The great part played by women coming forward during the war to take the
place of men called to the army is disclosed in a White Paper recently
issued by the Board of Trade. Over a million and a half women offered
their services, in addition to those already employed.[23:1] The
increase has been the highest in the occupations in which comparatively
few women were engaged before the war. In April, 1918, 701,000 women
were working on munitions and 774,000 in other industrial government
employment. A disturbing fact revealed (called, I note, in the Report an
_interesting point_!) is the number of women who have been engaged in
hard, laboring work. Before the war when the public discovered women
doing very hard work, it excited indignation and pity. The women
chain-makers of Craddock Heath, to cite one example, were accorded
general commiseration. But during the war our feelings on the question
would seem to have undergone a somewhat sudden transformation; a
complete turn-round has taken place in our attitude. Heavy work done by
women--foundry work, for instance, _demanding great expenditure of
physical strength_[24:1] has excited admiration and _become an important
factor of the industrial situation_. A glamour of patriotic war service,
added to the lure of high wages, has been thrown like a cloak of romance
over such exhibitions of female power. They became victories of female
will over female weakness.
Certainly in many cases the work done was quite unsuitable for women.
The employment of married women during long days of tiring work had
inevitable results. Babies were neglected or births were deliberately
prevented. This spendthrift folly will have to be paid for in the
future.
Not that I believe that all apparently hard work to be on an equality
of unfitness for women. Country work is generally healthful; though hard
work it is restful to the nerves. Every kind of nerve-racking work as in
factories, heavy weight-lifting, long standing, and the tending of
machinery without any kind of human interest, must be detrimental to
women. Certain employments, consecrated by custom as comparatively
womanly, yet, in their nerve-exhausting details mean ill-health. Take,
for an instance, the average shop-girl, or machine worker, with her
whitened face, dragging steps and flattened figure: does she not show
plainly that she is anæmic and wanting in vitality? On the other hand,
to my eye the lift attendants on the tubes, the charming conductresses
of the 'buses seem healthy, though their work has been done only
recently by women. I would make the influence of an occupation on
woman's health--considering first and as most important her primary
biological function as a potential mother--the test of its womanliness.
But the health of women will never be protected while we are content to
accept the valuations and suffer the defilements of this commercial age.