Loading...
Around the time of the First World War (1914-1918), many viewed the war as a turning point for women in Britain. War-related work created a new image for women, who according to this view sought paid work for the first time and who were consequently "rewarded" with the right to vote in 1919. Government rhetoric at the time posited that women had "earned" new civil rights, and many later historians, swayed by this sentiment, concluded that during and after the war, women seized a range of new work opportunities, won political and legal rights, and laid to rest certain prejudices against their gender.
This view obscures the truth about women's experience before, during, and after the war. Nearly one-third of Britain's women were already performing paid work (some in such home-based trades as sewing and childcare) when the war broke out, and the nation only begrudgingly admitted women to paid war work after the failure of such alternatives as importing foreign male laborers. Even the much-touted "reward" of the vote did not extend to the majority of women war workers, who were under the minimum voting age of 30. Above all, postwar Britain encouraged women to surrender their factory jobs to returning veterans. By 1921 a smaller percentage of women had paid employment than in 1911.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author's argument about the experience of women in Britain during and after the First World War?
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Around the time of the First World War (1914-1918), many viewed the war as a turning point for women in Britain. | What it says: Some people thought WWI was a major moment that changed things for British women. What it does: Introduces a viewpoint/perspective that others held Source/Type: Author reporting on what "many" believed (not the author's own view) Connection to Previous Sentences: This is our starting point - no prior information to connect to Visualization: Timeline showing 1914-1918 war period marked as "turning point" by various observers What We Know So Far: There's a common belief that WWI changed women's situation in Britain What We Don't Know Yet: What exactly changed, whether this view is accurate, what the author thinks |
| War-related work created a new image for women, who according to this view sought paid work for the first time and who were consequently "rewarded" with the right to vote in 1919. | What it says: This view claims war jobs gave women a new reputation, they started working for pay for the first time, and got voting rights as a reward. What it does: Elaborates on the "turning point" view by explaining specific changes Source/Type: Still reporting what others believed ("according to this view") Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds on sentence 1 by explaining WHAT the "turning point" supposedly was - provides the details behind the general claim Visualization: Before war: Women not working for pay → During war: Women in war jobs → 1919: Women get vote as "reward" Reading Strategy Insight: Notice "according to this view" - the author is still describing others' opinions, not stating facts |
| Government rhetoric at the time posited that women had "earned" new civil rights, and many later historians, swayed by this sentiment, concluded that during and after the war, women seized a range of new work opportunities, won political and legal rights, and laid to rest certain prejudices against their gender. | What it says: Government said women earned their rights, and historians who believed this concluded women gained work opportunities, legal rights, and overcame prejudices. What it does: Restates and reinforces the same "turning point" view with more sources Source/Type: Government rhetoric + historians' conclusions Connection to Previous Sentences: This is NOT new information! This restates the same "women gained from the war" perspective, just with different sources (government + historians vs. "many people") Visualization: Support for "turning point" view: General public + Government + Historians all agreeing women gained opportunities, rights, overcame prejudice Reading Strategy Insight: Feel relieved here - this is reinforcement, not new complexity. The author is building a strong foundation before likely challenging it. |
| This view obscures the truth about women's experience before, during, and after the war. | What it says: This common view hides what really happened to women. What it does: **MAJOR SHIFT** - Author rejects the view and signals the real argument is coming Source/Type: Author's direct opinion/thesis Connection to Previous Sentences: This contrasts with everything before. Sentences 1-3 built up the "turning point" view from multiple sources. NOW the author says this view is wrong. Visualization: Popular view (from sentences 1-3) labeled as "OBSCURES" → Real truth (coming next) Reading Strategy Insight: Classic GMAT pattern! Build up a view, then knock it down. Everything that follows will challenge the "turning point" narrative. What We Know So Far: Common view says WWI was turning point for women, but author disagrees What We Don't Know Yet: What the real truth is |
| Nearly one-third of Britain's women were already performing paid work (some in such home-based trades as sewing and childcare) when the war broke out, and the nation only begrudgingly admitted women to paid war work after the failure of such alternatives as importing foreign male laborers. | What it says: About 33% of women already had paying jobs before the war, and Britain only let women do war work reluctantly after other options failed. What it does: Provides first piece of evidence challenging the "turning point" view Source/Type: Historical facts presented by the author Connection to Previous Sentences: This directly contradicts sentence 2, which claimed women "sought paid work for the first time" during the war. This evidence shows women ALREADY worked before the war. Visualization: Before war: 33 out of 100 women already working → During war: Britain reluctantly adds more women only after foreign workers failed Reading Strategy Insight: This systematically dismantles the "first time working" claim. The author is building a fact-based counter-argument. |
