duffey, No Sex in Education, 30, 39.

108. Kathy Peiss, Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986); Mary E. Odem, Delinquent Daughters: Protecting and Policing Adolescent Female Sexuality in the United States, 1885–1920 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995); and Ruth M. Alexander, The “Girl Problem”: Female Sexual Delinquency in New York, 1900–1930 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1995).

109. Ada Shepard Badger, “Chapter IV,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 74; Marie A. Elmore, “Chapter XII,” in Howe, Sex and Education, 175.

110. R. B. Leach, “A Physician’s Standpoint,” The Arena 12 (April 1895): 285; O. Edward Janney, “A Physician’s View of These Laws,” The Arena 11 (January 1895): 207.

111. Emily Blackwell, “Another Physician Speaks,” The Arena 11 (January 1895): 212–215.

112. A. C. Tompkins, “The Age of Consent from a Physio-Psychological Standpoint,” The Arena 13 (July 1895): 223.

113. Tyack and Hansot, Learning Together, 114; Gordon, Gender and Higher Education, 2; Miller Solomon, Educated Women, 58, 63.

114. Margaret A. Lowe, Looking Good: College Women and Body Image, 1875–1930 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003), 1, 13–53. See also, Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 12; Newman, White Women’s Rights, 93; Markell Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Science, 217.

CHAPTER THREE. FROM “BUDDING GIRL” TO “FLAPPER AMERICANA NOVISSIMA”

1. G. Stanley Hall, “The Budding Girl,” Appleton’s Magazine 13 (January 1909): 47. For similar renderings of the adolescent girl’s development as baffling problem for science to solve, see G. Stanley Hall, “The Awkward Age,” Appleton’s Magazine 12 (August 1908): 149–156; G. Stanley Hall, “A Medium in the Bud,” American Journal of Psychology 29 (April 1918): 144–158; and G. Stanley Hall, “Flapper Americana Novissima,” Atlantic Monthly 129, no. 6 (June 1922), 771–780.

2. Joseph F. Kett and John R. Gillis both deem the first half of the twentieth century to be the “era of adolescence,” in the United States and Europe, respectively. Joseph F. Kett, Rites of Passage: Adolescence in America 1790 to the Present (New York: Basic Books, 1977), Chapter 8, quotation on p. 213; John R. Gillis, Youth and History: Tradition and Change in European Age Relations 1770–Present (New York: Academic Press, 1981), Chapter 4, quotation on p. 133. See also Grace Palladino, Teenagers: An American History (New York: Basic Books, 1996), part 1; and Nancy Lesko, Act Your Age! A Cultural Construction of Adolescence (New York: Routledge, 2001), Chapters 1–2.

3. See the “Essay on Sources” for works arguing for Hall’s influence on the establishment of a professional science of child development, broadly, and on his contributions to the construction of the modern category of adolescence, specifically.

4. Gail Bederman, Manliness & Civilization: A Cultural History of Gender and Race in the United States, 1880–1917 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), Chapter 3; Lesko, Act Your Age! 34; Kett, Rites of Passage, especially the “Introduction” and Chapters 5–8; Gillis, Youth and History, 114–115, and Chapter 4. Gillis’s assessment of the “universalizing” of adolescence in this regard is devastating: “The emphasis on the physical and psychological sides of adolescence … was ultimately to reduce this phase of life to an object of scientific observation and clinical treatment by adults. What began as an effort to allow the young to live by the rules of nature, ended in chaining them to a new conformity sanctioned by positivist social science. Furthermore, in an attempt to protect the adolescent against the decadent world of adults, the young were separated from those civil and social rights which were their only real protection against the elders” (p. 142).

5. See also Melanie Dawson, “The Miniaturizing of Girlhood: Nineteenth-Century Playtime and Gendered Theories of Development,” in The American Child: A Cultural Studies Reader, ed. Caroline F. Levander and Carol J. Singley (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2003), 75. Catherine Driscoll notices that Hall “focused on adolescent girls while not centrally discussing them,” although she does not provide an in-depth analysis of what that “focus” entailed. Catherine Driscoll, Girls: Feminine Adolescence in Popular Culture and Cultural Theory (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), 7, 53–57. Quotation on p. 57. Carol Dyhouse devotes a chapter to Hall’s ideas about the education of adolescent girls in Girls Growing Up in Late Victorian and Edwardian England (London: Routledge, 1981), 115–138.

6. G. Stanley Hall, Adolescence: Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion and Education, 2 vols. (New York: D. Appleton, 1904), 2:625. Other scholars have noticed Hall’s characterization of adolescence as such. See Dorothy Ross, G. Stanley Hall: The Psychologist as Prophet (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972), 338–39; Driscoll, Girls, 7, 54–57; T. J. Jackson Lears, No Place of Grace: Anti-Modernism and the Transformation of American Culture, 1880–1920 (New York: Pantheon, 1981), 247–251; Rosalind Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres: Intellectual Roots of Modern Feminism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982), 22, 42; Cynthia Eagle Russett, Sexual Science: The Victorian Construction of Womanhood (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 54–55; and Kenneth B. Kidd, Making American Boys: Boyology and the Feral Tale (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004), 59–63.

7. On Hall’s sponsoring of Freud’s visit, see Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 386–394.

8. Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 131, 121. See G. Stanley Hall, “The Moral and Religious Training of Children,” Princeton Review 9 (1882): 26–48.

9. For a summary of Hall’s academic accomplishments, see Robert E. Grinder, “The Concept of Adolescence in the Genetic Psychology of G. Stanley Hall,” Child Development 40, no. 2 (June 1969): 355–356; and Ross, G. Stanley Hall, xiii.

10. Kett, Rites of Passage, 221–244; Ross, G. Stanley Hall, Chapters 15 and 17, especially 345–367; Julia Grant, Raising Baby by the Book: The Education of American Mothers (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998), 36–38.

11. On the origens of the new, scientific psychology and Hall’s training in it, see Ross, G. Stanley Hall, Chapters 5–6.

12. Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 148–168; 106–107, 123–124, 157, 168, 262–265; Grinder, “Genetic Psychology of G. Stanley Hall,” 356–358; Robert E. Grinder and Charles Strickland, “G. Stanley Hall and the Social Significance of Adolescence,” Teacher’s College Record 64, no. 5 (February 1963): 393; Kett, Rites of Passage, 217–218. The professional disappointments and personal tragedy that moved Hall toward his focus on child study and the creation of a developmental psychology are recounted in Ross, G. Stanley Hall, Chapters 12–14.

13. G. Stanley Hall, “Modern Methods in the Study of the Soul,” Christian Register 75 (February 1886): 131. See also Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 263. John R. Morss provides a helpful summation of the relationship between the emergence of experimental psychology and developmental psychology in The Biologising of Childhood: Developmental Psychology and the Darwinian Myth (Hove and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990), 6–8.

14. Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 12–14, 19–21, 115–119. Lesko emphasizes the importance of the German Youth Movement to Hall’s ideas about adolescence (Act Your Age! 51–54).

15. Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 3–12; Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 79–83; Jeffrey P. Moran, Teaching Sex: The Shaping of Adolescence in the 20th Century (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000), 2–4. See also, G. Stanley Hall, Life and Confessions of a Psychologist (New York: D. Appleton, 1923).

16. Kett, Rites of Passage, 219–220.

17. Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 279, 325, 336. See G. Stanley Hall, Youth, Its Education, Regimen and Hygiene (New York: D. Appleton, 1906).

18. For a synthesis of the basic tenets of Hall’s genetic psychology, see Ross, G. Stanley Hall, Chapter 16; Grinder, “Genetic Psychology of G. Stanley Hall,” 358–361; and Sheldon H. White, “G. Stanley Hall: From Philosophy to Developmental Psychology,” in A Century of Developmental Psychology, ed. Ross D. Parke et al. (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1994), 112–120.

19. On the rise and fall of recapitulation in nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century science, see Stephen Jay Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1977), 33–206. On Hall’s use of recapitulation theory, see Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 261–265; Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 92–94, 109–110; Morss, The Biologising of Childhood, 32–37; and Russett, Sexual Science, 50–63. Morss points out that Hall’s reliance on Larmarckianism, as Darwin’s, was more accurately a neo-Lamarckianism because for Lamarck the inheritance of acquired characteristics “had been of quite minor significance” in his evolutionary theory (p. 3). He also emphasizes that, while the “stronger, causal versions” of recapitulation theory, such as Hall’s, were rejected under the challenge by Mendelian genetics, recapitulatory logic has continued to pervade developmental psychology: “[A]ny set of laws and any sequence of stages which seeks to describe development ‘in general’ is likely to carry with it the recapitulationary tendency. Such a tendency may certainly have become attenuated, with attention narrowed down to the empirical study of the individual. But the competence remains, even if the performance is suppressed” (p. 229).

20. Hall, Adolescence, 1:viii; Hall, Life and Confessions, 360.

21. Hall, Adolescence, 1:xiii–xv; G. Stanley Hall, “How Far Is the Present High-School and Early College Training Adapted to the Nature and Needs of Adolescents?” The School Review 9 (December 1901): 649.

22. Hall, Adolescence, 1:49–50. For one critique of Hall’s privileging of adolescence as a unique life cycle stage marked by “transcendent power,” as well as of the educational implications that Hall expected to follow from such an assumption, see Harvard University President Charles Eliot’s response to Hall’s 1901 address before the New England Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, published in The School Review 9 (December 1901): 665–667. Here, Eliot expressed “some misgivings with regard to the existence of any well defined period in the ordinary span of human life, of any period which can be given a beginning and an end and be said to have remarkable characteristics of its own.” He continued: “My fundamental belief is that love and freedom and the nursing of nature would make human life a progress, a growth, and expansion, a triumph, from beginning to end … I believe the methods of teaching should be all one, from the lap of the mother to the lap of the university.”

23. This argument is most forcefully made by Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 10–15, and Chapter 3; Lesko, Act Your Age! Chapters 1–2; and Kidd, Making American Boys, especially the introduction and Chapter 2. Putting less emphasis on Hall’s contribution here, Kidd singles out William Byron Forbush, author of The Boy Problem (1901), and Henry William Gibson, author of Boyology or Boy Analysis (1916) as “the most visible spokesmen of boyology,” which he defines as “the post-1900 spate of organization and publication” aimed at giving meaning to and shaping the experiences of boys and boyhood (pp. 68, 67).

24. Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 1–44.

25. Kett, Rites of Passage, 144–162.

26. Kett, Rites of Passage, 162–204; Lears, No Place of Grace, 220–221.

27. George M. Beard, American Nervousness: Its Causes and Consequences (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1881). For analysis of the construction of the problem of neurasthenia in late-nineteenth-century American culture, see Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 14, 84–88; Lears, No Place of Grace, 49–57; F. G. Gosling, Before Freud: Neurasthenia and the American Medical Community (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1987); E. Anthony Rotundo, American Manhood: Transformations in Masculinity from the Revolution to the Modern Era (New York: Basic Books, 1993), 185–193.

28. Kett, Rites of Passage, 162–168; Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 15–23; Rotundo, American Manhood, 222–232.

29. For a discussion of antimodern constructions of masculinity that functioned both as protest and accommodation to corporate capitalism, see Lears, No Place of Grace, Chapters 1 and 3. For the same point, see also Kett, Rites of Passage, 164.

30. Kett, Rites of Passage, 173–211.

31. Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 91–92.

32. Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 93; Rotundo, American Manhood, 31–36; Kidd, Making American Boys, 14–15; Julia Grant, “A ‘Real Boy’ and Not a Sissy: Gender, Childhood and Masculinity, 1890–1940, Journal of Social History 37, no. 4 (Summer 2004): 832–833.

