The courtroom was packed for the trial of Susan B. Anthony, the foremost leader of the women's rights movement in the United States. What crime was she accused of committing? In November 1872, she and 15 other women in Rochester, New York, had demanded to be registered and had voted in the national election. Soon after, all 16 women were arrested. In 1872, women could not vote in New York or in any other state.

Of the 16 women, only the leader, Susan B. Anthony, was put on trial. Hers would be a test case. If she could convince the jury that she had a right under the U.S. Constitution to vote, she would be found not guilty. Then all U.S. women would win the right to vote.

The U.S. District Attorney, Richard Crowley, charged Anthony with violating the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. That amendment, adopted in 1868 after the Civil War, was intended to guarantee blacks the same rights as whites. It forbade any state to deny "the right to vote ... to any of the male inhabitants" who were 21 or older. It was the first time that the word male had ever been written into the Constitution, and it bothered Anthony plenty.

Anthony saw in the amendment a legal case for the right of women to vote. The 14th Amendment also said that "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge [lessen] the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." Well, said Anthony, weren't women citizens of the United States? And if citizens could not be denied the right to vote, it seemed plain enough that women could not be denied that right.


http://www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=4973

in 1869! Ironically, now one of the most RW states.

The uniform of the officer appears more 1900 then 1872. The quality of the photo appears to good for an action shot in 1872. Silk top hats were popular for men from 1850s till after 1900 so it proves nothing. The woman's clothing is hidden by the fact she is on the ground, but I can not see a bustle, popular around 1900 but not 1872.

It is clearly an old photo but is it 1872 or closer to 1900 is my only question.

Now the helmet worn by the police officers were in widespread use in England by the 1870s. Many US police forces were using them in the 1870s, but most were not. As the US came closer to 1900 the use of such helmets increased so most police departments were using them by 1900. On the other hand most were gone by the 1920s. Thus it is the helmet worn by the police during the suffrage movement days, but then disappeared soon afterward, replaced by the present day police officer hat.

Took me awhile but I found the answer. That is a 1910 photo of Ada Wright during a suffrage protest.

My findings are below.

Already covered.

from today's perspective it sure looks like it could be 1872 but it was fairly similar in 1910, even though in the UK.
Funny how 100 yrs later 1972 fashion is immediately discernible from today 2014, same time scale.

Men's fashion change a lot less then women's. Thus if you look at men's suits from the 1970s to today is not that great. Three button "coats" are replaced by three piece suits with two button coats, which in turn replaced by three button "jackets". In many ways a three button suit from the early 1970s was back in style in 2000, having been replaced by three piece suits in the early 1980s which was replaced by two button suits with no vest in the 1990s. Three button suits came back around 2000.

Notice no big changes in what is called "informal wear" i.e. suit and tie. Such "informal wear" has gone through few changes, two button coats or three button coats, vest or no vest, that is the limit when in comes to men "informal wear". Causal dress changed more, but not suits and ties. This is normal for male clothing. The last big change was the adoption of pockets, permitted by the invention of the sewing machine.

Now teens are more fashion conscious then older people. I have NOT purchased a new suit in over ten years; and I wear one most days. That is typical of male dress. Thus the teen is a better guide as to time period by style then older males. Women style are even better, but we have only one in view and she is on the ground.

a British suffragette who was beaten by police on "Black Friday" in 1910.

Go to page 7 : http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/politics/pdf/g9_all.pdf

I hate that.

The sentiment's fine, but... I hate that it's not correct.

=====================

I got it from Liberaleffects FBook page.

But its amazing what women had to go through to get the right to vote.

Black Friday was a women's suffrage event that occurred in the United Kingdom on 18 November 1910.

The protests came in response to parliamentary proceedings regarding the Conciliation Bill, which would extend the right of women to vote in Britain and Ireland to around 1,000,000 wealthy, property-owning women. The bill made it to a second reading, but British Prime Minister Herbert Henry Asquith indicated that there would be no more Parliamentary time for the reading in the current session. In response, the Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU) sent a delegation of around 300 women to protest, and 200 were assaulted when they attempted to run past the police. Many of the arrested suffragettes reported being assaulted and manhandled by the police. It was the first documented use of police force against suffragettes.[1] In the aftermath, Asquith's car was vandalized, and the event caused some embarrassment to Winston Churchill.

The aftermath of Black Friday[edit]
The events of Black Friday were a public relations disaster for the government; the press took the side of the Suffragettes, printing pictures of police assaulting unarmed female protesters. The actions of the police were greatly criticised.[2] After Black Friday, Asquith stated that if the Liberals were elected at the next general election, they would include a Suffrage Bill that could be amended to allow women to vote. The WSPU rejected this believing that it was an attempt to delay reform; the events of Black Friday were damaging to the suffrage campaign as well, as they caused MPs to distance themselves from the issue.

This was the first time that Suffragette protests were met with violent physical abuse, however it was generally supported by the British population, who at the time were relatively opposed to women's franchisement. Two women died as a result of the police violence, and around two hundred women were arrested.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Friday_(1910)

This is NOT Susan B. Anthony. This is Ada Wright, a British suffragette who was beaten by police on "Black Friday" in 1910.
http://www.obitoftheday.com/post/35155203876/dear-tumblr-this-is-not-susan-b-anthony-this

dared stand up to patriarchy.

My great-grandmother used to smile when my great-grandfather would tell her how to vote. She told me, many decades later with a snicker, that we all are alone in the booth and they never argued politics.

Thanks for that historical pic, ErikJ.

were beaten, jailed, forcefed, and brutalized, this is important. THIS is what happened (and happens) to women who DARE stand up to patriarchy, DARE to demand their rights as human beings.

it is fascinating to me that several of the posters commented, not on the subject, NOT on the fact of women being beaten for simply asking for their rights, but because the caption was wrong. way to avoid a disturbing topic.

DU commenters aren't the ones you need to worry about. They simply don't want the message to be lost as it goes around the internet because the caption draws focus for its inaccuracy. If this pic/meme is being sent around the internets, then it NEEDS to be accurate.

Now, maybe I'm giving conservatives too much credit -- I doubt most would try to confirm if that was really Susan B. Anthony.

But this is really the same issue as proper grammar and spelling: IT IS IMPORTANT for your message, whatever it may be, that you don't demonstrate ignorance when you're delivering it, even if it is an accidental error on a detail that isn't even important to the message itself.

You think people here are avoiding a disturbing topic? I'd say quite the opposite. They just don't want this topic to be avoided by others over a mistake.

==============================

Many years ago on Masterpiece Theater, there was a series about the Pankhurst sisters protesting, getting arrested, force fed, and generally abused for the cause of women's suffrage in Britain.

It was called "Shoulder to Shoulder" after the theme song. It's on Youtube.

Episode 1:

to find it on dvd.

"shoulder to shoulder" was, as you said, about the battle for suffrage in england, and "iron-jawed angels" is about the battle here in the states.

Some things just never change.