# data[].attributes.body
Emmeline Pankhurst and Evelyn Sharpwere two very important figures of the women's suffrage movement whoactually devoted themselves to equality through extremely different forms of activism. Pankhurst was known for her militancy, advancing the cause spiritedly through public speeches, protests, and hunger strikes. Throughher famous speech, "Why We Are Militant," she calls for pathos and repetition to try to get her audience to be aware of the injustices perpetratedagainst women; she proudly states that the suffragettes would not yield until they win the right to vote. On the other hand, Sharp's means of contributing to the movement was through literature;she embraced an indirect challenge tothe Victorian view of womanhood. Her children's book, The Restless River, introduced the figure of a powerful female-a queen whose husband is hardly mentioned-subtly underminingthe patriarchal bias and presenting girls with a model of self-determination. Whereas Pankhurst took to the streets, Sharp used storytelling to instill a sensein younger generations. Confrontationalbold tactics employed by Pankhurst intended to seek immediate change, while Sharp tried cultural values tochange gradually. Their work togethersymbolized two forms of activism that went hand in glove: public defiance and cultural transformation. Each wasdissimilar, yet both made an impact on the suffrage movement, proving that for social change to take place, there must be direct action with a reimagination of the role of society. Andit is their legacy that continues today,from protests to violence, in the ongoing struggle for equality betweenthe sexes and the value of diversity forsocial movements.

# data[].attributes.body
The ideology of Pankhurst and Sharp are share similar perspectives about Women’s Equality by one side showing grace and peace through activism while another shows the extreme consequences of women having no equality. Evelyn Sharp tried to convey the idea of women equality by peaceful protesting and intellectual word which can come as intriguing when one is on th opposite side of the battle. Yet, it can come off as too passive and making it seem like the movement isnt as serious as it really is. The need for women’s rights in this era is at the pinnacle for most women’s minds, one cannot just try to achieve that with soft words—someone has to truly knock that sense into the lawmakers. That’s where Emmeline Pankhurst comes in, with her wittiness and her ability to perervere through the true horrors of jail— she shows the true strength of a women that won’t stop fighting for what she deserves. Thought these women had very different ways to express their needs of equality, the overall message is that women need, want, desire, and deserve the equal rights and freedoms of men that roam amongst their society.

# data[].attributes.body
While both Pankhurst and Sharp, strong and passionate activist for women’s suffrage, share similar ideas for equality, their approch to achieving that very justice differs. Pankhurst and Sharp both want for women’s to be granted the some equal rights that men have. They both feel that their gender should have no standing effect on their rightful place in society. While both women shared a common interest in the movement, their unique approaches impacted the fight in completely diffrent ways. Pankhurst’s harsh and violent tone is seen in her speech “Why We Are Militant.” She begins the speech by stating “the only justiﬁcation for violence….is the fact that you have tried all other available means and have failed to secure justice.” Pankhurst feels as that women have exhausted all other means of achieving justice and since no improvement has be made they must now turn towards violence. Her urgent and angry spirt throughout the speech puts her in the category of a suffragette setting her apart from Sharp who was described as a suffragist. Evelyn Sharp’s tactic of changing society complete differentiates from Pankhurst’s anger and violent approach. Seen in Sharps children’s novel “The Restless River”, she attempts to implement her ideals about gender through different generations, starting with the children. The fairytale like story is similar to the average reading materials for a child while also alluding to a much deeper meaning. She begins the story by stating, “The land of Nonamia was once ruled by an extremely original Queen.” This may appear to be just another childhood story but, Sharp is reversing the societal norms by making the main charter, the queen, a women. She is trying to incorporate hints of irony and sarcasm into her story in order to change the young unbiased minds of children. It is no secret that Pankhurst and Sharp both just wanted women to finally be seen a equal to the man. Weather it was Pankhurst’s blunt and violent words or Sharp’s subtle and ironic diction, both played an important role in the women’s rights movement during their time. Even through their contrasting methods of securing justice, it could not have been done without either one of them.

# data[].attributes.body
Sharp and Pankhurst both pursued women’s equality, but their different approaches highlight distinct philosophies within activism. Sharp, an emphasizer of nonviolent resistance, believed that peaceful actions could change social ideas and lead to change. Her philosophy was built in the idea that persuasion through civil disobedience would create empathy and ultimately weaken oppressive structures without provoking harm. Pankhurst, however, felt that urgency needed a more forceful approach; her slogan “deeds, not words” emphasized her idea that direct and sometimes violent actions were essential to achieving immediate attention and results. In her view, peaceful methods alone were simply not enough to practice positive systemic resistance with meaning, proceeding to call for active confrontation to cause immediate societal change. For example, Pankhurst’s Suffragettes engaged in protests, hunger strikes, and even property damage to demand public attention, heavily contrasting with Sharp’s dedication to persuasion over destruction. Together, these strategies represent two sides of social activism, specifically in feminism, that continue to influence modern movements for equality, where nonviolent and violent protests often coexist to keep issues in the public eye and push for change.

