Did the First World War Represent an Irrevocable Crisis of Gender in the UK Essay Example

were viewed as temporary measures enacted during a tumultuous era and were subsequently reverted upon attaining peace.

Some historians, like Michelle Perot, believe that the changes during this time were a natural progression of industrialized society. They argue that tension between masculine and feminine roles already existed in the 20th Century and that women over 30 were given suffrage in 1918. In this essay, I will argue that while there was a gender crisis during the war, the authorities only made deliberate changes that they saw as necessary. The immediate postwar period saw a return to gender norms for the most part.

During the First World War, women showed a preference for maintaining their customary roles in both work and culture. Many philanthropic organizations, including the well-known Primrose League, remained highly active throughout the war. Women involved in these movements continued to carry out tasks they had been engaged in since the Victorian era, such as nursing, recruiting, entertaining wounded soldiers and raising funds.

In the past, women in positions of power were often portrayed as peacemakers who backed the war because they cared for their families and understood the sacrifices made by their male relatives. As mothers, they felt a duty to their country to witness their sons and husbands engage in battle. The gender-based division of labor was especially apparent among married couples, where men were obligated to fight regardless of marital status, while women with families were expected to prioritize their familial duties.

The only approved forms of war work were part-time jobs and volunteer nursing. Part-time jobs allowed women to care for their families while volunteering as

nurses reflected the nurturing and healing image associated with femininity. Nurses during the Great War were commonly depicted as passive angels who extended their motherly role into the public sphere.

The job of caring for injured British soldiers and helping them recover was seen as saintly in its goals and accomplishments. However, scholars such as Lynne Layton and Sandra Gilbert have noted the profession's more controlling aspect, which could indicate a gender crisis during wartime. Vera Brittain's memoir 'Testament of Youth' is a notable example of this.

Caring for patients appeared to cultivate a unique feminine empathy that was absent in her earlier years. It also contributed to her sexual liberation through interactions with men, providing insights into masculine behavior and facilitating the shedding of inhibitions. Moreover, she relished the newfound freedom of spending time alone with men, a privilege previously denied to women her age prior to the war.

Gilbert has characterized it as a form of 'sexual liberation' for women, a notion that can be observed in modern literature where nurses were often portrayed not only as caregivers but also as influential individuals with authority and duty towards their patients. The men in the vulnerable position of being immobile patients would have felt emasculated by the fact that nurses were frequently their only source of support.

Despite being established five years prior to the war with over 2,500 VADs across the country by 1914, the women who served as part of the Voluntary Aid Detachment (VAD) on the Western Front, Mesopotamia, and Gallipoli faced more criticism than regular hospital nurses. Their close proximity to the frontline caused concerns about

their intentions and potential impact on male soldiers' self-esteem.

Some VADs were motivated by the suffrage movement to prove their capability to the government. Olive Dent, on the other hand, believed that nursing was a job for men and saw an opportunity for women to contribute by becoming nurses while men were enlisting as soldiers. This meant they could emulate and support the soldiers' efforts by being physically close to the danger zone.

The war leaders felt threatened by this attitude as it challenged both the masculinity of the soldiers and the femininity of women who desired to be something they were not. The fear was intensified by women's involvement in other male-dominated fields such as industry and military roles. VADs, being from higher social positions, enjoyed more protection. However, women working in munitions factories, coal mining, and textiles were mostly from working or lower middle-class backgrounds.

Efforts were made by the establishment to restrict women's newfound economic freedom due to fear. This included preventing many female representatives from participating in labor boards and, if they were allowed, they only had non-voting status. Interestingly, charges of immorality did not have the same impact on other military branches like the Women's Royal Naval Service (WRNS), which primarily recruited from the middle and upper-middle classes. The Sporting Times published a provocative cartoon asking whether one would prefer a slap in the eye or a WAAC on the knee.

In relation to class-based fears, it is crucial to acknowledge the evolving gender roles during wartime in Britain. The government aimed to maintain the hierarchical structure of society and mitigate the impact of the

gender crisis. This notion depicts society as a double stranded helix, where one strand is consistently subordinate to the other. This principle also dictated the responsibilities of women and men in the workforce.

