|
Post by stacey on Dec 10, 2010 12:02:12 GMT -5
So, it says in our notes that in WW1 that woman took on the role of the men once they left for war. Why were there so many open jobs? Did all of the men in these homes go to War? I’d think it would be hard on the family for the wife to work a full time job, provide for the family and take care of her home. It seems like people these days have the same amount of stress, if not more. What about the women who were unemployed, what did they resort to? It’s interesting how once some woman were given the right to vote under The War time Elections act they still chose not to vote, why would this happen? I think that in today’s culture not enough people are educated about the political system, therefore they chose to just not cast a vote.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Delainey on Dec 14, 2010 16:49:54 GMT -5
You raise some good points and ask some decent questions.
1). Women filled jobs left vacant by men who went to fight oveseas. 2). I don't know if women would've honestly figured into unemployment figures to be honest (at least not at this time). I think it was assumed a woman would either become a nurse, teacher (or some other traditional job) and/or get married and raise a family. 3). In terms of the public's general knowlege of our political process, I'd say most people have a rough idea how things work. For the most part people tend to only vote on the basis of one or two issues. This would be a weakness in our political process, in that, political parties have much more to offer than just one or two things. I.e. Some people voted in Saskatoon for a pro-life candidate (he happend to be a member of the Liberal Party). I suspect those that voted for his pro-life stance may not have been familiar with any of his other stances on say economics, etc.
|
|