ComicBooks.com Register / Loginit's free!

Judge, 1916-09-09 · page 22 of 32

Judge — September 9, 1916 — page 22: what you’re looking at

📖 Open the full issue in the page-flip reader →
Judge — September 9, 1916 — page 22: Judge, 1916-09-09

What you’re looking at

This page contains two distinct pieces: **Left side:** An advertisement for *Collier's* magazine promoting a short story called "The Modern Judgment of Solomon" by Charles E. Van Loan, featuring a character named Old Man Curry and his racing horses with prophetic names. **Right side:** An article by Anna Cadogan Etz titled "The Modern Woman: Suffrage Facts and Fancies." It satirizes anti-suffrage arguments through ironic contrast. The piece presents the claim that women are fragile creatures needing male protection, then demolishes this "theory" with a "fact": Russian peasant women armed with spades and pitchforks successfully fought for land rights during wartime—even persuading the Russian government to yield to their demands where men's rebellions had failed. Etz uses this example to mock the notion that voteless women lack political capacity. The article also ridicules the false equation of women's suffrage with "free love," noting that prominent suffragists were devoted wives and mothers.

📄 Transcribed text from this page (OCR, searchable)

Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.

Old Man Curry is rac- ing his string of prophet- named horses again. In “The Modern Judg- ment of Solo- mon,” Charles E. Van Loan tells another of the old man’s amus- ing experiences. Read it in the September 9th issue of @ Dany THE MODERN WOMay Suffrage Facts and Fancies INNA CADOGAN ETZ When Fact Routs Theory HIS is the theory: Woman is a lovely fragile creature, not only inca ble of bearing the responsibilities of government but incapable g self-government. She stands in constant need of the protection of stalwart man, who ever stands bravely in front of her to ward off danger of any sort or kind. In asking for the vote she endangers her right to thi protection, Let her beware lest she fly from the frying pan into the fre! These are, at least some, facts: A recent Russian press report describes government officials as hiding in little groups in an administration buldng in mortal terror of bands of women armed with spades and_pitchforke fighting for their homes with a courage and desperation that stopped not at the destruction of property or even murder. The Russian peasant woman has been catale working creature, warranted never to play the worm and turn on her exploiter. Now she stands forth in the lurid light of publicity as a persn who may submit to every indignity from her husband, vet in his absenc protect her rights and his with Amazonian vigor. The government, so the story goes, has checked the uprising by yielding to the demands of the women that there shall be no reapportionment of th land during the absence of their men at the front. The Russian gover ment that is wont to reply to rebellions of men with Siberia, imprisonment and death yields to the uprising of women! Women, votcless, unorganized, and uneducated, get what they want from government when they want it! Somebody please bring the waste-basket while we dump in all the current theories about the relative strength, courage, and political capacity of me and women, including the approved theory of the proper and only way fer women to realize their desires! Free Love and Votes for Women 667 WANT to talk to you a few minutes about woman suffrage,” said th smiling, ingratiating suffrage canvasser to. housewife who answeral her knock. But the housewife drew herself up to her full height and sternly replicd as she closed the door in the face of the astounded su ist, “I would have you know that I love my husband.” “Dear Madam,——” so runs a letter from an anonymous gentlemaa friend of “The Cause,” “there is a general belief that the women, if they vote, will favor feminism, or, in other words, free love. If you would clear this point up in your articles, it would bring you many votes from mes who are in doubt on the question,” and the letter was cordially s “Well Wisher.” Shades of Lucy Stone and Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the lor faithful wives who have championed votes for women amid the rush of 2 completely domesticated life! The suffragist calls on one and all but ia vain. The archives of suffragedom are stuffed with the pictures of leading suffragists surrounded by admiring offspring and with husbands be: approving eye descending on the group from the background. All in ¥ they rate their own charms so low, that Men are so inherently modes : wives won't run off with the fi nothing can make them believe that the’ book agent who appears at the door if women are not amenable to ls made by men only. Anyone can sce the connection between votit with a host of domestic concerns, but never has the issue of free love bet ind the food supply and deci they might glimmer the fact that if the wife were set free fre care of protecting food and water and morals from an all infesting polite blight; if she could vote to remove the etuse and thus escape suffering free the consequences of imperfect city housekeeping: then she might indeed ke free for free love—free in fact to love her husband without ze can and the erra ni | free love is exactly what iving to key one corner of her mind’s eye on the garb: controlled gas meter. Tf men but knew want: free love from free wives. the Identified Itendant in Accident Ward—We don’t know who he is is in a critical condition Wife—That's John! What did he eritic ize particularly? madam, but comicbooks.com