Women in Industry
In all the animal world one can hardly
find a place where orderly effort, planned to secure
some future advantage, does not appear. Getting
food, defending life, and caring for offspring have
all combined to drive not only the descendants of
Adam, but his ancestors as well, to sweat-producing
effort. Of course this is not definitely planned;
getting food often waits on appetite; defense is sometimes
merely running away; and the young are frequently
left to feed themselves or die. But the fact
remains that in digging burrows, building nests, laying
up honey and nuts, and in protecting and providing
for the young, a vast deal of effort is put forth
in forest and field which is not immediately productive
of pleasure.
This work is seldom equally shared
by all the members of the group. With bees, the
drones and the queen are alike exempt from work, and
an asexual group has been developed to feed and protect
them. Some ants compel others to do their work;
and everywhere there seem to be individuals who are
constitutionally lazy and others who, because of strength
or sex attractiveness, are able to get more than their
share of food and protection with less than their
share of effort.
From the first, some division of work
between male and female grows almost inevitably out
of their different relations to reproduction.
Following conception, the male can always run away
and leave the female to feed and fight for herself
and her offspring, and he is very prone to do so.
Even when he stays by and shares in the joy of the
newly born he generally leaves the female to get ready
the nest, and largely she protects and provisions
it.
Among domesticated animals, where
their working possibilities have been very highly
developed, females are much more desirable workers
than males. The maternal function partly explains
this, as in the case of cows and hens which give us
milk and eggs; and even with mares and sheep the offspring
adds to the general working value. Still, it seems
to be true that even for purposes of draught, the
males are of less value than the females, unless reduced
to the non-sexual condition of geldings and oxen.
The stallion, bull or ram is too katabolic, too much
of a consuming, distributing, destroying force to
be very valuable in the daily routine of agriculture
or commerce. While the female is generally smaller
and less powerful than the male, she is quiet, easily
enslaved; and, as we have said, her maternal functions
can be diverted to our daily use. She produces
more workers, and her flesh is more palatable, because
less distinctive, than that of the male. Hence,
among domesticated animals, selection, based on considerations
of work, multiplies females and keeps males only for
breeding purposes.
As a quadruped, the female suffers
very little handicap from the functions peculiar to
her sex, except when actually carrying her young or
nursing them. When she stands erect, however,
the support for the special organs of reproduction
is far from ideal; heavy lifting, or long-continued
standing, often leads to disaster, and the periodic
functions, even in the healthiest conditions, must
always place women at a working disadvantage as compared
with men. Add to this the fact that women are
smaller, less agile, and far less strong, than men,
and, even when not encumbered with young, it is clear
that a woman, when confronting physical work in competition
with men, needs something more than a fair field and
free competition. Idealists and travelers among
primitive people love to tell us how easily women meet
their special functions, carrying burdens equal to
those carried by men when on the march, and dropping
out from the caravan for only a few hours to give
birth to a child; but the fact remains that women in
all primitive societies age quickly and that those
who are spoiled are thrown aside and forgotten.
Woman’s handicap as a working animal in competition
with man is too obvious and too deep-seated to be idealized
away.
In all savage societies labor is clearly
specialized between the sexes. The man, because
of his superior strength and mobility, fights, hunts
and makes weapons of the chase. The woman fetches
and carries, digs and delves, cures the meat, makes
the rude huts, clothing and pottery. Gradually
she changes wild grasses to domesticated plants, and
rears the young animals brought home from the chase,
till they follow and serve their human masters.
She is truly the mother of industries, and it in no
way detracts from her credit that her motherhood is
here, as elsewhere, mainly unthinking.
With the exhaustion of the supply
of wild animals, man is forced to turn his attention
to the world of vegetation and he takes over the direction
of the plants and animals which woman has largely domesticated.
In his career as fighter and hunter he has learned
to cooperate with his fellows to a degree which aids
him greatly in dividing the arable land, protecting
his crops, and using grazing lands in common with the
tribe. He has also learned to make stone hatchets,
spears and bows and arrows. Woman has not felt
the same necessity to invent in her work; such new
tools as she has devised have been helpful, but men
who could not invent have been wiped out by those
who learned to make stronger spears or better arrow-heads.
