At the turn of the century, imperial nations clashed in a series of conflicts. Starting with the first global war, the Russo-Japanese War from 1904-1905, and ending with two more global wars known as the World Wars. World War I was meant to be the war to “end all wars,” but naturally, given the need to number it, such was not the case. Yet, this label was not given out of naivete or blind optimism that no wars would ever take place again, but out of sheer hope that the world powers would be wise enough to never let a war of this scale happen again. 

In all of these conflicts, women served their nations in official capacities never seen before. From Japan, to the US, to India, to Europe, and Africa, women everywhere saw their roles transformed and reframed, while their rights and responsibilities irreversibly evolved.

The Russo-Japanese War

Before World War I, the first truly global conflict was the Russo-Japanese War; what some historians refer to as World War Zero - although other European wars like the Seven Years War have also been in contention for such a title. As European powers divided up Africa and looked for spheres of influence in China, emerging powers in Russia and Japan sought to engage in the political and economic games of the age, namely: industrialization, militarism, imperialism, and nationalism. Both nations used state-driven industrialization, which drew women into the workforce, and used their new wealth to fund efforts to expand power and control over neighboring regions. 

Imperialism is catastrophic for the people and states that lie in the path of the militant power, but it is even bloodier when two powers bump into one another. In this case, both Japan and Russia sought control over Manchuria, a region north of Korea, to control regional ports and expand their economic opportunities. Manchuria shared its borders with Russia, under the rule of Tsar Nicholas II, which sought to expand its influence in the Korean and Liaodong peninsulas. Japan was concerned about Russian aggression in the region given that the Japanese themselves had been working to establish dominance over the Korean peninsula since they began a trade relationship in 1876. 

Initially, Japan offered a deal to cede control of Manchuria to Russia in exchange for unimpeded influence over Korea, but Russia rejected the proposal - quite possibly seeing expansion there in their future. In response, the Russo-Japanese War began in 1904 when Japan launched a surprise attack on the Russian navy at Port Arthur. The Japanese navy, led by Admiral Togo Heihachiro, successfully damaged Russian naval vessels and gained the upper hand in battles at Port Arthur and Liaoyang. By the end of that year, Japan had sunk every ship in Russia's Pacific fleet, and the surrender of the Port Arthur garrison marked a significant, surprise victory for Japan. Russia later suffered heavy losses in the Battle of the Yellow Sea and had to mobilize its Baltic Fleet as reinforcements. This war gained international attention because it is the first major indicator of what war between two industrialized and imperial powers looks like. The war was also supported by European powers: France backing Russia and Britain backing Japan. 

Drawing of Japanese forces storming a Russian position

In this war, cultural definitions of masculinity, or what it meant to be a man, were at the forefront. At the turn of the century, Japanese military conscription and compulsory education shaped modern military manhood. Japan's nation-building efforts formed an idealized “manly” image in military academies and on battlefields, and followed the historical trend of excluding women - even those capable of performing necessary military tasks. Militarization favored a specific type of masculinity over femininity seen in military parades exercised around the world. Physical examinations during conscription, or recruitment, played a role in shaping the reputation of men, and the Japanese military even intentionally adopted aspects of a Western diet to make its male soldiers stronger and more “masculine” in appearance. They promoted hygiene and physical fitness through military-style exercise for men. 

Masculinity was similarly used in Russia as a not just a trait of their military, but their governing bodies. Historian Christine D. Worobec notes that ruling elites viewed their peasant class as, 

devoid of masculine characteristics. According to landowners and government officials, peasants displayed feminine qualities by being inferior, weak, irrational, and potentially disruptive. Distinguishing itself as masculine and superior, strong, rational, and orderly, the state was able to preserve hierarchical power relationships and avoid fundamental reforms in the agrarian sector until after the first bursts of revolutionary fervor in 1905–6, when it appeared that if the state did not tame the savage peasant, it would be destroyed.

She continues by noting that the stratification of Russian society was deeply entwined with the notions of patriarchy and paternalism, where “Women and children found themselves subordinated to husbands and fathers just as peasants as a whole were subordinated to the tsar, the supreme father.” A number of Russian revolts were connected to this notion of subordination from the top down, though most did not consider the subordination at the most basic level: the home. 

As a result of this emphasis on masculinity, homophobia in Japan, Russia, and the West was rampant, and intensified in military circles - despite countless members of LGBTQ+ community having served in wars throughout human history (including this one). Men who were considered weakly, or non-conforming to standards of masculinity were considered “feminine” and undesirable, while women - who were not in the military and subject to this physical regimen - were seen as the antithesis of strength. Ideal masculinity was also associated with mental and physical strength. 

As masculinity segregated itself from femininity, what it meant to be feminine was a bit unclear. Certainly it was tied to maternity, care, and tenderness, but the Russo-Japanese War also saw Japan’s first state-sponsored military brothels emerge, what would later be termed the “Comfort Women” stations in World War Two, as Japanese leaders believed that prostitutes were necessary to control male sexual desire, because, they believed, “real men” should need to have sex with submissive women regularly. Similarly, Russian soldiers were accused of mass rapes in their marches through Manchuria. The definition of masculinity in this time and these cultures was thus emphasizing dominating rather than other qualities of manhood like protecting. The use of brothels and violently sexualizing enemy women that began with the Russo-Japanese War would peak in WWII with unimaginable sexual crimes against women.

Postcards of the war traveled the world with depictions of the war’s progress, and as in most wars, women’s bodies were used in these depictions to evoke feelings and stir people to support one side of the conflict over another. For example, one cartoon showed a feminized “Saint Russia” naked and tied to a post at the mercy of a leering Japanese soldier. 

