On this day in 1915, the Massachusetts Foundation for the Humanities reminds us, a referendum to give Massachusetts women the vote failed at the polls.
The Foundation adds this interesting historical note: “In spite of its leading role in the nineteenth-century woman’s rights movement, Massachusetts was the first state to organize an association of women opposed to suffrage. Known as the “Anti’s,” these women believed that they could be better, more effective citizens without the ballot. Many of the “Anti’s” were active in Progressive era causes; they feared that involvement in electoral politics would erode their influence. For over 30 years, they and their male allies succeeded in keeping Massachusetts women out of the voting booth. But ultimately they lost the fight. On this same day in 1920, Massachusetts women cast their votes in a federal election for the first time.”
How are women doing today in Massachusetts politics? In particular, does our Democratic Party encourage women to run for office as much as it can? As much as it should?
I love you. Thanks for posting that.
<
p>
Seriously though. There is a great book, “Why Women Don’t Run for Office,” by Dr.Jennifer Lawless (she ran for Congress in RI) that has some points about how women are NOT running for office. Some highlights can be found [http://www.emilyslis…] here, courtesy of Emily’s List. They also have a great “You’ve Been Asked,” to run advertisement.
<
p> But I think that before women run for office in MA we need democrats (women, men, any race/relgion/creed.)
At the moment.
There has been a lack of anyone in the governor’s office for a couple of years now. I picture a room full of cobwebs, so maybe there are some spiders.
<
p> – Dan
on Democrats before we can start encouraging more women to run and electing more women?
…Seats are for MEN!
<
p>
Dems just have to TALK about women, not share power with them.
Betty Taymor wrote a book about the struggle of women in Massachusetts politics. It is called “Running Against the Wind” and was published in 2000, not too long ago. I think the Massachusetts Democratic Party could do more to encourage women to run for office, but I also think there is still a culture here that is biased against women who run for office- which is what Betty Taymor’s book argues. Proof? Look at the make-up of the Massachusetts congressional delegation; it’s all men. Look at the proportion of women in the legislature; it is only about 24%. And this is a state that considers itself to be more progressive than most other states.
…and have several buttons to deny women the vote, all manufactured in Boston!
<
p>
The best anti-suffrage POSTCARDS come from Britain!
“We’re clearly soldiers in petticoats
Dauntless crusaders for women’s votes…”
<
p>
Actually, the songs from Mary Poppins were written here, just set over there. So never mind.
<
p> – Dan
Interesting hobby. Where did you get the anti-suffrage memorabilia? Do you know of any public collections in the state?
Oddly enough, a lot of the Anti- stuff is up in Maine, in attics and antique stores (one place, I also picked up a Sinn Fein button from the 1920’s).
<
p>
I think many in Mass. tossed theirs when they lost.
<
p>
I also have things like an enameled pin from the Primrose League, named in honor of Lord Beaconsfield (Disrali to you!), the first organization of conservative women voters. And of course, my ‘Never Another Season of Silence’ pendant from NOW in 1976.
Radcliffe’s Schlesinger Library focuses on the history of women in America, so it’s a pretty good bet they have an extensive collection of material from the time of the suffrage movement. I spoke recently with a former curator of manuscripts there, and she said they make an effort to collect material from all aspects of the history of women in America, not just from the feminist side.
Women in MA politics have made progress, but we’re nowhere close to equality. The legislature is only 26% women – and that is the most that it has ever been. We’ve been at a plateau there for several years now. The truly bad news is that no matter what happens on Tuesday that number will go down because a number of women electeds are retiring and not being replaced by women.
<
p>
People think MA is so “progressive,” but we aren’t when it comes to electing women. We’ve only sent 3 women to Congress EVER, and none since 1983. We’ve never had a woman US Senator and we’ve only had 4 women elected to statewide office.
<
p>
The Democratic Party absolutely needs to do more to support women seeking public office – and more women need to step up to the plate and run.
Edith Roger (R) – also the longest serving woman in the House
<
p>
Margaret Heckler (R) – later Ambassador to Ireland
<
p>
Louise Day Hicks (D) elected to…um….never mind.
We need to follow the lead of states like Washington where both US Senators are women and so is the governor. California has a ton of women in the Congressional Delegation and both US Senators are women. The NY Times Magazine had a short piece last Sunday on how well the western states are doing at electing women as compared with the rest of us. When Martha Coakley wins next week she’ll be the only female consitutional officer- she needs some company!
but we certainly don’t need two female senators and a female governor.
<
p>
Let’s focus on making sure the environment is welcoming of all citizens, including women, gays, Jews, the physically disabled, blacks, hispanics, and the least represented sizeable group…
<
p>
The least represented group isn’t women, or gays, or blacks, or hispanics, or Jews. It’s muslims. There isn’t a single muslim congressman. Not one.
http://www.boston.co…
I saw a similar article a few weeks ago, alerting me to the data. Otherwise, I’d have had no idea…
We have only had 7 different senators in the last 50 years, so there haven’t been many opportunities for women to run. I hope there is a strong female candidate when it comes time for Ted to retire.