It is the same difference in adaptability
which one observes to-day between the farmers on the
western frontier of America and those who remain in
their peasant homes in Europe. The peasant has
even greater need of inventing than has his expatriated
countryman in Colorado, but he lacks the driving impulse.
It was the same with women and men under the conditions
of savage life. Thus it came about that man’s
greater strength and mobility, backed by power of
cooperation and invention, gave him the leadership
in such primitive life as we find depicted in the
pages of Homer or in the epic of the Jews. True,
woman was his first lieutenant, but he spoke for her
in most of the larger matters of the industrial life.
With settled conditions and accumulation
of wealth, the most desirable women were almost entirely
freed from physical labor and gradually became luxury-loving
parasites and playthings, as we pointed out in the
second chapter of this volume. Meantime slaves
were multiplying, male and female and, while the most
desirable women passed to the harem, the mass of them
became drudges in house and field. It is hard
for us to realize that it is exactly in those times
when a few women are surrounded with great luxury
that most of the sex are reduced to heavy labor and
wretchedness.
During the early Christian ages, a
tradition was gradually formed concerning woman’s
place in industry, or rather three traditions were
formed. The working woman of the lower classes
was to be the housekeeper, which meant that she was
to care for food, cook, spin, weave, sew and mend,
scrub and wash, bear children and nurse and tend them.
If she were of the middle class, she was to be a mother,
to supervise this range of work, look after dependents,
conserve social conditions and be the lady bountiful
of her district. The second ideal was the woman
of religion, who was to subdue her passions, observe
set prayers and other religious exercises, and do
the menial work of the convent. The third ideal
was the lady of chivalry, who appeared after the tenth
century. She was to be cared for and protected
from work or anxiety; menials were to prepare her
food, clothes and ornaments; gallants were to await
her orders and do her bidding.
With the rise of Protestantism, and
later with the rise of modern democracy, these ideals
were blended, and women found themselves, not indeed
slaves and subject to sale, but serfs, entangled in
a mass of feudal obligations and bound to the house.
Practically, most men still hold this threefold conception
of woman’s place in the social organism.
She is to be a combination of housekeeper, nun and
lady. It is the kitchen, church and children
ideal of the German Emperor.
Meantime forces were set at work which
were to change the economic foundations of the family
and enable the woman to emerge from serfdom into some
new form of industrial relationship. From the
rise of the European cities in the twelfth century,
certain industries have tended, especially in the
Netherlands and in England, to segregate themselves
in farm-houses and towns. Women naturally participated
in these activities, generally taking the least desirable
parts. With the freeing of the mind, which followed
the democratic revolutions at the end of the eighteenth
century, inventions blossomed out and perfected steam
engines, cotton gins, spinning jennies, and a
thousand other machines driven by steam or water power,
which have changed the civilization of Europe and
America. Miss Edith Abbott has shown us how this
change, involving increasing segregation and specialization,
came into America even in the pre-Revolutionary time.
Spinning and weaving industries led
the way in this movement, but its full force was not
felt until the late eighteenth century. Since
then, one industry after another has left the home
for the factory until to-day, in all large communities,
even the preparation of food increasingly goes to
the packing-house, the canning establishment, the
bakery and the delicatessen-store. These industries
needed hands, and so the women followed them to the
factories.
As 1870 marks the beginning of higher
education for women, so it also marks the beginning
of her industrial self-consciousness. The perfecting
of such inventions as the typewriter, the telegraph
and the telephone, and the creation of a great variety
of office appliances, together with the perfecting
of highly elaborate means of distribution, like the
departmental store, called for thousands of cheap workers
possessed of some slight intelligence but not necessarily
having any serious preliminary training. Our
elementary schools and high schools have increasingly
turned out a multitude of girls who could meet these
requirements. The increased cost of living, the
lessened labor demands of the home, and the attractions
of the pay envelope, have called millions to work
in industrial plants. In 1890, there were 4,005,532
wage-earning women in the United States; in 1900, 5,319,397;
while in 1910, we have probably nearly 8,000,000.
Like most other great changes in civilization,
this industrial transformation was neither preceded
nor accompanied by any general consciousness of what
was happening. Daily necessities were offset by
weekly pay envelopes, or the failures fell out of sight,
and so the next week and the years followed.
Country populations moved away; cities grew enormously,
leading to congestion in living which, combined with
the daily absence of women, has often transformed
the old time homes into communal tiers of tenements
occupied, during working hours, only by the young
and the infirm.
