Archive for December, 2011

Final Project

Wednesday, December 14th, 2011

For my final project, I chose to improve the timeline in a technical manner.  My original group was in charge of finding dates that belong in the Print & Predecessors section and some of those dates were in B.C. and the timeline program was not originally written to accept those B.C. dates.  Consequently, our group had to place all of these dates on 100 A.D. for the time being.  Eventually a fix was discovered and for my project, I thought I should work with the division of digital learning and technologies to move all of those dates to there proper place in B.C.  I ran into some complications because at first, it would only move the dates with four digits so dates like 270 B.C. and 15,000 would not show up on the timeline.  I worked with one of the members and we were able to fix the issue with the 3-digit dates, but were not able to fix the dates with five digits.  I was able to move all the those dates, but the four that were five digits are still on 100 A.D. because we were not able to find a fix.  I thought this was a good project because it would help improve the accuracy of the timeline regarding the print and predecessors entries.


Tuesday, December 13th, 2011

Research Paper




Kielce Final

Monday, December 12th, 2011

Following World War II, Poland’s political, physical, and ethnic identity was radically altered. Politically, the Soviet Union’s influence turned the Polish government’s ideology towards the east, while physically the country’s borders were pushed 150 miles to the west. Immediately following the war there were an estimated 5 million displaced Polish citizens remaining outside the country’s borders, creating logistical havoc. Furthermore, with the approximate 3.2 million Polish Jews killed during the Holocaust, coupled with the new territory gained, Poland was also ethnically homogenous for the first time, with roughly 90% of the population consisting of Roman Catholics.[1] During this period of an evolving Poland, the country’s largest pogrom took place on July 4th, 1946 in the southeastern town of Kielce.[2] The pogrom signified the extremely high tensions between the Jewish ethnic minority in Poland and the Catholic majority. The political uncertainty and ethnic conflicts provided a basis for aggression in Kielce, but also revealed greater political and moral implications. These implications include politically the Polish Communist Party holding culpability for the events, while the local Catholic church bore the moral responsibility.

The pogrom took place after Henryk Blaszczyk, an 8 year-old boy, left home for two days to pick cherries at a friend’s house without telling his father he was leaving home. That night Walenty, the boy’s father, drunkenly walked to the police station to report his son missing. The police recognized he was inebriated and asked that he return in the morning to file a report if Henryk was still missing. However, that next morning the son returned and clearly was not kidnapped, but the father still went and reported to the police that Jews abducted him with plans of blood libeling him.[3]  Soon after filing the report, police began walking to 7 Planty Street, the apartment building of the accused kidnappers, where 180 Jews lived. As the police walked, they shouted out that Jews had killed a Christian child and a crowd gathered. The police then, with the shouting support of the crowd, entered the building and began throwing Jews into the street. These events were just the beginning of what led to a full out riot, which murdered roughly forty two Jews and injured as many as eighty other men, woman, and children.[4] Looking at the pogrom with a narrow lens makes it seem that the events were nothing more than a false accusation that led to mob mentality and chaos. In part this is true, but it fails to represent the bigger picture exposing the motivations and political agendas that were at work.

With regards to the small scale motivation, Poland after WWII was extremely anti-Semitic. Some common Polish proverbs from the time include “A German, a Jew, and the Devil — all children of one mother;” “A girlfriend’s word, a Jewish oath, both uncertain;” and “The Jew and the noble contrive to ruin the peasant.”[5] These common proverbs reveal a common motif that Jews were of a lower, untrustworthy status, even comparable to the Devil. However untruthful the perceptions of Jews amongst the general public actually were, it is extremely important to recognize that these perceptions were commonplace. The perception also continued into Polish literature, where the motif of Jews holding desired jobs reoccurred, such as innkeepers, tavern keepers, shopkeepers, craftsmen, or important merchants.[6] This perception existed within the minds of gentile Poles who believed strongly that Jews held all the well paying jobs, especially with regards to the growing Communist Party after WWII. However, it is prudent to point out that during the era Jews in general were struggling to make ends meet, as revealed by the harsh living conditions within the apartment building of 7 Planty Street itself.[7]

Widespread anti-Semitism throughout ethnically homogenous Catholic Poland quickly made its way to political agendas too. When the war ended, Poland was in the midst of two political ideologies vying for authority. The Soviets, who played the largest role in liberating Poland from Germany, signed the Polish-Soviet treaty of 1945 solidifying the new western boarder of Poland and giving 70,000 square acres to the Soviets.[8] This act, coupled with the Soviet occupation within Poland at the end of the war, began the installation of a Communist government backed by Moscow. Two political groups controlled the political arena in 1946, those members of the Polish Communist Party (PPR) and the Polish Peoples Party (PSL). Both groups used anti-Semitic tactics to further advocate their acceptance by the majority, but often in very different ways.

