The main message prevalent in both of the primary sources is that gender was used to bring women into the war effort and that this made them begin to question what role they would play in Canadian society after the war was over.
The first article outlines how women at the time felt that the war against Germany was not just a war for political freedom, but a war for the freedom of women. The primary source give excellent insight on how the war could be framed so as to call women into action. It is a great view as to how gender affected the war. Women felt compelled to help fight Germany as the Nazis (and fascism) were subverting what was viewed as the traditional role of women in society. While these women may have still held somewhat unexceptional views of where their place was, they still wanted the freedom to be where they liked to be. For example, it is said that although women enjoy being in the kitchen and cooking for their families, it should be their choice to do so and not be forced by the government. The main message in the first source is that fascism presents not just a threat to democracy, but a threat to womenhood as a whole.
The second article outlines that later int he war once women had acclimatized to working in the factories and for the war effort there began to be much though regarding what a women’s place would be in Canadian society after the war was over and the men were home. Working on the war effort had broken many of the myths surrounding women in the workplace and it became apparent that women were just as good workers, and enjoyed working as much as men did. The prospect of returning to domestic work was not a happy thought for many women who wished to continue working at the jobs they had become quite good at during the five years of the war. The main message of the second primary source is that as the end of the war approached there was serious discussion amongst working women about continuing on in the workforce even after the men had returned home.
Blog: How was WW2 a watershed moment in Canada history? and commenting on primary sources by women during ww2
M. Rotenberg’s “It’s a Women’s War” is a very nationalistic speech addressed to Canadian women, envoking many values we earlier discussed as maternal feminism. As a example on how maternal feminists and women reacted to the rampant militarism and policies of the Nationalist Socialist Party. What’s significant about this transcript is that it occurs in the midst of 1944, towards the end of the war (assuming the discovery of the concentration camps puts this into late 1944) and this speech seems to indicate that even then, Canada’s women felt united to serve in the war effort. Moreover, the speech also gives an idea of how traditional gender roles affected how women saw the war and affected how they served in it.
The second article addresses more directly the original blog question on the syllabus. Anne Frances’s reflections on the role women in the wake of the Second World War, certainly help explain why to women, World War 2 was a watershed moment. Frances’s reflections reveal that the participation of women in volunteer organizations and factories had actually altered or at least got a degree of women to question traditional gender roles. The detailed examples Frances uses to outline participation of women in national organizations and the conclusions she draws from how women were able to work together in the war further reveal the changed conditions of gender roles and how women saw them as changed. The primary source also reveals that now that the war was over, women wanted to continue working in the volunteer organizations, explore job opportunities or increase their participation within their communities.
Rotenberg: this primary source from 1944 gives readers a direct sense of how gender was viewed back then. There is the idea of fascism and democracy, but women would need to take action if they wanted democracy. There was a sense of contributing to the war, but also doing the traditional roles at home (like “double duty”) The idea that “some are naturally inferior” and being viewed as the weaker sex was a popular norm back then. Do women move forward to gain more freedom, or potentially risk what they have? In this sense, it was a women’s war.
Frances: Also from 1944, it gives more of an insight to how women were viewed in society post WW2, compared to the first one. This looks at how women were perceived after the war; would they return to their homes, or continue working? Because of the war efforts, women emerged into the workforce. For example, they worked together to raise funds (ie: auxiliaries), volunteered, etc. After the war, some women wanted to continue working, which resulted in many taking up courses such as nursing. However, not everyone wanted to work, and simply returned to their homes. The idea of the “weaker sex” was challenged as women proved they could do a double duty. in later decades, we see more emergence of women in the work sector, and finding for more equal rights…
In this week’s readings, the two primary sources show how women contributed to the World War II (WWII), which made them question what would happen to them after the war was over.