The children of all ages after a while
followed their mothers into the factories; but the
evil effects of child labor were so apparent that
repressive legislative measures have increasingly raised
the age of their admission until now, in the more
advanced communities, they must stay outside the factory
doors until they are twelve or fourteen years old.
Some growing self-consciousness, largely of a police
nature, has led us to institute measures for the protection
of the children who are not allowed to work.
Schools, playgrounds, day nurseries, institutional
churches, college settlements and public social centers
now bid against the streets and vacant lots, the nickel
shows and the dancing halls, for the children’s
patronage.
Education, however, true to its origin
as the assistant of theology, refuses to recognize
in any large way the new world into which we have
come, and where the next generation of children must
follow. Manual training has, here and there,
quieted the fears of some who had disturbing visions;
and we go on employing an army of unenfranchised,
celibate women, with little or no industrial experience,
to teach ten million boys how to be good citizens
of a republic, and how to serve in a modern industrial
army; and ten million girls how to work in shops and
factories, and how to live without homes. As a
consequence, girls come up to the factories from their
schools with ideals, so far as the school has
shaped them, founded on unmarried school mistresses
and George Washington; and they pass, by way of the
altar, into cheerless tenements which the school still
thinks of as places where children are cared for,
family clothing is made and the family baking is done.
Practically, of course, most education is given outside
the schools, and there the evils of an unregulated
time of transition are multiplied through imitation.
The wealth and material comfort produced
for the fortunate classes by these segregated industries
have blinded us to their effects on human life, and
we have all been bribed to silence concerning everything
which could discourage enterprise or frighten capital.
Like most bribes, however, these have largely stopped
in the pockets of the exploiters of public opinion.
In the opening years of this new century,
public consciousness has had a wonderful awakening.
The popular mind, quickened by universal education,
and freed from a burden of fixed beliefs, is turning
restlessly to inquire about everything that affects
human life. Work could not escape this inquisition,
and so we are asking not only for a fairer division
of the profits of work, but we are also inquiring what
occupations are unfit for women, with their special
limitations and obligations. When the work is
reasonable, how long should a woman work daily?
Should she work at night and overtime? Should
she work with dangerous machinery? Should she
handle substances that endanger health? Should
she be required to stand through hours of continuous
work? Should she work in bad air, due to dust,
moisture, or excessive heat or cold? Should she
have a decent retiring-room? Some daring inquirers
are even asking whether industrial efficiency, gained
through specialization and keying up, may not be purchased
at too high a price of mental monotony and nervous
strain. Most people are content to learn that
the effects are not immediately destructive to the
girls and women involved; but some day we shall demand
that the barons of industry shall not be allowed to
squander the heritage of the unborn generations.
Women have themselves done much to
quicken this public consciousness. Enrolled in
labor unions, they have shown power to stand together
and make sacrifice, as in the shirt-waist makers’
strike in New York in 1908, which commanded the admiration
of all fair-minded observers. The more fortunately
placed women have aided these movements toward self-betterment;
and, through such organizations as the National Consumers’
League, they have compelled manufacturers and shopkeepers
to observe more reasonable hours, pay better wages,
and furnish decent material conditions for their employees.
The solution of woman’s present
industrial problem is not an easy task, but out of
the present unsettlement certain facts are emerging
with a good deal of clearness. The efficiency
in production, secured by concentration and specialization,
make it certain that the old-time home with its multiplied
industries will not return, but that more and more
even of its present lessened activities will be transferred
to factories and to their equivalents. It is
also certain that women are not going to be supported
in indolence by men, because when deprived of the
discipline which full participation in life gives,
they must always degenerate. For themselves,
and for the sake of their children, they will demand
a chance to live abundantly. It is also clear
that our present chaotic conditions are destructive
of health, happy marriages, effective homes, and the
strong line of descendants which must always be the
chief care of an intelligent society.