The Russo-Japanese War concluded with the Treaty of Portsmouth, mediated by American President Theodore Roosevelt in 1905 in New Hampshire. Despite Japan's clear victory, the country faced significant financial losses and had limited bargaining power. Therefore, the treaty resulted in Russia ceding Port Arthur to Japan while retaining the northern part of Sakhalin Island. Roosevelt's support of Tsar Nicholas in refusing indemnities led to a frustrated Japan and anti-American riots soon broke out in Tokyo - seeding resentments that would remain several decades later in the outbreak of World War II. 

Japanese forces marching in Seoul, South Korea

While they were not in the war’s battlefield spotlight, both nations looked to engage their women in the war effort as a part of the emerging “home front” of war. The civilians of each nation had to provide the food and supplies for their soldiers fighting in these wars, and such contributions are not only critical to one’s victory in any given conflict, but they similarly reflect the public’s attachment and aspirations surrounding the war. For women, who are typically kept far from the battlefields, participation on the home front is often viewed as a method of advancing rights and freedoms. 

However, in both cases, the participation on the home fronts and the people’s reaction to the war’s aftermath are similarly reflective of these aspirations not being achieved through the war. For Russians, the slate of losses dealt to them by the Japanese limited the war’s popularity and further depleted public support of the Romanov tsar. Thus, the support of the Russian home front was complicated by an emerging public revolution. Likewise, Japan’s surprise victory had been fueled by civilians’ support in food and supply production, as well as heavy taxation, but their military had also paid dearly for that victory in the way of Japanese soldiers’ lives which also negatively affected the families they left behind. Japanese wives and families had expected that through the demand of war reparations from Russia, they would be compensated for the losses of their husbands and sons, but Japanese officials had been persuaded by US President Theodore Roosevelt to opt for peace without such reparations. A similar public revolt followed in Japan, leading to political upheaval and reform.

Still, Russia agreed to withdraw from Manchuria and recognize Japanese control of Korea, which was formally annexed by Japan just five years later. The war marked a shift in global power dynamics with an Asian nation defeating a European power for the first time, and demoralized the Russian Empire, contributing to the Russian Revolution a decade later. It also initiated warfare among major powers in the Pacific region.

The Russo-Japanese War ultimately foreshadowed future global conflicts, and was marked by extreme brutality. It is estimated that both sides suffered casualties exceeding 150,000, and tragically, around 20,000 Chinese civilians, mostly women, lost their lives for simply being caught in the path of the warring parties. The deaths of many civilians can be attributed to the brutal actions of the Russian forces in Manchuria. Journalists who reported on the war described instances where Russian soldiers looted and set fire to numerous villages, as well as committed acts of rape and murder against the women residing there.

Yet, the war was treated as nothing short of a global spectacle with journalists from around the world flocking to see two industrialized powers engage in modern war. Tensions between global leaders around the world continued to grow and it seems the brutal lessons of the Russo-Japanese War were not minded. The war that should have been heeded as a warning of the World Wars to follow, wasn’t. 

World War I 

The Russo-Japanese War would be quickly and unquestionably overshadowed by the subsequent World War I. World War I is a haunting reminder of the dangers of war because just how many people were killed before world leaders (all male) called for a stop. Ten million combatants were killed, perhaps double to triple those figures for the number wounded and maimed - physically and mentally - while the number of civilians who were killed in the crossfire, starved, or lost to disease spread by war is unfathomable. World War I ended the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires and devastated others. It also led to the Great Depression, which claimed additional human lives.

World War I was caused by the same things that caused the Russo-Japanese War - the desire for power and resources. It was made worse by shifting alliances that caused more nations than necessary to get involved. What should have been an isolated conflict between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, turned to global war because of militarism, alliances, imperialism, 

and nationalism. 

In a centuries-long competition for lands and conquest, Europeans had seen both a series of wars for their colonies’ independence and continued efforts by wealthy nations to assume control over poorer nations. Such a competition for influence and power was ongoing in the Balkans, where the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Russia were continuously applying pressure to significantly smaller states. In June of 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand - heir to the Austrian throne - was assassinated in Sarajevo, Bosnia, by Serbian nationalists determined to retain their sovereignty. Many point to the assassination of the Austro-Hungarian heir to the throne and his wife, Sophie the Duchess of Hohenberg, as the catalyst for the war, but their murders were merely an excuse for the war that had been looming for decades owing to increasing militarization and competition over resources needed to fuel the industrial nations.

Assassination of Archduke Ferdinand and Duchess Sophie

As the prospect of war was immediately thrown on the table, a complicated web of alliances was pulled to the surface. Serbia called on their ally, Russia, to back them in the war. Austria-Hungary called on their ally, the newly united Germany, to support them. Germany was eager to use this war as an excuse to expand, while the Ottomans also eagerly dove in as they wanted to challenge Russia for economic influence in the Black Sea and the Middle East. France was required by treaty to back Russia in the event of war, so the prospect of war was daunting for Germany from that start, and their experts knew they needed to quickly sack Paris to remove France from the war before turning to face Russia - the European giant - with their full strength. To do this, they decided to act immediately and invaded France on August 2, 1914, through neutral Belgium: their ultimate downfall. The violation of Belgium's neutrality and the resulting assaults on human rights, such as massacres and rape by the invaders, caused Britain, previously neutral, to join the war. Russia, France, and Britain, longtime rivals even as recently as the Russo-Japanese War, were on the same side. 