During the lead up to the pogrom the Polish Communist Party was working to gain legitimacy. The Soviets wanted Poland under their sphere of influence to create a buffer zone between them and the eastern European states, primarily Germany. On June 30th, 1946 the PPR held the Trzy Razy Tak (Three Times Yes) referendum, whereby Polish citizens could vote on matters of parliamentary structure, land reform, the nationalization of industry, and the incorporation of Western territories into the Polish state. The results were faked to meet the aims of the PPR takeover, but the Polish Peoples Party responded vehemently with protests.[9] Opponents of the PPR, such as the US ambassador in Poland Arthur Bliss Lane, later argued that the poor publicity immediately following the referendum pushed the Communist Party to then instigate the July 4th pogrom in order to divert media coverage to the harsh anti-Semitism in Poland.[10]

Other sources that point to the PPR using the pogrom to overshadow the referendum attested to the use of the Security Police (UB) during the events. The UB acted as a Communist police force that oversaw the regular police called the Citizens Militia (MO). It was around 10:30 am when the UB entered the scene at 7 Planty street and called off the search of the building by the Citizens Militia. Upon their arrival, they also brought a small military detachment to help keep order on the streets with the rising tensions in the crowd. However, the military detachments under UB direction actually entered the apartment building and began killing the Jews and plundering their possessions.[11] Later, when the heads of both the UB and MO were questioned in court, the head of the UB admitted that he had jurisdiction because the event was a “political provocation.”[12] This implies that he knew of the events and was ordered through the PPR not to interfere. Another critic was Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, who accused UB police officer Major Sobczynski of attempting to order foundry workers to gather in the market square and then have his operatives shout that the Jews were killing Polish children at 7 Planty Street. Mikolajczyk believed he attempted this to “add to the terror of the times” and divert attention away from the referendum.[13]

Critics of the PSL on the other hand make the argument that the Kielce Pogrom was actually a useful tool manipulated after the events by Stanislaw Mikolajczyk to push his own political agenda as head of the PSL. Through the main newspaper of the PSL, Mikolajczyk argued that Poles, not Jews, were the true victims of the Kielce Pogrom because Jews were the “chief executors of the Communist regime.”[14] In other words, he believed in what is called Zydokomuna, or the idea that the rise of communism in Poland was a result of Jews returning from hiding in the Soviet Union during WWII.[15] This belief is how the members of the PSL were able to adapt the image of Jews in Poland to meet their political needs.

Politically and legally the broader implications are seen within the Polish Communist Party, the police and military forces, the Polish Peoples Party, and the anti-Semitic gentile Poles at large, but recognizing moral culpability is also important. The Roman Catholic clergy was most notably absent during the Kielce Pogrom and therefore shoulder the weight of moral responsibility. Cardinal August Hlond and the rest of the clergy the Sunday following the Pogrom were issued a statement to read without commentary, whereby they condemned murder of all kind, but never acknowledged the severely racist and anti-Semitic pogrom of Catholics upon Jews; in fact, it only mentioned the word Jew once.[16] Even during the actual events, two Catholic priests, Jan Danielewicz and Roman Zelek, never even attempted to quell the rioters who were at 7 Planty participating in the pogrom.[17] The Polish citizens would have likely responded to the priests as in a similar event in Czestochowa where a “quick thinking priest stood up and branded the shouting as a provocation,” narrowly adverting another pogrom.[18] The Church as a whole did not definitively act against anti-Semitism after the pogrom and failed to take action when necessary.[19]

The broader implications from the Kielce Pogrom extend past the political and moral sphere as well. Even as late as 1987, Polish citizens who took part in the pogrom had trouble defining the events, the political backers, or the causes. The anti-Semitism of the gentile Poles even showed 40 years later in interviews through backhanded comments and stereotypical assumptions. The Jews that survived displayed noticeable fear in the interviews, while many of those who witnessed the atrocities still felt it was the Jews fault they were attacked. Furthermore, the fear of some that they might be accused of being Jewish was even more frightful, because in their minds they could have been beaten or killed for no reason.[20] This concept suggests that even many years later gentile Poles are unable to see how utterly unjustified the Kielce Pogrom really was as a means of achieving anterior motives.