In Mattie Rotenberg’s broadcast in 1944, she critiques the treatment of German women by the Nazis. The Nazis had an important phrase that explained what were the responsibilities of women, which was: “Kuche, Kinder, Kirche”, which translated to “Kitchen, Children, and Church”. On the outside, this might seem like the correct behaviour during World War II, however the Nazis were constantly interfering in the women’s private lives. For example in the kitchen, they lost their freedom when inspectors were freely able to observe and boss around the women. As for the children, females were purposely used for their bodies to try and produce male soldiers for the war. In addition, the mothers were not able to raise their children the way they would want to, without the narrow-mindedness that was a part of the Nazi regime. Finally the Church constantly preached to the women that they must continue to worship the State compared to other perhaps more ‘humane’ faiths. Through her broadcast, she argues that WWII suppressed women. Furthermore, they were used by the State to satisfy its needs almost to the point of forcing them to become robots. This just goes to prove that this war was indeed a “women’s war” and that they had to fight for their freedom and also for equality for all women.
In the second primary source, also from 1944, Anne Frances explains how WWII made a significant impact on Canadian women as they realized that there are more opportunities for them to work or volunteer in society rather than just being a housewife. During the war, women volunteered and fundraised to help the troops overseas. Also, they proved that they were capable running a home efficiently while also having a career. As the end of the war grew nearer, there was a sense of suspense as everyone was unsure of what would happen when the males came home. During this time, according to Frances, there were many acts of social activism involving women, further solidifying their role in society. In other words, the war was part of the reason why the women started to work together and was able to feel empowered through teamwork, which has continued through to the present day.
Overall these two pieces have a common end goal of wanting gender equality. In Germany, women worked hard to fight for their own freedom in their own spheres of influence. In Canada, the women had two options after the war ended, to go back to how they lived in the past (as housewives) or to rise above and build on the women’s rights that were awarded to them during the war. By allowing women more rights, Canadians could start over to try and solve societal problems, including poverty and unemployment, which can only be done with the equal involvement of all females.
The topic of Anne Frances and Mattie Rotenberg’s papers was the role of women once WW2 had ended. Rotenberg touches upon the idea that a woman’s role in German society was for the “Kitchen, Children and Church”. Rotenberg argues that because of the war, army officials were impeding on the livelihood of women and controlling their lives. Being written mid 1944, Rotenberg expresses her frustration with the controlling behaviour of the armed forces on how women were to cook for the men in war, raise their children to become soldiers, but also keep their Christian faith while their children were not to be raised to have faith in Christianity. This was a problem because Rotenberg was speaking about women sticking up for themselves and protecting their children and the way they live.
Anne Frances speaks about the role of women on the Canadian home front, and in late 1944, the possible positive repercussions of women continuing to work in factories. She also talks about how women can continue their responsibilities to the home, her children, and her commmunity and country. This is significant at the end of WW2 because it would mean women would have a more equal role in society to men if they were allowed to continue in their new lives that they have had for the previous 5 years.
Rotenberg’s article stressed the message that WW2 was a Women’s war. Women’s roles in the war have always gone overlooked and it was overlooked that Women were also victims in this war. They were denied many of the rights the Jewish were denied so this war was about their freedom as women as well. Fascism in Nazi Germany was altering what women were and creating “obedient robots” of them. Because the role of women was changing, they craved a democracy but the only way to obtain it is to make it themselves.
In Frances article, is it evident that women’s roles during the war were very significant and what is the potential reason women today are proud business women. This was the shift from women solely having responsibilities within the household to doing the “double job”. They made the government fully aware that women are able to care for the home and family while maintaining work outside of the home. They had the drive to continue this work after the war to better their communities and country. They finally had a different role they felt they belonged to and that was working for their country and not only for their families. Gender roles were changing and the women were all for this change.
The first article deals with Mattie Rotenberg’s view on women’s participation during WW2, especially Canadian women. The basis of her analysis is that despite women were not fighting in the front line and taking bullets for their country, they are as much concerned as men by the international situation at the time. Women were enslaved by the Nazi ideology, which considered them inferior to men, and forced them into “Kitchen, Children, Church”. Those activities are indeed more female-oriented as Rotenberg admitted, but what she was pointing out is that Nazis were intruding in their personal lives, using them as obedient robots to reach the German youth and indoctrinate them. As a consequence, WW2 was a Women’s war because they had to fight themselves for a better democracy at home, “building up and guarding the spirit” of democracy, as imperfect as it was. Women needed to defend their home, their children and their religious beliefs in order to strengthen their nation, then not letting doors open for barbarism and slavery imposed by National Socialism.
