Reynand Wu
In recent weeks, a discernible trend has emerged in the public sphere, showcasing women on the political right who appear to effortlessly straddle two seemingly contradictory archetypes of womanhood: the ambitious "girlboss" and the domestically focused "tradwife." This visible dual persona, increasingly prominent in conservative circles, illuminates an intricate and often overlooked connection between contemporary conservative womanhood and a particular strain of individualistic feminism, demanding closer scrutiny and analysis.
The Dual Persona in Public Life: A Modern Phenomenon
The juxtaposition of these two ideals has been vividly illustrated by recent public figures. Senator Katie Britt, for instance, chose to deliver her high-profile response to the State of the Union address from her kitchen, a setting traditionally associated with domesticity and the private sphere. This strategic backdrop, while seemingly innocuous, subtly reinforced an image of grounded, maternal femininity alongside her formidable political presence. Similarly, Michele Morrow, a conservative activist from North Carolina recently elected as the state’s Superintendent of Public Instruction, has consistently burnished her public image by emphasizing her roles as a wife and mother above all else. Her campaign narrative frequently highlighted her domestic credentials, positioning them as central to her leadership capabilities and moral authority, even as she pursued and achieved a significant public office.
These instances are not isolated anomalies but rather prominent examples of a broader cultural current. The #tradlife movement, which gained significant traction online around 2019, has cultivated an aesthetic and ideology centered on traditional gender roles. Tradwife influencers curate and perform a version of femininity that prioritizes devotion to home and family, often underpinned by the financial provision of a strong husband. Their online presence is characterized by meticulously crafted visuals: aprons, immaculate kitchens, perfectly coiffed hair, and carefully applied makeup, all set within serene domestic environments. They often share scratch recipes and domestic tips, presenting an idealized vision of homemaking that frequently belies the inherent chaos and demanding realities of raising young children and maintaining a household. This curated online existence, however, contains the very seeds of the "girlboss" mentality it appears to oppose.
Deconstructing the "Tradwife" Phenomenon: Choice and Entrepreneurship
While the tradwife archetype might evoke images of a bygone era, suggesting a "backward" mode of femininity and marriage, its contemporary manifestation is unmistakably modern, characterized by elements of "choice" and entrepreneurial spirit. Unlike historical instances where domestic roles were often dictated by societal norms or economic necessity, the modern tradwife actively chooses this lifestyle. More importantly, this choice is not merely a private commitment; it is often a public performance and a monetized endeavor. It is insufficient for a modern tradwife to simply focus on her husband and children; she must actively engage in self-promotion and content creation. She blogs, vlogs, and cultivates a significant online presence as an influencer, transforming her domestic life into a brand. This is precisely where the "girlboss" mentality, with its emphasis on individual agency, personal branding, and marketability, seamlessly integrates with the tradwife ideal.
The tradwife movement, far from being a simple rejection of modern feminism, can be understood as a complex response to its perceived failures and the pressures of contemporary life. Proponents argue that they are "opting out" of the vulnerability and constant stress of the modern labor market, which they often perceive as undervaluing women’s labor and imposing an untenable burden of "doing it all." Indeed, research consistently highlights the persistent gender pay gap, with women earning approximately 82 cents for every dollar earned by men, and facing significant barriers to advancement in corporate America. The median weekly earnings for full-time working women in the U.S. were $1,001 in the first quarter of 2024, compared to $1,217 for men, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Furthermore, women disproportionately bear the burden of unpaid care work, spending an average of 4.1 hours per day on domestic tasks and caregiving, compared to 2.5 hours for men, a disparity exacerbated for mothers. For many, the tradwife path is framed as a conscious decision to reclaim control over their lives and dedicate their energies to what they believe is most fulfilling.
Intriguingly, the tradwife phenomenon is not confined to a single demographic. There are, for instance, visible Black tradwife influencers, who articulate their choice as a deliberate escape from the double burden of racial and gender discrimination in the workplace, and the exhaustion of navigating both family responsibilities and corporate demands. They proudly assert their decision to prioritize family, aligning themselves with men in shoring up the traditional ideology of the father as the primary breadwinner, a model that has been steadily eroding in many Western societies. This deliberate choice, often showcased on successful social media channels, is presented as an accessible and desirable alternative, implicitly challenging the prevailing narratives of female empowerment through career advancement.
The Genesis and Evolution of "Girlboss Feminism"
To fully grasp the intricate connection between these two archetypes, it is crucial to understand the trajectory of "girlboss feminism." This particular brand of feminism gained widespread prominence with the publication of Sheryl Sandberg’s 2013 book, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead. Sandberg, then the Chief Operating Officer of Facebook, posited that women could achieve greater professional success by emulating men in the workplace – by being more assertive, negotiating for what they wanted, and "leaning in" to their careers. The book became a global bestseller, sparking a cultural phenomenon that encouraged individual ambition, self-advocacy, and a market-driven approach to female empowerment.
Lean In resonated deeply within corporate America and beyond, becoming a touchstone for a generation of women striving for professional recognition. It aligned with a broader neoliberal ethos that emphasizes individual responsibility, meritocracy, and market solutions to social problems. The message was clear: structural barriers to women’s advancement were surmountable through individual effort, strategic planning, and a dose of "chutzpah." This perspective quickly permeated popular culture, leading to the widespread adoption of "girlboss" as an aspirational label, synonymous with ambitious, successful, and independent women.
However, "girlboss feminism" soon faced significant criticism. Scholars and activists pointed out its inherent limitations, particularly its "colorblind" approach and its failure to adequately address systemic inequalities. Critics argued that Lean In‘s advice was primarily applicable to privileged, often white, middle-class women who already possessed significant social capital and resources. It overlooked the compounded challenges faced by women of color, single mothers, and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, for whom "leaning in" was often not a viable option due to deeply entrenched structural barriers like systemic racism, lack of affordable childcare, inadequate healthcare, and persistent wage discrimination.