The chaos that was post war Poland resulted in a harsh and unwelcoming climate for returning Jewish misplaced persons. Furthermore, the competing political agendas between the PPR and PSL used the minority Jewish population as a tool towards advancing their ideologies. They both tried to capitalize on the widespread existing anti-Semitism to manipulate Polish citizens. During the course of the pogrom, failure of the police forces to manage their subordinates coupled with the failure of the Catholic priests to dispel violence led to the largest pogrom in Polish history.




Anna Williams, “The Kielce Pogrom,” UCSB Department of History,                (accessed October 4, 2011).

Bliss Lane, Arthur.  I Saw Poland Betrayed: An American Ambassador Reports To The     American People. New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1948.

Bozena Szaynok, “The Kielce Pogrom,” Jewish Virtual Library,    (accessed October 4,    2011).

Checinski, Michael. Poland: Communism, Nationalism, and Anti-Semitism. New York: Karz-       Cohl Publishing, 1982.

Gross, Jan T. Fear: Anti- Semitism in Poland After Auschwitz, An Essay in Historical          Interpretation. New York: Random House, 2006.

Hertz,  Aleksander. The Jews in Polish Culture. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press,      1988.

Lozinski, Marcel. Witnesses: Anti-Semitism in Poland, 1946. DVD. Produced by Gerard de           Verizier. 1987.

Michlic Beata, Joanna. Poland’s Threatening Other: The Image of The Jew from 1880 to the          Present. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2006.

Mikolajczyk, Stanislaw. The Rape Of Poland: Pattern of Soviet Aggression. New York:     McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1948.

Platform Against Antisemitsim and For Emancipation, “Kielce Pogrom, July 4, 1946,” Contested             Terrain, (accessed October 4,           2011).

Ringelblum, Emmanuel. Polish-Jewish Relations During the Second World War. Evanston, IL:      Northwestern University Press, 1992.

Schatz, Jaff. The Generation: The Rise and Fall of the Jewish Communists of Poland. Berkeley     and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1991.

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, “Pogroms,” Holocaust Encyclopedia.    (accessed October 4,       2011).


  [1]  Jaff Schatz, Generation: The Rise and Fall of the Jewish Communists of Poland (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1991), 199-202.

  [2]  Holocaust Encyclopedia, “Pogroms,” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, (accessed November 13, 2011).

  [3]  Blood libel is a false accusation that Jews murder gentile children and use their blood to mix into the baking of matzo bread. The fact that he chose 7 Planty, the location of the pogrom, is also not unusual because only 8 months prior to the pogrom a grenade was thrown into the building as an anti-Semitic attack.

  [4]  Jan T. Gross, Fear: Anti- Semitism in Poland After Auschwitz, An Essay in Historical Interpretation (New York: Random House, 2006), 83-84, 93.

  [5]  Aleksander Hertz, The Jews in Polish Culture (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1988), 200.

  [6]  Hertz, Polish Culture, 217.

[7]  Marcel Lozinksi, Witnesses: Anti-Semitism in Poland, 1946, DVD, prod. Gerard de Verbizier (1987).

[8]  Schatz, Generation, 200.

[9]  Schatz, Generation, 205.

[10] Arthur Bliss Lane, I Saw Poland Betrayed: An American Ambassador Reports To The American People (New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1948), 249. Bliss Lane was so politically in opposition to the Soviet takeover in Poland that he actually resigned from being the U.S. ambassador to Poland.

[11]  Gross, Fear, 88.

[12]  Gross, Fear, 95.

[13]  Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, The Rape of Poland: Pattern of Soviet Aggression (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1948), 167. It is important to note that as the head of the Polish Peoples Party, he was staunchly opposed to Communist control and his book was clearly biased against the PPR.

  [14]  Joanna Beata Michlic, Poland’s Threatening Other: The Image of The Jew from 1880 to the Present (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2006), 235-237.

