The Woman Suffrage Movement

The uncensored Case Against char balloting In the azoic twentieth century, Britain was experiencing a potentially innovationary social and cultural change. The charr Suffrage Movement was fighting to procure the right to voting for women. In the homogeneous(p) period, in response to the concept of women voting, Almroth Edward Wright, an English physician, wrote The Unexpurgated Case Against Woman Suffrage.In Wrights book, he refutes the Woman Suffrage Movements right-to-vote claim by arguing that woman suffrage would be venomous to the state due to a womans inability to hold still for the physical force and prestige of the nation, a womans cerebral defects, and defective moral equipment. Furthermore, he illustrates that womens rights activists may actually be hindering women with their demands that would lastly result in women being placed in a far more minus position than they were before acquiring the vote.Wright begins by axiom The primordial argument against givi ng woman the vote is that that vote would not represent physical force. Wright argues that the vote is a symbol of civility, law and order, and imbued with the spirit of a nation to ward by enemies both foreign and domestic. The introduction of a political co-partnership would promising withdraw to a degeneration of the British Empire into a weak and poorly(p) shadow of its former self. The British Empire would in all likelihood exhibit the same symptoms of the latter stages of the Western Roman Empire that competitors would piecemeal steadily all all over time.The result would be that leadership to uphold law and control over British subjects and colonies would crumple leaving the door wide open for each other Imperial power to snatch the defenseless British holdings. As such, entrance of women voters would bring an end to the old and familiar Victorian England and gatekeeper forth a culturally different England that Wright considers a social disaster. It seems Wright be lieves that Britain would hold out a detrimental blow to its prestige in the eyes of their colonies and dominions as well as the world, if English women could vote.This means that women would inhibit the spirits and esprit de corps of the British armed forces and would introduce effeminate elements into the masculine dominated British Empire, turning it from Old Jack into a Mary Ann. In accompaniment to these concerns, Wright illustrates that a womans expert defects ar beca practice of her minds inability to clear solutions with evidence, which results in an unreal picture of the external world. He also argues that a woman is con signifiered by her thought process. This is because a womans mind is linked to emotional reflex response center.Wright further explains that because of this link, women cannot nominate sound judgment and give a critical intellectual summary without being under severe distress. As a result a womans mind gives in to congenial emotional responses that gives them gaiety to which Wright points out, womens minds can serve them sole(prenominal) as a mother fucker to comfort and gratify her with mental thoughts that are not too strenuous. Wright continues by illustrating that women and even intelligent women chip in all sorts of misconceptions about their abilities.Wright argues that women are delusional in believing that they are physically equal to men to any assess. It is quite a grievous mistake that one would believe that women could fare physically strenuous jobs such as coal mining or heavy lifting on a day-to-day basis. Being mentally strain coupled with physical stress, Wright would say that emergencies of the job would be faced continually. It seems that Wright is precept that women overestimate themselves in comparison to men at physically demanding task that they wouldnt be equal to(p) to handle it want term.This would explain why emergencies would happen frequently because accidents would happen weekly if not a day by day basis. For that reason, it is improb adapted to allow women to vote should they also demand to achievement in jobs that they are realistically incapable of performing over a long duration. This information would serve as ammunition for the industry heads and naysayers to argue that the sparing is suffering due to low levels of efficiency and increase expenditure from the authorities to the DOLE to cover all these accidents consequently the whole nation suffers.A third base argument that Wright brings up is that women are equipped with defective morals. He explains that women are incapable of putting aside their own interest in upgrade of the good of the nation and only an uncommonly number of women are able to put aside their personal bias by voting in favor of something that benefits the nation. It seems he is alluding to the fact that women, when put to the vote would most likely vote for positions that would be favorable to anything that has to do her family and w ould consider anything else frivolous.The picture variegated of women voters canvases an extremely selfish and self-absorbed group of people that would not only cause Britains foundation to splinter from blatant corruption further summarily result in execution of egregious acts that might as well kill king and country themselves. Wright continues his critique by saying , There are no good women, but only women who have lived under the influence of good men. Meaning that since women can only use morally defective equipment, women would be congenial creatures that would be easily swayed by their father, husband, or an influential man.And vote for whatever she has been persuaded to vote for which would consequently blow a fuse propositions perhaps even passing legislation that would have otherwise travel flat. Because of this he goes on to blatantly say that women, because of their domestic almost savage morality cannot be trusted with the vote for they would not be able to exer cise diligently with the exception of a select few. Wright takes the Womens Suffrage Movements claim of a right to the vote and presents it in an exaggerated way.He first explains that because there are more than three cardinal women in England, these women experience sexual restrictions causing an inbred sense of antipathy towards the opposite sex, which Wrights explains that the Suffrage Movement takes advantage these women so that they could achieve their ultimate goal of economic independence of women. However, to attain this goal, they want to have allthing from the universities and jobs to e truly political relational positions open to them.He claims that they want a radical feminist revolution that throws the very nostalgic English traditions that have been set in oppose for centuries out like yesterdays garbage. And replace it with an English egalitarian rules of order that exclusively might as well be a Communist or Fascist state. Its interesting that Wright takes ju st the idea of women wanting to vote and morphs the idea in to women wanting to outright dismantle all the mores of society and remove all the distinctions between a man and a woman.But women afterward rebuke this argument by saying that they only want the vote, not a revolution and they are good mothers and wives who are raising the British citizens of tomorrow. Wright subtly carts in again the notion of equality for women. He explains that if the government gives in to the demands of women activist, the government would actually be doing a disservice to women in general. Women would have to compete with men for these highly skilled jobs and would most likely not be able to compete with men, which would increase the wealth bedcover between men and women.Consequently, this would leave women in a very disadvantageous position of being chronically poor and forced to take odds jobs to survive. Furthermore, women would likely lose their financial condense from their husbands and/or f athers because women would now be economic equals to men therefore they must go and find jobs to support themselves. Another problem that Wright points out is that men and women have rarely worked in the same workspace before and with the introduction of equality of work in to mainstream society, the implications of whether or not men and women can work in intimate connecter raises serious questions.He continues to explain that before that even occurs, the intellectual immoralities and limitations of women including their sexual acknowledgment would interrupt intellectual intercourse between men. Interestingly enough, he introduces mingled examples that synergies his argument. For example, when two men are having a stimulating intellectual conversation, an visual aspect of a woman in their proximity would put an end to their discussion. So the hypothesis here is that women being admitted in to male dominated intellectual societies and universities would undoubtedly suppress if n ot bring an end to a demarcation of intellectual growth.As a result, the proposal of bringing man and woman to work together not only is radical, it maybe detrimental to nation. Wrights The Unexpurgated Case Against Woman Suffrage uses a lot of cynical lyric and seemingly logical explanations to refute womens right to vote. At the beginning, Wright stabs the stretch forth right in lungs and expounds why it is the way it is and that the vote of women can and volition cause unnecessary burdens on the state and the very people attempt to hold dear them.However, near the end of his piece, he begins to give a very consoling but backhanded compliment of women. Its painted as if these changes are going to occur, it will undoubtedly cause more rigorousness for women and thats why Wright and these naysayers are fighting so hard to protect these ignorant women from themselves. However, Wrights arguments logical explanations would later succumb to the growing clamor for reform that wou ld eventually culminate in women getting the vote in 1918.