In general, the roles of women were the same in both World War I and World War II. Many went off to work so as to fill in spots vacated by men, while some remained at home and took care of the family.
Women in both World Wars served mainly in factories, where large numbers of men had previously worked. They also took on such jobs as nursing and care.
In World War II however, women took on an even larger variety of jobs that were originally "men-only". Some, especially in the Soviet Union, joined front-line-combat divisions of the military, while others did skilled labor in the factories (as opposed to being barred from operating the more complex machinery).
In summary, the role of women in World War II was similar in that women took jobs to replace the men, and that some left once the men (who survived...) returned. However, their roles between World War I and II differ in that women in World War II had a much larger variety of jobs and were allowed to take on the more traditionally male jobs. This led eventually to women's suffrage.
Total war is just as the name suggests. It is a war that totally involves the nation (that sentence sounded very "surfer-brah"-like. Ugh.) and relies on everyone to help support the war efforts. Total war's pull was powerful enough to break down the previously male-dominated structure of society- if only temporarily.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I like how you tie the fluctuating roles women had during war to the definition and manifestation of total war.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the point you made about total war. It really does require the involvement of everyone, and I have to wonder if the traditional gender roles would have ever broken down if it wasn't a necessity at the time or if it would have taken a lot longer. The comments you make definitely make me question what is necessary for change to occur.
ReplyDeleteI like how you connected the roles of woman laborers with total war's utilization of every resource available. I thought your concluding point echoed a point I made earlier, which is that desperate times call for desperate measures. Sometimes it takes a World War for people to swallow their pride and prejudices!
ReplyDeletei agree with your points
ReplyDeleteI like the point you made about total war and how it is a force powerful enough to upturn tradition (though not permanently). I agree with what your post suggests about women's rights being much longer delayed had it not been for world war. It makes me kind of sad, though, that women have to prove themselves so much just for a small amount of respect in return, and WWI and II are perfect examples of this.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your post, but one part especially caught my attention. In the last sentence of your post, you said that women gained rights during World War II - if only temporarily. After World War II came the fifties, when the image nuclear family became one of society's idols, and women were forced to stay at home.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading this opinionated-piece because it clearly showed evidence and backed it up. I agree with your view of expansion of the role of women during the second world war.
ReplyDeleteI liked reading this post. It gives a good summary of your opinion on how the war accelerated the development of women's rights in the world and you give clear supporting evidence.
ReplyDelete