Vinnie's World | Literary Articles: With Liberty and Justice for All

Home > Articles > And Justice For All?

With Liberty and Justice For All?

Women in the American Political System

By Vinnie Apicella

The status of women in American society was one of great tragedy and eventual triumph. Oppression reigned supreme before and after our nation's rebuilding period and subsequent colonization. An oppression in the sense that women were subservient to the male figure, but perhaps even more so in their own "sphere of things" for which they knew no differently. The effect of the American Revolution of 1776 and the creation of the Union in 1787 saw another kind of revolution take place in the minds of women, which gradually led to a changing of their status in American life—a continual one that would mark their existence throughout the rest of the 18th century and beyond.

Amazingly, women were afforded more rights it seemed, while our country was still under British rule. Though much of that could be attributed to a general lack of concern or consideration on the part of the then governing body, ironically, in the aftermath of the American Revolution when women should’ve been recognized for their contributions to the patriotic cause, they were offered little recognition in the minds of the Founding Fathers.

During the colonization period in the 17th and 18th centuries, women were not completely barred from political participation. Left to the discretion of the respective states, women did actually have a right to vote, even if it wasn’t officially declared. What would become later known as a true sign of equality and right of citizenship was for all intents and purposes available to women, though few of them concerned themselves with it: "Colonial America was not a political golden age for women, but it did not bar them completely from political participation..." (Darcy, p.6)

With regards to property ownership, women possessed the right to hold property granted them from past generations or inherited through marriage. Divorced women could leave a marriage with their property or could be granted freeholds in their own name. In fact women were rather active in many aspects of social and political functioning. There have been those rare cases where one would petition state legislatures on certain political issues as occurred in a local dispute in Andover, Massachusetts or act as political figures as was the case of disaffected Quakers contesting a number of Pennsylvania elections.

Women also conducted political campaigns for their husbands, exercised feudal authority in local matters, took an active part in debates, and even held positions of Attorneys, Publishers, Custodians of the Poor, and Tax Collectors. The women’s condition as documented in Women and the American Experience follows: "There was no unity of policy among the colonies... nor was there unity of principle within them. Colonial laws often protected women’s interests... but they rarely promoted her autonomy or independence." (Woloch, p. 76) So during pre-revolution times, while women seemed to have a less-defined role in society, this seemed to their advantage as they were not met with as many restrictions that would engulf them once the ink dried on our new Constitution.

During the Revolutionary War, women played an active part in supporting the American troops in their quest for freedom. Several women showed their patriotic spirit by setting up camps for the army, supplying them with food and supplies, acting as spies, crossing the boundary to shelter revolutionaries behind British lines, performing acts of sabotage, and even going so far as to dress up as men and join in the crusade! In an odd twist, they were almost on equal footing as their male counterparts during this time of great pride, yet when it was all over and the governmental structure was laid out, they were largely ignored for their efforts.

After the war, the political community was made up of men who were simply viewed in a higher context than women were. Political and domestic patriarchy was institutionalized in the state laws. Ironically and unfairly, women were not recognized or perhaps accepted as the versatile players they proved to be during the campaign but were basically relegated to ideals of male servitude. In essence, they shot themselves in the foot with their service as supporters of the revolutionary cause and the men that fought for it, though Washington would later acknowledge his approval of their fund-raising efforts.

At the time the new national government was being constructed, women found themselves with no specific role from a political perspective. Linda Kerber wrote: "For many women, the revolution had been a strongly politicizing experience, but the newly created republic made little room for them as political beings." (p.11) Suffrage, which would later go on to be a woman’s biggest challenge, was granted to all eligible white males while women were rewarded with no such honor.

In fact, after the revolution, there was a shift away from the property-basis of political participation toward a universal recognition of male suffrage. As it turned out, whatever slim rights women retained relating to property, marriage, or political free will were no longer largely ignored, but instead minimized. John Adams’ wife Abigail was quoted as saying in opposition to the Absolute Sovereignty that earlier befell the English Revolution of 1688: "Do not put such unlimited powers into the hands of the husbands... remember men would be tyrants if they could." (Woloch, P. 84)

After the revolution, women were only the most indirect beneficiaries of independence. They gained no new legal codes or access to political life. Men’s rights increased, women’s rights decreased. So women would need to rely on their own determination and creativity if something was to get done:

Women were left to invent their own political character following the revolution… in the face of severe ridicule, responding both to the anti-intellectual complaint that educating women served no practical purpose and the conservative complaint that women had no political significance. (Kerber, p. 269)

But though such rights were unfairly and unreasonably decreased, women of the post-revolutionary era did go through a change in status thanks in part to Abigail Adams and the "Companianate Marriage," which took into consideration her influence in the household. As well, a new legitimacy of women’s education, "to instruct the mass of our citizens in their rights, interests and duties as men and citizens," according to Jefferson, and an enhanced regard for motherhood where they would become "Republican Mothers," suggested they could aid in the effectiveness of the new system by raising children of good character.

Were these new acknowledgments afforded to women in and of themselves as equal beings? On the contrary, women were in fact recognized for their war efforts and by that same token, they would still be recognized as subservient to men. Neither an interest in politics nor their avid patriotism transformed women into citizens equal to that of men. Women did not receive new legal codes or independence from coverture where what had previously been in possession by them had been turned over to their husband’s custody during, and in some cases, after marriage.

The whole basis of the drawing of the new U.S. Constitution was to protect the individual rights of the people and provide them with a strong national government designed to unify those rights and implement a democratic rule while enhancing the new role of the Constitution by making it more difficult for a majority rule to dominate. Shortly after Washington's run and before his ominous words could probably finish echoing in the ears of his predecessors regarding the dangers of party factions, it was determined to be beneficial that the American people be offered a choice other than what a simple Federalist government had to offer. In The Party’s Just Begun, this concept is taken a step further:

By the Presidential election of 1800, two congressional party caucuses composed of like-minded members, had organized around the competing standards of Hamilton and The Federalists, supporters of strong central government, and Jefferson and Madison. The Republicans who preferred empowering the states rather than the federal government. (Sabato, P.33)

Thus Party Politics was born with Jefferson becoming the first President elected as the nominee of a political party, and with it, rested the hopes that this system would be a sound representation of the varied interests and maintain the individual liberties of the people through the healthy competition of at least a two party system.

The structure of the party system involves grouping together individuals, assumed to be proficient enough to act on behalf of the people (constituents) from each state in order to see that their needs and expectations are carried out by the national government. The party structure might be pictured like a stratum with all parts being equal as they scale from the national, state, county, and local levels. Each part or division retains its own autonomy in and of itself, however each is subject to nationally imposed rules and regulations. Everything is centralized toward a downward position specifically to channel power away from the top.

The American Party setup is highly transient and the rules for membership are very thin. Anybody can register and sign up for any party of their choosing. The parties tend to take on local characteristics where an individual might have political aspirations, no experience, but plenty of desire, learn the tricks of the trade, and before long control their own county or city district much like a George Washington Plunkitt did in New York’s Tammany Hall late in the 19th century.

Women were never thought of as political beings and up until recently after the Revolutionary War, were considered dim-witted, frail, and out of touch in a man's political world. They were expected to be at home promoting "domestic harmony" and improving their education as homemakers and parents. Going back to the "Republican Mother" ideal, those who were thought to possess such strong republican ideals should naturally avoid politics and go into business and other ventures based upon their learned skills. This was in spite of their contributions to the nation’s war efforts.

But perhaps the underlying factor was that the domineering male half of the population, as would be discovered later on as women’s educational institutions took off, was afraid of role-reversal or of what the "amazons" might do if allowed entry into the political field. Linda Kerber wrote: "There was an argument that linked female political autonomy to an unflattering masculinity. The tone of this anti-political complaint was not unlike the anti-intellectualism directed against women, and indeed often appeared in conjunction with it." (279)

In any case women did and would have their go of it independently not long after the new government was established. But in the meantime, there were religious institutions that had always and still were there to provide a vehicle for women’s pious and charitable background, though only a minimal entry for the platform.

So while American politics was continually dominated by such powerfully orchestrated "machines" that effectively excluded women, several women took it upon themselves to work independently and form their own institutions that were consistent with their ideals:

During the early 19th century, middle-class women in northern towns and cities were forming female societies devoted to charity and humanitarian ends. Through voluntary associations, women were able to create their own networks outside the home, develop experience in organization and tactics, and make a distinctive contribution to benevolence and reform. (Woloch, p. 167)

Women of the time had a fondness for church and charity. Soon after they were determined to take a stand against the more pressing issues, which brought them to previously uncharted areas: Women’s temperance movements were employed to eliminate disorderliness in the home resulting from their husband’s extensive saloon patronage; Like-minded clubs were developed to discuss motherhood and Christianity as well as various other charitable functions.

As well, female associations also ran homes and shelters for poor widows and prostitutes, but they also ran institutions such as The Boston Seaman’s Aid Society and The Providence Employment Society that were economically sound and provided for jobs. Similar to the functioning of the political parties they were so shrewdly kept away from, these women’s associations usually adopted a corporate structure and drew up their own constitutions, held officer elections and formal meetings. The main business at hand was the soliciting, managing and dispensing of funds.

The Women’s Christian Temperance Movement soon led to an acknowledgement of women’s rights reformation that would recognize the equal rights of all citizens beginning with abolishing slavery, a matter which stood side by side with their own crusade for equality. Nancy Woloch wrote: "By the 1830’s, Northern women were forming associations not only for a vast array of benevolent goals but for broader ones—peace, temperance, abolition and moral reform." As was usually the case, the origin of their movements started small, but later built up steam that would reach national proportions.

Moral Reform, which didn’t last very long, (Plunkitt must’ve known something!) was based on changing the views of women in the minds of men. Forever the inferior race, it took place in the early- to mid-19th century and soon snowballed into an Equal Rights Movement. The New York Moral Reform Society had the distinction of taking place in the most prominent city in the nation and was flocked to by thousands of women, growing so large that it soon had to expand to a national level and become The American Female Moral Reform Society. "Moral reform offered a way to improve the environment, protect the young, help less fortunate women, and exert authority over men," according to Nancy Woloch. (p. 173)

Moral Reform, as serious as it became, might have been a moderate goal for some, but a more radical one loomed on the horizon in the form of Women’s Suffrage. With two prominent historical figures at the helm until nearly the end, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony fought for the one matter that would give women their rightful place as an equal in society: the right to vote as citizens.

Thus, The National Women’s Suffrage Association and American Women’s Suffrage Association had their places in history, though for a while were separated on the issue of abolition. As women became more involved in public life, they sought to protect themselves from being exploited and thus The Women’s Protective Movement came to be. But the suffrage issue would rage on until early into the 20th century and it wasn’t long before the party organizations saw the writing on the wall and began to compete for their loyalty.

In many of the same ways classic party politics and the independent activities of women paralleled each other in theme: both raised attention to significant issues; both raised capital in the aid of promotion; both could split into factions as the result of internal debates; each sought new members and promoted activism; both sought fruition in an ultimate destination—or legislative designation. However, the cause for which the women fought was more along the lines of mission fulfillment rather than increasing the boundaries of the "women’s sphere. Their counterparts could well lay claim to the former, but it’s doubtful any of the political parties could admit to the latter—even the honest ones.

The parties themselves were already established entities while the women were fighting for their political lives. Still in all, Democratic politics might have been possible if the party bosses were bypassed in favor of a direct primary where public offices would be decided by an electorate and not the bosses, therefore allowing a reformer to be eligible for offices provided the voters wanted to bypass the usual suspect. Obviously that was still a sticking point, as the main influence would have to be derived from a main populous that couldn’t vote! But on both counts, things would eventually change. Nancy Woloch succinctly sums up this relationship: "In organization, women assumed an aggressive stance and a distinctive identity. Unlike men, they entered public life as cooperators not competitors." (p. 270)

Media politics offers candidates or nominees the ability to communicate to a widespread audience without being face to face and without having to rely on the party organization to act as intermediary. The style of reaching large numbers seems to be a necessary evil for those dealing in big territories with large populations rather than the locally acceptable greeting and handshake. Though in recent times, both methods could prove beneficial as Maggie Lauterer, hailing from a small Southern town, learned the effectiveness of both down home charm and exploitation of large media campaigns in her political education in 1994.

