The leaders if these two societies were also completely different in how they thought the problem of women being second class citizens should be tackled; on one hand Emmeline Pankhurst the head of the WSPU felt that negotiation tactics of the NUWSS were pointless and had a lack of success, she felt that other methods should be used for example civil disobedience (shouting out during government officials speeches), violence and damaging of government officials property,
Christian Lunn 2 of 5
Emmeline Pankhurst along with her two daughters advertised the “Deeds, Not Words” feeling around the U.K. which she felt would help in the struggle for the vote.
On the other hand there was Millicent Fawcett the leader of NUWSS who believed in a peaceful solution to the problem under her leadership the NUWSS held public meetings, organised petitions, wrote letters to politicians, publicized newspapers and other peaceful means of protest.
Millicent Fawcett also believed that it was important the NUWSS campaigned for a wide variety of causes. Millicent also believed that the WSPU’s methods of voting would cause distrust from the government officials and make the problem even worse.
Both leaders of the two main women suffrage societies were intelligent and strong minded and had their own opinions. However Emmeline Pankhurst believed that women were superior so they should fight. But Fawcett believed that they should work for the common cause of humanity. She also believed that women were superior but violence was not a superior way to show it.
There were also obvious differences in the tactics of the two groups on one hand the WSPU used radical, violent methods. They’d do anything to get across their views, it was believed Davison threw herself in front of a moving horse at the Derby, and there were often reports of policemen being attacked. One very violent and risky protest was when the suffragettes marched into Downing Street and began throwing small stones through the windows of the Prime Minister’s house.
As a result of this demonstration, twenty seven women were arrested and sent to Holloway prison. Another major attack was when a member of the WSPU attacked Churchill. Winston Churchill, who had just alighted from a railway carriage, was attacked by a suffragette wielding a riding- switch.
Theresa Garnett, a member of WSPU, broke through the cordon of private detectives surrounding Churchill, gripped his coat and hit him in the face with her hand. For a moment Churchill grappled with her as she shouted “Take that, you brute! You brute” I will show you what English women can do” Charged with assaulting Churchill with a whip, she said, “Has it hurt him much?”
Christian Lunn 3 of 5
So as you can see this group was not going to give up until they got what they wanted “A women dominated UK” no matter what the price. On the other hand the NUWSS believed in peaceful negotiation and marches, protests and petitions.
The NUWSS was a law abiding group who sought after the trust and support of high ranking political figures and the government itself to promote women’s rights within the U.K. this group was also not going to give up till they got what they wanted. “The vote for equal rights to men” but they were patient and were willing to wait and saw that it would be a long process before women would be completely equal to men.
Both groups developed from what they were due to new leaders or new ideas. However these new ideas also made the two groups even more different to each other and instead of making a united U.K. women were becoming divided in their beliefs. Some ideas of the WSPU were to make the whole of WSPU just for women, originally both women suffrage groups allowed men to join, they especially allowed working men who had some of the same struggles as women and men who felt strongly for women’s rights to join. However now the Pankhurst’s felt that the WSPU. Was becoming 50% men and 50% women group.
Which defeats the objective of women fighting for women’s votes and she believed that this was a sex war against men? So she decided it would be purely women’s society.
Other ideas were drastic. They expelled law abiding women because the WSPU members wanted to be more violent which resulted in attacks, vandalism and destroying property. Another idea of the WSPU was to move location from Manchester to London. This was a very good move, their income increased dramatically because of the upper class women from London joining and putting lots of money into WSPU. On the other hand the NUWSS believed working in the common cause of humanity. They didn’t result in violence because they thought they were better than men, they decided that women should make a decision NUWSS or WSPU because at the beginning women were allowed in both. But because NUWSS disagreed with the WSPU’s methods they thought it morally right that they should make a decision.
Christian Lunn 4 of 5
Many of the women chose NUWSS because they believed that the violence had gone too far also the women who were thrown out of the WSPU joined the NUWSS. Another idea of the NUWSS was to ally with working class women. Because some women in the NUWSS joined the Labour Party as they wanted to keep their numbers up.
The main idea of both groups was to have women’s votes however WSPU felt women’s votes just wasn’t enough.
Membership of both of the groups was also different to become a member of the NUWSS all you had to do was sign a form to say you agree with women’s rights to vote, and there was no charge which attracted working class women who were on low wages and didn’t have a lot of money.
It doesn’t say if the WSPU membership was free. But I’d take a guess it wasn’t. When WSPU moved to London it says that their income increased. This could have only been due to membership prices or sponsors.
To conclude the NUWSS had the best ways of tackling the problem for everyone involved. It played safe and didn’t resort to extreme measures. The NUWSS slowly but surely persuaded government officials that Women being second class citizens and property of men is a thing of the past.
They gained the trust of men in parliament and reached the goal. However the WSPU did gain public attention and made officials think twice before saying “NO” but with a price; property was damaged and many members left because of the increase of violence.
WSPU carried on with a few members left but eventually died out in 1914 with many of the leaders in jail, or of very poor health or in exile. A few leaders escaped abroad to flee from the police and organized WSPU campaigns abroad.
So NUWSS used the best method of tackling the problem. Because it had no consequences and achieved best results.
Christian Lunn 5 of 5
In conclusion to this essay, I feel that both groups were different because of the two different leaders of the two groups and their strong opinions. On one hand there was Fawcett who led the suffragists, who believed in peaceful protests and negotiation because she wanted to prove that women were sophisticated and were worthy of the vote. Fawcett believed that the suffragette’s radical methods were spoiling the chances of getting the vote; she thought that the use of violent and radical methods was showing the men that we can’t be trusted and that the country would be a shambles if the women had the vote. On the other hand Emmiline Pankhurst believed that her radical methods were gaining publicity and forcing the government to take notice and give them the vote. Emmiline also felt that Fawcett’s methods weren’t making an impact and that if women wanted the vote they had to show they were strong and not giving up. So, both methods of the two women suffrage groups were completely different however I believe that both groups contributed to women gaining the vote.
Christian Lunn 11H
Year 11
History coursework 2
St John Fishers Catholic High School
