Low Price Guarantee
We Take School POs
The Transfiguring Sword: The Just War of the Women's Social and Political Union
Contributor(s): Jorgensen-Earp, Cheryl R. (Author)

View larger image

ISBN: 0817308709     ISBN-13: 9780817308704
Publisher: University Alabama Press
OUR PRICE: $37.95  

Binding Type: Hardcover - See All Available Formats & Editions
Published: March 1997
* Out of Print *

Annotation: Jorgensen-Earp provides a new understanding of the recurrent rhetorical need to employ conservative rhetoric in support of a radical cause.

The Women's Social and Political Union, the militant branch of the English women's suffrage movement, turned to arson, bombing, and widespread property destruction as a strategy to achieve suffrage for women. Because of its comparative rarity, terrorist violence by reform (as opposed to revolutionary) movements is underexplored, as is the discursive rhetoric that accompanies this violence. Largely because of the moral stance that drives such movements, the need to justify violence is greater for the reformist than for the revolutionary terrorist. The burden of rhetorical justification falls even more heavily on women utilizing violence, an option generally perceived as open only to men.

The militant suffragettes justified their turn to limited terrorism by arguing that their violence was part of a "just war". Appropriating the rhetoric of a just war in defense of reformist violence allowed the suffragettes to exercise a traditional rhetorical vision for the sake of radical action. The concept of a just war allowed a spinning out of a fantasy of heroes, of a gallant band fighting against the odds. It challenged the imagination of the public to extend to women a heroic vision usually reserved for men and to accept the new expectations inherent in that vision. By incorporating the concept of a just war into their rhetoric, the WSPU leaders took the most conventional justification that Western tradition provides for the use of violence and adapted it to meet their unique circumstance as women using violence for political reform.

This studychallenges the common view that the suffragettes' use of military metaphors, their vilification of the government, and their violent attacks on property were signs of hysteria and self-destruction. Instead, what emerges is a picture of a deliberate, if controversial, strategy of violence supported by a rhetorical defense of unusual power and consistency.

"An original study that shows how rhetorically skillful women made the use of terrorism an effective weapon in their efforts to win the vote". -- Karlyn Kohrs Campbell, University of Minnessota

"An interesting and challenging work.... Clearly organized and well-argued". -- Martha Solomon Watson, University of Maryland at College Park

Click for more in this series: Studies in Rhetoric and Communication (Hardcover)

Additional Information
BISAC Categories:
- Social Science | Women's Studies
- History | Europe - Great Britain - General
- Political Science | Political Process - Campaigns & Elections
Dewey: 324.623
LCCN: 96034736
Series: Studies in Rhetoric and Communication (Hardcover)
Physical Information: 0.85" H x 6.26" W x 9.31" L (1.2 lbs) 216 pages
Themes:
- Sex & Gender - Feminine
Features: Bibliography, Illustrated, Index
 
Descriptions, Reviews, Etc.
Publisher Description:

Jorgensen-Earp provides a new understanding of the recurrent rhetorical need to employ conservative rhetoric in support of a radical cause.


The Women's Social and Political Union, the militant branch of the English women's suffrage movement, turned to arson, bombing, and widespread property destruction as a strategy to achieve suffrage for women. Because of its comparative rarity, terrorist violence by reform (as opposed to revolutionary) movements is underexplored, as is the discursive rhetoric that accompanies this violence. Largely because of the moral stance that drives such movements, the need to justify violence is greater for the reformist than for the revolutionary terrorist. The burden of rhetorical justification falls even more heavily on women utilizing violence, an option
generally perceived as open only to men.


The militant suffragettes justifed their turn to limited terrorism by arguing that their violence was part of a just war. Appropriating the rhetoric of a just war in defense of reformist violence
allowed the suffragettes to exercise a traditional rhetorical vision for the sake of radical action. The concept of a just war allowed a spinning out of a fantasy of heroes, of a gallant band fighting against the odds. It challenged the imagination of the public to extend to women a heroic vision usually reserved for men and to accept the new expectations inherent in that vision. By incorporating the concept of a just war into their rhetoric, the WSPU leaders took the most conventional justification that Western tradition provides for the use of violence and adapted it to meet their unique circumstance as women using violence for political reform.


This study challenges the common view that the suffragettes' use of military metaphors, their vilification of the government, and their violent attacks on property were signs of hysteria and self-destruction. Instead, what emerges is a picture of a deliberate, if controversial, strategy of violence supported by a rhetorical defense of unusual power and consistency.

 
Customer ReviewsSubmit your own review
 
To tell a friend about this book, you must Sign In First!