On this day 100 years ago: Votes for Women

Remembering Suffrage in 2018: An unfinished cause?

Professor Linda Connolly

Director Maynooth University Social Sciences Institute and author of ‘From Revolution to Devolution: the Irish Women’s Movement’

*this blog should be appropriately cited if used in other publications, public talks or in media work 

The Great Reform Act of 1832 restricted the parliamentary vote to “male persons.” Some 86 years later, the December 1918 general election was the first opportunity for women to exercise their democratic right to vote in parliamentary elections in Ireland.  Only 53.3% of the female population was included in the franchise as only women aged over 30 with property qualifications or in a university constituency could vote. Although limited by age, class and wealth, the securing of votes for women in 1918 was nonethelesssignificant and critical. Female suffrage has over time beenconsidered the high point of ‘first wave’ feminism, which is evident in the impressive Vótáil 100 State commemoration programme in 2018 www.oireachtas.ie/votail100/votail100. However, the long term antecedents of first wave feminism in Ireland also deserve due consideration at this time. Existing evidence of the activism of individual women and campaigns led by women in the nineteenth century dates to at least the 1830s. Significant achievements were made in the nineteenth century in areas such as, married women's control of their own property, education, employment and local government in this period.  In addition, the achievement of suffrage in 1918 was preceded by another suffrage campaign - the right of women to vote and run in district council elections was granted in 1898. Moreover, feminist activists were commonly protestant and unionist in sympathy in this period.  Mary Cullen and Maria Luddy have shown that although there is little evidence of a mass based women's movement, in nineteenth century activism was not just a question of a few isolated individuals.  "These women were, of course, from the middle and upper classes, the classes which generally involved themselves in women's issues" in the nineteenth century (Cullen and Luddy, 1995: 17).  Yet, quite a lot of the writing on the early decades of the twentieth century speaks as if Irish feminism did not exist until it emerged parallel to the broad nationalist renaissance in political, social, economic and cultural life at the end of the nineteenth century.  

In the early twentieth century, while protestant and unionist-inclined women still campaigned, catholic and nationalist women were of course becoming active in increasing numbers and the campaign for suffrage involved a wider coalition of women.  A more broad based women's social movement expanded from the turn of the twentieth century (involving prominent women leaders such as Constance Markievicz, Hanna Sheehy Skeffington, Eva Goore Booth, Louie Bennett and Helen Chevenix), and a militant suffrage strand emerged.   Between 1912 and 1914 there were twenty-six convictions of suffragettes.  The militancy of a relatively small group of radical activists, over this short period, generated significant attention for the cause (the writings of Margaret Ward and Louise Ryan detail several aspects of the women’s movement in this period).

First wave feminism was often divided (not unified) by the national question, firstly between unionists and nationalists, and secondly on whether the vote for women or the national cause took precedence. Nationalism is, of course, an integral dynamic in the historical development of the Irish women's movement.  Yet, the women's movement is unique in that a range of political and social questions are inextricably interwoven in its agenda. Conflict between nationalist and suffrage women from 1912 until 1920 has been widely considered a pivotal dynamic of first wave feminism. In general, nationalists opposed the idea of campaigning for a vote for the British parliament - the issue of Irish independence must come first.  Nationalist-feminists became increasingly involved in the overall struggle for suffrage after the 1916 Rising, however.  More research needs to be conducted on unionist suffragism in this period. Little is known about the lack of conversion of unionist feminists to nationalism in this period with more emphasis to date on Protestant women who fervently adopted nationalism (such as the Gifford sisters).  

The rich history of socialist-feminism and women engaged in philanthropy and poor relief from the nineteenth century is also important. Apart from suffrage and unionist-nationalist relations, the writings of first wave feminists demonstrate widespread activism on issues to do with class, trade unionism, morality, sexual abuse and the law in the nineteenth and indeed in the early decades of the twentieth century.  Campaigns around questions of immediate interest to women, children and the poor came to the fore, for example, when Maud Gonne and Inghinidhe na hƒireann, and the women around Connolly, devoted much of their energies to raising money to feed the children of the urban poor. 