Map of alliances in World War I

The web of alliances throughout Europe was complicated and interesting for several reasons, but perhaps most interesting of all is the relationship between several of the biggest decision-makers in this war. Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany and King George of Britain were first cousins, sharing Queen Victoria as their grandmother. Tsar Nicholas was also one of George’s first cousins on the other side who cemented his connections to the British royal family by marrying Queen Victoria’s favorite granddaughter, Princess Alexandra or Alix of Hesse. Just one year before the war, all three emperors were at a family event, the wedding of Wilhelm’s daughter, Princess Victoria Louise of Prussia. These ambitious cousins were now engaged in the bloodiest war in world history. They, along with the other world leaders involved in this massive conflict that saw over twenty nations at war, would never see the battlefield, but they would send millions of their own people to die on them in the name of power. 

Similarly, the war erupted around the globe, largely due to relationships countries shared (or hoped to share) with Europeans; this includes both colonial and alliance-based relationships. In Asia, hostilities began in August of 1914 when New Zealand - part of the British Commonwealth - occupied Samoa, a German territory at the time. Australia - also part of the British Commonwealth - similarly seized German New Guinea weeks later. China also declared war on the Germans, seizing their holdings in Chinese port cities, while Japan sailed into naval supremacy in the region by taking on German vessels in the region trying desperately to hold on to their colonial holdings. Other Allied forces also saw naval battle with the Germans in this region, and stretching through the Pacific. 

While North American nations like Canada and the United States would join the war in Europe, most of South America remained neutral in this war. With the exception of Brazil, who sent naval, air, and medical forces to participate in the war, most South American nations that did declare war did so later in the conflict in hopes of gaining political favor, but did not become directly involved. Nonetheless, some still found themselves in the front row seats of naval battles off the coast of Chile, the Cape of Good Hope, and the Falkland Islands. 

Relationships with European nations also brought about the participation of nations in the Middle East and Africa. For Africa, this included both the transporting of colonial forces to the battlefields of Europe, as well as direct warfare between nations under opposing colonial forces. British and French soldiers led local colonial troops against the German colonies of Kamerun (modern Republic of Cameroon) and Togoland (modern Togo and part of Ghana), while German soldiers and colonial forces from the colony of South-West Africa attacked the British colony of South Africa. Likewise, colonial forces from India were similarly uprooted for service on the battlefields of Europe. In many ways, it was this global explosion of war that brought into question the nature and risks of colonization itself. 

India

The complication of colonial participation in such a war may be best illustrated in India. This one colony alone provided over a million troops for the British war effort, and 70,000 were lost. The vast majority of these soldiers fought against the Ottoman Empire in now infamous campaigns like Gallipoli.

When forced to join the war as part of the empire, Indian women’s enthusiasm was palpable. Royal women of the native states offered their support. During World War I, the government created the Society for the Employment of Muslim Women to address the wartime labor shortages and encourage women to work in the Battalions of Women Workers. In six months, 14,000 women in Istanbul had applied for employment through the society. This brought women of all classes into the workforce previously dominated by men. 

Sultan Shah Jahan, the Begum of Bhopal, spoke at the Delhi War Conference, stating, “The need of the Empire is undoubtedly India’s opportunity.” Surprisingly, even the political bourgeoisie, including nationalist parties like the Indian National Congress, supported the war effort. Both moderate and extremist factions within the Congress hoped that India's contribution to the war would lead to the desired "dominion" status within the British Empire. Notable figures like Annie Besant, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi, and Jawaharlal Nehru encouraged women to join the struggle for independence. Female social reformers like Swarnakumari Devi and her daughter Sarala Devi Chaudhurani played important roles in inspiring women to participate in the nation's cause. Ramabhai Ranade, a women's rights activist, gave a loyalist speech at the Bombay War Conference and received recognition for her support.

Sultan Shah Jahan

But for girls and women of the lower classes, the war touched closer to home as their fathers, husbands, and sons were fighting the war. The letter from one girl to her father on the front survives, where she wrote, “Dear Father, [...] This is Kishan Devi. I am writing in to inform that I am alright over here [...] We were really scared after receiving your letter [...] My heart is yours. You are everything to me, and I worry about you. I am like a living dead without you [...] Reply to our letter soon.” Devi was not alone, as letter writing was an important part of women’s roles during the war. Women all around the world, corresponded with their fathers and brothers, fiancés and husbands. Most women at home wrote letters to keep up morale of the men in the trenches abroad. Emily Chitticks wrote to her fiancée Private William Martin, saying, “My Dearest Will [...] I shall be so relieved to get a letter from you. I can't help feeling a bit anxious dear [...] I know God can take care of you wherever you are and if it's his will darling he will so are you to come back to me, that's how I feel about it dear, if we only put our trust in Him. I am sure he will.” Soon after, she learned he was killed in action. Future dominion status or the grander step of independence was highly sought after, but cooperation in the war could quite literally hit home. 

Women’s Pacifism ​​

Well before the true horrors of World War I would emerge on the front pages of newspapers around the world, an active group of women around the world were those involved in peace efforts during this period. From the mid-1800s onwards, there were early efforts to promote transnational women's peace work, but this wouldn’t really come to fruition until World War I, when the deadliness of war took on a whole new dimension. 

Female delegates to the 1915 Women's Peace Conference in The Hague

One notable early example was Julia Ward Howe, an American activist, who called for a Mother's Peace Day after the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71. In 1873, this day was celebrated for the first time in various American cities, as well as in England, Switzerland, Italy, and France. There were also other early initiatives, although short-lived, such as the efforts of Marie Goegg from Switzerland in 1868, and the establishment of several women’s peace organizations in the late 1890s one by Eugénie Potonié-Pierre and Ellen Robinson and another in Paris by Gabrielle Wiesniewska. 

Jeanne Mélin

In the years leading up to the war, women flocked to Europe to promote peace between nations. Jeanne Mélin, a French pacifist and feminist, attended 30 peace conferences in France during the final months of 1913. She believed deeply that women were the life givers, and as a result, could prevent wars that took life away. The work of Mélin and others of the time had a central message that women had been largely excluded from political affairs, and thus it was argued, perhaps women’s involvement in such matters could help prevent such outcomes. She advocated for using education to stamp out violent behaviors and developed a system of co-education of girls and boys centered on the idea of exchanging masculine and feminine strengths. Mélin joined many pacifists across nations of her era who claimed capitalism was responsible for war, a position that incurred the wrath of capitalists and threatened their lives. 

Sensing the impending war, in the days, weeks, and months that followed men and women involved in pacifist efforts went to work. Initially, women’s pacifism focused on condemning war itself as inhumane rather than analyzing the specific political circumstances leading to the war. Then, in July, Jean Jaurès, an outspoken labor leader and pacifist, was assassinated before giving a high profile address. Mélin was a supporter of Jaurès and was horrified at his death, but the rapidly changing landscape put her perspectives in a tailspin. She was frustrated that German pacifists refused to accept German culpability in the conflict and felt pacifism without consideration for socio-political circumstances may not be the best path. By August, her home in France was bombed by the Germans, and for Mélin and other women pacifists, these early months of war served as a transition phase in their philosophical positions on war when war was no longer an abstract, far-away concept.  

Peace activities faced censorship and severe restrictions in all warring nations, while neutral countries provided more opportunities for pacifists to express their disapproval of the war. For instance, in New York, 1,200 women participated in a silent women's peace parade in August 1914. In the same year, Emmeline Pethick-Lawrence from Britain and Rosika Schwimmer from Hungary toured the United States, delivering lectures on peace.

Women’s Peace Parade in New York, 1914

The organization of anti-war efforts led to the establishment of the Woman's Peace Party in Washington, D.C., in January 1915, with 3,000 women participating. Their program called for a convention of neutral nations, advocating continuous mediation as a means to reach a negotiated peace. Women marched in all black and wrote letters in their home countries, hoping to keep their husbands, sons, and fathers safe. One of the most popular songs in America in 1915 was “I Didn’t Raise my Boy to be a Soldier,” as women around the country - and around the world - desperately tried to keep their loved ones from becoming a number in the growing statistics of the war. While some managed to stay neutral throughout, others were inevitably dragged in; like the United States in 1917.  

As matters escalated, discussions about an international women's meeting began in Europe when the International Women’s Suffrage Alliance (IWSA) canceled its scheduled congress in Berlin. Organized by Germany’s first female jurist, Anita Augspurg, and Dutch pacifist Aletta Jacobs, more than 1,000 female delegates came together at the Hague in 1915 to discuss not only the end of this war, but the prevention of wars in the future. These women had to brave political repercussions, hazardous travel, and the risk of entering already war-torn Europe to show their dedication to peace. 

During the congress, participants advocated for political rights for women, democratic measures, international arbitration, democratic control of foreign policy, disarmament, free trade, and pacifist education. They viewed equity and democracy as essential prerequisites for a peaceful world order. The congress participants also believed that women's suffrage was necessary for women to have political influence and played on societal norms of motherhood to support their radical political demands. 

International Congress of Women in 1915. left to right:1. Lucy Thoumaian – Armenia, 2. Leopoldine Kulka, 3. Laura Hughes – Canada, 4. Rosika Schwimmer – Hungary, 5. Anika Augspurg – Germany, 6. Jane Addams – United States, 7. Eugénie Hamer – Belgium, 8. Aletta Jacobs – Netherlands, 9. Chrystal Macmillan – UK, 10. Rosa Genoni – Italy, 11. Anna Kleman – Sweden, 12. Thora Daugaard – Denmark, 13. Louise Keilhau – Norway

The congress also led to the establishment of the International Committee of Women for Permanent Peace (ICWPP). This committee worked to maintain international communication but faced increasing challenges due to travel restrictions, disrupted mail routes, and financial difficulties throughout the war. National sections of the ICWPP focused on spreading peace propaganda and organizing relief work in their respective countries. Activities in the warring nations faced severe restrictions and opposition from nationalist groups and even other women's organizations. Sadly, their voices were muffled by the ongoing call for supremacy through war from those who wanted no piece of their peace.

Women’s War Support

While male world leaders poured more and more of their young men onto the battlefields of Europe, women everywhere were required to play a role as well. This was meant to be a supportive role in line with cultural views of femininity, but gradually morphed into more active roles as the war dragged on and devastating numbers of male lives were lost. Initially, however, the goal was for women to serve by supporting the men who went to war - writing letters, sending small gifts and food, and general encouragement. 

Yet, the war demanded a shift in women's traditional roles, blurring the lines between their expected behaviors. Propaganda portrayed women as gentle, vulnerable homemakers who were both objects of affection and victims of enemy atrocities. The men of Europe were called on to defend and attract them through their actions on the frontlines. At the same time, they were depicted as resilient and active participants in the war effort. They were told through propaganda that they could play critical roles on the “home front” for the glory of their country in the same way that their fathers, brothers, and husbands were. 

In this vein of civic duty, women in multiple countries aggressively supported conscription efforts through a form of “toxic femininity,” that bullied men into doing their “male duty.” This was most evident in Britain. In 1914, the Order of the White Feather was created as a propaganda campaign to shame men into enlisting. The white feather symbol represented cowardice and neglect of duty. It was believed to have originated from cockfighting, where a white tail feather indicated a weak and passive bird. In August 1914, a group of women in Folkestone handed out white feathers to non-uniformed men to shame and pressure them to join the fight. The movement spread across the country, gaining attention in the media. Some men faced harassment and coercion, even if they were contributing to the war effort in critical civilian roles like farming, industrial production, and more. 

