Camilla Jessen
Fascist regimes promoted narratives of domestic bliss, but they relied on women’s unpaid labor.
Authoritarian regimes have long relied on women’s labor to support the state, using narratives of domestic bliss to mask systemic exploitation.
In the United States today, similar dynamics are being reinforced through online platforms and political messaging.
This was reported by Digi24.
The “Cradle and the Ladle” in Nazi Germany
In Nazi Germany, Gertrud Scholtz-Klink was the head of the Nazi women’s office from 1934 to 1945.
She promoted domestic and reproductive duties as a national imperative, known as “the cradle and the ladle.”
Her audience included millions of women in Nazi associations and subscribers to Frauen Warte, the regime’s women’s magazine.
Glorifying Housework and Motherhood
Scholtz-Klink glorified housework and motherhood, publishing lifestyle advice that emphasized clean homes, healthy children, and natural beauty. All while maintaining the illusion of choice.
Historian Claudia Koonz noted that these publications functioned much like modern social media.
Motherhood as Political Instrument
Nazi propaganda, including financial incentives and awards for prolific mothers, framed women’s reproductive labor as a civic duty.
Ordinary women were complicit in promoting racialized and authoritarian ideals, effectively acting as agents of the state within the home.
Authoritarian Family Structures
Thinkers like Theodor Adorno and George Lakoff have observed that authoritarian regimes institutionalize male authority through family hierarchies.
Women are made subservient, and children are raised to internalize fear and conformity, preparing them to accept the broader social order.
Parallels in Contemporary US Politics
Under the Trump administration, policies promoting traditional gender roles, limiting reproductive rights, and curbing workplace equality echo past authoritarian strategies.
Pro-natalist rewards, like $1,000 government accounts for newborns and discussions of a “National Medal of Motherhood,” incentivize women to prioritize childbearing over career or autonomy.
The Womanosphere
The Womanosphere, a digital network of influencers and content creators, promotes ideals of traditional femininity, motherhood, and domesticity.
Influencers such as Alex Clark, Candace Owens, Riley Gaines, and Allie Beth Stuckey create content that reinforces anti-LGBT, white supremacist, and Christian nationalist values, often cloaked in lifestyle, wellness, or “cottagecore” aesthetics.
Reactionary Feminism Online
Digital content often frames domesticity as women’s natural role, discouraging financial independence and professional ambition.
This “reactionary feminism” argues that devotion to home and family aligns with evolutionary and societal imperatives, while sidelining the realities of modern labor, childcare, and healthcare challenges.
Historical and Modern Exploitation
Just as Nazi and fascist regimes relied on unpaid female labor to prop up the state, the Womanosphere encourages women to internalize responsibility for social and economic stability at the household level.
Cuts to social safety nets, healthcare, and education in the US further intensify this reliance.
Economic and Social Pressures
With reduced government support for childcare, education, and healthcare, women are increasingly tasked with roles that combine domestic labor, education, and health provision, essentially performing functions that were previously supported by the state.
Influencers frame this as personal choice or moral duty rather than systemic exploitation.
The Illusion of Domestic Fulfillment
Content in the Womanosphere romanticizes domesticity—gardening, cooking, and child-rearing—as fulfilling and aspirational.
Yet, it obscures systemic inequities, such as racial disparities in maternal mortality, restricted reproductive rights, and financial dependence on male partners.
Power, Labor, and Gender
Historically and today, authoritarian and reactionary movements have relied on women’s labor—both paid and unpaid—to uphold societal structures.
Whether through propaganda or digital influence, the narrative of women’s “domestic happiness” continues to function as a tool for control, masking structural inequality and limiting autonomy.
This article is made and published by Camilla Jessen, which may have used AI in the preparation
