Employment, Relief and the Breadwinner Ideal: A Historiography of the Great Depression in Canada

The Great Depression was a terrible point in Canadian history, and for most of the world. It was a point in time where thousands of people lost their jobs, and even lost their homes because of the depressed economy. Business was booming in the early 1920s, but when companies tried to expand, and therefore issued stocks, the economy was thrown off. Some investors sold their stocks for high prices, and as a result, everyone else followed. With less of a demand, stock prices became fractions of what they used to be, and on October 29, 1929, the New York Stock Exchange collapsed, followed by the Toronto and Montreal Stock exchanges. This collapse of the stock markets caused a depression like which the world had never seen before. It was

The pains and dangers they have endured in our defence give them the right to expect it” (46). The arrival of the Great Depression in the 1930s did nothing to lessen this sentiment. Due to the lack of jobs as a result of the Depression, women’s jobs were not seen as a priority, in fact, in a reply to a letter written in 1936 to the National Employment Commission, the Commissioner wrote that “[Women] have a lot of rights in good times, when there is lots of employment,” in an attempt to justify the takeover of women’s jobs (87). Once again, women were being edged out of the workforce. Society ignored the contributions they made during the war and their worth as workers, instead impressing upon them the role of the homemaker that women were trying to move away from. During the 1940s women were sequestered into a role of submissiveness and domesticity, both at home and in the workplace. Post World War II Canada promoted the dream of domestic bliss to boost the economy. Women were expected to be stay-at-home mothers while the men were the breadwinners. The Canadian magazine ‘Chatelaine’

The Great Depression was one of the worst collapses in the history of the Canadian economy. Canadians endured years of misery and in the same manner, suffered through all the ineffective solutions that took place. Despite Prime Minister Bennett's multiple advances to bring the economy back to pace, most of the solutions Bennett acted upon caused more harm than good to the economy. Bennett's first solution was enrolling in Protective Tariffs, which not only sent more residents out of work but also reduced Canada’s trade with other countries. Secondly, Bennett's involvement in putting up relief camps bought hatred, from unemployed men, towards Bennett and his government. Thirdly, Bennett's final attempt was the New Deal, which ultimately led

The Great Depression may very well have been one of the most significant eras in Canadian history. It has taught us many lessons about the present and predicting the future. The ‘dirty’ thirties, as it was referred to, was a time of hardship and poverty for most. Imagine what it would be like if we had to endure the same magnitude of recession? You wouldn’t have your phone or your computer. Maybe you would be living with all of your relatives in one house? Or you would be growing your food in your backyard?

Women working men’s jobs were not as welcomed in society as they were in factories. People held on to the belief that women should be house wives and not have to do much in the way of work. The man should provide for the family, and the women should take care of the family. Many of the women who worked were lower class and had to help provide for their families, or were the only providers for their families. Women who worked men’s jobs were looked down upon and thought to be no better than dirt. Although women working in factories were still women, men did not show them the same respect as they did a woman working as a secretary or teacher.

The Great Depression of the 1930's is a benchmark for all depressions and recessions in the past and in the future. In the booklet "The Great Depression of the 1930s in Canada" , Michiel Horn gives an intellectual dissection of the events that occurred during the Great Depression. Michiel Horn's approach leaves the reader with a foul taste for the Dirty Thirties. This essay will summarize Michiel Horns key points as well as discuss the ability of Michiel Horn to report his findings.

The Great Depression was not just a little event in history, hence the word “great”, but a major economical setback that would change Canada, and the world, forever. The word “great” may not mean the same thing it does now; an example of this is the ‘Great’ War. These events were not ‘good’ or ‘accomplishing’ in any way, quite the opposite, but in those times it most likely meant ‘big’. What made it big are many factors, both in the 20’s and 30’s, which can be categorized into three main points: economics, politics and society. With all these events, compressed into ten years, this period of economic hardship of the 1930’s truly deserves the title the “Great Depression”.

