Women's Suffrage - Article Example

Why, and from whom, was there so much opposition to the movement for votes for women between 1867 and 1918' The women's suffrage movement was an integral part of the broader social reformations taking place toward the end of the nineteenth century. Europe and the United States of America were the arenas for most progressive social and political transformations in modern history. Consistent with this fact, the leaders for the women's suffrage movement too emerged from these geo-politic landscapes. This essay will focus on the evolution of the movement starting from the last decades of the nineteenth century and through its successful culmination toward the end of the First World War. Various arguments put forward by its proponents and opponents are brought to discussion in an attempt to preserve objectivity and meet academic standards. The women's voting rights movement was not an independent strand of social activism. Its history is profoundly intertwined with public protests and demonstrations for the abolition of slavery, universal male franchise, etc. In fact, for close to a century after the American Declaration of Independence, only a select minority of property owners were entitled to vote1. This automatically disqualified all women, for property was transferred through paternal lines, from father to sons, without any share for daughters. A large section of white men from low socio-economic backgrounds were hence disenfranchised. The position of black men and women was even more pathetic, given that they themselves were treated as 'property' and traded in slave markets2. The reasons given for this linkage between property and suffrage were not founded on objective truths about human nature, but were a result of prejudice and lack of understanding. The members of the political and cultural Establishment argued that "the true reason of requiring any qualification, with regard to property, in voters, is to exclude such persons as are in so mean a situation that they are esteemed to have no will and independent judgment of their own." 3 Whatever the requisites for voting franchise were, they were based on questionable and vague "virtues" amongst the electorate and its representatives. Needless to say, such conditions excluded a large majority of people on the basis of race and gender4. If opposition to women's voting rights first came from the wealth-owning elite in the United States, more subtle forms of suppression were witnessed in Britain. The Women Writers' Suffrage League (WWSL) and the Actresses' Franchise League (AFL) were formed in 1908 with a view to support the suffrage campaign through "propaganda, plays, sketches and performances"5. But, the upper-class male dominated theatre establishment of the day saw an affront to their own privilege and lifestyle in the works presented by writers from these leagues. While historians would mark this period as the Edwardian era, the attitudes held by ruling-class men was still very much Victorian and conservative. Hence, beyond citing practical reasons for denying women suffrage, they asserted how such changes are morally wrong. Even progressive organizations such as Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU) and the National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies (NUWSS) could not agree on issues of sexual morality. Radical feminist group, the Freewoman even advocated the concept of "free love" without the legal constraints of marriage6. Such notions on women's freedoms offended the orthodoxy as well as fellow suffragettes. When Millicent Fawcett requested Elizabeth Wolstenholme Elmy to resign from the Married Women's Property Committee for the latter having borne an illegitimate child, the divisions within the suffragette community became obvious. Hence, the opposition to women's voting rights came not just from men wanting to protect their superior status, but also from many women sympathetic to the cause of suffragettes but, however, were apprehensive about its moral ramifications7. It should also be pointed out that the opposing men were not always acting on selfish motives. Many well-meaning men objected not women's suffrage per se, but the means adopted by the suffragettes in trying to achieve their end. The feminist theatre at the turn of the century did, at times, go overboard in its endeavour to get its message across. As Sos Eltis notes in her scholarly analysis on Edwardian feminist drama, "The sexual theme of these suffrage plays is also unexpected in the light of suffragists' desire to challenge the doctrine that, "woman is sex and beyond that nothing. Plots centring on seduction, pregnancy and commercial sex not only concentrated attention on women's physical relation to men, but focused on the heroine's fallen sexuality and thus, inevitably, the actress's body"8. Other important institutions of performance arts, including the Women's Theatre and Pioneer Players (founded by Edith Craig in 1911) produced many plays in the years leading up to the First World War that centred on "women's sexual sin and judgement, from poverty-driven prostitution to sexual harassment, seduction and royal adultery"9. The plays were set in both contemporary and classic periods.10 The theatre provided feminists with a powerful medium of communication with audiences across the socio-economic spectrum. But, in spite of the sound rationale behind the demands made by feminist playwrights, their works tended to present a radically new order of society with women's suffrage was only one of many changes