In 1918 British and Irish women over the age of thirty were granted the right to vote and stand for election to parliament.  Constance Markievicz, who was elected, and Winifred Carney were the only female candidates in the election.  In the new State, it became quickly apparent that the right of women to vote per se did not radically change the position of women in Ireland.  The collective vote of women did not become a force for political pressure and change, nor did women become elected representatives in large numbers.  Indeed, the number of women elected as public representatives has remained comparatively low on a consistent basis, right up to the present day.  The intense campaign for suffrage had been important symbolically, however, in that as a campaign it unified a concerted (although ideologically different) network of feminist activists that were to sustain in future decades.  By 1920, it was clear that the remnants of this network would maintain a high degree of continuity and co-operation in the Free State (see my 2003 book and Caitríona Beaumont’s work for a fuller discussion).  The women's movement remained active in the early years of the independent State, working primarily outside of the new political establishment regardless of the granting of suffrage.  

Achieving the vote in 1918, and full adult suffrage in 1922, is widely considered the last  piece of progressive legislation affecting women for many years. The fact that successive governments of the Irish Free State introduced direct legislation in the 1920s and 1930s that reinforced several restrictions on the rights of women in the arena of employment, participation on juries and reproduction is palpable.  The 1937 Constitution can be viewed as the culmination of the State imposing a consistent patriarchal agenda in the decades following independence.  The culture engendered by State leaders in this era impeded the participation of women in party politics and in Government. And women who subverted the received definition of family and sexuality that was premised on marriage and motherhood were routinely institutionalised or exiled. Although women's groups were active throughout the twentieth century, it was not until the 1970s that a powerful women's movement began to successfully disrupt this trend in key domains. Votes for women in 1918 was a significant achievement in a patriarchal society that restricted women’s rights and freedoms in so many other ways. But as feminists themselves recognized at the time – suffrage was just one important step in a much wider cause that would require, and indeed still requires, several more years of activism and fortitude.   

———

#OnThisDay - 100 years ago the 'Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act 1918' allowed the following  "A woman shall not be disqualified by sex or marriage for being elected to or sitting or voting as a Member of the Commons House of Parliament." 

#Vótáil100 www.oireachtas.ie/votail100/votail100

MacGill Summer School 2018

Can the women speak?

Summer schools, panels and manels

Professor Linda Connolly spoke at the 2018 MacGill Summer School on a panel “Women in Irish Public Life: Why are organisations such as MacGill Summer School still trapped in a world of gender stereotypes?” Friday 27^thJuly, 2018. This was also published in the Irish Times.

In 2016 and 2017, 75% of those listed on the ‘papers delivered’ section of the MacGill Summer School website were men. There were a number of all male panels listed at the school over several years but no all female panels. In the 2018 school, however, there is now an impressive 40% female speakers listed after a rush of positive action. Several questions now arise, however: if MacGill can reverse a negative trend so quickly what else can be done to address the much wider problem of women’s unequal participation on panels in the Irish public sphere? Why do some events and organisations achieve gender parity when others fail?

Historically, male panels were evident in all male juries and parliaments which denied women the right to vote, for instance. Statistically today ‘manels’ persist in many public fora and are extremely prevalent in the Irish media, academia, business and politics. For instance, the most recent edition of Irish Historical Studies, the journal of Irish historians, was widely criticised for all 10 articles being written by men. Likewise prominent radio and television shows are known to habitually include very few women on panels.

Manels in reality serve to demean, exclude, undermine, offend and disadvantage a whole generation of women in Ireland. The practice of adding a woman to the ticket only after a gender problem is noticed likewise reeks of tokenism and puts many women off from participating in events. Womenin Ireland speak far less than men in public. A recent study by the Open Society Foundationlooking at five years of high-level conferences in Europe, reveals that a woman has only 1 opportunity to speak for every 3 times a man speaks. The dominance of male presenters and speakers—which has led to use of the terms "manpanels" or "manels"—has major implications for women, the study argues, because of theimpact on key policies and decision-making dictated by such events. Conference and summer school organizers and media outlets are the gatekeepers who make decisions about who will have the opportunity to share their views with policymakers, journalists and business leaders.

Society in general needs more robust, gender sensitive social and educational policies to create the conditions for greater participation of women in public life.Addressingthe ‘four C’s’ coined by Senator Ivana Bacik in a study of women in politics – cash, confidence, childcare and culture – remains necessary. Some men bowed down to pressure to stand down and permit women to take their place at the MacGill Summer school this week. ‘Leaning in’ may help enhance the visibility of individual women – and we need more female role models and leaders - but this will not change the overall structures and culture that serve to exclude women. Moreover, ‘lean in’ is dependent on an individual woman having the privilege, confidence and ‘clout’ to do this in the first place. 

Many women do not possess any clout or influence, and will require adequate notice and advance resources from organisers to travel and participate in events and on the media. Panel organisers, television and radio producers relying on ‘experts’ beyond elite institutions and the usual suspects is also critical if participation in the public sphere is to be widened in Ireland. The Danielle Carroll Summer School last week responded to the MacGill controversy by focusing on women directly impacted by homelessness, poverty, austerity and profound injustices in our society. The historian Catherine Corless likewise has proven that critical expertise often lies in local communities outside elite institutions and amongst women.

Often women themselves are blamed for manels – accused of turning down invites all the time, being never available especially at short notice and considered not as ‘good’ as the men when on. Yet many strategies for increasing the number of women on media panels for instance, including gender bias training for producers and researchers, exist. Likewise gender monitoring, targets or quotas overseen by bodies like the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland would focus minds. ‘Fixing the women’strategies such as media training and mentoring are important but will not fundamentally change the unconscious bias that determines how panels are decided at source.

MacGill learned the hard way that manels will cause a reaction but they can be addressed. Importantly, the necessary presence feminism has in Irish public life was demonstrated. Activism, protest, naming, calling out, social media organizing all generate a real challenge to male dominated arenas. Examples of this in the arts, the media and academia includeWaking the Feminists, Fair Plé, Academic Manel Watch, the Gate Theatre investigation, the Micheline Sheehy Skeffington three conditions campaign and Women on Air. 

The State also has an important role to play. Should manels funded by public money (that women workers contribute to through taxes) be prohibited? Should State gender quotas be introduced and economic sanctions implemented for events, media bodies etc if equal gender representation on panels is not achieved? Irish universities will not receive research funding from Science Foundation Ireland and the Irish Research Council, for instance, if they do not increase the number of women in senior positions. 

And what about men?Imagine that one learns about a manel only a few days before a conference. What do you do? Drop out? Defend it? Deny it? Avoid responsibility? Or call it out and demonstrate solidarity and resistance with women? As #metoo and other campaigns have shown speaking out in any situation will be contentious. But these kinds of disruptions are a necessary step in tackling manels. The women are clearly thereif invited and included.

Repealing the 8th Amendment

A Historic Moment in Reproductive Rights

copyright Professor Linda Connolly

Director, Maynooth University Social Sciences Institute

The Minister for Health introduced the Regulation of the Termination of Pregnancy Bill in the Dáil, which seeks to legalise abortion services in Ireland this week. This was a historic occasion undoubtedly in a State and society that has demonstrated a deeply troubled relationship with women who fall pregnant outside of marriage by institutionalizing orcriminalizing women. "Today we begin the job they have given us, of making the law that follows the repeal of the 8thAmendment and after 35 years in our Constitution, in doing so, we are also making history," he said.  The minister said history was made in the streets, in homes and in ballot boxes across the country by people, including politicians, who had campaigned "steadfastly for years".

