Mentality of the general Population
The impact of the protest against conscription can be seen through the mentality of the public at the time.
The popular opinion was that conscientious objector were much like the shirker – they wanted to avoid duty and hardship. People were unable or unwilling to see conscientious objectors as anything other than men who did not fight for their country (men who lack patriotism) because, for many, you either supported New Zealand or supported Germany and this view was evident by the actions of the people towards the conscientious objectorss
The popular opinion was that conscientious objector were much like the shirker – they wanted to avoid duty and hardship. People were unable or unwilling to see conscientious objectors as anything other than men who did not fight for their country (men who lack patriotism) because, for many, you either supported New Zealand or supported Germany and this view was evident by the actions of the people towards the conscientious objectorss
Some eligible people who did not enlist:
Married men (who had a 'more' legitimate reason not to enlist) were even favoured by organisations (e.g. Auckland Employer's Association).
In a more extreme response to ‘shirking’, the Bay of Plenty Times called for death penalty for shirker (this is the same penalty for refusing work at front line), which not only shows their resentment for the C.O.s, but also how, despite New Zealand being comparatively far from the place of actual physical fighting, the line between home front and front line became blurred as anti-shirker mentality became more prevalent. There was also a case where a woman left a man on altar citing that she it was 'to punish him for slacking'.
- Had their names printed (shamed)
- Told they were shaming any future children by making them a child of a shirker
- Lost jobs, their positions, friends and relationships
Married men (who had a 'more' legitimate reason not to enlist) were even favoured by organisations (e.g. Auckland Employer's Association).
In a more extreme response to ‘shirking’, the Bay of Plenty Times called for death penalty for shirker (this is the same penalty for refusing work at front line), which not only shows their resentment for the C.O.s, but also how, despite New Zealand being comparatively far from the place of actual physical fighting, the line between home front and front line became blurred as anti-shirker mentality became more prevalent. There was also a case where a woman left a man on altar citing that she it was 'to punish him for slacking'.
This resentment and discrimination demonstrated by majority of the public remained even after war, as shown through the continued poor treatment of C.O.s following the end of World War 1.
- Some organisations continued to campaign against C.O.s even after the war
- C.O.s on staff at Rotorua hospital ineligible for promotion and had to wear armband
- Archibald Baxter (one of 14 C.O.s sent to front line) was made to report and wait for hours at hospital (though he required no treatment)
White Feather League
The White Feather League was a group of women who gave white feathers to men who, despite being eligible to serve in the army, did not. The white feather symbolised the cowardice of the recipient, the woman's shame and contempt for the man and as "emotional labour" - a way for the woman to handle her "anxiety and grief for any sons or her husband" being in war. White feather giving was not uncommon, though there were a number of people against this practice. One some person was Joseph Wards who noted that 'no man or woman had a right to send a man a white feather and pronounce him a coward'. The effect this practice had for the man presented the feather differed for each man. Some men were unaffected by a presentation of a white feather while others were greatly influenced by it. In one instance the receiver had even enlisted in the army upon receiving a white feather saying, "I'm no hero. I didn't want to fight, but I couldn't stand that". |
CArtoons
This cartoon depicts the opinion of the public at the time of the conscientious objector being either foppish, a coward or a slacker with no valid reason for not enlisting in the war.
The cartoon above has come from the New Zealand Observer newspaper. All the images shown in the cartoon depicts the conscientious objector in a negative light. The top left shows him to be a coward, running away from Japanese soldiers, the next image along questions and criticizes the masculinity of the objector (as the doctor says that these COs are not boys but girls) and the top right image shows a CO as being effeminate – being taken care of by his mother who comes to place a ribbon on his hair. The central image shows the Minister of Defence James Allen at a lost as to what to do to the CO while the image to the right of this shows the CO to be much like a puppet – “put a penny in the slot and hear him consciously object”. The last two images at the bottom of the cartoon simply depicts the CO as a weak individual and as an object of ridicule by women.
In all the images the CO appears to be well dressed but lanky and weak, which suggests that the objector is a foppish individual. Clearly the intent of the cartoon is to shame and ridicule the CO as it suggests that the reason why COs oppose conscription is because they are cowardly and ‘unmanly’.
The cartoon above has come from the New Zealand Observer newspaper. All the images shown in the cartoon depicts the conscientious objector in a negative light. The top left shows him to be a coward, running away from Japanese soldiers, the next image along questions and criticizes the masculinity of the objector (as the doctor says that these COs are not boys but girls) and the top right image shows a CO as being effeminate – being taken care of by his mother who comes to place a ribbon on his hair. The central image shows the Minister of Defence James Allen at a lost as to what to do to the CO while the image to the right of this shows the CO to be much like a puppet – “put a penny in the slot and hear him consciously object”. The last two images at the bottom of the cartoon simply depicts the CO as a weak individual and as an object of ridicule by women.
In all the images the CO appears to be well dressed but lanky and weak, which suggests that the objector is a foppish individual. Clearly the intent of the cartoon is to shame and ridicule the CO as it suggests that the reason why COs oppose conscription is because they are cowardly and ‘unmanly’.