For silence your cell phones. Of course it would use them for social media you are welcome to keep them on. Also during our q a we have microphone, just one this time, so if you could step up to that mike mika would be great because as you can see we have cspan film we also making an audio recording of this event. And feel free to leave your chairs with our. We have more events coming up this afternoon so youre welcome to stick around all day. Im pleased to welcome Johanna Neuman this afternoon to discuss her important new book gilded suffragists about a group of new york socialites who fought for the womens right to vote in the early part of the last century. Among the more than 200 social figures involved in the movement she writes about a host of familiar names including astor, belmont, harriman and vanderbilt, richard might just what a radical explosive notion the womens vote was in the early 1900s and how in her own words theres a moment when generations cross paths and an idea that once seemed radical loses its toxins. Publishers weekly has called this book one of the top books for fall, from independent publishing houses. Neuman is a scholar in residence at American University and an awardwinning journalist who is written for the Los Angeles Times and usa today. Shes going to be in conversation this afternoon with Judy Woodruff who she knows from back when they both covered the white house. Judy is the managing editor and anchor for pbs newshour, and she also worked as a correspondent for nbc, cnn, npr, and many other places. Please help me welcome Johanna Neuman and Judy Woodruff. [applause] thank you. Im so delighted to be here and i know johanna is, shes going to get a chance to sit and just a minute. I have to start of full disclosure and say when johanna wrote me about this event a few months ago and said is any chance youd be free, i wrote her immediately back and said absolutely. I would love to see you. The book sounds great. I cant wait to see it. Because we go way back. As you just heard we go back to the white house during the early 1980s when both of us were just out of middle school. [laughing] put it this way, we were early on in our career as a journalist and we bonded back even though i was a broadcast, she was in red. We always kind of gravity towards each other. I was such a huge fan of a reporting and she was such a respected journalist. But johanna comehither got onto even greater things. She went on to earn her phd as you just heard. She is a scholar in residence. Shes done extraordinary historical work and this latest book is just a treat for all of you who havent had a chance to read it yet or peek at it. You are truly in for a treat. Johanna, without going any longer on all the prefaces, just why havent you changed . [laughing] full disclosure, the doctors. [laughing] you covered, i knew you as a reporter, Los Angeles Times, having politics. You covered the white house, state department, the congress if im not mistaken. I want to do a bit of quick background. How did you find away from doing that to the interest in history . Well actually, i was very happy as a journalist. I loved what i was doing. Can you all hear me, first of all . But in late 2008 when the economy was collapsing, the Los Angeles Times where i worked decided to close its washington bureau, and i took a buyout as many journalists have in the last two decades. And i started freelancing. The Los Angeles Times called back within a month and asked if i would do their Political Blog from washington in the Morning Hours before anyone in los angeles was up. If anything happened in washington in the morning, it was mine. And one day im sure many of you remember this, the obamas got a dog. [laughing] his name was bow and he was a portuguese water dog, and, of course, everyone is going to have this tidbit in my job as a blogger is to think how can i distinguish us. So i thought and thought, added to the blog post that was titled obamas get a black and white dog, and it did a real fun postracial biracial peace and what it meant for the country that we now had a black and white dog. [laughing] this thing went viral for about 15 minutes, the National Editor called me several hours later and said this was fabulous. Lets have more of this. This is fantastic. And later that evening when i was having dinner with my husband without title, jeff glaeser, i said i really have to find something more substantive. [laughing] the dog lovers here may resent that. That is the truth. Then we started brainstorming about what i could do that id loved, and i had always loved history. My father was great history buff and it given me the bug. So i decided at a a very advand stage to go back to school and get my phd in history. This is my first book as a historian, and its also for me its the first test of my conviction that you can marry the deep Archival Research imperative of the historian with the narrative skill of a journalist. Why did you want to write about these women and the suffragists . This wasnt just the suffragist movement. This was aspect that is virtually gotten no attention. I went back to school. I knew very little about the Suffrage Movement. Its not like they taught it in school. So it was one of the topics that interested me while i was back in school, and i