AS , like her sister Louisa , became actively interested in social questions concerning the position of women. She supported the struggle for the suffrage, and her name was one of the six hundred that appeared July 1889, as representative of an even greater number, with the combative Women's Suffrage: A Reply in the Fortnightly Review. It was she who took the lead in publishing the work of herself and of Louisa, and of seeing Louisa's work reissued following her death.

Her interest in labour politics and women's rights, including the suffrage campaign, continued throughout her life. In 1884 she publicly reprimanded ladies who work among the poor [who] think it right to save their money for charity and buy cheap costumes, made far off by the same sisterhood. By supporting unfair trade, even while supporting charity, she argued, they become parties to more oppression than the district visiting of a lifetime can atone.

At the request of John Stuart Mill , MS was the first to sign his new parliamentary petition for women's suffrage .

In London in 1905, GS joined the Fabian Society . (There is no record of her having joined any women's suffrage organisations.)

MS 's mother was Charlotte (Carmichael) Stopes (1841-1929), an active feminist and a publishing freelance scholar. She campaigned for women's suffrage and as well as her academic writing published children's stories on the one hand and polemics about women on the other. Charlotte Stopes was the first woman in Scotland to earn a University Certificate. She was harsh as a mother, parsimonious with praise but willing to inculcate religious fears.

Another aunt, Philippa (Pippa) Strachey was like other women in the family a committed suffrage leader and writer.

The young Alice, whose parents were conservatives, thought socialism romantic. She later wrote, I walked in the suffrage processions, but we thought of it as Romantic and Historical.

AW 's home in Hampstead became an informal salon. She hosted musical events, garden entertainments, and talks on women's suffrage.

NCB 's feminism manifests itself in her writings celebrating female sexuality and her activities promoting women writers, but she was mildly critical of English suffragists for sacrificing their femininity in their struggle for women's rights: Les Anglaises ont gagné le suffrage en devenant des hommes. On n'est pas toujours libre du choix des armes. During the First World War NCB was a committed pacifist, but during the Second she supported the Fascists, and, in spite of being one-quarter Jewish, expressed objectionable, anti-semitic views.

In 1920 EMB was listed as a regular contributor to the Woman's Supplement of The Times. On 31 October 1929, in the continuing aftermath of Katherine Mayo 's book Mother India, Bell wrote to The Times to disagree with Eleanor Rathbone (very respectfully: Rathbone's reputation for fair play and sincerity needs no defence from me) and to urge unity and co-operation among those working for the betterment of Indian women. When suffrage for some but not all Indian women was being discussed, she wrote again to argue that widows of soldiers killed on active service certainly deserved the vote. Having written repeatedly to The Times on the issue of Indian women's education, she went on to send a short note about counting one's blessings during the second world war, and a strong objection (following the lead of Phyllis Deakin ) to the way the War Injuries Compensation Scheme doled out more money for an injured man than an injured woman. This form of the broader practice of unequal pay, EMB argued, was indefensible since medical services charged no less for women patients; single women often have dependent parents; disabled men are frequently able (as women are not) to secure the services of a wife; and the humanity common to both sexes has a right to relief.

Both of TB 's parents were active in public life. At one time they were leaders in the local opposition to women's suffrage. They were also both published authors.

Bentley was the first person in her family to receive such an extensive and expensive education: none of her brothers went beyond the secondary school level, and it was understood that Cheltenham was preparation for university. Her mother saved from her dress allowance for years to enable her daughter to go away to school, in the hope that this would advance Phyllis socially. Phyllis loved the ritual and order of Cheltenham, where she boarded at Bunwell House. She added French, music and elocution to her studies, and enjoyed playing cricket and hockey. After receiving her mother's written permission, she heard Emmeline Pankhurst lecture on women's suffrage and was rather perplexed by [her] vehemence. At the end of her two years at Cheltenham she passed the Matriculation and Intermediate Arts examinations for London University . Working for a London external degree was then possible at Cheltenham, but this option would have been too expensive, so in summer 1912 she returned home to Halifax to study on her own. She was back at Cheltenham for four terms between September 1913 and December 1914.

EFB became a founding member of the Fabian Women's Group , whose mandate was to become the pioneer Socialist body supporting the Suffrage agitation.

The author at the heart of this story is a children's writer, Olive Wellwood, who is married to a wealthy banker and lives in a Kentish farmhouse strangely called Todefright. The actual Edith Nesbit , J. M. Barrie , Kenneth Grahame , and William Morris , all make cameo appearances. The Wellwood children and their London cousins, as well as Philip Warren, working-class boy who has left his Potteries home in search of a wider world, each get a book especially written and designed for them. Childhood is, however, as much shadowed as idyllic here, and the whole story (freighted with dense information about Victorian museums and banking, the Arts and Crafts and suffrage movements) moves inexorably towards the brink of the Great War.

