Videos I included in my PowerPoint

December 12th, 2011

These are the links to the two videos I had at the end of my presentation. I only had time to show one of them, which was the one that had the Rosie the Riveter theme song in the background. This first video is a short clip of a woman who is a grandmother and goes to work helping in the factory during World War II.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfZ9Rjm2xWQ

This next video is the clip I showed in class with the Rosie the Riveter theme song. I mainly used this clip because of the song and I really enjoyed the ending where it showed women “going back into the kitchen”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55NCElsbjeQ&feature=related

Video of Final Presentation

December 12th, 2011

I was not abale to upload my video from my phone because the file is too large. Even when I try to upload it from the phone onto YouTube, it still says it is too large and I would need to select a smaller portion of it. I am still trying to figure a different way to load it so the entire video will be able to be seen.

Original Image

December 12th, 2011

 Original Norman Rockwell image of Rosie the Riveter

Final Draft- Rosie the Riveter

December 12th, 2011

The outbreak of World War II and the United States involvement drastically changed the lives of millions of women all over the nation. With the onset of mechanized warfare, the industrialization of mass-produced goods and the benefits of assembly line production, workers were able to produce war munitions at an exponential rate.  The social and cultural roles of American women throughout the early 1940’s shifted tremendously from the home to the workforce, and without their answer to the call to action, the war may have had a very different outcome.  Their work ethics and determination were a major factor in the United States’ winning of the war.  In turn, World War II helped to provide them with the tools they needed to survive and started them on the path to compete equally within a man’s world.  The six million American women that joined the workforce during World War II could be considered a hidden army of the Allies.

Women played a vital role during World War II in the combined Allied war effort against the Axis powers of Germany and Japan. They quickly made transitions from their roles of homemakers and mothers to the roles of women in the workforce.  During the period between 1941 and 1945, the United States government issued various forms of propaganda to entice these women to leave their homes and enter the workforce.  These women took on various jobs including steel work, shipbuilding and various forms of factory work. One of the most notable and successful campaigns utilized was the Rosie the Riveter campaign.  This campaign was the epitome of gender transgression and it helped to not only persuade women to leave the domestic realm and take on masculine jobs, but also to change the perspectives of women when viewing the workforce as a man’s sphere.

On December 7th, 1941, the Japanese forces bombed the naval base of Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. This devastating blow to the United States sparked the immediate entry of the United States to enter into the Second Great World War. While the men were being called into action to deploy overseas to help fight the Japanese, many jobs were becoming vacant in the states and this provided the ideal opportunity for women to take advantage of these vacancies and prove what they had long been capable of. In total, 18 million women were involved in the workforce between the years of 1941 and 1945, with six million of these women coming into it for the first time.[1] The majority of these women continued to work in traditional women’s occupations; however, an estimated number of slightly over three million women worked in defense industries. Although these significant changes for women were enormous, unfortunately they did not alter the recurrent state of economic or social inequality for women. For many years, women had suffered discrimination and inequality in the workforce relative to men (including significant pay inequalities for the same work as men) and this remained unchanged throughout the duration of the war. Despite all of the inequalities that women faced during this time, they still remained true to their nation and their families, and were able to jump into the workforce and take over the jobs that men had left behind.

Various forms of propaganda were utilized during the conflict and the purpose of this propaganda was to mobilize widespread support for wartime and political actions.  Several campaigns were geared directly towards women to entice them to help the wartime effort in any way that they could.[2] The Office of War Information (OWI) was the main governmental office that was in charge over the propaganda campaigns.[3] Among the responsibilities of the OWI was the selling of the idea that women were not only able but obligated as well to become involved in wartime work. During the first few months of the Allies entering into the war, they took a severe beating from the Japanese, causing more and more men to leave the home front and join the Armed Forces. With so many men leaving, more and more jobs were opening every day for women, and the Allied war effort depended on women to fill in the jobs where the men had left. Ever since the Great Depression, many women jumped at the opportunity to obtain a war job.[4] For the first time, women were able to compete in the workforce for better pay, a common privilege that men had always been privy to. In early 1942, the Bureau of Labor Statistics predicted a shortage of about six million workers by late 1943, which caused President Roosevelt to create the War Manpower Commission (WMC), which was to “ensure maximum utilization of the nation’s manpower in the prosecution of the war.”[5] After its creation in 1943, the WMC and the OWI produced various campaigns that were aimed specifically at women. Common recurring themes used amongst these campaigns were the aspects of patriotism and glamour, concepts that appealed to the younger generation of women in the United States. In 1943, an issue of The Saturday Evening Post featured the first image of what has come to be known as “Rosie the Riveter”: a muscular but pert, rosy cheeked young woman, rivet gun slung across her lap. “The double message was clear: her loafer-clad foot was firmly planted on Mein Kampf  – symbolizing her role in stamping out fascism – but she could still remain feminine, as the powder puff and mirror peeking out her coverall pocket reminded.”[6]