was first going to write about suffrage in the 19th century when it was this terrible schism between the two branches of the movement, between Elizabeth Cady stanton and susan b. Anthony on one side, and lucy stone and her husband Henry Blackwell on the other. Stone and blackwell after the civil war, they are staunch abolitionists, and they believe that the black men should be enfranchised first, that the 15th amendment would give black men the right to vote, should be ratified, and then women can fight for their vote. Susan b and Elizabeth Cady, if theyre going into the constitution, we are going with them or else we are fighting it. And this split the movement for almost 30 years, and they had rival organizations. It was deeply damaging for the cause. And i was set out, that was going to be my dissertation topic. I was going to prove that Elizabeth Cady and susan b were horrible people and they had ruined the movement and so forth. But it was so depressing. [laughing] and my faculty advisor who has kindly coming today and he can remember that i walked into his office and i said i want to start thinking about what finally worked. I i want to look forward to the positive news that women finally got to vote. And so i started researching the early 20th century to see what was going on. I started reading newspaper accounts, and i tripped over these women. Nobody had noticed them. They were there. They were sort of two famous to notice. So you didnt know about them when you started this thing, is that right . No. No, i was reading newspapers from the 1900s, and it would be occasional references to events where these fancy uber wealthy celebrity socialites were coming out for suffrage. What happens when they join suffrage in 1908, this again is a movement that a sort of been in the doldrums. Its been languishing. Its considered the cause of the friends, the intellectual friendship or the very codeword, theres codeword for lesbian fringe or radical fringe but clearly not the mainstream. And then come these Society Women and they are covered already. They are celebrity figures already, they are covered by the press for their decor, their close, their travel, their entertainment. They are just over the top which is one reason its such a fun read. When they came out for votes for women, electrified Public Opinion. It sort of interested the mainstream. It would be like Angelina Jolie embracing you and suddenly you when refugees, its like to what i thought. But thats what happened i believe. What was the moment, and speaking of touching back on your point about race, that comes up again as it turned out in what you write about, but what was the moment let me put it this way. When did you realize that they were consequential enough to devote this much attention to them . What made you realize that . Im not sure i did. I just like their stories, and no one had covered them and they just thought they were, yeah, i just thought they were delicious characters. Really, it was at the journalist me that resonated first, and then as i studied them i noticed the consequences of their involvement. You could really see it. One of my favorite anecdotes in the book is about a woman named Florence Nightingale what was her last name . And not the other. Not the other. She was a Canadian Immigrant and she moved to new york, and she opened a beauty business, and the reason i cant remember her last date is that she changed her name to Elizabeth Arden. [laughing] and Elizabeth Arden was never political, and one day she shocked her staff by leaving her desk and going out to join one of the suffrage parades, those iconic suffrage parades you may have seen photos of along fifth avenue, and when she got back, or staffers were like we didnt know you supported the cause. She said oh, i dont but our clients do. [laughing] and thats with a new they were talk to us a little bit about the instigators of this, the first women from the Socialite Group class, whatever we want to call it, who were brave enough, bold enough, i had other times enough to stick their necks out and say im going to do something about this. The first one, and there was a first one, was kathryn doer maki. She was the daughter, the descendent of great old money in new york, and she marries new money, the silver mining fortune of Clarence Mackey and his family. And they had this gilded existence, they have a place in manhattan. Of course they rent every season in newport. They have 628acre estate in roslyn, long island, and catherine is beautiful. She stunningly beautiful. She is covered for everything she does. When she decides to run for a seat on the school board, it is a shock to everyone. And two years later she decides shes going to fight for womens right to vote. And it is electrifying. There is a woman, lucy stone who i mentioned before from the 19th century, her daughter alice wrote this beautiful description of what happens when mackay joined the effort. She said, you know, when alices mother lucy was campaigning for womens rights and against slavery in the 1840s, men, being the audience, right, they hissed, they threw rotten eggs and alice was beside herself that now mackay speaks, people are clamoring for tickets. They cant wait to hear her. They are selling out at events. Suffrage finally had a spring in its step. People are excited about it again. And i believe thats really one of the assets they bring. The other asset they bring, which i mean we can develop this later, but i think they are what you could call it an obsession with fashion or you could call it their eye for fashion, but clearly their fascination with fashion trends was an asset they brought to the campaign. They understood that if you wanted to sell something to the mainstream, you had to present it in such a way that would be appealing, as you would any consumer product, right . They treated the campaign as if it were a consumer effort. So i think that was one of her great contributions. Way ahead of their day. Talk a little bit, johanna, about how they were received by the established, what was then the movement. They came out of leftfield, right field, i dont know what you want to call it but they were out of the field. I feel most of us will never understand. Yeah, i mean, the one thing can i tell a story . Thats what we love. We love these stories. What am my Great Research adventures was when i, i went to many archives and libraries across the country because these women lift bread crumbs everywhere, right . Where are somebodys libraries . If they all left the materials at the library of congress it wouldve been much easier, but some of them left in the slice and your library at radcliffe, and theres a very good womens collection. The Huntington Library in pasadena. So this was on a trip to los angeles and just a few collection of one to look at ucla. One of them was an oral history transcript of mrs. Magis secretary, ethel was earning. And a pretty excited because as a journalist you interview people all the time. As historian you learn to interview documents. You learn to talk to the people through the documents they left. You can ask them questions. They dont always answer. But i was very excited and i get there and i request the file, it comes and open and theres one page and it says this transcript is missing. [laughing] and i dont know if any of you ever seen a 60 something have a hissy fit, thats what i proceeded to do. The librarian escorted me out of the research [laughing] and then they summoned this marvelous lady to raise the barn, the head of the Oral History Department at ucla, and i explained the problem coming to raise the barnett set. I will promise to look for this. I will commission a research assistant. We will scour the library. We will try to get you this transcript, but because of the rules of oral history at the time this interview was done, which was in the 1960s, so this woman was interviewed in the 1960s about events in the 19 tens, we cant send you a pdf. You have to come back to california. And im a student on a little budget, but two weeks later i get an email from her and she says, im really sorry, we never found the transcript, but we did find that tapes. [laughing] and she said were going to put on a cd, you can come after which a laptop and you can listen and you can take notes. Well, this was a great blessing in my life because i got to hear the voice of someone who knew one of my, what i come to call my ladies. Its about as close as a historic income to touching history. The thing that tickled me about apple, ethel was an immigrant from hungry, and she talked about mackay and how she had influenced her to dress. She said mackay, mackay draskovic she said she never dressed me, overdressed me. She dressed me as a secretary, should properly be dressed. But she spoiled me, and mackay took on the family twice a year visit to paris and treated her to a finishing school really, treated her to refined living. And what was interesting about, and that mackay understood the role that fashion plate in getting people to events, but she said, including reporters, because thats what they wanted to report on, what mrs. Mackay was wearing. Imagine the press. I cant. [laughing] but she said that the reporters never left one of our events without a statement from mrs. Mackay about the womens Suffrage Movement. And the other thing that was marvelous about listening to it instead of reading it is that the historian was interviewing ethel gross not because she been mrs. Mackay secretary, but because later in life she marries Harry Hopkins, and Harry Hopkins as many of you know went on to be one of fdrs chief aides. And so the historians keep trying to push her to talk about harry, and ethel keeps wanting to talk about mrs. Mackay. She finally sort of knex that you by telling him, you know, i just want you to understand that the reason Harry Hopkins married me is because when he met me he didnt see a hungarian immigrant. He saw a lady of refinement. Wow. But quickly go back to that, the question about how did the movement received these women. How did they, you know, how there were some people like Harriet Stanton blanche was Elizabeth Cady stanton his daughter saw early that theyre going to be key to one of the emerging aspects of the movement, which was a broadbased cross class coalition. So blanche had already reached out to workingclass women and factory workers and immigrants, and professional women and teachers and librarians, middleclass club women, and now she could add this piece in the idea of these parades along fifth avenue was really to demonstrate