By Safiya Ali
Edited by Saundarya Mitter and Georgia Wood
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, there were demands for women’s legal and sexual equality with men. One particular demand was the right for women to vote, and for this matter ‘they did not see at least some victory until after the First World War’.1 The right to vote was important to women as it appeared that legislation was biased against them, and it asserted the belief that women were inferior to men. For women, the vote was a symbol of gaining equality, however, it also became synonymous with being ‘a key to wider change’.2 The enfranchisement of women would potentially give them the opportunity to achieve changes in sexist legislation and have a more equal status to men. Although the vigorous campaigning for the right to vote by women in the years before 1914 was a factor in winning the argument for women’s suffrage, it seems that the First World War, which lasted from 1914 to 1918, was arguably the driving force that won this argument, allowing women over the age of thirty to be enfranchised in 1918. The argument for women’s suffrage had been restricted from being successful in the years before 1914 due to many factors, such as the internal divisions between suffrage groups, a patriarchal and sexist society, and the unwillingness of political parties to cede to the demands of women.
The suffrage movement was quite divided in the years before 1914, which made it harder for the argument for women’s suffrage to be won as different groups faced different situations. Varying circumstances placed limitations on suffragists, such as being geographically separated. Although local groups were more flexible, it was a struggle for a national group to contribute effectively. It was also difficult for some women to frequently travel to London due to financial and time constraints. Furthermore, many women found it challenging to contribute to the movement due to their domestic duties and taking care of their children. There were also conflicting political affiliations between the women, as the upper and middle classes supported the Conservatives, while the working class supported the Labour Party and socialism.3 Moreover, different suffragist groups utilised alternative tactics. For example, some historians have argued that the militant suffragists caused a disruption to the movement, as they attracted negative public attention due to their radical actions, such as destroying property. The ‘opinionated members and a weak centre inevitably made the history of Victorian suffragism a history of splits’.4 There were also disagreements amongst the suffragists, over issues such as the rights of prostitutes, sex, and femininity. The main disagreement was over the debate of either demanding the vote for every woman, or single women that owned property.5 The disagreements and constraints among the suffragists, therefore, made it harder for the argument of women’s suffrage to win due to the lack of organisation.
In a patriarchal and sexist society, it was difficult for the argument supporting women’s suffrage to thrive as there were deep-rooted beliefs about gender roles in society, which inspired anti-suffragists to fight against the suffrage movement. Women were not able to have the same privileges as men; their main role was to raise their children and follow their domestic duties, so their status was inferior to men. Victorian men believed that women should not be given the vote as they were too emotional and less intelligent, which made them incapable of understanding politics - and if they did involve themselves in politics, they would neglect their children and household duties.6 Also, according to men, brute force is essential and exercised in politics. This made women not suited for politics due to their gentle nature, which would make them incapable of using the same types of force male politicians exert. The husbands of some women also disapproved of the suffrage movement, and mothers especially were unable to participate due to their domestic duties. Beth Sutton-Ramspeck stated that ‘without a doubt, suffragists brought to the fore the misogynistic responses of many men’.7 For example, Sir Almroth Wright, who was a member of the Anti-suffrage League, wrote a letter to the Times about suffragist ‘hysteria’, also implying that the militant suffragists deserved the violence asserted against them due to their actions.8 It was these misogynistic beliefs deeply ingrained in society that caused restrictions on the movement for many years, as a majority of the population were simply too close-minded to consider the enfranchisement of women, because the prospect of women voting was seen as a threat to the order of society.
The anti-suffragist movement was not limited to male members, as there were also women that actively opposed women’s suffrage. Julia Bush asserted that ‘women provided a good deal of the initiative and most of the hard work behind the organised opposition’.9 One example was the famous anti-suffragist, Mrs Humphry Ward, who wrote ‘An Appeal Against Female Suffrage’, which was signed by many women. She wrote that women’s participation in politics was ‘made impossible either by the disabilities of sex, or by strong formations of custom and habit resting ultimately on physical difference, against which it is useless to contend’.10 As the appeal was signed by multiple women, this indicated that they too were influenced by the misogynistic views ingrained in society, resulting in their support for the anti-suffragist movement. The split between women somewhat invalidated the argument for suffrage, as it appeared that some women themselves believed that they should not be trusted with being given the right to vote. In response to the female opposition, Millicent Fawcett even pointed out ‘the inherent absurdity of the whole position of anti-suffrage women’.11
The argument for suffrage was limited due to the fact that majority of male politicians held the misogynistic views aforementioned, such as believing women were unfit for politics. In order to win the argument, parliament had to be in support of it, as they ultimately made the final decisions. Before 1914, petitions and bills in favour of women suffrage were constantly dismissed and voted against as no party was willing to support it. Particularly, in 1866, a Ladies’ Petition for women suffrage was brought forward to the House of Commons, and a women’s suffrage amendment was added to the 1867 Reform Bill; however, it was defeated.12 Another example is the failure of the Conciliation Bill in 1910, which Asquith’s government refused to pass. Furthermore, the male politicians viewed the matter of women suffrage as absurd. In 1867, an MP claimed that the debate over the women’s suffrage amendment was a ‘pleasant interlude…interposed with the grave and somewhat sombre discussions on the subject of Reform’.13 Therefore, women’s suffrage was not seen as a serious matter, with the anti-suffrage speeches by male politicians often being condescending. Although the Local Government Act in 1894 gave married women who owned property the vote for local elections, giving women the right to vote for national elections was not seen as a serious consideration.
The First World War appears to be the driving factor that eventually won the argument in 1918. Due to conscription during the war period, it opened up many opportunities for women to join the workforce, as most men left their jobs to fight in the war. Women were called upon to work in the factories, manufacturing arms and in various other jobs. Their role in education, agricultural, and commerce sectors became larger, and some women even engaged in military and parliamentary functions.14 Women were able to prove their economic value, as their work for the war effort demonstrated their ability to carry out the same jobs as men. Their service convinced much of the opposition that women should be enfranchised, which led to the argument for women suffrage to be won. Pugh argued however, that the war delayed the vote, which Bartley agrees with, stating that ‘it would be naïve to believe that women received the vote solely for services rendered in the First World War’.15 Furthermore, although Steinbach acknowledges that the War was a key factor in giving women the right to vote, she argues against the idea that it was the main factor that led to the enfranchisement of women. She instead states that ‘most war workers were younger than thirty and so remained unrewarded’, instead believing that it was the years of campaigning that earned them the vote.16 Although this may be likely as women’s campaigning also contributed to winning the vote, a more convincing argument is put forward by Schwarz, who asserted that the War positively impacted women as ‘the fact that women obtained the franchise is evidence of a change in their image and status’ in society, and the argument that ‘women were incapable of holding their own and contributing in demonstratable ways to the national effort’ now seemed invalid.17 Additionally, it changed women’s mindsets, as they became conscious of their capabilities and potential. Steinbach even agreed that women’s contributions to the war effort ‘changed the terms of the debate over women’s contributions to the nation’.18 Thus, this demonstrates how the War was the final driving force that won the argument.
In conclusion, although the campaigning of the suffragists played a role in winning the argument for women’s suffragism, it seems that the argument was actually won during and after the war period, 1914 to 1918. The First World War ultimately gave women the opportunity to ‘prove’ that they have the potential and skills to perform ‘male jobs’, leading to them being included in the electorate. Suffragists achieved victory due to the passing of the Representation of the People Act in 1918, which allowed women over the age of thirty who had property to vote. The argument for women’s suffrage was restricted in the years before 1914, so had not won yet, due to the deeply ingrained misogynistic beliefs of society, the anti suffragists that fought against the movement, and the unwillingness of male politicians to support it. It was the work of suffragists during the war that ultimately gave the final push for the argument supporting women’s suffrage to succeed.
Notes
1 Susie Steinbach, Women in England, 1760-1914: A Social History (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2004), p. 284.
2 Martin Pugh, The March of the Women: A Revisionist Analysis of the Campaign for Women’s Suffrage, 1866-1914 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 10.
3 Steinbach, Women in England, 1760-1914, p. 288.
4 Pugh, The March of the Women, p. 11.
5 Steinbach, Women in England, 1760-1914, p. 300.
6 Steinbach, Women in England, 1760-1914, p. 296.
7 Gillian Beer, Nicola Diane Thompson, Victorian Women Writers and the Woman Question (United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1999) p. 214.
8 Beer, Thompson, Victorian Women Writers, p. 214.
9 Julia Bush, Women Against the Vote: Female Anti-Suffragism in Britain (United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 2.
10 Mrs Humphry Ward, An Appeal Against Women Suffrage, The Nineteenth Century Magazine (1889).
11 Millicent Fawcett, Women’s Suffrage: A Short History of a Great Movement (London: T.C and E.C Jack, 1912) p. 45.
12 Steinbach, Women in England, 1760-1914, p. 285.
13 Steinbach, Women in England, 1760-1914, p. 296.
14 Bernard A. Cook, Women and War: A Historical Encyclopaedia from Antiquity to the Present (United States: ABC-CLIO, 2006) p. 235.
15 Paula Bartley, Votes for Women 1860-1928 (United Kingdom: Hodder Education, 1998) p. 23. 16 Steinbach, Women in England 1760-1914, p. 316.
17 Marc L. Schwarz, Votes for Women 1860-1928, p. 236.
18 Steinbach, Women in England, 1760-1914, p. 316.
Bibliography
Primary Sources:
Fawcett, Millicent. Women’s Suffrage: A Short History of a Great Movement. London: T.C and E.C Jack, 1912
Ward, Mrs Humphry. An Appeal Against Women Suffrage. The Nineteenth Century Magazine, 1889
Secondary Sources:
Bartley, Paula. Votes for Women 1860-1928. United Kingdom: Hodder Education, 1998
Beer, Gillian and Thompson, Nicola Diane. Victorian Women Writers and the Woman Question. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1999
Bush, Julia. Women Against the Vote: Female Anti-Suffragism in Britain. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2007
Cook, Bernard A. Women and War: A Historical Encyclopaedia from Antiquity to the Present. United States: ABC-CLIO, 2006
Pugh, Martin. The March of the Women: A Revisionist Analysis of the Campaign for Women’s Suffrage, 1866-1914. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2000
Steinbach, Susie. Women in England, 1760-1914: A Social History. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2004
Comments