“Suffragette”—Unapologetically Feminist

By Linda G. Ford

13 January, 2016
Countercurrents.org

It was so refreshing, and surprising, to see “Suffragette” and see a seriously feminist film. The film was firmly based in its historical context, but it also is clear that the oppressive conditions those feminists fought have not disappeared. I am the author of Iron-Jawed Angels: The Suffrage Militancy of the National Woman’s Party, 1912-1920, a book about militant American suffragists. I felt that the “Iron-Jawed Angels” film (2004) lacked the spirit and the essence of determined feminism that I had tried to convey in the book. American—and British—militant suffragist/feminists were revolutionaries. They sought to change a very entrenched male power structure which ruled over every aspect of their lives. The “Suffragette” film captures that. It captures the dead seriousness of the early 20th century feminist fight. It concentrates on working women, factory women, and in particular, one woman: Maud Watts.

The film’s been criticized (usually by male film critics) for piling too much misery on one woman, calling that unrealistic. Of course, it’s not unrealistic at all. It is still realistic to portray a working woman’s life as one of uncertain job security, bad environmental conditions; and as compared to male workers, unequal pay, unequal respect, and sexual harassment on the job. And it is also realistic to portray women’s lives as still including domestic violence, unequal decision-making and unequal household work with men; and a continued lack of seriousness applied to women’s issues (or women’s power) politically. The film also reminds us that unlawful surveillance, public shaming, harassment, attempts to recruit protesters as spies, and jailing and torture of political dissenters is still liberally, and increasingly, used against female political dissenters. “Suffragette” brilliantly shows the anger and militance created by broken government promises, and the cruelty of the harsh and brutal police methods of female crowd control. As with American militant suffragists, husbands and family members saw the women’s actions as bringing shame to them, as revealing the women, like Maud Watts’ husband said, were “wrong in the head,” and could not be controlled by their menfolk. And as with American militants, the women developed a feeling of sisterhood with their colleagues as they became part of a feminist revolution against patriarchal violence and control.

The British militant suffrage movement, the Women’s Social and Political Union, led by Emmeline Pankhurst, inspired and created policy blueprints for the American militants’ National Woman’s Party, led by Alice Paul and Lucy Burns. In fact, Paul and Burns, along with other U.S. militants, served in Britain, experiencing street corner speaking for suffrage, rough handling by police, and the torture of forced feeding to prevent hunger strikes. Both groups used increasingly militant tactics in the face of intransigent male government: from unfurling banners at politicians, to “unlawful” protests, pickets and demonstrations. Both groups paid by facing increasing governmental punishment. Unlike the more frivolous and light-weight “Iron-Jawed Angels” film, “Suffragette” captures the drama, the dignity, and the significance of the women’s fight.

It’s impossible to achieve perfection, especially in a two-hour portrayal, and there were a couple of errors, or at least erroneous impressions. For one thing, Emmeline Pankhust and daughter Christabel gradually moved away from including working women in their cause. In fact, that was one reason they broke with daughter Sylvia—she insisted, as a socialist, on maintaining, and emphasizing, those ties with her headquarters in the East End of London. And Emmeline Pankurst did face criticism (in spite of her own suffering in prison) for giving the inspirational speech and then escaping to Paris (rather like the brilliant and one-time, 15-minute speech by the incomparable Meryl Streep). Emmeline and Christabel Pankhurst also supported the war effort once World War I began, a war which Sylvia Pankhurst, the pacifist, did not. This brought Sylvia closer to the American pacifist, NWP leader Alice Paul. Such quibbles do not diminish the power of “Suffragette,” and especially the mesmerizing performance, the performance that carries and maintains the continuity of the story, of Carey Mulligan as the wonderfully courageous Maud Watts.

The overarching effect of seeing “Suffragette,” as a feminist, was wow! It pulls no punches—so dramatic and so true. It was not a story done in terms of men and relations to men (like the ”Iron-Jawed Angels” film did too often)—it was quiet and deadly serious. We live in a global, corporate-run, militarized world. In America, we are surrounded by all the anti-woman signs we feminists were fighting against in the 1970s and 80s—sex-segregated jobs, violence against women, too much military, and unequal political and economic and domestic power. The cultural female icon is a prostitute. Any female singer or actress has to look like one (to be “free”—so familiar!). Women who object to obscenely sexist video games on the internet get death threats. Women who write exposes of the campus rape culture are discredited. Incidents of domestic abuse are on the rise—including literally visible ones by hyper-masculine NFL players. Women’s issues, women’s rights, women’s power: we need a new surge.

There are some good signs of a fight. Finally, after over 50 women reported sexual abuse at his hands, the rich, famous and powerful Bill Cosby was charged with the felony of sexual assault and will be tried. When former NBA player Gilbert Arenas suggested WNBA players should wear thongs or lingerie as the only way men would watch their games, Elena Delle Donne, WNBA MVP of the Chicago Sky, responded. Donne said, “Women were not put on this earth just for men to look at. We are people. We have a purpose. We are role models. I am an athlete first and foremost.” I wrote a book about 15 years ago called Lady Hoopsters: A History of Women’s Basketball which traces the constant battle between women ballplayers having to be “ladies” versus athletes, between being weak and constrained versus being strong, competent and respected. The police inspector in “Suffragette” comes down on the side of women as weak and constrained. He told Maud Watts she was “nothing in the world.” But she told him he was wrong, that women would win. After the horror of Emily Davison’s sacrificing her body for the Cause at the Derby, after all the disappointments and violence, Maud Watts said there would be “thousands of feet” to follow hers: “We go on.”

* I was not a consultant for the “Iron-Jawed Angels” film (although I was, eventually, compensated for their use of my title).

Linda Ford is a former history professor and feminist organizer. She lives in central New York where she has an internet book business and writes women’s history. Linda Ford is currently finishing Women ‘Politicals’: Jailed Dissidents from Mother Jones to Lynne Stewart. She can be reached at linda[dot]ford[at]twcny.rr[dot]com