Media politics is no different than classic party politics in the sense that both require fair sums of money to finance a campaign. However in the media circuit, more can be obtained in a quicker and more efficient manner through the use of television, radio and computer technology. Using ex-wrestler Jesse "The Body" Ventura as an example, a man who on image alone could’ve been dismissed as a laughable joke, he defeated political veteran Hubert Humphrey III in a recent Minnesota election for Governor. There’s something apparently to be said for celebrity status which certainly bleeds media politics for all it’s worth, but in this case it’s hard not to believe in the sincerity of someone who in spite of celebrity status might have had an edge because of a lacking in political background.

In a sense, media politics breeds the political aspirant who can be an entertainer at the same time. Image means everything in this day and age, though there are exceptions, as was the case with Maggie Lauterer. Though she made an impressive political debut, there will always be someone who prefers to leave politics to the trained politician and "let her get back in front of the television screen and cover the news." (Vote for Me—Video)

Professional media groups’ stocks have risen over the years as their services must have increased hand over fist with the growth of modern political candidates. With services that can be streamlined in direct relation to the customer’s needs, they can make the individual look like the star quality that might make the biggest difference. But essentially, media politics have diminished the value of the big party system and have allowed the independent candidate to furnish their own campaign provided they have the means to support it and the desire to run for nothing more than their career. However, some acknowledgment is due the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1972 and the creation of Party Action Committees!

As opposed to an earlier time in the history of politics, there is much more ease and flexibility for someone seeking to gain political entry. In the years following the 1960’s, not long after the decline of the last great party boss Richard Daley of Chicago, there were a large number of people getting into politics who never appeared before. Those bosses and the parties they controlled so effectively had the door kicked open in front of them and their power suppressed with the insertion of direct primaries seriously limiting their control of the elections.

So the opportunities for women are there. Without the worry of outstretched hands ready to plunge into the unsuspecting potential office-holder’s pockets, the party bosses and their organizations are now a secondary afterthought. It had to happen. Richard Daley held as much power as Mayor of Chicago for his six terms as anyone ever knew. He was widely accepted and appreciated as someone who brought real progress into that city during his tenure some forty years ago. But he couldn’t hold up to the inevitable change that was fast engulfing his beloved city. In the blink of an eye, Mr. Daley and his team were obsolete and heading on the fast track to public disgrace.

When women finally received their right to vote in 1920 and were officially admitted into the political forum, a parallel position was created for them as Co-Committee Person at each governmental level. So just that quickly they went from having no one in any portion of office to having several right from the beginning.

New politics requires education and skill unlike the days of a Plunkitt who vehemently denied the necessity of book smarts and insisted on the street-wise climate and face to face contact. And it worked well for him back then. In William Riordan’s impressive compilation of the Tammany Hall legend, Plunkitt’s comment draws irony: "Have you ever thought what would become of the country if the bosses were put out of business and their places were taken by a lot of cart-tail orators and college graduates? It would mean chaos." (p. 92)

Today’s candidate-centered new brand of politics has to be able to sell itself in order to survive where characterizing, personalizing and dramatization take precedence over actual issues:

The erosion of the parties’ organizational strength set the stage for the introduction of new political techniques that represented radical departures from campaign practices of the 19th century. In place of manpower and organization, contending forces began to employ intricate electronic communication techniques to attract electoral support. (Lowi & Ginsberg, p. 502)

Regarding the equal footing that male and female candidates may or may not be on even today, new politics offers a level playing surface for all. Either or both can have celebrity status, possess wealth, relate to the people for whom they’re campaigning, but most importantly, they don’t need the backing of a strong party as they did in the past. In fact, while parties do of course still exist in all facets and locales of a government, they’ve diminished to the point of relative obscurity when drawn upon their glory days of the past.