# data[].attributes.body
Emmeline Pankhurst and Evelyn Sharp were both prominent figures in the women's suffrage movement in the early 20th century, but they had different approaches to achieving their goals. Emmeline Pankhurst was known for her militant tactics as the leader of the Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU). She believed in direct action, including public demonstrations, hunger strikes, and even acts of civil disobedience and vandalism to draw attention to the cause of women's suffrage. In her speech Why We Are Militant Pankhurst states that in, “Great, Britain there is no other way.”This shows her dominant mindset that had her devoted forcing her not to conform to other methods of making a change. In contrast, Evelyn Sharp was a journalist and a member of the National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies (NUWSS), which advocated for more peaceful and constitutional methods. Sharp focused on writing and speaking to persuade the public and lawmakers about the importance of granting women the right to vote. Sharp stated that , “chief virtue was the patience.” Sharp wanted to make a change but she understood that the change she was looking for would not happen in one day so in order for a difference to be made she had to keep at it in her literature. While Pankhurst's approach was more confrontational, Sharp's was rooted in advocacy and education, highlighting the diversity of strategies within the suffrage movement.

# data[].attributes.body
In the struggle for women’s equality, while Sharp implemented a nonviolent approach to advocate for change such as writing books, Pankhurst utilized militant tactics behind bars, highlighting the contrasting yet powerful methods each believed necessary to achieve social change and women’s equality. Pankhurst and sharp both activists in the fight for equality for women. Evelyn Sharp believed that change would only occur if it was a nonviolent approach. She wrote “The Restless River” in this chapter, Sharp discusses the power of nonviolent resistance as the method that should be used. Sharps aim was to provide a framework for how societies could build resilient, nonviolent defense systems that uphold justice through peaceful means. Her character, Queen of Nonmia, expresses this idea in the chapter. The Queen declares, “I decline to marry a tailor merely because he has killed a few giants, or outwitted a bear,” This quote shows the Queens idea of a man is not the typical standard but her longing of a man who has genuine qualities in a partner rather than shallow displays of heroism. Rather than direct confrontation she wants someone who is driven by nonconformity. The queen did not need the assistance of a king to rule her kingdom successfully. She expresses her belief in her own abilities and the desire to prove that women can uphold these societal gender roles, she does this by saying, “There was a King of Nonamia, too, but no one knew anything about him, except that he was the husband of the queen of Nonamia…” She does this to show that women can be put in the roles of a “men’s job” and preform just as well. Her use of writing helps push these ideas into the minds of those who disagree without taking violent action. Emmeline Pankhurst believed that more radical, confrontational tactics were necessary to achieve any change. She organized and participated in protests and hunger strikes to push for more awareness. She gives her famous speech, “Why Are We Militant” in 1913 as an attempt to rally up supporters of the movement she pushes for urgent action. Pankhurt truly believes that she has tried all other tactics before resorting to violence she expresses,"The women who are waging this war are women who would fight, if it were only for the idea of liberty-if it were only that they might be free citizens of a free country-I myself would fight for that idea alone." This quote reflects Pankhurst’s deep commitment to the principle of freedom and equality. She is saying that even if the only reason to fight were the abstract vision of freedom, without any immediate personal benefit, Pankhurt and other women would still find the fight worthwild. Ultimately Pankhurst and Sharp took very different approaches in the goal of women’s rights. However no matter how different their approaches are their ideas are both aligned. They significantly impacted the movement helping women gain equal rights and end the Women’s Suffrage .

# data[].attributes.body
Advocating for women’s equality, Emeline Pankhurst and Evelyn Sharp are significantly different when highlighting their different perspectives on the movement. Sharp's outlook in “ The Restless River” challenges the societal norms during that time, changing the roles. She uses the Queen of Nonamia depicting her as a wise ruler, showing that women are capable of being in a great position of power. The Queen saying, “I decline to marry a tailor merely because he has killed a few giants, or outwitted a bear," depicts how she is independent and takes the initiative which demonstrates her competence. Defying those traditional roles, Sharp highlights the intelligence and strength that is potential for women by having a Queen who is the person in charge rather than the men. On the other hand, Pankhurst uses direct action addressing real world issues and immediate concern to overcome the systemic barriers. In her speech she brings to attention that women have “spent long and useful lives trying to get reforms, and because of their voteless condition, they are unable even to get the ear of Members of Parliament, much less are they able to secure those reforms.” Pankhurst uses the very real situation of being denied rights everybody should get in a free country to empower women to join the movement. She showcases something that is deprived from them and  that should be theirs but is taken, and advocates for more aggressive actions. While both women use different ways to show the importance of women being treated equally, they use different tactics to persuade and empower their audiences. Sharp uses storytelling to illustrate the capability in women leadership and Pankhurst uses urgency to action to achieve political change. Collectively, both women showcase two different approaches on women’s suffrage but ultimately they both made a significant influence using different tactics.