<
p>
No women elected to congress since 1983? How many new men have been elected recently?
8 of our 10 members of of Congress (House, not Senate, obviously) have been elected since 1983. Everybody but Markey and Frank. You’re right, turnover could be higher, but with the seats changing hands (at least) 8 times in 23 years you’d think we would have gotten another woman in there by now.
to put human rights on the ballot?
With the discussions in other threads about state legislators that should be replaced, does anyone in those districts know any women who would be good candidates?
<
p>
Having a female AG might help set a good example. I suspect that is rarer than a female governor.
<
p> – Dan
go “lower” than state lege. Get female town meeting members, selectwomen, female town managers, etc. Get more women involved in the state Dem and GOP paries. Get more women managing precinct and town-wide GOTV campaigns.
…that we have the Mass. (and National) Federation of Republican Women, which is a natural base for women running for municipal office, which gives free campaign schools (at which I’ve taught)…
<
p>
And there is NO corresponding Democratic group.
<
p>
How come?
Emily’s List is the leading national organization promoting women candidates who are Democrats and pro-choice. Emily’s List is a powerful PAC than raises millions each cycle for women candidates and also offers training, support, and assistance.
<
p>
If you are a woman and a Democrat but pro-life (has this ever happened?), I think you are mostly out of luck.
Women in the Senate and House – for pro-choice GOP women.
What can I say? I’m sorry for your loss.
I want to apologize for that comment. It was thoughless and carelessly and too quickly typed. I probably cannot come up with a way to explain what I meant that will make it better.
<
p>
Twenty years from now, what will Massachusetts’ progressives look back on and say “Holy cow! I can’t believe that we stood for THAT!”
when you let the dominant folks (in this case, men) vote on the rights of people not in that group.
<
p>
And yet some people think now that equal marriage should be voted on.
And won by getting four or more votes. A few retirements and it might disappear just as quickly. Rights that are created through the actions of the polity are ultimately more secure.
<
p>
Had two or three of those votes gone the other way, SSM proponents would be seeking legislation, or legislation-forcing ballot initiatives.
These “rights” things don’t just pop out of the air, unless you believe our government was-is created-maintained exclusively by divine inspiration.
Oh, sorry, I was misinformed. I thought those judges said something about the Constitution of the Commonwealth. I didn’t realize they had pulled it out of the air.
I think the judges just recognize that the constitution protects rights that are not explicitly named within it (the document), such as the right of a person to marry another person, of whatever sex. Since that “right” is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, the SJC is in essense pulling it out of the “air,” that is in the case that came before them (through the air)?
Well, now I’m convinced. Referendum is the right way to go, as the suffrage story clearly demonstrates.
<
p>
Can’t have stuff based on unnamed protections of the Constitution.
The political process of securing the right of women to vote has made that right an awful lot mores ecure than, say, their right to choose whether to terminate a pregnancy, hasn’t it?
a legal fiction.
50/50 by 2020 is a term I’ve heard. Some groups are working for equal representation by women in government wih a goal of the year 2020.
<
p>
Here’s one site: 50-50 by 2020
<
p>
And this Without Boundaries. I met the woman who runs this at YearlyKos, she’s working hard for parity. She pressed Howard Dean for a response to her “every open seat a woman’s seat” strategy. Her blog related to this is: 5050X2020
are all women this cycle. All three of the districts: one incumbent and two challengers. Quite a contrast to Massachusetts.
Of course, they’re Republicans and therefore don’t count.
The ingredients to be elected on the statewide level usually include the above criteria, which is why Kerry Healey won’t get elected since she lacks the last two factors. Many qualified, brillant women reside in the Commonwealth and they face barriers with un-equal pay, multiple family responsibilities and a general lack of support from other women….who are also receiving un-equal pay, are overwhelmed with family/work and have little slack to promote female candidates. I can’t say that I know one woman who is not handicapped in at least two of the above criteria, DESPITE excellent credentials in many other categories. I am not suggesting that the solution is to marry Sean Healey and join the humane society, but rather equal-pay and organized grooming of candidates from the DSC and other groups could help. Let’s see if Patrick and Murray can figure out how to really change politics as we know it.
I think this is a major barrier to many women who would run if encouraged to do so. While working as a volunteer on at least two campaigns, I have witnessed older women treat some of the younger, very bright, very energetic women as if they are pariahs. There does not seem to be any willingness to mentor the younger women. The same goes for the so called women groups. I had a woman friend who ran for the legislature about 8 years ago and all the women groups (I think Emily’s List was one, but I am not sure) supported the male candidate instead, even though my friend took positions on the issues in line with the group’s positions. The reason given? The groups thought her male candidate had a better chance of winning. My friend lost, but not by very much. Maybe ths support of the women’s groups would have helped her win.