This column first appeared in the Victoria Daily Times on Dec. 12, 1941.
I thought I was through writing articles about women and their woes. I thought women had become people, once and for all; and so could be classified as human beings hereafter. But again the woman question has been raised.
They are not people after all, at least not real people, each one standing on her own feet. They are a class set apart for special treatment and special criticism.
I read the criticism in a book by no less a person than J.B. Priestley, whose Britain Speaks after the news delights us all. Priestley does not like them because they are too dressed up. They are dressed up even at breakfast time, and that irritates Priestley, who says: “It is not necessary to be handsome all day long.”
He is particularly irritated by the older women who attempt to keep time at a distance by external means. Here is his description:
“She has cotton-white and elaborately waved hair; all the honest lines have been blotted out of her face except just here and there where the powder lies thick like snow in a mountain crevice. At first sight she looks like a distinguished specimen of American motherhood — after another glance she looks stupid and hard. It is a bad business being a woman in most places, but over here there is no relaxation. No letting up, no relief from the first line trenches.”
Then he goes on to discuss what he has gleaned from the advertisements in the magazines about women.
“Women belong to a highly competitive class. A young woman must look prettier than the girls she is with. She must dazzle or be ignored. When she gets her man she must keep him. If she slacks off for a day or two he is gone! Always she must be on her guard, cultivating her mind, her poise, her charm, her personality. It is a hard life.”
Like most picturesque writers, Priestley exaggerates for the sake of emphasis. The advertising of beauty aids has run riot, and might have made women too conscious of their appearance. I do not like the “lacquered” faces, either. But every woman knows that to feel well groomed is a source of comfort, even when life goes wrong.
But there are graver questions than paint or powder coming over the hill, as the earth rolls from west to east. Women might have been declared to be persons Oct. 20, 1929, by the Privy Council in London (after being turned down by the Supreme Court of Canada), but they are not going to receive equal pay with men in the Canadian army or air force. They are rated in comparison with men, as nine to 13.
“Oh but,” some will say, “men risk their lives in the armed forces and women will be working in the safe shelter of an office or a canteen.”
Safe? There are no safe places in this war, and every woman who takes the King’s shilling agrees to go where she is sent. A woman who was dug out of the ruins of her home in England scratched and bruised, with her mouth full of plaster, was asked by her rescuers: “Where is your husband?” and she replied: “He’s in the army — blinkin coward!”
When the news broke that women were not going to be paid the same as men, there was not much said. Women are not disposed to quibble about money at a time like this. The women who can afford it, and some who can’t, are working for nothing. But it is always a mistake to let an injustice pass unnoticed.
At least so it seemed to me, when last Sunday night I heard a former member of Parliament make a suggestion that made me feel like the old fire-horse when he hears the fire alarm. The member of Parliament, speaking on the subject of what must be done to prevent a recurrence of the evil days following the last war, said he thought it would be a good plan to remove women from their jobs in offices and factories to make places for the returned men; and to encourage marriage and births by government subsidies. “Germany,” he said, “has done this,” and I think he added, “successfully.”
I expected his two associates to slap him down at this juncture and throw him out, but they did nothing of the kind. One mildly said he did not believe the women would take kindly to this idea; but the first man said he believed they would welcome it, and he added: “We need the population.”
Of course I know this was just a voice on the air, but I am afraid it was something of a trial balloon. There have always been some people who resent women in business, or any other well-paid position. To shove women out of industry would save some thinking and planning for the hard days ahead, but I cannot imagine anything more unfair; and the insulting part of it is this loathsome idea that women would like it.
Marriage and the bearing of children could, and should be made easier. The ban on married women working should be removed forever. Just now we do not hear much about it when work is plentiful, but certainly neither a man nor a woman should be penalized for marrying; and the coming of a child should not be financial disaster to a young couple, as it is now.
But all this can be done without invoking Hitler’s tactics.
We should have maternity hospitals where the expense is nominal and the service the best that can be provided. Surely the people of Canada can well afford to pay for the safe arrival and care of the infant population and their mothers. But this suggestion of making women get married because of economic pressure is a wicked thought, and if I know the mind of Canadian women, it will be rejected with scorn.
There will not need to be such a great letdown after the war if the people of Canada will do what the government is pleading with us to do. Refrain from buying now, lend or save our money, let the stock of clothing and furniture, pots and pans run low. These things are not being manufactured now in great quantities — some of them not at all. If we do go shabby, what difference does it make?
Then, when the war is over and the making of planes and tanks ceases, the factories can be set to build refrigerators and double-boilers and cars. We can go on a buying bout, helping to bridge this time of readjustment. Here in Canada, there are many things to be done. Roads to build, recreation grounds, mines to work, and more food to produce for the victims of the war.
I believe, with many others, that life is going to be much simpler before this great struggle is over and to many of us will come a new mentality. Changes are coming in our economic pattern, not by compulsion but by consent and necessity. The revolution is going on, and we might as well recognize it and give it our careful thought.
More and more we are going to have governmental interference, price fixing, rationing, restrictions. In Britain today there are no very rich people. How can there be when people pay 16s in the pound for taxes? Yet all are rich in heroism and honour. The slums have been cleared away, and a new sense of fellowship has come between the classes. Everyone has learned to share. Nations must learn it, too.
Today I heard that four Russian newspapers are going to be admitted into Canada. I wondered how that would affect the people who believe, as one leader expressed it: “If this war brings Socialism, it is not worth fighting.” It is now some months since he said that and perhaps he has changed his mind. I hope so.
Some of McClung’s columns from the 1930s and 1940s have been collected in a book, The Valiant Nellie McClung: Selected Writings by Canada’s Most Famous Suffragist, by Barbara Smith.
