To better understand the significance of women’s political involvement in the 1920s, it is crucial to consider the broader historical context. For much of history, women were denied fundamental rights, including voting, owning property, and participating in public life. The women\u2019s suffrage movement, which gained momentum in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, was pivotal in changing these norms. [2] The impact of World War I cannot be overstated, as women\u2019s contributions during the war challenged societal expectations and demonstrated their competence in traditionally male roles. [2] These efforts culminated in the ratification of the 19th Amendment, which not only secured voting rights for white women but also catalyzed their entry into other public arenas. However, the suffrage movement was marked by exclusions, particularly of Black women, and internal divisions among white women based on age and levels of radicalism. [1]<\/p>\n
The article starts with the author declaring she hasn\u2019t \u201cseen such effusion and enthusiasm, such hero worship unashamed\u201d since her days in college, as she did in the headquarters where women worked for various presidential candidates. She conveys her excitement about such tremendous shift for women and admiration for what great things they now do. The article describes some of the women\u2019s involvement in the women\u2019s suffrage movement, for example Harriet Vittum<\/a>, Fletcher Dobyns<\/a>, and Olive Stott,<\/a> and illustrates their efforts to capitalize on the hard-won right to vote. For example, Olive Stott later led the National Association of Women Lawyers, emphasizing the enduring influence of these trailblazing women. The article also highlights Margaret Cumpacher, known as “The Mother of the Navy,” who showcased women\u2019s contributions during World War I and beyond by volunteering as a Navy recruiter. In the center of the article is an illustration of the seven women who were significant for the presidential campaigns all over the United States. This leads us to infer that the women all over America were ecstatic to take on the power roles and utilize their strengths to help advance the society. The article\u2019s enthusiasm matches the changes in the women\u2019s literature at the time \u2013 feminism in its earliest form, a main character woman usually moving to a big city, like New York, to find her individual freedom and new work roles. [4] Most of the women talked about in the article have lived in New York or other big cities for most of their lives.<\/p>\n National Association Women Lawyers see President Hoover through four representatives, asking for United States Plenipotentiaries to the Hague to vote for a World Code of equality between men and women. Left to right, front row: Mrs. Olive Stott Gabriel, President, Mrs. James Garfield Riley, Dean Washington College of Law, Miss Laura Berrien, and Mrs. Bernita Shelton Matthews, Vice President of the Association [State, War and Navy Building, Washington, D.C.] [5]<\/p><\/div>\n Despite the author\u2019s tone being enthusiastic and anticipatory, the article’s celebratory tone overlooks the persistent challenges women faced. According to later discoveries of social scientists, \u201cmany women at the time were still unable to contribute fully to American society \u2013 even after suffrage \u2013 because they have remained the oppressed victims of history.\u201d [3] Because there was a period of historical neglect of the image and role of women in post-WWI, historians began to question its validity. [3] One concrete example of this was that in the 1920 elections, the same ones the New York Tribune<\/em> article talks about, significantly less women than men had utilized the ballot [3], and those who did mostly voted unpredictably, possibly due to lack of political experience. Not many writers further followed women\u2019s progress in navigating their economic and social roles. [3] Additionally, even in fictional pieces that served to inspire women, \u201cnot all men respected the New Woman\u2019s independence, and some women themselves questioned whether or not the struggle was worthwhile\u201d [4]. Furthermore, fictional portrayals of the \u201cNew Woman\u201d in literature sometimes depicted blind rejection of tradition rather than meaningful engagement with modernity.\u2074<\/p>\n While women\u2019s participation in political campaigns was a groundbreaking step, it was just the beginning of a longer struggle for equality. The New York Tribune<\/em> article captures the excitement of the moment, but it also invites reflection on the complexities of women\u2019s evolving roles in public life. A statement that perfectly summarizes women’s role in political life, as highlighted in the article, is:<\/p>\n “Very few women want public office. But they want to have a share in selecting the men best fitted for office and most able to carry out the things in which they believe.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n By exploring this source, we gain insight into both the achievements and limitations of the women\u2019s movement in the 1920s, a decade of both progress and ongoing challenges.<\/p>\n [1] \u00a0Lynn Dumenil, \u201cThe New Woman and the Politics of the 1920s,\u201d OAH Magazine of History<\/em> 21, no. 3 (2007): 22\u201326, https:\/\/research.ebsco.com\/linkprocessor\/plink?id=f073120b-40ad-3b97-bd87-33d7c8688eea<\/a>.<\/p>\n [2] \u00a0David S. Emory, America: A Narrative History<\/em>, Brief 12th ed. (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2022), 334.<\/p>\n [3] \u00a0Estelle B. Freedman, \u201cThe New Woman: Changing Views of Women in the 1920s,\u201d The Journal of American History<\/em> 61, no. 2 (1974): 372\u201393, https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2307\/1903954<\/a>.<\/p>\n [4] \u00a0Maureen Honey, \u201cGotham\u2019s Daughters: Feminism in the 1920s,\u201d American Studies<\/em> 31, no. 1 (1990): 25\u201340, http:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/40642351<\/a>.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/americanhistory\/files\/2024\/12\/service-pnp-hec-35700-35760r-300x233.jpg\")
<\/a><\/h1>\n
Works Cited<\/h3>\n