^1. For example, McGrory, Mary, “Reducing Reform to Baby Talk,” Washington Post, 19 July 1994Google Scholar; Will, George, “‘Compassion’ Treats Only Welfare Symptoms,” The Daily Progress (Charlottesville, Va.), 19 June 1994Google Scholar; Thomas, Cal, “Government Can't Correct Roots of Welfare; Religious Groups Can,” The Daily Progress (Charlottesville, Va.), 19 June 1994Google Scholar; Murray, Charles, Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950–1980 (New York, 1984)Google Scholar; Kaus, Mickey, The End of Equality (New York, 1992)Google Scholar; for liberal implication in this trend, Amott, Teresa, “The War on Welfare: Clinton's Carrots and Sticks,” Dollars and Sense (November–December 1993): 12–15, 32–34.Google Scholar

^2. For a fine discussion of civil society as a public place separate from the state but beyond the confines of our usual sense of “private” (the familial), see Evans, Sara, “Women's History and Political Theory: Toward a Feminist Approach to Public Life,” in Hewitt, Nancy A. and Lebsock, Suzanne, eds., Visible Women: New Essays on American Activism (Urbana, 1993), 119–39.Google Scholar

^3. For “dependency,” see Gordon, Linda and Fraser, Nancy, “A Genealogy of Dependency: Tracing a Keyword of the U.S. Welfare State,” Signs: A Journal of Women in Culture and Society 19 (Winter 1994): 309–36.Google Scholar

^4. Kunzel notes how it is time for historians to explore “the mutual constitution of ideologies of gender and race” (165). For one beginning, see Boris, Eileen, “The Racialized Gendered State: Constructions of Citizenships in the United States,” Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State, and Society 2 (Summer 1995, forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^5. Solinger, Rickie, Wake Up Little Susie: Single Pregnancy and Race Before Roe v. Wade (New York, 1992).Google Scholar

^6. Walkowitz, Daniel J., “The Making of a Feminine Professional Identity: Social Workers in the 1920s,” American Historical Review 95 (October 1990): 1051–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^7. Carp, E. Wayne, “Professional Social Workers, Adoption, and the Problem of Illegitimacy, 1915–1945,” Journal of Policy History 6 (Summer 1994): 161–84, esp. 173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^8. See the portraits offered by Peiss, Kathy, Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York (Philadelphia, 1986)Google Scholar, and Meyerowitz, Joanne J., Women Adrift: Independent Wage Earners in Chicago, 1880–1930 (Chicago, 1988).Google Scholar

^9. See also Solinger, Wake Up Little Susie, 148–204.

^10. For a more sustained analysis of this process, see Gordon, Linda, Pitied But Not Entitled: Single Mothers and the History of Welfare (New York, 1994).Google Scholar

^11. Notable exceptions are Crocker, Ruth Hutchinson, Social Work and Social Order: The Settlement Movement in Two Industrial Cities, 1889–1930 (Urbana, 1992)Google Scholar, and Luker, Ralph E., The Social Gospel in Black and White: American Racial Reform, 1885–1912 (Chapel Hill, 1991).Google Scholar

^12. See, for example, Rouse, Jacqueline Anne, Lugenia Burns Hope: Black Southern Reformer (Athens, Ga, 1989)Google Scholar; Neverdon-Morton, Cynthia, Afro-American Women of the South and the Advancement of the Race, 1895–1925 (Knoxville, Tenn., 1989)Google Scholar; Hall, Jacqueline Dowd, Revolt Against Chivalry: Jessie Daniel Ames and the Women's Campaign Against Lynching (New York, 1979)Google Scholar; Mary E. Frederickson, “‘Each One Is Dependent on the Other’: Southern Churchwomen, Racial Reform, and the Process of Transformation, 1880–1940,” in Hewitt and Lebsock, eds., Visible Women, 296–334; Lynn, Susan, Progressive Women in Conservative Times: Racial Justice, Peace, and Feminism, 1945 to the 1960s (New Brunswick, 1992), 40–67.Google Scholar