How Did Pankhurst Justify The Fight For Women's Rights During The 18th Century

During the 18th century, the women’s role in society was restricted to the house and to her family, therefore limiting their job options to domestic related chores, as teachers and in department store. However, women attained certain rights such as the right to own property, right to wages and a right to an education. This wasn’t enough for many educated and middle class women, who wanted to tackle issues of social equality, equal wages and the most of all, more active involvement in their government. The first moment began when the National Society for Women’s suffrage was formed in 1868. Women lobbied parliament to grant the society’s importance. However, lobbying proved to be ineffective since most of parliament consisted of male members who were deeply rooted in conservative beliefs. A new group formed in …show more content…
Pankhurst argues that when parliament passed certain bills that angered or violated the rights and interests of the common man, men would riot and act violently until Parliament gave into their demands to either change the bill or not pass the bill at all. When Parliament tried to pass Reform Bill of 1832, the Londoners rioted against parliament. The country was on the brink of revolution until Parliament dropped the bill after an attempted arson caused half of Bristol city to be burned. Pankhurst argued “ You need something dynamic in order to force legislation through the House of Commons… “ (Why We are Militant? 1). She believes that the Parliament talks about reforms that benefit the people but never writes them nor passes them, therefore, only through the signs of a revolution will cause parliament to take action. Women have tried to lobby to Parliament about passing the law, which allows women right to vote and nothing has happened. Therefore, only when women act violently will Parliament meet their