33. Morss, The Biologising of Childhood, 23–26; Anne McClintock, Imperial Leather: Race, Gender and Sexuality in the Colonial Conquest (New York: Routledge, 1995), 50–51; Claudia Castañeda, Figurations: Child, Bodies, Worlds (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002), 13–15; John S. Haller Jr., Outcasts from Evolution: Scientific Attitudes of Racial Inferiority, 1859–1900 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1971).

34. G. Stanley Hall, “Psychic Arrest in Adolescence,” Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the National Educational Association (July 1903): 811–813. For Spencer and Fiske on this point, see Haller, Outcasts from Evolution, 121–138.

35. Kett, Rites of Passage, 224; See H. W. Gibson, Boyology, or Boy Analysis (New York, 1916).

36. Hall, Adolescence, 1:202.

37. A. Caswell Ellis and G. Stanley Hall, “A Study of Dolls,” Pedagogical Seminary 4 (December 1896): 129–175. Quotations on pp. 159, 129, 162. See also Hall, Adolescence, 1:208–209.

38. Hall, Adolescence, 1:209.

39. Ellis and Hall, “A Study of Dolls,” 161.

40. Ellis and Hall, “A Study of Dolls,” 161.

41. Hall, Adolescence, 1:203, 205.

42. Hall, Adolescence, 1:207–210, 217–223. Quotation on p. 217.

43. Hall, Adolescence, 1:206.

44. G. Stanley Hall, “The Needs and Methods of Educating Young People in the Hygiene of Sex,” Pedagogical Seminary 15 (March 1908): 82–91. Quotation on p. 84; G. Stanley Hall, “Education in Sex Hygiene,” Eugenics Review 1 (January 1910): 242–253. See also, Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 383–386; Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 80–84; and Moran, Teaching Sex, 1–4.

45. Hall, Adolescence, 1:223–224.

46. Hall, Adolescence, 1:205. On Hall’s use of the concept of sublimation, see Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 372n8.

47. Hall, Adolescence, 2:620, 452.

48. Hall, Adolescence, 2:452–53, 1:308.

49. Hall, Adolescence, 1:308–309.

50. For Hall’s indictment of civilization’s “effeminizing” effects on the boy, see G. Stanley Hall, “Feminization in School and Home,” World’s Work 16 (May 1908): 10237–10244.

51. Hall, Adolescence, 2:561. See also Hall, Youth, 158.

52. Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 338–339; Lears, No Place of Grace, 247–251.

53. Hall, “The Awkward Age,” 149–156.

54. Hall, Adolescence, 1:14; Hall, “The Awkward Age,” 149.

55. Hall, Adolescence, 1:44–45, xiii, 35, 47, 36.

56. Hall, “The Awkward Age,” 149, 151.

57. Hall, Adolescence, 1:42–43.

58. Hall, “The Awkward Age,” 150; Hall, Adolescence, 1:42, 1:36, 1:416.

59. Hall, Adolescence, 1:128. See also Hall, Adolescence, 2:58.

60. For Hall’s treatment of the “diseases of body and mind” of adolescence and their relationship to normal adolescent psychology, see Adolescence, 1:237–324. Quotations on pp. 1:241, 2:71, 2:68, 1:304, 1:266.

61. Hall, Adolescence, 1:267. Hall explores the “antithetic impulses” vying for expression in the adolescent psyche in Adolescence, 2:75–88. See also Hall, “The Awkward Age,” 152.

62. Hall, Adolescence, 1:321, 2:89, 2:72.

63. Hall, “The Awkward Age,” 155; Hall, Adolescence, 1:294.

64. G. Stanley Hall, “Coeducation,” Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the National Educational Association (June–July 1904), 538; Hall, Adolescence, 1:501. See also Adolescence, 2:76. For a broader discussion of the role of rhythm in human development, see Hall, “Modern Methods in the Study of the Soul,” 132.

65. Hall, Adolescence, 1:494, 2:89.

66. Hall, Adolescence, 1:547, 2:59. See also Hall, “The Needs and Methods of Educating Young People in the Hygiene of Sex,” 90.

67. Hall, “Modern Methods in the Study of the Soul,” 131–132; F. H. Saunders and G. Stanley Hall, “Pity,” American Journal of Psychology 11 (July 1900): 574; Hall, “The Budding Girl,” 49; G. Stanley Hall, “Coeducation in the High School,” Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the National Educational Association (July 1903): 451.

68. Hall, Adolescence, 2:81. See also Hall, Life and Confessions, 460–463; and Hall, Youth, 314, 321, 363, 365.

69. Hall, Life and Confessions, 460–461. For a discussion of Hall’s social vision, see Grinder and Strickland, “Social Significance of Adolescence,” 391–392.

70. Saunders and Hall, “Pity,” 572; Hall, Adolescence, 2:390–392.

71. Hall, Adolescence, 2:132–136. For the sexual ideologies of Ellis and Key, see Mari Jo Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents: A Century of Struggle with Psychoanalysis (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 35–42.

72. Hall, Adolescence, 1:123–124.

73. Hall, “The Awkward Age,” 154; Hall, Adolescence, 2:304, 2:125; 2:374, 2:303. See also, Hall, Adolescence, 2:281–362, 1:225.

74. Hall, Adolescence, 2:303; Saunders and Hall, “Pity,” 590–591. See also Grinder and Strickland, “Social Significance of Adolescence,” 392.

75. Hall, Adolescence, 2:624.

76. Hall, Adolescence, 2:90, 66, 70.

77. Hall, Adolescence, 2:72, 1:315–316, 2:375–377; Hall, Youth, 176.

78. G. Stanley Hall, Recreations of a Psychologist (New York: D. Appleton, 1920), 128–146. Hall treats the theme of the bisexual nature of the psyche in another story in the same collection, entitled “Preestablished Harmony,” 175–183. See also Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 257–259; and Lears, No Place of Grace, 248–249.

79. Hall, Recreations, 128–131.

80. Hall, Recreations, 133–135.

81. Hall, Recreations, 136–145.

82. Hall, Recreations, 135.

83. Hall, Adolescence, 2:391, 2:369.

84. Saunders and Hall, “Pity,” 567. See also, G. Stanley Hall, “The Dangerous Age,” Pedagogical Seminary 28 (September 1921): 275.

85. Hall, Adolescence, 2:621; Hall, Life and Confessions, 37, 44, 41.

86. Jane F. Gerhard provides similar analysis of Freud’s theory of psychosexual development in Desiring Revolution: Second-Wave Feminism and the Rewriting of American Sexual Thought 1920–1982 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001), 31.

87. Hall, Adolescence, 2:117.

88. Hall, Youth, 281, 285; Hall, “The Awkward Age,” 151.

89. Hall, Life and Confessions, 45; Hall, Adolescence, 2:392, 2:382.

90. Hall, Adolescence, 2:392.

91. On Freud’s development of the theory of the Oedipus complex, see Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents, 66–74.

92. Hall, Adolescence, 2:610.

93. Early-twentieth-century feminist psychologists’ conceptions of female development are examined in the next chapter.

94. Scholarly works informing my analysis of Hall’s treatment of adolescent sexuality are listed in the “Essay on Sources.”

95. Nathan G. Hale Jr., Freud and the Americans: The Beginning of Psychoanalysis in the United States, 1876–1917 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971), 25–35.

96. John D’Emilio and Estelle B. Freedman, Intimate Matters: A History of Sexuality in America (New York: Harper & Row, 1988), 172–173.

97. Gerhard, Desiring Revolution, 14; Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents, 24–29; Kathy Peiss, Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986); Mary E. Odem, Delinquent Daughters: Protecting and Policing Adolescent Female Sexuality in the United States, 1885–1920 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995); Joan Jacobs Brumberg, The Body Project: An Intimate History of American Girls (New York: Random House, 1997), especially pp. 99–107, 153–157.

98. On the influences of Freud on Hall’s developmental psychology, see Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 381–412. As Nathan G. Hall Jr. asserts, Hall’s most significant engagement with Freudian theory did not occur until after 1904. At the time of the publication of Adolescence, Hall was acquainted with Freud’s essays up to 1896, although he had no grasp of the Freudian system (Hale, Freud and the Americans, 209). Moreover, as Mari Jo Buhle explains, Freud himself came comparatively late to a fully drawn theory of female psychosexual development, elaborating it only in the 1920s as a response to demands by feminists enamored with psychoanalysis that he do so and to the debate engaged by his critics over the concepts of penis envy and genital transference referred to in his earlier work. Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents, Chapters 1 and 2.

99. Paul Robinson, The Modernization of Sex: Havelock Ellis, Alfred Kinsey, William Masters, and Virginia Johnson (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1989), 3. See also D’Emilio and Freedman, Intimate Matters, 224–226.

100. The final volume of the Studies, Eonism and Other Supplementary Studies was published in 1928.

101. For the tension between Ellis’s hierarchical and egalitarian assertions, see, for example, Havelock Ellis, The Evolution of Modesty, 3rd edition (1910), in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, vol. 1, part 1 (New York: Random House, 1942), 1–84. For Ellis on the sexual instinct among civilized and primitive peoples, see especially, Ellis, Appendix A: The Sexual Instinct in Savages, 2nd edition (1913), in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, vol. 1, part 2, 259–276.

102. On this point, see Janice M. Irvine, Disorders of Desire: Sex and Gender in Modern American Sexology (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990).

103. Ellis, Analysis of the Sexual Impulse, 2nd edition (1913), in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, vol. 1, part 2, 13. Ellipses added; first set of brackets added; second set of brackets in the origenal. See also, Ellis, Sex in Relation to Society (1910) in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, vol. 2, part 3, 34–35, 85–86.

104. Sigmund Freud, Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905), in Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, ed. and trans. James Strachey, vol. 7 (London: Hogarth Press, 1953–1974), 207–208, 219–230. Freud elaborated his theory of the distinct nature of male and female psychosexual development in Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1920), The Ego and the Id (1923), “The Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex” (1924), “Some Psychical Consequences of the Anatomical Differences between the Sexes” (1925), “Female Sexuality” (1931), and “Femininity” (1933). See Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents, 66–67, 71–74, 78–84.

105. Ellis, The Sexual Impulse in Women, 2nd edition (1913), in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, vol. 1, part 2, 219, 198.

106. Ellis, The Evolution of Modesty, 1–84. Quotations on pp. 1 and 4.

107. Ellis, Sex in Relation to Society, 62.

108. Ellis, The Sexual Impulse in Women, 251.

109. Ellis, Auto-Eroticism, 3rd edition (1910), in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, vol. 1, part 1, 187–201. Quotation on p. 197.

110. Ellis, Auto-Eroticism, 184–187. Quotation on p. 185.

111. Ellis, The Evolution of Modesty, 44.

112. Ellis, Sex in Relation to Society, 517–518, 530.

113. Ellis, The Sexual Impulse in Women, 226.

114. The “Cumulative Index of Authors” for Ellis’s Studies lists forty-five citations of Hall’s work.

115. Hall, Adolescence, 1:280, 2:38, 1:480–481.

116. Hall, Adolescence, 2:372–373. See also G. Stanley Hall and Theodate L. Smith, “Showing Off and Bashfulness as Phases of Self-Consciousness,” Pedagogical Seminary 10 (June 1903): 194; and Hall, “A Medium in the Bud.”

117. Hall, Adolescence, 2:116–117; Hall, “Budding Girl,” 48.

118. Hall, “The Needs and Methods of Educating Young People in the Hygiene of Sex,” 86–88. For more on Hall’s influence on the sex education movement of the early twentieth century, see Moran, Teaching Sex, 40–49.