Order of the White Feather pinning a feather on a civilian man

The tactics employed by the women varied in effectiveness, sometimes targeting the wrong individuals, including injured veterans. These women’s taunts were so prolific that the government was compelled to issue badges to acknowledge civilian contributions in an effort to fix the situation, but criticism continued. The campaign stirred controversy, but the women involved remained steadfast in their beliefs that “real” men should fight to protect their country. Prominent figures such as Mary Augusta Ward, Emma Orczy, and Emmeline Pankhurst supported the movement, as suffragettes used this evolving narrative to argue that women actively involved in the war deserved full citizenship more than male pacifists or conscientious objectors.

Government-issued propaganda posters served to reinforce these gender norms. Posters played a vital role in spreading messages, and on them, women were often depicted as personifications of nations, embodying qualities like morality, virtue, innocence, and justice. The Imperial Maritime League appealed to British women to ensure their men enlisted, aligning with Kitchener's famous "Your country needs you!" poster, which targeted men. The home was portrayed as a place of security that needed protection from German aggression at any cost. Those who refused to join the war effort risked being rejected by their sweethearts and faced accusations and blame. 

World War I Propaganda 

Women in the Labor Force

Some women believed that they could, collectively, improve their station through supporting the war. If women could prove that they too could take on the rigors of war, perhaps their nations would then better recognize their status, rights, and ideas. Namely, multiple Western nations were grappling with the issue of suffrage, and many women hoped their performance in the war could be the deciding factor.

Women in the United Kingdom doing industrial labor during World War I

By the end of the war, over 1.4 German women and 4.7 million British women had joined the war effort, while the Americans boasted over nine million women joining their formal labor force to meet war needs. Even the Ottoman Empire created the Islamic Organization for the Employment of Women to help make up for their shortage of manpower after the drafts, and by the end of the war women were shouldering much of the labor in the country, despite their similar lack of political representation. 

The way the war impacted the gendered labor force was a bit different for women living in the war zones like in Belgium, because they didn’t have enough warning or time to pull men from their jobs into armed service. Even with forced deportations of male workers starting in 1916, women did not systematically replace men as they did in neighboring countries. The majority of Belgian women mobilized to ensure nutritional survival. Many joined charities, while others engaged in civil resistance. Women in the unoccupied zone and those in exile were also tasked with supporting the army, caring for the wounded, and assisting refugees. Women were also responsible for the wellbeing of children left behind in the war-torn region and often had to evacuate them to France or Switzerland. Despite efforts to provide jobs, income insecurity grew, leading to clandestine prostitution near the trenches

In areas not physically overwhelmed by the war, women continued in domestic roles and also saw increasing participation outside the home performing secretarial work and other accepted “women’s jobs.” Sewing workshops were established to produce military clothing, and small factories employed women to make gas masks and camouflage netting.Yet, with millions of men away from home around the world, women jumped into manufacturing and agricultural roles as a chance to provide for their families or improve their prospects. In Russia, 15 million men were drafted to fight, causing a shortage of labor in jobs that were essential to sustain the war effort. There, and in many other places, the government relaxed restrictions on female and child labor, leading to a significant increase in the number of women working in fields that often were off-limits to them.

Women working in a munitions factory

They took on jobs traditionally dominated by men, such as metalwork, machine manufacturing, and munitions production. They also filled in for men in various male-driven roles like streetcar conductors, truck drivers, and railway workers. Women entered fields like accounting, utilities and telegraph operation, and took on jobs as messengers, mechanics, chimney sweeps, mail carriers, police officers, janitors, and carters. Despite their important contributions, women were paid significantly less than men, earning as little as 35 percent of male wages. 

A woman working as a chimney sweep during World War I

Some people criticized their involvement, perceiving women as a threat to male dominance in these fields and society-at-large. The largest increase in female labor occurred in agriculture, where women made up around 72 percent of workers on peasant farms and 58 percent on landowner estates by 1916. However, male farmers saw the increase of women in the profession as a sort of "feminization" of agricultural labor and met these women farmers with negativity and hostility. For them, women were an unwelcome challenge to male control. Similar resistance could be found in other fields, and only increased when the war came to a close and soldiers returned home and needed to resume the jobs they left behind. 

Wartime Nursing 

From the just first days of the war, the hospitals were quickly overwhelmed from the brutality. Starting with the invasion of Belgium, women were called upon to help everywhere. Women from all walks of life, regardless of their medical skills, rushed to improvised aid stations set up in various places like schools, museums, monasteries, and castles. Contrary to the romanticized image of nurturing angels, these nurses faced physically demanding, poorly compensated, and emotionally challenging work in hospitals and convalescent facilities. Women also joined auxiliary services in the army, performing tasks like laundry, cleaning, disinfection, cooking, and sewing. 

Women’s direct participation in the war can be seen best in the medical field, as they were seen as having natural qualities useful for this role. Most warring nations had tens of thousands of volunteer nurses and doctors to try to serve their country and stem the tide of extreme loss from the traumatic injuries of industrial war, the introduction of chemical warfare, psychological phenomena like shellshock, and general disease that followed warring bodies. The numbers of those wounded in this war were entirely overwhelming, and their injuries equally horrific. Medical professionals could not have saved even half of those they did without these waves of female volunteers racing around to provide treatments, change bandages, feed, clean, and comfort the wounded soldiers in the hundreds of hospitals that surrounded the battlefields of Europe. 