Although the Rosie the Riveter campaign is notably recognized as the leading factor in persuading women to join the war effort, there are a few scholars and women’s historians who would disagree. Not only do they believe that the campaign did not have that significant an effect on women, but they also disagree that so many women were compelled to join the workforce. According to Karen Anderson, “the tendency of historians to focus on Rosie the Riveter has distorted the analysis of the nature of wartime changes. Because most American women remained homemakers during the war, Rosie was not the typical wartime woman.”[7] Although these assumptions are interesting, it is more widely accepted and understood that more women than men made up the workforce during World War II, and the majority of these women actually enjoyed what they did, or at least enjoyed the wages that they were earning. Along with patriotic motives, many women took war jobs to help bring their men home more quickly and to help make the world a more secure place for their children.[8]  Many women employed in defense plants wanted to keep their wartime jobs, including fifty percent of those who had previously been homemakers, and they resisted being channeled back into service and trade work (such as waitressing, tailoring, etc.). Clearly, economic imperatives and the fulfillment of doing skilled work exerted a greater influence on women who had advanced during the war than did propaganda or private fantasies.[9]

Contrary to popular myths and conceptions, women were not only compelled to join the workforce during World War II, but the majority of women actually wanted to keep their wartime job after the war was over. For over a century, women in the United States had been working; however, this was a time in which they could earn substantial wages for their work. As the armed forces filled its ranks with manpower, industry filled its jobs with womanpower and surprisingly enough, at the end of the war, many women surrendered their jobs with great reluctance. “A 1944 Labor Department study reported that eighty percent of the women interviewed desired to continue working and in the same kind of job after the war.”[10]

The outbreak of World War II and the United States involvement brought about a huge shift for women in the U.S. Although women had been fighting for equal rights socially and politically for almost one hundred years already, World War II and women migrating to the workforce sparked a change in the ways that women desired to be treated. For years, it was accepted (and in many states law) that women could not work, or at least there could only be one “breadwinner” per family and men typically filled this role.[11] At the war’s end, the majority of these women were enjoying the money they were making for their quality production and they refused to leave their jobs.  This forced many employers to institute layoffs and massive firing campaigns because men who were returning home from war needed their jobs back. It is astonishing that these women were treated in this way considering the fact that they were quick to mobilize in a time of need for their country, yet the entire time they were being used and the government was quick to get rid of them in the end. These massive layoffs and firings were government backed, and just as propaganda was utilized to bring women into the workforce, it was utilized to remove them as well.[12]

World War II was a pivotal moment in women’s participation in the paid labor force. Wartime workers demonstrated that it was possible for women to maintain their households while also assuming the role of breadwinner with outside employment.[13]  According to Karen Anderson, the experience “pointed the way to a greater degree of choice for American women.”[14] Never before had the government and industry launched nationwide propaganda campaigns to recruit women workers, and never before had so many women responded.[15] By going to work in war industries or what were officially called “essential civilian services,” millions of American women learned new skills and capabilities.[16] Rosie the Riveter was a huge icon for women of World War II because she was the memorable face that women saw in magazines, newspapers, and even commercials. Women relished the idea of being able to compete in a man’s world yet still retain her femininity underneath the coveralls and welder’s mask.[17] These women were truly amazing in the feats they accomplished; not only were they able to transition from the domestic realm of the household into the man’s sphere of the workforce, but they did so with style and class. Whatever individual motives each woman possessed, her patriotism, determination, and eagerness to help her fellow Americans showed through and helped to pave the way for future women’s rights and equal opportunities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

 

 

Anderson, Karen. Wartime Women: Sex Roles, Family Relations and the Status of Women during World War II. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1981.