to men, again, that all kinds of women wanted to vote. That it wasnt any longer the interest of a few. And i just want to say in about five minutes were going to open up for questions from all you so start thinking about questions you want to ask johanna. How did the two, when did it click, i guess is my question, yet so many wonderful stories about the tactics, the rivalry between two of these women. Theres some wonderful anecdotes about that, but when did it click . When was it clear that these women who later did not get the attention or appreciation that you point out they rightfully deserved, when was it clear that they made the difference, they made a difference . I think it was clear by the mid19 by 1915 there was such a staple of the movement that they were, actually by 1912. In 1912, you know, this middle portrait is out of the belmont. All although was mrs. Mackay grt rival, and thats interesting, the very fact that two women at the social class would both want to be queen b of suffrage. But in the early 1910s, harriet lach try to get them to join the parade, and the parades at that time for women. First of all operate is seen as a very male, almost military kind of function. Secondly, the idea that women would be walking in the street was offensive to them. Mackay was horrified. Belmont retreated to her home in long island. There was a great deal of fear not just among the elite women but also the middleclass women that they would be taken for radicals or streetwalkers. In 1912, and maybe this is the turning point, Albert Belmont decided that Public Opinion had shifted and what except women understanding walking in the streets. And she led a delegation in that years parade. Several journalists commented afterwards that the push, the cover was a singular contribution. So i dont know if that answers it does. There are so me fascinating questions. How hard was it for i guess, i dont know if you want to call them the intellectuals of the movement, to accept the idea that it took this appeal to society to close, to appearance, to broaden the popular appeal of the movement . I think it was very hard. I think they resisted a lot. They were accustomed to doing things their own way. It was also a great deal of tension over tactics, as you mentioned. There were sort of, there was a mainstream movement called a National American women suffrage association, which at its peak had 2 million members. It was the goliath. They were very much mainstream. They did legislate appeals. They did petitions. They courted the the president wanting to get his endorsement. There was a smaller sort of ragtag group of radicals headed by alice paul called the National Womens party. And 1917 alice paul starts picketing the white house. We are at war in europe, and a lot of people find this, you know, with the air of the jingoism pervading the society. Its very controversial. So theres this tension over tactics, and i wear this pen. This is a jailhouse door in that was made for all the suffragists who went to jail for the right to vote. And to me its a meditation on the difference between moderate and radical, and makes me sort of ponder which one is more effective at bringing social change. Maybe all of these things contribute. Maybe the fashion ability of the gilded ones and the mainstream legislative appeals of the mainstream suffrage activists, and the radicals may be pushing us further than our comfort zone. Its one of the enduring questions. Im about to turn it over to the audience. Why do you think though that essentially these women were forgotten for so long . I dont know. Im not aware of them. Maybe they were written about. I dont know the answer to that. I think, i dont know, would be curious what readers think about why. To me they are compelling figures, as i mentioned, not just for the substantive role but for their delightful excessive. So i dont know why they had been ignored. I think there were agendas after suffrage is finally enacted at the federal level in 1920, a lot of memoirs get written. A lot of papers are burned, which surprised me. Some of the main figures in the Suffrage Movement burned their papers, including, i mean a lot of major players. So theres a lot we dont know, but i think theres a settling of scores that these women, they were wealthy, they were autocratic. These were not like, you know, little delicate creatures. One of the things i learned from apple was these women were accustomed to running huge estates ethel. They had huge staffs to run. When they cut in the Suffrage Movement they for the most part did not join already existing movements or organizations. They formed their own. They wanted to be president. And so yeah, thats fascinating piece. Questions. I have more butter want to give you a chance. Where more than halfway into the hour. Some of you, lets see, and if there are two microphones. I think theres one over here or just one over here. So step up to the mic. I wonder if you know why they burned their papers . Thats one question. I also wonder if the used their money to support anybody elses Suffrage Movement . And specifically if they had any connection to the radicals. And i also wonder wait a minute. Thats a lot of questions. [laughing] you can come back any minute. Why did they burned their papers . When i went back to school i would often ask has been do you think i have enough brain cells to do this . Can you keep track of these questions . Yes. The question of burning papers, it has a long legacy, goes back to susan b susan b. Y burned her papers. I think there was a feeling like im going to leave my autobiography or might authorize biography, and then im going to burn everything that might contradict it. Admin do that, too . I dont know. The other question was did they work on other causes . This is a very important question. I had a mentor early on in the process at harvard. Hes considered the father of the history of capitalism. Hes into big, macro history, e was interested in my work because he written about the moneyed men of new york but he had not mentioned the women. So we arranged to have coffee once when i was up in cambridge. And he said to me, how many of these women do you have . And im thinking like a journalist, and i said way too many. I have 24 already. And im thinking, you know, how am i going to tell a story, read a narrative, make it compelling . It would be like Downton Abbey on steroids. And he said well, can you get to 100 . And i said well, you know, i probably could because i had been reading newspaper accounts of the day they each had their social they were at the bottom of newspaper copy would be also in attendance at this event were mrs. Soandso and, but ive been ignoring them because i i already had too many. So i said i think i can get to 100. He said you need to get to 200. [laughing] you need to find out everything you can about them, what church they belong to, what Political Party they affiliate with, what causes they support, what clubs they joined, whether the money was new or old, whether they were divorced, whether their children, and this took six months out of the research. I stopped going on trips and i just did this spreadsheet. One of the things he taught me was how they are not a a monol. I do want to say sometimes all i started with in the morning was the description of someone as mrs. Husbands name. And thats all i had. It took me sometimes all day. I looked at census records, birth records, death notices, wedding announcements. And i would be triumphant when i got her maiden name. I felt i excavated these people. But what the spreadsheet time he was a myriad with her motives, and you really cannot talk about, and on the question of radicalism, three of these 200 uber wealthy elite women did join alice pauls more radical organization, and they went to jail for the right to vote. One of them is however mayer or you may know as one of the great art collectors in this country. She was good friends with mary cassatt. And her husband was henry o have meyer was president of the sugar trust that the federal government eventually busted up for antitrust. But they had a lot of money and he would often to your to visit mary. They had an incredible collection that now actually undergirds much of the metropolitan museums collection. And she went to jail. Alice paul asked her to come to washington to light a figure of Woodrow Wilson in effigy. [laughing] and shes not a kid. At the time she is 63, and she comes to washington and she never quite light the match. In fact, she says in an article later, you know, if i managed to like him on fireeye probably wouldve gotten a light sentence. But she likes, rather than paying five dollars fine, she likes to go to prison. And this radicalize is her, and she writes poignantly about i was in jail thinking, wheres my uncle sam . And so thats what i really cant say they were all of one mind. Subject for another book, or three. Next question. What was the impact on their marriages . Did you see a pattern . Thank you so much. They were all marriage, is that right . Most of them were. I thank you for the question because i always forget to mention that i have a chapter in the book on the men. Its called mirror men, because thats what the newspapers of the day called them. It was a derisive term. You mere man who are helping women. You are not really men. They endeared himself to me because they took such a beating from their colleagues when they marched. About 1912, suffrage parade, there were 1000 and marching under the mans leg for womens suffrage, and they took more heckling than any other contingent of the parade. They were called all kinds of names, which ill let you imagine. What was the question . That was it, how did the men most of them were husbands of the women. But some of the husbands had trouble . Yet, quite a few. Quite a few had trouble. And some marriages faltered over it. Yes, i believe that the amendment for womens voting was passed and it was finally ratified in 1919. No, it was enacted, it was passed in 1919. It was ratified in 1920. So it was really a bad time for, like, progressive thinks. We had the palmer raids. We had during the were all the germans being lynched. We had the ku klux klan coming in. How was it possible to get such a progressive thing passed . Good question. I think, the flipside of that is that it was the end of the progressive era. It was a type of many reform causes, and all of them on that. Seem to attract across class coalition, a broad tent pics of the movement to clean up city hall, to read City Governance of political bosses, rid. I know him. [laughing] its okay. So its the flipside that they were the tail end of the progressive era that so many reform causes over all kinds of issues, even, theres some causes even earlier, the Ottoman Society is formed, and theres an effort to get women to stop wearing feathers in their hats because its killing off the bird population. So theres all kinds of Reform Efforts that are going on, and to me this is, in fact, max eastman who was the editor of the masses in Greenwich Village and one of the men mentioned in the mirror men chapter, he was a socialist and an advocate of free love. There was a lot of them whole birthcontrol Movement Comes out of this era. He said the womens right to vote was the great fight in my generation, and thats sort of how i look at it. We have a special guest Betsy Griffith is the author of the book on Elizabeth Cady stanton. Two was a nasty woman. [laughing] arent we all . [laughing] and i teach womens history of politics and prose and hope you all come when more and help you be a guest at one of my classes. Suffrage passes because by 1919 women were voting in enough states and controlled enough Electoral College vote that the car was going to switch rather than have women both of out of office that there are all these complexities. I cant wait to read your book. Congratulations and thank you. Im interested in the money because these were more of the emily is a list of that era. I know mrs. Belmont was constantly filling alice pauls carpetbag with cash and i know the magazine money, 39 inheritance. So we able to track actual funds . Did the traditional women get more . Did the radical women get more . Were all these women about whom you have written donors as well as supporters . Thats an interesting question, thank you very much. I think most of them were donors, but the point i was hoping to make in the book was rather different. Because that aspect of their involvement had been covered before, and to me what was more intriguing was not that they wrote checks, but they actually stood with the cause. They marched. They gave speeches. They held events. So thats really what i focused on. I do think that alva belmont probably, if you did and accounting, she would tip the scales toward the radical side. She had first funded the mainstream, as you know, and then she got sort of tired of them and inpatient with the mainstream organization because it wasnt really making a difference. And she felt that alice paul good, that alice paul was getting attention for Different Things than celebrity or fashion. She was getting attention for radical, controversial tactics. Just a quick followup to that. If these women had wanted to make big contributions, did you have the ability to do that . Did they have enough control over the money in their households to do that . I would hesitate to make a global statement about that, but i but i would guess that most of them, yes, most of them did, and most of them did make contributions. I mean, alice paul had, i mean, alva belmont basically supported alice paul, paid her salary for her whole life and i was just, i had this magical event last sunday, almost as magical as this, at Woodlawn Cemetery in the bronx. They called and they said, i dont know if you know this but many of the women you write about are buried here and we would like you to come and speak. I was delighted. And they said, and were going to invite the descendents so i was like oh, my god, what if i got something wrong . [laughing] but it was a charming, really a charming event. And afterwards i asked to go to the mausoleum where alva belmont is buried, and on her death she put in her will that you wanted to be buried with a suffrage procession at her funeral. She wanted a female to officiate but they couldnt i guess find one. But Everything Else she asked for. There were 1500 people at the funeral. Alice paul was there. Harriet stanton blatch, christabel came from london. Margaret sanger was there. She had a stellar sendoff, and she had requested that a suffrage banner accompany her to her mausoleum and be installed next to her grave. And alice paul, according to the cemetery officials, is the one who planted it there, and it hangs there still. It is in deep disrepair and theyre hoping to get the New York Historical society to restore it. But it was, it was assigned to me it was a sign to me that deeply alice paul was indebted to alva belmont. Any tidbits from the descendents for sharing . Elizabeth cady stanton great, great granddaughter do i have that right . Colleen jenkins, yeah, she came and we just had a ball. The historian of the cemetery put us in a golf cart and drove us around to the key burial sites. This is at night. No, no. [laughing] and want to get halloween. It wasnt yet. The historian insisted we stop at mrs. Mackay is great which had fallen into serious disrepair. You can hardly read the inscription on the tombstone, and she insisted that i stand behind the tombstone and have a picture taken. She said, you have rescued her, and i was just wow. Yes. Johanna, is there a high Society Origin Story about who, when and why the suffrages decided to wear white at their parade . There may be but i dont know what it is. I do know that Harriet Stanton blatch was a very intimate object, and there has been