In the first place, then, we must
work to produce an entire change in our present mental
attitude toward organized industries. Our present
worship of industrial products, no matter how obtained,
must give way to a recognition of the fact that the
chief asset of a nation is its people; that a woman
is more important than the clothes she makes in factories
or sells in stores; and that to needlessly destroy
or scrapheap a working woman is worse than to needlessly
destroy or scrapheap the finest and most costly machine
ever devised by man. Such a statement seems to
carry conviction in its every phrase, but the fact
is that we do not believe it, and until we do believe
it, there will be little help for our present absurd
and wretched conditions. Unregulated competition,
backed by greed of individuals and groups, will go
on wasting the wealth of women’s lives until
we cease to be fascinated and hypnotized by the display
of products which they make possible. Better
fine women and children, and few things, than stores
and warehouses crowded with goods, and the women and
children of our present factory towns. By fixing
our attention on people instead of things, we should
almost certainly secure more and better things; but,
regardless of cost, we must change the focus of our
attention.
In the second place, girls must get
ready to be women. The education of the home
and the school must be unified, and together they must
give a training that will lead girls into the actualities
of the life that lies before them. Our present
elementary schools, and still more our high schools,
lead girls neither to intelligent work nor to intelligent
living as women and mothers. Up to at least the
age of fourteen, the education should be general,
looking to the development of all the powers of body,
mind and sensibilities. But through all these
eight or ten years of training, two factors should
receive constant and intelligent attention. In
the first place, we should realize that we are not
fitting women for drawing-rooms nor for convents, but
for a working world; therefore well graded and interesting
manual training should run through all these years
and should furnish a well-developed base for later
special industrial preparation of some kind. In
the second place, the girls should be taught by men
and women, married and unmarried, and fine ideals
of actual womanhood, not alone in shops and factories,
in school-rooms, and in professions but
also in homes, should be constantly held before them.
Our present education leaves this training mainly
to the homes, and neither the parasitic rich nor our
eight million wage-earning women, when mothers, can
or will attend to it.
After the girl reaches the age of
fourteen, she should have at least two years of further
education in which she could master the details of
some necessary work which would enable her to look
the world in the face and offer fair payment for her
living. With most girls, this work would be connected
with children and the service of the home; for domestic
service, no matter how organized, must always occupy
a multitude of women. All girls should have at
least rudimentary training in these matters.
During the period of transition from
schools to their own family life, the girls might
well give a half dozen years to work in factories and
stores where the conditions should be as good, and
as well guarded, as in our best school buildings in
factories, in a word, where the employers would be
willing that their own daughters should work.
This is surely a fair standard. Work which is
not safe or fit for me to do, is not fit for me to
hire done. If this principle fails, then democracy
is but a dream.
But during all this period of preparation
we should never forget that, as Madame Gnauck-Kuehne
so admirably points out, “women’s work
has to a large extent an episodic character."
All women confront romantic love, marriage and children;
and any woman who misses them misses the crowning
joy and glory of her life. Vicarious realization
may save the soul, but it can never fill the place
of reality. The man fronts these same experiences,
but they are not related to his work as they are related
to the work of women. Surely there can be no doubt
that the ideal solution, in this period, is a man
and woman so deeply bound together by love that there
is no question of self-protection, either in terms
of work or money; and the man being freed from the
burdens of maternity, should mainly earn the income.
We shall discuss the new type of home and family in
a later chapter, but in any home where there are children
there is need of an intelligent mother’s very
constant care.
If a happy home were the universal
destiny of women, our problem would be greatly simplified;
but this is far from being the case. Not more
than one-half of all women over fifteen are married
at any one moment. From the ages of twenty to
thirty-five, one-half are married; but it is only
from thirty-five to fifty-five that as many as three-fourths
are married; over fifty-five there are less than one-half
married, and most of the others are widows. Most
of these women who are not married must work outside
the home, and no girl, rich or poor, should be allowed
to reach maturity without being prepared to face this
possibility. Work is not a curse but a blessing;
it is an indispensable part of every well-ordered
life; and without it, the individual and the group
will certainly degenerate. Rich and foolish parents,
who cannot realize this basal fact, should nevertheless
see that, even as insurance, their daughters must
be able to pay their way in life, if need comes, without
selling themselves either in marriage or out.
Even if the woman marries happily, she is never sure
that she may not some day have to face self-support,
and possibly for more mouths than her own.
