Demonstrate The Course Competency Of Global Perspective

Demonstrate the Course Competency Of Global Perspective by Constructing an Evidence-Based Argument

This assignment asks you to demonstrate the course competency of Global Perspective by constructing an evidence-based argument that integrates multiple perspectives on an issue in Modern US History. The ability to understand different perspectives is a critical skill for historians and essential to functioning as a well-informed citizen. This assignment involves creating a dialog between two historical figures from 1920 who hold opposite views on women's suffrage. You should creatively explain who these women are and their relationship, and then craft a dialog in which each attempts to persuade the other to change their mind.

Specifically, you will first read and take notes on two newsletters concerning women's suffrage: "The Remonstrance against Woman Suffrage" and "The Suffragist." Next, write either at least four short letters (one paragraph each) or a spoken dialog between the two women about their opposing views on suffrage, demonstrating critical thinking and use of primary sources with prior knowledge.

Paper For Above instruction

The early 20th century in the United States was marked by intense debates over women's suffrage, a pivotal issue that reflected broader societal shifts and conflicts. To exemplify the multiple perspectives on this issue, I will craft a dialogue between two women in 1920, embodying contrasting viewpoints: Margaret, a middle-aged mother from rural Ohio who opposes women's suffrage, and Emily, a young, educated woman from New York who advocates for it. Their relationship is that of a mother and daughter, a common dynamic that highlights generational and ideological divides.

Margaret, rooted in traditional values and skeptical of social change, begins their conversation. "Emily, I understand your desire to see women vote, but I fear that such radical change could undermine the morals and stability of our society. Women are naturally nurturers, best suited to caring roles within the family and community. Allowing them to vote might divert their focus from these vital responsibilities and lead to chaos." Her perspective is influenced by the prevailing societal norms that viewed women primarily as moral guardians and homemakers. This view is supported by voices like those in "The Remonstrance against Woman Suffrage" (Remonstrance, 1920), which expressed concern about women's involvement in politics disrupting societal order (Nineteenth Century Collections Online, 1920).

Emily responds with a firm but respectful tone. "Mama, I respect your beliefs, but times are changing. Women have proven their capability through participation in war efforts, education, and public service. Denying them the vote is discriminatory and unjust. It is a matter of equality and justice, not chaos. Women's suffrage is a step towards social progress, empowering women to influence policies that affect their lives." Emily's perspective aligns with the optimism expressed in "The Suffragist," which celebrated women's achievements and their right to political participation (Nineteenth Century Collections Online, 1920). This dialogue underscores the differing interpretations of gender roles and societal order during this transformative period.

Margaret considers Emily's arguments but remains cautious. "I see your point, but I worry that politics will corrupt women and lead to moral decline. Besides, women in my community focus on raising children and maintaining the home. They don’t have the time or interest in voting or politics." Her concerns are reflective of the traditionalist viewpoint that saw women's primary responsibility as domestic. Critics of women's suffrage, like those in "The Remonstrance," believed that women's engagement in politics could jeopardize societal stability (Nineteenth Century Collections Online, 1920).

Emily counters with hope and conviction. "Mom, change is inevitable, and it can be positive. Women are already contributing significantly outside voting—working, leading, protesting—and their voices deserve representation. Democracy should include everyone, and excluding women is unjust. Giving women the vote would strengthen society by promoting fairness and inclusivity." This exchange illustrates the evolving perspectives on gender and democracy, involving both personal conviction and societal influences, and reflects the historical debates of the era.

References

• "The Remonstrance against Woman Suffrage." Remonstrance (1920). Nineteenth Century Collections Online. https://access.nineteenthcenturycollections.com
• "The Suffragist." The Suffragist VII, no. ). Nineteenth Century Collections Online. https://access.nineteenthcenturycollections.com