A painting of victims of a chemical attack

While nursing is often considered a field that allowed women to contribute while keeping them safe from the dangers of the battlefield, an estimated 1,500 nurses lost their lives in the process as they contracted disease or fell victim to bombing and shelling when serving so close to the front lines. While serving in France, one American anesthetist, Sophie Gran, wrote that she “had just given this poor boy anesthesia when a bomb hit. We were supposed to hit the floor, but he was out and didn’t know what was going on. I took a tray and put it over our heads.” Working in these hospitals they witnessed all the greatest horrors of the war, and in doing so, they saved countless lives.

World War I hospital

Women also contributed to the medical care of soldiers from afar by producing and packing medical supplies, donating blood, and contributing to lifesaving medical developments. For example, Marie Curie, who was already an eminent scientist having been awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1903 with her husband for their theory of radioactivity, and the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1911 for her work with radioactive isotopes, invented mobile X-ray cars nicknamed "little Curies," which led to more precise and critical healthcare for the most at-risk patients. Around 150 women were trained to be X-ray operators on the battlefront, including Curie herself. 

Marie Curie driving a mobile x-ray car

Women in Uniform 

Many women were willing to put their lives on the line as a sign of ultimate support for the war effort, whether that be through nursing or in uniform. Hundreds of thousands of women made their way into volunteer corps within their militaries to serve their countries. Both the Allies and Central Powers used female volunteers for non-combat tasks that would free more men up for the battlefield. This included clerical work, driving, radio operation, and more. These roles - much like nursing - were meant to keep women far from the dangers of the battlefield in lines with gendered roles. Nonetheless, a fair number would be caught up in combat regardless. 

Maria Bochkareva (middle) fighting in a men’s regiment before forming the Women’s Battalion of Death

However, some nations, like Serbia and Russia, used women as combat troops and sent them to the front. The best known of the female Russian soldiers was Maria Bochkareva. She is credited as the first woman to lead a Russian military unit after petitioning the Tsar for the right to serve, and was the founder of the “Women's Battalion of Death.” This battalion was made up of around 2,000 “patriotic” women volunteers. She faced all the criticism and ostracism we would expect of society at the time, but was decorated for saving fifty wounded soldiers from the field and wounded several times. Other female units would follow hers. They were expected to serve mostly for propaganda value and out of need for troops, and did not fully reflect how those societies viewed women and equality. Case in point, these women were subject to regular abuse, criticism, and alienation from the men they served alongside. 

Russian Revolution

This war shook more than just the ground where the artillery flew ceaselessly for years. For Russia, the German onslaught in World War I resulted in the Russian Revolution. This public uprising saw the overthrow of Tsar Nicholas II and ultimately the murder of him, his wife, their four daughters and son. This also saw a complete shakeup of their political system, eliminating the monarchy altogether. 

While the Western Front in France was locked in a stalemate between trenches that stretched from Switzerland to the English Channel, the Eastern Front between Germany and Russia was much more mobile, and as a result, civilian populations were more exposed to the war. Russia, still reeling from the debts of the Russo-Japanese War, was unable to fully finance the war effort. Tough rations were imposed on civilians, and women at home struggled to feed their children. In some cases, as the German army approached Russian villages, women were told to defend their homes with whatever weapons they could find.

For the people, this invasion was the final straw in a long line of offenses. Tsar Nicholas II was wildly unpopular in Russia and had been for a long time. The night of his coronation, poor policing at a celebratory event resulted in hundreds of Russian peasants being trampled to death. In a public relations nightmare, that night, he and his German-born wife, Alexandra, attended a royal event where they were seen dancing as if nothing had happened; a fact capitalized on by the Bolshevik revolutionaries already active in Russia. Alexandra was said to have been visibly disturbed, but Nicholas was not, and further, their reputations were already set. 

Alexandra and Nicholas Romanov

In her tenure as consort, Alexandra was out of touch with the Russian people and expected them to love her simply because she was their ruler. She took a while to learn Russian and isolated herself at court. Then, in subsequent years, she gave birth to four daughters, making the stability of the government uneasy given the Russian requirement for a male heir. Some pressure eased in this respect when, around the time that war with Japan broke out, she gave birth to a sickly Alexei Nikolaevich. 

During World War I, Nicholas played an active and direct role in defending Russia and Alexandra was left in charge of affairs on the home front - a monumental task given the demands of the war. Alexandra’s German origins in a time when Russia was in the bloodiest conflict in history against Germany didn’t help her position. When support for her was limited, she relied on her confidant Rasputin, an eccentric mystic who showed incredible skill in calming Alexei during his bouts of ill health. The general distrust of the monarchy, the failing war, and the difficulties and limitations faced by the people led to the brutal murder of Rasputin in 1916 by the aristocracy who claimed he was misleading her. Blame would still fall on Alexandra and Nicholas for Russia’s hardships, leading to their tragic demise. 

As the opposing ideology, social democracy in Russia attracted women from both working-class backgrounds and the intelligentsia. Many of them eventually became prominent figures within the Bolshevik Party, but while the revolution had feminist roots, it did not have feminist ends. One of the most appealing prospects of a more democratic system was the potential for greater autonomy and political voice for women. 

The Russian movement for women's suffrage, like everywhere in the world, gained momentum during World War I. More radical groups flourished, criticizing the elite "bourgeois" women's groups, which were mostly led by privileged women. They argued that these women could not comprehend the needs of working-class and peasant women, and they believed that the women's movement posed a threat to working-class unity. Nadezhda Krupskaia tirelessly advocated for women's rights and education, and she married the communist leader, Vladimir Lenin, in 1898. Krupskaia held significant positions within the Bolshevik party until her death in 1939.

