.png)
There’s a belief that women didn’t work outside the home until the 1940s. On the Whatever Podcast, a Gen Z woman makes this claim while on a dating podcast. But here’s the thing. I’m approaching 50 and thought she did not that long ago.
It wasn’t until I started researching my female ancestors that my perspective shifted. It also helped me learn a genealogical truism: historical claims depend on time and location.
The problem with bringing assumptions into genealogy is this. When we believe the Big Lie that women didn’t work outside the home in the United States until World War II, we may skip entire categories of genealogy records because “It wouldn’t apply to my female ancestor.” If we find a woman defying the norm, we might assume she’s an exception instead of questioning if our belief was flawed from the start.
In this video, I’ll show you how the Big Lie about women and the labor force nearly kept me from discovering an amazing story about one of my ancestors—and how challenging assumptions can transform your research.
The Big Lie About Women’s Work
Many people believe women didn’t work outside the home in the United States until World War II, and Rosie the Riveter became a household name. You’ll find this claim in articles, books, and even political debates.
Why Many Married Women Were Banned From Working During the Great Depression
The history of women’s work and wages and how it has created success for us all
A Very Hungry Girl: How I Filled Up on Life...and How You Can, Too!
River of Time: My Descent Into Depression and How I Emerged with Hope
Grammar and Beyond: Level 2 Workbook Volume 2
And yet, many will counter the argument that women have worked outside the home
But history is complicated, and we can’t paint with broad strokes, or we might paint over our ancestor and their stories.
If you hang around the Family History Fanatics channel long enough, you’ll hear Andy, or I say this refrain regarding genealogical research: “It depends.”
Could your ancestors have married in a Lutheran Church when they were Catholic? It depends.
Was your great-uncle required to share the proceeds of an estate sale for his father with the children of his deceased sister? It depends.
Could women inherit property separate from their husbands? It depends.
I’m scratching the surface of “It Depends” statements. You can share the “it depends” statements you’ve encountered in the comments section so I can tap into them in future videos.
Genealogists Must Research Laws and Cultural Norms Regarding Women's Work
But for now, know this. Before believing your female ancestor couldn’t work outside the home, it’s worth researching the laws of your ancestor’s time and place.
According to the World Economic Forum, 104 countries limit what jobs women can hold. That’s today.
But, in a different location or a different time in history, that may or may not be true from where your ancestors lived. So, while this video shares a US-based story, you have to understand the legal restrictions for your ancestors.
In the US, you’ll likely find the legal restrictions for women and work in the same sources you found laws regarding inheritance. So, search for statutes for the state or location where your ancestor lived and find the year those statutes applied. (For instance, Statutes for Pennsylvania.)
But what about cultural norms?
Cultural norms aren’t always codified in law. Therefore, they can be harder to research. However, genealogical records can be a goldmine if you know where to look. So, always look for females in various records, as well as men. You might be surprised by what you find.
Meet Elmira Young – The Truth Behind the Lie
Let’s walk back to the late 1800s. While researching my great-aunt, Elmira Young, I expected to find a widowed mother scraping by after her husband, Jerome Howard, died as a Civil War prisoner of war.
I could have searched for a Civil War Pension record, but before I spent money on a great-uncle’s case file, I searched my second favorite genealogical collection - newspapers.
What I didn’t expect was this:
In the Lawrenceburg Press, published on August 1, 1878, there’s a column titled “What Women Are Doing”. Right there in black and white, I read:
“The practice of Dr. Elmira Y. Howard, 459 West 6th St., is one of the most extensive and successful in Cincinnati.”
Wait, what? “Dr. Elmira Howard"!!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Dr. means that Elmira had a medical career, so she went somewhere to obtain advanced training. That training happened before 1878!
“Her practice?"
“The practice of” means her practice. She’s a business owner, not a man?
“One of the most extensive and successful?”
That doesn’t happen overnight. So, how long has she developed the most extensive and successful practice at a time when women were supposedly not allowed to work outside the home?
Cincinnati Wasn’t a Frontier Town
If you, like me, when considering a female doctor in the 1880s, start conjuring up images of Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman in a small frontier town, think again.
Cincinnati was booming in the 1870s. By 1880, its population had topped 255,000—larger than Houston, Texas, at the time and bigger than entire states like Colorado, Oregon, or Utah.
Cincinnati wasn’t some backwater town. It was the eighth-largest city in the United States. And Elmira wasn’t just surviving—she had one of the city’s most successful medical practices.
↪️ Are you looking for more genealogy resources?
Grab your copy of FREE Genealogy Research Guides:
Genealogy Research Reveals Insights Into Women in the 1870 Workforce
As I consider that my great aunt not only ‘worked outside the home’ but was doing it successfully in a large town, I wonder if she is an anomaly.
