1) In source A I can clearly see that it is a poster aimed at getting women the vote. It shows how ridiculous and illogical the system was. It shows that drunk men still get the vote. They can’t understand politics. It shows that “lunatic” men still get the vote. They don’t even know what day of the week it is let alone who to vote for. Even though women who are “doctors” and “teachers” can’t vote. They are smart people. They can understand politics. Especially when a woman is a “mayor” she still can’t vote, even though she can run a town. This poster clearly shows that the system is ludicrous, it doesn’t make sense.
Decent people aren’t rewarded. In judgement I would say that this is a good poster for the campaign of women’s rights. It clearly shows that even though a woman understands and deserves the right to vote, they don’t get it. Even though pimps, convicts and lunatic men still get the vote. It is a very effective poster. If I saw this poster back then, it would change my mind about women’s suffrage for the better. 2) In some ways source B agrees with source C but in other ways it doesn’t, source C is clearly against the suffragettes. It describes them as “the shrieking sisters” and it shows that it is true in the picture.
It shows that they are ugly, unladylike and out of control. Source B agrees with this. The title of the book where the source is from is “Women or Suffragette”. It clearly agrees that the suffragettes are not ladylike. It also agrees that suffragettes “shrilled”. It says that women should “make voters, rather than be voters”. This is where the sources start to differ. This saying shows that source B is completely against all women getting the vote. Source C-however shows a suffragist stopping a suffragette from campaigning. She is described as a “sensible woman” she is lady like and respectable.
Source C is respectful to the suffragists. It could even be a piece of suffragist propaganda. In judgement I would say that in some-ways-source B supports that evidence of-source C but in other ways it doesn’t. Both sources are definitely against suffragettes. They say that they are “shrieking, irresponsible and unlady like”. Source B -says “women or -suffragette”. -They -djffer in that source B is-against all women getting the vote, however source C gives good-light to the suffragist campaign. It is a good chance that it is suffragist propaganda. ) would use both sources but would treat source C with a little more caution.
I would use them together to get the big picture. 3) Before the outbreak of World War 2 women had not gained the vote. Despite the efforts of the suffragettes. The suffragettes started in 1905. They were a group of women campaigning to get women the vote. Their mission statement was deeds not words. As you can predict from this statement the suffragettes were a violent group. They started by disrupting a parliament meeting in Manchester Free Hall. They spat and fought with policemen. They got arrested. They got front page news. That was their aim. As they went on they got worse.
They set fire to post boxes, buildings, golf courses, and even blew buildings up. When they went to prison they went on hunger strike. They did all this to make front page news. Make women getting the vote a big issue However, they still didn’t have the vote by 1914. Some say that suffragettes had just hindered women’s chances of getting the vote. People said that they were terrorists. Which they were. The government could not be seen to be giving in to terrorism.
Especially because there was a fear of trouble brewing in Ireland and that would set a bad example to them. ake them think that it is a step forward to become terrorists. One of men’s biggest arguments for not giving women the vote is that they are irrational. The suffragettes just proved this fact. Liberals used to support women getting the vote but because of the suffragettes they withdrew their support. The conservatives who were against women having the vote were now even more against the idea of women voting. Because there were more women than men, giving women the vote would “ultimately put the control of the government into female hands”. Men didn’t want this.
That statement was true. It could not happen. There would be 1 million more female voters than male. Another reason why women hadn’t got the vote by 1914 is that women were divided. There were the suffragettes and the suffragists. The suffragists were against the suffragettes. They said that they weren’t lady like. Men said how can women decide who to vote for if they can’t even decide what they want. The people who could give women the vote were parliament. And every MP was a man. In some ways the suffragette campaign was successful though. Women’s suffrage was a matter of news.
Emily Pankhurst was one of the leading suffragettes she proves it was a matter of news by saying “their violent campaign made the newspapers full of us”. In judgement I would say that the suffragettes and women did not gain the vote by the outbreak of war because of the suffragettes. They were good and bad though. They clearly made women’s suffrage front page news. But they were never going to win a campaign because they were terrorists and they were women, women hadn’t got the vote by World War 2 because they hadn’t deserved it. 4) Source F is a government propaganda poster.