  [15]  Gross, Fear, 192-193.

  [16]  Gross, Fear, 136-138.

  [17]  Gross, Fear, 135-136.

  [18]  Mikolajczyk, Rape of Poland, 167.

[19]  Bliss Lane, Poland Betrayed, 249.

[20]  Marcel Lozinksi, Witnesses: Anti-Semitism in Poland, 1946, DVD, prod. Gerard de Verbizier (1987).

Final Paper

Monday, December 12th, 2011

My final copy of my paper on the Battle off Samar can be found here: History 299 final paper

299 Speech Power Point Presentation

Monday, December 12th, 2011

Slave Codes2

299 Speech Presentaion Video

Monday, December 12th, 2011


Videos I included in my PowerPoint

Monday, December 12th, 2011

These are the links to the two videos I had at the end of my presentation. I only had time to show one of them, which was the one that had the Rosie the Riveter theme song in the background. This first video is a short clip of a woman who is a grandmother and goes to work helping in the factory during World War II.

This next video is the clip I showed in class with the Rosie the Riveter theme song. I mainly used this clip because of the song and I really enjoyed the ending where it showed women “going back into the kitchen”.

Video of Final Presentation

Monday, December 12th, 2011

I was not abale to upload my video from my phone because the file is too large. Even when I try to upload it from the phone onto YouTube, it still says it is too large and I would need to select a smaller portion of it. I am still trying to figure a different way to load it so the entire video will be able to be seen.

Original Image

Monday, December 12th, 2011

 Original Norman Rockwell image of Rosie the Riveter

Final Draft- Rosie the Riveter

Monday, December 12th, 2011

The outbreak of World War II and the United States involvement drastically changed the lives of millions of women all over the nation. With the onset of mechanized warfare, the industrialization of mass-produced goods and the benefits of assembly line production, workers were able to produce war munitions at an exponential rate.  The social and cultural roles of American women throughout the early 1940’s shifted tremendously from the home to the workforce, and without their answer to the call to action, the war may have had a very different outcome.  Their work ethics and determination were a major factor in the United States’ winning of the war.  In turn, World War II helped to provide them with the tools they needed to survive and started them on the path to compete equally within a man’s world.  The six million American women that joined the workforce during World War II could be considered a hidden army of the Allies.

Women played a vital role during World War II in the combined Allied war effort against the Axis powers of Germany and Japan. They quickly made transitions from their roles of homemakers and mothers to the roles of women in the workforce.  During the period between 1941 and 1945, the United States government issued various forms of propaganda to entice these women to leave their homes and enter the workforce.  These women took on various jobs including steel work, shipbuilding and various forms of factory work. One of the most notable and successful campaigns utilized was the Rosie the Riveter campaign.  This campaign was the epitome of gender transgression and it helped to not only persuade women to leave the domestic realm and take on masculine jobs, but also to change the perspectives of women when viewing the workforce as a man’s sphere.

On December 7th, 1941, the Japanese forces bombed the naval base of Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. This devastating blow to the United States sparked the immediate entry of the United States to enter into the Second Great World War. While the men were being called into action to deploy overseas to help fight the Japanese, many jobs were becoming vacant in the states and this provided the ideal opportunity for women to take advantage of these vacancies and prove what they had long been capable of. In total, 18 million women were involved in the workforce between the years of 1941 and 1945, with six million of these women coming into it for the first time.[1] The majority of these women continued to work in traditional women’s occupations; however, an estimated number of slightly over three million women worked in defense industries. Although these significant changes for women were enormous, unfortunately they did not alter the recurrent state of economic or social inequality for women. For many years, women had suffered discrimination and inequality in the workforce relative to men (including significant pay inequalities for the same work as men) and this remained unchanged throughout the duration of the war. Despite all of the inequalities that women faced during this time, they still remained true to their nation and their families, and were able to jump into the workforce and take over the jobs that men had left behind.

