Updated: Apr 21
It can sometimes be a difficult task to walk in another person’s shoes. You may recognize the difficulty of trying to experience the suffering of someone of another race, class, or gender. When considering the celebration and recognition of the ratification of the19th amendment of our U.S. Constitution, my initial thoughts went to my Mother. She is a grand lady of 94 years and I did discuss this with her and received some compelling insights of a movement that began, most likely, even before the 19th Amendment was ratified in1920. I also consulted my young bride of almost 50 years regarding this topic of the women’s suffrage movement. I got guidance from both of my experts.
Most countries are marked with historical milestones. Depending on the ideological side of the coin a person was on, those events were either celebrated or perhaps considered abominable. Nevertheless, moving along a continuum of time and change is inevitable. In an almost science fiction-like manner I often consider the “what if” of some of our historical political decisions and the repercussions of decisions made – or delayed. From the standpoint of Constitutional law and procedure, what if we had never ratified the Bill of Rights or what if we had never decided as a young nation that we would abolish slavery? What calamities could we have avoided if the disenfranchisement of segments of our population did not exist?
My early study of the suffrage movement indicates that patriarchal-motivated concerns wanted to “save” women from the worries and intricacies of politics and governmental processes. I have often noted that when we change the name of something to make it more tolerable and give it better public exposure – we can keep some things “acceptable” for a long time. I will continue my study and (perhaps less than academic) research into this movement. Without it, where would we be today? Think about the people who would not have had a say in our government. Think about the beliefs of some sectors of the population that the disenfranchisement of citizens based on gender is fallacy Love to hear your insights and comments.