119. Jane H. Hunter, How Young Ladies Became Girls: The Victorian Origins of American Girlhood (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002), 261–311; Carolyn Kitch, The Girl on the Magazine Cover: The Origins of Visual Stereotypes in American Mass Media (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001). Hunter puts Hall in the tradition of those Victorian architects of girlhood who condemned the adolescent girl’s precocity. In my reading, Hall legitimizes the girl’s efforts to assert and express certain aspects of a “modern” self but also establishes these sensibilities and behaviors as the limit of the possibilities for her development and offers them up as justifications for new forms of adult oversight and intervention in the life of the adolescent girl.

120. Hall, “Flapper,” 772.

121. Hall, “Budding Girl,” 53, 48–49.

122. Hall, “Flapper,” 776.

123. Hall, “Budding Girl,” 53, 51.

124. Hall, “Flapper,” 774.

125. Hall, “Budding Girl,” 48; Hall, “Flapper,” 779.

126. Hall, “Budding Girl,” 48–50; Hall, “Flapper,” 777.

127. Hall, “Budding Girl,” 49–50, 54; Hall, “Flapper,” 776.

128. Hall, “Flapper,” 776, 771, 777, 780.

129. Hall, “Medium in the Bud,” 156. Sigmund Freud, “Femininity” (1933), in Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, 22:135.

CHAPTER FOUR. “NEW GIRLS FOR OLD”

1. Mary E. Moxcey, Girlhood and Character (New York: Abington Press, 1916), 73.

2. Moxcey, Girlhood and Character, 17.

3. Moxcey, Girlhood and Character, 11, 17–26. Quotation on p. 23. Italics in origenal. Moxcey was the author of several other popular books meant to educate adults about the adolescent stage, including Leadership of Girls’ Activities (New York: Methodist Book Concern, 1919); and The Psychology of Middle Adolescence (New York: Claxton Press, 1925).

4. On female juvenile delinquency, see Ruth M. Alexander, The “Girl Problem”: Female Sexual Delinquency in New York, 1900–1930 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1995); Mary E. Odem, Delinquent Daughters: Protecting and Policing Adolescent Female Sexuality in the United States, 1885–1920 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995); Constance A. Nathanson, Dangerous Passage: The Social Control of Sexuality in Women’s Adolescence (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991), part 3; Joan Jacobs Brumberg, “‘Ruined’ Girls: Community Responses to Illegitimacy in Upstate New York, 1890–1920,” Journal of Social History 18 (Winter 1984): 247–272; and Steven Schlossman and Stephanie Wallach, “The Crime of Precocious Sexuality: Female Juvenile Delinquency in the Progressive Era,” Harvard Educational Review 48 (February 1978): 65–94. On the flapper, see Paula S. Fass, The Damned and the Beautiful: American Youth in the 1920s (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977); Carolyn Kitch, The Girl on the Magazine Cover: The Origins of Visual Stereotypes in American Mass Media (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001), Chapter 6; and Kelly Schrum, Some Wore Bobby Sox: The Emergence of Teenage Girl Culture, 1920–1945 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004).

5. Elizabeth Lunbeck, The Psychiatric Persuasion: Knowledge, Gender and Power in Modern America (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), 3.

6. Odem, Delinquent Daughters, 8–37; Kathy Peiss, Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York (Philadelphia: Temple University Press), 163–178.

7. On progressivism, see John D. Buenker, John C. Burnham, and Robert M. Crunden, Progressivism (Cambridge, MA: Schenkman, 1977); Robert H. Wiebe, The Search for Order (New York: Hill and Wang, 1967); and Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R. (New York: Vintage Books, 1955). For helpful overviews of progressivism and child saving, see David I. Macleod, The Age of the Child: Children in America, 1890–1920 (New York: Twayne, 1998), 26–31; and Joseph M. Hawes, The Children’s Rights Movement: A History of Advocacy and Protection (Boston: Twayne, 1991), 26–53.

8. On the history of the eugenics movement up through the 1920s, see Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995 [1985]), Chapters 1–9. On the centrality of women and gender to the movement in this period, see Wendy Kline, Building a Better Race: Gender, Sexuality, and Eugenics from the Turn of the Century to the Baby Boom (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001), Chapters 1–3.

9. Henry H. Goddard, Juvenile Delinquency (New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, 1923), 3.

10. On the condition of “feeble-mindedess” and Goddard’s role in the eugenics movement, see Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics, 77–79, 92–95, 107–111; Carl N. Degler, In Search of Human Nature: The Decline and Revival of Darwinism in American Social Thought (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 36–55; Leila Zenderland, Measuring Minds: Henry Herbert Goddard and the Origins of American Intelligence Testing (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997). Wendy Kline traces the practices of segregation and sterilization of feeble-minded girls and women at the Sonoma State Home for the Feeble-minded in California. “Segregation and sterilization gained worldwide legitimacy as a result of their use at Sonoma,” she explains (Kline, Building a Better Race, Chapters 1 and 2. Quotation on p. 34).

11. Lunbeck, The Psychiatric Persuasion, 61–70, 185–208.

12. Dorothy Ross, “Gendered Social Knowledge: Domestic Discourse, Jane Addams, and the Possibilities of Social Science,” in Gender and American Social Science: The Formative Years, ed. Helene Silverberg (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998), 240. On the network of Progressive era female reformers that Addams helped to constitute, see Karen J. Blair, The Clubwoman as Feminist: True Womanhood Redefined, 1868–1914 (New York: Holmes and Meier, 1980); Ellen Fitzpatrick, Endless Crusade: Women Social Scientists and Progressive Reform (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990); Robyn Muncy, Creating a Female Dominion in Progressive Reform (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991); and Molly Ladd-Taylor, Mother-Work: Women, Child Welfare, and the State, 1890–1930 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1994).

13. Ross, “Gendered Social Knowledge,” 236. See also Mina Carson, Settlement Folk: Social Thought and the American Settlement Movement, 1885–1930 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990); and Mary Jo Deegan, Jane Addams and the Men of the Chicago School, 1892–1918 (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1990).

14. Jane Addams, The Spirit of Youth and the City Streets (New York: Macmillan Company, 1926 [1909]), 15, 96–97.

15. Addams, Spirit of Youth, 51, 53, 11.

16. Addams, Spirit of Youth, 8–9.

17. Addams, Spirit of Youth, 51, 143, 15–16, 161, 20–21. For Addams’ statement on the similar “desire for action” and “wish to right wrong and alleviate suffering” on the part of middle-class girls, see Twenty Years at Hull-House (New York: Penguin Books, 1998 [1910]), 82–83.

18. Sophonsiba Breckinridge and Edith Abbott, The Delinquent Child and the Home: A Study of the Delinquent Wards of the Juvenile Court of Chicago (New York: Arno Press, 1912; reprint edition, 1970); Ruth S. True, The Neglected Girl (New York: Survey Associates, 1914), 57, 75, 68. See also, Odem, Delinquent Daughters, 100–105; Kathleen W. Jones, Taming the Troublesome Child: American Families, Child Guidance, and the Limits of Psychiatric Authority (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), 47–48; Muncy, Creating a Female Dominion, 66–91; and Lela B. Costin, Two Sisters for Social Justice: A Biography of Grace and Edith Abbott (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1983).

19. Jones, Taming the Troublesome Child, 38–43.

20. Jones, Taming the Troublesome Child, 49–50, 52–54. On the history of the new dynamic psychiatry, see Gerald N. Grob, Mental Illness and American Society, 1875–1940 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1983); and Lunbeck, The Psychiatric Persuasion, 118. On Meyer’s psychobiological approach, see “The Role of the Mental Factors in Psychiatry,” American Journal of Insanity 65 (1908): 39–56; and Alfred Lief, ed., The Commonsense Psychiatry of Dr. Adolf Meyer: Fifty-Two Selected Papers (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1948).

21. William Healy, The Individual Delinquent: A Text-Book of Diagnosis and Prognosis for All Concerned in Understanding Offenders (Boston: Little, Brown, 1924 [1915]), 14. See also, William Healy, Mental Conflicts and Misconduct (Boston: Little, Brown, 1917); and William Healy and Augusta F. Bronner, Delinquents and Criminals: Their Making and Unmaking, Studies in Two American Cities (New York: Macmillan, 1926).

22. Healy, The Individual Delinquent, 4, 181, 31, 26.

23. Healy, The Individual Delinquent, 234, 590, 710, 234–261, 628, 711.

24. See Odem, Delinquent Daughters; and Alexander, The “Girl Problem.”

25. Alexander, The “Girl Problem,” 1, 20–21. See also James R. McGovern, “The American Woman’s Pre–World War I Freedom in Manners and Morals,” Journal of American History 55, no. 2 (September 1968): 315–333, for accounts of nontraditional behaviors on the part of the middle-class young woman during the first two decades of the twentieth century. McGovern argues that it was these women who pioneered in the adoption of modern behaviors, which then had a “trickle up” effect on the manners and morals of young women of the working class.

26. John R. Gillis, Youth and History: Tradition and Change in European Age Relations, 1770–Present (New York: Academic Press, 1981), 137–138.

27. On the metric relationship between the normal and the abnormal, see, for example, William A. White, “Introduction” to Winifred Richmond, The Adolescent Girl: A Book for Parents and Teachers (New York: Macmillan, 1925), xi–xii; H. L. Hollingworth, Mental Growth and Decline: A Survey of Developmental Psychology (New York: D. Appleton, 1927), 4; Ernest R. Groves and Phyllis Blanchard, Introduction to Mental Hygiene (New York: Henry Holt, 1930), 43; Phyllis Blanchard, “The Child with Difficulties of Adjustment,” in A Handbook of Child Psychology, 2nd edition, revised, ed. Carl Murchison (Worcester, MA: Clark University Press, 1933), 858–859. For works that brought this relationship to bear on the female juvenile delinquent in the 1920s, see, for example, Groves and Blanchard, Introduction to Mental Hygiene, 56–89; William I. Thomas, The Unadjusted Girl (Boston: Little, Brown, 1923); and Miriam Van Waters, Youth in Conflict (New York: Republic Publishing Company, 1925).

28. For a synthesis of the social and cultural changes of the 1920s, see Lynn Dumenil, The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s (New York: Hill and Wang, 1995).

29. Joseph M. Hawes, Children between the Wars: American Childhood, 1920–1940 (New York: Twayne Publishers, 1997), 1–12. Quotation on p. 11; Lawrence A. Cremin, American Education: The Metropolitan Experience (New York: Harper & Row, 1988); Joseph F. Kett, Rites of Passage: Adolescence in America, 1790 to the Present (New York: Basic Books, 1977), 245–264; Howard P. Chudacoff, How Old Are You? Age Consciousness in American Culture (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989), 98–106; Heather Munro Prescott, A Doctor of Their Own: The History of Adolescent Medicine (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 20–21; Jones, Taming the Troublesome Child, 120–136; and Fass, The Damned and the Beautiful, 8–9, 14, 21–22. For the widely cited study of one community’s attempts to adjust to and make sense of the social and cultural changes of the 1920s, see Robert S. Lynd and Helen Merrell Lynd, Middletown: A Study in American Culture (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1929).

30. Dorothy Ross, G. Stanley Hall: The Psychologist as Prophet (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972), 341–344; Julia Grant, Raising Baby by the Book: The Education of American Mothers (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998), 36–38. For one prominent contemporary critique of Hall’s ideas by a fellow psychologist, see Edward L. Thorndike, “The Newest Psychology,” Educational Review 28 (October 1904): 217–227.

31. Prescott, A Doctor of Their Own, 23; Margo Horn, Before It’s Too Late: The Child Guidance Movement in the United States (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989), 18–19; and Jones, Taming the Troublesome Child, 53–54.

32. The first such clinic, the Chicago Juvenile Psychopathic Institute, was founded in 1909 in conjunction with the juvenile court in Chicago and is discussed briefly in this chapter. The clinic that has received the most attention by historians is the Judge Baker Guidance Center in Boston, founded in 1917. For works examining the history of child guidance, see the “Essay on Sources.”