Despite women's advancements, the gender relationship remained unchanged with men's work seen as more important. Before the war, male nurses had higher positions than females. However, during the war, female nurses were overshadowed by male soldiers risking their lives. Overall, from 1914 to 1918, the UK government's actions towards women highlighted a growing gender crisis. However, there is evidence contradicting the idea that this crisis could not be reversed.

The main aim of wartime propagandists was to exaggerate the temporary nature of women's work and uphold gender distinctions. The key message was that 'although women are capable of any job during the war, they will stop working once the war is finished'. As part of a propaganda campaign, a woman working as a gravedigger was highlighted, temporarily fulfilling her husband's role while he was absent. This suggested that once he returned, he would resume his position and traditional gender roles would be reinstated.

The War Government initially resisted establishing daytime care programs for working mothers but eventually made concessions out of necessity. In 1916, recognizing the changing dynamics of the war, the government introduced these programs, acknowledging that women's productive capacity was now more crucial than their previous role as 'reproductive national property'. By the end of the war, around 700,000 women had taken over men's jobs and were widely praised by most of the country.

Despite the fact that 'two weeks after the armistice, 11, 300 women

were discharged... women had almost vanished from men’s jobs by 1919 and by 1920 men were even taking over some skilled women's jobs', it is important to consider that this is irrelevant. This demonstrates that order had been successfully restored. Some historians argue against these claims by emphasizing that suffrage was granted as a form of 'reward' for women proving themselves through their war work. However, Veronique Molinari presents a more persuasive argument by suggesting that women were simply compensating for the absence of male votes, similar to how they compensated for the labor shortage during the war.

The Act expelled the majority of working women from their jobs, specifically targeting women over 30 and excluding young women who were a significant part of the workforce during the war. This exclusion also applied to the 'Khaki Girls' and the VADs on the front line, who wore uniforms resembling those of men. The symbolism of their attire was seen as a threat to the social order that soldiers were fighting to uphold. By dressing in khaki and holding military titles, these women stood out in public, a space previously associated with prostitutes. This departure from societal norms made them susceptible to sexual assault and rumors about their promiscuity and availability to male soldiers.

The uniform, while providing women with equality, also denied them their femininity as they were associated with lesbianism. The Women's Volunteer Reserve (WVR) was even called 'Upper class Amazons' due to their resemblance to the legendary warriors who removed their breasts to enhance their skills in archery during battles.

Their presence and actions on the battlefront not only affected the

atmosphere of male warriors but also endangered their role as mothers on the home front. According to one soldier, the women present were not considered suitable for marriage as they were not seen as being womanly. Even in 1920, Arabella Kenealy wrote an article stating that these "mannish women" were incapable of parenthood and were directly responsible for what she called "race suicide", indicating that the gender crisis continued beyond the war.

The sexualization of women on the battlefront persisted even after World War One, particularly during the Second World War and the Gulf War. In 1981, Enoch Powell revived the old argument that physical force is necessary in extreme situations, implying that power should be held by men as the stronger gender. Powell also emphasized the contrasting roles of men and women in war: men taking lives and women involved in the creation and preservation of life.

In the military, there has always been little acceptance of femininity, making it a predominantly male domain. The experiences and relationships between male soldiers at the frontlines highlight the existence of a gender identity and gender role dilemma in the UK. Before the war, there was a growing belief that it was necessary to remove boys from any influences that could make them more feminine, which coincided with the expansion of public schools. Especially for upper and middle class boys, their expectations for 1914 encompassed enduring challenges, seeking adventure, displaying group loyalty, and embracing the homosocial values learned during their education.

However, when studying the reasons behind writing letters home to mothers, a conflicting double image emerges. There was a consistent tension

between the writer's personal need to ponder on events and the mother's need for reassurance. On one side, the act of writing increased their perception of self-sacrifice and accountability, as they pondered how concerned their mothers would be and aimed to uphold their morale rather than focusing on their own anxieties. They tended to downplay the everyday dangers faced and frequently referred to them as 'excitement'.

Accounts of skirmishes lacked self-focus. For instance, in one letter to his mother, Lance Corporal David Fenton mentioned being in the thick of the action but mainly wrote about their Senior Officer. Fenton praised the officer for leading his men under extremely challenging conditions and going above and beyond his duty by hurling bombs and keeping the men together in a remarkable manner. On the other hand, the constant communication with their mothers fostered a maternal dependence and brought forth a feminine sensibility in them.

Fenton often talked about the conditions in the trenches and the tasks carried out, like washing, shaving, and staying dry. These were activities that any average mother could comprehend. Moreover, it seems that when there were no actual maternal figures present, men would take care of each other in maternal manners by looking after the sick and injured themselves. The officers felt a sense of responsibility towards those under their command similar to that of a parent towards their own children.

Although soldier-to-soldier relationships are commonly perceived as paternal, they also often exhibit maternal qualities. Lance Corporal Fenton's letter to the fallen comrade's mother during World War One provides an illustration of this. In his letter, he describes cradling the deceased

soldier in his arms until his final breath and planting two kisses on the forehead – one symbolizing a mother's affection and the other signifying his own love.

Fenton's personal losses, such as the recent loss of his stepmother, may have affected him emotionally and influenced the nature of the kiss. Additionally, there could have been a sensual aspect to it. According to Das, the bond among young men on the front had both elements of homoeroticism within a heterosexual context. This took place during a time when British culture was grappling with conflicting ideas about "manly love," rooted in their experiences in public schools, and the controversy surrounding Oscar Wilde's same-sex actions.

Arguably, due to the intensity of the situation they faced and their prolonged alienation from societal norms, these men achieved a heightened level of closeness with each other that was incomprehensible to those back home. In his unpublished memoirs, W. A. Fenton recounted the experience of "sharing everything, from the last cigarette, the last army biscuit, to the last bit of cover during enemy bombardments," which fostered a sense of almost loving one another.

The physical aspect of these relationships was emphasized, rendering any comparison to conventional notions of ‘manly love’ irrelevant due to the lack of mention of the body. This does not imply that most soldiers were involved in homosexual relationships; however, it indicates a distinct rediscovery of gender and a reevaluation of masculinity. Ultimately, the circumstances faced by soldiers during World War I undoubtedly disrupted traditional perceptions of masculine bravery, where men previously had the opportunity to prove themselves through direct combat.

The events of

World War One brought about a unique feeling of anonymity and signaled the start of large-scale modern warfare. Soldiers found themselves disempowered, lacking control over their environment. Joanna Bourke argues that heroism was unable to cope with the challenges posed by 20th-century warfare. The significant number of soldiers affected by war neurosis, or shell shock, presents compelling evidence for a gender crisis in Britain during the war. This condition can be viewed as a physical representation of male gender anxieties.

According to renowned psychiatrist W. H. R. Rivers, a quarter of frontline discharges were attributed to psychological causes, and there were 80,000 reported instances of shell shock by the war's end. Rivers determined that the number of neurotic symptoms experienced did not align with battle intensity, length of service, or emotional predisposition; instead, it correlated with immobility. Initially, shell shock cases were viewed as indicative of weakness in individuals, but by the time the Somme offensive took place in 1916, it became evident that nobody was exempt from its effects.

The rate of war neurosis was significantly higher for Army officers, who primarily belonged to the middle and upper classes and had received an education focused on masculinity and war at public schools. Some treatments used for shell shock, like shaming and electric shocking, were undeniably reminiscent of those applied to hysterical women during the 19th Century. The appearance of shell shock triggered discussions about the perceived femininity of its victims. Symptoms varied, ranging from individuals losing their capacity to walk, talk, or think logically.

The notion of manliness was rejected by many both physically and mentally. This led to an important

discussion about masculinity that had been deliberately avoided in previous generations. Eventually, war neurosis became widely accepted as a treatable medical condition. The understanding that patients' childish outbursts could be addressed and that self-control and maturity could be regained played a key role in this acceptance. Therefore, the crisis was not permanent.