Essay Questions
Chapter Two: All Rights are not Equal – Suffrage versus the Equal Rights
Amendment
1. Compare and contrast the goals and strategies of the NAWSA, as led by Carrie
Chapman Catt (1915), and the Congressional Union as led by Alice Paul (1914). How did
each organization and leader view the fight for suffrage? How did each leader situate her
organization's actions within the context of the time? Recognizing that hindsight is
almost always perfect, which strategy do you think was most effective in gaining suffrage
for women and why? Could suffrage have been won through the efforts of one
organization without the other? Explain.
2. What series of events led up to several women deciding to vote "illegally"—in other
words, why had they come to conclude that this was a good strategy? What was the
Supreme Court's reasoning in the Minor v. Happersatt decision that declared their actions
unconstitutional? With their federal constitutional claims denied, how did the suffragists’
overall strategy change? Evaluate how things might have been different for the women’s
movement, had the court sided with Virginal Minor.
3. Evaluate the relationships women's groups have historically built with other social
movements. Choose any one alliance discussed in Chapter Two and discuss what women
gained from the alliance, the roles women played in both movements, and the eventual
outcome for both groups. In your judgment, do women benefit from collaborating with
other social groups in the pursuit of equality? What about today? Do you think a
collaboration between groups interested in promoting women’s rights and some other
organization might be beneficial? Explain with specific examples.
4. Compare and contrast the objections to the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1920s
with those in the 1970s. What was the basis for opposition to the ERA in each time
period, who was most vociferously opposed to the ERA, and how was opposition
mobilized? If advocates of the ERA want to try again for ratification, what might they
learn from the previous attempts and how might they construct a strategy for successful
ratification in the twenty-first century? Who would you expect to be the opponents this
time and why?
5. Create an argument in the affirmative or negative regarding the need for an Equal
Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution today. Be sure to include an historical
evaluation of why the U.S. does not currently have such an amendment. If you argue in
the affirmative, give the specific language that you would support in an ERA, address
why the current laws and court interpretations are inadequate for the protection of
women's rights, and assess how an ERA would change the lives of women and men. If
you argue in the negative, be sure to cite relevant laws and/or court cases that support
equal rights, rendering an amendment unnecessary, and articulate the ways in which an
ERA would alter life for the worse.
6. The most recent strategy for ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment follows the logic
of the 27th Amendment, also known as the “Madison Amendment.” Proponents of the
ERA argue that acceptance of the Madison Amendment means that Congress has the
power to maintain the legal viability of the ERA and verify ratification if three more state
legislatures affirm the amendment. Evaluate this strategy relative to that of simply
starting over and re-introducing the ERA to Congress and the states. Since 88 percent of
the American public wants the Constitution to explicitly guarantee equality, is this an
issue that the women’s movement should promote more vigorously? Why or why not?
7. Identify commonalities and differences among the women involved in the antisuffrage and anti-ERA movements. What were their motivations for political action?
Historian Susan Marshall argues that by legitimizing an expanded political role for
women, “the feminist movement has bequeathed a much larger legacy to contemporary
political culture: the mobilization of conservative women. . . . They serve as ironic
testimony to feminist assertions of female equality” (p. 62). Identify a contemporary
example in which women are at political odds with one anther, but both fully engaged in
the political process in pursuit of their goals. In your judgment, will there ever be a time
when gender unifies women in politics? Why or why not. Explain.