Women in 20th Century Canadian Society: Social Conventions and Change20th century society placed Canadian women within restrictive conventions and norms. There was a very pronounced domestic expectation placed upon women that they would have jobs or careers, but only until they married. Once married, the expectation was that they would abandon their careers to be housewives, working within the domestic sphere of the home, cooking and cleaning and tending to the general needs of the family. During this period, the expectation was that the husband and father was the man of the house and the sole financial provider or “breadwinner” for the family. Given the narrowness of existence for these women, and how limited their choices were, their reactions to this type of domestic captivity were all very diverse. Some women responded to the limiting social conventions by conforming to the expectations placed upon them, while others made great effort to expand their horizons and possibilities, by taking jobs outside the home: there was literally no static pattern to how women responded to the social constraints placed upon them.

The excerpt from the primary source, "I played lady with some little friends" by Dorothy May King, demonstrates that the social restrictions and expectations on women are so severe, they have trickled down to young girls, who manifested these expectations within their games and during playtime. It is common for children to play or imitate the adults around them: in this manner, children are like little parrots, mimicking the adult world that surrounds them. The young girls in this excerpt demonstrate how they imitated the social constraints put on women by recreating them in their playtime, and essentially normalizing them. The women would lift up their skirts, most likely for two reasons: the first was to make sure the hems of their skirts didn’t get muddy or trampled when crossing the street. The other reason was most likely to put themselves on display: when they’re walking down the street they have the attention of men. By lifting their skirts a little, they’re almost showing themselves off as a commodity, as doing so “would show off her figure nicely” (204).[footnoteRef:1] The excerpt demonstrates how these social constraints have been so hard-wired into women, the women are almost treating themselves as a product or good that should be on display and that had to be protected by walking in pairs. The women walked in pairs because there was probably a social convention at the time which dictated that a woman could not be unaccompanied not without a chaperone when walking down the street. It can also be interpreted as a way of infantilizing women, and forcing the expectation of “the buddy system” upon them. This source demonstrates the sheer and utter conformity towards the establishment of being a woman: it shows that women embraced and accepted the role of being feminine, of being perceived as “weaker” and needing to walk in pairs.

However, in the poem “Only a Working Girl" by Marie Joussaye Fotheringham, the author demonstrates how she responds to the...

As stated earlier, the intense social constraints on women revolved around the expectation that they would work for a finite period of time: only until they got married. For a woman to work indefinitely or for her entire life (and to be happy about it) was an intense subversion of social norms. Hence, Fotheringham responds to the social constraints by ignoring them and by clearly stating that she doesn’t care if people find her lifestyle strange or if her choices mean that she “belongs to the ‘lower classes’”.[footnoteRef:2] This woman writes a poem to express her viewpoint because a poem best demonstrates the beauty and grace present in the life choices she had made. The poem has a sense of vividness and melody, which imprint her life choices with a sense of beauty to them. This poem is written for both those who condemn her choices as well as those who imitate her choices as well. It is a rebuttal to all the people who deem her as lower class, as well as for all the women who struggle with such a life choice as well—they too can celebrate their independence. The poem is a form of resistance as it does celebrate these often maligned and scorned life choices of the workingwoman.
On the other hand, the Great War offered an opportunity for many women to break free of the massive social constraints they were placed under. Prior to the war, women were defined and confined by what was known as the “cult of domesticity” and opportunities for them to work outside of the domestic sphere were very few.[footnoteRef:3] “The Great War… was to give many women the opportunity—in many cases the necessity—to move out of a familiar environment, that even when typing and shorthand were involved, was essentially an extension of their homes.”[footnoteRef:4] This indicates that the Great War represented an opportunity to expand the boundaries of their own lives for many women and the possibilities of what they could achieve. “A sociological and psychic change had already taken place: the war had liberated many women from their own hearth.”[footnoteRef:5] This quote demonstrates that the war changed the opportunities for work that women had, freeing them from the confines of domestic work. “Old-fashioned views about women’s work were challenged and public opinion began to accept that perhaps women had a right to earn their own living, and indeed, could make vital contributions to the economy.”[footnoteRef:6] In a sense, the war represented a paradigm shift and demonstrated that women could be valuable members of society who contributed directly to the economy. This directly challenged the perspective of the typical woman. Hence, during the war, women responded to their circumstances by taking the jobs of their husbands, not merely to make money, but as a means of breaking free from social constraints. [1: Dorothy May King quoted in Linda Goyette and Carolina Jakeway Roemmich, eds. Edmonton: In Our Own Words, (Edmonton, University of Alberta Press, 2004), p. 204.] [2:…