Reading Response: In Private: The Daily Lives of Jewish Women and Families

The piece “In Private: The Daily Lives of Jewish Women and Families, 1933-1938” by Marion Kaplan delineates the reaction of Jewish women in the face of the changing environment of Nazi Germany, which was characterized by restrictions that effected family life and altered the role of women and men. Kaplan points out the ways in which the roles of women changed, the transition that occurred in reversals of gender roles, and how men reacted to this situation.

Kaplan points out that certain values received more emphasis. The milieu of the Jewish family became a refugee in the face of persecutions as the family members sought emotional comfort. The author points out that women interceded for their husbands in the public sphere with state officials. Women also showed greater insight than men in sensing the danger that they were facing in Nazi Germany. The way the Nazi policies affected family life can be analyzed on two planes, at the group level and at the individual level. She points out that in 1941 there was a Harvard study that assessed the attitudes that men and women assumed in the face of the mercurial environment in Germany. Jewish organizations attempted to deal with the restrictions placed on the “Jews as a group”. According to the Harvard study, there was increased emphasis on the importance of the family and friendships, reliance on the self, as well as “the lowering of ambitions, increased planning and action; and a change in life philosophy” (p. 51). The Harvard study found that the perspective of men also shifted to place more emphasis on family life. Friendships among Jews also provided some comfort. However, socially, the Jews had to limit their interactions to the milieu of “their own homes or organizations, staying away from public theaters, and museums, but still, occasionally, frequenting movie houses.” (p. 51). Among the topics discussed there was the “worsening situation for Jews, the emigration of friends and children, and details about visas, foreign lands, and foreign climates “of an existence where they would no longer be frightened to death when the doorbell rang in the mourning, because they would be certain: it is only the milkman!”

Factors that contributed to the shift in gender roles came with the change in status of men. There was increased unemployment so the men would gather with other male friends to comfort each other. They had to be careful because they were being watched by the Gestapo or other informants from among the neighbors. Social life was very difficult during the period between 1933-1938. Wealthier Jews could afford to leave for vacations outside of Germany. The laws that emphasized restrictions directed towards Jews resulted in an increased awareness of one’s identity as a Jew. Religion was also a factor that received more attention than before as it provided comfort. There was increased synagogue attendance. Jews also turned to Zionism and there was increased membership as Jews sought a new homeland.

Another way in which Jews sought to cope with this was emigration. The attitude of men and women towards emigration differed. The expectations of the society towards women were that they should endure and seek ways to cope with this situation. Women were “to prepare less expensive meals, to repair their homes and clothing themselves, and to make do with less help around the house.” (p. 54). Women’s organizations encouraged women to keep their “moral strength to survive” and suggested that when cooking, they should cook vegetarian menus as kosher meat was expensive and hard to obtain, and they should have their daughters help their mothers in the kitchen. In terms of men, they were “expected to pitch in— but only minimally. Despite women’s new responsibilities, the “domestication” of men felt illegitimate to women and men alike” (p. 55). The press advised women to hire young men to help with household choirs since the Nuremberg laws forbade Jews to hire Aryan women below 45 years of age. The Nazi laws were taking a deep psychological burden on Jews. In terms of emigration, women wanted to emigrate while their husbands tended to resist and did not want to leave Germany.

In terms of role reversals, “Jewish women took on new roles as breadwinners, family protectors, and defenders of businesses or practices (…) The Nazis essentially destroyed the patriarchal structure of the Jewish family, leaving a void to be filled by women” (p. 59). Women became the representatives of their husbands in public matters, and often saved them as “it was always assumed that the Nazis would not disrupt gender norms: they would arrest or torture Jewish men but would not harm women” (p. 60). As such, as a result of this, women ended up having more “assertive roles in public” (p. 60).

Jews were also migrating due to the hostility they encountered in villages and smaller towns and so they headed for larger cities were they would have some privacy.  Women had to cope with the “new urban environment: crowded apartments, unskilled jobs, and public constraints, not to mention deteriorating political circumstances”. They also joined social welfare activities in the Jewish community and Jewish women’s organizations who sought to help the newcomers adjust to the new life.

Women were more insightful in interpreting danger signals, and they attempted to convince their husbands to emigrate. Kaplan makes the argument that women were not as attached to their life in Germany as men were because they were not as integrated into the public sphere. Marion believes that women were not as attached to their status in Germany since “their status had always been determined by that of their father or husband anyway” (p. 64). Women picked on warning signals coming from their neighbors and children, servants and they took on these signals seriously. In exchange, men had a different interpretation of events; they were trying to analyze things. It is interesting that “a widespread assumption that women lacked political acumen—stemming from their primary role in the domestic sphere—gave women’s warnings less credibility” (p. 64). Men believed that singling out the Jews was Hitler’s ruse to gain power in Nazi Germany, but once he would have this power, he would stop. There was much confusion in interpreting what the Nazi policies really meant. Marion notes that there was prejudice in interpreting women’s reaction to the Nazi dangers and they were viewed as “hysterical”, they were considered “too emotional in general” and their attempts to convince their husbands to emigrate were being discredited. The ultimate decision to emigrate belonged to their husbands. However, there was a shift in this with the November Pogroms, where “some wives broke all family conventions by taking over the decision making when it became clear that their husbands’ reluctance to flee would result in even worse horrors.” (p. 69). The Nazis wanted the Jews to emigrate between 1935 and 1939 and they regarded this as the “territorial final solution” (p. 70). However, Jews faced very harsh limits in emigrating, such as there were restrictions on immigration and the Nazi government wanted to enrich themselves by placing cumbersome emigration taxes forcing people to sell everything they had to be able to pay these taxes. Moreover, the Jews who were emigrating were obligated to buy foreign currency at rates that were exploiting them. Furthermore, there was much corruption as the Nazi officials as well as those working in foreign consulates demanded bribes. Besides financial exploitation, Jewish women were also sexually exploited by Nazi officials who demanded sexual favors in order to grant them emigration visas. Overall, one quarter of German Jew fled before 1938.