Nadezhda Krupskaia

In 1914, Bolshevik women, including Nadezhda Krupskaia, Konkordiia Samoilova, and Inessa Armand, published Rabotnitsa (The Woman Worker). Leading up to the revolution, it was revived in 1917 and became crucial for sharing feminist perspectives during the revolution. The February Revolution of 1917 - which began on International Women's Day in the middle of the war - is generally recognized as the starting point of the revolution. Thousands of women from various backgrounds took to the streets demanding food and better conditions for soldiers' families. Just a month later, in March 1917, Petrograd witnessed the largest women's demonstration in Russian history. Led by Poliksena Shishkina-Iavein, President of the League for Women's Equal Rights and Russia's first female gynecologist, along with the revolutionary Vera Figner, approximately 40,000 women participated in the march. 

The 1917 International Women's Day March held in Petrograd

Finally, in July 1917, women over the age of 20 were granted the right to vote and hold public office. Their first opportunity to exercise this newly acquired right came during the elections for the Constituent Assembly in November 1917, six months after Nicholas had been deposed. In some areas, such as Yaroslavl, the female voter turnout exceeded that of men. 

When Nicholas was deposed, a provisional government was established that was meant to marry tradition and reform, but many Russians saw it as continued rule by the elite. Protest and resistance continued, as did the war. Working class women were active in anti-World War I protests, calling for peace in Russia. 

Ultimately, however, the revolution just meant more war for Russia when it turned into a civil war, with its focal point being the October Revolution of 1917. The nobility defended by the White Army attempted to hold off their overthrow by the Bolshevik revolutionaries in the Red Army. Women’s regiments were among the forces brought in to defend the Winter Palace where the royal family were held, but their numbers were considerably smaller, as the White Army did not actively recruit women for combat roles. By contrast, an estimated 80,000 women served with the Red Army. Rozaliia Samoilovna Zemliachka, known as "Bloody Rosa" by the British opposition, served as a senior military commissar. However, the majority of women in the Red Army served in support roles as doctors, nurses, telephonists, and clerks.

For over a year after being stripped from power, the Romanov royal family had been held under house arrest in Siberia. They hoped they would be exiled to Britain where they could live with their cousins, but their opposition argued that their family had committed too many crimes against the people of Russia to be allowed a comfortable life elsewhere. As the war raged and the White Army made advances, the Red soldiers guarding the royals worried they might be rescued. On July 17, 1918, at 2:00 a.m., Nicholas, Alexandra, their five children, and four servants were abruptly awakened and instructed to prepare for departure. Led by Nicholas, who carried his sickly son, they were taken to a small room downstairs and told to pose for a picture. Then, 11 intoxicated men entered the room and executed the family by firing squad. The children didn’t die initially, so the soldiers finished the gruesome act using their bayonets. Olga was 22, Tatiana was 21, Maria was 19, Anastasia was 17, and Alexei, the heir, was 13.

The Romanov Family

To cover the crime and stop loyal royalists from honoring the dead, the bodies were later taken to an old mine site to conceal their identities. The executioners dismembered the corpses with axes, doused them with acid, and set them on fire. The remains were buried in two separate locations, and it took over 70 years to locate and identify their bodies.

The Impact of the Revolution

Ultimately, the Red Army won and communism took root in Russia, becoming known as the Soviet Union. The early years of Soviet rule brought significant changes to women's lives. Alexandra Kollontai, the People's Commissar for Social Welfare and the first woman in the Bolshevik government, played a crucial role in improving women's rights. Kollontai had extensively written about the "woman question" before the revolution and advocated for sexual liberation. The Family Code of 1918 granted women equal status to men, recognized illegitimate children's rights, secularized marriage, and allowed couples to choose either the husband's or wife's name after marriage. Divorce became more accessible, abortion was legalized in 1920, and communal facilities for childcare and domestic tasks were introduced to relieve women of household responsibilities.

Alexandra Kollontai at the International Socialist Congress, Copenhagen, 1910

In 1919, the Women's Bureau (Zhenotdel) was established. Initially led by Alexandra Kollontai, Inessa Armand, and Nadezhda Krupskaia, its purpose was to disseminate propaganda among working-class women and engage them in public life and the revolutionary process. The Zhenotdel also aimed to promote literacy and education among women in Central Asia. As the proletariat was not substantial in Central Asia, the Soviets believed that Muslim women, as the most oppressed group within the region's patriarchal structure, could see substantial social change. However, their attempts to target women in the region faced resistance, partly due to the history of Russian colonization, and contributed to growing anti-Soviet sentiment.

Sadly, the reforms to improve women's lives were relatively short-lived. By the mid-to-late 1920s, both public and party attitudes toward family policies became more conservative. In the 1930s, Joseph Stalin reversed many of the rights granted to women and families in the 1918 Family Code. Abortion was banned, divorce became extremely difficult to obtain, and the rights of illegitimate children were revoked. Stalin also disbanded the Zhenotdel in 1930, claiming that women's emancipation had been achieved in the Soviet Union, and therefore, the department was no longer necessary. Throughout the entire history of the Soviet Union, women accounted for only 3-4% of the party's powerful Central Committee on average.

The early communist vision of women's equality and liberation, where women would have equal access to any profession and communal institutions would take on the responsibilities of child-rearing and housekeeping, was never fully realized. As emphasis shifted back toward the traditional family unit in the 1930s, women were burdened with the double duty of domestic chores and demanding full-time work, often in physically demanding jobs.