| Even the much-touted "reward" of the vote did not extend to the majority of women war workers, who were under the minimum voting age of 30. | What it says: Most women war workers couldn't even vote because they were younger than the required age of 30. What it does: Provides second piece of evidence challenging the "reward" narrative Source/Type: Historical fact about voting age requirements Connection to Previous Sentences: This challenges sentence 2's claim that voting was a "reward" for war work. If the war workers couldn't vote, how could it be their reward? Visualization: War workers (mostly under 30) → Cannot vote due to age requirement → "Reward" doesn't apply to those who "earned" it Reading Strategy Insight: Another systematic challenge. The author is methodically attacking each piece of the "turning point" narrative. |
| Above all, postwar Britain encouraged women to surrender their factory jobs to returning veterans. | What it says: Most importantly, after the war, women were pushed to give up their factory jobs to returning soldiers. What it does: Provides the strongest evidence against lasting change for women Source/Type: Historical fact about postwar policy Connection to Previous Sentences: This challenges the entire "women seized opportunities" narrative from sentence 3. If they were encouraged to give up jobs, they didn't really "seize" lasting opportunities. Visualization: During war: Women in factory jobs → After war: Women pushed out → Veterans take the jobs Reading Strategy Insight: "Above all" signals this is the author's strongest point - the war didn't create lasting opportunities if women lost them immediately after. |
| By 1921 a smaller percentage of women had paid employment than in 1911. | What it says: Three years after the war ended, fewer women were working for pay than before the war even started. What it does: Provides final, conclusive statistical evidence that reinforces the author's argument Source/Type: Statistical comparison (historical data) Connection to Previous Sentences: This is the ultimate proof against the "turning point" theory. It uses concrete before/after numbers to show women actually lost ground. Visualization: 1911 (before war): X% of women employed → 1921 (after war): Less than X% employed → Net DECREASE, not increase Reading Strategy Insight: Perfect conclusion! This statistic encapsulates the entire argument - if WWI was truly a "turning point," women's employment should have increased, not decreased. Final Summary - What We Now Know: • Popular view: WWI was turning point that gave women work opportunities and voting rights • Reality: Women already worked before war, were reluctantly allowed war work, young workers couldn't vote, were pushed out after war, and ended up worse off than before • Author's point: The "turning point" narrative is false |
To challenge and disprove the widely accepted view that World War I was a turning point that improved women's status in Britain by showing that this narrative is false and misleading.
The author builds their argument by first presenting a popular view and then systematically destroying it with evidence:
The popular belief that World War I was a turning point that improved women's status in Britain is completely wrong - women actually ended up worse off after the war than they were before it started.
This is a strengthen question asking us to find information that would most support the author's argument about women's experience during and after WWI. The author's main argument is that the popular "turning point" narrative is false and misleading - women didn't actually gain lasting benefits from the war and were worse off afterward.
From our passage analysis, we know the author systematically dismantles the "turning point" view by showing:
The author's core argument is that women were pushed back into their pre-war status and actually ended up worse off, not better.
To strengthen this argument, we need evidence that supports the idea that women's gains were temporary and that they faced systematic barriers to maintaining their wartime positions. The strongest evidence would show that women were actively excluded or discriminated against in the postwar period, reinforcing the author's point that they "surrendered their factory jobs" and ended up with lower employment rates than before the war.
Why It's Wrong:
• This contradicts the author's evidence that Britain "only begrudgingly admitted women to paid war work after the failure of such alternatives as importing foreign male laborers"
• Active recruitment would suggest women were welcomed, not reluctantly accepted
• This would actually weaken the author's argument by supporting the "turning point" narrative
Common Student Mistakes:
Why It's Wrong:
• Media portrayal of women as vital in both roles would support the "turning point" view that the author opposes
• This suggests women successfully maintained both domestic and work identities, contradicting the author's argument about lost opportunities
• Positive media images would weaken the claim that women were pushed back to pre-war status
Common Student Mistakes:
Why It's Right:
• This provides a concrete mechanism explaining HOW women were excluded from postwar employment
• Union membership as a prerequisite creates a systematic barrier that supports the author's claim about women surrendering factory jobs
• This directly explains why employment rates dropped between the war and 1921
• It shows the exclusion was institutional, not just social pressure
Key Evidence: "Above all, postwar Britain encouraged women to surrender their factory jobs to returning veterans. By 1921 a smaller percentage of women had paid employment than in 1911."
Why It's Wrong:
• Equal pay would suggest women gained lasting benefits from the war
• This would support the "turning point" narrative that the author argues is false
• Improved working conditions contradict the author's argument that women ended up worse off
Common Student Mistakes:
Why It's Wrong:
• This actually supports the author's point that women already worked before the war, but doesn't strengthen the argument about postwar decline
• While consistent with the author's view, it doesn't add new support for the main argument about women being worse off after the war
• The author already established that women worked before the war - this just provides more detail about the same point
Common Student Mistakes: