Jasmine's blog: "Stuff!"

<!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->

Was the role of women on the Home Front 1940-1946 a Positive or Negative Experience?

It is often thought that the event of WW2 was what brought about progressive thinking towards equality towards women. Most people would assume that it was because of the ability that women showed during war times is what brought about this new wave of thinking.

During WW2 women were working in jobs that were traditionally applied to men.  Most women were volunteers but soon they were conscripted into joining the war effort. Women worked in areas that were traditionally confined to men; they worked in areas such as iron and steel working, engineering and vehicle building. During this time, the presence of women in more traditional roles of domestic and textile services was on the decline. Women enjoyed the extra income that they could bring into the family, not only that but they were able to enjoy a new type of social life too. Women then could enjoy the company from their fellow workers instead of being at home in a restrictive family life. Many women no longer saw the role or a working women and the role of a family person as an ‘either or’ option. They saw that they could go out to work where they were needed without causing any major disturbances in family life.

The Royal Commission on Population, established in 1945, announced that married partners had gained a more equal status that had been accelerated by the war.

Although the war had opened up new prospects for women it didn’t mean that they stayed open. After the end of the war many women were pushed back into domestic roles. From 1939 to 1943 the number of women in employment rose from 4.8million to 6.7 million and reduced back to 6.2 million after 1945. This shows that a large majority of the women workers were already in work regardless of the war. By 1951 the proportion of the women labour force had reverted back to those levels of that in the 1930’s. Employers and trade unions had agreed on restoration of pre-war practises when it was over. This meant that for many women, no matter how competent they were at their work, there were no hopes of career advancements or that their jobs would still be there for them once the war was over. It can be argued that this wasn’t an intentional act to drive women back into their domestic roles but it was to make sure that the men returning from war would not be out of a job that they originally had once they return home.

Women workers received lower rates of pay than those that would have been paid to men whilst doing exactly the same type of work. Some progress was made in applying equal pay in the engineering industry, but this only applied to a small minority of women who could directly replace men and perform precisely the same job. The average earnings for women increased during the war but were still significantly lower than those of a male’s wages. Pressure from women lead to the establishment of Equal Pay Campaign Committee, this helped secure a somewhat bitter victory in an amendment to the Education Bill. The amendment required equal pay for female teachers and was won by a vote of 117 to 116, however the government threatened to resign unless the vote was overturned. The government at the time tended to largely ignore any issues regarding equal pay.

Many women worked part time during the war and continued to do so afterwards, this was a way of supplementing the family income. Part time workers had very few rights regarding to job security, training, sick pay and pensions. Women in part time jobs re-enforced the idea that women were only suitable for low skilled jobs. Domestic work was continued to be seen as a woman’s sole responsibility even after they were conscripted into the labour force.  After 1945, major firms restored the marriage bar, leading doubt to shadow the claim that the war helped to promote progressive thinking. Barriers restricted employment opportunities for married women and post 1945 the marriage boom led to a baby boom, this was then interpreted as confirmation that the war didn’t really encourage or empower women to break free from domestic roles.

In conclusion it can be argued that the war helped to show the nation what women were capable of; women were allowed to demonstrate skills that they had all along but were restricted from using. Not only that, the attitudes of women changed. Social surveys suggested that the earning power given to women helped boost their self esteem and more confident to take on new challenges after 1945. Although many women left employment after 1945, they had left with a new sense of independence meaning that they were now less likely to settle for subordinate roles within a marriage. Women had developed higher expectations within a marriage and were therefore more likely to break one up if it did not meet their standards.

However in the long run, there were no major changes in the attitudes of the role of women. They were seen as capable but that their role still belonged in the home. Even though women had realised their own potential, it did not necessarily mean that those in control of society would allow that potential to grow. Just because women had shown ability during the war, once the war was over those skills they had developed were no longer in demand. In the question of whether the role of women in the Home Front a positive or negative experience, it can be concluded that the progressive thinking of society was positive but actually putting it back into practise was not. Women simply did not have as much of a role in post war working society as they did pre-war; this was mainly due to less demand for workers.