Book Review

Woman Suffrage and the Origins of Liberal Feminism examines the relationship between the political ideology of the suffragists and their acts of political expediency that eventually won the vote for women. It was clear that this work is a political science text, not a history text. As the title suggests, this is a study in political ideology. Political ideology is defined as the platform of arguments that persuade audiences to follow that leader, join her organization, or support a reform goal as a nonmember. According to Marilley, over the years suffragists developed three distinct liberal feminist ideologies that dominated during different phases of the movement and that were designed to mobilize different supporters against different forms of opposition to their cause. These three feminisms are the feminism of equal rights, the feminism of fear, and the feminism of personal development.	1
The feminism of equal rights was the primary ideology from the Jacksonian era through Reconstruction, and it simply called for freedom through equality. This inclusive egalitarianism developed within the Garrisonian anti-slavery movement as women like Maria Stewart, the Grimké sisters, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton entered the public sphere as abolitionists but transformed themselves into feminists who called for radical structural changes in marriage, the political system, and society. The ideology of equal rights downplayed suffrage in favor of equal rights, but was unable to mobilize much support outside the Garrisonians. Even women in the temperance movement rejected the radical ideas of the feminism of equal rights. The only political victories of this phase were those involving married women's property rights, but even these victories could not be counted as feminist victories. The failure of the feminism of equal rights to achieve suffrage through the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments led to the development of a new ideology.	2
The feminism of fear was developed in the mid-1870s by Frances Willard, leader of the Women's Christian Temperance Union. Instead of concentrating on equality for women, Willard emphasized the threat of male physical abuse of women and its threat to women's freedom and security. Suffrage became a means toward prohibitionist reforms and "home protection." Willard brought more women supporters to suffrage than any other leader. The feminism of fear also expanded the definition of citizenship to include full citizenship for women. Unfortunately, the feminism of fear also relied on nativist and Americanist sentiments to garner support. It was during this time period that suffragists' racism and elitism were most vocally expressed. Yet, by appealing to the white, Protestant political elite, the suffragists were able to achieve some suffrage victories.	3
The feminism of personal development called for women's freedom through opportunities to become full persons. This feminism was developed early in the movement but did not dominate until the twentieth century. Like the feminism of fear, this ideology placed suffrage first. It emphasized the personal losses that each woman suffered without the right to vote and drew attention to the basic injustice of the exclusion of women from politics. Unlike the feminism of fear, however, the feminism of personal development rejected racist, nativist, and elitist arguments for a return to more egalitarian principles. Political success, however, was still only achieved through appeals to and alliances with the political elite.	4
The major contribution of Woman Suffrage and the Origins of Liberal Feminism is Marilley's fresh perspective on the relationship between the ideology of the suffragists and their political strategies and actions. It would be easy to read this book, or at least the cover commentary, and come away thinking that her central thesis was that women sought a radical goal but as a politically powerless group had to sell out to politically powerful men to achieve that goal. But that is not what Marilley is arguing. Rather, she is arguing that the relationship between ideology and politics is complex, not in conflict. Both ideology and expediency in politics are important if we are to understand the struggles and battles of the suffrage movement. Ideological appeals were necessary to get the movement going, to gather women's support, and to give women the skills and confidence they needed to make the movement work. They were also needed to gather enough public support to move the issue to the political agenda. Getting the issue from the political to the legislative agenda, on the other hand, required different political strategies aimed at getting support from the policymakers. Thus, there is not a conflict between ideology and political expediency. They are both essential parts of a policy process.	5
Marilley's use of primary sources, allowing the suffragists to speak for themselves, is the work's greatest strength. Her analysis of these sources is also strong. She challenges previous interpretations of the movement with strong evidence to support her interpretation. Her case analysis of two early suffrage efforts in Colorado are also powerful additions to the work. The major weakness of this book is its writing. It is a hard read. Although Marilley is not writing a history of the suffrage movement, the history is a necessary part of the analysis and she does not tell the story well. The first several chapters are extremely dense and difficult. Her middle chapters, including the chapters dealing with the Colorado movement, become an easier read, with the best being the chapter previously published elsewhere. The last few chapters again become difficult. This is unfortunate because while I would recommend this book to my colleagues who incorporate women into their courses on political philosophy, political and social movements, and women's history, I would never ask my students, even my graduate students, to wade through this book.	6
Kate Greene University of Southern Mississippi

Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.