Source D is a newspaper article talking of the campaigns. This is very useful in telling us about the media interest. It tells us that even though some newspapers did not support the vote for women, they still found it interesting and their readers found it interesting. The newspaper is a national newspaper so this tells us that it must have been a major talking point to have been printed in a national newspaper. All these factors are useful in telling us that women’s right to vote was a well known topic. However, it also shows us negative propaganda and as it was published in a national newspaper, this view must be supported by many of the public.
But my main point is to show that the campaigns DID make the right for women a well-known subject and a major talking point among the British public.
However, the campaigns were not able to achieve the vote for women alone. This is because they had some disadvantages:
By 1914 many people were against the Suffragettes and their campaigns because of their violent methods. Also, source D shows us how the public were mixed up between the Suffragettes and Suffragists and did not realise that only one group were violent, so they had a negative view on BOTH groups. This is not useful for the campaigns as the violence created a negative image on the women in general and so the right for women to vote became less and less likely. Also, despite all the campaigns women had not managed to convince some men and women. This may be because of their violence and also the fact that ALL women were banned from art galleries and museums because of their violence which created a negative image of all women. The banning and the violence created a bad impression from the public and even newspapers that supported the vote for women felt obliged to condemn their actions.
My evidence to prove that the campaigns had drawbacks and was creating negative publicity are sources G and F; source G tells us that most women did not feel that they needed the vote and what they actually wanted was “protection against too much childbirth, and a secure and comfortable home.” A point to consider is the fact that it shows that the suffrage campaigns were NOT the most successful women’s organisations. It was actually the mothers union who campaigned for protection, motherhood etc. this is useful in telling us that no matter how hard the suffrage’s were trying to gain the support of the public, many WOMEN were not supporting them in the first place. So how were they to gain the right for women when most women did not even feel it was important? This factor is a definite drawback of the campaigns.
However, as this source is judging attitudes and feelings, is it entirely reliable? The historian would have to go on anecdotal evidence which would be from one person or diaries etc. so it would not be reliable in telling all women’s feelings but maybe a few. The historian may have generalised attitudes. Also, diaries and other primary sources like this can be misleading and biased, which would make this source unreliable.
On the other hand, other factors make it very reliable; the fact that it is written by a professional who will have done detailed research and looked at many primary sources make it reliable and therefore useful in telling us about the campaign’s disadvantages. The historian is also free to research all sources. He also has a duty, as a historian, to address all the evidence impartially. Furthermore, although this source is mainly from anecdotal evidence, it includes a fact: that in numerical terms the Mother’s Union was the more successful women’s organisation. We can trust this to be quite reliable as it from a professional historian. This tells us that although the campaigns gained publicity it still did not manage to convince some women.
Source F is telling us the views of a conservative leader who thinks that women do not have the experience to vote, and that women have problems in the way they have been educated, their strength and their duties. This is telling us that the campaigns were not useful in persuading some people that women deserve the right to vote. This source also tells us that quite a lot of people must have felt this way as it is from a Conservative LEADER, this would be quite an important person and would be representing his party and his public’s view. This means that quite a lot of people felt this way as Curzon was the leader of the second biggest political party. Still, not all people felt this way. This source is quite reliable as it is a speech from an important person who would have to be reflecting his party’s and his public’s views.
So we can see that although the campaigns gained women publicity, it didn’t gain ALL support of the people. Many (both men and women) had still not been persuaded that women should gain the right to vote and as this was the campaigns main objective, it meant that they were not totally successful.
The war DID play a large part in helping to gain women the vote, the main reason being that it removed all bad publicity against women. It showed those who were still unconvinced that women WERE responsible and reliable. It showed that women were strong, caring and patriotic. It also helped to remove all arguments AGAINST women: many men said women could not do what the man did, they weren’t strong enough and they weren’t clever enough. But during the war women were taking over the jobs of the men in the factories who had left for war. From my own knowledge I know that an estimated 2 million women replaced men in employment.
They also joined the military war effort and created the ‘women’s royal air force’ etc. this showed that women were just as strong as men. Also, many young women took on dangerous jobs in chemical factories. This also helped in showing how women were just as strong as men.