Although The Making of Rachel Rowe was not positively reviewed when it was first published, recent commentators like Margaret Bradstock and Louise Wakeling have praised the novel's compassionate depiction of Rachel's socially unacceptable status as an unwed mother. They argue that ACshows considerable growth in understanding . . . the unmarried mother, and that although her novel displays clear limits to social acceptance because Rachel is eventually morally rehabilitated by marriage, it nevertheless demonstrates a great sensitivity to human error. Bradstock and Wakeling also underscore the positive portrayal of a suffragette in the briefly-introduced character of Esther Helstone, who, they argue, reveals AC 's growing feminist sympathies. This novel, while not dealing centrally with the women's suffrage struggle, none the less evidences that Cambridge was one middle-class liberal who did sympathizes, whatever reservations she must inevitably have had about the strategies used by the more militant suffragettes in their campaign. While several stereotypes of the suffragette operate in AC 's text, she had at least begun to see the value and necessity behind the suffragettes' cause.

Though without particular ability, Theodore gets his Fellowship at his college, St Mary's. He is then elected Warden. But before his new dignity can give him self-confidence, he learns that he was elected purely in order to keep out the alternative candidates: the power-hungry Dr Quears who would champion any cause—Morris Dancing, Woman's Suffrage—in order to have something more to control, and the genuinely eminent Professor Haughton, who, however, has bohemian manners, writes sporting fiction and laughs uproariously at his own Rabelaisian jokes.

The Journal comes out unabashedly in support of some causes, such as early closing, the education of young women, and the sanitary movement. EC criticises the growing income gap between rich and poor, favouring legislation to redress the miseries of dressmakers as well as lauding the poor who help themselves, for instance through Working-Class Benefit Societies, and seeks to draw attention to child abuse (she counsels never striking children). Though many of her poems about labour use masculinist vocabulary (man and boy, father and son), she also writes specifically of women's labour (her hand grows hard with duty) and many of the causes she takes up are women's causes. Indeed, Eliza Cook's Journal takes a proto-feminist approach (feminist according to historian Kathryn Gleadle ), supporting issues such as married women's property law reform, and (as in The Wrongs of Englishwomen in October 1850) extending its analysis to women at all social levels. It stops short, however, of supporting suffrage.

Later in life CFC 's initial interest in law continued to show itself through her involvement in crime prevention policies. Her favourite proposal was for the creation of ragged schools where all children could be given free education, provided with meals, and trained in trades. CFC believed that equal education would pave the way for granting suffrage to both genders and all classes equally.

Although she took clear stands on feminist issues in her writing, DMC considered herself absolutely non-political. Ladies' Land League s, Primrose Habitation s, Female Suffrage Societies, are to me equally obnoxious. Late in her career, she claimed that men and women, though different, are equal. But she also wrote: Very few women can take care of themselves, to say nothing of other people. Some say this is the fault of Nature, some of education—a centuries-long education into helpless subservience. Whichever theory is right, or perhaps half-right and half-wrong, the result is the same.

Before she withdrew from public feminist activities in 1870, IC lent her support to the early women's suffrage movement and the campaign for women's higher education. After 1870 she directed her energies to publishing novels, didactic literature, and educational books for children. Her publications reflect her interest in issues related to working-class moral reform, such as temperance and Sabbath Day Observance.

The opening features a stalwart figure who lands an airplane in front of an old English manor house in the thirtieth century, tinkers with the engine, smokes a pipe, enters the house with the air of its owner, and calls out: Hello, darling! Here I am again! Only after this does the text reveals that this is the woman of the title, Member of Parliament, Martha Brown: a magnificent specimen of bronzed womanhood.VC depicts a society in which gender roles are completely reversed, in England at least: women run the government (and levy an income tax of eighteen shillings on the pound) and men, such as Martha's husband James (one of her four in this exploration of polyandry), tend to look after the children (in which activity Martha, for one, takes no interest) and have hobbies such as writing novels, although exceptionally gifted men can still occupy important positions such as that of Censor of plays. The novel's extended reversal of gender roles defamiliarizes them, and it makes other serious points along the way, demonstrating that here female suffrage has done away with cruelty, unemployment, prostitution, vivisection, meat-eating, the adulteration of food (now a capital offence), pollution, and even representations of violence or misery. Martha herself has abolished prisons by advocating the execution of the unreformable. The novel describes James's growing discontent as a result of her leaving him in the country with the children for extended periods while she pursues an exciting life in London as a celebrated politician and author, a life that includes male lovers whom she keeps. Martha is feeling bored with her life, despite being at the pinnacle of her career, when she falls in love with a virile American man of Scottish descent, Bruce Campbell, who is a marked contrast to the effeminate men she has known. He insists on complete possession of her, arguing that love is a savage thing. It is not a thing of civilization; it is a thing of nature. In the end, Martha passes over the offer of the post of Prime Minister in order to follow the man she loves to America, a fate she herself characterizes as civil death.

She was thirty-nine years old when they married, and he forty-four. Munby's family knew neither of Hannah nor of the marriage until after his death. The marriage was childless. There is some dispute as to whether it was consummated. Although Munby asked her to call him Arthur from this point, she persisted with Massa. Munby continued with his life much as before. Although he lived in chambers, he did not practise as a barrister, but worked as a clerk at the Ecclesiastical Commissioners , lectured at the Working Women's College (where he taught Latin to classes of women), and wrote.