The Nazi Women exposed as every bit as bad as Hitler’s male followers

[TidiousTed]

Portrayed in soft tones and pastels, their beatific gaze stared from billboards and freesheets across the land. Blonde, fresh-faced and pure, these were the women of Hitler’s Third Reich.
They were prolific mothers, skilful homemakers, hard-working secretaries and dedicated auxiliaries. They supported their men at war and devoted themselves to the cause of their Fuhrer.

And their Fuhrer treated them with all the delicacy of a courting lover. When war began, Hitler forbade them to work in the munitions factories for fear they would lose their femininity under the stress of hard physical labour.

Read the whole story here

 

[samtemporary]

Interesting article; a side of the War effort not really exposed. I love the quote "inner son of a b**ch".

 

[Bluebird Marsha]

If I read the article correctly, this is one of the first German published books to address the role of women in Nazi Germany. I only stress that because, while I can't cite the sources (and I'm not in the mood to Googlize it at the moment), I'm pretty sure I've read books in the past 30 years that do discuss this topic. I'm pretty sure I saw the above picture when I was in middle or high school (circa late 70s, early 80s).

I remember that the ranks of female concentration camp guards were drawn from the "lower classes", and that there were several training institutes for them. Fewer than for the men, but definitely more than one.

There was a quote in the article from the author that I found interesting. "Kompisch concludes: ‘The fact is that women allowed their female characteristics to be suppressed to bind themselves to the Nazi state and its agencies."

I used to work some with the German Air Force, and their families. I'm not sure if it was because they were military, or whether it's a national characteristic- but they did seem to view women as gentler/kinder/weaker- and anything out of that picture as an abnormality. Not saying that isn't a view of many Americans- because you can see that female murderers are usually viewed a bit more kindly than their male counterparts. But somehow the author seems surprised that women would commit the most horrible of crimes for the same reasons as men. Greed, revenge, self-enhancement, and because they enjoyed it.

I wish I could be equally surprised. But I know my own gender can be just as vicious as the guys.

 

[Edward]

I'm glad to hear one of the ladies voice this.... it always strikes me as rather quaint, at best, when anyone makes the assumption that the most heinous of crimes are somehow the more shocking when committed by a woman. Of course, all too many still do subscribe to such sexist claptrap: see, for example, the way Myra Hindley has been demonised in British popular culture way over and above Ian Brady.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

Not really surprising as Hitler, even early in his political career, had quite an appeal to women -- frighteningly so. In fact in many images of early Nazi rallies and of Hitler speaking one is struck by the significantly large number of women in the audience.

 

[Flat Foot Floey]

No big news, really. The stories of female SS warden and such have been told. Maybe it is the first book that focusses on this topic only. It may be true that people feel even more unconfortable to talk about than about male war criminals.

The 2008 movie The Reader tells a story about one of them. It's based on a novel that was publushed in 1995. We did read it in school (I think in 1999 or 2000)

In the seventies there were some very very bad exploitation movies about the "she wolve of the ss" talking about exposed nazi women.

So it is hardly a secret.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Exactly. It wasn't even a secret in 1945.

 

[sheeplady]

I don't really know what to say to this, like Bluebird Marsha, I'm not really surprised. Women can be every bit as vicious as men. And they are just as easily manipulated by propoganda and fear as men.

I haven't read the book, but I have to say that I hope it doesn't make comparisons of well-educated female scientists who experimented on humans to women who had multiple children to feed the Nazis' need for soldiers. The two roles are simply not comparable in my mind. I don't think we'd compare a male rank and file soldier (by the end of the war they had children serving) to a Gestapo agent or a murderer scientist. Although they both had a role to play, the amount of ethical responsibility is very different.

It was interesting to read that women reported their spouses for anti-Nazi activities that they didn't do to gain power in the household. I can't see this as something that was very widespread, given the need for men for the war effort. How many household's had men at home that could be reported?

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think some of the atrocities committed *could only* have been thought of by women. That doesn't speak well of us as a sex, but there you go.

 

[filfoster]

Wasn't Unity Mitford so smitten with AH that she tried to kill herself? Well, as so many millions discovered, he was to die for.