In conclusion Source A is more supportive of Source C than Source B is as it implies that women definitely preferred factory jobs rather than domestic service. It also supports the point that more money was being earnt which meant that the family was better off financially. Whereas Source B inferred that the working conditions for women were awful, wages low and that women were most definitely not happy in their new jobs.
3.
Source D is a photograph taken in a munition factory during the First World War. The words on the board at the back read ‘When the boys come back we are not going to keep you any longer-girls’. This source is useful to an extent as it infers that it was the opinion of the people writing the message that the importance of the work of women during the war was not particularly significant as otherwise they would have not risked being so nasty as this would have greatly lowered women’s morale. The reliability of the Source also has to be questioned as it is not stated who took the photograph, when it was taken or what the purpose of taking it was. When the photograph was taken is particularly important as the attitude of men towards women workers improved throughout the war.
Source E is a poster produced by the British government in 1916 with the purpose of encouraging women to work in munitions factories. This source is useful to an extent as it suggests that the importance of the work of women during the war was very vital otherwise the government would have not have had to advertise for help. The source implies that the government had recognised the role of women during the war and that women volunteering to work in industry was a necessity. The source is a form of propaganda as it shows the governments attitude not reality. The source is also useful as it shows a link between men and women as behind the women in the picture there is a soldier waving goodbye and going to war.
In conclusion Source E is more useful than Source D in helping to understand the importance of work of women in industry during the First World War. This is because Source E demonstrates how the government desperately needed women’s help for munitions, even enough to be concerned for their safety as the women were made to wear safety clothes. Whereas Source D more shows the attitude of people to women workers, rather than how important their role actually was. Source D also has limitations as its reliability must be questioned.
4.
During the First World War men made it very apparent that they strongly opposed the employment of women. Since 1905 a new form of trade unionism, Syndicalism, had developed in Britain. They planned to use the strike as a weapon to change government policies. After the outbreak of war men hastened to join trade unions which in 1915 encouraged an enormous number of strikes against female workers. This eventually meant that the government were forced to sign agreements with unions to the effect that women would not keep their jobs at the end of the war.
However this was certainly not all the action men took. Male employees also showed their disapproval by refusing to help women workers, giving confusing instructions and particularly, playing practical jokes. This can be seen in Source G which is a woman’s account written in 1919 of experiences while working during the First World War. The source describes how such pranks included nailing up her drawer and pouring oil over all her work in the night. Here men have outwitted women and this would have made the men feel better about themselves. These pranks could demonstrate how childish the attitude of men was during such a difficult period. However these men would not have visualised themselves as immature as they were just trying to prove they were still superior to women, despite both genders often being paid similar wages.
It is suggested that men showed these attitudes to protect their friend’s jobs, however it could also be assumed that some of the male workers left behind were conscientious objectors. They would have perhaps felt embarrassed in a new society where men were scarce and women were gaining importance, whereas they were used to previously working in a very male dominated environment. Indeed this would have made them feel very anxious about their role and value in their job.
Men would have also felt particularly insecure as women demonstrated not only their mental capabilities but also their physical strength. Women proved that they were capable of men’s work, which had never been considered possible before. This would have scared men, as this was the character they had always depended on to make them more superior. This was why men were fighting at war and women were not allowed. Men left at home would then have felt that they were losing all hold over women, and that in fact women were gradually showing that they were actually quite equal to men.
Male employees also feared wage dilution. Obviously they did not want their wages reduced in favour of unskilled women. For all of the above reasons I have stated, men opposed the employment of women during the First World War, not because they thought they were incapable, but the opposite. In many ways the male race felt threatened by the new found skills and strength of women.
5.
The statement that Britain could not have won The First World War without the work of women on the Home Front is largely true although there were undoubtedly many other factors that contributed to Britain winning the war. It must be recognised that the war effort did not only take place on the fighting fronts overseas, but equally on the Home Front as well. As there were few men left at home, the women played a crucial supporting role in Britain’s endeavour to win the war.
After the outbreak of war in 1914, 14% less women worked than before the war as many had given up to be at home in the absence of their partners, who like 10,000,000 other British men had joined the armed forces. The factories were being manned by less employees than before who struggled to maintain output. It took The Great Shell Shortage of May 1915 to alert the government’s attention to the reality that more workers were desperately required to increase the production of weapons and ammunitions. David Lloyd-George recognised that women were needed to help the war effort. Without the recruitment of women the British army would have run short of supplies which in turn would have hindered their chances of success.
As a result of David-Lloyd George’s recruitment drive many women came to the country’s aid and by the end of 1915 another 1,200,000 women began working in almost all of the professions. Thousands of women left domestic service and poured into munitions factories, sweated trades and textiles. The numbers of women employed in the manufacturing industry alone, increased by 792 000 as shown in source F. Women rejected the traditional laws of feminism and for the first time ever, took over conventional male jobs. This is demonstrated in Source I where it is stated ‘there are girls at the wheels of half the cars that pass’.
The presence of women in these factories made the men feel threatened and their resentment made life more difficult for the women employees as demonstrated in sources D and G. And despite appalling conditions as shown in Source B, women soon proved their worth, not only mentally but physically as shown by source H ‘Women can satisfactorily handle much heavier pieces of metal’ and also in source J. Women helped reach the supply requirements necessary for the war and the targets would not have been possible without them. Despite the manual labour not usually associated with women, they enjoyed not only the ‘freedom, the spirit of independence’ of factory life but also thought they were ‘very well off’ as shown by sources A and C. Women also volunteered as nurses in the Voluntary Aid Detachments (VAD) and by 1917 were recruited as full time members of the armed forces.
However there were also many other factors that contributed to Britain winning the War. Perhaps the most important was the government’s application of Propaganda. The main method of propaganda was posters, such as the one shown in Source E. Despite propaganda undoubtedly playing a key role in recruitment, its importance cannot be considered as significant as the role of women during the war. Propaganda was not vital to the war effort whereas the recruitment of women was because without them working in the munition factories Britain would have run out of supplies which were vital to the country’s chances of victory.
The Defense against the Realm Act 1914 (DORA) and the Military Service Act 1916 also played an important role in the war effort. DORA gave the government extensive powers such as closing public houses to prevent employees turning up drunk for work. The Military Service Act meant that 3,500,000 men were conscripted to the armed forces. These were unquestionably useful strategies; however the war could still have been won without them existing, whereas the role of women had a far superior importance.
In conclusion the statement ‘Without the work of women on the Home Front, Britain could not have won the First World War’ is true to a great extent. As previously acknowledged, whilst factors, other than women, were significantly helpful in the war effort, if women had not joined Britain’s workforce in munitions factories, it would have been impossible to make enough weapons, ammunitions, and other necessary supplies required to lead Britain to victory