“In politics, if you want anything said, ask a man; if you want anything done, ask a woman.” Margaret Thatcher’s words perfectly describe women in the Republican party. While conservative women may not always be in the public eye as much their male counterparts, they are an integral aspect of the party. This is the topic of Catherine Rymph’s Republican Women. Rymph discusses the history of women in conservative politics from the 1920s, until present-day. This paper will utilize her book and the experiences of conservative women to examine three areas; the work women do within the Republican party, the role of morality in motivating women to become involved in conservative politics, and the avenues through which women become politically active. According to Republican politician Martha Zoller, the volunteer base of the Republican party is primarily women. Catherine Rymph argued in Republican Women that this trend has gone on since the beginning of conservative politics, or at least since the 1920s, when her book begins. Women often did what she terms the “housework of government,” these were the mundane ““day-to-day work that received little glory, but was critical to …show more content…
sustaining and building the party.” Although the Republican leadership acknowledged these tasks were vital, they held no appeal to men, and garnered no respect for the women performing them. Robert Humphrey, publicity director for the Republican National Convention in 1932 and 1934, argued that women carried out these jobs because by taking on jobs that men found “too boring or time-consuming” they earned a “sense of achievement.” The mundane day-to-day tasks were the ones performed by Margaret Holliman. Holliman was born in Bainbridge, Georgia and moved to Atlanta after completing her education. She first became interested in politics because of her husband, a conservative professor at Georgia Tech. In 1964, when her children were enrolled in school Holliman volunteered for her first campaign, the Goldwater Campaign. In both this campaign, and the 1966 government election. Holliman hand addressed envelopes, looked up phone numbers, contacted potential voters, and went door-to-door seeking support for her candidates. In 1966 she collected signatures to put a Republican candidate on the ballot. From 1971 through 1975 she was the president of the Georgia Federation of Republican Women. This title led her to become the co-chair of the 1976 Regan campaign in the state of Georgia, where her primary task was to attract women to support the candidate. The tasks performed by Holliman are precisely the tasks described by Rymph. The women undertook the mundane work, while the men gained all the credit. In her interview with Callie Holmes, Martha Zoller stated that these women were expected to continue these tasks- even if their candidate lost. Following World War II women began to play an even larger role in politics, that of the “social housekeeper.” These women were suburban homemakers who believed that they had a moral obligation to become involved in politics. They framed “politics as an urgent crusade of good against evil,” and years earlier Jane Addams had argued that a woman’s “domestic responsibilities required their participation in public life.” During the 1954 convention, the National Federation of Republican Women invoked the party icon of the elephant, feeling that it was appropriate because it was said to have “vacuum cleaner in the front and a rug beater behind.” These women believed they had a moral duty to become involved in politics, often believing this extended into education. One example of this political education discussed by Rymph is Elizabeth Farrington’s “School of Politics.” In May 1960, these three-day day training sessions were held in Washington and were initially designed to train one Republican man and one Republican woman from each precinct. The training was intended to instruct precinct workers how to become more effective, training them to utilize knowledge about their area. In spite of being targeted towards each gender equally, the vast majority of attendees were women. In contrast, similar schools set up by Democratic women were more heavily attended by men. Nancy Schaefer is an example of a female politician who utilized politics as an avenue to voice her moral concerns.
Schaefer was born June 28, 1936 and grew up in Clayton, GA. As a child she was immersed in politics, both her grandfather and father were both highly active in their home of Rabun County, Georgia. Schaefer served in the Georgia State Senate from 2004-2008. In her first political race, Schaefer ran for Mayor of Atlanta. In the early 1990s Schaefer had been attending local meetings to assist in the search for a mayoral candidate. At the final meeting, she was nominated to be that candidate. Although she lost the race, it is arguable that she had a large impact on local politics. Especially if her contention that her opponent, Bill Campbell, borrowed aspects of her speeches is
true! During her time in politics, Schaefer became aware of an issue that deeply concerned her- corruption in Child Protective Services (also known as the Department of Family and Children Services). For three years she researched this government agency and was dismayed at her findings. Financial incentives offered by the federal government had turned this helping organization into a business. Schaefer was shocked to learn that some counties even had quotas. November 16, 2007 Schaefer released a report on her findings, The Corrupt Business of Child Protective Services. In the report she argued that CPS is a necessary agency, but that it needed to be completely restructured. She contended that children were being removed from homes where they were protected and loved, simply because the family did not have the money to fight for them. She included a letter from a foster parent, Sandra regarding Jeremy. The foster mother alleged that Jeremy had been returned to deplorable conditions solely because his biological family was able to afford legal representation. This issue was one that Schaefer championed until her passing. Before her death in 2010, Schaefer also worked closely with the Southern Baptist Convention, and spoke at numerous United Nations conferences on their behalf. She spoke in an effort to “protect the family,” and argued against things like abortion and homosexuality. During one conference in Rome, Italy, Schaefer and others with her felt like they weren’t being heard. So one evening they took a sheet from their hotel room and created a banner saying “United States Delegation Ignores United States Women.” They raised this banner one afternoon following a press conference and created such a stir that those involved were asked to leave. The women were isolated in their hotel room for the rest of day, and then half of the next. Schaefer felt vindicated by the feedback she received from other countries. She stated that many representatives visited them in the hotel during their lock down, sharing their stories. Many told of instances they begged the US for help, and in the shipments they received there would be roughly three-to-four inches of medicine on top, but the rest was nothing but condoms. Schaefer related that the representatives told her “your country is destroying our morals!” Martha Zoller’s political career began slightly different from Holliman and Schaefer. She was the youngest of four, born in Columbus, Georgia 1959. She became interested in politics at a young age, as it was the frequent dinner-time conversation with her family. Because she wanted to have something interesting to add, Zoller would read on the latest topics. One day, her brother inquired if she ever had a thought of her own. This was when Zoller realized that instead of simply regurgitating facts, she needed to form opinions on her own. Following her graduation from the University of Georgia, she initially worked in retail. When she married her husband she became an instant mother to her husbands’ three sons from a previous marriage. A few years after becoming a stay-at-home-mom to her stepchildren, she gave birth to her daughter. The role of stay-at-home mom was one she never saw herself in, but during this stage she learned that yes, she could have it all; she just couldn’t have it all at once. It was during this stage in her life that she began to listen to talk radio. One day she heard Hilary Clinton make her infamous “I could have stayed home and baked cookies” statement. This comment infuriated her and prompted her to call in to the local station, WDUN. Over the next few months Zoller made several phone calls to the station as a caller, and was eventually asked if she would co-host a talk show a few times a week with Bill Maine. In 1996, after the OJ Trial was over, a small thousand-watt station, WGGA, needed a show to fill in for the hour that had been set aside for trial updates. The station was owned by Jacobs Media, who also owned WDUN, and thus began the Martha Zoller show. Eventually, she was brought over to the main station, WDUN. During this time she joined the Georgia Gang in 2000, started making television appearances, and writing opinion columns. Her time in the media led to her run for Congress in 2010, which she lost to Doug Collins. For Zoller, abortion is one of the most significant issues in politics. She stated that when she became pregnant and saw “that grainy sonogram” image of her daughter , she began to believe that life begins at conception. However, she does not believe that abortion should be illegal, stating that while it is never a “good” option, sometimes it is a viable option. Zoller insisted that instead of focusing on the law, people needed to focus on changing hearts. Rymph maintains that abortion is one of two issues (along with the ERA) that forced feminists out of the Republican party. It appears that Zoller would disagree with this claim. While she views abortion as a woman’s issue, she holds a drastically different perception from those that consider themselves pro-choice. Zoller stated that most doctors don’t want to perform abortions, so women are now being sent to abortion clinics. They are now seeing doctors that do not know the individual woman, and will not counsel them on the various options. Zoller made the claim that instead of uplifting women, we are harming them. According to her, Since Roe V. Wade women have been relegated to going to a place where they don’t receive the information on what is best for them. Holliman, Schaefer and Zoller each played a different role in the Republican party. While Holliman primarily performed the behind-the-scenes tasks, both Schaefer and Zoller performed more public duties. Along with different values, each woman had distinct reasons for entering politics. Zoller’s participation was inspired by Hilary Clinton’s infamous “I could have stayed home and baked cookies” comment. It seems that Schaefer was heavily influenced by her family history, although, actually becoming a politician appears to have been happenstance- as it occurred while she was assisting in the search of a mayoral candidate. When questioned on how she became interested, Holliman credited concern her conservative husband’s influence, stating that when her children were enrolled in school and she had the time, she decided to volunteer. There are accuracies to Rymph’s portrayl of Republican women. However, at the same time, it feels condescending. She refers to Republicans as “anti-feminisits,” stating that a woman cannot be a supporter of conservative politics and a feminist at the same time. She essentially asserts that women must fit into her defined role and definition in order to be a true “feminist.” While Zoller, Schaefer, and Holliman share many similarities with the women presented in Republican Women, it is impossible to broadly characterize such a diverse group.
Kim E Nielsen. "Book Review of Belle Moskowitz: Feminine Politics and the Exercise of Power in the Age of Alfred E. Smith, and: No Place for a Woman: A Life of Senator Margaret Chase Smith, and: Barbara Jordan: American Hero." Feminist Formations, Fall 2001, 205.
After the success of antislavery movement in the early nineteenth century, activist women in the United States took another step toward claiming themselves a voice in politics. They were known as the suffragists. It took those women a lot of efforts and some decades to seek for the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. In her essay “The Next Generation of Suffragists: Harriot Stanton Blatch and Grassroots Politics,” Ellen Carol Dubois notes some hardships American suffragists faced in order to achieve the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. Along with that essay, the film Iron-Jawed Angels somehow helps to paint a vivid image of the obstacles in the fight for women’s suffrage. In the essay “Gender at Work: The Sexual Division of Labor during World War II,” Ruth Milkman highlights the segregation between men and women at works during wartime some decades after the success of women suffrage movement. Similarly, women in the Glamour Girls of 1943 were segregated by men that they could only do the jobs temporarily and would not able to go back to work once the war over. In other words, many American women did help to claim themselves a voice by voting and giving hands in World War II but they were not fully great enough to change the public eyes about women.
The women of the state of Arizona have always played a significant role in politics. Before most women even had the right to vote, two women from Arizona, Frances Munds and Rachel Berry, were the first women elected into the state legislature. Today, Arizona has the highest percentage of women in the state legislature. More impressive is the fact that Arizona is the first state ever to have an all-female elected line of succession. There is no doubt that these five women greatly contributed to making 1997 the "Year of the Woman," where there was a dramatic increase in women's representation in the House and Senate. Why women in Arizona have flourished in the political arena and continue to do so is a question our group will try to answer in our research. More specifically, I will discuss women in current Arizona politics. In reviewing the role of women in current politics today, I will discuss the reasons as to why women have such strong political power in the state of Arizona, and the difference, between the views of voters in Arizona and other states. I will also discuss not only the future of women in Arizona politics but the future of women in national politics as well, and what to expect as the new millenium approaches.
To begin with, there are many events in United States history that have shaped our general understanding of women’s involvement in economics, politics, the debates of gender and sexuality, and so forth. Women for many centuries have not been seen as a significant part of history, however under thorough analyzation of certain events, there are many women and woman-based events responsible for the progressiveness we experience in our daily lives as men, women, children, and individuals altogether. Many of these events aid people today to reflect on the treatment of current individuals today and to raise awareness to significant issues that were not resolved or acknowledged in the past.
In 1850 society the new republic altered the role of women by making the differences of men and women in society more noticeable, by giving them a higher status, and allowing them to demand more rights and think for freely.
In the 1890s, American women emerged as a major force for social reform. Millions joined civic organizations and extended their roles from domestic duties to concerns about their communities and environments. These years, between 1890 and 1920, were a time of many social changes that later became known as the Progressive Era. In this time era, millions of Americans organized associations to come up with solutions to the many problems that society was facing, and many of these problems were staring American women right in the face.
Baker, Paula. “The Domestication of Politics: Women and American Political Society, 1780-1920.” American Historical Review 89, no. 3 (1984): 620-647.
...ip between a man and his wife as opposed to patriarchal domination was considered the republican model. In the role of a mother, the republican woman was not as able to pursue involvement in the economy and her family’s income due to the increased duties of motherhood. Nonetheless, society recognized that the characteristics of women were ideal when caring for and educating children to become virtuous citizens, and so women were assigned responsibilities that had primarily been the father’s. And finally, politics excluded women because republican ideals deemed them unfit to make useful contributions, and they would be seen as less feminine and forgoing their rights as a woman if they tried to participate. Even so, many women believed that they could engage in state affairs and found methods such as satirical literature and petitions to discreetly express their views.
