2. What has been the relationship between war and gender in Australian history? Is war an inherently masculine enterprise?

Choose which conflicts you will focus on. Theoretical material may be useful. Does not have to be solely about women gender refers to mens experience of masculinity as well. Although war is often considered to be a male domain, with violence, strength and dominance being traditionally masculine attributes, the contribution of women to war cannot be denied. Looking at World War II, it is evident that in situations of war womens roles are changed and their gendered identities can become strengthened or compromised in relation to masculine identities. Similarly, masculine identities were challenged by the presence of women within a traditionally masculine enterprise. While war served to challenge traditional gender ideologies, it also to some degree maintained the distinctions between men and women, with women generally taking on more caring or safe roles while men utilised their hegemonic masculine qualities in the frontline. The sexual nature of women was also emphasised during war, which served to maintain their position as the

untrustworthy and sexually deviant sex. This essay will examine some of the ways that gender, as a seemingly rigid category has become compromised or maintained in the context of war and how womens contributions during war time have been undermined by their social and political positioning, as the weaker sex. World War II brought about greater independence for women, as their traditional place within the home became impractical. As women began to fulfill the roles of men within the workforce, they gained entry to the public sphere, which paved the way for the existence of women outside the home. Their entrance into many industries was not welcomed, except after the realisation that the labour shortage

was so extreme that it made necessary their participation (Clark 1991 p. 15). As a large number of men were overseas or serving in the armed forces, womens independence increased and they were able to participate in many male occupations; the number of women in paid employment increased by more than one-third between 1939 and 1944, and many women participated in volunteer work (Sturma in Poynting & Morgan 2007 pp. 204). During the early 20 th century, women were defined by their position within the home where they were expected to display the feminine characteristics of nurturing, caring and maintaining the home through cooking, cleaning and childrearing (Bomford 2001 pp. 7). Their contribution to the public or political sphere was prevented by the assumption that women belong in the home and that their nature is suited to the private sphere. Women have traditionally been equated with peace and creativity, as they have been associated with the domestic sphere and detachment from politics and public life (Plain 1996 pp. ix). There were strongly held convictions about the proper ordering of society, the role of men as breadwinners of families, coupled with ideas about the inferior capacities of women (Clark 1991 p. 15), which was threatened by womens participation in the workforce. With women experiencing greater participation in the public sphere and greater freedom to display skills and attributes that were traditionally masculine through labour, they essentially posed a threat to the very notion of masculinity that was positioned as being powerful and exclusive. With women realising their success within typically masculine roles, much could be said about the traditionally rigid notion of gendered identities, which were evidently more fluid than portrayed by dominant culture. This increased independence and success posed a threat, as it was reported that women would never again accept their pre-war status (Sturma in Poynting & Morgan 2007 pp. 204), which was

supported by war literature that portrayed women as no longer being confined or concerned about taboos and being able to do what they only dreamed of doing before (Sturma in Poynting & Morgan 2007 pp. 204). It seems evident that while women were a necessary contribution within the home front through the occupations they took on, they were still constructed as weaker and less independent than men with the war still being considered a masculine domain. When women were able to participate, it was only in the hopes that they would forget their temporary independence and return to their normal feminine roles after the war. During the war, women were encouraged to participate in the war efforts but post-war media reflected the desire for women to return to their traditional roles and return to the traditional sphere of feminine interests, always following old trends, rather than innovating new ones. (Lake 1990 p. 267). Feminists have pointed out that World War II, rather than blurring gender distinctions, actually reinforced sexual difference, as women were expected to fulfill male roles but maintain their feminine charm and appearance, highlighting their sexual nature (Lake 1990 p. 269). This emphasises the notion that, although women were granted access to greater independence, their status was still belittled by the necessity of their sexual nature as a prerequisite for their femininity. Through greater economic independence women could afford and experience sexual adventure but this came at a cost as society attempted to control this freedom also. The new independence of women was seen as disturbing to men, particularly in a sexual sense (Sturma in Poynting & Morgan 2007 pp. 204). During WWII, the perceived characteristics of femininity were highlighted through the portrayal of women as sexually deviant and weak in their inability to control their sexual appetite. The social aspects of the home front during WWII brought about a great

fear, not only of the enemy but of the threat of Venereal Disease, which was seen as being a threat to social values and interests (Sturma in Poynting & Morgan 2007 pp. 197), much like women were through their sexual nature. By emphasising this fear politically and socially, the gendered identity of women was maintained by placing blame upon them for sexual immorality. This sexual immortality was seen as an inherent property of femininity, with women being unable to practice selfcontrol in sexual relations. Although the fear was actually greater than the real threat, this moral panic exemplifies the positioning of women as weak and as a threat to society due to their supposed emotional and irrational nature. During this time, women were either portrayed as victims of sexual predators, which reinforced the idea that women were weak and vulnerable. On the other hand, women were more frequently blamed for the VD crisis, placing blame on sexually promiscuous women, prostitutes and immoral girls who frequented city hotels after finishing their work in factories and other places (Sturma in Poynting & Morgan 2007 pp. 201). Although this type of behaviour was abhorrent, it was depicted as an element of femininity that only contributed to the perceived weakness of women and their need for protection and restriction. The changing position of women can be seen as the cause of this panic, and the restrictions that followed were another means of controlling women. Women were stigmatised and restricted during this time, with health officials and police becoming involved in monitoring and restricting women for the sake of public morality and health (Sturma in Poynting & Morgan 2007 pp. 201).This can be seen as a result of the perceived threat of the growing independence of women, the disruption of families, the presence of many foreign males and falling birth rates, with venereal disease being seen as threatening health and womens increased independence seen as threatening society,

particularly domestic moral order (Sturma in Poynting & Morgan 2007 pp. 208). Womens experiences of femininity therefore involved blame and placed them on the outer of morality, further highlighting the assumed feminine character of temptress and whore. It seems that the panic around venereal disease was a tool to reinstate traditional sex roles and to repress women in order to reverse their newly found independence. This served to deny recognition of womens

participation within the home front and rather reinforced their inability to be trusted with independence. War, it is clear, is a gendering activity. War restructures gender relations in ways that must be taken account of after the war; foreign troops within Australia lead to sexualisation of the local female population. The conditions of war enabled the undermining of sexual restraint and self-control in the light of uncertainty of the future, producing an environment where femininity could be easily and readily associated with sexuality (Lake 1990 p. 275).

Woman has been appropriated as a symbol of peace and domesticity, a repository of the values that must be left at home in the heat of battle, and she has constituted the object of battle- a prized possession that must be protected- the struggle for which personalises war aims that are otherwise abstract and distant. (Plain 1996 pp. ix) Women have traditionally been positioned as carers and nurturers who exist in opposition to the assumed masculine role of territorial defence. Women being able to participate in the war in a more hands on sense and being placed in more dangerous situations goes against the traditional notions of femininity as fragile and in need of protection, reducing the traditionally masculine character of heroism, strength and dominance. The opposition of womens entrance into armed services is based on gender stereotypes, with the image of women as

passive nurturers which is portrayed as incompatible with the image of the combat soldier who signifies an aggressive killer (Bomford 2001 pp.1) In this sense, women represented a threat to masculinity in the physical context of war and within the home front. Many women participated in the war through nursing but many more joined the auxiliary services in order to relieve men so they could participate in combat roles (DVA 2008 pp. 41), which highlighted womens secondary position; they were only given traditionally male roles when males were unable to fulfill those roles. Over 66,000 women enlisted in a branch of the womens services during the war, just under 7% of the nearly one million Australians who served. (DVA 2008 pp. 42) More women were involved in the auxiliary component than the medical

component with 24,000 women comprising the Australian Womens Army Service (AWAS), 3000 women in the Womens Royal Australian Naval Service (WRANS) and 27,000 women serving in the Womens Australian Auxiliary Air Force (WAAAF) (DVA 2008 pp. 42) . This goes against the traditional conception of women as carers, rather showing that women actively participated in the physical aspects of war, showing that they are not inherently opposed to war, anymore than they are congenitally inclined towards sentimentality, nurturance or the colour pink. Rather, they are set in opposition to conflict by the cultural codes and norms of twentiethcentury society. (Plain 1996 pp. ix) While women were involved in auxiliary aspects of war, they received less training than men in terms of duration and weapons handling (Bomford 2001 pp. 19), emphasising that their position was one of necessity not necessarily of suitability. Women were expected to be ladies first and soldiers second, which again reflects the need for women to remain feminine through the promotion of duties that were deemed suitable for women (Bomford 2001 pp. 25). It is evident that ideologies of femininity were reinforced throughout

WWII under the guise of independence and freedom, with emphasis being placed on womens sexuality in all spheres.

The main focus of womens participation in war is generally focused on their war work, industrial work, and the control of sexuality (Bassett 1992 pp.1). These elements all reflect the underlying notions of femininity in opposition to masculinity, with women fulfilling the roles of men but still being limited and confined due to their presumed feminine qualities. It is evident that war was essentially a masculine domain that remained dominant despite the presence of women. Throughout WWII gendered identities appeared to be challenged but at the same time they were reinforced; there was a temporal threat to masculine identity, which society as a whole opposed.

Reference List

Bassett, J. (1992) Guns and Brooches: Australian Army Nursing from the Boer War to the Gulf War. Oxford University Press: Australia. Bomford, J. (2001) Soldiers of The Queen. Oxford University Press: New York. Clark, R. (1991) The Home Front: Life in Australia during World War II. Australia Post: Australia. Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) (2008) Australian Women in World War II (1939-1945). Australian Government: Australia. <Accessed online 25/4/11: http://www.dva.gov.au/commems_oawg/commemorations/education/Documents/DV A_Women_in_War_part3.pdf> Lake, M. (1990) Female Desires: The Meaning of World War II, Australian Historical Studies, 24:95, 267-184. <Accessed online 25/4/11: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10314619008595846> Plain, G. (1996) Womens Fiction of the Second World War: Gender, Power and Resistance. Edinburgh University Press: Edinburgh. Sturma, M. (2007) Public health and sexual morality: Venereal disease in World War II Australia, in Poynting, S. and Morgan, G. (eds) Outrageous! Moral Panics in Australia, ACYS Publishing: Tasmania.