Does Source B support the evidence of Source C about the Suffrage campaign?

During the early 20th century, Women's battle for equality reached its very peak as their campaign to be granted suffrage became even more passionate and frantic, as. It was around this time that the first real changes started occur; and as with any revolutionary crusade, there was a great deal of controversy surrounding it. It therefore comes as no great surprise that an immense amount of media was published concerning the subject. This was created by people on both sides of the campaign, and so there is a very wide range of the opinions voiced through forms of books, newspaper articles, speeches and in particular propaganda posters. Both these sources depict an extremely disdainful view towards women's suffrage, however to what extent they support each other in the rest of their views is rather debatable and needs to be considered to a further degree. Although these two sources were written for entirely different purposes, they surprisingly share one of their common principles, sending out an almost identical message on the actions of Suffragettes. Both authors feel that they were behaving in a maniacal manner which was totally unacceptable, and one which would only be used by the most preposterous lunatics. Source C depicts a suffragette protesting [maniacally], in a very emotional posture with greatly exaggerated and unwomanly actions. The viewer immediately feels contempt towards her, seeing her as nothing but a [nuisance]. This feeling is then enhanced by the label underneath- ‘The Shrieking Sister'. This is implying that the suffragette is very mentally unstable, to the extent of hysteria. Also, by ‘Sister' it is associating her into an [organization], as part of a brethren which we are led to believe are all like this. This immediately lowers all suffragette campaigners, making their cause worthless. Source B is portraying a very similar [feeling], labeling the protests as a ‘shrill cry'. The word shrill here implies how they are [hysterical], irrational and desperate. It's purpose, similar to that of Source C's is to demote them and point out how ridiculous their actions are. Another way in which the two sources are [linked/similar] is in the way they dehumanize women suffrage campaigners. Source B does this simply by the title of the book- â€Å"Women or Suffragette†. This suggests that a woman could only be one or the other, and that should they be a suffragette they are letting go of an femininity. Even by just reading the title of the book, the public feel forced into making a decision between the two sides- between being a respected, charming woman or being an indistinguishable/undefinable monstrosity. Source C uses similar tactics in putting this point across, using the label and the drawing of the Suffragette behaving in an animalistic way to highlight the beastiality and violence of the woman. Text is used to great advantage by both Corelli and Partridge to make their views [noticed], and both use fonting techniques to capture the readers attention, Partridge using a larger, bolder, more noticeable font and Corelli simply putting it in italics to stress the importance of that view. This results in the viewer being able to interpret their main [points] even at a glance, which increases the liklihood of success of their work. (Success being that people begin to reflect on the situation through the view of the authors). Whilst the Sources may support each other in their fundamental [reasons], they differ quite a bit in the rest of their views. One of the biggest ways in which their opinions vary is on the whole suffrage campaign. Source B is quite clearly against the whole cause, as Corelli does not differentiate between Suffragists and Suffragattes whilst she is slandering female campaigners, and simply generalizes them together. On the other hand, Source C makes it clear that they have no [issues] whatsoever with Suffragists. In the portrait, the Suffragists is represented as calm, mature and is standing very upright and [sensibly]. She is making no radical actions, and appears to be heavily critizing the [actions] of the Suffragette. In the caption, she is even labelled as the ‘Sensible Woman'. This implies that Partridge is by no means against the cause, and that if campaigners behave in appropriate and [sensible] manners then he is perfectly happy to listen to their cause, and that he is simply refusing to tolerate the violence of Suffragettes. However, this view is not very clearly shown by the poster, and it left to the viewer to interpret it themselves. In general, Source C is only commenting on the tactics used in the campaign, not the reasoning behind the campaign. Source B is completely different to this, and it is full of critism of Women for demanding suffrage. Corelli clams that ‘Women were and are destined to make voters rather than to be voters themselves'. By the comment, she is stating that she feels that the situation is never going to change, and that women should just stay in the Private Sphere where they are expected to be. She feels that women are not capable of voting, and that the injustices they suffer should be stopped through other means. Corelli suggests that the lack of equality it women's own fault, saying that it is a result of ‘the way in which mothers have reared their sons'. This is saying that if Women want to change the way in which they are treated in society, they must do it by giving their sons, the generation which will shape the future as they become adults, a more [morally intact] view of women. Whereas contrary to this belief of it being due to women's own mistakes that society is so obvlivious to their rights, Source C suggests that it is due to Suffragettes that the campaign is still failing, as is exampled by the Suffragists commenting that Suffragettes were the cause's ‘worst enemy'. In conclusion, I feel that Source B does support a great deal of the evidence in Source C- that about the campaigning techniques of Suffragettes; however it can vary a great deal in other views and in some ways they even contradict each other, such as with the opinion of who was to blame for the great sexism of the time. In general, I feel that although the views of the two sources are in places identical, this is just a coincidence, as they are for different reasons. This is most likely due to the fact that the original media had different purposes. Source B was from a book which was very clearly anti-women's suffrage. Anyone who would be reading the book would clearly already be leaning towards these views, and Corelli was simply trying to persuade them more, or share her opinions with them. Partridge was using his poster to appeal to Suffragettes, and to the public, to try and make them realize that violent, militant campaigning was not helping the cause, and making the whole thing seem just rants of hysterical, moronic women. By acting like animals with ‘shrieking' and ‘shrill cries', they bring a bad reputation to all women, and simply give support to the claims that women were 'emotionally weak'. The one thing which they most storngly support each other in is in blaming Suffragettes for the level of disfain the public have towards Women's Suffrage, and it is this solely which links the too.