Treaty of Versailles 

While Russia underwent its transformation into the Soviet Union, the rest of Europe remained embroiled in war. In October of 1918, an armistice between the Ottoman Empire and the Allies ended fighting in the Middle East. Just days afterward, the disintegrating Austro-Hungarian Empire signed an armistice with Italy. In the West, after years of deadlock and stalemate, German defeat was imminent and the French, British, American, and Belgian leaders were not open to compromise; peace would require Germany to submit to complete demilitarization, departure from France, Belgium and Alsace-Lorraine, and release of Allied prisoners of war. They were given just 72 hours to consider the terms. On November 10th, German Kaiser Wilhelm II stepped down from the throne, and the next day, November the 11th at 11:00am, hostilities ceased. This day is now known as Armistice Day. Peace, it seemed, had finally come. 

Front page of the New York Times November 11, 1918

Unfortunately, objectives in the resolution to the war were about punishment, not peace. The negotiations were challenging as British, French, American, and Italian representatives had different visions of how punishment should look, and Germany was excluded from the discussions. When they were given demands for complete demilitarization, exceptionally steep war reparations, and the prospect of lost lands, Germany sent a series of counter-proposals on the 29th that were rejected. The Allies gave Germany just five days to accept the offered terms or face the resumption of war. Germany reluctantly accepted the terms. 

Example of anti-German propaganda which influenced views of Germany throughout and after the war

While the Central Powers as a whole suffered in the aftermath of the war, the conditions imposed on the Germans were undeniably severe. Germany took responsibility for the war and lost 68,000 square kilometers of territory, its colonies in Africa, and its military power was severely limited. Germany also agreed to pay a massive sum of 20 billion gold marks in reparations to France. This humiliation fueled Germany's desire for revenge, and planted the ultimate seed for World War II that was to emerge two decades later. 

Amid negotiations, not a single woman was in the room. The International Committee of Women for Permanent Peace’s ultimate goal was to hold a congress during the official peace negotiations in hopes that they would either be invited to take part, or at a minimum, their ideas could play a role in the discussions. The post-war congress took place in Zurich in May 1919, where about 150 women from 16 countries discussed the new political order in Europe. They strongly opposed the Versailles Treaty, believing it would lead to renewed conflict. The ICWPP changed its name to the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) and relocated its central office to Geneva, near the newly-formed League of Nations - an organization designed to facilitate greater communication between international parties and prevent such a war from occuring again. Emily Greene Balch became the leader, and she later received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1946.

After reaching a peace agreement with Germany, the Allies shifted their focus to the remaining former Central Powers. The Austro-Hungarian Empire lost more than 60 percent of its former territory, which now belonged to independent nations like Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and part of Poland. The final treaty of the Paris Peace Conference was the Treaty of Sevres, signed in August 1920 between the Allies and the former Ottoman Empire. Although Sultan Mehmed VI accepted the treaty, it was rejected by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, a Turkish nationalist leading a war for independence. Eventually, negotiations between Ataturk’s representatives and the Allies resulted in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, which recognized the establishment of the new nation of Turkey. This treaty proved to be the most enduring among all the Paris treaties.

Map of the aftermath of Austria-Hungary’s dissolution

Map of Europe after Germany’s defeat in World War I

Map of the aftermath of the Ottoman Empire’s dissolution

Not unlike others in WWI, the women of Turkey filled men’s labor positions en masse during the war. In response, Ataturk made the advancement of women a primary goal in democratic Turkey. He passed laws regarding equal citizenship, marriage rights, divorce rights, rights of inheritance, and more. He rapidly westernized and modernized women’s roles. Women were given the right to vote and be elected officials, and they could serve in the fields of law and medicine. Turkey became the first country to have a female supreme court judge (Melahat Senger-Ruacan in 1945) and first female fighter pilot (Sabiha Gökçen in 1946). As Ataturk said, "Our most urgent present task is to catch up with the modern world […] We shall not catch up with the modern world if we only modernize half the population." 

Sabiha Gökçen (wearing the helmet) and her colleagues in front of her plane

Yet, feminists in Turkey found it to be all show while little changed in reality. Turkish journalist Sabina Sertel wrote, 

The chances of unhappiness for an unmarried woman are one hundred percent. I may agree with you, society will not. I may applaud you, but they will stone you. Do you think you can live single and free like a man? That’s a bigger fantasy than your romantic dreams. People at work will always see you as a woman and focus on your sexuality. The minute you walk down the street arm-in-arm with a man you like, the neighborhood kids will stone you, the door of every house will be closed to you, and everywhere you go, people will judge you. Any man you live with will see you as simply a plaything he has temporarily made his own. Eventually the police will hound you.

One of the efforts made was to modernize women’s dress as well, but the path to women’s “liberation” removed women’s choice – so not very liberating in reality. Ataturk forced women to remove their headscarves called hijabs, which are a sign of modesty. Many women found comfort in wearing the headscarf and wanted to continue wearing them. Despite understanding the importance of modernizing with women involved, Ataturk missed the whole point of autonomy and choice as prerequisites for freedom.

Conclusion

World War I destroyed empires, touched millions of homes, and disrupted gender norms around the world. Graveyards filled Europe and the memory of war was everywhere as women mourned the loss of their loved ones, faced the impact of the war’s aftermath, and in places, even struggled to get married because of the generational loss of men. Many men who did return home were both physically and emotionally scarred. Women held families together, nursed wounded and recovering soldiers, supported veterans and civilians alike who dealt with post traumatic stress, and looked to honor the lives of those that were lost. While many welcomed peace after such a horrific war, old grudges remained, and although no one wanted it, World War II was coming. 

In the meantime, society had to adjust to the new way of the world. Could women go back to normal after years of upheaval? Would women’s wartime involvement lead to suffrage around the world? In what ways would World War II be different from World War I for women?