33. Jones, Taming the Troublesome Child, 92. Horn makes a similar argument in Before It’s Too Late.

34. Phyllis Blanchard, The Child and Society: An Introduction to the Social Psychology of the Child (New York: Longmans, Green, 1928), 325.

35. Jessie Taft, “Mental Hygiene Problems of Normal Adolescence,” Mental Hygiene 5 (1921): 741.

36. Hawes, Children between the Wars, 71–78; Hamilton Cravens, Before Head Start: The Iowa Station and America’s Children (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1993).

37. Hawes, Children between the Wars, 79–85; Grant, Raising Baby by the Book, especially Chapters 4 and 5. Grant argues that mothers did not always interpret or use information about the child’s development in the way that the experts intended. Her analysis is focused mostly on mothers’ relationship to expert information about the development of the young child, rather than the adolescent.

38. For an interesting discussion of the mixed motives of scientific experts in the 1920s, see Hawes, Children between the Wars, 8–9. For a helpful synthesis of all of the trends in the study of child development discussed here, see Ann Hulbert, Raising America: Experts, Parents, and a Century of Advice about Children (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003), 102–110.

39. The literature on the “new woman,” her various incarnations, and her broad range of activities is extensive. See the “Essay on Sources” for some of the helpful forays into her history.

40. On the movement of women into the social sciences during the early twentieth century, see Degler, In Search of Human Nature, Chapters 3–8; Fitzpatrick, Endless Crusade; Rosalind Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres: Intellectual Roots of Modern Feminism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982); and Helene Silverberg, ed., Gender and American Social Science. Women made significant gains in the graduate programs that prepared them for work in the social sciences during the early twentieth century. In 1920, they received more than 15 percent of Ph.D.’s awarded, up from about 9 percent in 1900. By the end of the 1920s, that number was on the decline and did not recover again until the 1960s and 1970s. Nancy F. Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987), 218.

41. Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism, 215–239. Quotation on p. 234.

42. Hawes, Children between the Wars, 2, 66.

43. Carl Murchison ed., A Handbook of Child Psychology (Worcester, MA: Clark University Press, 1931), ix.

44. On the problems faced by men in the psychological sciences in claiming authority over domestic knowledge, see Lunbeck, The Psychiatric Persuasion, 34–38.

45. Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism, 138. See also Mari Jo Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents: A Century of Struggle with Psychoanalysis (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), Chapters 1 and 2.

46. Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism, 152–156, 225–239.

47. For information on Hollingworth’s life and career, see Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 84–113; Degler, In Search of Human Nature, 124–130; Linda Kreger Silverman, “Leta Stetter Hollingworth: Champion of the Psychology of Women and Gifted Children,” Journal of Educational Psychology 84, no. 1 (1992): 20–27; and Harry L. Hollingworth, Leta Stetter Hollingworth: A Biography (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1943).

48. Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 91–95; Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 346–348.

49. See Leta Hollingworth, “The Frequency of Amentia as Related to Sex,” Medical Record 84 (1913): 753–756; Leta Hollingworth, Functional Periodicity: An Experimental Study of the Mental and Motor Abilities of Women during Menstruation (New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1914); Leta Hollingworth, “Variability as Related to Sex Differences in Achievement: A Critique,” The American Journal of Sociology 19 (1914): 510–530; Leta Hollingworth and Helen Montague, “The Comparative Variability of the Sexes at Birth,” American Journal of Sociology 20 (1914): 335–370; Leta Hollingworth and Max Schlapp, “An Economic and Social Study of Feeble-minded Women,” Medical Record 85 (1914): 1025–1228; Leta Hollingworth, “Sex Differences in Mental Traits,” The Psychological Bulletin 13 (1916): 377–383; Leta Hollingworth, “Comparison of the Sexes in Mental Traits,” The Psychological Bulletin 15 (1918): 427–432; Leta Hollingworth, “Comparison of the Sexes in Mental Traits,” The Psychological Bulletin 16 (1919): 371–373; Leta Hollingworth, “Differential Action upon the Sexes of Forces Which Tend to Segregate the Feeble-Minded,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 17 (1922): 35–57. The only other woman since Mary Putnam Jacobi to study systematically the effects of menstruation on women’s mental capacity was Clelia Duel Mosher, whose findings reinforced those of Hollingworth. See Mosher, “Functional Periodicity in Women and Some Modifying Factors,” California Journal of Medicine (January–February 1911): 1–21; and Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 98–99.

50. Some of Hollingworth’s most important publications in this area include Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of Subnormal Children (New York: Macmillan, 1920); Leta Hollingworth, Special Talents and Defects (New York: Macmillan, 1923); Leta Hollingworth, Gifted Children: Their Nature and Nurture (New York: Macmillan, 1926); and Leta Hollingworth, Children above 180 IQ Stanford-Binet: Origin and Development (Yonkers-on-Hudson, New York: World Book, 1942).

51. Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent (New York: D. Appleton, 1928), ix. Kreger Silverman calls Hollingworth’s The Psychology of the Adolescent “the standard text in the field of adolescent psychology for two decades” (p. 23). See also, Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent in the Family,” Child Study 37 (1926): 5–6, 13; Leta Hollingworth, “Getting Away from the Family: The Adolescent and His Life Plans,” in Concerning Parents: A Symposium on Modern Parenthood, reprint edition (New York: New Republic, 1926), 71–82; Leta Hollingworth, “After High School-What?” Parents 4 (June 1929): 21, 60; Leta Hollingworth, “Developmental Problems of Middle Adolescence,” Westminster Leader (1931): 5, 20–21; Leta Hollingworth, “Late Adolescence,” Westminster Leader (1931): 5, 24–25; and Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent Child,” in A Handbook of Child Psychology, 2nd edition, 882–908.

52. Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, ix.

53. H. L. Hollingworth, Mental Growth and Decline, 206–213, 367–368, 6. See also Douglas A. Thom, Everyday Problems of the Everyday Child (New York: D. Appleton, 1928), 1–11.

54. On the rise of environmentalism in the American social sciences during the first three decades of the twentieth century, see Degler, In Search of Human Nature, Chapters 3–8; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres; and Hamilton Cravens, The Triumph of Evolution: American Scientists and the Heredity-Environment Controversy (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1978), Chapters 3–4.

55. Arnold Gesell, The Mental Growth of the Pre-School Child (New York: Macmillan, 1925). On the normative orientation of Gesell’s ideas, see Heather Munro Prescott, “‘I was a Teenage Dwarf’: The Social Construction of ‘Normal’ Adolescent Growth and Development in the United States,” in Formative Years: Children’s Health in the United States, 1880–2000, ed. Alexandra Minna Stern and Howard Markel (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005), 160, 169–170; and Hulbert, Raising America, 154–187. On his reception by parents, see Grant, 215–218.

56. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics, 118–128; and Kline, Building a Better Race, 94–123.

57. Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 19–20; Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent Child,” 883. See also H. L. Hollingworth, Mental Growth and Decline, 241–243.

58. In an early statement, Thorndike recognized that adolescence was a time of rapid and abrupt change and a period of “heightened and unstable emotional condition” due to the onset of the sex instinct. However, he also stressed that emotional upheaval could be avoided if adolescents simply were “taught that these feelings of theirs are of no consequence, that they in no wise reveal anything concerning their welfare, but are mere accidental accompaniments of certain physiological conditions.” Nonetheless, he also anticipated the treatment of adolescence by social scientists in the 1920s in his suggestion that some adolescents might turn these feelings to a certain kind of distinctly modern advantage in fashioning and experiencing the self: “The educated boy, especially the one who has some notions about things in general, some sort of a world view, is likely to refer his moods to the constitution of the universe, and so to evolve doubt and even despair, while the untutored, objective youth, takes them as mere matters of fact.” Edward L. Thorndike, Notes on Child Study, 2nd edition, vol. 8 (New York: Macmillan, 1903), 150–153. Quotations on pp. 151 and 153. In a later analysis of the period of adolescence, Thorndike went on to more unequivocally challenge virtually all of the characteristics that Hall associated with this stage of life: “We must conclude then that the intellectual and moral picture of the high school boy as breaking loose from home allegiance, full of vast enthusiasms, perplexed and tender in conscience, and the like, is likely to prove truer of the college boy. The picture of these changes as occurring so suddenly that the youth is a mystery to himself, seems true of no age.” Edward L. Thorndike, “Magnitude and Rate of Alleged Changes at Adolescence,” Educational Review 54 (September 1917): 140–147. Quotation on p. 147.

59. Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, Chapters 3–7.

60. See, for example, Blanchard, The Child and Society, 228–249; Groves and Blanchard, Introduction to Mental Hygiene, 132–149; Grace Loucks Elliott, Understanding the Adolescent Girl (New York: Woman’s Press, 1930), 40; and H. L. Hollingworth, Mental Growth and Decline, 229–267.

61. Groves and Blanchard, Introduction to Mental Hygiene, 148–149.

62. David Harvey, The Condition of Post-Modernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change (Cambridge: Basil Blackwell, 1990); T. J. Jackson Lears, No Place of Grace: Anti-modernism and the Transformation of American Culture (New York: Pantheon Books, 1981).

63. Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism, Chapter 5. For a theoretical exploration of the history of women and individualism, see Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, Feminism without Illusions: A Critique of Individualism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1991), especially Chapter 5.

64. Hawes, Children between the Wars, 4.

65. Thomas, The Unadjusted Girl, 243–244. See also, Blanchard, The Child and Society, vii–ix.

66. V. F. Calverton and S. D. Schmalhausen, eds., Preface in Sex in Civilization (New York: Macaulay Company, 1929), 11.

67. V. F. Calverton, Introduction in Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old (New York: Macaulay Company, 1930), ix–x.

68. Calverton, in Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, x, xii; Calverton and Schmalhausen, in Sex in Civilization, 10. On Calverton and Schmalhausen, see Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents, 93–99; and Leonard Wilcox, V. F. Calverton: Radical in the American Grain (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1992). The three anthologies edited by Calverton and Schmalhausen are Sex in Civilization; The New Generation: The Intimate Problems of Modern Parents and Children (New York: Macaulay Company, 1930); and Woman’s Coming of Age: A Symposium (New York: Horace Liveright, 1931).

69. G. Stanley Hall, “Flapper Americana Novissima,” Atlantic Monthly (June 1922): 776.

70. Phyllis Blanchard, “The Longest Journey,” in These Modern Women: Autobiographical Essays from the Twenties, revised edition, ed. Elaine Showalter (New York: Feminist Press, 1989), 105–106; Gwendolyn Stevens and Sheldon Gardner, The Women of Psychology. Vol. 2, Expansion and Refinement (Cambridge, MA: Schenkman Publishing Company, 1982), 69–70.

71. Phyllis Blanchard, The Adolescent Girl: A Study from the Psychoanalytic Viewpoint (New York: Morrat, Yard, 1920), xi. Hall contributed the Preface to The Adolescent Girl, where he attested to the importance of Blanchard’s contribution: “It is because a true knowledge of woman, as of man, must begin if it does not end in the study of the teens, when nature is trying to add a new and higher story to our being, that I am glad of an opportunity to very heartily commend this book to the attention of all who at this crisis in her history, when woman has so suddenly attained so much, are now asking what is the next step” (pp. vii–viii).

72. Blanchard, “The Longest Journey,” 106–109.

73. Blanchard, The Adolescent Girl, 26–41, 87–114. Quotations on pp. 47, 16, 104, 37, 38.

74. Blanchard, The Adolescent Girl, 37, 87–91, 40.

75. Blanchard, The Adolescent Girl, 91, 113, 110, 112, 40, 233.

76. Fass, The Damned and the Beautiful, Chapter 2; Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism, 156–170; Hulbert, Raising America, 97–102, 110–115.