But the woman who marries during her
adolescent period, between the ages of twenty-five
and fifty, must also work, and here we meet the hardest
problem of all. More money is often needed than
the man can earn; the wife may bring an industrial
or professional equipment which is too valuable to
discard; often the demands of the home, especially
where there are no children, do not call forth the
best energies of the woman, and she needs the larger
life of outside work. Hence many married women
must continue to work away from the home. In any
of these cases, the problem is difficult. Bearing
and rearing a child should retire a mother from fixed
outside occupation for at least a year. Arguments
born out of conflict cannot change this primitive
fact. Women should not do shop or factory work
during the last months of pregnancy, and babies should
be nursed from seven to nine months. A baby should
be nursed for twenty minutes, every two or three hours
of its waking time; and since it does not always waken
regularly, the nursing mother is debarred from most
continuous work, even if it does not interfere with
her effectiveness as a milk producer.
The question of maternal care for
children after they are weaned is more difficult to
settle, but notwithstanding certain statistics gathered
in Birmingham, in February, 1910, which showed
that the infant mortality among working mothers was
one hundred and ninety per thousand, while, among
those not industrially employed, it was two hundred
and seventy per thousand, it seems sure that infant
mortality is extremely high in foundling asylums and
in factory homes. In Fall River, where out of
every one hundred women, forty-five are at work outside
the home, three hundred and five babies, out of every
one thousand born, die before they are a year old;
while even in New York City, but one hundred and eighty-nine
out of a thousand die. The natural location of
Fall River should make it a very healthy city.
One remembers, too, the classic statement that deaths
among little children fell off steadily in Paris during
the siege of 1870. Little children seem better
off even in time of war, with the mothers at home,
than in time of peace with their mothers in the factory.
A few years ago, we turned to sanitary
day nurseries, and to pasteurized milk and other prepared
baby foods, as the solution for neglected or unhygienic
feeding. To-day we know that even a dirty and
ill-conditioned mother secretes better milk for her
baby than can be prepared in any laboratory.
We must wash the mother and feed her the milk, and
then let her give it to her baby, instinct with her
own life. It is quite possible that our recent
talk of ignorant mother love and of the necessary
substitution of sanitary nurseries, canned care and
pre-digested affection must all go the same way.
We shall probably get our best results by cleaning
up the home, enlightening the mother, and then letting
her love her child into the full possession of its
human qualities.
Economically, too, at least with factory
workers, it is questionable if their wages will support
sanitary day-nurseries, with intelligent nurses for
small groups of children, and at the same time pay
some one to cook and scrub at home. If the mother
must still cook and care for her house, in addition
to her factory work, the burden is too great; and if
money for nurses must come from the state, or from
charity, then we all know the danger of such subsidies
to industry, in its effect on wages.
Surely the ideal toward which we must
work is for the mother, during the period when she
is bearing and rearing children, to be supported by
the father of her children. Let her do the work
meantime which will best care for her children, and
at the same time conserve and strengthen her powers
for the third period of her life.
This period, from fifty to seventy-five
years, is now more shamefully wasted than any other
of our national resources. If one attends a State
federation of women’s clubs one will find nearly
every delegate of this age. They are women of
mature understanding and of ripe judgment, still possessing
abundant health and strength, and where relieved by
economic conditions from the necessity of manual work,
they have to live such irregular and uncertain relations
to life as can be maintained by mothers-in-law, grandmothers,
club secretaries, and presidents of town improvement
societies. Remove all restrictions on woman’s
activity, and these strong matrons would vitalize
our schools, give us decent municipal housekeeping,
supervise the conditions under which girls and women
work in shops and factories, and do much to clean up
our politics. Debarred from direct power as they
are, they are still making us decent in spite of ourselves.
For the future, then, it seems that
we must accept working women in every path of life.
We must remove all disabilities under which they labor,
and at the same time protect them by special legislation
as future wives and mothers. All girls must master
some line of self-supporting work; and, except in
the cases of those who have very special tastes and
gifts, they should select work which can be interrupted,
without too great loss, by some years of motherhood.
During this time, the mother must be supported so
that she can largely care for her own child, though
she must also maintain outside interests through work,
which will keep her in touch with the moving current
of her time. Industries must be humanized and
made fit for women. The last third of a woman’s
life must be freed from legal limitations and popular
prejudices, so that we may secure these best years
of her life for private and public service. And
meantime, it is well to remember that every step we
take in making this a fit world for woman to work in,
makes it a fit world for her father, her brothers,
her lover and her husband to work beside her.