Ottilie Baader's Memoir and Women in Industrial Germany

Introduction

Germany is a well-recognized industrial powerhouse in the world today. Its industrial development, like that of many countries in Europe, occurred gradually over the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This was made possible by the millions of men and women who gave their labor — those who carried the bricks, printed the books, hacked down the coal, sewed the shirt cuffs and collars, and laid down the railroad ties that facilitated the growth of the industrial sector in Germany. Ottilie Baader was one such woman, forced to work as a seamstress in multiple sewing factories in Berlin to support her siblings and ailing father. The source selected for this analysis is her memoir composed in 1921, in which she details how female workers such as herself were manipulated by Berlin factory owners and how they were forced to work under strenuous conditions at a degrading pay, until they finally learned to stand up against gender-based oppression at the workplace.

Baader provides crucial insight on three core areas: (i) the status of women in German society; (ii) their contribution to industrialization; and (iii) the introduction and growth of unionization among female factory workers in Berlin. Literature presented in various history books and scholarly articles was reviewed to determine what other researchers say about these three areas, and how those views align with or differ from those put forth by Baader in her memoir. The review showed that Baader's descriptions about the role and place of women in German society at the time are largely in line with other available information.

The subsequent sections summarize the results of the conducted review. The first section draws comparisons between the descriptions provided by Baader in her memoir and those provided by other researchers in relation to the evolving roles of men and women in German society. The second section compares Baader's descriptions with those of other scholars regarding the contribution of women to the process of industrialization in Europe. The final section examines what Baader says about unionization and the growth of union activity in Germany, vis-à-vis what other scholars say.

The Evolution of the Status of Women in Europe in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries

Baader mentions that women were allowed to work in factories as long as they were unmarried and did not have children. Even when she and her sister were old enough to work for themselves, they had to remain unmarried in order to keep their factory jobs. Baader does not explain why this was so; however, a number of researchers have supported the view that European culture considered the place of women to be in the home.² According to Duiker and Spielvogel, working-class organizations believed that allowing married women to take up roles in the workplace would ruin the physical and moral well-being of families, given that women were supposed to stay at home to nurture their children and provide support to their husbands.³

Baader also mentions that the invention of the sewing machine in 1860 opened up opportunities for more women to increase their participation in the sewing industry by working from home. However, there was a clear sexual division of labor, with women often allocated secondary roles such as assembly and preparatory work while men took care of the main sewing roles. This view is supported by Kramarae and Spender, who posit that women working in European factories were given the lowest-paid, semi-skilled, and unskilled roles for three major reasons.⁴ First, these roles were seen as extensions of their domestic tasks.⁵ Second, women lacked training and skill in the use of new technology, as such facilities were often reserved for men, who were viewed as the more important workers.⁶ Third, it was feared that allocating women roles traditionally meant for men would threaten the position and superiority of the male workforce.⁷

In her book, D. Hafter explains that the secondary status of women in job-related roles in the European community in the eighteenth century extended even to family workshops and guild workshops.⁸ Men provided direction and management and made all decisions pertaining to the workshop.⁹ The wife and children were left to perform unskilled, auxiliary duties.¹⁰ Women had no close connection with the production process.¹¹

Baader agrees with other scholars that these roles continued to evolve, and in the course of time, the position of women in factories and in the guild workshop became more prominent.¹² She mentions in her memoir that after working as a seamstress for some time, she was accorded an opportunity to receive training through a regular apprenticeship program. Moreover, she explains that more and more women began to be employed in sewing roles as opposed to being confined to preparatory roles alone, as had been the case in the eighteenth century and the first half of the nineteenth century.

With the invention of the sewing machine in 1860, women such as Baader were able to use the training they had received to improve their skill in the complex sewing roles that had traditionally been reserved for men. Women were able to establish their own trades, become bosses of guilds, and even achieve mastery of textile crafts.¹³ Their legal status improved considerably.¹⁴

In the latter nineteenth century, men in Europe began to feel threatened by the rising status of women and their continued occupation of traditional male roles. In a bid to enhance their position and control, they developed the "family wage" concept and constituted trade unions to ensure that women's work remained inferior and the separation between the public and domestic spheres was maintained. As a result, wage labor opportunities for women in sectors such as agriculture decreased, and most were forced to live in poverty.¹⁵

The Impact of Women on Industrialization in Europe

Opportunities for women continued to shrink until the twentieth century, when the Second Industrial Revolution opened up new jobs for them.¹⁶ As Duiker and Spielvogel point out, the expansion of government services and development of larger industrial plants during the Second Revolution created a large number of white-collar jobs.¹⁷ Owing to the shortage of male workers, women found opportunities as sales clerks, file clerks, secretaries, typists, telephone operators, teachers, and nurses.¹⁸

One might ask whether the status of women in Europe in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries contributed in any meaningful way to the process of industrialization. In her memoir, Baader mentions that women often worked at degrading pay, with many having to work as prostitutes at night to earn extra money. This view is supported by Kramarae and Spender, who suggest that women were accorded lower pay than men because they were considered inferior and lacking the requisite skills and know-how.¹⁹ With their lower wages, women offered better prospects for employers than men, who demanded higher wages owing to their responsibility to support the family. Women thus contributed to industrialization in Europe through their low wages and comparatively fewer work-related demands.

This was, however, not the only way in which the status of women contributed to the process of industrialization. In their analysis seeking to establish why companies often preferred to employ women over men, D. Elson and R. Pearson found women to be naturally more docile, nimble-fingered, quick, and more disciplined than men.²⁰ The authors attribute these qualities to women's nurturing nature and their ability to carry out multiple tasks simultaneously.²¹ These biological qualities made them more attractive employees than their male counterparts, and this nurturing quality was drawn from their position in the home and in the domestic sphere.²²

Elson agrees with Baader that women are less inclined than their male counterparts to join unions and engage in disruptive behaviors.²³ In her memoir, Baader recounts how difficult it was for her and other social democrats to organize women and convince them to engage in union activity. As Kramarae and Spender point out, the traditions of European society at the time placed women below men in terms of social standing, meaning women were not expected to compete with or stand up against their male counterparts.²⁴ Women's biological qualities thus made them easier and less costly to employ, and this facilitated the process of industrial growth.

Conclusion

Evidently, Baader's text aligns with the descriptions provided by other researchers, particularly in regard to the status of women in European society, their contribution to industrialization in Europe, and the causes of the slow growth of union activity during the industrial revolution. Baader demonstrates how women were allocated secondary roles in the industrial sphere, reflecting their position in society vis-à-vis their male counterparts, and how this status helped them contribute to the process of industrialization. The author agrees with other scholars that female employees were easier and less costly to handle than their male counterparts. She also agrees with other scholars that ignorance and lack of awareness played a role in the slow growth of union activity in Europe during the industrial revolution. Baader's viewpoints therefore align to a significant degree with those put forth by other scholars in this area of study.