# data[].attributes.body
Evelyn Sharp and Emilia Pankhurst both became prominent figures in the fight for women’s equality during the 1900s, but their tactics to get recognized ranged from peaceful to violent. Sharp was most well known for writing novels and children stories that were controversial at the time, due to their feminist themes. In one of these children’s stories, The Restless River, Sharp wrote about a royal couple. The queen was all-powerful and controlled everything, and the king was only known for being the queen’s husband and following her orders. Sharp’s main intention for doing this was to flip the marriage roles that were followed in the majority of households at the time. Just as the king in the story, many women were known just as the wife who only did what the husband wanted. Sharp hoped that making the king the weak one in the marriage would prompt men to start rethinking how they treat their wives and realize that women are people too and deserve the same rights and recognition as a man. Meanwhile, Pankhurst became known as a participant in many women’s rights protests and spoke around the world on the subject. While in the United States, she delivered a speech, “Why We Are Militant”, in which she explained that the protests were starting to turn more violent because they “have tried all other available means”. Pankhurst is telling her American audience that no matter how many peaceful protests women hold, Parliament will never give women equal rights because they are women. Thus, women protestors are resorting to last option, violence. Pankhurst and other women’s rights activists hoped that by using violence, they will scare politicians into finally passing laws they have been fighting for many years. Even though they used different measures, Evelyn Sharp through literature and Emilia Pankhurst through protests, they both had the same goal, to get women equal rights and successfully end the Women’s Suffrage Movement.

# data[].attributes.body
As strong female activists, Emmeline Pankhurst and Evelyn Sharp both had a passion for women’s rights, however, their ideas differ greatly and they approach the issue with contrasting perspectives. Pankhurst and Sharp impacted the votes for women movement in their own unique ways. Pankhurst carried her appeal to the United States and gave the speech “Why We Are Militant” in 1913. The speech highlights her urgent attitude and militant tactics to solve the problem. Pankhurst believes that she has tried all other means before resorting to violence and she supports this truth by expressing, “the time is long past when it became necessary for women to revolt in order to maintain their self-respect in Great Britain. The women who are waging this war are women who would ﬁght, if it were only for the idea of liberty-if it were only that they might be free citizens of a free country-I myself would ﬁght for that idea alone.” Pankhursts statement proves she is prepared to continue the fight. Her speech also revisits her time in prison and her experience with hunger strikes. Finally she explains that these acts will not stop until justice is served. Variously, Evelyn Sharp took a more nonviolent or humble approach by writing books such as her famous work “Rebel Women” and the children’s story “The Restless River”. Through these works, Sharp emphasizes personal sacrifices and provides different perspectives on the issue, ultimately switching roles with men. In her book “Rebel Women” she is asked how a woman would have the time to vote if she has took look after her family and her reply was simply, "How does a man find time to vote, if he has a wife and six children to support?" This rhetorical question makes men question their role in their household. Women have plenty of responsibilities and standards to reach yet they are not rewarded with the rights they deserve. Sharp highlights inequality and challenges what is acceptable in society to create a logical appeal. Ultimately, Pankhurst and Sharp took very different approaches when dealing with women’s rights. However, their ideas significantly impacted the movement regardless of the path they took.

# data[].attributes.body
Although Evelyn Sharp and Emmeline Pankhurst both were key figures in the Women’s suffrage movement of Great Britain their approaches to making changes differed greatly which is clearly evident in their writings. The women clearly show the two sides of the movement: a suffragist and a suffragette. Sharp used nonviolent tactics synonymous with the suffragist movement. She wanted to peacefully sway the opinions of the nation on women's worth. One way she did that is by writing children's stories like Restless River that flipped gender roles and illustrated the idiocy of gender stereotypes in a simple way that even children could understand. This use of rhetoric and storytelling was an important persuasive technique because it helped to put the voting movement in a different perspective and show what women truly want, equality. Suffragettes like Emmiline Pankurst wanted to enact change quickly by any means necessary. As opposed to Sharp's attempt to slowly persuade her audience to agree with her opinions, Pankhurst took swift action. Pankhurst was not afraid to use violence and aggressive activism techniques to get her way. Her work "Why We are Militant" shows her opinion clearly as she states “I want to say that from the moment we began our militant agitation to this day I have felt absolutely guiltless about this matter.” She is ready to fight for her rights by any means necessary including violence. The suffragettes were ready to initiate a swift and aggressive change as opposed to the pacifist in the group. Both women worked towards gaining voting rights however Sharp worked to get a slow and complete change in societies opinion on women whereas  Pankhurst uses dramatic violent tactics to quickly gain her rights