Data consistently reveals the stubborn persistence of these structural issues. Beyond the gender pay gap, women remain significantly underrepresented in senior leadership positions across most industries. In 2023, women held only 28% of CEO positions at Fortune 500 companies. Furthermore, the cost of childcare in the U.S. is prohibitive for many families, often exceeding housing or college tuition costs. The average annual cost of infant care ranges from $8,000 to $24,000, placing immense financial strain on working parents, particularly mothers. The "myth of mutuality," as described by scholars, suggests an equitable division of labor in American families, yet women continue to shoulder a disproportionate share of domestic and caregiving responsibilities, even when working full-time. This reality often leads to burnout and career stagnation, undermining the very premise of "leaning in."
The Unseen Link: Entrepreneurship as the Bridge
The convergence of the girlboss and tradwife ideals becomes most evident in their shared emphasis on entrepreneurship and personal branding. While the girlboss strives to build a career empire, the tradwife builds a domestic empire, both leveraging digital platforms and market logic to validate and propagate their chosen lifestyles. The tradwife’s meticulous curation of her domestic life for public consumption – her blogs, vlogs, and social media channels – is a direct application of the girlboss’s entrepreneurial spirit. She is, in essence, an entrepreneur of domesticity, marketing her "choice" as an aspirational lifestyle product.
This shared embrace of entrepreneurialism is a critical hidden link. It transforms what might appear to be a regressive step (the tradwife) into a seemingly progressive "choice" within a neoliberal framework. By framing their lifestyle as a conscious, empowered decision that is then monetized or publicized, tradwives adopt the very individualistic, market-driven logic that underpins girlboss feminism. Both archetypes, in their distinct ways, are products of a culture that valorizes individual effort, personal responsibility, and the ability to self-brand and monetize one’s identity. This convergence highlights how deeply embedded market feminism has become across the political spectrum, subtly shifting the focus from collective action and structural change to individual adaptation and self-optimization.
Societal Implications and "The Gender Order of Neoliberalism"
As explored in depth in The Gender Order of Neoliberalism, the United States has historically leveraged the perceived "empowerment" of its women as a form of soft power on the global stage. This narrative positions American women as autonomous, career-driven, and liberated, contrasting them with women in other parts of the world who are often depicted as "backward," oppressed, or trapped in patriarchal cultures. This self-congratulatory narrative, however, often overlooks the complex realities and persistent inequalities faced by American women themselves.
The current landscape, where women are pushed to navigate the narrow divide between being a hyper-successful "girlboss" and an idealized "tradwife," underscores a profound impoverishment of the feminist imagination. Historically, transnational feminist organizing in the mid-20th century championed a vastly different vision of empowerment. In the 1950s and 1960s, these movements advocated for comprehensive structural changes: reproductive justice, ensuring women’s autonomy over their bodies; fair pay for fair work, addressing economic inequality; universal childcare, recognizing the societal value of care work and supporting working parents; universal healthcare, ensuring access to essential services for all; and fair trade between nations, promoting global economic justice.
These expansive, collective visions of empowerment have largely receded from contemporary political discourse, replaced by a focus on individual coping mechanisms and lifestyle choices. The inviting visuals for community kitchens, childcare collectives, and widely available healthcare – the societal infrastructures that would genuinely liberate women from the burden of "doing it all" – are conspicuously absent from mainstream media and political platforms. Instead, the discourse remains tethered to individual women’s choices, whether it’s excelling in a demanding corporate environment or meticulously curating a domestic one.
The profound implication of this narrowed feminist imagination is that women continue to function as America’s de facto social safety net. When public policies fail to provide adequate support for families – affordable childcare, paid parental leave, universal healthcare – the burden invariably falls on individual women to compensate. They are expected to navigate these systemic deficiencies through personal resilience, private solutions, or by "opting out" entirely, effectively privatizing what should be public responsibilities. This perpetuates a cycle where women’s labor, whether paid or unpaid, remains undervalued and essential to the functioning of society, yet largely unsupported by robust public infrastructure.
The Way Forward: Reimagining Empowerment Beyond Dichotomies
The current societal framing of women’s roles, oscillating between the "girlboss" and "tradwife" archetypes, fails to address the fundamental structural issues that constrain genuine empowerment. Moving forward requires a radical reimagining of what a joyful, equitable life could look like for all women, irrespective of their career or domestic aspirations. This necessitates a shift from individualistic solutions to collective action and systemic reform.
A truly empowered future would prioritize policies that create a supportive environment for all families and individuals. This includes robust investments in universal, high-quality, and affordable childcare, ensuring that parents, especially mothers, are not forced to choose between career and family. It demands the implementation and enforcement of fair pay legislation to close the persistent gender wage gap. It calls for comprehensive universal healthcare that addresses women’s specific health needs and reduces financial strain. Furthermore, it requires a cultural shift that equally values both paid labor and unpaid care work, recognizing that both are essential for societal well-being.
By moving beyond the narrow, often contradictory, confines of the girlboss and tradwife paradigms, society can foster a broader, more inclusive vision of empowerment. This vision would not only celebrate individual achievement but also champion the collective infrastructure that enables all women to thrive, to pursue their aspirations – whether in the public or private sphere – without having to bear the disproportionate burden of societal neglect. It would mean cultivating a political imagination that can envision and advocate for community-centric solutions, rather than leaving women to navigate systemic inequalities as individual entrepreneurs of their own lives.
