The term “feminism,” meaning to advocate for the equal rights of men and women, first came into use during the Progressive Era. While “feminism” had previously described something akin to femininity, the Oxford English Dictionary shows that feminism, as we now understand it, first emerged in newspapers and magazines right around when Ida Tarbell hit her stride with McClure’s in the 1890s.

Tarbell, as a prominent figure of the Progressive Era, has been referred to as a feminist. But is this justified? It’s one thing to be a successful, and influential female progressive figure, and another to actively vouch for feminist values. Tarbell had a complex history of writing for and supporting certain women’s causes, while notoriously opposing female suffrage. Although later on, after enfranchisement in 1920, she did switch her position and encouraged women to vote in elections. Despite this reversal, I would argue that her reluctance to support the suffrage movement is potentially a dark spot on her career and legacy as a progressive era icon.

So what does this mean for Tarbell’s legacy? Various historians and biographers of Tarbell have argued about what the significance of Tarbell’s evolving stance on suffrage means. This article will aim to dive into the thorny, hazy issue of Tarbell and feminism.

Groups advocating for women’s enfranchisement arose quickly after the civil war, with the National Woman Suffrage Association, and American Woman Suffrage Association rising to prominence. These groups campaigned throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, with select states independently giving women the right to vote leading up to the 19th Amendment in 1919, which was country-wide. Despite having shared goals these groups, as in the United Kingdom, often varied in methodology, with some being more militant than others in their protests.

Alongside the pro-suffrage groups, there was a distinct anti-suffrage movement in the Progressive Era. While many men in government, and society at large, opposed female suffrage, it is important to note that there was also a significant number of women who also opposed suffrage. The National Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, for example, was formed by women who hoped to prevent enfranchisement, and offer a counter-point to pro-suffrage groups. Many of these anti-suffrage women came from wealthier backgrounds, which allowed them to convey their message broadly in print media.

Tarbell’s Beliefs & Change over Time

Ida Tarbell grew up in this landscape of pro and anti-suffrage. In her childhood home, Tarbell had been around suffragettes, and women’s advocates from an early age, as her family often welcomed in intellectuals as they travelled through Pennsylvania. As she notes in her biography, she had an initial bad reaction to many of the suffragettes and women intellectuals who came through, as she perceived them to be dismissing her.

In her early writing career, Tarbell demonstrated her interest in women’s causes, and advocated for greater recognition of women’s contributions to society and economy. Her article “Women as Inventors,” for example explored how women went beyond the “domestic sphere” when it came to new patents, and argued that women should be given more support as inventors or entrepreneurs.

Over time, however, Tarbell took a clear anti-suffrage position in her writing. She began writing openly against many of the pro-suffrage organisations, and the drive behind feminism at large. She claimed that suffragettes were too militant in their protests, that the movement was against the natural order, and inherently anti-male. Tarbell’s works, such as “Making a Man of Herself,” and The Business of Being a Woman alienated her from feminists and women’s rights advocates across those she might have considered peers.

Tarbell did, eventually, come around however. Following the 19th amendment in 1920, she wrote in favour of women voting for a piece in Good Housekeeping, where she encouraged women to get out and vote and opined that the democracy of the USA would be better for it. 

Moreover, Tarbell spoke in favour of women assuming higher leadership positions in both government and society, citing famous historical women leaders.

Clashes with the Suffrage Movement

Tarbell’s relationship with the suffrage movement saw her frequently clash with other women, and suffrage advocates. As mentioned above, the publishing of her anti-suffrage beliefs saw her alienated from many of her readers, and journalist peers. Perhaps most intimately, historian Barbara Somerville has even suggested Ida was criticised by her mother Esther, a committed suffrage-supporter. 

Tarbell’s relations with suffragettes were not all negative, however, as seen best in her participation in Presidential committees. In particular, suffragette members were reportedly unhappy when Tarbell joined them on President Wilson’s Women’s Committee for Council of National Defence. Ida, despite the icy atmosphere, was believed to have won over her counterparts through her good-natured enthusiasm.

This, to me, is one of the most fascinating aspects of Ida Tarbell’s long relationship with the suffrage movement. Tarbell was never a die-hard conservative, and advocated in favour of women’s place as inventors and drivers of innovation in society. Moreover, she was evidently willing to change her position, not locked into her anti-suffrage views, despite having publicly written against them. 

Finally, Tarbell was willing to work with the suffragettes of the Women’s Committee, and they too came around to her, despite their seemingly insurmountable ideological conflicts.

As I mentioned in the introduction of this piece, historians and biographers of Tarbell have debated Tarbell’s stance on suffrage, how it impacts her legacy and what it tells us about Progressive Era feminism. Robert Stinson, for example, suggests that Tarbell’s relationship to the suffrage movement highlights best the “Ambiguities of feminism.”

Perhaps it is this ambiguity that muddies the water of Tarbell and her legacy for modern readers. Ambiguity, on a subject like women’s right to vote, makes us justifiably uncomfortable in the 21st Century. Yet a Progressive Era icon like Tarbell, who supported so many of the causes we associate with liberalism, fluctuated on suffrage. This fluctuation, to me, is most interesting. The evolution of Tarbell’s attitude towards suffrage makes her a difficult figure to judge.

So, should we consider Tarbell a feminist icon, and how does someone’s opinion changing overtime weaken or strengthen their legacy?