Male v. Female Political Consciousness?

Harper presents a balanced and fair examination of the possible consequences of extending the vote to women. Her principle point suggests that while the sexes might have different perspectives and unique sensibilities, there may indeed be no inherent differences between men's and women's "natures" where moral character is concerned. Here there are differences between individuals, rather than a collective character of an entire gender. Her belief is that while the group which had previously held sole decision-making power--men--had by this time severely tainted the waters of political life, relief would not come simply by adding the women's vote into the mix (or in keeping with the metaphor, I guess I should say, into the current). It seems she believed instead that the inclusion of women, by opening political channels to a greater number of people, as well as representing the entire other half of the American population, would nurture a greater possibility for other important voices to be heard, and would thereby effect a cleansing of the "muddy channels" of the current political state. Her declaration that the extension of the ballot would not serve "to make home less happy, but society more holy" suggests that the inclusion of women would result in a society which functions more "whole"-ly.

In keeping with what Frances wrote, the female characters of _The Blithedale Romance_ and _Ruth Hall_ were not portrayed as morally elevated beings "by virtue of their womanhood" alone. They were simply individuals making their way through life in a time that was not hospitable to their gender. All three had womanhood in common, yet their solutions were diverse: Priscilla chose submission; Zenobia chose escape; Ruth persevered. As with the vote, "it is not through sex but through character" that we conduct our lives and our decisions, including our political decisions. I wonder what kind of voters Priscilla, Zenobia, and Ruth might have been.