Embedded Files
Volume 1 | Issue 2 - Women & Gender
Article by Brogan Campbell. Edited by Liam Geoghegan. Additional Research by Liam Geoghegan.
In 1918, all women over the age of 30 obtained suffrage in Britain; women starved themselves, chained themselves to gates for days, and in the case of one suffragist, Emily Davison, threw herself under the king’s horse at Ascot in 1913. Yet, even now, in the 21st Century, the question of whether these tactics were necessary remains unclear.
The majority of British female activists in the early 20th century felt at a loss as the government continued to refuse women suffrage. It is widely understood that this was mainly due to fear of losing male voters for the party or upsetting a powerful, hierarchical system. As a result, many activists adopted an aggressive mentality, as their shock tactics would hopefully gain more support and publicity than did the rewards for “good behaviour” route, as tried previously. Nevertheless, it is of common opinion that these aggressive actions overshadowed the real, practical, moderate and naturally progressive reasons for granting female suffrage post-World War One, such as impressive, supportive behaviour during times of hardship. Nevertheless, the legacy of women’s activist movements is still alive today. Their work arguably still encourages much of the female population to vote, many reminded by the fact that women died so that they could vote. This is a victory in itself, thus showing that the aggressive tactics were successful in creating a legacy and a message to women of the future.
The National Union of Women’s Suffrage, founded in 1897 by Millicent Fawcett, introduced the idea of female voting equality to England in preparation for the 20th century. Women across the world were being granted equal voting rights and with England having been nominally ruled by one woman for over 60 years, it is unsurprising that women began to feel that their opinions should no longer be smothered by an oppressive male voting class. Yet, ironically, this Union, believed that any aggression or violence would persuade male voters that women were hot-headed and emotional, and thus could not be trusted with something as responsible as the vote. However, these gentle tactics were slow and unconvincing, as many politicians believed that women would not understand the voting system or parliament and therefore could not take part in the voting process. This caused many women to lose their patience and the Suffragettes were formed by Emmeline Pankhurst.
However, the more aggressive tactics of the Suffragettes also backfired on the cause. The death of Emily Davison at Ascot caused many men to ask the simple question: “if this was an educated woman, what would a less educated woman do? Surely they could not cope with the right to vote?” Furthermore, the Suffragettes’ antics were not always well planned or well aimed. For example, Lloyd George (the Liberal Party leader) supported female suffrage, yet, in 1913, the suffragettes burned down a part of his house.
Nevertheless, as the country was plunged into World War One, activists put their campaign on hold in order to join together and do what was best for the country. Many politicians were impressed with their mature attitudes, and this may have been the main reason behind why women were granted the vote. However, it is arguable that it was the fear of women restarting aggressive activities following the war, and causing more lives to be lost, which eventually convinced parliament to allow female suffrage, although only permitting the over 30s a vote. In fact, women were not granted equal voting rights with men until 1928, via the Representation of the People Act, following little opposition in parliament. This was mainly due to acceptance of female progression in political circles, notably including the appointment of Margaret Bondfield as parliamentary secretary in 1924, rather than a continuation of aggressive tactics.
In the 21st Century, women have equal rights yet, arguably, still are second place in the political circle. There has only been one female Prime Minister, and men still outweigh women in Parliament by a large majority – showing that women have a long way to go until they stand equal in political Britain.
Report abuse