Anne Frances’ article is more focused on which behaviour volunteering Canadian women would adopt after the war. It is obvious that war-time had deeply changed the structure of gendered roles in society, with women getting involved in more and more different fields they were not before. Some women, whom are referred to as “the most intelligent” by Frances, wanted to carry on improving education, raising money, reducing juvenile delinquency with on-field work. It seems women felt like they had proven their value by taking professional jobs while still doing useful work for their communities, or by working together, which was not thought possible before the war. After reading the article, I think it could be seen as a statement that Canadian women had to be prepared to take responsibilities and find their place in the post-war world, continuing on the path they had successfully taken to support their husbands and children during war.
The First article by Rotenberg is stressing the theme that World War 2 was a “Women’s war”. Rotenberg describes the women’s war as a war in a special way, not necessarily in the front lines with the bullets and bombs, but a war to sweep Nazi tyranny from the world. Rotenberg addresses the role women played in the Second World War, particularly Canadian women. The women were fighting against the Nazi ideology, which forced them into the kitchen, children, and church. Rotenberg however does point out that the ideology isn’t so bad, as those three are the women’s field, however, she disagrees with how the Nazi’s go about it, by interfering into their personal lives, treating them to be obedient. The women wanted change, wanted a democracy, but in order to achieve democracy they had to go and get it themselves.
The second article from Anne Frances talks of the role of Canadian women after the Second World War. Frances talks about the shift of the role played by the women, as they moved from stay at home wives, to proving they can shoulder more responsibilities, evident in the role in which women played during the war. Frances touches on the fact that women can shoulder the “double job” by continuing to take care for their family and uphold the house, as well as taking up work outside the house. Frances suggests that the intelligent will want to keep on going when the war is over, carry on what they are doing opposed to going back to the way things were before, remaining solely in the households.
The first primary document for this week’s blog entry focuses on the idea that the Nazi movement wasn’t only dangerous in the obvious senses such a violence, but also that it was a war on women, and women’s rights. The author shows her frustration and concern with the Nazi mindset, stating that is is detrimental to her role as a woman in the church, the kitchen, and as a mother. The author then goes on to voice her concern for what the woman’s role in society will be after the war. She makes it clear that women have proved themselves as being useful, functioning members of society, and it concerns her if these will be forgotten once men return from the front lines. And very importantly, she touches on the notion that women themselves must continue to make themselves responsible, and actives members of society, it is their duty to themselves, and their nation, to keep active in politics, and to continue to maintain a powerful image for themselves.
The second source focuses less on the philosophical outlook of way that women are being perceived, and more on what their functionality in society has actually been like in the war time/absence of men. The Author, Anne Frances, touches on the capability that women have shown in the work place, and the potential that they have if given the opportunity to shine. What is interesting, is both of these text place a majority of the responsibility on women to allow themselves to be respected and valued both at home, as well as in the work place.
How was WWII a watershed moment in Canadian history?
WWII was a watershed moment in Canadian history because it was the point at which Canada truly came of age as a nation. Canada had taken large strides during the First World War to “grow up” as a country, but it fully turned the corner to become a nation on the world stage during the course of WWII. It did this in a number of ways, both on the home front and fighting in both the European and Pacific wars. At home, Canada’s women were a critical part of the war effort, and without their service Canada’s troops would never have been able to win the war. Canadian women also became politically active at this time like never before, and showed the rest of Canada that they could do a job to the same degree as men.
In Europe, Canada’s soldiers fought bravely alongside the long-established armies of Britain and America, and took part in major military operations such as the liberation of Italy and the invasions at Normandy. Canadian soldiers one again proved their mettle as soldiers in a major conflict, and their efforts were heralded by all.
The Second World War was a major turning point in Canadian history, and one of the most important moments in the ongoing process of nation building. The work of Canadian women on the home front and Canadian soldiers in the wars in Europe and the Pacific set the stage for Canada to a grow into a player on the world stage in the second half of the 20th century.
Tyler Cole, 
hartcamp, 
bedard, and 7 others are discussing.
maxgardiner 10:37 pm on March 3, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The main message prevalent in both of the primary sources is that gender was used to bring women into the war effort and that this made them begin to question what role they would play in Canadian society after the war was over.
The first article outlines how women at the time felt that the war against Germany was not just a war for political freedom, but a war for the freedom of women. The primary source give excellent insight on how the war could be framed so as to call women into action. It is a great view as to how gender affected the war. Women felt compelled to help fight Germany as the Nazis (and fascism) were subverting what was viewed as the traditional role of women in society. While these women may have still held somewhat unexceptional views of where their place was, they still wanted the freedom to be where they liked to be. For example, it is said that although women enjoy being in the kitchen and cooking for their families, it should be their choice to do so and not be forced by the government. The main message in the first source is that fascism presents not just a threat to democracy, but a threat to womenhood as a whole.
The second article outlines that later int he war once women had acclimatized to working in the factories and for the war effort there began to be much though regarding what a women’s place would be in Canadian society after the war was over and the men were home. Working on the war effort had broken many of the myths surrounding women in the workplace and it became apparent that women were just as good workers, and enjoyed working as much as men did. The prospect of returning to domestic work was not a happy thought for many women who wished to continue working at the jobs they had become quite good at during the five years of the war. The main message of the second primary source is that as the end of the war approached there was serious discussion amongst working women about continuing on in the workforce even after the men had returned home.
Vincent Yam 11:46 pm on March 3, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Blog: How was WW2 a watershed moment in Canada history? and commenting on primary sources by women during ww2
M. Rotenberg’s “It’s a Women’s War” is a very nationalistic speech addressed to Canadian women, envoking many values we earlier discussed as maternal feminism. As a example on how maternal feminists and women reacted to the rampant militarism and policies of the Nationalist Socialist Party. What’s significant about this transcript is that it occurs in the midst of 1944, towards the end of the war (assuming the discovery of the concentration camps puts this into late 1944) and this speech seems to indicate that even then, Canada’s women felt united to serve in the war effort. Moreover, the speech also gives an idea of how traditional gender roles affected how women saw the war and affected how they served in it.
The second article addresses more directly the original blog question on the syllabus. Anne Frances’s reflections on the role women in the wake of the Second World War, certainly help explain why to women, World War 2 was a watershed moment. Frances’s reflections reveal that the participation of women in volunteer organizations and factories had actually altered or at least got a degree of women to question traditional gender roles. The detailed examples Frances uses to outline participation of women in national organizations and the conclusions she draws from how women were able to work together in the war further reveal the changed conditions of gender roles and how women saw them as changed. The primary source also reveals that now that the war was over, women wanted to continue working in the volunteer organizations, explore job opportunities or increase their participation within their communities.
Susanna Chan 1:21 am on March 4, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Rotenberg: this primary source from 1944 gives readers a direct sense of how gender was viewed back then. There is the idea of fascism and democracy, but women would need to take action if they wanted democracy. There was a sense of contributing to the war, but also doing the traditional roles at home (like “double duty”) The idea that “some are naturally inferior” and being viewed as the weaker sex was a popular norm back then. Do women move forward to gain more freedom, or potentially risk what they have? In this sense, it was a women’s war.
Frances: Also from 1944, it gives more of an insight to how women were viewed in society post WW2, compared to the first one. This looks at how women were perceived after the war; would they return to their homes, or continue working? Because of the war efforts, women emerged into the workforce. For example, they worked together to raise funds (ie: auxiliaries), volunteered, etc. After the war, some women wanted to continue working, which resulted in many taking up courses such as nursing. However, not everyone wanted to work, and simply returned to their homes. The idea of the “weaker sex” was challenged as women proved they could do a double duty. in later decades, we see more emergence of women in the work sector, and finding for more equal rights…
Tamara Ling 11:46 am on March 4, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
In this week’s readings, the two primary sources show how women contributed to the World War II (WWII), which made them question what would happen to them after the war was over.
In Mattie Rotenberg’s broadcast in 1944, she critiques the treatment of German women by the Nazis. The Nazis had an important phrase that explained what were the responsibilities of women, which was: “Kuche, Kinder, Kirche”, which translated to “Kitchen, Children, and Church”. On the outside, this might seem like the correct behaviour during World War II, however the Nazis were constantly interfering in the women’s private lives. For example in the kitchen, they lost their freedom when inspectors were freely able to observe and boss around the women. As for the children, females were purposely used for their bodies to try and produce male soldiers for the war. In addition, the mothers were not able to raise their children the way they would want to, without the narrow-mindedness that was a part of the Nazi regime. Finally the Church constantly preached to the women that they must continue to worship the State compared to other perhaps more ‘humane’ faiths. Through her broadcast, she argues that WWII suppressed women. Furthermore, they were used by the State to satisfy its needs almost to the point of forcing them to become robots. This just goes to prove that this war was indeed a “women’s war” and that they had to fight for their freedom and also for equality for all women.
In the second primary source, also from 1944, Anne Frances explains how WWII made a significant impact on Canadian women as they realized that there are more opportunities for them to work or volunteer in society rather than just being a housewife. During the war, women volunteered and fundraised to help the troops overseas. Also, they proved that they were capable running a home efficiently while also having a career. As the end of the war grew nearer, there was a sense of suspense as everyone was unsure of what would happen when the males came home. During this time, according to Frances, there were many acts of social activism involving women, further solidifying their role in society. In other words, the war was part of the reason why the women started to work together and was able to feel empowered through teamwork, which has continued through to the present day.
Overall these two pieces have a common end goal of wanting gender equality. In Germany, women worked hard to fight for their own freedom in their own spheres of influence. In Canada, the women had two options after the war ended, to go back to how they lived in the past (as housewives) or to rise above and build on the women’s rights that were awarded to them during the war. By allowing women more rights, Canadians could start over to try and solve societal problems, including poverty and unemployment, which can only be done with the equal involvement of all females.
eself 2:58 pm on March 4, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The topic of Anne Frances and Mattie Rotenberg’s papers was the role of women once WW2 had ended. Rotenberg touches upon the idea that a woman’s role in German society was for the “Kitchen, Children and Church”. Rotenberg argues that because of the war, army officials were impeding on the livelihood of women and controlling their lives. Being written mid 1944, Rotenberg expresses her frustration with the controlling behaviour of the armed forces on how women were to cook for the men in war, raise their children to become soldiers, but also keep their Christian faith while their children were not to be raised to have faith in Christianity. This was a problem because Rotenberg was speaking about women sticking up for themselves and protecting their children and the way they live.
Anne Frances speaks about the role of women on the Canadian home front, and in late 1944, the possible positive repercussions of women continuing to work in factories. She also talks about how women can continue their responsibilities to the home, her children, and her commmunity and country. This is significant at the end of WW2 because it would mean women would have a more equal role in society to men if they were allowed to continue in their new lives that they have had for the previous 5 years.
slali 5:03 pm on March 4, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Rotenberg’s article stressed the message that WW2 was a Women’s war. Women’s roles in the war have always gone overlooked and it was overlooked that Women were also victims in this war. They were denied many of the rights the Jewish were denied so this war was about their freedom as women as well. Fascism in Nazi Germany was altering what women were and creating “obedient robots” of them. Because the role of women was changing, they craved a democracy but the only way to obtain it is to make it themselves.
In Frances article, is it evident that women’s roles during the war were very significant and what is the potential reason women today are proud business women. This was the shift from women solely having responsibilities within the household to doing the “double job”. They made the government fully aware that women are able to care for the home and family while maintaining work outside of the home. They had the drive to continue this work after the war to better their communities and country. They finally had a different role they felt they belonged to and that was working for their country and not only for their families. Gender roles were changing and the women were all for this change.
Pierre-Marie B. 6:49 pm on March 4, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The first article deals with Mattie Rotenberg’s view on women’s participation during WW2, especially Canadian women. The basis of her analysis is that despite women were not fighting in the front line and taking bullets for their country, they are as much concerned as men by the international situation at the time. Women were enslaved by the Nazi ideology, which considered them inferior to men, and forced them into “Kitchen, Children, Church”. Those activities are indeed more female-oriented as Rotenberg admitted, but what she was pointing out is that Nazis were intruding in their personal lives, using them as obedient robots to reach the German youth and indoctrinate them. As a consequence, WW2 was a Women’s war because they had to fight themselves for a better democracy at home, “building up and guarding the spirit” of democracy, as imperfect as it was. Women needed to defend their home, their children and their religious beliefs in order to strengthen their nation, then not letting doors open for barbarism and slavery imposed by National Socialism.
Anne Frances’ article is more focused on which behaviour volunteering Canadian women would adopt after the war. It is obvious that war-time had deeply changed the structure of gendered roles in society, with women getting involved in more and more different fields they were not before. Some women, whom are referred to as “the most intelligent” by Frances, wanted to carry on improving education, raising money, reducing juvenile delinquency with on-field work. It seems women felt like they had proven their value by taking professional jobs while still doing useful work for their communities, or by working together, which was not thought possible before the war. After reading the article, I think it could be seen as a statement that Canadian women had to be prepared to take responsibilities and find their place in the post-war world, continuing on the path they had successfully taken to support their husbands and children during war.
bedard 6:58 pm on March 4, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The First article by Rotenberg is stressing the theme that World War 2 was a “Women’s war”. Rotenberg describes the women’s war as a war in a special way, not necessarily in the front lines with the bullets and bombs, but a war to sweep Nazi tyranny from the world. Rotenberg addresses the role women played in the Second World War, particularly Canadian women. The women were fighting against the Nazi ideology, which forced them into the kitchen, children, and church. Rotenberg however does point out that the ideology isn’t so bad, as those three are the women’s field, however, she disagrees with how the Nazi’s go about it, by interfering into their personal lives, treating them to be obedient. The women wanted change, wanted a democracy, but in order to achieve democracy they had to go and get it themselves.
The second article from Anne Frances talks of the role of Canadian women after the Second World War. Frances talks about the shift of the role played by the women, as they moved from stay at home wives, to proving they can shoulder more responsibilities, evident in the role in which women played during the war. Frances touches on the fact that women can shoulder the “double job” by continuing to take care for their family and uphold the house, as well as taking up work outside the house. Frances suggests that the intelligent will want to keep on going when the war is over, carry on what they are doing opposed to going back to the way things were before, remaining solely in the households.
hartcamp 5:56 pm on March 6, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The first primary document for this week’s blog entry focuses on the idea that the Nazi movement wasn’t only dangerous in the obvious senses such a violence, but also that it was a war on women, and women’s rights. The author shows her frustration and concern with the Nazi mindset, stating that is is detrimental to her role as a woman in the church, the kitchen, and as a mother. The author then goes on to voice her concern for what the woman’s role in society will be after the war. She makes it clear that women have proved themselves as being useful, functioning members of society, and it concerns her if these will be forgotten once men return from the front lines. And very importantly, she touches on the notion that women themselves must continue to make themselves responsible, and actives members of society, it is their duty to themselves, and their nation, to keep active in politics, and to continue to maintain a powerful image for themselves.
The second source focuses less on the philosophical outlook of way that women are being perceived, and more on what their functionality in society has actually been like in the war time/absence of men. The Author, Anne Frances, touches on the capability that women have shown in the work place, and the potential that they have if given the opportunity to shine. What is interesting, is both of these text place a majority of the responsibility on women to allow themselves to be respected and valued both at home, as well as in the work place.
Tyler Cole 12:04 am on March 7, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
How was WWII a watershed moment in Canadian history?
WWII was a watershed moment in Canadian history because it was the point at which Canada truly came of age as a nation. Canada had taken large strides during the First World War to “grow up” as a country, but it fully turned the corner to become a nation on the world stage during the course of WWII. It did this in a number of ways, both on the home front and fighting in both the European and Pacific wars. At home, Canada’s women were a critical part of the war effort, and without their service Canada’s troops would never have been able to win the war. Canadian women also became politically active at this time like never before, and showed the rest of Canada that they could do a job to the same degree as men.
In Europe, Canada’s soldiers fought bravely alongside the long-established armies of Britain and America, and took part in major military operations such as the liberation of Italy and the invasions at Normandy. Canadian soldiers one again proved their mettle as soldiers in a major conflict, and their efforts were heralded by all.
The Second World War was a major turning point in Canadian history, and one of the most important moments in the ongoing process of nation building. The work of Canadian women on the home front and Canadian soldiers in the wars in Europe and the Pacific set the stage for Canada to a grow into a player on the world stage in the second half of the 20th century.