How Women Won the Vote: The Political Successes of the State Suffrage Movements, 1866-1920

这是对社会运动能够克服强大的反对意见以带来重大政治变革的条件的研究。它将研究世纪之交前后几十年的国家级妇女选举权运动，以了解运动取得成功的情况。1869年，怀俄明州是第一个给予妇女选举权的州(当时是一个领土)。到1920年第19修正案被批准时，33个州颁布了法律，赋予妇女一种或多种形式的部分选举权，如在总统或市政选举中投票的权利，15个州(其中一些州已经颁布了部分选举权)给予妇女全面选举权。研究国家选举权运动的主要目标是开发和实证检验社会运动成功的理论模型。研究人员很少研究导致运动成功的条件，这些条件是根据政治结果(而不是动员或文化结果)定义的。对于州选举权运动来说，政治上的成功是将投票权扩大到女性。该理论框架将运动动员理论与国家理论结合起来，假设妇女参政论者实现政治变革的能力既取决于运动动员资源的能力，也取决于他们面临的社会结构机会。资源动员理论认为，运动的成功源于运动参与者动员关键资源的能力，包括组织和类型的意识形态和战略。运动动员的政治过程模型表明，政治机会结构影响运动的有效性。然而，研究人员通常将政治机会结构解释为仅包含实际政治结构和过程(例如，政治的公开性或选举的不稳定)对国家行为者批准搬迁要求的决定的影响。这项研究借鉴了国家的各种理论，扩展了机会结构的概念，理论上认为，性别、经济和种族的机会结构也对运动带来政治变革的能力产生重要影响。它结合了社会运动理论和国家理论来解释社会运动的成功。本研究采用定量的方法来检验理论模型的实证有效性。事件历史分析允许比较状态运动和它们运行时的状态上下文，以解释为什么有些运动失败，而另一些运动成功。其他方法，如定性比较分析和递归回归，也将被用来探索结果的复杂性和稳健性。国家运动在理论上表现出重要的差异(例如，在组织、战略和意识形态方面)，它们运作的背景也不同(例如，关于政党政治和文化和经济反对)，从而为比较分析为同一总目标--妇女选举权而工作的多个运动提供了机会。这一历史研究将有助于我们了解美国民主的发展，因此对教师和学生，特别是对妇女历史感兴趣的人来说，将是有价值的。然而，科学成果将具有更广泛的价值，改进了关于总体政治运动成败的正式模型，包括现代政治运动。

This is a study of the conditions under which a social movement is able to overcome powerful opposition to bring about significant political change. It will examine the state-level women's suffrage movements in the decades before and after the turn of the century to understand the circumstances in which movements are successful. In 1869 Wyoming was the first state (then a territory) to grant women suffrage. By 1920 when the l9th amendment was ratified, 33 states had enacted laws giving women one or more forms of partial suffrage, such as the right to vote in presidential or municipal elections, and 15 states (some of which had already enacted partial suffrage) had granted women full suffrage. The primary goal in studying the state suffrage movements is to develop and empirically test a theoretical model of social movement success. Rarely have researchers examined the conditions that lead to movement success defined in terms of political outcomes (as opposed to mobilization or cultural outcomes). For the state suffrage campaigns, political success was the expansion of the vote to women. The theoretical framework combines theories of movement mobilization with theories of the state, hypothesizing that the ability of the suffragists to bring about political change was shaped both by the movements' abilities to mobilize resources and by the social structural opportunities they confronted. Resource mobilization theory suggests that movement success stems from the ability of movement participants to mobilize key resources, including organizations and types of ideologies and strategies. The political process model of movement mobilization suggests that political opportunity structures influence movement effectiveness. Researchers, however, have typically interpreted political opportunity structures to encompass only the effect of actual political structures and processes (e.g., the openness of the polity or electoral instability) on the decisions of state actors to grant the demands of move ments. This research draws from various strands of theories of the state to expand the notion of opportunity structures, theorizing that gendered, economic, and racial opportunity structures also importantly influence the ability of movements to bring about political change. It combines social movement theory and theories of the state to explain social movement success. This study employs quantitative methods to test the empirical validity of the theoretical model. Event history analysis permits comparison of the state movements and the state contexts in which they operated to explain why some movements failed and others succeeded. Other methods, such as qualitative comparative analysis and recursive regressions, will also be employed to explore the complexities and robustness of the results. The state movements exhibit theoretically important variation (e.g., in terms of organization, strategies, and ideologies), and the contexts in which they operated also vary (e.g., concerning party politics and cultural and economic opposition), thus offering the opportunity for comparative analysis of multiple movements working toward the same general goal, women's suffrage. This historical study will contribute to our understanding of the development of American democracy, and thus will be of value to teachers and students, especially to those who are interested in women's history. However, the scientific results will have much broader value, improving formal models of the success and failure of political movements in general, including modern ones.