To what extent did the militant campaign for female suffrage change up to 1912
Group 1<br />To what extent did the militant campaign for votes for women change in the years to 1914?<br />
Definition of ‘militant’<br />The definition changed as feminist campaigns took place.<br />Predating the sources:<br />1860s- attending a public meeting and daring to speak<br />Early 1900s- carrying banners and ‘heckling’ ministers and MPs<br />1912- window smashing and arson<br />
Emmeline Pankhurst<br />The first ‘suffragette’, believed to have begun the female suffrage militant movement.<br />Unimpressed by NUWSS, she believed that to progress, women had to “lift themselves out of their subordinate position and campaign”. <br />First ‘militant’ move from her was unfurling a pro-suffrage banner at a meeting and allowing Annie Kenney to ask “will the Liberals give votes for women?” in 1905. <br />
Source 1A - 1908<br />Banners<br />Shows a mass gathering of female suffrage supporters.<br />Organised demonstration, with people from all over the country gathering to show support in a peaceful meeting, both men and women.<br />300,000 attendees- even by today’s measures, it was huge.<br />Large meetings and use of banners would, however, be seen as militant back then.<br />No violence<br />
Source 1B- 1908<br />Standing above men<br />Woman addressing a gathering of men- unusual, as women were not expected to speak out in public.<br />Standing on a chair, above men- showing authority.<br />Not afraid of saying and doing what she wants to.<br />Going against the customs of time by not submitting under the control of men.<br />Men were involved in suffrage- similar to Source A.<br />Refusing tradition and the authority of men<br />
Source 1C- 1910<br />The supporters could be identified amongst other people.<br />Similar to modern political merchandise<br />Showing support via merchandise<br />Group colours that can be used to recognise supporters- still used today (e.g. political party demonstrations). Once again, organised campaign. <br />Not suggesting any violence.<br />
Source 1D- EmmelinePankhurt’s speech1912<br />Materialism above life, hurting people would not bring any results.<br />Suggestion of chaotic action<br />Organised violence<br />First source that mentions violence, both on timeline and the order given.<br />States that property is far dearer than a human life to the government.<br />Calls the suffragettes to commit vandalism to get the government’s attention.<br />Suggests that physical violence towards people is to be avoided, as Emmeline Pankhurst did not see any point in it.<br />
Source 1E (regarding 1912)<br />Planned, and not spontaneous.<br />She is rather calm and confident too. <br />Vandalism by a woman<br />Shows one woman’s actions, suggesting that it was a response to Emmeline’s speech and that she was a supporter.<br />Certainly doesn’t fit in with the ‘angel in the house’ ideal and very shocking behaviour for a woman, particularly back then.<br />The suffragettes had planned their attacks.<br />Only property was targeted- she lets the couple move on before striking as to not hurt them.<br />Property (shops) targeted at random?<br />
Source 1F- 1913<br />Wealthy property<br />Confirms that the suffragettes did not intend to physically hurt other people, or even animals.<br />Property was not targeted at random, like in Source E. They went for a wealthy house of a known opponent, which would be the most effective attack.<br />The attacks carried on months after Emmeline’s speech.<br />Specific target<br />Only property damage<br />
Consequences of Emmeline’s speech<br />Looking at the sources, it seems that Emmeline’s speech in 1912 has brought a change to suffragettes’ behaviour:<br />Sources A, B and C do not mention violence but rather peaceful support.<br />Source D calls for violence.<br />Sources E and F respond by depicting it.<br />The speech had provoked a new form of militancy that was previously unmentioned in sources dating to 1908-10 but can be clearly seen in post-1912. <br />Less than a decade after the unfurling of the first banner, property damaging had become an official part of the campaign.<br />
Change in attitude<br />Although it could be called militant, though mostly peaceful campaign up to 1912 tended to use well-known tactics of the suffrage- public meetings, carrying banners etc.<br />After Emmeline’s speech, things quickly took a violent change, but remained militant as they were still organised. <br />Unseen actions for a woman before (i.e. window smashing and arson), they brought about a radical change in attitude of the campaigners and helped revive the cause. <br />It all happened in a short amount of time. <br />Emmeline’s speech<br />Source A<br />Source B<br />Source D<br />Source E<br />Source F<br />Disruption of the meeting<br />Source C<br />1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914<br />
A particular slide catching your eye?
Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.