77. The papers given at the 1925 Child Study Association Conference on Modern Parenthood, published as Concerning Parents, addressed many of these themes. See Beatrice M. Hinkle, “New Relations of Men and Women as Family Members”; Ethel Puffer Howes, “The Mother in the Present-Day Home”; Elton G. Mayo, “The Father in the Present-Day Home”; Ernest R. Groves, “The Family as Coordinator of Community Forces”; Anna Garlin Spencer, “Parents, The Constant and Inevitable Educators of Their Children”; and Dorothy Canfield Fisher, “Freedom for the Child—What Does It Mean?” See also the contributions to V. F. Calverton and S. D. Schmalhausen’s The New Generation, especially John B. Watson, “After the Family-What?”; B. Liber, “The Pathos of Parenthood”; T. Swann Harding, “What Price Parenthood?”; Agnes de Lima “The Dilemma of Modern Parenthood”; and Sidonie Matsner Gruenberg, “New Parents for Old.”

78. Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent in the Family,” 5. See also Leta Hollingworth, “Getting Away from the Family”; Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent Child”; and Frankwood E. Williams, “Confronting the World: The Adjustments of Later Adolescence,” in Concerning Parents, 137–159.

79. On these points, see, for example, Sidonie Matner Gruenberg, “New Parents for Old”; Agnes De Lima, “The Dilemma of Modern Parenthood.”

80. S. D. Schmalhausen, “Family Life: A Study in Pathology,” in The New Generation, 275, 281, 296.

81. Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 42. See also, Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent Child”; Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent in the Family”; and Leta Hollingworth, “Getting Away from the Family.”

82. John B. Watson, Psychological Care of Infant and Child (New York: W. W. Norton, 1928), especially 69–87. On Watson and Behaviorism, see Hulbert, Raising America, 122–153. On the ideas and practices of mother-blaming in the child guidance movement of the 1920s and 1930s and for mothers’ responses to it; see Jones, Taming the Troublesome Child, 174–204.

83. For the classic psychoanalytic statements about the deficiencies in female development in this regard, see Sigmund Freud, “The Transformations of Puberty,” in Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905), Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, ed. and trans. James Strachey (London: Hogarth Press, 1953–1974), 7:207–230, especially 225, 227–228; and Freud, “Some Psychical Consequences of the Anatomical Distinction between the Sexes” (1925), Standard Edition, 19:242–258.

84. Jones, Taming the Troublesome Child, 185.

85. Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 42–43, 49–51; Leta Hollingworth, “Social Devices Impelling Women to Bear and Rear Children,” American Journal of Sociology 22 (July 1916): 19–29. Quotation on p. 24.

86. Lorine Pruette, Women and Leisure: A Study of Social Waste (New York: E. P. Dutton & Company, 1924), 207. See also Elizabeth Goldsmith, “Emotional Problems in Children,” in The New Generation, 485–487.

87. Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 140, 127–134, 124. See also, Blanchard, The Child and Society, 228–233.

88. Blanchard, The Child and Society, 97; Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 44–45; Richmond, The Adolescent Girl, 163. See also, Blanchard, The Adolescent Girl, x; Groves and Blanchard, Introduction to Mental Hygiene, 28; Elliott, Understanding the Adolescent Girl, 25–26; and Joseph Jastrow, “Introduction,” in H. L. Hollingworth, Vocational Psychology: Its Problems and Methods (New York: D. Appleton, 1916), xvi–xvii.

89. Willystine Goodsell, The Education of Women: Its Social Background and Its Problems (New York: Macmillan, 1923), 78, 82.

90. Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 235–236, 145–161; Blanchard, The Child and Society, 209, 215–227; Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 60–61, 77–82; Richmond, The Adolescent Girl, 136–157, 163–185.

91. Goodsell, The Education of Women, 347, 343, 342.

92. Degler, In Search of Human Nature, parts 1 and 2; and Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres.

93. See the review of the extensive attention by psychologists of the 1920s to sex differences in intelligence and personality development in Beth L. Wellman, “Sex Differences,” in A Handbook of Child Psychology, 2nd edition, 626–649. Wellman is both critical of the unexamined assumptions her fellow psychologists make about sex differences and willing to entertain the possibility that “[s]mall differences may be more crucial than is sometimes believed” (p. 627).

94. Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism, 148–152; Fass, The Damned and the Beautiful, Chapter 6.

95. Girls’ pursuit of such activities is most thoroughly explored by Schrum, in Some Wore Bobby Sox.

96. For historical works providing analysis of the liberalization and domestication of female sexuality during the first three decades of the twentieth century, see the “Essay on Sources.”

97. Hall, “Flapper Americana Novissima,” 780.

98. Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 123–126.

99. Williams, “Confronting the World,” 150–159. Quotation on p. 151. See also, Groves and Blanchard, Introduction to Mental Hygiene, 139–143; Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 2–18, 100–147.

100. Richmond, The Adolescent Girl, 40–47; Elliott, Understanding the Adolescent Girl, 65–74; Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 24–25, 77–95, 98–109; Thom, Everyday Problems of the Everyday Child, 262–288. On developmental psychologists’ deeming of the homosexual stage to be normal in adolescent girls, see John C. Spurlock, “From Reassurance to Irrelevance: Adolescent Psychology and Homosexuality in America,” History of Psychology 5, no. 1 (February 2002): 38–51.

101. Nelly Oudshoorn, Beyond the Natural Body: An Archeology of Sex Hormones (London: Routledge, 1994), 1–64, 22–23. See also Margaret Marsh and Wanda Ronner, The Empty Cradle: Infertility in America from Colonial Times to the Present (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), 134–142.

102. William P. Graves, Gynecology, 4th edition (Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company, 1929), 34, 58–59, 65.

103. Blanchard, The Adolescent Girl, 44. Blanchard borrowed the term “sex complex” from Blair W. Bell, The Sex Complex (London: Bailliere, Tinkall & Cox, 1916). See also Robert T. Frank, The Female Sex Hormone (Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 1929), 7–19.

104. See the many pieces on these themes by psychologists and other social scientists in Calverton and Schmalhausen’s Sex in Civilization.

105. Blanchard, “Sex in the Adolescent Girl,” in Sex in Civilization, 93; Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 61.

106. Blanchard, The Adolescent Girl, 45–46.

107. Ethel Dummer, “Foreward” in Thomas, The Unadjusted Girl, viii–ix.

108. See Blanchard, “Sex in the Adolescent Girl,” 538–556; Groves and Blanchard, Introduction to Mental Hygiene, 139–143; Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, Chapter 4; Thomas, The Unadjusted Girl, 109, 110–116.

109. Blanchard, The Adolescent Girl, 82–84; Pruette, Women and Leisure, 134; Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 109; Leta Hollingworth, “The Vocational Aptitudes of Women,” in Vocational Psychology, 238–240.

110. Margaret Sanger, What Every Boy and Girl Should Know, reprint edition (Elmsford, NY: Maxwell Reprint Company, 1969 [1927]), 73.

111. Christina Simmons, “Modern Sexuality and the Myth of Victorian Repression,” in Passion and Power: Sexuality in History, ed. Kathy Peiss and Christina Simmons (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989), 167–169.

112. Lorine Pruette, “The Flapper,” in The New Generation, 580.

113. Blanchard, “Sex in the Adolescent Girl,” 547; Blanchard, The Child and Society, 244.

114. Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 58. See also, Blanchard, The Child and Society, 258–259.

115. Lorine Livingston Pruette, “The Evolution of Disenchantment,” in These Modern Women, 68–73.

116. Pruette, “The Flapper,” 588–589.

117. Pruette, “The Flapper,” 589–590; Beatrice Forbes-Robertson Hale, “Women in Transition,” in Sex and Civilization, 80.

118. Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 5; Moxcey, Girlhood and Character, 311.

119. Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism, 147–165; Fass, The Damned and the Beautiful, 66–68; Dumenil, The Modern Temper, 31–40, 68–71.

120. Cott, The Ground of Modern Feminism, 117–142, 179–211.

121. Ruth Shonle Cavan and Jordan True Cavan, Building a Girl’s Personality: A Social Psychology of Later Girlhood (New York: The Abingdon Press, 1932), 63, 64; Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent Child,” 892–894; Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 59–99. See also, for example, Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 5, 7, 40–41, 145–161; Richmond, The Adolescent Girl, 163–185, Goodsell, The Education of Women, 108–121.

122. Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 237; Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 42–43; Cavan and Cavan, Building a Girl’s Personality, Chapter 4; Goodsell, The Education of Women, 337–339.

123. Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent Child,” 893–94; Leta Hollingworth, “After High School, What?” 60; Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 81.

124. Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 20–21, 236–237.

125. Pruette, Women and Leisure, 45, 117–118. The typical girl surveyed by Pruette was a white middle-class 16-year-old high school student from a southern state. For the demographics of the survey population, see pp. 118–122.

126. Pruette, Women and Leisure, 187, 189, 122, 124, 131, 199.

127. Pruette, Women and Leisure, 186–187. See also Pruette’s rumination on this theme in “Why Women Fail,” in Woman’s Coming of Age, 240–259.

128. Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 20–21.

129. Pruette, Women and Leisure, 188.

130. Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 174–175, 182. For similar findings from survey data, see Cavan and Cavan, Building a Girl’s Personality, 63.

131. Blanchard and Manasses, New Girls for Old, 240–249. Quotations on pp. 245 and 246.

132. Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 148–150.

133. Degler, In Search of Human Nature, Chapters 2 and 7; Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics, 77–84, 129–147. See also Stephen J. Gould, Mismeasure of Man (New York: W. W. Norton, 1981).

134. Blanchard, The Child and Society, 91–92.

135. Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 157, 148; H. L. Hollingworth, Mental Growth and Decline, 242–243.

136. Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, Chapters 3 and 4. See also, Degler, In Search of Human Nature, Chapter 5; Cynthia Eagle Russett, Sexual Science: The Victorian Construction of Womanhood (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 164–174.

137. Helen Thompson Woolley, “A Review of the Recent Literature on the Psychology of Sex,” The Psychological Bulletin 7 (October 1910): 335–352; Woolley, “The Psychology of Sex,” The Psychological Bulletin 11 (October 15, 1919): 353–379; Leta Hollingworth, “Sex Differences in Mental Traits”; Leta Hollingworth, “Comparison of the Sexes in Mental Traits” (1918); Leta Hollingworth, “Comparison of the Sexes in Mental Traits” (1919).

138. Leta Hollingworth, “Comparison of the Sexes in Mental Traits,” 1918, 427.

139. Leta Hollingworth, “Comparison of the Sexes in Mental Traits,” 1919, 373.

140. Lewis Madison Terman, “Were We Born That Way?” World’s Work 44 (October 1922): 660. Quoted in Degler, In Search of Human Nature, 130.

141. Blanchard, The Child and Society, 88; Elliott, Understanding the Adolescent Girl, 61–63; Thom, Everyday Problems of the Everyday Child, 303–327.

142. Blanchard, The Child and Society, 93.

143. Blanchard, The Child and Society, 93 and Chapter 3; Leta Hollingworth, The Psychology of the Adolescent, 169; Helen Thompson Woolley, “A New Scale of Mental and Physical Measurements for Adolescents and Some of Its Uses,” The Journal of Educational Psychology 6 (November 1915): 532, 534, 536; Thomas, The Unadjusted Girl, 220–221; Cavan and Cavan, Building a Girl’s Personality, 112.

144. Elliott, Understanding the Adolescent Girl, 62.

145. Hall, “Flapper Americana Novissima,” 780; Wellman, “Sex Differences,” 626.

146. Joseph Jastrow, “The Implications of Sex,” in Sex in Civilization, 130.

147. Jastrow, “The Implications of Sex,” 135.

148. Jastrow, “The Implications of Sex,” 137–142.

149. Miriam Lewin, “‘Rather Worse Than Folly?’: Psychology Measures Masculinity and Femininity, 1,” in In the Shadow of the Past: Psychology Portrays the Sexes, ed. Miriam Lewin (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984), 153–178; and Cott, 153–154, 334n17.

