what did women gain as a result of their involvement in the war?Explain?
455026
Hard to say if the "gained" anything, but they did men's jobs because the men were at war, and they've been doing men's jobs ever since.
345018
I suggest reading Everyday Life and Politics in Nineteenth Century Mexico: Men, Women, and War by Mark Wasserman (2000).  You will find the answers you need in there.  \nAlso, check out this website: http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/travel/dpalfrey/dpcolonial2.html
360745
Academic Essays and Debates\non Women in the Military\n\nHere is another one
441099
If you're talking about throughout the course of history, I imagine it that it helped bring the two genders closer together in terms of equality after it became generally accepted for women to receive higher education.\n\nA few hundred/thousand years ago, the only voters were property owners (white males).  Nowdays, at least more people are aware of the different types of inequalities that exist.
651039
1. Racial tension amongst soldiers, despite that military units of different race were not mixed.\n\n2. "Liberal" loss of support for the war.\n\n3. Cut exports/imports via railways; loss of major agriculture; (all due to Southern possession).\n\n4. Poor military leaders.
532836
We think we won the war not because we won it alone (although I would say the USSR has a much bigger claim on being a deciding factor than the UK) because you were losing alone, and we stepped in and helped turn the tide.  You were holding your own and preventing an invasion on the UK, but losing ground in the Pacific and couldn’t hold out forever in the UK proper, either.  The US stepped in, and was the help you needed to win on the Western European front.  The USSR has a stronger claim as well because it fought a vicious war with levels of self-sacrifice that the UK never even close to matched (although this isn’t to attack the UK – it is a good thing for the people there that they weren’t invaded and didn’t have any Stalingrads or Leningrad sieges), which is why they get more credit as well.  The US also feels like it deserves a thank you because it wasn’t invaded by the Nazis and of its geographic location meant that it probably could have held out indefinitely – unlike the UK, it had a choice about entering the war, but did so anyway, at a great cost in lives and money.  In the Pacific, the US provided more troops and infrastructure than did the UK (again, not because the UK was lazy or somehow worse at fighting, but because they had less men, less money and less production capacity as well as more pressing threats to the UK itself, and were stretched as far as it could be), and afterwards returned much of the area it freed to the UK.  We also were responsbile for the reconstruction and reformation of Japan.  The British helped there, true, but they had to work on reconstructing their own lands (much of which was funded by the US’s Marshall Plan), so the again the bulk of the effort was the US’s.  So we see it as we earned a decent share of the credit there too.\n\nIf anything, i woudl argue that the USSR deserves mroe credit - for positical reasons their contributions were downplayed by the West during the Cold War. I wouldn't give Canada too much credit fo rhelping form day one - their contributions were worthy, but they had no choice in helping; the Kig of England was their head of state. If England was bombed, they had to get involved.  The US only had to get invovled if to help the other states (it could have left Hawaii and the other Pacific holdings as the Japanese thought it would and continued peacefully as the continental US plus Alaska for a long time).\n\nPS Why are you so angry about htis?  Did you fight in WWII and feel you aren't getting your fair share of the redit?  are you generally bitter that yours is not the wealthiest adn msot powerful country?  If you are Canadian - be grateful for this.  You spend minimal amounts on your military because you know that the US woul dnever allow Canada to be invaded.  You then spend your money on social programs such as national health and inexpensive univeristy education.
426045
The bombings destroyed citites, killed people, and those that survived had to start all over.  \n\nAir raids in the United Kingdom were scary and instilled fear in people.\n\nMany civilians tried to leave or escape Europe for their lives/safety.  If family members were trapped and had to go to concentration camps, it mentally hurt the entire family.  Some familys even had to start over after WW2 and generations, pictures, and heirlooms were lost.\n\nIn America, the economy prospered.  World War 2 greatly improved our economy. Women got the taste of working outside the home, the stock market was on the uprising again. People were starting to make money and become prosperous. The government used ads to help boost liberty bonds, blood donations,reserving supplies for the troops and the enterntainment industry. America proved to other nations that we are a strong country. \n\nHope this helps.
945329
Here are a couple:\n\n1. Development of Canadian nationalism:\n\nDespite all of the people that Canada lost in the First World War, there were many battles in which Canadians fought valiantly. Canadians became known for their bravery and strength, and we began to see ourselves as a nation separate from Britain, capable of accomplishing our own goals. Specifically, you should look into the battle at Vimy Ridge and Ypres.\n\n2. The war caused women's roles to start to change. Look for facts about:\n\n-More Canadian women in the workforce.\n-The Canadian suffragist movement.\n\nPerhaps you might also want to say something about how the war was a pre-cursor to the Roaring Twenties in Canada, or how the war helped us to industrialize.
53132
yes. almost every nation involved did, except for those defeated. The website at historychannel.com has some really good info on post war europe and asia
210163
There were very few women in combat zones (Allied women, at least) and those who were there were primarily nurses.  The services did use women for a few other funtions.  One was for the women to fly the aircraft from the States to points of embarkation where they were loaded on ships.  Stateside, women took over men's jobs in building the war material.  "Rosy the Riveter" was actually many thousand women.  When the war ended these women lost their jobs and men took them once again.
744723
Probably the U.S. military is the best example.  \n\nThey still enforce quotas for women, who are excluded from many combat duties I believe, unless there's been massive changes since I was in about 15 years ago.
476413
I would say how much did it make america earn. America was just an emerging country in the beggining of the century. It got awfully rich after WWI, and awfully rich after WW2\n\nselling arms during the war, and reconstructing after.
762912
I found a link which has information on forgotten heroines of the Civil War.  It is about the nurses who cared for soldiers\nin dire conditions and has articles on lots of them.\nIt looked interesting, and there seemed to be lots of other links to information about Civil War women.
387269
World War II: The Impact at Home\n\nThe quick fall of France to the German army in 1940 shook the strong pacifist sentiment of the American public. Suddenly, Great Britain alone stood between Nazi Germany and the United States. Once the United States was fully committed to the war in December of 1941, patriotism soared in American society. Americans' willingness to carry out blackout and civil defense drills; to recycle metals, paper, and even cooking fats; to work longer hours, but to have fewer consumer goods to buy with their salaries demonstrated the nation's strong support for the war. There were political changes as well, as the country began to shift to the right. \n\nhttp://us.history.wisc.edu/hist102/lectures/lecture21.html\n\nWhat effects did WWII have on women in America?\n\nWomen began to do the jobs that the men used to do. They worked in factories, steel mills, and on fighter planes. A woman who worked in an industrial or manufacturing job was refered to as "Rosy the Riviter".\n\nWomen married earlier in life, had more children and relied much less on their husbands after the war. The divorce rate in the United States and Britain skyrocketed, compared to previous years. Women held higher paying jobs than in pre-war years, and this caused some conflict when men were discharged from the military and wanted their old jobs back, which were now held by women.\n\nWomen went into the workplace and never looked back. They took over factory jobs, drove trucks, flew military aircraft across the Atlantic Ocean to England, and numerous other jobs that had traditionaly been open only to men. Once the men returned from the war the women were more independant than ever and would never be content to sit at home again.\n\nWomen played the role of helping fabricate weapons and bombs and all the equipment the soldiers would need. Women never set foot on the battle field but they also were nurses and assistants and that helped alot since they needed medical treatments\n\nhttp://www.faqfarm.com/Q/What_effects_did_WWII_have_on_women_in_America
714925
http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/littlewomen/index.html
1001375
Looks like you answered your own question...\n\nMoney and resources were diverted because of the war.
1149089
The answer to this is in the area you posted.\n\nSociety and culture.\n\nWomen kept houses and babies, men worked in the fields and other manual labor, eventually it was easier and warmer for them to wear pants, while women had no need for them.