Today is the anniversary of the 34th American presidential election. The year was 1920; it was the first presidential election in which women were allowed their own votes. This seems like a good day to post a memento from the political battle over women’s suffrage, the right to vote and run for political office.
The fight for suffrage took decades and women were on both sides of the issue. The document below is a copy of an argument against women’s suffrage — Some Reasons Why We Oppose Votes for Women — printed in 1894. The National Association Opposed to Women’s Suffrage was led by Josephine Dodge. (Open and click “full size” to read.)
Alice Duer Miller was on the other side of the fight. In 1915, she wrote and circulated a satirical response titled Why We Oppose Votes for Men. Drawing on parallel logic, she made a case for why it was men, not women, who shouldn’t be voting. (Click for a larger copy.)
1. Because man’s place is in the army.
2. Because no really manly man wants to settle any question otherwise than by fighting about it.
3. Because if men should adopt peacable methods women will no longer look up to them.
4. Because men will lose their charm if they step out of their natural sphere and interest themselves in other matters than feats of arms, uniforms and drums.
5. Because men are too emotional to vote. Their conduct at baseball games and political conventions shows this, while their innate tendency to appeal to force renders them particularly unfit for the task of government.
It helps to have a sense of humor.
Happy anniversary of the first gender inclusive American presidential election everyone.
Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.
Comments 12
Bill R — November 2, 2014
Combined, these lists serve to highlight the foolishness in disenfranchising others to vote. Unfortunately, the Supreme Clowns don't seem to get it even at this late date...
fss — November 2, 2014
I like the 4th and 7th reasons in Oppose Votes for Women: essentially saying voting is useless, unrepresentative and corrupt anyway, so why bother doing it any more than we already do.
Bob v — November 2, 2014
Voting fraud is the same as not being able to vote at all, voting loses its intended affect.
Arcrawfo — November 2, 2014
Oh what a huge burden it is on tax payers, to have to pay for votes to be organised...
What.
FYouMudFlaps — November 2, 2014
That satire is brilliant! Of course, even 100 years later, it isn't applied since men are the default and thus not othered.
Vintage Feminism: “Why We Oppose Votes for Men” — November 3, 2014
[…] first presidential election in which American women were allowed to vote. In honor of the occasion, Sociological Images flagged this satirical pamphlet created by suffragette Alice Duer Miller in […]
lmba03 — November 3, 2014
I don't understand the timeline on the first one. Women got the right to vote in Colorado in the state wide referendum of 1893. It explicitly says a test of 17 years in Colorado. So 1894 (first election Colorado women could vote) + 17 would make it 1910 or 1911 not 1894. So did the writers of the Oppose Votes for Women not have their dates straight or maybe they meant 17 months? It doesn't work for Wyoming either which granted women the vote in 1869 as a territory and were admitted as a state in 1890.
Suffragist Satire | ilostmyprayerhanky — November 3, 2014
[…] http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2014/11/02/suffragist-satire-1915/ […]
The Shorties Man – Bridget Magnus and the World as Seen from 4'11" — November 4, 2014
[…] With Ballots: scary! Be sure to vote, […]
The Case Against Male Suffrage – gasspoll.us — November 4, 2014
[…] From today’s perspective, the pamphlet’s logic is absurd. And to many at the time, as well, women opposing their own enfranchisement was ripe for the mocking. Which was why, in 1915, the suffragette Alice Duer Miller wrote a response to it. She called her own treatise “Why We Oppose Votes for Men.” […]
Democracy – Out of Context — August 13, 2018
[…] Background: https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2014/11/02/suffragist-satire-1915/ […]
History Teacher — January 15, 2021
@imba03
I personally believe that the document is dated incorrectly. The document was published by the National Association Opposed to Women's Suffrage which was not founded until 1911. If the document was then published in 1911 it fits nicely with the timeline. I think the error therefore is not in the document but in the citation from the Library of Congress which dates the document. Further the 1911 date fits much better with the satirical response which was published in 1915. Why would write a satirical response to something which had been published 21 years pryor?