# data[].attributes.body
There are many different contrasting ideas between Sharp and Pankhurst. The first difference in how each woman fought to achieve the right to vote. Sharp was a suffragist. She used non violent tactics to prove her point that women should be given the right to vote. This can be viewed in live footage when she is killed by a horse after she tries to pin the woman suffrage colors on the horse. These actions reflect Pankhurst and her want for the balance of peace and equality. On the other hand, Pankhurst was a suffragette. She believed that the only way to achieve the goal of equality was through her militant approach. Pankhurst allows her views to be seen through the perspective of a man when she asked if “men ever had to suffer from the laws more than women have suffered”. These actions shed light onto Pankhurts’ very strict and hard approach to the problem at hand. Overall, the suffrage movement has foreshadowed many future events such as the Black Lives Matter movement as both movements wanted to achieve the same goal of equality, however many different viewpoints played in to how the equality was achieved.

# data[].attributes.body
Evelyn Sharp and Emmeline Pankhurst were two influential women in the early 20th-century British women's suffrage movement, but their different approaches to obtaining equal rights for women highlight sharp contrasts in these two women. Sharp was committed to non-violent activism: through education, effective writing, and reasoned argument, she felt were the most potent keys to opening the minds of the public and those of legislators to women deserving equal rights. Through her career as a journalist and writer, Sharp applied her skills to appeal to the moral conscience of society by depicting women in a rational light who were capable and thus deserving of political agency. For instance, her writings have focused on the primacy of dialogue and civil discourse where she maintained that permanent change could only take place with mutual understanding and gradual reform. Sharp underlined the power of non-violent activism: "We are not here to wreck lives; we are here to build a world fit for women." This quote encapsulates her belief in constructive, peaceful protest as a means of securing rights. On the other hand, Pankhurst, who, together with her daughters Christabel and Sylvia, founded the WSPU, which advocated a much more radical line; according to her conviction, all avenues of nonviolent protest had already been tried and fought for but in vain due to the uncompromising position of the government. Indeed, the catchphrase coined by Pankhurst herself, "Deeds, not words," speaks to the very core of her argument: only aggressive, non-conformist measures like hunger strikes, window-smashing, and public demonstrations would finally take hold and force the powers that be to yield. As she once said, "The condition of our sex is so intolerable that we must rebel against it." While Sharp objected to violence, believing it would alienate potential allies and dissipate any moral authority from the movement's cause, Pankhurst considered radical action as the only way to break up the status quo and command immediate attention to women's grievances. Even though their approaches were different, both women strove for the common aim of suffrage and promotion of women’s rights on legislative and social levels. But opposing stances between Sharp's advocacy of nonviolent means versus Pankhurst's militancy upon entering the woman suffrage movement reflect the larger, contrasting views on the best methods for enacting social change within the movement itself, which reverberates in much of today's debate about how much peaceful protest or brute force should be used in today's movements for equality.

# data[].attributes.body
Two key figures, Emmeline Pankhurst and Evelyn Sharp both had an influential impact in the Women’s Suffrage Movement, however, they both took very different approaches in how they were going to try and gain women’s rights. Emmeline Pankhurst was an active protester who riled up crowds and threatened the use of violence and revolt to gain the rights that women desired. In Emmeline’s powerful speech “Why We Are Militant” she addressed the fact that she has tried every possible solution and it has only led her and other angry women to “revolt in order to maintain their self-respect”. Emmeline shows her anger and passion throughout her speech because she truly believes that violence has become the only possible solution to obtaining women’s rights. On the other hand, Evelyn Sharp creates a more peaceful approach as she writes “The Restless River”, which is a children’s book that teaches young girls about a powerful Queen who holds all the power over the King. In her story she writes “There was a King of Nonamia, too, but no one knew anything about him, except that he was the husband of the Queen of Nonamia”. Evelyn shows the reversed roles how the Queen holds all the power which teaches her audience how women can be just as powerful as men when given equal opportunities. Although Pankhurst and Sharp display different actions taken to gain women’s rights, they are both significant activist that demonstrate their courage and determination to obtaining equal rights for women.

