In the essay In Times Like These, Canadian suffragette, Nellie McLung focuses on the concept of equality. She argues that women deserve to have rights equal to those of men in all cases. This does not exclude politics. She states If politics are to corrupt for women than they are to corrupt for men for men and women are indissolubly joined for good or ill. (McLung, 2003). McLung appears to argue against the Victorian Cult of Demesticity that relegated women to the home, and assumed that because women were naturally good and thus, should not be exposed to politics, even so much as the minimal exposure that they would receive, participating in voting as an equal citizen of the nation.
McLung (2003) argues that women are eminently suitable for politics, in that they have historically spent their lives cleaning up after others. Essentially, if a woman is suited to cleaning up her husbands mess, than she is suited to cleaning up the mess that men have made of government. McLung (2003) also proposes that the argument that women should not be granted the vote if they are married and will vote with their husbands is false. The main reason behind this is that this is not a negative thing. McLung argues that men tend to marry women who share their views on current events and that it would not necessarily be a bad thing to double the votes of married men as they are the core of what good honest society is based upon. Finally, McLung (2003) argues that the idea that women would not vote if granted suffrage is blatantly false. She points out that if women are granted to vote, and choose not to, the male dominated society of the time would lose nothing, but, if they did choose to vote, society would only gain by the experience.
McLung (2003) also dissects the pedestal theory that makes it appear that men are little more than adoring servants worshipping women for their virtues. She states that, pedestals are no place for a woman that is truly virtuous, because truly virtuous women wish to change the things that they see as being wrong with the world. McLung (2003) also argues that the pedestal theory is one more way of keeping women oppressed and in subordinate positions.
McLung (2003) essentially takes apart every argument against suffrage that was proposed at the time, and dissects it in order to demonstrate the falsity of the arguments. She also was writing this argument intending it as a diatribe against the anti-Suffragist Movement that was working to deny women the vote. The central purpose of this argument is to persuade people that women did deserve that vote. That they were equal to ment, and would use the right to vote in no more, or no less of a responsible manner than men had done.
McLungs final argument has to do with the claim that wishing to have the same political rights as men, is not feminine by stating that men and women hold many of the same virtues to be dear, such as honesty and loyalty, and to claim that wishing to participate fully in activities that demonstrate these virtues such as voting makes a woman unfeminin is to also claim that they make men out to be effiminate.
This argument was published during a time in which the Womens Suffrage Movement was entering its last stages. Canadian women would succeed in the battle to gain voting rights in 1918 and women in the United States would gain the right in 1920. This essay was one of the final volleys in that battle. McLungs essay offers many points that appear to have the purpose of persuading those who stood against womens voting rights, that the Suffragettes were in the right on this matter.
McLungs argument is very persuasive. She offers clear evidence that all is not as those those in the Anti-Suffragist Movment would have people believe. She makes it evident that women are no more likely to be irresponsible voters than men, and that giving women the vote could have positive benefits for society. McLung does an admirable job of persuading the reader that giving women the right to vote could not possibly have any damaging effects on society whatsoever.
McLungs (2003) position can also be used to make the position of the Canadian Suffragettes clear to the common reader. While the Suffragette Movement frequently made the news in the early part of the 20th century the news was often biased against the Suffragettes. McLungs arguments presented a powerful picture of why women wanted the right to vote, and why women felt that their abilities in the political arena were equal to those of men. These arguments also demonstrte the philosophy behind the Suffrage Movement
This was a philosophy that declared that women had the the right to equal consideration under the law and that they deserved the right to vote as much as mean did.
It can be concluded, that McLung (2003) stages a persuasive argument on the Suffrage Movement and on the right of women to vote. It is difficult to say how people responded to this argument. However McLungs argument is clearly stated, and simply worded, so it seems likely that people would have responded in a positive manner to this work.
McLung (2003) argues that women are eminently suitable for politics, in that they have historically spent their lives cleaning up after others. Essentially, if a woman is suited to cleaning up her husbands mess, than she is suited to cleaning up the mess that men have made of government. McLung (2003) also proposes that the argument that women should not be granted the vote if they are married and will vote with their husbands is false. The main reason behind this is that this is not a negative thing. McLung argues that men tend to marry women who share their views on current events and that it would not necessarily be a bad thing to double the votes of married men as they are the core of what good honest society is based upon. Finally, McLung (2003) argues that the idea that women would not vote if granted suffrage is blatantly false. She points out that if women are granted to vote, and choose not to, the male dominated society of the time would lose nothing, but, if they did choose to vote, society would only gain by the experience.
McLung (2003) also dissects the pedestal theory that makes it appear that men are little more than adoring servants worshipping women for their virtues. She states that, pedestals are no place for a woman that is truly virtuous, because truly virtuous women wish to change the things that they see as being wrong with the world. McLung (2003) also argues that the pedestal theory is one more way of keeping women oppressed and in subordinate positions.
McLung (2003) essentially takes apart every argument against suffrage that was proposed at the time, and dissects it in order to demonstrate the falsity of the arguments. She also was writing this argument intending it as a diatribe against the anti-Suffragist Movement that was working to deny women the vote. The central purpose of this argument is to persuade people that women did deserve that vote. That they were equal to ment, and would use the right to vote in no more, or no less of a responsible manner than men had done.
McLungs final argument has to do with the claim that wishing to have the same political rights as men, is not feminine by stating that men and women hold many of the same virtues to be dear, such as honesty and loyalty, and to claim that wishing to participate fully in activities that demonstrate these virtues such as voting makes a woman unfeminin is to also claim that they make men out to be effiminate.
This argument was published during a time in which the Womens Suffrage Movement was entering its last stages. Canadian women would succeed in the battle to gain voting rights in 1918 and women in the United States would gain the right in 1920. This essay was one of the final volleys in that battle. McLungs essay offers many points that appear to have the purpose of persuading those who stood against womens voting rights, that the Suffragettes were in the right on this matter.
McLungs argument is very persuasive. She offers clear evidence that all is not as those those in the Anti-Suffragist Movment would have people believe. She makes it evident that women are no more likely to be irresponsible voters than men, and that giving women the vote could have positive benefits for society. McLung does an admirable job of persuading the reader that giving women the right to vote could not possibly have any damaging effects on society whatsoever.
McLungs (2003) position can also be used to make the position of the Canadian Suffragettes clear to the common reader. While the Suffragette Movement frequently made the news in the early part of the 20th century the news was often biased against the Suffragettes. McLungs arguments presented a powerful picture of why women wanted the right to vote, and why women felt that their abilities in the political arena were equal to those of men. These arguments also demonstrte the philosophy behind the Suffrage Movement
This was a philosophy that declared that women had the the right to equal consideration under the law and that they deserved the right to vote as much as mean did.
It can be concluded, that McLung (2003) stages a persuasive argument on the Suffrage Movement and on the right of women to vote. It is difficult to say how people responded to this argument. However McLungs argument is clearly stated, and simply worded, so it seems likely that people would have responded in a positive manner to this work.
No comments:
Post a Comment