sought. Thus, instead of persuading its audience, the plays ended up shocking them. The sudden transition from conventional romantic plots to brave new feminist ones created as much confusion as public support11. It then became much easy for the critics to condemn these plays and propagate negative sentiments about its ultimate motives. Hence, feminist intellectuals of the first decade of the twentieth century inadvertently mitigated their own progress by failing to adopt a balanced approach to their social activism. The opposition to women's franchise also focused on the possible consequences for domestic life women's involvement in public life would entail. There were worries about the future of the family as women might increasingly find it difficult to fulfil their roles as mothers and caretakers. The opponents also claimed that parliamentary enfranchisement of women would ultimately lead to their social citizenship, infringing into traditional male roles. Even within the liberal quarters of British polity, suffrage was not unanimously espoused. The suffragettes, on the other hand, countered these apprehensions by emphatically stating that "if it was becoming the business of the state to promote moral goodness, then surely women, the exemplars of that goodness, should have the vote"12. But, the most vocal opposition for the suffragette movement was not against the cause of women empowerment as it is against the militant means they sometimes employed. When the voices of protest were not heeded to, the suffragettes resorted to violent displays of their discontent that included causing physical damage to public buildings, throwing stones at shop windows, etc13. While suffragists of the Edwardian age generally respected the rule of law and the integrity of the parliamentary system, their lack of success to include women in the democratic process compelled them to change their attitude toward both. Increasingly, "the nineteenth-century women's movement concerned itself with the underlying conceptual basis on which the state rested, asking from whence the authority of the state originated. What, feminists asked, was the relationship between the rule of law, parliamentary sovereignty, and the authority of the state' Their major battles illustrate the extent to which nineteenth-century feminist movements questioned the authority of the law in establishing women's status. Feminists waged subsequent battles over married women's property, access to divorce, and marital rape. These issues all raised questions about the state's ability to legislate fairly where women were concerned"14. Seen in this light, the instances of militant protest on part of the feminists was a result of frustration with the status quo and desperation to take their case forward. The women's campaign for voting rights had taken its first significant step in April 1866, under the leadership of Barbara Bodichon, Jessie Boucherette, Emily Davies, and Elizabeth Garrett, who issued a petition stating their demands15. But it wasn't until after 1905, when militancy was adopted by the suffragettes as a tactic, that the powers that be were pressured to make concessions. Hence, while those denouncing violent protest as unlawful and anarchic, the peaceful methods employed during the first forty years of the movement bore no fruit16. Throughout the fifty years of struggle, from 1867 to 1918, the suffragists exploited the opportunities presented by the printing press and manufacturing industry to promote their cause. The ultimate success to the women's suffrage movement should be attributed in equal measure to their tactics employing the "pen" as well as the "sword". Just as their violent agitations met with disapproval, their communication with the public, through cartoons, pamphlets and household artefacts too attracted criticism17. The Artists' Suffrage League, whose members included the talented Dora Meeson Coates, produced many thought-provoking postcards. The 1909 poster conceived and drawn by Duncan Grant (titled "Handicapped") caught public attention. Among other notable propaganda material were the "Bugler Girl" (created by Caroline Watts), "The Factory Girl" (authored by Emily Ford) and "What's Sauce for the Gander is Sauce for the Goose" by Mary Sargant Florence. The League distributed its prints to grassroots women's societies so that it reached even the remote parts of the country18. The suffrage propaganda campaign was so successful that the British government acknowledged it and adopted the same tactic during the Great War that followed19. Some of the criticisms made of the artists and their works are true. For example, suffrage artists, whenever they depict women, she is shown to belong to upper-middle-class and working-class men were invariably presented as shifty, drunk, violent or lazy20. Certainly, this type of negative stereotyping of men was offensive and incorrect. Even those men, who were initially sympathetic to the women suffrage cause, were put off by these misrepresentations. In this way, the suffragists inadvertently undermined their own support base. While the posters, cartoons, pamphlets, etc helped sway the public opinion in favour of women's franchise, the campaign in the form of symbolic paintings on jugs, mugs, plates and bowls of all shapes and sizes did help the movement gain traction. That these innovative efforts generated public support for their cause was a vindication of the non-militant, peaceful approach to social change, even if the progress was slow and gradual21. A famous cup & saucer set, that captured the spirit of the movement, was the 1909 white china designed by Sylvia Pankhurst, which has "strikingly clean, straight lines and is rimmed in dark green with green handles; each piece carrying a single motif, the "angel of freedom" blowing her trumpet and flying the banner of Freedom"22 The other notable piece of china that was supportive of the women's suffrage campaign was "an enigmatic small dish, hand-painted in purple, white and green, with "Vote for Women" in its centre"23. While women were beginning to express themselves more than ever before, they were yet to be treated 'equal under law' with men. It was not easy to convince and get concessions from a backward looking orthodox establishment that comprised the ruling class. When random and uncoordinated acts of suffragette militancy were becoming more common, more supporters and sympathizers joined those at the forefront in emphatic displays of public solidarity. This is how the convention of annual parades organized by suffragists came into being. The leaders of the movement understood the potential of the parade as a vehicle for social progress24. The notion of the parade as civil demonstration has more historical significance in America than in Britain. For instance, "Parades as celebratory performance had been a distinct feature of American civic ceremony since the early days of the republic. The parades of the woman suffrage movement appropriated this public expression of solidarity--a symbolic form traditionally employed by men to proclaim their collective agency--as a conscious transgression of the rules of social order. Suffrage women's very presence in the city streets decisively challenged traditional notions of femininity and subsequent restrictions on women's conduct".25 These parades worsened the insecurities harboured by men and they expressed their dislike of the developments in many different ways. Since these demonstrations26, represented women's ascendancy both symbolically and substantially, the long held views of superiority of men were being dismantled for the first time in human history. This tugged at the heart of male psyche, shaking the very foundations of their identity and self-perception27. Seen in light of this psychological affectation of women's suffrage, it becomes clear that the opposition from men was motivated by self-interest, rather than any sound ethical consideration. Further, the scale and spirit of these annual parades was implemented as an act of public celebration, a social protest entrenched in symbolism, and a demonstration of women's willingness and capability to participate in public affairs on par with men.28 Between the years 1867 and 1918 women from all walks of life underwent many struggles and hardships for winning their right to vote. They gathered to picket, go on hunger strikes, write to newspapers and draw political cartoons, paint artefacts and more. Many were abused, and some were even arrested. But, unfortunately, these women did not live to see the fruits of their struggle, for politicians and civil society offered severe resistance for women's progress. Finally, when the 19th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was ratified on Aug. 26, 1920, a new era had begun for all women. The Amendment quite rightly stated that "the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."29 Inspired by this first major victory, women forced changes elsewhere in the world, including in Britain. At last, women can exercise a basic privilege that they were denied for long. But later generations of women seem to have forgotten the blood-writ history of their forbears and today only one in two eligible women cast their ballot in national elections. This is most obvious in the United States and less so in the UK. The excuses they give are weak and evasive. Instead of saying that they are disillusioned with the electoral system or that they are busy with other preoccupations, they should go out and participate in the democratic process. After all, the vote is both a right and a responsibility, the failure in exercise it would lead to dire consequences for all citizens. Bibliography: Borda, J. L. (2002). The Woman Suffrage Parades of 1910-1913: Possibilities and Limitations of an Early Feminist Rhetorical Strategy., Western Journal of Communication, 66(1), 25+. Catt, C. C., & Shuler, N. R. (1923)., Woman Suffrage and Politics The Inner Story of the Suffrage Movement., New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Cogan, J. K. (1997). The Look Within: Property, Capacity, and Suffrage in Nineteenth-Century America. Yale Law Journal, 107(2), 473-498. Crawford, E. (1999). The Women's Suffrage Movement: A Reference Guide, 1866-1928. London: UCL Press. Eltis, S. (2007). The Fallen Woman in Edwardian Feminist Drama: Suffrage, Sex and the Single Girl., English Literature in Transition 1880-1920, 50(1), 27+. Hughes, K. (2003, October 13). A Stitch in Time: Postcards, Teacups, Badges and Buckles-The Suffragettes Used Every Available Medium to Bring Their Message Home. Kathryn Hughes on How Women Turned Needlework and Painting into Campaigning Tools. New Statesman, 132, 38+. Kent, S. K. (1990). Sex and Suffrage in Britain 1860-1914. London: Routledge. The Legacy of Women's Suffrage. (1996, November 3). The Washington Times, p. 5. Mayhall, L. E. (2003). The Militant Suffrage Movement: Citizenship and Resistance in Britain, 1860-1930. New York: Oxford University Press. Sheppard, A. (1994). Cartooning for Suffrage (1st ed.). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Appendix: Read More