UW News

October 22, 1996

Today’s anti-immigrant sentiment isn’t unique

Immigration is one of the hot button issues of the 1990s and that’s nothing new, according to a University of Washington professor and author of a new book that is one of the first to focus on the experiences of women immigrants.

Sociologist Kathie Friedman-Kasaba, author of “Memories of Migration,” which looks at Italian and Russian-Jewish women immigrants, says today’s anti-immigration sentiment is more pronounced than attitudes during the 1881-1924 period. That was the so-called open door era when an estimated 26 million people, primarily European, poured into the United States. However, most of the anti-immigrant feelings and policies then were directed at Asians, leading to the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, which barred further Chinese immigration, and a 1917 agreement with Japan, which slowed male Japanese immigration to the U.S.

But women also were targets of prejudicial attitudes during the open door era, according to Friedman-Kasaba, who is an assistant professor of liberal studies at the UW’s Tacoma campus. She says women not only didn’t find the streets of America paved with gold, as many newcomers imagined, but they had to overcome wide-spread beliefs that immigrating females were a moral threat to the United States — either already being prostitutes or likely to be lured into prostitution by criminal elements.

“Immigration was a mixed bag for women. For some, particularly older women, immigration was a disaster. Many older women were very lonely and language was a major barrier. A number of these women were confined to ethnic communities and the back rooms of stores where they never earned money.

“But for many younger women, immigration was an opportunity and they didn’t regret it,” explains Friedman-Kasaba. She adds that the experiences of Russian-Jewish and Italian immigrants are somewhat analogous to the situation experienced today by Cuban and Mexican immigrants, respectively..

“Jews came as refugees and didn’t have the opportunity to return to Europe, while some Italians, primarily men, went back and forth to Italy annually. Many Italians never intended to settle in the United States permanently, but were trapped by World War I and were forced to stay here. Today, Cuban immigrants can’t return home because of the political situation, while some Mexican men migrate here seasonally year after year.” Jewish and Italian immigrants also had experiences similar to those of today’s military families, according to Friedman-Kasaba.

“Most women who immigrated followed their husbands and weren’t pioneers. They were heads of households in Russia and Italy after their husbands left for the U.S. These women are comparable to contemporary military wives who have to adjust when moving from post to post or when their husbands have overseas duty. Part of the time they are on their own — taking care of the family, running the budget, paying the bills — and then they rejoin a more traditional family.”

Friedman-Kasaba believes one of the big differences between the Russian-Jewish and Italian immigrants was the type of organizations with which each was involved. She says a number of Jewish groups were created to aid immigrants. In addition, such groups as the National Council of Jewish Women helped create a more protective environment for women when they arrived at Ellis Island in New York, insulating them from anti- immigrant feelings.

Italian women, on the other hand, were more exposed to anti-immigrant sentiment and so-called Americanizing groups that attempted to take the ethnicity out of newcomers and make them “Americans” through such programs as settlement houses, nutrition and English classes. Still, Italian immigrants formed community organizations around the communities from which they came. The Italian government sponsored ties between the old country and immigrants so the newcomers would send money back to help develop their hometowns.

Friedman-Kasaba says life in some ways was more difficult and isolating for women in the United States than it was in the old country and that things really didn’t improve for women until the second generation.

“The daughters of immigrants achieved material gains by breaking out of their ethnic economic enclaves. First they unionized and then their next move up the economic ladder was to go into teaching. Jewish women did this first, moving into New York schools in the 1920s and 30s, followed by Italian women.”

Immigration was and is about women becoming independent wage earners and imagining possibilities both inside and outside of their ethnic communities, she believes. “Despite the disastrous experiences of some women, across time and across immigrant groups, women don’t return to their native countries. Men do. This was true at the turn of the 20th century and it is true today.”

#####
For more information, contact Friedman-Kasaba at (206) 552-4463 or by e-mail at {Friedman@u.washington.edu}. “Memories of Migration: Gender, Ethnicity and Work in the Lives of Jewish and Italian Women in New York, 1870-1924” was published by State University of New York Press, 1996.