This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/06/the-role-of-violence-in-winning-votes-for-women-and-men
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| The role of violence in winning votes for women (and men) | The role of violence in winning votes for women (and men) |
| (11 days later) | |
| Reminding us of the suffragettes’ militant campaign of window-smashing and rock-throwing, Emily Thornberry asks “how far are you willing to go” to achieve political success (We owe it to the suffragettes to keep fighting for women, 5 February). Good question. It’s conveniently forgotten – even by their biggest admirers – that the suffragette movement is the only mass movement in British history since the Luddites to espouse violence as both a legitimate and necessary tactic. It was this preparedness not to compromise or play by the rules that kept the issue of women’s suffrage so high up the agenda and, arguably, it was only the outbreak of world war that delayed a successful conclusion. | Reminding us of the suffragettes’ militant campaign of window-smashing and rock-throwing, Emily Thornberry asks “how far are you willing to go” to achieve political success (We owe it to the suffragettes to keep fighting for women, 5 February). Good question. It’s conveniently forgotten – even by their biggest admirers – that the suffragette movement is the only mass movement in British history since the Luddites to espouse violence as both a legitimate and necessary tactic. It was this preparedness not to compromise or play by the rules that kept the issue of women’s suffrage so high up the agenda and, arguably, it was only the outbreak of world war that delayed a successful conclusion. |
| Is it fair to suggest that the largely non-violent (and male-dominated?) movements of the last 200 hundred years, from the Chartists and the 1926 general strike to the trade union struggles of the 70s and 80s, might have been more likely to succeed had they adopted some of the suffragettes’ determination, bravery even, and shed their law-abiding timidity? To answer the call of the poet Shelley, to “Rise like lions after slumber / In unvanquishable number”, sometimes a few windows have to get broken.Andy de la TourLondon | Is it fair to suggest that the largely non-violent (and male-dominated?) movements of the last 200 hundred years, from the Chartists and the 1926 general strike to the trade union struggles of the 70s and 80s, might have been more likely to succeed had they adopted some of the suffragettes’ determination, bravery even, and shed their law-abiding timidity? To answer the call of the poet Shelley, to “Rise like lions after slumber / In unvanquishable number”, sometimes a few windows have to get broken.Andy de la TourLondon |
| • Rachel Holmes’s article (Which branch of feminism got women the vote? We all did, 6 February) demonstrates a sentimental view of the suffragettes and a consequent failure to understand why the more measured, constitutionalist approach of Mrs Fawcett and the NUWSS was so decisive in getting women over 30 the vote in 1918. | • Rachel Holmes’s article (Which branch of feminism got women the vote? We all did, 6 February) demonstrates a sentimental view of the suffragettes and a consequent failure to understand why the more measured, constitutionalist approach of Mrs Fawcett and the NUWSS was so decisive in getting women over 30 the vote in 1918. |
| It is simply untrue to state that the suffragettes only targeted property, not people. That may have been true of the leadership, but certainly not of the rank and file membership. In one year alone, 1914, shortly before Mrs Pankhurst disbanded the WSPU’s campaign to concentrate on the war effort, there were several incidents of suffragette violence against individuals: Lord Weardale was attacked with a horsewhip by Mary Lindsay, who mistook him for Asquith, the prime minister; a bomb on a Blackpool train badly burned a train guard. Meanwhile there were widespread reports of suffragettes practising with revolvers on shooting ranges around London. Had war not broken out in 1914, there can be little doubt that suffragette violence against individuals would have intensified still further.Mark BostridgeLondon | It is simply untrue to state that the suffragettes only targeted property, not people. That may have been true of the leadership, but certainly not of the rank and file membership. In one year alone, 1914, shortly before Mrs Pankhurst disbanded the WSPU’s campaign to concentrate on the war effort, there were several incidents of suffragette violence against individuals: Lord Weardale was attacked with a horsewhip by Mary Lindsay, who mistook him for Asquith, the prime minister; a bomb on a Blackpool train badly burned a train guard. Meanwhile there were widespread reports of suffragettes practising with revolvers on shooting ranges around London. Had war not broken out in 1914, there can be little doubt that suffragette violence against individuals would have intensified still further.Mark BostridgeLondon |
| • May there be much rejoicing to see Millicent Fawcett commemorated as a women’s suffrage leader (Fawcett portrait goes on show at Tate, 3 February)! Among other reasons for remembering her are her commitment to the education of young women (especially through her part in founding Newnham College, Cambridge) and in the improvement of social conditions in London through her very active role in its county council. For her, these causes were inseparable. She followed EM Forster’s advice: only connect.Jinty NelsonLondon | • May there be much rejoicing to see Millicent Fawcett commemorated as a women’s suffrage leader (Fawcett portrait goes on show at Tate, 3 February)! Among other reasons for remembering her are her commitment to the education of young women (especially through her part in founding Newnham College, Cambridge) and in the improvement of social conditions in London through her very active role in its county council. For her, these causes were inseparable. She followed EM Forster’s advice: only connect.Jinty NelsonLondon |
| • Without getting all Daily Mail about it, the 1918 act for the first time recognised the principle of universal suffrage: votes not based on property qualifications. It didn’t give the vote to all women, but it represented the culmination of the movement to finally allow working men the vote – and should be remembered for this, too.Mike GavinLondon | • Without getting all Daily Mail about it, the 1918 act for the first time recognised the principle of universal suffrage: votes not based on property qualifications. It didn’t give the vote to all women, but it represented the culmination of the movement to finally allow working men the vote – and should be remembered for this, too.Mike GavinLondon |
| • It is right and proper that we celebrate the extraordinary achievements of the suffrage movement in 1918, but there is still much to be done. To help speed the final stages and in the spirit of the movement, I suggest that we again adjust the age at which UK citizens can vote. For women it would be lowered to 16 years; for men raised to 30. Naturally the changes would only be for 10 years in the first instance.Joe CollierRichmond, Surrey | • It is right and proper that we celebrate the extraordinary achievements of the suffrage movement in 1918, but there is still much to be done. To help speed the final stages and in the spirit of the movement, I suggest that we again adjust the age at which UK citizens can vote. For women it would be lowered to 16 years; for men raised to 30. Naturally the changes would only be for 10 years in the first instance.Joe CollierRichmond, Surrey |
| • How utterly amazing! On a day that purports to celebrate 100 years of women’s suffrage (6 February), no women had birthdays in the Guardian! Everybody keeps asking “how far have we got?” Well, that kind of sums it up.Mary RouthHelensburgh, Argyll and Bute | • How utterly amazing! On a day that purports to celebrate 100 years of women’s suffrage (6 February), no women had birthdays in the Guardian! Everybody keeps asking “how far have we got?” Well, that kind of sums it up.Mary RouthHelensburgh, Argyll and Bute |
| • Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com | • Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com |
| • Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters | • Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters |
| Women's suffrage | Women's suffrage |
| Feminism | Feminism |
| Activism | Activism |
| Protest | Protest |
| Emmeline Pankhurst | Emmeline Pankhurst |
| Women | Women |
| letters | letters |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |