suffragettes Emily Wilding Davison

[keith lockey]

Why are they 'celebrating' her death? That's not nice, is it? I mean people have just been chastized for celebrating Maggie Thatcher's demise. Now these lot want to celebrate the death of EWD!!!

[John Fox (foxy)]

It's becoming just like flogging a dead horse now.

[keith lockey]

It's becoming just like flogging a dead horse now.

If only this one could be laid to rest, Foxy!

[Maggie/915]

Just get out and vote!

You do not need to read this thread.

[Maggie/915]

Radio 4 today 11am

Val McDermott 'Deeds not Words'

Emily Wilding Davison.

[johndawsonjune1955]

Just to let you all know that Channel 4 at 8 pm on Sunday is secrets of the sufragettes. Its about Emily W Davison and why she died. Footage too. Get it your diary

[Brett]

Seen this advertised yesterday John.

[johndawsonjune1955]

Seen this advertised yesterday John.

Yes, hope its good, as i am interested in this.

I dont think she meant to kill herself, just disrupt the race, but either way it was dangerous and she died.

Lets hope they shed more light on it tho

[Maggie/915]

Today is the Derby at Epsom and every BBC news broadcast. so far, covers the story of Emily.

New evidence, by a lady in Morpeth, suggests the Suffragettes practiced pinning the colours onto a horse in Morpeth.

This week the I Newspaper has carried a series of articles on the New Sufferagettes.

Interesting reading.

Hope I am not upsetting anyone for bringing this topic up again.

It is History/ Herstory and I think it important to our region and our town.

[johndawsonjune1955]

Thats interesting Maggie, and maybe a possibility.

Maybe need to look a little further into that and see what else has been said.

Sadly, the only one with the answers is dead (Emily)

[Keith Scantlebury]

I cannot believe for one solitary minute that anyone could step into a group of galloping racehorses and expect to come back out and tell the tale. To even suggest that she intended only to pin colours to an animal weighing over half a ton and travelling at about 40 mph is ludicrous. This lady killed herself, its as simple as that. It is only pure luck that no-one else was killed that day and as I said earlier had she done it today she would have been charged with a criminal offence.

Edited June 2, 2013 by keith

[Symptoms]

Surrender Keith, surrender! Give it up boy, give it up!

I watched that programme and the restored film footage CLEARLY shows her attempting to attach a scarf to the dobbin. There was also clear evidence that this tactic was being practiced prior to the event. Yep, with hindsight, "to pin colours to an animal weighing over half a ton and travelling at about 40 mph is ludicrous", might seem a fair observation. I suppose we could describe the action taken by that brave soul in Tiananmen Square, namely, trying to stop that huge tank, as ludicrous. Or what about those taking part in the Warsaw Uprising? Or that woman comfronting that guy in Woolwich. Or Lisa Potts, the nursery teacher awarded the George Cross for saving her charges from a machete attack? The list is endless ... and most could be described, in the cold light of day, by some as ludicrous.

The clear conclusion of the programme was that it was NOT suicide, it was a stunt that went wrong. I reckon had she survived the Peelers would have nicked her and she would have served more time in clink and continued to be force-fed.

[keith lockey]

You all know my feelings on this subject; I said at the ouset that Emily Davison was mad to even attempt to pin a scarf or banner on the king's horse. I watched the documentary on IPlayer and Now I believe she DIDN'T intend suicide. BUT; such an action could only lead to serious injury at least - not just to EWD but the jockey and horse as well. (Not to mention all the other riders who just missed her!) You all seem to be skirting round that fact. EWD could have killed that jockey - leaving his family to cope for themselves. Why you choose to ignore this is beyond me. You also seem to be ignoring the fact that the sufragettes waged a campaign of terror beforehand. (Mentioned in the documentary) Keith is correct in saying it was ludicrous to attempt to pin a 'statement' onto a galloping horse. Seriously. What kind of sane person would even try such a thing? She made a brilliant statement by locking herself in the House of [Commons?]. Now that was clever! Not only that it didn't involve risking anybody's life. But let's stay focused on what she did - stepping in front of a galloping horse. REALLY!!

[Symptoms]

Just as silly/reckless as a jockey climbing on a dobbin for any race, especially over jumps (I know the Derby's 'on the flat') ... a calculated risk with the everyday threat of death or serious injury anyway. What the glorious Emily did was a calculated risk to promote a worthy cause.

I'm sure the King would have seen the bereaved family taken care of ... perhaps the jock's wife employed as a palace wet-nurse or a princess's bum wiper, the kids could be used to clean the chimneys in the various palaces or used as playthings of various princes.

I'm not ignoring the actions of their wider campaign just narrowly focusing on the dobbin race which I think is the main thrust of this thread. I'm quite prepared to debate the wider questions involved in political action, how these actions are seen and described by vested interests, the ultimate benefits for the disenfranchised, and so on.

