Дисертація присвячена комплексному порівняльному дослідженнюполітики Великої Британії та СРСР у сфері залучення жінок до служби взбройних силах у роки Другої світової війни.На основі широкого кола першоджерел та історіографічних напрацюваньпопередніх років окреслено соціальне становище жінок у Великій Британії таСРСР напередодні війни. Визначено особливості залучення жінок до служби вармії та парамілітарних формуваннях у міжвоєнний період. У праціхарактеризується нормативно-правове регулювання служби жінок у військовихформуваннях упродовж Другої світової війни. З’ясовується специфіка та умовислужби жінок у збройних силах Великої Британії та СРСР у 1939–1945 рр.Простежуються особливості висвітлення проблеми жіночої служби в рокиДругої світової війни в публічних виступах політиків. Співставлено підходи доорганізації британської та радянської пропаганди у сфері залучення жінок долав військових підрозділів. Окреслено особливості демобілізації та вшануванняпам’яті ветеранок Другої світової війни у Великій Британії та СРСР.Проаналізовано соціокультурну інтерпретацію досвіду жінок, які служили увійську, ними самими та іншими членами британського і радянськогосуспільств.^UThe twentieth century witnessed not only two world wars but also theconfrontation between democratic and totalitarian regimes. The pernicious ideologyand repression of dissidents led to the collapse of most totalitarian systems in Europe,while democracy proved to be a progressive path of development. At the same time,the differences and common features of totalitarianism and democracy remain apromising area for research. Scholars usually focus on the many differences betweenthese regimes in the political, economic, social, and cultural spheres, trying toemphasize the parallelism of their development. However, were the differences in thegender policies of totalitarian and democratic systems in the twentieth century sostriking? We did not find a thorough answer to this question in the academicliterature. At the same time, whatever it may be, this answer will significantly deepenthe understanding of the essence of the two political regimes from a historicalperspective. The methodological basis of this study includes the gender approach, theconcept of “double helix” by M. R. Higonnet and P. L. R. Higonnet, and themethodology of analysis of propaganda works by G. Jowett and V. O’Donnell. A setof general scientific, historical and interdisciplinary methods was also used to solvespecific problems: a critical analysis of sources, typological, critical discourseanalysis, retrospective, historical-comparative, analytical-psychological, statistical,analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, analogy, comparison and generalization.Based on a wide range of primary sources and historiographical studies ofprevious years, the social position of women in Great Britain and the USSR on theeve of the war was outlined. The peculiarities of the involvement of women in thearmy and paramilitary organizations in the interwar period are determined. The studycharacterizes the normative and legal regulation of women's service in military unitsduring the Second World War. The specifics and conditions of women's service in thearmed forces of Great Britain and the USSR from 1939 to 1945 were clarified. Thepeculiarities of the coverage of the issue of women's service during the Second WorldWar in the public speeches of politicians were traced. Approaches to the organizationof British and Soviet propaganda aimed at recruitment of women to the military unitsare compared. The features of demobilization and commemoration of female veteransof the Second World War in Great Britain and the USSR were outlined. Thesociocultural interpretation of women’s military service by servicewomen and othermembers of the British and Soviet societies was analysed. The author concludes that despite the significant differences between thetotalitarian and democratic regimes in their approaches to state-building, propaganda,economics, and social and cultural affairs in the interwar period, during the war, therewas a convergence between them, in particular in organizing women’s militaryservice.Both states used a utilitarian approach to women to recruit large numbers ofthem to the military because there was a lack of human resources. At the same time,both governments tried to keep the status quo in gender relations, where women are asubordinate group to men. Of course, during the Second World War, it was almostimpossible not to change what would be considered “suitable” roles for women, butin general, gender relations were kept unchanged. For example, one can see it in thepeculiarities of the public discourse that was rather different for both countries, butthe common feature was the representation of women as an auxiliary force in themilitary even in those cases where they performed operative and combat tasks. Forexample, when many Soviet women held combat positions, the public discoursementioned only a few cases of heroines, and there were no mentions of the large scaleof this phenomenon. General materials in the media about the Red Army usuallyaddressed the soldiers exclusively in the male gender. Also, we can see it in theexample of the British women who performed operative tasks in the anti-aircraftdefence and held positions that before the war were combat ones and then werereclassified by authorities during the war into non-combat positions to keep thewomen`s status in society as non-combatants.Thus, given the wide range of similarities between the totalitarian anddemocratic countries toward women in the military, it can be concluded that in thiscase the differences between their political regimes were placed in the background,giving way to their patriarchal essence.