- Created by: Shaikh
- Created on: 26-02-12 18:57
Ways women had equality and ways they were 2nd cla
- Own thier own property.
- Didn't have to live in marriage house
- Had 4 weeks of work after child was born
- If you owned a property could vote afte a taking a gender qualification
2nd class citizens:
- No vote
- All male jobs in Parliment
- Couldn't do all jobs
- Gender Qualification
Women deserve the vote:
- Single or Widowed women have the same responsibility as men.
- Decisions Parliment make, effect women and so they should have a say in decisions and choosing the MP.
- Have had more oppurtunities in jobs the vote should be next.
- Two heads better than one (male and female).
- Women pay taxes, like men.
- Should be able to influence how the taxes they pay are spent.
- Vote in local elections, some serve on local committees (law board/education committees) Shows tthey can be trusted and are proffesional.
- Un-educated males vote, whilst educated and respected women can't.
- Have special skills/expertise and can help on issues such as education and the home, have a range.
- Spiritual spine of the nation.
Women shouldn't vote:
- Too emotional to be trusted.
- Middle class women not interete din laws for the working class.
- Two seperate spheres: Men - Poltical and worldley, Women - Homemakers and mothers.
- Women will become hateful, heartless, disgusting human beings.
- Stronger sex (males) must protect weaker sex (females).
- Only the undesirables will have children as respectable women will develop careers and neglect families.
- Will have to give vote to layabouts and riff-raff.
- More important concerns.
- Women didn't fight in the war so shouldn't decide if the country goes to war.
- Women are pure and so should be protected.
- Influenced when MP John Stuart Mill suggested giving votes to women(1867/73).
- Founded by Miss Milicant Fawcett in 1897, 500 local branches of National Union of Womans Suffarage Societies.
- Kept it public, argued the case with: MPs, Leaflets, Petitions and organised meetings.
- Not violent, but calm and collected.
- Like a glacier "Slow, but unstoppable."
- 1903 - Emmeline Pankhurst founded a new campaign organisation called Womans Social and Political Union.
- More radical and Militant.
- Disrupted meetings and harrassed ministers.
- Did hunger strikes, chained themselves to railings, throwed stones through windows, 'rushed' the house of Commons.
Reactions or thoughts about Suffragettes by Suffra
- Some Suffragists admired bravery.
- Mrs Fawcett held a banquet when some Suffragettes were first released.
- As the protests and direct action became more violent the Suffragists felt you couldn't get the Democratic vote the Un-Democratic way.
- Militancy would also put MPs off voting for womens rights/votes.
- Mrs Fawcett felt it was the inept MPs fault that militancy be created.
- (suffragettes) Edith New made speeches in Downing St. she also chained herself to the railings so she coudn't be moved.
- (suffragists) Threw stones at No. 10 Downing street.
- (suffragists) Mrs Pankhurst, her daughter and 'General ' Flora Drummond went to jail as they persuaded a crowd to 'rush' the House of Commons.
Derby 1913: Emily Davison
- Emily Davison (a militant suffragette) attempted to attach a banner to the King's horse during the derby horse race, on 8th June 1913, this failed and she was stamped to death by the horse.There are many different interpretations to what happened on that day, some see her as dieing for her cause and others she her as foolish.
Realiability in Sources:
- Every source is produced for a reason.This purpose could be to educate, persuade, frighten or mislead.
- All sources have a producer. If you know something about the author you can ask yourself 'are they saying exactly what we expect them to in this situation.' If not they're not speaking in self interest, suggests source is more reliable than it would've been.
Realiability in Sources (cont.):
- Look at the centent of the source for clues on it's reliability. Does your background knowledge agree with what's in the source,if it does or doesn't agree you should state it and back that up with specific examples.
- The way which a source is written can hint at the reliability, if it is hurtful, sarcastic, bitter or dramatic is one which could lack the proper perspective, a dry, factual account or opinions could be more interesting to read, but could be more truthful.
Realiability in Sources (cont.):
Make sure that you acknowledge that even if sources are one-sedied account of an event they are still higley useful and should not be classed as useless. Factually unreliable sources give historians an insight into the opinions and attitudes of the people involved.