Dating back throughout history woman were often considered to be too soft or docile to work. In the early 1800’s, as well as the 1950’s, it was thought that woman should not only be pure in heart, mind and body, but that they should be submissive to their husbands and not work outside the home, this was known as the Cult of Domesticity (Keister & Southgate, Inequality: a contemporary approach to race, class and gender, 2012, p. 228).

Robert L. Daniel, author of, American Women in the Twentieth Century, explains that women were being recruited to work in various jobs (122). Single women, ones that did not hold responsibilities to a husband or family were employed first and women that had families were taken only as a last resort (Daniel 123). Daniel further explains, "The nation's need permitted an expansion of women's economic role without it being perceived as a feminist threat" (123). What women could offer was now found as valuable and useful. The public opinion of women made a drastic turn around from their previous attitudes. The government and the media no longer looked down upon women for entering the work force, but gave much encouragement (Chafe, 134). In magazines such as "Lifetime" there were even advertisements promoting women to work.

At a time when labour unions were gaining in memberships, organization, and bargaining power, women in the workforce made marginal gains during this period considering the booming economy. Sociologically, a healthy economy should in theory provide the framework for change. When citizens have low unemployment and more money in their pockets, time and attention is less directed at bread and butter issues like sustenance and poverty, and aimed at equality and social progress. For women unfortunately, this was not necessarily the case. Their battle with employers was still a struggle between classes than gender parity. Male union leadership would naturally further male worker interests first,8 and this shows a culture of sexism in the workplace that was clearly difficult for working women to overcome. Even union-dues paying women rarely openly questioned their subordination as a sex.9 They were most likely outnumbered and the consequences of being a whistle blower did not want to be entertained. In the mindset of women who worked however, was a developing identity as female wage earners and unionists.10

Before the war women had to fit into a stereotype of “the perfect family” (“A Change in”). Prior to 1941 only 30% of women worked for 10 years and only 50% worked for 5 years (Discovery Education). Women were encouraged not to work, because it broke “the perfect family” stereotype (“The Women of”) (“A Change in”). Even husbands did not want their

Although females had push into the right direction, they still did face some adversity. “Many fully employed women defined themseleves as ‘homemakers’, outside the sphere of wage work” (Abelson, 117). This shows that even with all these changes for the better women did not shy away from their traditional roots.

A. Homemaker roles were forced upon women. However, it seemed like this could change during the 1930s. When the Depression hit, it heavily affected what was considered “men’s work,” such as work in heavy industry. However, “women’s work,” such as teaching, domestic service, and clerical work, were not so harshly affected.

With the rise of the modern age economic survival has become difficult for families based on a single income. This economic need along with modern attitudes toward gender equality has resulted in women being represented in the workforce in greater numbers. However, until the 1960’s women faced severe discrimination when trying to enter and maintain a position in the workforce. Often qualified women would be passed over for men with less experience and education. Employers were fearful that women were too emotional and were not equipped to handle the stress of the work environment. Also driving the decision to not hire or promote women was the concern over the additional health care expenses and leave time pregnant

The economics of intimate partner relationships play a role in patriarchy and the reinforcement of women abuse. Martin (1981) states that meritocracy is a discourse that everyone has equal opportunity in the workforce. It fails to recognize the barriers that prevent people from having the same opportunities as others. For instance, women face many social pressures that prevent them from working in the public sphere such as discrimination, sexism, being pushed down to apply for certain jobs because it dominated by males and may not have the physical requirement like body mass. Martin (1981) argues that capitalism supports patriarchal families and the idea that a woman's place is considered to be in the private sphere, the home, while a man is to be in the public sphere. Martin (1981) states that capitalism is about competition and succeeds when barring disadvantage or vulnerable populations including women from advancing to the top of the hierarchy so that people, predominantly white males, would remain in power. One strategy to prevent women from advancing in their career is to receive minimum wage and less income than men which therefore makes them easily replaceable in the work force. This defines women as temporary workers (p. 41). This leaves women economically dependent on men and gives a reason