Before the 1920s men and women were thought to have two separate roles in life. People believed women should be concerned with their children, home, and religion, while men took care of business and politics. In 1920 there were significant changes for women in politics, the home, and the workplace. When the 19th amendment passed it gave women the right to vote. “Though slowly to use their newly won voting rights, by the end of the decade women were represented local, state, and national political committees and were influencing the political agenda of the federal government.” Now a days it’s normal for women to be involved in politics and it’s normal for women to vote. Another drastic change
Wolbrecht, C. (2000). Of Presidents and Platforms. In The politics of women's rights: Parties, positions, and change (pp. 23-72). Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.
Society has long since considered women the lessor gender and one of the most highly debated topics in society through the years has been that of women’s equality. The debates began over the meaning between a man and woman’s morality and a woman’s rights and obligations in society. After the 19th Amendment was sanctioned around 1920, the ball started rolling on women’s suffrage. Modern times have brought about the union of these causes, but due to the differences between the genetic makeup and socio demographics, the battle over women’s equality issue still continues to exist. While men have always held the covenant role of the dominant sex, it was only since the end of the 19th century that the movement for women’s equality and the entitlement of women have become more prevalent. “The general consensus at the time was that men were more capable of dealing with the competitive work world they now found themselves thrust into. Women, it was assumed, were unable to handle the pressures outside of the home. They couldn’t vote, were discourages from working, and were excluded from politics. Their duty to society was raising moral children, passing on the values that were unjustly thrust upon them as society began to modernize” (America’s Job Exchange, 2013). Although there have been many improvements in the changes of women’s equality towards the lives of women’s freedom and rights in society, some liberals believe that women have a journey to go before they receive total equality. After WWII, women continued to progress in there crusade towards receiving equality in many areas such as pay and education, discrimination in employment, reproductive rights and later was followed by not only white women but women from other nationalities ...
All across the world there are major political parties fighting in each country in order to take control of their government. The United States of America is not an exception, as the Democratic and Republican parties compete against each other in every election in order to gain control of the US Government. These two political parties are the most popular and powerful in the US, there are very popular that other political parties have no chance on competing against these two in an election race. In order to win elections the parties need the vote of the people, the parties need for every gender to vote for them in order to have a chance in winning the election. Both parties need the vote of the men and woman, but these genders tend to vote differently. There has been different studies in which they state, that in some aspects of politics woman tend to vote differently than men. The two parties are different in many aspects but they are also similar in fact that they both need to vote of the woman and the men in order to win the election. In the next paper I will show the history of this two major political parties, and how women tend to vote differently than men.
The progressive era in the Unites states lends itself well to the study of women interactions to politics considered alongside the rise of radical right-wing organizations. The most promote organization was the Klu Klux Klan and the new formed women's branch. I started research on this topic by reviewing reference works, then refining the topic's broader idea through articles and books. The research allows for the understanding of the topic to create a question about woman's interactions to politics through the right-wing ideology of the Klan.
When The Feminine Mystique was published, men's turnout at the polls exceeded that of women by five percent. Since 1980, women have consistently voted at higher rates than men, according to the Center on American Women in Politics at Rutgers University. The number of women elected to office at every level of government has spiraled. In 1963, there were two women in the US Senate and only 12 women in the House of Representatives. Today, 20 women serve in the Senate and 77 serve in the House. Similar shifts have occurred at the local and state levels. Although a rise in women's turnout has spurred these gains, men are now more willing to vote for women candidates than ever before.
The role of women not having a say in politics has disintegrated and society has leaned towards gender equality, allowing women to achieve leader positions in different professions through hard work and talent. S. Kane and S. McCabe have demonstrated that “As women have gradually become leaders in the professions … they also have taken jobs once regarded as too physically strenuous. Women have become sanitary workers, police officers, firefighters, and coal miners” (Text #5, ‘Women in the U.S. today’).Women have shown their strength and became leaders in professions in which they were discarded before, because it was acknowledged as a man’s job. Women are able to achieve jobs as coal miners and firefighters which was