It shows that the government were encouraging women to help in the war effort. They wanted “women munitions workers, to enrol at once”. In the poster we can see that women’s work-was-vital. They made the shells that were used in the front line. There is a woman in the front of the poster. It shows that women did help. The source is also good because it is a primary source. Source G is a secondary source. It is full of facts about the Jobs-women did-before and during the war. It is good because it shows that -women started to work in massive numbers during the war. It is also good because it is from a school textbook.
It is not going to lie or be biased. We can trust it. Because it is a secondary source the person that wrote it can use hindsight to get the big picture. It clearly shows that over 1 million women went to work for us during the war. Over 500 000 women that were working at the metal industries made, guns, shells, tanks and warships that were vital to us winning the war. The source shows that women were doing the jobs that men normally did. It is a good source to use because whoever wrote it has the benefit of hindsight. However, like all things we have to treat sources F and G with some caution.
Source F is propaganda. Propaganda isn’t famous for telling the truth. It shows that the government wanted women to work during the war but it doesn’t actually tell you they did. Source G doesn’t seem to be biased. The historian who wrote it has no reason to lie. The only drawback is that you don’t’ know where he got the evidence from. He could have got it from a biased source. He most probably got it from government sources. The government could have been lying to trick women into thinking that it’s the normal thing to go out and work. This is unlikely but it is still a possibility.
You have to treat this source with some caution. In judgement I would say that in some ways the sources are really useful. They tell us what the government wanted women to do “enrol at once”, and if we believe the evidence of source G, which I do, they did. We can see that the government campaign was hugely successful. Women worked in crucial munitions and metal work so that men could use them on the front line. Over a million women worked in key industries which enabled men to go and fight. The sources are far more useful together with other sources to get the big picture.
These sources evidence that women’s war work was outstanding and vita to our success in World War 2. In my view, women had now earnt the right to vote. 5)From my own knowledge I know that the government wanted women workers. It was government policy. They had posters up encouraging women to go to work and help in our war efforts. Because of the war, suffragette violence stopped. Women went into work and did dangerous and taxing jobs like factory work and munitions manufacture. Jobs that men would normally be doing. Women allowed men to get to work. Most people’s general opinion is that women’s war work got them the vote.
Source H begins to agree with this fact. It states that women got the vote “as a reward for loyal wartime service”. Source I also supports the view that women’s war work got them the vote. It says that the ” generalisation that war work got women the vote contains some truth” and that “during the 4 years of conflict there had been a tremendous mood change” in favour of women getting the vote. Source j is a speech by Herbert Asquith in the House of Commons in 1917. He admits that he was opposed to women getting the vote before the war. But now he is for it because women “had contributed during this war”.
This evidences the fact that women’s war work got them the vote. From my own knowledge I know that even the Conservatives had changed their mind. They believed that women should get the vote as a reward for their war work. As we know there are other interpretations -There is a bigger-picture. Suffragettes were saying that women got the vote because the government were scared that they would start their violent campaign again. Source J states “for 3 years now the suffragettes have not restarted their horrible campaign of violence”. This proves the suffragettes right. It could also prove the fact that it’s just because they stopped right.
They showed sense. Because of this many Liberals who had wanted to give the votes to women, but couldn’t because the suffragettes were terrorists, could now publicly support women suffrage. This is another point of view that differs from their war efforts. Also the fact that there were more women than men was a big reason for them not getting the vote. From source H we can evidence that “the age limit of 30 for women” was agreed. They did this because most women by the time they were 30 would be married anyway, so they could be likely to vote the way their husband did.
That is the 3rd reason that differs from women’s war work. But in some ways that statement showed that little had changed. All these reasons are factors we can use to get the big picture. In judgement I would say that women getting the vote for their war work was mostly true but there is also more to it that meets the eye. Women did do dangerous jobs that could be fatal. Because of this our men could go to war. That reason is a massive factor. Another big factor is the suffragettes. They made women getting the vote an issue, but in my view that’s all they did.
Once it became an issue they just hindered their chances. Also we found a way around the population problem. Now women could make a difference anyway. In my view it was mainly women’s war work that got them the vote. The other reasons were also big factors though. Women being front page news is a massive factor. The suffragettes made it an issue. Now women couldn’t make a difference because they had to be over 30 to vote. But by far the biggest reason is that women helped us to win the war. Without them we couldn’t have won it. They got what they deserved. The vote!