During the early 1900s, women were undermined by men. They were as different as mars was to venus. If a woman had any idea that seemed too grand to be possible, they were “hysterical” women. After all, she was only a woman (Blom 192). Men, on the other hand, would be considered brilliant for their ideas. “Women were from venus. But they were trapped in servitude on planet mars: ‘the male destructive principle is diametrically opposed to the female, constructive one, which is based on mutual aid, on grace, on understanding and dialogue” (Blom 192). Baroness Suttner was against this idea because she herself had struggled and had to work hard to earn her living. She did not live like aristocratic women did at her time, being a companion to a man of power for the entirety of their lives. She learned from an early age how to be independent. Therefore, war seemed the only way for history to change and for women to get the freedom and equality they wanted. However, many were against this idea and thus she was heavily criticized. Nevertheless, Baroness Suttner continued her campaign.
At this time, many people were also considering leaving and going off on their own because they felt the government no longer was with them but rather against
…show more content…
Many women lost their sons and husbands in war, meaningless war. Therefore, women were not only fighting against the government for their rights but also for the rights of every person who lost family in war. There were also men who supported the women’s strike for the right to be equal partners with men in society. These same men also supported rebellion against the government. So you see, at this time because these two trends were going on at the same time, everyone and anyone was involved in both. The two trends were not different from each other and it included the cooperation of men and women