Housing the Single Woman: The Frankfurt Experiment - Study Notes

Objective of Study: Examine housing initiatives for women post-World War I in Frankfurt as part of social reform efforts.
**Context of Women's Employment: **
- Poor wages: Boarding house workers made between 17 to 24 marks per week, unable to rent poor accommodations at 30 marks.
- Independence: Women sought to avoid constant oversight by landladies, advocating for housing units with kitchenettes (reported by Social Democrats Elsa Bauer and Sophie Ennenbach).
Demographics of Single Women:
- By 1925, women outnumbered men aged 25-40 by 1.25 million due to war casualties, leading to 2.8 million "surplus" women in single-person households (over 75% of households).
- Continued workforce participation: One-third of women remained in full-time employment, despite societal pressure to conform to domestic roles.
Women in the Workforce:
- Post-war contributions: Women held skilled industrial jobs (steel, machinery, mining) during the war and maintained positions amidst labor rationalization trends post-war.
- Statistical representation in various industries by 1924-1926:
- 8,000 women among 10,000 clothing industry workers.
- 20% of electro-technical workers in Frankfurt were women by 1926.
- Increased presence in retail (25% by 1924) and clerical jobs (39% by 1925).

Ernst May's Role:
- May returned to Frankfurt in 1926, tasked with building housing projects as part of “The New Era” initiative.
- Achievements: Over 60,000 residents rehoused in 14 settlements (15,000 units), transforming urban living in Frankfurt and earning renown across Europe.
Addressing Women's Housing Needs:
- Women’s coalitions and labor groups formed to advocate for housing solutions, highlighting the struggle of single women living in inadequate conditions such as rental barracks or overcrowded boarding houses.
- Ledigenheim as a historical solution for housing single women but faced challenges in overcrowding and poor conditions.

Grete Lihotzky's Contribution:
- Advocated integration of women's housing within family-oriented communities to avoid social isolation.
- Einliegerwohnung Proposal (lodger apartment):
- Affordable, efficient housing models for women, facilitating small, independent living arrangements attached to larger familial communities.
- Predicted rent would range from 18 to 30 marks, far more accessible than contemporary apartments costing 200-300 marks.
- Featured models aimed at various income levels among women workers, students, and professionals to accommodate diverse economic situations.
Housing Models Designed by Lihotzky:
- Types I and II: Dormitory-style with shared facilities for factory workers and clerical staff.
- Type III: For skilled workers like nurses and teachers (160 marks or more in income).
- Type IV: Middle-class women with greater amenities and private space, although this was beyond reach for many workers.

Women City Councilors’ Advocacy:
- Despite political opposition (during economic prioritization of family housing), persistent lobbying resulted in discussions for women’s housing initiatives across the city council.
- Proposals often restricted by budget constraints and societal expectations of women and domesticity; ultimately leading initiatives to prioritize male single housing or family units.
Outcome of Advocacy Initiatives:
- Only 143 units were constructed out of an initial proposal for 4,000 specifically for women. The units built did not specify women, highlighting a failure in addressing demographic needs.

Baublock Adickesallee (1928-1930):
- Designed by Bernhard Hermkes, aimed to address housing for professional women without social stigma associated with single women’s housing.
- Accommodated teacher and health-related workers at competitive rents but faced backlash for economic viability and community resistance against female independence.
Platenstrasse Project (1930):
- Proposed two parallel buildings for 100 units with complete independence but adjusted specifications reduced unit size and desirable amenities.
- Rents were higher than projected, often excluding those lower-income women the project aimed to support.

Public Perception and Criticism:
- Press coverage depicted women's independent living as unnatural, intertwining the project with societal fears of female freedom leading to various potential social 'ills.'
- Critiques by conservative figures emphasized that these units failed to foster community or integrate women into familial neighborhoods as envisioned.
Final Reflections on Housing Initiatives for Single Women:
- Amidst rising economic hardship and growing fascism, the initiative to create dedicated housing for single women stalled, exacerbating their socio-economic isolation and lack of representation in housing policies, reinforcing the narrative of women as transient within societal roles.

Lessons Learned:
- Economic pressures led to the underfunding and de-prioritization of women’s housing. The intersecting societal views of gender roles further complicated the housing situation.
- The history of designed housing for women illustrates ongoing struggles between advocacy for independence and societal expectations in the context of Weimar Germany's broader political and economic landscape.