 

Campbell, D’Ann. Women at War with America: Private Lives in a Patriotic Era. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.

 

Carnes, Mark C. and John A. Garraty. American Destiny: Narrative of a Nation. New York: Pearson Longman, 2006.

 

Cashmann, Sean Dennis. America, Roosevelt and World War II. New York: New York University Press, 1989.

 

Colman, Penny. Rosie the Riveter: Women Working on the Homefront in World War II. New York: Crown Publishers, 1995.

 

Field, Connie. (Producer and Director). The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter. Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982.

 

Frank, Miriam, Marilyn Ziebarth and Connie Field. The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter: The Story of Three Million Working Women during World War II. Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982.

 

Gluck, Sherna Berger. Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War and Social Change. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1987.

 

Harris, Mark Jonathan, Franklin D. Mitchell and Steven J. Schechter. The Homefront: America during World War II. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1984.

 

Hartmann, Susan M. The Homefront and Beyond: American Women in the 1940’s. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982.

 

Hesse-Biber, Sharlene Nagy and Greg Lee Carter. Working Women in America: Split Dreams. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

 

Honey, Maureen. Creating Rosie the Riveter: Class, Gender, and Propaganda during World War II. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press, 1984.

 

Jones, John Bush. All Out for Victory: Magazine Advertising and the World War II Homefront. Lebanon: University Press of New England, 2009.

 

McEuen, Melissa A. Making War, Making Women: Femininity and Duty on the American Homefront 1941-1945. Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 2011.

 



[1]   Miriam Frank, Marilyn Ziebarth and Connie Field, The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter (Emeryville, California: Clarity Educational Productions: 1982), 16.

 

[2]   Ibid., 89.

 

[3]   The United States Office of War Information (OWI) was established by Executive Order 9182 on June 13th, 1942 by President Roosevelt and remained in effect until September of 1945. The office’s main duties included distributing posters and broadcasting to the American public to promote patriotism and to encourage support. They were also responsible for warning the public of possible threats or spies and their main contribution was the encouragement of women to join the workforce.

[4]   Penny Coleman, Rosie the Riveter: Women Working on the Homefront in World War II (New York: Crown Publisher’s Inc, 1995), 44-45.

[5]   Ibid., 46-47. The War Manpower Commission (WMC) was established by Executive Order 9139 on April 18th, 1942 by President Roosevelt. The main duties of the WMC were to manage and balance the labor needs of the armed forces, agriculture, and industry.

[6]  Sherna Berger Gluck, Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War and Social Change (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1987), 12.

[7]  Karen Anderson, Wartime Women: Sex Roles, Family Relations, and the Status of Women during World War II (Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1981), 10.  Mein Kampf is the famous memoir written by Adolf Hitler that translates to “My Struggle.”

[8]  Susan Hartmann,  The Homefront and Beyond: American Women in the 1940’s (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982), 23.

[9]  Maureen Honey, Creating Rosie the Riveter: Class, Gender and Propaganda during World War II (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1984), 11.

[10]  Mark Jonathan Harris, Franklin D. Mitchell and Steven J. Schechter, The Homefront: America during World War II (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1984), 118.

[11]  D’Ann Campbell, Women at War with America: Patriotic Lives in a Patriotic Era (Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1984), 103.

[12]  Coleman, 96-97.

[13]  Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber and Gregg Lee Carter, Working Women in America: Split Dreams (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 43.

[14]  Anderson, 174.

[15]  Ibid., 100-101.

[16]  Ibid., 101.

[17]  John Bush Jones, All out for Victory: Magazine Advertising and the World War II Home Front (Hanover: University Press of New England, 2009), 224-225.

Chakrabarty- A Small History of Subaltern Studies

October 28th, 2011

Chakrabarty’s A Small History of Subaltern Studies is a review article in which he takes a Marxist approach to class analysis. The term subaltern refers to the study of the homeless, the oppressed, the poor, etc. Throughout history there have been a wide array of subaltern peoples that can be studied, including slaves, native americans, women in general, Holocaust victims, indigenous populations of territories that were conquered and colonized and the early American colonists as well. All of these people were considered oppressed by some higher form.  Considering this article is primarily focused on Indian history, Chakrabarty mentions the ideas of nationalism and colonialism in his essay as being the two major areas of research and debate defining the field of modern Indian history in the 1960’s and 1970’s. For many years, India was colonized and controlled by the British and it was referred to as the Crown Jewel of the British Empire. One historian, Bipan Chandra viewed Indian history of the colonial period as being “an epic battle between the forces of nationalism and those of colonialism” (5). To understand this difference, it is important to have a general background of the history of India and to be familiar with concepts of nationalism and colonialism.

Final Lit Review- Rosie the Riveter Icon

October 28th, 2011

Lindsey Smith

HIST 299

10-21-11

Lit Review Final

           

Women played a vital role during World War II in the combined Allied war effort against the Axis powers of Germany and Japan. They quickly made transitions from their roles of homemakers and mothers to the roles of women in the workforce.  During the period between 1941 and 1945, the United States government issued various forms of propaganda to entice these women to leave their homes and enter into the workforce.  These women took on various jobs including steel work, shipbuilding and various forms of factory work. One of the most notable and successful campaigns utilized was the Rosie the Riveter campaign.  This campaign was the epitome of gender transgression and it helped to not only persuade women to leave the domestic realm and take on masculine jobs, but also to change the perspectives of women when viewing the workforce as a man’s sphere. There is an abundance of literature that exists referencing the campaign; however, there seems to be an obvious trend that none of these sources pre-date the 1980’s. This phenomenon is most likely contributed to the post-feminist movement that took place in the 1980’s and continued on through the early 1990’s, during which many women were protesting for equal rights and equal pay amongst men, the same injustices that working women of the 1940’s  were succumbed to.

            Although the image of Rosie the Riveter almost always comes to mind when imagining the women behind the scenes of World War II, according to Karen Anderson’s 1981 Wartime Women this was not the case.  “Because more American women remained homemakers during the war, Rosie was not the typical wartime woman.[1]  Anderson’s book is not the first work to address this little known fact.  Both women’s history authors D’Ann Campbell and Susan Hartmann reference in their works that the Rosie the Riveter image has “distorted the analysis of the nature of wartime changes.” [2] In further support of the misconception of all women in the United States joining the workforce, Sherna Berger Gluck stated in her 1987 book Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War and Social Change that “three-fourths of the homemakers themselves thought they could best contribute to the war effort by continuing to do what they were doing.” [3] The Rosie the Riveter image is commonly seen as an empowering force on women but how powerful was this image when it was first introduced? According to both the 2001 American Women: A Library of Congress Guide for the Study of Women’s History and Culture in the United States and Penny Coleman’s Rosie the Riveter: Women Working on the Homefront in World War II, the original Rosie the Riveter image was a creation of Norman Rockwell and not the traditional image of the beautiful woman advertising the slogan “We Can Do It!” In an effort to launch the propaganda campaign, the United States government released the latter image a few months after Rockwell’s Rosie image graced the cover of the May 29, 1943 edition of the Saturday Evening Post.[4]

            In the 1982 book The Homefront and Beyond: American Women in the 1940’s, Susan Hartmann examined the new roles these wartime women were establishing and she mentions three conditions that helped to bring about these changes.  First, women were replacing men only for the duration of the war.  Second, “women would retain their femininity while performing masculine duties” and finally, the media emphasized the feminine motivations behind women joining in the war effort, contradictory to the traditional patriotic values. “In the public image, women took war jobs to bring their men home more quickly and to help make the world a more secure place for their children.” [5] Miriam Frank, Marilyn Ziebarth and Connie Field help to fortify Hartmann’s assertions by describing a popular newsreel of the 1940’s that was used as a propaganda technique. In this newsreel, an attractive actress is shown working hard and taking a job because the nation was “in a jam.” The narrator goes on to state “Somehow that answer pleased us. No sudden emotional urge sent this young woman into war work. No loss of a loved one. No temporary economic embarrassment.” [6] This provides evidence that there were multiple reasons as to why women joined the labor movement.

When the war was over, women were expected to give up their manual labor jobs and return back home to readjust to their normal household duties.  When the men were returning home from war, they needed their jobs back.  According to Mark Jonathan Harris, Franklin D. Mitchell and Steven J. Schecter in their 1984 book The Homefront: America during World War II “a 1944 Labor Department study reported that eighty percent of the women interviewed desired to continue working and in the same kind of job after the war.” [7]  To further support their arguments, Maureen Honey (who is a prominent women’s history scholar in the field of propaganda and women during World War II) also stated in her 1984 book Creating Rosie the Riveter: Class, Gender and Propaganda during World War II that “many women employed in defense plants wanted to keep their wartime jobs, including fifty percent of those who had previously bee homemakers, and that they resisted being channeled back into service and trade work.” [8]  Because the propaganda campaigns of the war included not only the enticement for women to join in the war effort, but after the war was over, various forms of media outlets and propaganda were used to push women back into the domestic sphere of life.  “Clearly, economic imperatives and the fulfillment of doing skilled work exerted a greater influence on women who had advanced during the war than did propaganda or private fantasies.” [9]  There were many contributing factors as to why so many women were hesitant to leave their blue-collar laboring jobs after the war; however, money was the major incentive.  According to D’Ann Campbell’s 1984 Women at War with America: Private Lives in a Patriotic Era, the average national teacher’s salary was $1,441 in 1940, and in more rural areas, the amount would have been half of that.  Blue-collar workers had the prospective of making twice the amount of a city teacher, and four times the amount of a rural teacher.[10]  Given these extreme differences, it is easy to understand why these factory working, skilled labor women chose to remain doing manual labor jobs.  However, Campbell also introduces other overwhelming statistics.  In 1943, only one in eight women considered factory work as being acceptable, and typically, it was only acceptable for those women with no higher than an elementary education, which consisted of 37 percent of the population.[11]  According to Campbell, socio-economic factors played major roles in contributing to the ways women viewed certain jobs.  Not only were education and class important, but race as well; however, propaganda that was used catered more towards white women versus women of color or minority status.  She also stated “the heavy doses of government inspired media propaganda on the joys of manual labor obviously did not carry much credibility.” [12]

 Contrary to popular beliefs, not all women were compelled to join the workforce for the same reasons during World War II.  Although propaganda and media focused on the patriotism aspects and persuading women to help their husbands overseas, according to an abundance of research, money was a major incentive in driving women into the workforce, or at the very least it was the main factor in contributing to women staying within once the war had come to an end.  How did the Rosie the Riveter icon gain so much popularity and how was this campaign able to sway so many women (if it did indeed sway them)? Common trends amongst the writers of the various sources that have been used are their qualifications in the subject of women’s history. Karen Anderson, D’Ann Campbell, Connie Field, Sherna Gluck, Susan Hartmann and Maureen Honey are all prominent women’s historians and they have each all commented and critiqued on each other’s works, if not helped to contribute. Their combined works spread throughout a decade almost, beginning in 1981 and ending in 1987. These sources are very credible and provide extensive information on the overly general topic of women in the workforce during World War II. Each author also provides a detailed bibliography which can help the prospective researcher discover more information on the topic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

 

American Women: A Library of Congress Guide for the Study of Women’s History and Culture in the United States. Hanover and London: University Press of New England, 2001.

 

Anderson, Karen. Wartime Women: Sex Roles, Family Relations and the Status of Women during World War II. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1981.

 

Campbell, D’Ann. Women at War with America: Private Lives in a Patriotic Era. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.

 

Colman, Penny. Rosie the Riveter: Women Working on the Homefront in World War II. New York: Crown Publishers, 1995.

 

Field, Connie. (Producer and Director). The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter. Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982.