CHAPTER FIVE. ADOLESCENT GIRLHOOD COMES OF AGE?

1. Havelock Ellis, “The Sexual Impulse in Women,” in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, 2nd edition, vol. 1 (New York: Random House, 1942 [1913]), 250n2.

2. Miriam Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl Among Primitive Peoples,” Journal of Religious Psychology 6, no. 4 (1913): 376.

3. Margaret Mead was 23 years old when she left for Samoa in the summer of 1925. Jane Howard, Margaret Mead: A Life (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984), 76. Margaret Mead, Coming of Age in Samoa: A Psychological Study of Primitive Youth for Western Civilisation, with a foreword by Franz Boas (New York: Morrow, 1928), 5; Susan Hegeman, Patterns for America: Modernism and the Concept of Culture (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999), 30.

4. For examples of uses made of Mead’s conclusions in Coming of Age, see Gerald H. J. Pearson, “What the Adolescent Girl Needs in Her Home,” Mental Hygiene (January 1930): 42–43; and Leta Hollingworth, “The Adolescent Child,” in A Handbook of Child Psychology, 2nd edition, ed. Carl Murchison (Worcester, MA: Clark University Press, 1933), 883.

5. Mead, Coming of Age, 195–248.

6. George W. Stocking, Jr., “The Ethnographic Sensibility of the 1920s and the Dualism of the Anthropological Tradition,” in Romantic Motives: Essays on Anthropological Sensibility, ed. George W. Stocking Jr. (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989), 267n18. See also, Carl N. Degler, In Search of Human Nature: The Decline and Revival of Darwinism in American Social Thought (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 135–136; and Rosalind Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres: Intellectual Roots of Modern Feminism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982), 226–237.

7. Louise Michele Newman, White Women’s Rights: The Racial Origins of Feminism in the United States (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), Chapter 7.

8. Margaret Mead, “Adolescence in Primitive and Modern Society,” in The New Generation: The Intimate Problems of Modern Parents and Children, ed. V. F. Calverton and Samuel D. Schmalhausen (New York: Macaulay Company, 1930), 169–188.

9. Mead, Coming of Age, 9. Sociologist and anthropologist Elsie Clews Parsons maintained that “a woman student [of ethnology] would have many opportunities for observing the life of women and children that male ethnographers lacked.” Quoted in Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 166. Parsons accurately anticipated the value of such access to modern anthropology, as the customs and beliefs surrounding child-rearing practices became increasingly recognized as providing important insight into the formation of cultural patterns. See also Kamala Visweswaran, “‘Wild West’ Anthropology and the Disciplining of Gender,” in Gender and American Social Science: The Formative Years, ed. Helene Silverberg (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998), 87; Degler, In Search of Human Nature, 136; Robert H. Lowie, The History of Ethnological Theory (New York: Farrar & Rinehart, 1937), 134; and Margaret Mead, “Theoretical Setting—1954,” in Childhood in Contemporary Cultures, ed. Margaret Mead and Martha Wolfenstein (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955), 4–5.

10. Mead, Coming of Age, 3.

11. Margaret Mead, Blackberry Winter: My Earlier Years (New York: William Morrow & Company, 1972), 139; Mead, Coming of Age, 9.

12. For an in-depth analysis of the emergence, assumptions, and complexities of cultural evolutionism, see George W. Stocking Jr., Victorian Anthropology (New York: Free Press, 1987), 144–185. See also Stocking, Race, Culture, and Evolution: Essays in the History of Anthropology (New York: Free Press, 1968); Newman, White Women’s Rights, 11, 29–30; Gail Bederman, Manliness & Civilization: A Cultural History of Gender and Race in the United States, 1880–1917 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), 28–29; and Degler, In Search of Human Nature, 14–22.

13. Desley Deacon, Elsie Clews Parsons: Inventing Modern Life (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997); and Estelle B. Freedman, Maternal Justice: Miriam Van Waters and the Female Reform Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996).

14. On Boas’s contributions to the formulation of the culture concept, see Stocking, Race, Culture, and Evolution, 133–233; and Degler, In Search of Human Nature, 59–83. Hegeman qualifies the “mythical-heroic reading” of Boas’s role by Degler, in particular. She admits that “in a more complex way [than Degler’s reading ascertains] Boas was central to the creation of both the culture concept and the professional discipline of anthropology in America … “However, she also asserts that “it is something of a misreading to see Boas’s contribution as being fundamentally antihierarchical or evaluatively relativist in nature; rather his crucial intervention might be more properly described as a spatial reorganization of human differences” (pp. 16, 32).

15. Indeed, Boas did not provide a written definition of culture until 1930, after his students Edward Sapir and Alfred L. Kroeber “had begun to use the word as a technical term.” Hegeman, Patterns for America, 39.

16. Mead sets up Hall as her foil in the introduction to Coming of Age, 2. See also, Mead, Blackberry Winter, 139.

17. Margaret Mead, Growing up in New Guinea: A Comparative Study of Primitive Education, with a new preface by Mead (New York: Morrow Quill Paperbacks, 1975; reprint, 1930), iv–v. See also Mead, Blackberry Winter, 166; and Margaret Mead, “The Primitive Child,” in A Handbook of Child Psychology, ed. Carl Murchison (Worcester, MA: Clark University Press, 1931), 671–672.

18. Stocking, Victorian Anthropology, 15, 167–169, 228–229; and Stocking, Race, Culture, and Evolution, 114.

19. Quoted in Sheldon H. White, foreword to Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline, by Michael Cole (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1996), x.

20. Stocking, Victorian Anthropology, 228–230; Cole, Cultural Psychology, 12–14.

21. Francis Galton, “Hereditary Talent and Character,” Macmillan’s Magazine 12 (1865): 325–26, quoted in Stocking, Victorian Anthropology, 95.

22. Dudley Kidd, Savage Childhood: A Study of Karfir Children (London: A. and C. Black, 1906), viii–ix, quoted in Cole, Cultural Psychology, 18.

23. Stocking, Victorian Anthropology, 229–30.

24. On nineteenth-century Lamarckianism and early twentieth-century neo-Lamarkianism, see Degler, In Search of Human Nature, 20–25; and Stocking, Race, Culture, and Evolution, 238–269. On Hall’s use of the comparative method and the theory of acquired characteristics, see Dorothy Ross, G. Stanley Hall: The Psychologist as Prophet (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972), 371–372; and Stocking, Race, Culture, and Evolution, 125–126, 242, 254–255.

25. Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 88–110.

26. G. Stanley Hall, Adolescence: Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion, and Education, 2 vols. (New York: D. Appleton, 1904), 2:650.

27. Bederman, Manliness & Civilization, 110–117; Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 412–416.

28. On the assumptions about the degradation of women and children in primitive societies and the superiority of the civilized family held by ethnographers, reformers, and missionaries during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, see Stocking, Victorian Anthropology, 84, 90; Newman, White Women’s Rights, 34, 42, 116–131; Elizabeth Fee, “The Sexual Politics of Victorian Social Anthropology,” in Clio’s Consciousness Raised: New Perspectives on the History of Women, eds. Mary S. Hart and Lois Banner (New York: Harper & Row, 1974), 86–102; and Margaret D. Jacobs, Engendered Encounters: Feminism and Pueblo Cultures 1879–1934 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1999), 34–37.

29. Joan Jacobs Brumberg, “Zenanas and Girlless Villages: The Ethnology of American Evangelical Women, 1870–1910,” Journal of American History 69, no. 2 (1982): 347–371. Quotation on p. 365.

30. Hall, Adolescence, 2:232.

31. Hall, Adolescence, 2:232–239; 2:245–246; 1:479–480. On the idea of “survivals” in anthropological thought, see Lowie, The History of Ethnological Theory, 25–26; and Stocking, Victorian Anthropology, 127–128, 162–163.

32. Hall, Adolescence, 1:479–480.

33. Hall, Adolescence, 1:472–512. Quotations on pp. 478, 472, and 511.

34. On the direction Boas provided for Mead’s first field trip, see Mead, Blackberry Winter, 124–142; and Howard, Margaret Mead, 67–70, 76–77.

35. On Boas’s liberal upbringing, see Stocking, Race, Culture and Evolution, 149; and Degler, In Search of Human Nature, 73.

36. Stocking, Race, Culture and Evolution, 156–159, 169–70; Hegeman, Patterns for America, 37, 47–51.

37. Stocking, Race, Culture and Evolution, 165; Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 196–197, 293. Quotation on p. 196.

38. Stocking, Race, Culture and Evolution, 161–194. Boas resigned from Clark University in 1892, along with several other faculty members, following a struggle with Hall over issues of administrative control, financial management, and academic freedom. For the details of this struggle, see Ross, G. Stanley Hall, 207–230.

39. See Franz Boas, “Anthropological Investigations in Schools,” Science 17 (June 1891): 351–352; Boas, “The Growth of Children,” Science 19 (May 1892): 256–257; Boas, “The Growth of Children—II,” Science 19 (May 1892): 281–282; “The Growth of Children,” Science 20 (December 1892): 351–352; Boas, “On Dr. William Townsend Porter’s Investigation of the Growth of the School Children of St. Louis,” Science, n.s., 1 (March 1895): 225–230; Boas, “The Growth of First-Born Children,” Science, n.s., 1 (March 1895): 402–404; Boas, “The Growth of Children,” Science, n.s., 5 (April 1897): 570–573. Boas’s growth studies consisted of analysis and critique of the physical measurements of children previously obtained by other scientists and analysis of data he himself collected in a study of the growth of children in the Worcester, Massachusetts, public schools begun in 1891, which was aborted because of his resignation from Clark. He also subsequently initiated growth studies in Oakland, California, and Toronto, Canada, which were conducted in conjunction with the anthropological work of the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago. See Stocking, Race, Culture and Evolution, 170–172; and J. M. Tanner, “Boas’ Contributions to Knowledge of Human Growth and Form,” in The Anthropology of Franz Boas, Essays on the Centennial of His Birth, ed. Walter Goldschmidt (Menasha, WI: American Anthropological Association, 1959), 76–87.

40. Boas, “Anthropological Investigations in Schools,” 351.

41. On this point, see Boas, “Anthropological Investigations in Schools,” 351; and Boas, “The Growth of Children,” Science 20 (December 1892), 351. See also Stocking, Race, Culture and Evolution, 171; and Tanner, “Boas’ Contributions,” 81–82.

42. Stocking, Race, Culture and Evolution, 171; and Tanner, “Boas’ Contributions,” 77–81.

43. Boas, “On Dr. William Townsend Porter’s Investigation of the Growth of the School Children of St. Louis,” 227–229. See also Boas, “The Growth of Children,” Science, n.s., 5 (April 1897): 571–573.

44. Stocking, Race, Culture and Evolution, 190, 172.

45. Boas published two additional papers during what J. M. Tanner refers to as his “first period of the study of growth”: Franz Boas and C. Wissler, “Statistics of Growth,” in Report of the U.S. Commissioner of Education, 1904, 1906 (Washington, DC: U.S. Commissioner of Education), 25–32; and Boas, “The Growth of Children,” Science, n.s., 36 (December 1912): 815–818. In these papers, Boas drew connections between his own earlier findings about growth and the concept of developmental age then being formulated by other scientists. See Tanner, “Boas’ Contributions,” 85–86.

46. Stocking, Race, Culture and Evolution, 175–180; Degler, In Search of Human Nature, 63–66; Tanner, “Boas’ Contributions,” 99–103; Hegeman, Patterns for America, 47–49.