By dropping their campaigns when the war started and immediately helping in the war effort, the suffrages showed their patriotism and responsibility to the cynics. The women showed men that without them they could still carry on and become self sufficient.
Also, David Lloyd George strongly supported women’s rights to work etc during the war. This meant that he though they were capable and the public would then support his views.
All these factors help to turn all the negative publicity into positive and meant that those who disagreed with women’s right to vote did not have much argument left as the women had proved them wrong.
My evidence to prove that the war helped to gain women the vote is sources H and J; source H is the cover of a magazine which is probably government propaganda. It may be aimed at the workers to show encouragement and for their morale. The picture shows man and woman as equal as they are together, holding the British flag, this is showing equality. The male is a soldier, this shows that the picture is trying to tell us that women are just as equal to soldiers. It also tell us how the government wanted the public to think, they are trying to show to women that THEY think that women and men are alike in status, and they are trying to show how women SHOULD be seen. This is very positive towards the women and shows how the women had showed their abilities to the government and they were now thought of positively. On the other hand, as I said it may just be to boost the morale of the women and to show them that the government are supporting them. However, this is still showing a positive attitude towards women. It shows that the government clearly needed them to help in the war effort and cared about the women morale.
Source J is from a speech made by former Prime Minister Asquith. He is saying that the war could not have been won without the women. He has changed his mind. Before the war he was against the vote for women and now he ‘will now find it impossible to withhold from women the power and the right of making their voices heard.’ I think that this source is quite reliable as Herbert Asquith is not in power and would not feel obliged to please his people and would therefore say his true feelings. However, as most of the government now supported the right for women to vote he may decide to simply change his mind as everyone else had. This makes it unreliable but on the whole it is a positive source which clearly indicates that because of the actions of women during the war he had changed his mind and would now give them the right to vote. This may also reflect how others felt as Asquith was an important figure and from my own knowledge I do know that SOME people changed their attitude towards the women due to there behaviour during the war.
Despite all the positive attitudes it could be argued that the role of the war was limited and although it helped gain some positive attitudes towards women it still did not persuade all people that women should be given the right to vote. I also think there were other factors which helped gain women the vote.
David Lloyd George was sympathetic towards the women and supported their campaign. This meant that people would also eventually support the campaign too, as he was a big figure of power and he would be persuasive in helping to gain women the vote. It also meant that people of his political party would be supporting votes for women too. The fact that Lloyd George was supporting the votes for women would make it a talking point and become popular too.
Another point to consider is that when women DID eventually get the vote is was given to women over 30. Younger women did not get the vote when in fact THEY were the ones who had taken on the dangerous jobs in munition factories etc. This proves that there may be other factors which helped to gain women the vote as if the war had been the main reason, women under 30 would have got the vote since they helped in the war effort the most.
My evidence to prove that the war had its limits in gaining women the right to vote is source I. source I says that attitudes to women remained negative and that they were victims of hostility and sabotage. This shows that some people still had negative attitudes to women and did not believe they had the ability to work. It shows that women were treated with hostility. This is useful in telling us that it was not only the war which gained women the vote as there were STILL negative attitudes during the war. This source is quite reliable as it is from a professional historian who is probably an expert and will have done his research thoroughly and objectively. Also, he is writing well after the time so his attitude should be neutral. I know that this source is reliable as from my own knowledge I know that although the attitudes to women turned positive there were still some which were negative. However, the source says that as women were able to take on the men’s jobs, it meant that men were vulnerable to conscription. This may be the REASON for the hostility – the men did not like the fact that women had the ability to do what they did and they would have to go to war. Also, we have only been given a small piece from a book, we do not know if there may be a mention of positive attitudes towards women and this makes it unreliable. But source I’s main view is that although there was SOME positive attitudes ‘in many instances, it remained negative’
To conclude I can say that although the war helped women gain the vote it was NOT the main reason to why women gained the vote. It played A part in gaining women the vote and without it the vote may not have been gained or until much later. Without the war the campaigns would have remained under negative views and the Suffragettes would have continued to take out their frustrations by violence. But without the campaigns the women’s help during the war would not have been recognised and easily forgotten. It WAS recognised as there was attention of the public and media on women because of the campaigns. This is why the campaigns and the war go hand in hand.
