According to sources A3 and A5, the war helped to change women’s attitude to work, and gave them new ideas on work they were capable of doing. A3 is a source that gives basic figures of women employed in the civil defence, mostly in jobs not performed by females in pre-war times. The source tells us that the war created new careers, such as positions at anti-aircraft batteries, army communications and army driving. It was not only the kinds of jobs that changed, but also the need for women to perform these jobs. Source A3 also describes the increase of women doing army driving by 1943 (80%). This could be down to the conscription of women, but other sources (like sources D2 and D3 from section D) believe that women were more than willing to do the work asked of them. Both sources make it clear that women were not only needed, but were crucial in the outcome of the war. Source A5 is a government issued article. It promotes the work the government wanted the women to undertake. There is no reason to believe this source is untruthful, but as it is a form of propaganda, it is likely to be exaggerating the good points and the ideas the government want to promote, and leaving out all of the bad points that contradict the effect the article would have. This source also makes most of the work seem glamorous, and tries to make women feel guilty for not volunteering to work. Although this source is an example of propaganda, it would have been extremely useful at the time, as it would have probably changed the way many women thought of work and therefore, their overall attitudes.
Source A5 is an example of government propaganda. It is an article issued by the Ministry of Labour and National Service. The article tells us that ten thousand women from North Wales were needed for work on the home front. I believe the article does two main things. One: it creates hatred of Hitler and Nazi Germany by using phrases like “creeping evil of Hitlerism” and “evil monstrosity of Nazi-ism”. Two: it promotes the work the government want the women to undertake. The article puts great emphasis on “tipping the scales” and the idea that the war will be lost if women do not immediately volunteer, there is a great sense of urgency. The source also stresses the need for women to ‘volunteer’, which suggests that the government originally did not want to conscript women. The article is written to prove its point from various angles. It promotes jobs as glamorous, says that the jobs women are needed for are just as important as the ones men do, fighting as soldiers, and stresses the honour women would gain from working and the equality they would have with men. The article is agreeing that women are capable of doing the work required of them, and emphasises the end of patronising women in employment by the phrase “ no longer…little jobs for little women”. The source also plays on the women’s guilt, saying that the war will be lost if the women do not help. The article also gives some information on certain jobs, like including the pay figures for work on the battlefront and civil defence and the munitions factories. I believe that this source could be quite reliable in certain aspects, but as propaganda, it is likely to be exaggerating the good points of work, and not including the bad points of women working.
World War 2 changed people’s attitudes to women and work. According to sources A1 and A2, women responded positively to the outbreak of war by patriotically volunteering to work on the home front. Source A1 is secondary evidence, as it is from a history textbook it is likely to be reliable evidence. The source describes the conscription of women in 1942 to work in the forces in a non-fighting role (WAAF, ATS, WRNS and secret agents were non-fighting positions within the forces) and on the home front, which involved civil defence work, factory work and the WLA. The source also tells us that this conscription was successful, as it tells us that by the end of the war, eight out of ten married women and nine out of ten single women aged 18-40 were doing work on the home front and in the forces. Source A2 agrees with this, as it says that by 1943 46% of women were involved in some form of national service. Source A2 is also secondary evidence from a textbook, and so is quite reliable, although when it mentions the opposition to the compulsion of women working it does not express what opposition this was and can be considered a little vague. I believe that the opposition came from both men and women, who saw the female's role as the homemaker and child-minder. However, both sources agree that women working became more widely accepted (by women and men alike) as the war progressed.
The jobs performed by women during the war are detailed in source A3. This source is also secondary evidence from a book by Vera Lynn. It is probably quite reliable as it is mainly rough statistical values, which give an idea of changes in attitude towards the type of work women did. The source is saying that the war helped to change many people’s attitudes towards women not doing ‘traditional’ jobs.
Source A4 is made up of four posters used during the war, and it is entirely primary evidence. The posters are full of patriotic imagery, and pictures of women in uniforms. The first poster features a picture of a female munitions worker, standing in front of a factory with fighter planes flying out of it. The caption reads “Women of Britain Come into the Factories”, and it implies that the female munitions workers are responsible for the entire production of the British Air Force. The second poster is advertising for women to join the WAAF. It features the union jack, which symbolises patriotism, and a picture of a WAAF member in uniform standing next to a fighter pilot. This poster’s theme is equality between men and women, and patriotism. The third poster includes the caption “Every Woman Not Doing Vital Work is needed now”, which suggests urgency for women to work. The picture in this poster is of two women in uniform, and the shadows of two male soldiers behind them. This might imply that women were equally or even more important than the soldiers. The final poster is advertising for women to take on evacuees. The picture shows an example of refugees who seem clean and well behaved, but from my own knowledge, I know that this was not always the case. The word service is used twice in his poster, which suggests that women taking on evacuees were as important as the women in the WAAF, factories etc. were. Although these posters are useful forms of primary evidence, they are all propaganda. Propaganda was used during the Second World War to influence public opinion (propaganda is still used today). As this source is purely propaganda, it is unlikely to be balanced and therefore reliable.
Further example of government propaganda is source A5. It differs from the propaganda in source A4, as it is an article, and targeted to a specific group of people. The article is government issued. The source is advertising for volunteers to work in factories and the ATS. The source does not have a date, however, we can assume that it is written before 1942 as it is advertising for volunteers to work, and after 1942, it was compulsory for women to do national service so there would be no need for propaganda such as this. The article emphasises the importance of women working, saying that the war would definitely be lost if women do not help. There is no reason to doubt the truthfulness of the article, however, as propaganda the use of exaggeration and the avoidance of any negative views must be taken into consideration.
I believe that World War 2 greatly affected people’s attitudes towards women and work. Nevertheless, I feel that it was mainly women’s attitudes that were changed, rather than men’s. After, and gradually during the war, women became more confident in their capabilities, and their refreshed attitudes became a turning point in British history.