criticism in 1911 of the dallying by the suffrages parade in getting organized. So in 1912 she is issued orders sort of like a general issuing orders to the troops, you march on time. You will all wear white. Macys at suffrage paraphernalia. They were all told, some things never change, right . She was the one who really instilled in them and need to show discipline. And its a funny thing for us to think about, that somehow male voters were going to judge whether to grant, or male legislators, who according to judge whether to grant women the right to vote, would notice promptness or uniforms. But harriet thought it was important to showcase disciplin discipline. This is not, this is really a tangent, but a similar thing happens during world war i when many suffragists who had been peace activists decide to work in war relief because they feel it will convince the men that they are committed citizens, entitled to vote. Fascinating. Im wondering if many of these Society Women traveled to england . Yes. And were influenced by the movement going on in england at the same time. English women partially got the right to vote before us, and others got the right to vote after we did. Did everybody here this question . Would you, other exposure to english there is marvelous Cross Atlantic conveyance of ideas throughout the movement, not just among the gilded. Many of the american suffrage leaders took tactical particularly instructions from the british. The soapbox speeches, the parades, the mass rallies. A lot of it was influenced by britain. Sometimes people ask me why are you calling them suffragists . The answer is that a british journalist had disdain the british activists by calling them suffrage jets. They decided to adopt the word as a badge of honor. But the american activists were, again, mindful of the reaction from american men who mightve been threatened by the violence of the british, the british actually bombed buildings. There were heckling of politicians. Assaulting mps, including winston churchill. And it did want to report that. So they went with the genderneutral term suffragist. Was there someone else . I i know that there were also women who oppose the National Association in opposition to womens suffrage. Senator James Wadsworth wife was with secretary of state lance things wife is what he can and impossible to remember their name, how to save wadsworth, and mrs. Anderson of anderson house, who called themselves you anything about them . Ive nothing able to find enough of a story. There were quite a few of them, and especially quite a few of them in this circle. The first chapter of the book deals with the creation of a club in new york called the colony club. Because it became a site for the bait within their class about whether suffrage would be good for women of social standing or not. Whether they were better off with moral suasion, or i like to call it bedroom influenced. I mean, you know, and there was also a fear among most, both men and women, that if women got into the dirty corrupt cigar written business of politics, it would coarsened them. It would make them less feminine. It would threaten the home. All these things were part of the mantra of what was called the antis. And in the book i have several examples of sisters who differed on the issue, sounding antis and sounding prose. And part of the thinking of the antis was a more elitist view, that if you extended the vote to all women, you would be expanding the pool of women who were not of their class, women who were working women and immigrants, and they didnt support that. Sounds familiar today. They called it, they were not for universal suffrage. They were for educated suffrage. One last question before we wrap up. I dont see another question here, but as as a report counts about the role the press play in all this. You talk about this at the outset, but they did this as you say mindful that theyre going to be covered. So what role did the press play in their ability to be effective or not . Thats a delicious question actually. One of the things that i tripped over early and that always amused me a little is that the New York Times was famously antisuffrage. And their editorials were more biting and ridiculing than any others. They sort of lead the train. But there is evolution. You can see the press turn at some point in the mid1910s. And maybe its the anger people. I didnt delve into the lives of the reporters as much, but theres a coming understanding, you know, sometimes i think about social change as, someone mentioned that there were women voting in the states, and that is a wonderful reminder, that states sometimes serve as an incubator for social change. And that by 1912 there are 1. 3 million women voting in this country. And by 1916 what wilson does not get reelected without their votes. The middle, however you want to about it, that is what happened in this case. Host i encourage all of you to dig into it. Lets think johanna. [applause] thank you all for coming. We have books behind the register. She is signing books. [inaudible conversations] you are watching booktv, television for serious readers. You can watch every program you see here online at booktv. Org. Im the executive director of townhall seattle, a pleasure to see you tonight for this appearance