Various forms of propaganda were utilized during the conflict and the purpose of this propaganda was to mobilize widespread support for wartime and political actions.  Several campaigns were geared directly towards women to entice them to help the wartime effort in any way that they could.[2] The Office of War Information (OWI) was the main governmental office that was in charge over the propaganda campaigns.[3] Among the responsibilities of the OWI was the selling of the idea that women were not only able but obligated as well to become involved in wartime work. During the first few months of the Allies entering into the war, they took a severe beating from the Japanese, causing more and more men to leave the home front and join the Armed Forces. With so many men leaving, more and more jobs were opening every day for women, and the Allied war effort depended on women to fill in the jobs where the men had left. Ever since the Great Depression, many women jumped at the opportunity to obtain a war job.[4] For the first time, women were able to compete in the workforce for better pay, a common privilege that men had always been privy to. In early 1942, the Bureau of Labor Statistics predicted a shortage of about six million workers by late 1943, which caused President Roosevelt to create the War Manpower Commission (WMC), which was to “ensure maximum utilization of the nation’s manpower in the prosecution of the war.”[5] After its creation in 1943, the WMC and the OWI produced various campaigns that were aimed specifically at women. Common recurring themes used amongst these campaigns were the aspects of patriotism and glamour, concepts that appealed to the younger generation of women in the United States. In 1943, an issue of The Saturday Evening Post featured the first image of what has come to be known as “Rosie the Riveter”: a muscular but pert, rosy cheeked young woman, rivet gun slung across her lap. “The double message was clear: her loafer-clad foot was firmly planted on Mein Kampf  – symbolizing her role in stamping out fascism – but she could still remain feminine, as the powder puff and mirror peeking out her coverall pocket reminded.”[6]

Although the Rosie the Riveter campaign is notably recognized as the leading factor in persuading women to join the war effort, there are a few scholars and women’s historians who would disagree. Not only do they believe that the campaign did not have that significant an effect on women, but they also disagree that so many women were compelled to join the workforce. According to Karen Anderson, “the tendency of historians to focus on Rosie the Riveter has distorted the analysis of the nature of wartime changes. Because most American women remained homemakers during the war, Rosie was not the typical wartime woman.”[7] Although these assumptions are interesting, it is more widely accepted and understood that more women than men made up the workforce during World War II, and the majority of these women actually enjoyed what they did, or at least enjoyed the wages that they were earning. Along with patriotic motives, many women took war jobs to help bring their men home more quickly and to help make the world a more secure place for their children.[8]  Many women employed in defense plants wanted to keep their wartime jobs, including fifty percent of those who had previously been homemakers, and they resisted being channeled back into service and trade work (such as waitressing, tailoring, etc.). Clearly, economic imperatives and the fulfillment of doing skilled work exerted a greater influence on women who had advanced during the war than did propaganda or private fantasies.[9]

Contrary to popular myths and conceptions, women were not only compelled to join the workforce during World War II, but the majority of women actually wanted to keep their wartime job after the war was over. For over a century, women in the United States had been working; however, this was a time in which they could earn substantial wages for their work. As the armed forces filled its ranks with manpower, industry filled its jobs with womanpower and surprisingly enough, at the end of the war, many women surrendered their jobs with great reluctance. “A 1944 Labor Department study reported that eighty percent of the women interviewed desired to continue working and in the same kind of job after the war.”[10]

The outbreak of World War II and the United States involvement brought about a huge shift for women in the U.S. Although women had been fighting for equal rights socially and politically for almost one hundred years already, World War II and women migrating to the workforce sparked a change in the ways that women desired to be treated. For years, it was accepted (and in many states law) that women could not work, or at least there could only be one “breadwinner” per family and men typically filled this role.[11] At the war’s end, the majority of these women were enjoying the money they were making for their quality production and they refused to leave their jobs.  This forced many employers to institute layoffs and massive firing campaigns because men who were returning home from war needed their jobs back. It is astonishing that these women were treated in this way considering the fact that they were quick to mobilize in a time of need for their country, yet the entire time they were being used and the government was quick to get rid of them in the end. These massive layoffs and firings were government backed, and just as propaganda was utilized to bring women into the workforce, it was utilized to remove them as well.[12]

