Abstract
The temperance movement in Australia has been regarded for some time now by historians as a significant feminist lobby. This paper explores the implications of this revisionist historiography for sociological debates, in particular the literature on the modern family and on the patriarchal welfare state. The assumptions that women passively acquiesced in the changes in Australia at the turn of the century and played no part in the construction of the breadwinner are regarded as untenable. They became historical actors who achieved gains and suffered losses that were then embedded in state policies and domestic relations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