# data[].attributes.body
While they were both very prominent figures during the Women’s Suffrage Movement, Evelyn Sharp and Emmeline Pankhurst’s approach to achieving social change differs greatly. Sharp, a pacifist and writer, was one of Britain’s most known suffragettes in her time. She firmly believed in the idea that change would only occur if it were pushed for nonviolently. She sought to inflict the feminist thoughts into the minds of children, which proved to be very smart tactic. Sharp wrote the short children’s book “The Restless River”, idealizing a society where the queen made all the decisions and did not need the assistance of a king. To directly switch the societal gender-roles, she writes “there was

a King of Nonamia, too, but no one knew anything about him,

except that he was the husband of the Queen of Nonamia; and that, indeed, was the most distinctive thing that could be said about him.” She creates this analogy to promote the ideology that the men become the inadequates and the women are praised and memorable. In contrast, Pankhurst took a more violent approach to call for change. She was a true suffragette, getting arrested countless times and being subject to force-feeding. In 1913, Pankhurst, originally from Britain, carried her appeal to the United States and delivered a speech titled “Why We Are Militant”. To call out men as hypocrites, she asks “how is it, then, that some of you have nothing but ridicule and contempt and [condemnation} for women who are ﬁghting for exactly the same thing?” In doing this, she points out that men will have sympathy for any other man, no matter the circumstance. However, when it comes to women asking for the right to vote, they do not even turn their heads. The strategies she used in her speech, such as providing a strong emotional appeal and giving an ultimatum, successfully fired up a lot of people. This is exactly what Pankhurst’s intention was in delivering her speech. Ultimately, both women possess different outlooks on how to achieve social change, but they are both rooted in the same purpose. To make a modern-day connection, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade two years ago and now, with a more conservative president elect, millions of women in America are experiencing a fear that their right to choose is going to be taken away.

# data[].attributes.body
While Emmeline Pankhurst and Evelyn Sharp both advocate for women’s equality, their approaches differ significantly, highlighting contrasting perspectives on activism. Pankhurst’s militant stance, as seen in her speech “Why We Are Militant,” argues that forceful action is necessary when peaceful methods fails “The only justification for violence…is that you have tried all other available means and have tried all other available means and have failed to secure justice.” This quote underscores Pankhurst’s belief that direct and sometimes disruptive tactics are essential to challenge a system that has repeatedly denied women their rights. In contrast, Sharp’s approach in “The Restless River” is more subtle and rooted in questioning traditional expectations. Through the character of the Queen of Nonamia, Sharp conveys a rejection of societal norms, as the Queen declares, “I decline to marry a tailor merely because he has killed a few giants, or outwitted a bear… Who wants to marry a man because he can do things?” This statement reflects the Queen’s independence and her refusal to conform to arbitrary standards, illustrating Sharp’s preference for change driven by wit and nonconformity rather than direct confrontation. While Pankhurst’s activism relies on aggressive action, Sharp’s narrative favors the quiet power of persistent defiance and critical thinking. Together, these works demonstrate the range of tactics within the fight for women’s equality, reminding us that both direct action and subtle resistance have shaped the path toward social progress, a dynamic still evident in modern movements for gender justice.

# data[].attributes.body
The ideas of Sharp and Pankhurst are vastly different because each author’s approach to equality shows a unique perspective on activism. Sharp and Pankhurst are key activists in the fight of votes for women. Sharp implemented a nonviolent approach by writing books, while Pankhurst utilized militant tactics by giving speeches and protesting behind prison bars. Emmeline Pankhust actively participated in hunger strikes and protests in order to bring awareness to the movement. She gives a famous speech, “Why We Are Militant” in order to call possible supporters of the movement to action. She uses tactics such as pathos, and repetition to force men to empathize with how little rights in government women have. The speech informed the American general public that the militant acts will not be stopped until women are granted the right to vote. Evelyn Sharp approaches equality differently by writing the children’s book, The Restless River, to reverse the societal norm of gender roles. It told the tale of a great Queen whose spouse, “no one knew anything about, except that he was the husband of the Queen of Nonamia”. Young girls could aspire to be the queen who thinks for herself and does not let any man push her into the shadows. Although Sharp was not actively participating in protests like Pankhurst, she managed to produce literature that would educate young minds. Although Pankhurst and Sharp have different beliefs in how society should be changed, both made a significant impact in the Suffrage movement. In modern society, we are still fighting for women’s equality using both a nonviolent approach with peaceful protests and militant approach such as the 4B movement.