Students sign to end women’s “suffrage”

Back to Article
Back to Article

Students sign to end women’s “suffrage”

Thuy Pham and Anika Akbar, Editors in cheif

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

Suffrage, the eight letter word defined as the right to vote may seem obsolete to some, but its roots stem from a history of discrimination and indignation, especially for women. From the dawn of civilization, women have been placed in a dim light to make room for the dazzling glory of their fathers, brothers, and husbands. In a fundamental sense, the human psyche has evolved to value patriarchal jurisdictions.
To put it into perspective, it has only been 97 years since the 19th Amendment was ratified in the Constitution, granting women the right to vote. Less than a century ago when activists raised public awareness, organized marches, and perpetuated the Women’s Right Movement to secure women’s equality in the political process.
However, Parkview students have tarnished their efforts and ridiculed the movement when they signed a “mock petition” to end women’s suffrage. Despite being cognizant of the women’s stride toward equality and the 19th Amendment, a common misconception for students regarding suffrage prevails. Since suffrage has the same denotation as suffrage, students associate the word with women suffering when in fact suffrage does not exist in the English dictionary. This misinterpretation may justify why 95% of the participating 53 students signed a petition to blatantly end women’s rights to vote. The only one to not sign the petition justified his decision by saying, “I don’t care.”
For the majority that did sign the petition, their ignorance exposes the necessity of the feminist movement, regardless of their benevolent intentions. “They’re suffering because they can’t vote,” says senior Spencer Decuir.
Others responded when prompt about their decision with, “I’m a feminist, or if you don’t sign it, then you’re promoting women suffering.”
Furthermore, their tenuous grasp of feminism revokes implications that the feminist’s stride is unnecessary in the modern 21st century. People are under the impression that feminism is not a relevant topic today and even proclaimed that women are receiving more rights and favors than men in social settings and under the law. They explained that judges are more lenient with their sentences for women and insinuate the pay gap is validated because men do more work than women, especially those who take maternity leave.
These oppositions to the movement will hold their naivetè of “suffrage” until society upholds the ideology that equality cannot decipher between gender. Regardless, the writers of the Oxford dictionary may want to obtain room for “suffrage” soon if women’s suffrage was to truly end.