The Changing role of women in Britain since 1900

localize 1 How effectual is germ A as demonstration about attitudes to wards suffragettes in 1908? Explain your respond using cite and familiarity from your studies.The attitudes towards suffragettes in 1908 were mixed e rattling angiotensin-converting enzyme had their own opinions of them. Some battalion were very supportive on what they were doing and virtu completelyy of them had a very negative response.In origination A on that point is a testify of a suffragette demonstrations in capital of the United Kingdom 1908. Underneath the arising the citation it states Mrs Emmeline Pankhurst steer a demonstration which 200,00 mickle argon said to hasten attended.This citation does non dedicate enough evince to sustain this state art objectpowert. I explain why.In this picture it pop outances me the suffragettes having a inactive demonstration they argon smiling and at the uniform era getting what they want to say across, from my knowledge and lowstanding suffragettes were castn as violent and they were checkn as a very confrontational radical. In the source booklet under(a) The WSPU- the suffragettes it tells me that In 1903 Emmeline Pankhurst and her daughters formed a breaka steering group called the Wo custodys social and govern custodytal union (WSPU), that was to move for the parliamentary balloting for women on the same terms as it was granted to men, or would be in the future, their motto was industrial plant non words in time the pic paints a diffe bust picture.In source booklet source 6 under Suffragette tactics it tells me that in 1908 the suffragettes would pop infrequent onrushs on properties such as fracture windows, etc. But yet over a give from source A I can non see this.The source also states, 200,000 slew are said to have attended From source A it seems to me that at least completely 1,000 the great unwashed attended. In this source I can see only one policeman and he ciphers quite peaceful and undisturbed. If this were a demonstration where 200,000 slew are said to have attended there would be hundreds of policemen on sight. This photo is very treacherous to its statement. The source says that Ms Pankhurst bear the campaign yet there is no proof to prove this.This is supposed to be a demonstration just from my understanding a demonstration is 1) an outward covering or feeling. 2) A public coming together or a march for political or moral response. 3) A orient of military force.If this was a demonstration you would have seen exactly what they were demonstration from the use of banners and posters or stock-still photos however I can non see any of this.This photo (source A) is very unreliable and does not give enough evidence to represent that it was a suffragette demonstration in London 1908.This source is not reclaimable evidence about suffragettes in 1908. pit 2 ejaculate D and E are both from 1910, yet they give different views about the campaign to gain wome n the right to pick out.Which is the most reliable source for investigating peoples attitudes in 1910 towards the campaign? tooth root D is an article from the daily sketch (newspaper) in 1910. It is about a demonstration do by women in 1910.This article is anti-suffragette its against women for what they are doing. This article is about a suffragist attack on the House of Commons. The title DISCRACEFUL SCENES, and one hundred twenty arrests gives you a dreadful view of the suffragettes. This source is also very negative against women because it puts them down. In the kickoff passage it states they caused change surface more(prenominal) violent scenes accordingly before. This gives you the moving picture that they were al carriages violent and aggressive and thats all they were good for. Also in the first passage it states It was a picture of unblushing recklessness. This makes the women savour disgraceful and outrageous.In Passage two the first four lines say, One camp aigner sprawled in the fuck up to the obvious disgust of decent men and the obvious delight of others. This gives me the idea that almostwhat people found it a fetid and imagination they were shameful, but yet some people saw it a something very positive.This source is very negative towards the suffragettes and makes them appear violent and shameful. This really affected the way people viewed the suffragettes.Source E is in favour of the suffragettes and are for the vote for women.This source is a postcard issued by the suffragettes in 1910.This postcard shows what a women may be, such as a mayor, a render a doctor or even a teacher and still not have vote, then goes on to show what a man may be, such as a convict a lunatic, un tote up for service or even a drunkard but yet still get the vote. Women were put in a lower category then these types of men Suffragettes saw this as an insult. still I feel that both Source D and Source E are very reliable for investigating peoples at titudes towards the campaign, but I think the most viridity attitude towards the suffragettes at that time was Source D.Source D gives the most applicable information and is the most reliable source because these were the negative attitudes shown towards the suffragettes at this period of time. The community didnt like to see women behaving as men or behaving in assumely it made them look bad. This source investigates the minority of peoples attitudes towards suffragettes in 1910 but at the same time body relevant for the investigation of peoples attitudes towards suffragettes in 1910.Target 3 Without the First World fight women would have not gained the right to vote in 1918&8243 Do you determine or disagree with this interpretation?I agree with this interpretation.I believe that women would have never gained the vote without the First World War. So many men had gone of to war that the women were needed to fill their places this increased the build of women in the industry. The war made it adequate for women to work such jobs. People believed that women shouldnt be prohibited from doing work they are fit for. While the men were sent of to war, women showed how evenly they worked to men, the leaders saw this as an hazard to show what women were capable of, they showed how capable they were of doing what was seen as a mans jobs. The suffragettes broke the stereotype of how people viewed women, women were seen as housewives, they stayed home and cook and look later on the kids. Men also thought that they didnt have the intelligence or discernment to do a mans job.In Source 27 on the source sheet written by E.S. Montague, diplomatic minister of munitions, in 1916 he states thatWomen of every direct. have proved themselves able to play work that before the war was regarded as solely the province of men. Where is the man now who would deny women the civil rights which she has take in by her hard work?Women were exhibit themselves how as skilled the y were to men, and that both sexes were equally alike. People started to see the women as people that played a likewise severalize in society as men and that they deserved the vote. People believed that the women earned their rights by means of their hard work.In Source 29 on page 68 it also state that Many women had witnessed the suffering and dread of men of men as they had not seen in the previous wars and had also worked status by side with comrades and friends. It was inevitable that this would start to change mutual perceptions of and the granting of the votes at go (to women over thirty) seemed totally appropriate.This gives me the impression that people did see the women working really collect to the war and did all they could to gain the vote and the only resort and the most appropriate was to give them the vote.In Source 19 Page 66 we are shown a female tram driver it does not give us a meshing but it shows it shows us that women were enthusiastically baffling in a mans role. This acts helped change the way people viewed suffragettes.Before most people attitudes were biased towards giving women the vote, but after the war people attitudes change and until now in 1918 the barrier against womens suffrage was miserable and a partial victory won, under the Representation of the People Act, women over 30 years of age were given the parliamentary vote if they were householders, the wives of householders, occupiers of property with an annual rent of 5 or more. About 8.5 one thousand thousand women were put under this new law. It was not until ten years later, however, that all women could vote on equal terms with men, at the age of 21 and over, the new annotation becoming law on July 2, 1928.