How can I find out that answer?
The same article that mentions her practice is part of a broader piece about women’s roles. It includes:
When I scroll to the top of this article named Elmira, I know I’m in for an easy answer to my quest to understand women in history. The article title is “ What women are doing and what those who read the Press wish to say ‘about Women.’” Unlike a Society News section, where we see the comings and goings of women, this column has something very different.
First off, Mrs. Jennie Cunningham Croly has been elected a member of the New York Academy of Science. A Wikipedia article about Jennie highlights her challenges as a female journalist, but it ignores that she was elected a member of the New York Academy of Science. Seems like that needs to be updated a bit. Regardless, she’s working outside of the home, is she not? Not only as a journalist but also as a scientific professional member of society. I’d really like to learn more about this, but for the purpose of this video, I need to move on and not go on a tangent.
Now, there is an entry where Vassar College female students sacrificed health for fashion. But this line makes me wonder what female college students are learning in general.
We can see the seedbed of taking your daughter to work day from an advocate in England.
We see an entry for college graduates from Swarthmore College. (But I thought women didn’t get advanced degrees until the mid-1900s. So, what are they studying?)
Then, I saw Mrs. Maxwell, who had been appointed State Librarian by the Governor of Iowa. She was formerly the Engrossing Clerk of the Senate and wrote a history of Guthrie County.
Mrs. C A Spear was appointed an Adjunct Professor of Physiology at the Philadelphia University of Medicine and Surgery. There’s a lovely quote about her appointment from a Trustee about her joining the faculty. This statement suggests that women were not only being educated but now becoming professors. And that title of Mrs. needs clarification. Was she indeed married at the time of this appointment?
Need I continue?
These women held titles and jobs far outside the domestic sphere—decades before Rosie the Riveter.
This next entry is rather interesting. It’s from the Portsmouth Times in Portsmouth, Ohio. If I’m reading this correctly, it lists Homeopathic Physicians. Some of the names are Dr. Mary Safford, Dr. Caroline Hastings, Mrs. Geo Newton, and Mrs. Cha Morse. Though the names are blurry, I wish the organization (and font) of this article were clearer. However, I’m seeing some female doctors here.
Below this section, there is an extract from Dr. Elmira Howard saying the diploma from Boston University School of Medicine offers a sufficient guarantee that either she (or the doctors listed above) are equal to the duty of being physicians. So, either this a testimony from Boston U for Dr. Howard, or she’s in a role to train other doctors, on behalf of Boston University.
Share your thoughts about the nature of this blurry article. But what I’m pointing out is that Dr. Howard is connected to Boston University, which wasn’t a backwater school.
Continuing the Case of Elmira, there were numerous papers with the advertisement of her practice when she moved into a different location in Cincinnati and then when she moved to Palmyra, Missouri.
Dr. Elmira and the Big Picture
Elmira wasn’t the only female doctor, either. An 1884 article from the Piqua Daily Call lists her, among other “lady physicians,” earning impressive incomes.
“Lady Physicians” leads off with, “To go the other extreme, the lady physicians have, in certain cases, earned the largest amount of money of any class of women. Dr. Elmira Y Howard is credited with a professional income of at least $7,000 a year. If the inflation calculator is believed, that’s a purchasing power of $225,352 today. There are other female doctors listed with some indication of their income.
If we expand beyond this article to the full page, we can see that this section is part of an article discussing the difference between skill and earnings.
It is estimated that 23,000 women earn their own living—nearly 10% of the population.
Mind you, that population includes men, women, and children. So, determining the percentage of women laboring at this time would require more than a cursory investigation.
But did women work outside of the home before World War II? In Cincinnati, I think the answer is - they might have. They might have been saleswomen, bookbinders, typists, domestic servants, waitresses, theater workers, school teachers, janitors.
Now, this is the observation of the article writer, and it shows the wide range of labor options that were available to women. When I see this list of options, I see that the jobs held depend on the skill of the female. That opens an entirely different topic regarding how they were able to or prevented from obtaining the skills for the higher-paid jobs. There are more hows and whys I can’t answer. But what I can say is this,
Genealogists Must Not Fall for the Big Lie When Researching Female Ancestors
Here’s the truth: sweeping claims like “women didn’t work outside the home until the 1940s” can derail your research. They blind you to valuable records and lead you to write incomplete or incorrect stories.
So, what can we learn?
Don’t assume your female ancestors didn’t work.
Don’t skip records because of preconceived notions.
Always let the evidence tell the story—especially when it challenges modern beliefs.
Now it’s your turn! What surprising occupations have you discovered in your family tree? Drop a comment below—I’d love to hear your stories.
Also, if you’ve had to rethink assumptions about the past while researching, let’s talk!
Additional Reading / Watching
More Genealogy Posts About Finding Women: