Did the entry of women to the workforce spark any major protests and/or strikes by men?

by cantamer

While I'm asking this question for primarily Western European and North American countries/economies, answers on other countries are also welcome.

I'm mostly curious about reactions relating to the economic consequences of increasing the number of workers in the labour market by nearly twofold, rather than protests by conservatives that wanted to keep traditional gender roles. Did trade unions support the idea of women entering the workforce? Would they ban women from joining a union?

ViolettaHunter

This is a really complex issue, I think and I don't know that much about it, but I'd like to point out that the workforce definitely didn't double due to women.

The so-called "traditional family model" of a bread winning father and a homemaking mother was only ever an ideal for a very limited time frame and certain class of people.

The vast majority of people in Europe throughout history (think 90%) were either peasants or later working class and never in a situation were they could afford the luxury of having women do no work or only light housework. A farm can't be run that way and neither could a working class home live on a single income. Women worked in all kinds of jobs from farm help to house maid and washer woman.

At first it was only nobles (both men and women) who could afford not to work, then with the rise of cities, the wives and daughters of some rich merchants/craftsmen could afford to "only" concentrate on house work (or supervise the servants to do it). This was only a small percentage of society though.

The lifestyle we today think of as a "traditional" family with a breadwinner and a home maker did not really come about until the rise of the bourgeoisie (or middle class if you will) in the 19th century due to the industrialization. Suddenly a much larger slice of society than before was neither poor nor noble, but could afford to mimic the nobility and have the women of the family essentially not work at all (and hire lots of servants).

Poor women still worked as they had done before, just now not as much on farms or as maids for the rich as before, but inceasingly in factories.

During the late 19th century and 20th century the middle class increased significantly and that's the peak of the housewife family model. All in all a pretty short time in history during which this was the norm for large parts of society. There were still plenty of poor working class women, who never stopped working.

Middle and upper class women too, during the late 19th/early 20th century had increasingly started taking on jobs that weren't open to them before, especially in academic areas. (The only acceptable job that used to be open to unmarried middle class women was governess and later, teacher.)

And they definitely encountered resistance by men. I know of quite a few cases of protests by students when women were first admitted to study, for example, medicine.

I have also read of appeals in newspapers after WWI, urging working class women to hand "back" their industry jobs to men, when jobs were scarce.

I'm sure someone else will know more about this, but I just wanted to point out that at the time the housewife model became less fashionable, many many women already were working or had never stopped to begin with. So the job market was not suddenly flooded with twice the number of employees.