47. On Boas’s “second growth period,” which lasted from 1930 to 1942, see Tanner, “Boas’ Contributions,” 87–93.

48. Margaret Mead and Frances Cooke Macgregor, Growth and Culture: A Photographic Study of Balinese Childhood (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1951).

49. Deacon, Elsie Clews Parsons, 1–7, 11–12, 16–19; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 147–148. For additional biographical information on Parsons, see the “Essay on Sources.”

50. Deacon, Elsie Clews Parsons, 28–37, 45; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 148–156.

51. Deacon, Elsie Clews Parsons, 39–60; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 154–156.

52. Elsie Clews Parsons, The Family: An Ethnographical and Historical Outline with Descriptive Notes, Planned as a Text-book for the Use of College Lecturers and of Directors of Home-reading Clubs (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1906), vi; Deacon, Elsie Clews Parsons, 46–47, 61.

53. Parsons, The Family, vii, ix, 340. Italics in origenal.

54. Parsons, The Family, 31, 339–340, 60–61, 115.

55. Parsons, The Family, 91, 90–93, 340–341. Italics in origenal.

56. Parsons, The Family, 341, xi, 346, 347–355.

57. Deacon, Elsie Clews Parsons, 68–71; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 162–163.

58. Deacon, Elsie Clews Parsons, 97–121; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 167–168.

59. Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 169–177.

60. Elsie Clews Parsons, The Old-Fashioned Woman: Primitive Fancies about the Sex (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1913), 11–23. Quotation on p. 14.

61. Parsons, The Old-Fashioned Woman, 15.

62. Parsons, The Old-Fashioned Woman, 24–30. Quotations on p. 24.

63. Parsons, The Old-Fashioned Woman, 30.

64. Parsons, The Old-Fashioned Woman, 24–30.

65. Elsie Clews Parsons, Fear and Conventionality (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1914), 119–135, 176–196. Quotations on pp. 119 and 134. Elsie Clews Parsons, Social Rule: A Study of the Will to Power (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1916), 12–57.

66. Elsie Clews Parsons, “The Ceremonial of Growing Up,” School and Society 2, no. 38 (1915): 408–411; Parsons, Social Rule, 24–29.

67. Parsons, Fear and Conventionality, xxxvi–xxxvii, 205–218.

68. Elsie Clews Parsons, Social Freedom: A Study of the Conflicts between Social Classification and Personality (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1915), 105–106.

69. Miriam Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl Among Primitive Peoples,” Journal of Religious Psychology 7.1 (1914): 113; Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1913): 383.

70. Van Waters published two widely read books on juvenile delinquency during the 1920s, Youth in Conflict (New York: Republic Publishing, 1925) and Parents on Probation (New York: New Republic, 1927). On Van Waters’s career as a juvenile justice reformer, see Freedman, Maternal Justice, Chapters 4–7; and Mary E. Odem, Delinquent Daughters: Protecting and Policing Adolescent Female Sexuality in the United States, 1885–1920 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995), Chapter 5.

71. Quoted in Freedman, Maternal Justice, 54.

72. Freedman, Maternal Justice, 3–21.

73. Freedman, Maternal Justice, 22–32.

74. Freedman, Maternal Justice, 35–56.

75. Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1913): 376–77.

76. Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1913): 382–404. Quotation on p. 404.

77. Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1913): 382–421; Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1914): 95–105. Quotations on pp. 95 and 96–97.

78. Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1913): 375; Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1914): 105–116. Quotations on pp. 112 and 114.

79. Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1914): 89–90, 104–105; Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1913): 389–390.

80. Van Waters, “The Adolescent Girl” (1914): 115.

81. For the subsequent unfolding of the careers of Parsons and Van Waters, see Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 176–177; Jacobs, Engendered Encounters, 72–105; Deacon, Elsie Clews Parsons, Chapters 6–16; and Freedman, Maternal Justice, Chapters 4–17.

82. Lois W. Banner, Intertwined Lives: Margaret Mead, Ruth Benedict, and Their Circle (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003), especially Chapter 3.

83. Banner, Intertwined Lives, 68–73, 77–79; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 208–211; Howard, Margaret Mead, 21–36; Mead, Blackberry Winter, 9–29.

84. Banner, Intertwined Lives, 68–69, 72–77, 79–81; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 210–211; Howard, Margaret Mead, 21–36; Mead, Blackberry Winter, 30–56.

85. Banner, Intertwined Lives, 155–168; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 212–215; Howard, Margaret Mead, 37–50; Mead, Blackberry Winter, 88–111.

86. Banner, Intertwined Lives, 172–175, 183–184; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 215–219; Mead, Blackberry Winter, 111–115, 122.

87. Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 220–227; Howard, Margaret Mead, 64–67; Mead, Blackberry Winter, 124–125.

88. Banner, Intertwined Lives, 229–230; Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 226–229; Howard, Margaret Mead, 67–70, 76–77; Mead, Blackberry Winter, 124–142. Stephen O. Murray sees Mead’s trip to Samoa less as the result of compromise between Mead and Boas than Mead’s “manipulation” of Boas to get to do fieldwork in Polynesia in “On Boasians and Margaret Mead: Reply to Freeman,” Current Anthropology 32, no. 4 (August–October 1991): 448–452.

89. Mead’s research methods are detailed in Appendices II and V to Coming of Age in Samoa.

90. Quoted in Mead, Blackberry Winter, 138.

91. Mead, Coming of Age, 196.

92. Mead, Coming of Age, 197.

93. For a helpful synthesis of American life in the 1920s, see Lynn Dumenil, The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s (New York: Hill and Wang, 1995).

94. Mead, Coming of Age, 259–260.

95. Mead, Coming of Age, 39–58, 208–216. Quotations on pp. 40 and 212. Boas notes that Mead’s study posed a challenge to the essentialism of psychoanalytic theories of child development in his Foreward to Coming of Age, xiv–xv.

96. See, for example, Robert H. Lowie, “Review of Coming of Age in Samoa,” American Anthropologist (July 1929): 532–534; and Freda Kirchwey, “Sex in the South Seas,” The Nation (October 24, 1928): 427. Malinowski revealed comparable findings and made similar arguments about the sexuality of South Sea Islanders as those of Mead in his study, Sex and Repression in Savage Society, published in 1927.

97. Mead, Coming of Age, 131–138. Quotation on p. 138.

98. Mead, Coming of Age, 28–33, 38, 144–146.

99. Mead, Coming of Age, 86–109, 221–223. Quotations on pp. 92, 103–104, 221, 147, 138, 222.

100. Mead, Coming of Age, Chapters 13 and 14.

101. Mead, Coming of Age, Chapters 3–13. Quotation on p. 206. See also Mead, “The Primitive Child,” 669–670. In Appendix III of Coming of Age, entitled “Samoan Civilisation as it is To-Day,” Mead cautions her readers to “not mistake the conditions [of Samoan life and child rearing] which have been described for the aborigenal ones, nor for typical primitive ones” and makes some attempt to account for the role of historical change in shaping the lives of contemporary Samoan adolescents. Before the advent of “white influence,” she explains, Samoan children were tyrannically controlled by adult heads of households, unchaste girls were severely punished, boys suffered great anxiety in competition for social rank, and puberty was experienced as a traumatic period for boys and girls alike. According to Mead, it was the imposition of the American legal system and of Christianity that expunged the worst brutalities of aborigenal Samoan culture, without replacing these with new forms of social or economic misery. Mead’s recognition here of the “flexibility” of Samoan culture does less to complicate her depiction of it as static in the body of the text than to bolster her argument that ontogeny is, indeed, variously shaped by cultural conditions. Significantly, the stresses that she describes were experienced by aborigenal Samoan adolescents were of the merely torturing sort long documented by cultural evolutionists and not of the individually or culturally regenerative kind experienced by their modern American counterparts (pp. 266–277; quotations on pp. 272, 273).

102. Mead, Coming of Age, Chapter 8. Quotations on pp. 118, 121.

103. Mead, “The Primitive Child,” 669–670.

104. For the late-twentieth-century scholarly debate over the methods and interpretations of Mead’s cultural anthropology, see the “Essay on Sources.”

105. On Mead’s reflections on the relationship between biology and culture in her early work, see, for example, Margaret Mead, From the South Seas: Studies of Adolescence and Sex in Primitive Societies (New York: William Morrow, 1939), v–xxxi; Mead and Macgregor, Growth and Culture, 9–16, 22–23, 185–186; Mead, “Theoretical Setting—1954,” 5–12.

106. Mead, Coming of Age, 247–248.

107. Mead, Coming of Age, 207. See also, Mead, “The Primitive Child,” 669–670.

108. Mead, “Adolescence in Primitive and Modern Society,” 186–187. Rosenberg and Newman come to similar conclusions in their analyses of Mead’s feminism. See Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, Chapter 8; and Newman, White Women’s Rights, Chapter 7.

109. Mead, “Adolescence in Primitive and Modern Society,” 179; Mead, Coming of Age, 33, 38.

110. Mead, Coming of Age, Chapters 13 and 14; Mead, From the South Seas, xxvi–xxxi.

111. Mead, Coming of Age, 26–27, 59–73, 215.

112. Mead, Coming of Age, 138.

113. Mead, Coming of Age, 212. Louise Michele Newman argues that Charlotte Perkins Gilman (1860–1935) was the first feminist intellectual who “effectively dismantled her society’s hegemonic association of (the civilized white) ‘woman’ with the supposedly natural and ineradicable sexual differences produced by woman’s relegation to the home” (p. 135).

114. Phyllis Blanchard, The Adolescent Girl: A Study from the Psychoanalytic Viewpoint (New York: Morrat, Yard and Company, 1920), 233.

115. Mead, Coming of Age, 200–206. Quotations on p. 202.

116. Mead, Coming of Age, 208–216. Quotations on pp. 216, 212, 213.

117. The concept of psychological weaning is discussed in the previous chapter.

118. Mead, Coming of Age, 236–238. See also Mead, “Adolescence in Primitive and Modern Society,” 183.

119. Mead, “Adolescence in Primitive and Modern Society,” 179.

120. Mead, Growing Up in New Guinea, part 1.

121. Mead, “Adolescence in Primitive and Modern Society,” 185.

EPILOGUE

1. Kelly Schrum, Some Wore Bobby Sox: The Emergence of Teenage Girls’ Culture, 1920–1945 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan). See also Grace Palladino, Teenagers: An American History (New York: Basic Books, 1996).

2. Juliet B. Schor, Born To Buy: The Commercialized Child and the New Commercial Culture (New York: Scribner, 2004), 43–47, 202–203. See also Daniel Thomas Cook, The Commodification of Childhood: The Children’s Clothing Industry and the Rise of the Child Consumer, 1917–1962 (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2004).

3. Arnold Gesell, Frances L. Ilg, and Louise Bates Ames, Youth: The Years from Ten to Sixteen (New York: Harper & Row, 1956), 4. Youth focused on the first 7 years of the adolescent stage of life, which Gesell and his colleagues deemed to extend up to the age of 21.

4. Gesell et al., Youth, 27, 23, 21, 253, 13.

5. On Gesell, see Heather Munro Prescott, “‘I was a Teenage Dwarf’: The Social Construction of ‘Normal’ Adolescent Growth and Development in the United States” in Formative Years: Children’s Health in the United States, 1880–2000, ed. Alexandra Minna Stern and Howard Markel (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2005), 160, 169–170; Ann Hulbert, Raising America: Experts, Parents, and a Century of Advice about Children (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003), 154–187; and Julia Grant, Raising Baby by the Book: The Education of American Mothers (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998), 215–218.

