94 Years Ago ....

[hlthe2b]

94 years ago the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote was ratified. These are some of the arguments used against it.



Sound familliar? The more things "change" the more SOME stay the same...
Women have the NUMBERS and the power to change things. WE MUST USE IT!

h/t to http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/
who states what should be the obvious: "And let me just remind you that the very same middle aged conservative white men that are today arguing against raising the minimum wage, closing the gender pay gap, and reforming immigration is the same demographic that fought so hard almost 100 years ago to nip this in the bud as well."

[littlemissmartypants]

1. I have been sharing your posts with a twelve year old

Family member. She enjoys them as much as I do.

She has expressed a desire not to march with me but she did ask if her grandfather is a feminist. I call that progress, especially since she's a tween. They're a tough crowd.

Thanks for your posts.
Lmsp

[hlthe2b]

2. Oh, how wonderful to hear!

I love hearing about our next generation of young feminists! (whether they are ready to adopt the term or not)

[catbyte]

3. And the Republicans are trying to drag us back to the way it was 95 years ago.

We women must start voting in larger numbers to preserve the rights our grandmothers, mothers, and, well, even I, fought for. I was 19 when Roe v Wade was settled, so I remember the. Bad Old Days enough to know we cannot go back. Like that sign I saw at a rally, "I can't believe I'm still protesting this shit."

[theHandpuppet]

4. Sad to say it reads like a pamphlet that could have been published yesterday

Last edited Tue Sep 2, 2014, 09:17 AM - Edit history (1)

The women's vote is going to be so critical in the upcoming election cycle. We've taken so many hits lately I'm hoping there's going to be hell to pay for conservatives come November.

[James48]

5. Acutally, that isn't today.

It was August 18, 1920 when the 19th Amendment was ratified by the 36th state, and became the law of the land.



But it is just as true that it is the same right-wingers today who deny minorities, the elderly, and the infirm, from having the right to vote.

[hlthe2b]

6. edited to reflect... thanks

[brer cat]

7. Oh my, can't have the government

under petticoat rule! LOL although it is sad indeed how much of it still applies.

K&R

[SheilaT]

8. I haven't seen any actual statistics,

but it took a remarkably long time for a majority of women to get it that their individual votes really counted.

Jackie Kennedy apparently only voted when she could cast a vote for Jack, and seems never to have voted again after he died.

In 1940, Life Magazine in an article about the upcoming election, interviewed more than one woman who did not plan to vote because their husbands were going to. And as recently as the 1970's, my sister-in-law, born herself after WWII, didn't vote because it would only cancel her husband's vote. I remember telling her that was all the more reason for her to vote.

[mountain grammy]

9. We women are often our own worst enemies.

[yurbud]

10. "Petticoat Rule"? Have their been elections when more women than men voted?

[Enthusiast]

12. Did the Petticoat Rule mean the country would be reluctant to engage in warfare?

I think we should adopt the Petticoat Rule.

[yurbud]

13. I agree.

[SheilaT]

15. Yes. Women have been outvoting men

since 1964.

Here's a link: http://cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/voters/documents/genderdiff.pdf

[yurbud]

16. Thanks

[Enthusiast]

11. Kicked and recommended! It does sound familiar.

Thank you, hlthe2b.

[eppur_se_muova]

14. "... can only double or annul their husbands' votes ..." ROFL !!

Double or annul ? Well, WHICH IS IT ?? It makes a world of difference !! You can only vote for your husband's candidate or another candidate, so your vote has no effect ???? Addition, subtraction, what's the difference, really ??

Bonus points for the quaint little cottage (with chimney smoke! How homey!) on Madison Avenue.