[keith lockey]

When I was a young whippersnapper of fourteen summers, I went to Epsom and Newmarket with the prospect of becoming a jockey. I had an uncle who had connections (!!!) Anyway, when I went to both the above places they told me in no uncertain terms that I would break a limb within my first year, either falling off a nobbin or being kicked by one. It was an accepted risk. But there is a hell of a difference between approaching a jump or a corner and preparing yourself for either and having some mad woman suddenly jump in front of your horse. The former two you are ready for, the latter is totally unexpected. I honestly cannot see how 'Glorious' Emily took a CALCULATED!!! risk in her action of that day.

As far as a worthy cause goes. Any politician with an ounce of common sense could have - or should have - seen the importance of giving women the vote. It has never failed to baffle me why they didn't just give them it. I am not anti-suffragette, as I think a lot of people think. I actually did a paper on this for my OU and came down on their side - except where EWD was concerned. I read that assignment paper the other week and my views then were the same as now. Her action was totally irresponsible and life threatening. There were so many women achieving things, without militancy, throughout the world and I still say EWD could have found a better way. As I said elsewhere, why didn't the suffragettes get a huge banner and walk down the course, before the start of the race. That way they would have got media attention - via TV - and the king and queen would have taken notice. It was a stupid, mindless act yet she has become a martyr and the world only sees her in a shining golden light. As Keith said, let someone try that today and see what the response would be.

[Maggie/915]

You are right from your side and I am right from mine, it's one too many mornings and a thousand miles behind!

As someone said.

[Symptoms]

KeithLwrote - "That way they would have got media attention - via TV - and the king and queen would have taken notice." What, in 1913? Gas or steam powered telly?

However, you're probably right about a banner ... trouble is it wouldn't have been reported. Just imagine the scene ... the King's Equerry sends for the owner of the Times, "Horace old man, the King wants you to spike the story ... there's a knighthood in it for you". And the rest they say doesn't appear in the history books and the 'ladies' remain in the kitchen.

[keith lockey]

KeithLwrote - "That way they would have got media attention - via TV - and the king and queen would have taken notice." What, in 1913? Gas or steam powered telly?

However, you're probably right about a banner ... trouble is it wouldn't have been reported. Just imagine the scene ... the King's Equerry sends for the owner of the Times, "Horace old man, the King wants you to spike the story ... there's a knighthood in it for you". And the rest they say doesn't appear in the history books and the 'ladies' remain in the kitchen.

Newsreel footage, Symptoms, you knew what I meant. Everyone has seen the newsreel and methinks this would have been shown in theatres etc. The whole premise of that documentary was the angles of newsreel footage trying to prove if she tried to commit suicide or place a banner on the horse. But in your second part you doubted whether my scenario would have got coverage in the paper...er...the whole incident got coverage, that's why there was and is a big furore. That's why we are bantering this on this forum. The EWD affair was a big issue and wasn't hidden from the public and I do believe I have seen it in the history books. Those same newsreel cameras and newspaper cameramen would have been able to capture a row of suffragettes parading down the course with a banner saying GIVE US THE VOTE. Instead we have images of a woman being knocked down by a horse.

[Keith Scantlebury]

Surrender Keith, surrender! Give it up boy, give it up!

I watched that programme and the restored film footage CLEARLY shows her attempting to attach a scarf to the dobbin. There was also clear evidence that this tactic was being practiced prior to the event. Yep, with hindsight, "to pin colours to an animal weighing over half a ton and travelling at about 40 mph is ludicrous", might seem a fair observation. I suppose we could describe the action taken by that brave soul in Tiananmen Square, namely, trying to stop that huge tank, as ludicrous. Or what about those taking part in the Warsaw Uprising? Or that woman comfronting that guy in Woolwich. Or Lisa Potts, the nursery teacher awarded the George Cross for saving her charges from a machete attack? The list is endless ... and most could be described, in the cold light of day, by some as ludicrous.

The clear conclusion of the programme was that it was NOT suicide, it was a stunt that went wrong. I reckon had she survived the Peelers would have nicked her and she would have served more time in clink and continued to be force-fed.

Symptoms, it wasn't just her life she endangered. Her actions could have just as easily killed others

[Maggie/915]

100 years after our death we will be forgotten.

Emily Wilding Davison is not, her ideals are still being debated and the campaign :-

Emily Inspires, is inspiring the New Suffragettes!

[keith lockey]

How do you think she would have been remembered if that jockey had been killed?

Can you imagine the damage she would have done to the suffragette movement in such a case!

As far as inspiring "new suffragettes", what new suffragettes?

And if a mad woman throwing herself in front of a horse is inspiration to others then their world is a sad place to be.

[Maggie/915]

My guess is that Emily felt as strongly about her cause.

It did not include flogging horses to death.

How many horses and riders die.

Bread and Circus!

[keith lockey]

You didn't answer my questions, Maggie, and I don't understand your reasoning, BUT try this one, from Germaine Greer of all people.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/10089541/Emily-Davison-was-she-really-a-suffragette-martyr.html

[Maggie/915]

Strangely, given the rest of this thread, I feel no reason to reply.

After all, everyone can read the papers I suggested!

Radio 4 this morning had an item on the Sufferagettes.

[Maggie/915]

For anyone interested.