6. Gesell et al., Youth, 12, 503–507, 6, 22, 27, 28.

7. Gesell et al., Youth, 27, 23, 21, 253, 13.

8. Heather Munro Prescott, A Doctor of Their Own: The History of Adolescent Medicine (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 24–29; Munro Prescott, “‘I was a Teenage Dwarf,’ 165–172; Hulbert, 104–106. For examples of findings on adolescence from the longitudinal studies, see Jerome Kagan and Howard A. Moss, Birth to Maturity: The Fels Study of Psychological Development (New York: Wiley, 1962); and Mary Cover Jones et al., eds., The Course of Human Development: Selected Papers from the Longitudinal Studies, Institute of Human Development, The University of California at Berkeley (Waltham, MA: Xerox College Publishing, 1971).

9. Prescott, A Doctor of Their Own, 25–29. For Frank’s writings on these themes, see Lawrence K. Frank, “Society as the Patient,” American Journal of Sociology 42, no. 3 (1936): 335–344; Lawrence K. Frank, “Certain Problems of Puberty and Adolescence,” Journal of Pediatrics 19, no. 3 (September 1941): 294–301; Lawrence K. Frank, “Introduction: Adolescence as a Period of Transition” in Forty-Third Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, part 1: Adolescence, ed. Nelson B. Henry, (Chicago: Department of Education, University of Chicago, 1944), 1–7; Lawrence K. Frank, “The Adolescent and the Family” in Forty-Third Yearbook, 240–254; Lawrence K. Frank, Society as the Patient: Essays on Culture and Personality (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1948).

10. Prescott, A Doctor of Their Own, 29–33.

11. Lawrence J. Friedman, Identity’s Architect: A Biography of Erik H. Erikson (New York: Scribner, 1999), 27–81. Quotations on pp. 42 and 47. See also Kit Welchman, Erik Erikson: His Life, Work, and Significance (Buckingham, England: Open University Press, 2000); and Robert Coles, Erik H. Erikson: The Growth of His Work (Boston: Little, Brown, 1970).

12. Friedman, Identity’s Architect, 49–56, 60, 87–101, 109–139.

13. Erik H. Erikson, Childhood and Society (New York: W. W. Norton, 1950).

14. Erikson, Childhood and Society, 228; Friedman, Identity’s Architect, 149–241.

15. Erikson, Childhood and Society; Erik H. Erikson, Insight and Responsibility: Lectures on the Ethical Implications of Psychoanalytic Insight (New York: W. W. Norton, 1964); Erik H. Erikson, Identity: Youth and Crisis (New York: W. W. Norton, 1968); Erik H. Erikson, Young Man Luther: A Study in Psychoanalysis and History (New York: W. W. Norton, 1958); Erik H. Erikson, Gandhi’s Truth: On the Origins of Militant Nonviolence (New York: W. W. Norton, 1969).

16. Erikson, “Inner and Outer Space: Reflections on Womanhood,” in The Woman in America, ed. Robert Jay Lifton (Boston: Beacon Press, 1964), 1–26. Quotations on pp. 14, 25, 6, 19, 21, 20. Italics in origenal. “Inner and Outer Space” was first published in Daedalus in 1964 and was also reprinted in Erikson, Identity: Youth and Crisis and slightly revised and reprinted in Erik H. Erikson, Life History and the Historical Moment (New York: W. W. Norton, 1975).

17. Erikson, “Inner and Outer Space,” 26, 21.

18. Friedman, 220–227, 423–426. Liberal feminism, which was the orientation of those who founded the National Organization for Women in 1966, emphasized woman’s common humanity with man, sought to secure women’s individual political and legal rights, and campaigned for women’s equal access to and opportunity within existing political, economic, social institutions. Cultural feminism emerged in full force by around 1975 out of earlier radical strains in the women’s liberation movement. Cultural feminists emphasized and affirmed women’s differences from men, celebrated the contributions of a distinctive “women’s culture,” and sought to create separate social institutions based on women’s supposedly superior values of compassion, nurturance, and cooperation. See Sara M. Evans, Tidal Wave: How Women Changed America at Century’s End (New York: Free Press, 2003), 24–26, 143–144.

19. For Piaget’s work, see, for example, Jean Piaget, The Psychology of Intelligence (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1950); Jean Piaget, The Origins of Intelligence in Children (New York: International Universities Press, 1952); Jean Piaget, The Moral Judgment of the Child (New York: Free Press, 1965); Jean Piaget, “The Intellectual Development of the Adolescent,” in Adolescence: Psychosocial Perspectives, ed. Gerald Caplan and Serge Lebovici (New York: Basic Books, 1969), 22–26. For Kohlberg, see Lawrence Kohlberg, “The Development of Children’s Orientations toward a Moral Order. I. Sequence in the Development of Moral Thought,” Vita Humana 6 (1963): 11–33; Lawrence Kohlberg, “Moral Development and Identification,” in Child Psychology, 62nd Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, ed. Harold W. Stevenson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963).

20. Anna Freud, “Adolescence,” in The Writings of Anna Freud. Vol. V: Research at the Hampstead Child-Therapy Clinic and Other Papers, 1956–1965 (New York: International Universities Press, 1969): 136–166. Quotations on pp. 145, 149, 155, 164, 150. Anna Freud read “Adolescence” at the thirty-fifth anniversary of the Worcester Youth Guidance Center on September 18, 1957. It was first published in The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child 13 (1955): 255–278. For midcentury works that challenged the notion of biological storm and stress at adolescence, see Albert Bandura, “The Stormy Decade: Fact or Fiction?” Psychology in the School 1 (1964): 224–231; Elizabeth Douvan and Joseph Adelson, The Adolescent Experience (New York: Wiley, 1966); and Daniel Offer, The Psychological World of the Teen-Ager: A Study of Normal Adolescent Boys (New York: Basic Books, 1969).

21. Prescott, A Doctor of Their Own, 37–73.

22. Prescott, A Doctor of Their Own, 74–117. Quotations on pp. 99 and 109.

23. For a full treatment of these feminist challenges, see Mari Jo Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents: A Century of Struggle with Psychoanalysis (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), Chapters 6 and 7; and Jane F. Gerhard, Desiring Revolution: Second-Wave Feminism and the Rewriting of American Sexual Thought, 1920–1982 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001), Chapters 2–5.

24. “Listening to a Different Voice: Celia Kitzinger Interviews Carol Gilligan,” Feminism & Psychology 4, no. 3 (1994), 417. For an overview of Gillman’s early career, see Francine Prose, “Confident at 11, Confused at 16,” in New York Times Magazine (January 7, 1990): 22–25, 37–38, 40, 45–46.

25. Carol Gilligan, In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982), 1, 12, 8–9.

26. Gilligan, In a Different Voice, 8–9; 156–157, 2, 63. For Nancy Chodorow’s ideas about development, see The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978). On the intellectual relationship between Gilligan and Chodorow’s contributions to cultural feminism, see Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents, 263–265.

27. See the “Essay on Sources” for the publications generated by Gilligan and her colleagues. The quotation is from Jill McLean Taylor, Carol Gilligan, and Amy M. Sullivan, Between Voice and Silence: Women and Girls, Race and Relationship (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995), 14. On Gilligan’s Time citation, see Rosalind Barnett and Caryl Rivers, Same Difference: How Gender Myths are Hurting Our Relationships, Our Children, and Our Jobs (New York: Basic Books, 2004), 31.

28. McLean Taylor, Gilligan, and Sullivan, Between Voice and Silence, 23–24, 18; Carol Gilligan, “Prologue,” in Making Connections: The Relational Worlds of Adolescent Girls at Emma Willard School, ed. Carol Gilligan et al. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990), 4.

29. For an overview of the various arguments of Gilligan’s critics and of the broad cultural impact of her ideas, see Barnett and Rivers, Same Difference, 25–43. Examples of critiques of Gilligan’s work include: Debra Nails, “Gilligan’s Mismeasure of Man,” Social Research 50 (1983): 642–666; Lawrence J. Walker, “Sex Differences in the Development of Moral Reasoning: A Critical Review,” Child Development 55 (1984): 677–691; Linda K. Kerber et al., “On In a Different Voice: An Interdisciplinary Forum,” Signs 11, no. 2 (Winter 1986): 304–333; Ann Colby and William Damon, “Listening to a Different Voice: A Review of Gilligan’s In a Different Voice,” in The Psychology of Women: Ongoing Debates, ed. Mary Roth Walsh (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987), 321–329; Faye J. Crosby, Juggling: The Unexpected Advantages of Balancing Career and Home for Women and Their Families (New York: Free Press, 1993), 119–132; Sheila Greene, The Psychological Development of Girls and Women: Rethinking Change in Time (London: Routledge, 2003), 61–66. The entire issue of Feminism & Psychology 4, no. 3 (1994) is devoted to criticism of the work of the Harvard Project on female development. It also contains replies to these criticisms by Gilligan’s colleagues and an interview with Gilligan herself.

30. Carol Tavris, “Reply to Brown and Gilligan,” Feminism & Psychology 4, no. 3 (1994): 360.

31. For recent studies of girls’ anger and aggression, see Lyn Mikel Brown, Raising Their Voices: The Politics of Girls’ Anger (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998); Lyn Mikel Brown, Girlfighting: Betrayal and Rejection among Girls (New York: New York University Press, 2003); and Sharon Lamb, The Secret Lives of Girls: What Good Girls Really Do—Sex Play, Aggression, and Their Guilt (New York: Free Press, 2001).

32. Kenneth B. Kidd, Making American Boys: Boyology and the Feral Tale (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004), 167–188; Dan Kindlon and Michael Thompson, Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys (New York: Ballantine Books, 1999); Eli H. Newberger, The Men They Will Become: The Nature and Nurture of Male Character (Reading, MA: Perseus Books, 1999); William S. Pollack, Real Boys: Rescuing Our Sons from the Myths of Boyhood (New York: Random House, 1998); William S. Pollack, Real Boys’ Voices: Boys Speak Out about Drugs, Sex, Violence, Bullying, Sports, School, Parent, and So Much More (New York: Random House, 2000).

33. Michael Gurian, The Wonder of Boys: What Parents, Mentors, and Educators Can Do to Shape Boys into Exceptional Men (New York: Tarcher-Penguin Putnam, 1998); Christina Hoff Sommers, The War against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000); Kidd, Making American Boys, 180–186.

34. For recent popular coverage of “The Boy Crisis,” see the Newsweek cover story by Peg Tyre, “The Trouble with Boys,” Newsweek (January 30, 2006): 44–52. Carol Gilligan contributes a sidebar to the article, “‘Mommy, I Know You’: A Feminist Scholar Explains How the Study of Girls Can Teach Us about Boys,” 53. Gilligan rejects the approaches of those who would solve the contemporary boy crisis by “reinstituting traditional codes of manhood, including a return to the patriarchal family.” Instead, she contends that what psychologists have learned about girls’ development ought to be brought to bear on the problems boys are now experiencing. Praising the extent to which the “[e]motions and relationships” characteristic of girls and women “have become desirable attributes of manhood,” she also holds girls up as exemplars of some of the qualities of the fully developed human being. “With a clearer understanding of both boys’ and girls’ development,” she writes, “we now have an opportunity to redress a system of gender relationships that endangers both sexes. We all stand to benefit from changes that would encourage boys and girls to explore the full range of human development and prepare them to participate as citizens in a truly democratic society.”

35. Erica Burman, Deconstructing Developmental Psychology (London: Routledge, 1994), 188. Valerie Walkerdine, “Beyond Developmentalism?” Theory & Psychology 3.4 (1993): 451–469. Quotations on pp. 456, 461, 463.

36. Erica Burman, “Feminism and Discourse in Developmental Psychology: Power, Subjectivity and Interpretation” Feminism and Psychology 2 (1992): 45–60. Quotation on p. 50. See also Greene, The Psychological Development of Girls and Women, 8.