 

Frank, Miriam, Marilyn Ziebarth and Connie Field. The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter: The Story of Three Million Working Women during World War II. Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982.

 

Gluck, Sherna Berger. Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War and Social Change. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1987.

 

Harris, Mark Jonathan, Franklin D. Mitchell and Steven J. Schechter. The Homefront: America during World War II. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1984.

 

Hartmann, Susan M. The Homefront and Beyond: American Women in the 1940’s. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982.

 

Honey, Maureen. Creating Rosie the Riveter: Class, Gender, and Propaganda during World War II. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press, 1984.



[1] Karen Anderson, Wartime Women: Sex Roles, Family Relations and the Status of Women during World War II (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1981), 10-11.

[2] Ibid., 10. D’Ann Campbell is the author of Women at War with America: Private Lives in a Patriotic Era and Susan Hartmann is the author of The Homefront and Beyond: American Women in the 1940’s.  All three of these publications were printed within 4 years of each other, and the authors mention each other within the acknowledgements.

[3] Sherna Berger Gluck, Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War and Social Change (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1987), 12-13.

[4] American Women: A Library of Congress Guide for the Study of Women’s History and Culture in the United States (Hanover and London: University Press of New England, 2001), 5 and Penny Coleman, Rosie the Riveter: Women Working on the Homefront in World War II (New York: Crown Publishers, 1995), 15.

[5] Susan Hartmann, The Homefront and Beyond: American Women in the 1940’s (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982), 23.

[6] Miriam Frank, Marilyn Ziebarth and Connie Field, The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter: The Story of Three Million Women Working during World War II (Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982), 92.

Connie Field, The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter (Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982) film

[7] Mark Jonathan Harris and Franklin D. Mitchell and Steven J. Schechter, The Homefront: America during World War II (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1984), 118.

[8] Maureen Honey, Creating Rosie the Riveter: Class, Gender and Propaganda during World War II (Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press, 1984), 11.

[9] Ibid, 11.

[10] D’Ann Campbell, Women at War with America: Private Lives in a Patriotic Era (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984), 104.

[11] Ibid., 113.

[12] Ibid.

Braudel Article “On History”

September 30th, 2011

This article was very interesting overall. Braudel dicusses the importance of history and how it relates to other disciplines, including the subject of history being considered a social science. I didn’t particularly care for his writing style. I would consider it wordy and in many cases he digresses so often it is difficult to follow the point he is trying to make. History is such an important discipline and as he makes reference to in his article, everything (including every discipline) is connected to history in some form. Everything and everyone has a history, whether it be of any contextual importance.  History, as well as many other disciplines (including mathematics as Braudel mentions) is broken down into many subcategories, just as other social sciences. I believe one of the main points Braudel is trying to make is that history is a social science.

Meet with a historian

September 26th, 2011

When I first met with Dr. McClurken to discuss my topic, he informed me that it may be too broad and that I should probably focus it down some more. The problem was, what did I want to narrow it down to? There are so many intersting things I could discuss in my paper about women involved in World War II, including women in the workforce, the impact on homelife, propaganda that was used, the way they were treated when the war was over, or the women pilots that served in the military.  When doing my initial research, I was shocked when I saw how many women pilots there were in the early 1940’s and how many women were involved with the military. I think the direction I need to shift and focus more on for my research paper is towards propaganda techniques that were used during the war that catered toward women and how effective their use was both before and after the war.

Book Review/ Article Review

September 26th, 2011

One of the main sources for my paper is Maureen Honey’s “Creating Rosie the Riveter: Class, Gender and Propaganda During World War II. I found an excellent book review through the Acacemic Search Complete database on the libraries LibGuides webpage. The book review can be found here. 

I have also found another book/movie review article pertaining to my topic. The main primary source I have is based on a film that Dr. McClurken provided me with titled “The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter”. It focuses primarily on the lives of about 5 to 6 women who were in the workforce during World War II. The interviews battle the issues of class, race and gender throughout the early 1940’s for these women. The review article I have found for this can be found here. 

 

 

Proposal

September 21st, 2011

The outbreak of World War II and the United States involvement drastically changed the lives of millions of women all over the nation. With the onset of mechanized warfare, the industrialization of mass-produced goods and the benefits of assembly line production, workers were able to produce war munitions at an exponential rate. The social and cultural role of American women throughout the early 1940’s shifted tremendously, and without their answer of the call to action, the world may not be the way it is today. Their work ethics and determination is a major factor in the United States’ winning of the war, and in turn, World War II helped to provide them with the tools they needed to survive and started them on the path to compete equally within a man’s world.  The six million American women that joined the workforce during World War II were the Hidden Army of the Allies.

            The goal of this paper is to explore the ways in which women contributed to the war effort, their treatment during such time by their employers, the roles the government and various forms of propaganda played in women’s decisions to leave their housewife statuses and the shift in the public’s view of women in the workforce at the end of the war. There are a number of reliable primary sources I have found that I will be basing my research on, including a documentary that provides first-hand accounts from various women from different socioeconomic, ethnical and racial backgrounds. I have also found a few websites that will help to aid in my research, providing written detailed accounts of women’s lives in the workforce.

            In addition to the various primary sources, I have found a substantial number of secondary sources as well. The majority of the secondary sources I have uncovered are various books, all focusing on the primary roles of women throughout the war and the “Rosie the Riveter” status. A few of the books I have found provide wonderfully extensive bibliographies, which will aid in my research further.

 These women were truly amazing in the feats they accomplished and the tasks they performed. Their stories are empowering and provide inspiration for all women, proving that women are not just the weak, feeble nurturing beings that societies and cultures throughout time have tried to keep separate from men. With my finished document, the readers will have gained a better understanding of what life was like for a woman in the United States between 1941 and 1945.

Bibliography

American Women: A Library of Congress Guide for the Study of Women’s History and Culture in the United States. Hanover and London: University Press of New England, 2001

Anderson, Karen. Wartime Women: Sex Roles, Family Relations and the Status of Women during World War II. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1981

Baxandall, Rosalyn, Linda Gordon and Susan Reverby. America’s Working Women: A Documented History 1600 to the Present. New York: Vintage Books, 1976

Campbell, D’Ann. Women at War with America: Private Lives in a Patriotic Era. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984

Carnes, Mark C. and John A. Garraty. American Destiny: Narrative of a Nation. New York: Pearson Longman, 2006

Cashmann, Sean Dennis. America, Roosevelt and World War II. New York: New York University Press, 1989

Colman, Penny. Rosie the Riveter: Women Working on the Homefront in World War II. New York: Crown Publishers, 1995

“Curtains for the Axis, Lace Curtains for Her”. Boeing News Tacoma Edition (October 31, 1944): 3

Field, Connie. (Producer and Director). The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter. Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982

Frank, Miriam, Marilyn Ziebarth and Connie Field. The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter: The Story of Three Million Working Women during World War II. Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982

Glazer-Malbin, Nona, ed. And Helen Youngelson Waehrer. Women in a Man-Made World. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company, 1973

Gluck, Sherna Berger. Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War and Social Change. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1987

Harris, Mark Jonathan, Franklin D. Mitchell and Steven J. Schechter. The Homefront: America during World War II. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1984

Hartmann, Susan M. The Homefront and Beyond: American Women in the 1940’s. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982

Hesse-Biber, Sharlene Nagy and Greg Lee Carter. Working Women in America: Split Dreams. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005

Jones, John Bush. All Out for Victory: Magazine Advertising and the World War II Homefront. Lebanon: University Press of New England, 2009

Lingerman Richard R. Don’t You Know There’s a War On? Toronto: Longman’s Canada Limited, 1970

McEuen, Melissa A. Making War, Making Women: Femininity and Duty on the American Homefront 1941-1945. Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 2011

Strebe, Amy Goodpaster. Flying For Her Country: The American and Soviet Women Military Pilots of World War II. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group Inc, 2007

War and Post-War Demands fir Trained Personnel, Institute of Women’s Professional Relations (New London, 1943)

Willmott, H.P., Robin Cross and Charles Messenger. World War II. New York: DK Publishing, 2004

World War II: Day by Day. London: Dorling Kindersley Limited, 2004