World War II was a pivotal moment in women’s participation in the paid labor force. Wartime workers demonstrated that it was possible for women to maintain their households while also assuming the role of breadwinner with outside employment.[13]  According to Karen Anderson, the experience “pointed the way to a greater degree of choice for American women.”[14] Never before had the government and industry launched nationwide propaganda campaigns to recruit women workers, and never before had so many women responded.[15] By going to work in war industries or what were officially called “essential civilian services,” millions of American women learned new skills and capabilities.[16] Rosie the Riveter was a huge icon for women of World War II because she was the memorable face that women saw in magazines, newspapers, and even commercials. Women relished the idea of being able to compete in a man’s world yet still retain her femininity underneath the coveralls and welder’s mask.[17] These women were truly amazing in the feats they accomplished; not only were they able to transition from the domestic realm of the household into the man’s sphere of the workforce, but they did so with style and class. Whatever individual motives each woman possessed, her patriotism, determination, and eagerness to help her fellow Americans showed through and helped to pave the way for future women’s rights and equal opportunities.












































Anderson, Karen. Wartime Women: Sex Roles, Family Relations and the Status of Women during World War II. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1981.


Campbell, D’Ann. Women at War with America: Private Lives in a Patriotic Era. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.


Carnes, Mark C. and John A. Garraty. American Destiny: Narrative of a Nation. New York: Pearson Longman, 2006.


Cashmann, Sean Dennis. America, Roosevelt and World War II. New York: New York University Press, 1989.


Colman, Penny. Rosie the Riveter: Women Working on the Homefront in World War II. New York: Crown Publishers, 1995.


Field, Connie. (Producer and Director). The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter. Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982.


Frank, Miriam, Marilyn Ziebarth and Connie Field. The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter: The Story of Three Million Working Women during World War II. Emeryville: Clarity Educational Productions, 1982.


Gluck, Sherna Berger. Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War and Social Change. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1987.


Harris, Mark Jonathan, Franklin D. Mitchell and Steven J. Schechter. The Homefront: America during World War II. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1984.


Hartmann, Susan M. The Homefront and Beyond: American Women in the 1940’s. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982.


Hesse-Biber, Sharlene Nagy and Greg Lee Carter. Working Women in America: Split Dreams. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.


Honey, Maureen. Creating Rosie the Riveter: Class, Gender, and Propaganda during World War II. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press, 1984.


Jones, John Bush. All Out for Victory: Magazine Advertising and the World War II Homefront. Lebanon: University Press of New England, 2009.


McEuen, Melissa A. Making War, Making Women: Femininity and Duty on the American Homefront 1941-1945. Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 2011.


[1]   Miriam Frank, Marilyn Ziebarth and Connie Field, The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter (Emeryville, California: Clarity Educational Productions: 1982), 16.


[2]   Ibid., 89.


[3]   The United States Office of War Information (OWI) was established by Executive Order 9182 on June 13th, 1942 by President Roosevelt and remained in effect until September of 1945. The office’s main duties included distributing posters and broadcasting to the American public to promote patriotism and to encourage support. They were also responsible for warning the public of possible threats or spies and their main contribution was the encouragement of women to join the workforce.

[4]   Penny Coleman, Rosie the Riveter: Women Working on the Homefront in World War II (New York: Crown Publisher’s Inc, 1995), 44-45.

[5]   Ibid., 46-47. The War Manpower Commission (WMC) was established by Executive Order 9139 on April 18th, 1942 by President Roosevelt. The main duties of the WMC were to manage and balance the labor needs of the armed forces, agriculture, and industry.

[6]  Sherna Berger Gluck, Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War and Social Change (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1987), 12.

[7]  Karen Anderson, Wartime Women: Sex Roles, Family Relations, and the Status of Women during World War II (Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1981), 10.  Mein Kampf is the famous memoir written by Adolf Hitler that translates to “My Struggle.”

[8]  Susan Hartmann,  The Homefront and Beyond: American Women in the 1940’s (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982), 23.

[9]  Maureen Honey, Creating Rosie the Riveter: Class, Gender and Propaganda during World War II (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1984), 11.

[10]  Mark Jonathan Harris, Franklin D. Mitchell and Steven J. Schechter, The Homefront: America during World War II (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1984), 118.

[11]  D’Ann Campbell, Women at War with America: Patriotic Lives in a Patriotic Era (Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1984), 103.

[12]  Coleman, 96-97.

[13]  Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber and Gregg Lee Carter, Working Women in America: Split Dreams (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 43.

[14]  Anderson, 174.

[15]  Ibid., 100-101.

[16]  Ibid., 101.

[17]  John Bush Jones, All out for Victory: Magazine Advertising and the World War II Home Front (Hanover: University Press of New England, 2009), 224-225.