Difference between revisions of "328--Week 6 Questions/Comments"

From McClurken Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Deprecated: Optional parameter $attribs declared before required parameter $contents is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Xml.php on line 131
Line 16: Line 16:
  
 
I found the"Partisan Women in the Progressive Era" by Melanie Gustafson very interesting. I didn't know that the idea of partisan vs. non-partisan was actually a gendered idea, nor had I thought about the idea that women's auxiliaries could have been seen as women's lack of dedication to the political arena (pg 250). However, one of the points she makes that stood out to me the most was the fact that women suffragists, specifically, Ida HUsted Harper, felt that women's involvement in partisan activities was actually damaging to the suffrage movement. My line of thinking would say that the involvement in the partisan groups would actually help the movement since it would show the dedication that women had to politics that supposedly the women's auxiliaries did not. -Elizabeth Frank
 
I found the"Partisan Women in the Progressive Era" by Melanie Gustafson very interesting. I didn't know that the idea of partisan vs. non-partisan was actually a gendered idea, nor had I thought about the idea that women's auxiliaries could have been seen as women's lack of dedication to the political arena (pg 250). However, one of the points she makes that stood out to me the most was the fact that women suffragists, specifically, Ida HUsted Harper, felt that women's involvement in partisan activities was actually damaging to the suffrage movement. My line of thinking would say that the involvement in the partisan groups would actually help the movement since it would show the dedication that women had to politics that supposedly the women's auxiliaries did not. -Elizabeth Frank
 +
 +
 +
In "Inez Haynes Irwin Recalls the  Militance of Suffragists in the National Woman's Party, 1921" it is mentioned that after the Senate and President remained silent on the issue of women's suffrage they announced their intention to hold a (peaceful) demonstration yet, when President Wilson heard this, he immediately said he would accept and talk to a delegation of women. I was wondering if he decided to talk to the women because he was afraid that they would meet together and gain support instead of quieting down if the bill didn't pass? And if this was his hope, how could he have expected the women who wanted the vote so badly to simply back down? In other words, did he talk with them with the hope of preventing the very demonstration that they had despite (or maybe because) of this meeting?- Elizabeth Frank

Revision as of 05:07, 19 February 2008