Source B does not support C as it looks and the negatives of women’s war work and how it effects their health. The source is initially about working conditions for women and it states how the work was extremely dangerous and how they were expected to work overtime for normal rates of pay. Unlike both sources A and C the source suggests that the pay was poor for the work that was done. Where as A and C portrait the pay as good compared to before like “the glass is half full not half empty.” Also the conditions that are described in source B are not very common as not many people painted “dope varnish” onto air craft so probably it will only apply to a minority. There is no mention of a social life or the freedom that the women had now acquired and which was the strong evidence linking A and C.
The nature of source C was a book written in 1917, it was written by a factory owner and possibly the purpose was to attract women to work in his factory he writes about how women prefer war work. Source A is a woman who writes about how she preferred war work directly linking. Source B is written by Sylvia Pankhurst a suffragette leader who unlike her mother and sister was against war work also she could also be bitter about the past and how women were treated thus creating negative opinion.
- How useful are sources D and E in helping you to understand the importance of the work of women in industry during the First World War?
Source D is a photograph of two women working in munitions factory during world war one, with a notice in the back ground on which a message is written “when the boys come back we won’t need you any longer girls.” The two women who are old and miserable they both look considerably tired with large bags under there eyes. The picture shows that women’s war work was only needed for a period of time, that women worked long hours and was not particularly fun. The source also gives useful information a bout what was made i.e. munitions what tools they had at their disposal and what physical conditions (area) they worked in.
The source is not particularly reliable as it looks to have been staged so when the photographer takes his picture it is placed in his opinion. The government has probably produced it as a reminder that women are not equal to men in the workplace and it’s only for a short period of time, this is to keep women in their place. The source is also to make the men feel secure that women won’t take over. The source is useful in the fact it indicates the political view of women in the Great War from men and the government, the working conditions and that people took pictures to represent their opinion. Though the source does not have much useful information about the importance of women’s war work. It implies that the fact that women were working though there was this much prejudice, means the job of munitions manufacturing was very important in wining the war that had consumed so much of the male workforce. Many other sources support this “when the men came back women were expected to go back to their old jobs,” G Thomas, life on all fronts gives similar information as source D
Source E is poster issued by the British government in 1916 to encourage women to enrol and do war work in munitions factories. It is a picture of a woman putting on a work jacket in the background, men waving getting on a train bound for the war. The caption at the top of the poster states “these women are doing their bit” and at the bottom it reads “learn to make munitions.” This is a useful source as it shows techniques used to get women to work buy trying to create a good public image, with a good looking healthy women helping to do war work. The background of men going to war implies working was as important as fighting and that by working they would help their men win the war.
The source reads learn to make munitions and not other things, as these were important to the war implying that so was the women’s work.
Source E is not particularly reliable as it is “government propaganda” and is a picture directly effected by the government. The source has important uses as it gives a message that women’s war work is that important it could be a deceive factor in wining the total war and that not enough women worked as they needed to recruit. Many propaganda recruitment posters were made. Historians might want to study sources relating to the total effect on the war that women’s war work had to support source E’s uses.
- Use source G, and your own knowledge, to explain why some men opposed the employment of women in industry during the first world war
Source G is a personal account written in 1919 by a women worker demonstrating the prejudice that women were shown during the war whilst working. The source describes scenes of extreme resentment from the women’s male colleagues for working, given “ the wrong or incomplete directions” for tasks and made to work more hours than she was paid to do so. In this account she states she had no tools that she needed and “it was out of the question to borrow anything off the other men.” The men of this account persecuted her for being a woman physically. “My drawer was nailed up by the men, and oil was poured over everything in it through a crack.” The source supports that there was strong resentment as women received the same pay as men, this created much tension in the war years as women had little training for the jobs they began to undertake though they proved many people wrong by being able to cope. The source is very negative towards the male attitude towards women’s war work though the women was greeted by two shop stewards who had no objection to her working there.
Men began to feel threatened by the mass employment of women in industry, as in the past women were limited to for example jobs in the domestic service and the sweated trades. It was completely new to men that women could now be on the same level as men, as males were nearly completely dominant in industry before the outbreak of war. The reason men resented women working in the industry were because that if they continued to employ women there would be a larger workforce and salaries would be reduced. Also the fact that women were weaker in the eyes of men and that it was an insult they could do the same job if not better than the men were.
Even though there was a war and everyone had to do their bit for society men still opposed women working in industry. The need for manpower on the western front caused women to be allowed to work in the military, still under vast amounts of resentment though not as much as in industry as the job’s they did were limited. In comparison to women working in industry where they were not limited to that extent received more opposition. The men found security in the “treasury agreements” made up by the government and the unions indicating that women workers to be paid same as men but women only allowed to take over men’s work for the duration of the war or till sufficient male labour should be available again.
- “Without the work of women on the home front, Britain could not have won the First World War.” Use the sources and your own knowledge to explain whether you agree with this view.
Women’s work on the home front was very influential but without the work that the women did during the war years would Britain and her allies come home victorious.
The work that women did during the war was for the war as the First World War was the first “total war” which effected every last person receding in the nations that were fighting. In 1916 when conscription was introduced, women’s roles in keeping up the home front became vital as many of the jobs now fell into the hands of women. One of the main problems that the army faced was a shell shortage on the western front. This was solved by the vast manufacturing of munitions by women, such as described in source A “hand cutting shell fuses” this was essential in the fighting in France.
The fact that women were wanted to work through so much discrimination as described in source G and even the government produced pictures e.g. source D of a prejudicial nature show that the work that was done was so important it did not matter about ill-feelings. The work was so important propaganda posters e.g. source E were used to encourage workers, not only did the manufacturing industry workers increase by 792000 workers between 1914 and 1918 as indicated by source F peoples expectations rose to shown in source H.. Women did the knitting of the uniforms to camouflage the troops this was important, as the French had been defeated heavily at alsace-loirane by not having camouflage uniforms. Nursing was common for women to work as and helped put more injured men back at the front-line increasing the chance of victory. Work in the armed forces in secretarial jobs freed up many men to go and fight also women worked on aircraft and similar things as indicated in source B this was important as recognisance flying gave much needed information about the enemies position to the commanders. All these occupations directly effected the war but the land girls who worked to produce food played a pivotal role in keeping up the home front. At the end of the war one of the main reasons for the German surrender is because of food shortages brought about by the British naval blockade. Women also worked in transport and other jobs to keep the country running smoothly as source I suggests they became “familiar figures”
Though women made a difference the role of women could be perceived as not important and that the fighting in France was the deciding factor, also during the battle of the Somme the women’s poor training led to “a third of the 1.5 million shells fired being duds.”
Though it was the military that eventually won the war, in my opinion without the women’s war work on the home front prevented a implosion of the country leading to possible revolts e.g. Russia and the women freed many men go to the front line though due to poor tactics they had no substantial presence