History was though already being ‘made’ in the arena of reproductive rights long before the 8th was introduced in 1983,both in a campaign for reproductive rights that had begunmuch earlier and through the silent, secretive actions of many thousands of Irish women who got themselves ‘into trouble’as it was termed. Abortions were provided illicitly in Ireland as documented in court prosecutions throughout the twentieth century and infanticide was commonplace. Over 100 Irish women were estimated to be dying annually from unsafe backstreet abortions in the 1930s for instance. Extra marital or unwanted pregnancy remained for decades a matter that was swept under the carpet or exported to be dealt with in the UK. The legalizing of abortion in the UK in 1967 in an effort to abolish risky ‘backstreet’ procedures combined with the mobilization of a second wave feminist movement demanding abortion rights in several countries were destined to provoke controversy and activism in Ireland. Although initial energy in feminist and liberal reproductive rights campaigns in Irelandfrom the early 1970s went into securing the legalization ofcontraception first, the right to free, safe, legal abortions was already a core stated demand of the feminist group Irishwomen United by 1976.

The relative ease of passage to the UK for a medicalizedabortion was undoubtedly a game changer for Irish women seeking a safe alternative to illegal abortions but the dangers to women not in a position to travel became all the more apparent. Numerous reproductive tragedies and abortion have dominated Irish political debate since the 1980s. The death of fourteen-year-old Anne Lovett in childbirth alongside her stillborn baby in a grotto in Co. Longford in 1984 was a profound event. Joanne Hayes, a single mother, was falsely accused of a double infanticide in a tribunal of inquiry into what became known as the ‘Kerry Babies’ case in the same year. The right to life of the unborn was protected by Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution introduced in 1983 but in reality its existence profoundly impacted women whose lives were at risk in Irish maternity hospitals because of their pregnancy. Individual women impacted by reproductive injustices havealso been the subjects of a range of litigation in both Irish and international courts on abortion in Ireland. In the case of A, B and C v Ireland in 2010, for instance, the European Court of Human Rights found that Ireland had violated the European Convention on Human Rights by failing to provide an accessible and effective procedure by which a woman can have established whether she qualifies for a legal abortion under Irish law. A number of cases related to whether an abortion was permissible in cases of fatal foetal abnormalities were taken.

Irish abortion law received worldwide attention when Savita Halappanavar died in 2012. She requested and was denied an abortion in an Irish maternity hospital while suffering from septicemia during a miscarriage. Savita’s death was a key turning point and brought thousands of protestors onto the streets, including a new generation of young women that campaigned extensively during the May 2018 referendum. The focus of the debate had shifted from the rights of mobile women forced to discontinue their unwanted pregnancies in the UK to the 8th being a life threatening risk to pregnant and immobile women in Irish maternity hospitals.  The constitutional and legislative abortion provisions subsequently discussed democratically at a series of Citizen’s Assembly meetings in 2016 and 2017 and at a Government appointed committee in 2017 which recommended substantial reform. The government proposed the 36th Amendment of the Constitution Bill in order to replace the current provisions of Article 40.3.3 with a clause allowing legislation regulating the termination of pregnancy.

The 36th amendment will decisively repeal the 8th. But the concealed stories of many thousands of pregnant Irish women will endure, having been buried, denied and silenced for decades. The story of P in December 2014 demonstrated the chaos that resulted from the 8th amendment, which the courtsconfirmed served to deny women and their families autonomy, consent and dignity in the case of maternal death prior to child birth. P was pregnant and kept on a life support machine to deleterious effect and against the wishes of her family because of the 8th amendment to the Constitution; the details of the case were harrowing.

Irish Times journalist Michael O’Regan commented in response the State apology to Joanne Hayes in 2018 that Ireland was ‘riddled with misogyny’ in the 1980s. Nell McCafferty has referred to the divisive 1980s that witnessed referenda on abortion and divorce as a civil war. The ScallyReport recently suggested women’s reproductive healthcare is characterized by ‘institutional misogyny.’ The legacy of the Irish civil war of the 1920s is obviously a critical issue in centennial Ireland. But the unequal and at times barbaric treatment of women in Ireland in the last 100 years has also created a legacy that must be fully considered in the decade of centenaries if Irish society is to arrive at a full and mature appraisal of its history and performance as a nation – equally and as controversially.

* cite the author if you draw on this piece in written work or in the media, including on television and radio