Listening to the lectures by Professor Kuhlman and Professor Woodworth-Ney, a number of similarities and a few differences are discernible in their views on women’s suffrage. Some of the similarities apparent in their comments are those to do with the trends in the suffrage movement, and interestingly, the differences are also in the arguments or comments on the patterns and trends in the suffrage movements.

To begin with, Dr. Kuhlman believes there is no clear pattern regarding the granting of suffrages to women from the map of the world. As she explains, it cannot be said that the suffrage movements began at a particular place and moved to another place in a pattern. The map reveals that the movements did not follow a pattern, but there were other trends across the world; such as the point that women were thought of as lesser people to men; lesser citizens to men. The fraternal societies across the world controlled governments and decided which freedoms women should have and at what point they would allow them to have those freedoms. Dr. Woodworth-Ney contributes to this argument by indication that whereas there may not have been patterns in the rest of the globe, there were perceivable patterns in the American West. In this region, as she indicates, women had some rights prior to the enactment of the 19th amendment. She is, however, quick to caution against the belief that all states in the west offered voting freedoms to women, and indicates that even the 19th amendment did not guarantee all the freedoms that were projected would be there for women. A few examples are given by the two professors about the trends and patterns identified and those not recognized. In Africa, as Dr. Kuhlman points out, freedoms were realized to a certain extent after white colonizers or colonial powers granted independence to African nations.

The two professors agree on a number of other things such as the benefits or gains realized as a result of the suffrage movements, and the lack thereof of some benefits that were needed. Dr. Kuhlman indicates that suffrage for women meant that they would be integrated into and feel part of political activities of their nations; hence enhancing their sense of patriotism and nationhood. She reveals that even though governments had been promoting nationhood as something people who share a culture and common interests have; women had been left out for they did not take part in things such as elections; they did not have voting rights before and this was problematic to nationhood. Thus, suffrages movements improved the relationship between nationhood and women. Dr. Woodworth-Ney brings up the social issues possibly brought about by the suffrage movements. According to her, some people in Texas and other southern states were concerned about the rights of black people to vote. Suffrage to women would mean that there would be racial connotations to the impending gains in the voting process.

Women’s suffrage also opened avenues on which other matters would be argued and pursued in national political forums. For instance, prior to the suffrages, domestic issues such as child adoption rights for women, divorce, ownership of property were never discussed as national issues. Suffrages brought them up and were discussed on such bigger forums than before. In this regard, there were events that contributed to women’s suffrage and these were the major wars such as the Second-World War. With suffrages granted, there was no longer the maintenance of the status quo anywhere in the world. Changes were being realized progressively; it did not happen in a day. The right to ballot was the start of an evolutionary process that would widen civil rights for cultures across the globe.